Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My Public Portal
About
10 October 10, 2007 Commission
RECORDS RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA TIME: 9:30 a.m. DATE: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 LOCATION: CONFERENCE ROOM University of California @ Riverside, University Village 1201 University Avenue, Room 207, Riverside Commissioners Chair: Terry Henderson 1" Vice Chair: Jeff Stone 2nd Vice Chair: Bob Magee Bob Buster, County of Riverside John F. Tavaglione, County of Riverside Jeff Stone, County of Riverside Roy Wilson, County of Riverside Marion Ashley, County of Riverside Barbara Hanna/ Brenda Salas, City of Banning Roger Berg / Jeff Fox, City of Beaumont Joseph DeConinck / Charles Grotke, City of Blythe John Chlebnik / Ray Quinto, City of Calimesa Mary Craton / John Zaitz, City of Canyon Lake Gregory S. Pettis / Kathleen DeRosa, City of Cathedral City Eduardo Garcia / Steven Hernandez, City of Coachella Jeff Miller / Karen Spiegel, City of Corona Alex Bias / Yvonne Parks, City of Desert Hot Springs Robin Lowe / Eric McBride, City of Hemet Patrick J. Mullany / Larry Spicer, City of Indian Wells Michael H. Wilson / Gene Gilbert, City of Indio Terry Henderson / Don Adolph, City of La Quinta Bob Magee / Robert L. Schiffner, City of Lake Elsinore Frank West / Charles White, City of Moreno Valley Rick Gibbs / Kelly Bennett, City of Murrieta Frank Hall / Harvey Sullivan, City of Norco Dick Kelly / Cindy Finerty, City of Palm Desert Ronald Oden ! Ginny Foat, City of Palm Springs Daryl Busch / Mark Yarbrough, City of Perris Gordon Moller / Alan Seman, City of Rancho Mirage Steve Adams / Dom Betro, City of Riverside Chris Carlson / Jim Ayres, City of San Jacinto Ron Roberts / Jeff Comerchero, City of Temecula Mike Perovich, Governor's Appointee Eric Haley, Executive Director Anne Mayer, Deputy Executive Director Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director Comments are welcomed by the Commission. if you wish to provide comments to the Commission, please complete and submit a Speaker Card to the Clerk of the Board. 11.36.00 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION www.rctc.org AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 9:30 a.m. Wednesday, October 10, 2007 CHANCELLOR'S CONFERENCE ROOM University of California @ Riverside, University Village 1201 University Avenue, Room 207, Riverside In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Government Code Section 54954.2, if special assistance is needed .to participate in a Commission 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. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS Each individual speaker is limited to speak three (3) continuous minutes or less. The Commission may, either at the direction of the Chair or by majority vote of the Commission, waive this three minute time limitation. Depending on the number of items on the Agenda and the number of speakers, the Chair may, at his/her discretion, reduce the time of each speaker to two (2) continuous minutes. In addition, the maximum time for public comment for any individual item or topic is thirty (30) minutes. Also, the Commission may terminate public comments if such comments become repetitious. Speakers may not yield their time to others without the consent of the Chair: Any written documents to be distributed or presented to the Commission shall be submitted to the Clerk of the Board This policy applies to Public Comments and comments on Agenda Items. Under the Brown Act, .the Board should not take action on or discuss matters raised during public comment portion of the agenda which are not listed on the agenda. Board members may refer such matters to staff for factual information or to be placed on the subsequent agenda for consideration. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES SEPTEMBER 12, 2007 Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda October 10, 2007 Page 2 6. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS - The Commission 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 Commission subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action adding an item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the Commission, if there are less than 2/3 of the Commission 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. 7. 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. 7A. AMENDMENT TO CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT FOR INTERSTATE 215 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS - DESIGN SEQUENCING PROJECT FOR ADJUSTMENTS TO FUNDING PLAN Overview This item is for the Commission to: Pagel 1) Approve Agreement No. 03-3.1-064-01., Amendment No. • 1 to Agreement No. 03-31-064 (Caltrans No. 08-1207 A/1), to reflect adjustments in Measure A funding; and 2) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 7B. REQUEST FROM THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS FOR ADDITIONAL. FEDERAL FUNDS ON GENE AUTRY TRAIL WIDENING PROJECT Page 8 Overview This item is for the. Commission to _ approve theincrease of federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds on the Gene Autry Trail widening project from $1.54 million to $4,038,020. 7C. FISCAL YEAR 2008-12 MEASURE - A FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT .PLANS FOR LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS FOR THE CITIES OF BEAUMONT AND LAKE ELSINORE Page 12 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve the FY 2008-12 Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plans (CIP) .for local streets and roads for the cities of Beaumont and Lake Elsinore as submitted. . • • " " 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 A g e n d a O c t o b e r 1 0 , 2 0 0 7 P a g e 3 7 D . F I S C A L Y E A R 2 0 0 7 / 0 8 M E A S U R E A F I V E - Y E A R C A P I T A L I M P R O V E M E N T P L A N A M E N D M E N T F O R L O C A L S T R E E T S A N D R O A D S F O R T H E C I T Y O F P A L M S P R I N G S . O v e r v i e w P a g e 2 0 T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i s s i o n t o a p p r o v e t h e a m e n d m e n t t o t h e F Y 2 0 0 7 / 0 8 M e a s u r e A F i v e - Y e a r C a p i t a l I m p r o v e m e n t P l a n ( C l P ) f o r f o c a l s t r e e t s a n d r o a d s f o r t h e c i t y o f P a l m S p r i n g s a s s u b m i t t e d . 7 E . F A I R I S L E D R I V E M E T R O L I N K S T A T I O N A N D B O X S P R I N G S Q U A R R Y P R O P E R T Y O v e r v i e w P a g e 2 6 T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e ! C o m m i s s i o n t o a u t h o r i z e s t a f f t o : n e g o t i a t e w i t h S t o n e P a c i f i c D e v e l o p m e n t r e g a r d i n g t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f a F a i r I s l e D r i v e M e t r o l i n k s t a t i o n . 7 F . P R O P E R T Y T R A N S F E R A G R E E M E N T / M E M O R A N D U M O F U N D E R S T A N D I N G W I T H M A R C H J O I N T P O W E R S " A U T H O R I T Y A N D L N R R I V E R S I D E , L L C F O R T H E M O R E N O V A L L E Y / M A R C H F I E L D ' M E T R O L I N K S T A T I O N O v e r v i e w T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i s s i o n t o : P a g e 3 6 1 ) A p p r o v e t h e A g r e e m e n t / M O U N o . 0 8 - 3 3 - 0 3 1 - 0 0 w i t h M a r c h J o i n t P o w e r s : A u t h o r i t y ( J P A ) a n d L N R R i v e r s i d e , L L C ( L N R ) f o r t h e t r a n s f e r o f p r o p e r t y f o r t h e M o r e n o V a l l e y / M a r c h F i e l d M e t r o l i n k s t a t i o n ; a n d 2 ) 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 o n b e h a l f t h e C o m m i s s i o n . Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda October 10, 2007 Page 4 7G. AGREEMENT WITH SPOTLESS JANITORIAL SERVICES TO PROVIDE CLEANING AND GROUNDS MAINTENANCE FOR THE FIVE METROLINK STATIONS IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY Overview Thisitem is for the Commission to: Page 39 1) > Approve selection of and award Agreement. No. 08-24-023-00 to Spotless Janitorial Services (SJS) to provide cleaning and grounds maintenance services at the five Commission -owned Metrolink stations and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. • NORTH MAIN CORONA SATELLITE PARKING AGREEMENTS Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page41 1) Approve Agreement No. 08-25-027-00 between .Corona Community LLC and the Commission to provide for 300 leased parking spaces as a satellite parking lot during construction of the North Main Corona parking structure construction; 2) Approve Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) No, 08-25-025-00 between the city of Corona (City) and the Commission to provide for shuttle services to a leased satellite parking lot during construction of the North Main Corona ` parking structure construction; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. 71. COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE Page 44 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file an update on the. Commuter Rail Program. • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda October 10, •2007 Page 5 • 7J. ALLOCATION OF LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006/07 FOR THE RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY 7K Overview Page 54 This item is for the Commission to allocate $208,278 of FY 2006/07. Local Transportation Funds (LTF) to the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) to cover projects identified in the FY 2006/07 capital projects reconciliation. AMENDMENT TO THE PROJECT SCOPE AND A PROJECT BUDGET ADJUSTMENT WITH LIM AND NASCIMENTO ENGINEERING CORPORATION TO EXPAND THE SCOPE OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND COST ESTIMATE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE INTERSTATE 215/STATE ROUTE 60 EAST JUNCTION BETWEEN THE BOX SPRINGS OVERCROSSING AND DAY STREET UNDERCROSSING Overview Page 56 This item is for the Commission to 1) Approve an amendment to the project scope (Attachment 1) for the -215/SR-60 East Junction project and increase of the project budget (Attachment 2) from $35.35 million to $55.742 million; 2) Approve Agreement No. 07-31-039-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 07-31-039-00, with Lim and Nascimento Engineering Corporation (LAN) based on the negotiated project scope, schedule, and cost that is attached to this agenda item for a base amount of $1,533,452, plus 23.9% contingency amount of $366,548 to cover potential changes in scope for a total not to exceed amount of $1.9 million [$1.682 million of federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program funds and $218,000 of Measure A as local match], which addresses the additional design fees required for expansion of the original project scope to incorporate elements from the Caltrans design sequencing project and additional portions from the .Segment 7 • project; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute necessary, non -funding related Caltrans cooperative agreements for the project; Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda October 10, 2007 Page 6 7L. AGREEMENT WITH PARSONS TRANSPORTATION GROUP TO PROVIDE el PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING SERVICES, PROJECT REPORT, AND ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO STATE ROUTE 91 IN THE EASTBOUND DIRECTION AND TO THE STATE ROUTE 71/91 INTERCHANGE FROM APPROXIMATELY '/4 MILE WEST OF GREEN RIVER ROAD TO SERFAS CLUB DRIVE IN THE CITY OF . CORONA Page 66 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award . Agreement No. 08-31-015-00 to Parsons Transportation. Group (Parsons) to provide preliminary engineering services for the preparation of Caltrans project report and environmental document (PR/ED) for the proposed improvements to SR-91 in the eastbound direction and to the SR-71/91 interchange from approximately �/4 mile west of Green River Road to Serfas Club Drive in the city of Corona based on the attached project scope, schedule, and cost for the base amount of $4,605,852 plus a contingency amount of $ 650,000 (14%), to cover potential changes in ., scope r for a total not to exceed amount of $5,255,852; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the :Commission;. 3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute necessary, non -funding related Caltrans cooperative agreements for the project; and 4) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work as may be required for the project. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda October 10, 2007 Page 7 7M. • STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 128 1) Adopt an OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED position on SB 974 (Lowenthal); 2) Adopt proposed amendments to SB 974 and authorize staff to transmit the amendmentsto state leaders; 3) Approve a priority list of projects for funding by any container fee revenue; 4) Adopt an OPPOSE position on the following federal bills: a) S.2019 (Hutchison, R-Texas); b) , H.R. 3510 (Peterson, R-Pennsylvania); 5) Adopt a SUPPORT position of .the SR-241 Foothill South toll road extension; and . 6) Receive and file the State and Federal Legislative Status Report. 8. AGREEMENTS FOR INTERNAL AUDIT SERVICES Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 144 1) Approve the selection process and award. Agreement No. 08-19-028-00 to KPMG LLP to perform internal audit services and on -call internal audit services; 2) Award Agreement No. 08-19-029-00 to Thompson, Cobb, Bazilio & Associates, P.C. and Agreement No. 08-19-030-00 to Mayer Hoffman McCann P.C. to perform on -call internal audit services; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. 9. 2009 MEASURE • A $300 MILLION WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY REGIONAL ARTERIAL CALL FOR PROJECTS Overview Page 197 This item is for the Commission to direct staff to release a call for projects for 2009 Measure A Western Riverside County Regional Arterial funds in the amount of $300 million. 10. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda October 10, 2007 Page 8 11. COMMISSIONERS / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT Overview This . itern provides the opportunity for the Commissioners . and the Executive Director to report on attended meetings/conferences and any other, • items related to Commission activities. Grade _Separation Video Presentation 12. CLOSED SESSION 12A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Negotiating Parties: RCTC - Executive Director of Designee Property Owner Representative - Steve Holgate Item APN Property Owner(s) 1 13. ADJOURNMENT 430-130-056 430-130-063 430-130-064 430-130-065 430-130-066 430-130-067 430-130-068 Shelbran Investments The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., •Wednesday, November 14, 2007, Board Room, County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. MIN Riverside County Transportation Commission TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board DATE: October 10, 2007 SUBJECT: Possible Conflicts of Interest Issues — Commission Agenda of October 10, 2007 The October 10, 2007 agenda of the Commission includes items which may raise possible conflicts of interest. An RCTC member may not participate in any discussion or action concerning a contract or amendment if a campaign contribution of more than $250 is received in the past 12 months from any entity or individual listed. Agenda Item No. 7F - Agreement with Spotless Janitorial Services to Provide Cleaning and Grounds Maintenance for the Five Metrolink Stations in Riverside County Consultant(s): Spotless Janitorial Services Christina Lara 5416 Lauder Ct. Riverside, CA 92507 Agenda Item No. 7K - Amendment to the Project Scope, a Project Budget Adjustment with Lim and Nascimento Engineering Corporation to Expand the Scope of the Development of Plans, Specifications, and Cost Estimate for the Construction of the Interstate 215/State Route 60 East Junction Between the Box Springs Overcrossing and Day Street Undercrossing Consultant(s): Lim and Nascimento Engineering Corp. Dokken Engineering Norman Suydam John Bishop 1887 Business Center Drive, #6 2365 Iron Point Road San Bernardino, CA 92408 Suite 200 Folsom, CA 95630 Associated Engineers Kleinfelder Jim Elliot Richard Escodan 3311 E. Shelby Street 1220 Research Drive, #B Ontario, CA 91764 Redlands, CA 92374 LIN Consulting Denwun Lin 21660 E. Copley Drive, #270 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Douglas Engineering Douglas Mays 414 Tennessee Street, #G Redlands, CA 92373 LSA Associates Romi Archer 20 Executive Park, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 Agenda Item No. 7L - Agreement with Parsons Transportation Group to Provide Preliminary Engineering Services, Project Report and Environmental Document for Improvements to State Route 91, in the Eastbound Direction and to the State Route 71/91 Interchange, From Approximately Y4 Mile West of Green River Road to Serfas Club Drive in the City of Corona Consultant(s): Parsons Transportation Group Khalil Saba Parsons Project Manager 3602 Inland Empire Blvd. Suite B-120 Ontario, CA 91764 Converse Hashmi Quazi 10391 Corporate Drive Redlands, CA 92374 Applied Earthworks, Inc. Melinda Horne 3292 E Florida Avenue, Suite A Hemet, CA 92544 Michael Brandman Associates Dr. Tom McGill 621 E. Carnegie Drive, Suite 100 San Bernardino, CA 92408 T. Y. Lin International Gary Antonucci 3550 Vine Street, Suite 120 Riverside, CA 92507 Associated Engineers, Inc. Jim lmbiorski 3311 E. Shelby Street Ontario, CA 91764 Paragon Partners, Ltd. Jim Rushing 5762 Bolsa Avenue, Suite 201 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Arellano Associates Genoveva Arellano 4091 Riverside Drive, Suite 117 Chino, CA 91710 Tatsumi and Partners David Tatsumi 5 Corporate Park, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92606-5166 Agenda Item No. 8 - Agreements for Internal Audit Services Consultant(s): KPMG LLP Lynn Mackenzie 355 South Grand Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90071 Mayer Hoffman McMann P.C. Marcus D. Davis 2301 Dupont Drive, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92612 Thompson, Cobb, Bazilio & Associates, P.C. Michael J. deCastro 21250 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 500 Torrance, CA 90503 County of>Riverside.� ',Dstr ct I' County of Riverside, District II County of Riverside, District° 1'II' County of Riverside, District IV County of Riverside, District V. City of Banning 'City,of`Beaumont 7"i'•T' 'r - City of Blythe ity ofi.CaIimesa,_' City of Canyon Lake City__;of' Ca:thedralCity City of Coachella City of oron City of Desert Hot Springs ,City 'of Hemet ' j _ City of Indian Wells ,City of`Indio' _ � City of -La Quinta City ofLake Els nore i City of Moreno Valley City_ofAMurrieta 'TM'^' City of Norco yCity of'Palm Desert r City of Palm Springs City of,Perris City of Rancho Mirage Oityof Riverside�y City of San Jacinto-737777. City ofjemecula •+cam Governor's Appointee, Caltrans District 8 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ROLL CALL OCTOBER 10, 2007 Present Absent RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMISSIONER SIGN -IN SHEET OCTOBER 1 4 2007 0 NAME AGENCY E MAIL ADDRESS -j% d- , V I frii 6j 2 C,fihVy � �r /--4-7 L- \ p� ,Q-Q �� 4�� ea:. (mac 13 i" 1 O cc G � V�HcrMo�f�� LV �9 Ti A i� s � a yp cZ , is a � ).\\I- Ce7 i AKi QLM -: u . �[/ C M0445ee � / _ G� �1S�l4-d,fre v /& 69e -- WPid t(.Fir---- GCH -e La—f2-�� ttVt Nt'Ae.Z t �?`i - /4 `1e 2.// f ii ��ti®.�- / /� . C .�m � G'G6�v?' im •• 0/ eA / C G / 1 �s /r U � 2' / !,2 �/ fJ'14$2-1-L4 e-^ �1e142-. LUL 1)1 /�d%ZGl) / it /iht' kl/ E ST 7/ 1 °.ge,vo e & Al )qAl0"1 4SH-C-•El .K4z Kw, cry ---11-3— f oe,.9 b 64)1_, /, #iZ& ��.6‘. A ,.7 4... f ( V\ , MY-rizkLINvy-A'• ��,l i%,yro G/c C, 3.,iji 64i. i Mks; " A G E N D A I T E M 5 " M I N U T E S " " 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 M I N U T E S W e d n e s d a y , S e p t e m b e r 1 2 , 2 0 0 7 1 . C A L L T O O R D E R . T h e 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 w a s c a l l e d t o o r d e r b y C h a i r T e r r y H e n d e r s o n a t 9 : 4 3 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 , 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 . P L E D G E O F A L L E G I A N C E A t t h i s t i m e , : C o m m i s s i o n e r R o b i n L o w e l e d t h e C o m m i s s i o n i n a f l a g s a l u t e . 3 . R O L L C A L L C o m m i s s i o n e r s / A l t e r n a t e s P r e s e n t S t e v e A d a m s M a r i o n . A s h l e y A l e x B i a s R o g e r B e r g D a r y l B u s c h B o b B u s t e r C h r i s C a r l s o n J o h n C h l e b n i k M a r y C r a t o n J o s e p h D e C o n i n c k R i c k G i b b s F r a n k H a l l B a r b a r a H a n n a T e r r y H e n d e r s o n S t e v e n H e r n a n d e z D i c k K e l l y R o b i n L o w e B o b M a g e e J e f f M i l l e r P a t r i c k M u l l a n y R o n a l d O d e n P a t t y R o m o R o n R o b e r t s J e f f S t o n e J o h n F . T a v a g l i o n e F r a n k W e s t M i c h a e l H . W i l s o n R o y W i l s o n C o m m i s s i o n e r s A b s e n t G o r d o n M o l l e r G r e g o r y P e t t i s Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes September 12, 2007 Page 2 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS Garry Grant, Meadowbrook area resident, expressed concern for the new commercial properties not adhering to the guidelines and -requirements located along State Route 74. He suggested that the Commission along with the planning agency and code enforcement work together to properly provide these guidelines. Mr. Grant also expressed _` his gratitude to Commissioner Marion Ashley for the two new city Limit signs along. SR-74. Laurie Taylor, representing the Residents Association of Greater Lake . Mathews, expressed concern that the Commission meeting was not properly noticed. She indicated that she had signed up on the Mid County Parkway (MCP) website to receive meeting notifications and did not receive notice regarding this Commission meeting, nor was it posted on the MCP .website. Therefore,she requested that Agenda Item No. 9, "Identification of the Locally Preferred Alternative for the Mid County Parkway", be pulled from the agenda. Cynthia Ferry, representing the Lake Mathews Talks community site, also expressed concern that the Commission meeting was not properly noticed and was not posted on the MCP website. Steve DeBaun, legal counsel to the Commission, clarified . that the agenda was posted in accordance to the Brown Act, noting that the MCP website is not subject to the Brown Act. Commissioner Bob Buster suggested that while websites may not be subject to the Brown Act, the Commission should adopt this practice to keep the public informed. At the Chair's request, Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board, confirmed that Commission agendas are posted to the Commission's website on a regular basis and have been for a number of years. Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director, replied that the MCP website is intended only for public hearings and that the Commission website posts all public meeting agendas. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JULY 11, 2007 M/SfC (M. Wilson/Ashley) to approve the July 11, 2007 minutes. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes September 12, 2007 Page 3 6. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS There were no additions or revisions to the agenda. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR Commissioner Daryl Busch stated that with regard to Agenda Item 7Q, "Agreement for Construction Management Services to Support the North Main Corona Parking Structure and the Perris Multimodal Facility and Authorization to Advertise for Construction Bids for the North Main Corona Parking Structure . and the Perris Multimodal Facility"; funding for the construction of the Perris Multimodal Facility has been secured. M/SIC (Lowe/Stone) to approve the following Consent Calendar items: Abstain: Miller, Agenda Item 7Q due to a conflict of interest. 7A. INTERFU.ND LOAN ACTIVITY REPORT Receive and file the Interfund Loan Activity Report for the fourth quarter ended June 30, 2007. 7B. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT Receive and file the Quarterly Investment_ Report for the quarter ended June 30, 2007. 7C. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Receive and file the Quarterly financial Statements for the fourth quarter ended June 30, 2007. 7D. SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY REPORT Receive and file the Single Signature Authority Report for the fourth quarter ended June 30, 2007. • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes September 12, 2007 Page 4 7E. 2009 MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PROGRAM MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT GUIDELINES 1) Approve the 2009 Measure A Local Streets and Roads Program Maintenance of Effort (MOE) Guidelines; and 2) Adopt Resolution No. 07-011, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding the 2009 Measure A Local Streets and Roads Program Maintenance of Effort Guidelines." 7F. STATE ROUTE CO/INTERSTATE 215 EAST JUNCTION CONNECTORS ADDITIONAL FUNDS REQUEST 1) Approve $4 million of Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program funds for the 60/215 East Junction connectors project for the right-of-way phase; 2) Approve $459,000 of Measure A funds as match to the $4 million CMAQ funds in the event it is needed; 3) Approve a budget amendment for . a $4 million increase to federal revenues in FY 2007/08; and 4) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute associated amendment agreements to reflect additional funding. 7G. ADDITIONAL FUNDS REQUEST FOR STATE ROUTE 60/VALLEY WAY TO INTERSTATE 15 PROJECT 1) 'Approve an additional $1.5 million of Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program funds for the SR=60/Valley Way to 1-15 high occupancy vehicle (HOV) and mixed flow gap closure ; project; and 2) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute associated amendment agreements to reflect additional funding. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes September 12, 2007 Page 5 7H. COMMISSION POSITION ON PROPOSED GOODSMOVEMENT CONTROL MEASURES FOR THE 2007 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN/2008 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN 1) Request that the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) develop and approve Goods Movement Control Measures for the inclusion in the 2007 South Coast Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP)/2008 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) that: a) demonstrates the feasibility of implementation by the attainment/implementation deadline(s); b) specifically identifies roles, responsibilities, and, funding of all parties involved including funding that the Commission agrees with; c) does not put the region at risk of losing _ federal transportation funds; and 2) Work with SCAG, South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), and the county transportation commissions to ensure fair and equitable responsibility for emissions reductions that also include federal regulatory agencies. 71. FISCAL YEAR 2008-12 MEASURE A FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS FOR THE CITIES OF CALIMESA, MURRIETA, AND NORCO Approve the FY 2008-12 Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plans (CIP) for local streets and roads for the cities of Calimesa, Murrieta, and Norco as submitted. 7J. FISCAL YEAR 2007-11 MEASURE A FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS FOR THE CITY OF CALIMESA Approve the FY 2007-11 Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for local streets and roads for the city of Calimesa as submitted. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes September 12, 2007 Page 6 7K. FISCAL YEAR 2007-11 MEASURE A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT FOR LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS FOR THE CITY OF CORONA Approve the amendment to the FY 2007-11 Measure A Capital Improvement Plan for local streets and roads for the city of Corona as submitted. 7L. CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ANALYSIS AND >OUTREACH FOR THE MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION °PLAN 1) Award Agreement No. 08-67-017-00 in the amount of $223,970 to Moore lacofano Goltsman, Inc. (MIG) to provide consultant services for Environmental Justice Analysis and Outreach for the Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan (MCGMA'P); and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 7M. GRADE SEPARATION JUMP START FUNDING AWARD FOR °TRADE CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to Legal counsel review, to execute agreements on behalf. of the Commission for grade separation project development for: a) City of Corona, Agreement No. 08-33-014-0.0 for $2.5 million b) City of Riverside, Agreement No. 08-33-012-00 for $4.5 million County .of Riverside, Agreement No. 08-33-013-00 for $3 million; and 2) Amend the FY 2007/08 Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) for the Commuter Rail Program to reflect the increased funding. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes September 12, 2007 Page 7 7N. AGREEMENT WITH BRE PROPERTIES FOR TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT AT THE LA SIERRA METROLINK STATION 1) Approve Agreement No. 08-67-018-00 with BRE Properties for transit oriented development (TOD) at the La 'Sierra Metrolink Station; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) approval, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 70. RELEASE OF STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS FOLLOWED BY A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR THE JOINT DEVELOPMENT/TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT OF THE NORTH MAIN CORONA STATION Approve the release of a statement of qualifications (SOQ) followed by a request for proposals (RFP) for the joint development/transit oriented development (TOD) of the North Main Corona Station. AGREEMENT WITH THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PERRIS VALLEY PIPELINE 1) Approve Agreement No. 08-33-019-00 with the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) of Southern California for the construction of the Perris Valley Pipeline in the San Jacinto Branch Linerail right-of-way; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel (Adorno, Yoss, Alvarado & Smith) review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 7Q. AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES TO SUPPORT THE NORTH MAIN CORONA PARKING STRUCTURE AND THE PERRIS MULTIMODAL FACILITY AND AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR CONSTRUCTION BIDS FOR THE ` NORTH MAIN CORONA PARKING STRUCTURE AND THE PERRIS MULTIMODAL FACILITY 1) Approve the selection process and authorize the Executive Director to negotiate a base contract and subsequent amendments to Agreement No. 08-33-011-00 with Transtech Owen Group to provide construction management services to support the construction of the North Main Corona parking Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes September 12, 2007 Page 8 structure in the city of Corona and the Perris Multimodal Facility in the city of Perris, for a total not -to -exceed amount of $3 million; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel , review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize staff to advertise to receive bids for the construction of the North Main Corona parking structure in the city of Corona and the Perris Multimodal Facility . in . the city of Perris, contingent on federal funding authorization: 7R. AGREEMENT WITH STV INCORPORATED TO PROVIDE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING, PLANNING, AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FOR THE PERRIS VALLEY LINE PROJECT 1) Approve the selection process and award: Agreement No.07-33-123-00 to STV Incorporated to provide planning, environmental, and preliminary engineering services for the Perris Valley Line (PVL) for a not -to -exceed amount of $12 million contingent on Federal Transit Administration (FTA) approval to enter into preliminary engineering (PE). Work will be authorized on a task order basis; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, : to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and! 3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel ;review, to approve amendments for potential additional work to the STV Incorporated contract from a contingency fund in the amount of $5.3 million to provide for: a) $1.5 million in general contingency; . b) $1 million for final design for stations, pending Commission decision on selection of stations and decision to deliver stations on a design -bid -build (DBB) basis; and $2.8 million for consultant support during construction if decision is made to deliver the remainder of the project on a design -build (DB) basis. " " 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 M i n u t e s S e p t e m b e r 1 2 , 2 0 0 7 P a g e 9 7 S . A U T H O R I Z A T I O N T O I S S U E A R E Q U E S T F O R S T A T E M E N T O F Q U A L I F I C A T I O N S F O R O N - C A L L M A I N T E N A N C E C O N T R A C T O R F O R T H E M E T R O L I N K S T A T I O N S 1 ) D i r e c t s t a f f t o d e v e l o p a n d a d v e r t i s e a r e q u e s t f o r s t a t e m e n t o f q u a l i f i c a t i o n s ( S O Q ) f o r o n - c a l l r n a i n t e n a n c e c o n t r a c t o r s e r v i c e s f o r t h e f i v e C o m m i s s i o n - o w n e d M e t r o l i n k c o m m u t e r r a i l s t a t i o n s ; 2 ) F o r m a s e l e c t i o n c o m m i t t e e c o m p r i s e d o f C o m m i s s i o n a n d M e t r o l i n k s t a f f t o r e v i e w , e v a l u a t e , a n d r a n k . a l l . S O Q s r e c e i v e d ; a n d 3 ) . A u t h o r i z e s t a f f t o n e g o t i a t e a c o n t r a c t w i t h t h e t o p - r a n k e d c o n t r a c t o r a n d b r i n g b a c k a r e c o m m e n d a t i o n t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r c o n t r a c t a w a r d . 7 T . P R O D U C T I V I T Y I M P R O V E M E N T P R O G R A M P O L I C Y R E V I S I O N S A p p r o v e t h e f o l l o w i n g p o l i c y r e v i s i o n s t o t h e P r o d u c t i v i t y I m p r o v e m e n t P r o g r a m ( P I P ) : a ) C h a n g e o p e r a t i n g c o s t p e r r e v e n u e h o u r f r o m a m a n d a t o r y t a r g e t t o a d i s c r e t i o n a r y t a r g e t ; a n d b ) I n c r e a s e t h e n u m b e r o f m i n i m u m d i s c r e t i o n a r y p e r f o r m a n c e t a r g e t s o p e r a t o r s m u s t m e e t f r o m t h r e e t o f o u r . 7 U . C O M M U T E R R A I L P R O G R A M U P D A T E R e c e i v e a n d f i l e a n u p d a t e o n t h e C o m m u t e r R a i l P r o g r a m . 7 V . I N T E R S T A T E 2 1 5 - B I - C O U N T Y I M P R O V E M E N T P R O J E C T I N C R E A S E I N F U N D I N G F O R P R O J E C T D E V E L O P M E N T W O R K A u t h o r i z e a n . i n c r e a s e i n f u n d i n g f r o m $ 2 m i l l i o n t o $ 4 m i l l i o n f o r t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f a p r o j e c t r e p o r t a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l d o c u m e n t ( P R / E D ) f o r t h e 1 - 2 1 5 B i - C o u n t y i m p r o v e m e n t p r o j e c t . 7 W . S T A T E A N D F E D E R A L S T A T U S R E P O R T R e c e i v e a n d f i l e t h e S t a t e a n d F e d e r a l S t a t u s R e p o r t a s a n i n f o r m a t i o n i t e m . Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes September 12, 2007 Page 10 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TRADE CORRIDORS IMPROVEMENT FUND CONSENSUS POSITION AND CANDIDATE LIST Stephanie Wiggins, Regional Programs Director, presented an update on the activities related to Proposition 113 and the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIF) consensus position and candidate list. Eric Haley, Executive Director, presented an update on SB 9.74 (Lowenthal) for container fees that could generate up to $500 million per year, however, the bill has been suspended by the Governor and Senator Lowenthal until January 2008. Commissioner Steve Adams replied that one of the issues with SB 974 is that it is subject to legal challenge. He expressed that the . Commission needs to pursue another direction. He explained the groundwork is set to pursue a .voluntary container premium, which is going uncontested. Eric Haley replied that the Commission is engaged on this issue and working on both the Lowenthal bill and the voluntary container premium :or fee. Stephanie Wiggins added that the discussions related to the voluntary container fee are being held in a private setting. The Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles have asked for the Commission's list of projects and staff has provided a list of grade separation .projects and needs to be considered for its voluntary container fee. Commissioner Adams ,stated that 100% of the voluntary container premium goes directly towards grade separations projects where a legislativefee does not. The voluntary container premium would have "a joint powers authority consisting of the four counties to oversee the funds. Chair Terry Henderson expressed that greenhouse gas emissions will become an issue as the Commission moves forward and needs to be recognized in future staff reports. Stephanie Wiggins replied that a request has been made to Southern California Association of Governments (SLAG) toprepare a greenhouse gas emissions assessment. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes September 12, 2007 Page 11 In response to Commissioner Buster's question regarding the use of these funds for pollution reduction and environmental _ justice issues, Stephanie Wiggins replied that there is a separate $1 billion fund as part of Proposition 1 B for those uses and staff is monitoring how those funds will be allocated. M/S/C (Busch/M. Wilson) to: 1) Approve the Southern California Consensus Position on the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIf) allocation process .as identified in Attachment 1; 2) Endorse the resulting Southern California TC1F Candidate List of Projects as identified in Attachment 2; and 3) Continue to work with the Southern California Working Group to advocate for inclusion of the consensus position in future legislation and/or California Transportation Commission (CTC) guidelines for the TCIF. 9. IDENTIFICATION OF A LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE FOR THE MID COUNTY PARKWAY Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director, presented the identification of a locally preferred alternative for the Mid County Parkway (MCP) and discussed the following areas: • Riverside County Integrated Project; Four Priority Corridors - Identified as part of the Community and Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP); Hemet -Corona, Lake Elsinore (HOLE) Corridor - Study area encompassed 1000 sq. miles, 14 alternatives evaluated, 120 + miles, modeling showed alternatives in the northern part of the study area provided the greatest transportation benefit; Agreement between local, state and federal partners for the completion of the project -level National Environmental Policy Act document for the Cajalco-Ramona Corridor Riverside County California, Multi -Modal Transportation Facility; MCP partner agencies - Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Environmental Protection Agency, Army Corps of Engineers, US Fish and Wildlife Agency, Caltrans and California Department of Fish and Game; Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes September 12, 2007 Page 12 • • • Studies include - Air quality, biological resources, community impacts,cultural resources, floodplain evaluation, geology and soils, hazardous waste, noise, parks and recreation, public services and utilities, transportation/traffic, visual and water resources; Designation of a preferred alternative — Provides early disclosure to the public, allows the public and agencies to provide focused input, saves money and minimizes impacts, does not preclude adjustments and streamlines federal permit processing; Alternative 9 — Least number of residential and business displacements, lowest cost, least damaging to water resources and species, only alternative which completely avoids Metropolitan Water District (MWD) Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), lowest direct impact to low income/minority populations, fewest impacts to farmland, and existing reserve lands and avoids a sacred site; Selection of a locally preferred alternative does not complete the approval process; and Next steps - Release draft environmental impact report and environmental impact study (EIR/EIS) for public review in January/February 2008; hold public hearings to receive comments, finalize EIR/EIS to address comments; Comrnission ' selection of a final alternative, certify the EIR under CEQA and approve the <project approximately November 2008; .record of decision by FHWA by December 2008; permits, final design and right-of-way acquisition by 2009 and construction in phases once funding secured by 2011 +; At Commissioner Barbara Hanna's request for clarification on the notification on the MCP website, :Cathy Bechtel replied that there is a MCP project website as well as project websites for SR-79, Perris Valley Line and Riverside -Orange County Major Investment Study. She explained one of the ` links on the MCP website states that one can sign up to be notified of public meetings, which is used to notify the public of special community meeting specific to the project. She stated that it has never been used, nor was it intended to be used each time the MCP was going to be discussed at a . Commission meeting. As it was mentioned earlier, the Commission agenda is posted on the Commission's website on a regular monthly basis for public access. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes September 12, 2007 Page 13 Tom Jacobson, representing the Valley Group, submitted a speaker card and had to leave prior to the opening- of the public comment period on this item. Chair Henderson read his comments from the speaker card, which stated support of the locally preferred alternative for the MCP. Ken Halama, Director of the Mott Rimrock Reserve, expressed concern for the locally preferred alternative for the MCP due to its close proximity to the. reserve that could jeopardize the use and teaching capabilities of the reserve as well as its biological integrity. Paul Rodriguez, representing Urban Crossroads, expressed support for the identification of a locally preferred alternative for the MCP, which allows for a single focus on an alternative. Urban Crossroads is advocating for the process, not a specific alternative at this time. Michelle Awadalla, Governmental Affairs Manager for Greater Riverside Chambers of Commerce, expressed support for the identification of the locally preferred alternative for the MCP in order to relieve traffic congestion and streamline the movement of goods and services that will enhance the local economy. John Roth, Gavilan Hills area resident, expressed concern for the locally preferred alternative for the MCP due to community impacts, design, costs, and commutability. He suggested that the Commission tour the area prior to taking action on this agenda item. He also indicated that he has another alternative that he will submit to Cathy Bechtel. Joy Robinson, representing the Residents Association of Greater Lake Mathews, also expressed concern for the locally preferred alternative for the MCP due to air quality issues that would result from the topography of the area. She suggested that the Commission tour the area prior to taking action on this agenda item. Additionally, she expressed dissatisfaction with the meeting notification process. Chair Henderson approved the request from Sandra Rytych, representing the Residents Association of Greater Lake Mathews, to yield her speaker time to Cynthia Ferry. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes September 12, 2007 Page 14 Cynthia Ferry, representing the Lake Mathews Talks community site, also expressed concern for the locally preferred alternative for MCP due to the air quality, traffic, noise, vibration, habitat sensitivity, and community -impacts. She believes Alternative 9 is not the most economically feasible alternative as it relates to properties. Ms. Ferry submitted letters from community residents to the Commission also expressing concern for the locally preferred alternative . for MCP. The letters will be incorporated into the record and distributed to the Commissioners. She then discussed a document submitted by the Residents Association of Greater Lake Mathews to the Commission in August 2001 regarding another alternative. Laurie Taylor, representing the Residents Association of Greater Lake Mathews, invited the Commission to tour the area prior to taking action on this agenda item. She also discussed the alternative route submittal by the Residents Association of Greater Lake Mathews and requested that it be reviewed again and compared to Alternative 9.. She also expressed concern for the locally preferred alternative for the MCP due to community, air quality, traffic, and habitat impacts. Charline Harrigan, Perris resident, also expressed concern for the locally preferred alternative for the MCP due to its environmental impacts and dissatisfaction with the meeting notification process. Commissioner Miller made a motion to approve staff recommendation in an effort to move this project forward. Commissioner Roger Berg concurred with Commissioner Miller':s motion. He stated that an alternative is necessary to relieve traffic congestion and it is the Commission's responsibility to look at the regional benefits of a project. Commissioner Bob 'Buster expressed strong concern for the adoption of a locally preferred alternative for the MCP. He recommended utilizing Cajalco Road as a boundary to create an alignment from the 1-15 to 1-21.5 freeway as the preferred alternative, noting that Alternative .9 is located in a rural area. He explained that with respect to environmental justice issues, Mead Valley has drainage issues and very dilapidated housing that needs to be upgraded and relocated. Therefore, he believes an alignment along Cajalco Road could help in an effort to improve Mead Valley. He requested staff explain why the Commission cannot overcome the obstacles with the MWD agreement. Additionally, he believes that there has been selectivity of criteria in the process without looking at all the options and alternatives. He stated that Alternative 9 would not serve the southern portion of Riverside. " " 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 M i n u t e s S e p t e m b e r 1 2 , 2 0 0 7 P a g e 1 5 H e a l s o e x p r e s s e d c o n c e r n f o r t h e l a c k o f d i r e c t n o t i c e s b y m a i l t o t h e a f f e c t e d a r e a r e s i d e n t s . H e r e q u e s t e d t h a t a n a d d i t i o n a l a n a l y s i s b y a n i n d e p e n d e n t ' s c i e n t i f i c r e v i e w p a n e l b e p e r f o r m e d t o d e t e r m i n e h o w t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s c o m p a r e r e l a t e d t o d a m a g e t o t h e e n v i r o n m e n t , i m p r o v e d a c c e s s , a n d ' p o l l u t i o n a n d n o i s e i m p a c t s . H e s t a t e d t h a t h i s g r e a t e s t c o n c e r n a b o u t A l t e r n a t i v e 9 i s i t s i m p a c t o n l a n d u s e . C h a i r H e n d e r s o n a s k e d C a t h y B e c h t e l t o r e s p o n d . t o C o m m i s s i o n e r B u s t e r ' s c o m m e n t s a s s h e r e c a l l s r e v i e w i n g s e v e r a l a l t e r n a t i v e s i n t h e p a s t y e a r s . S h e r e i t e r a t e d t h a t t h i s a c t i o n b e f o r e t h e C o m m i s s i o n i s t o : d e s i g n a t e A l t e r n a t i v e 9 a s t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s 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 a n d d o e s n o t . c o m p l e t e t h e a p p r o v a l p r o c e s s . C a t h y B e c h t e l s t a t e d t h a t a t h o r o u g h a n a l y s i s i s r e q u i r e d f o r a l l t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s a n d e x p l a i n e d t h a t s t a f f h a s b e e n w o r k i n g o v e r t h e ; E a s t t h r e e a n d a h a l f y e a r s , o n a m o n t h l y b a s i s , w i t h t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s c o n s u l t a n t t e a m , a l o n g w i t h t h e f e d e r a l r e s o u r c e a g e n c i e s ; A r m y C o r e o f E n g i n e e r s , E n v i r o n m e n t a l P r o t e c t i o n A g e n c y , U . S . F i s h a n d W i l d l i f e , a n d C a l i f o r n i a D e p a r t m e n t o f F i s h a n d G a m e . T h e t e c h n i c a l r e p o r t s , w h i c h h a v e r e c e n t l y b e e n c o m p l e t e d , l o o k a t t h e i m p a c t s o f w a t e r s , n o i s e , a n d a i r p o l l u t i o n a s a l l o f t h e s e a n a l y s e s m u s t b e c o n d u c t e d a n d w i l l b e a ' p a r t o f t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l i m p a c t r e p o r t . C a t h y B e c h t e l s t a t e d t h a t b a s e d o n t h e s t u d i e s , a d d i n g o n e t o t w o b a n e s t o e x i s t i n g C a j a l c o R o a d i s n o t p r o j e c t e d t o b e a b l e t o a c c o m m o d a t e t h e a n t i c i p a t e d g r o w t h i n t h a t a r e a . S h e e x p l a i n e d t h a t i n t h e M e a d V a l l e y a r e a , t h e a l i g n m e n t o f t h e M C P w o u l d b e t h e r e a l o n g w i t h t h e e x i s t i n g C a j a l c o R o a d , r e s u l t i n g i n 1 2 0 p r o p e r t y d i s p l a c e m e n t s v e r s u s n i n e o n A l t e r n a t i v e 9 . D u e t o t h e n u m b e r o f h o m e s i n t h a t a r e a , i t w o u l d a l s o r e q u i r e f r o n t a g e r o a d s f o r c o m m u n i t y a c c e s s , i m p a c t i n g a n a d d i t i o n a l 5 0 h o m e s . T h e c u r r e n t r i g h t - o f - w a y o n C a j a l c o R o a d i s a p p r o x i m a t e l y 7 6 f e e t . T h e r i g h t - o f - w a y n e e d e d f o r t h e M C P i s 2 2 0 f e e t a n d w i t h t h e a d d i t i o n o f t h e f r o n t a g e r o a d , a t o t a l o f 3 3 5 f e e t o f r i g h t - o f - w a y w o u l d b e n e e d e d f o r a n a l i g n m e n t o n C a j a l c o R o a d . S h e a d d r e s s e d t h e i s s u e s a b o u t t h e p o s t i n g o f m e e t i n g s a n d e x p l a i n e d t h a t m o d i f i c a t i o n s h a v e b e e n m a d e o n t h e a l l p r o j e c t w e b s i t e t o m a k e i t v e r y c l e a r t h a t n o t i f i c a t i o n w o u l d b e f o r s c h e d u l e d c o m m u n i t y m e e t i n g s a n d p u b l i c h e a r i n g s o n t h e p r o j e c t . I n r e s p o n s e t o C o m m i s s i o n e r R o b i n L o w e ' s q u e s t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e i n v o l v e m e n t o f t h e R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y H a b i t a t C o n s e r v a t i o n A g e n c y ( R C H C A ) i n t h e d i s c u s s i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e , p r e f e r r e d a l t e r n a t i v e , C a t h y B e c h t e l c o n f i r m e d i t s p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes September 12, 2007 Page 16 At Commissioner Mary Craton's request for information on a proposed alternative alignment and the elevation issues that were referenced in the public, .comments, Cathy Bechtel replied that the referenced alignment was submitted in 2001, considered, and rejected. The primary reason it was rejected was due to its location in the south. Studies showed that the farther north the alignment, the greater transportation benefit to the region. With regard to the public comments concerning the circuitous alignment of Alternative 9, sheresponded that if the alignment were straight, it would travel through several neighborhoods. Additionally, . the length of Alternative 9 is 31.9 miles while the other alternatives exceed 32 miles. She explained that all of the MCP alternatives are being designed to meet the Ca'trans' requirements. Chair Henderson asked who rejected the alternative alignments and what caused the Commission to look at Alternative 9 when there were three other alternative alignments being reviewed approximately three years ago and it was recommended by the Commission to look further. Cathy Bechtel replied that the alignments are accepted or rejected by'a small working group (SWG) for the project and provided the agencies involved. The SWG meets on a regular basis and reviews all of the data and makes determinations on what is and is not acceptable. As part of the process, there is a .federal requirement that stipulates if the project is in excess :.of $25 million, it must go through a value analysis study andindependent experts are brought in, -which have not been working on the project, to look at the alternative studies to see if improvements can be made. The value analysis study encouraged the SWG to come up with a different alignment that completely avoided the MWD reserve as going through that reserve would be difficult, which resulted in Alternative 9. However, this does .not take the other alternative alignments off the table. Commissioner John: Chlebnik expressed that if any other alternative was selected, he felt there would still be the same arguments, positions, and emotions involved. He stated that he believes the only alternative that he sees in order to please everyone is to abandon the entire idea of the MCP and questioned the acceptability of abandonment. Commissioner Michael Wilson stated that staff has received considerable criticism on every alternative that has been studied . and believes it: is not warranted He commended Cathy Bechtel and Commission staff for their work efforts and believes the Commission staff is the most dedicated, ethical staff that he has worked with in his 13 years in public office. He highlighted • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes September 12, 2007 Page 17 that the staff report states on page 165 that "this does not preclude the Commission from making adjustments to the preferred_ alterative during the public comment process." This process includes the communities that are affected and allows them to come forward and express their concerns. He noted that he has spent a considerable amount of time fighting fires in the impacted and surrounding areas and therefore knows them well. Commissioner Marion Ashley expressed understanding for Commissioner Buster's district as his district is experiencing similar impacts. He stated that this process has been going on for several years and many alternatives have been considered. There have been scoping session and public meetings regarding this alignment. He stated the need for the MCP and believes that by taking action now on a locally preferred alternative enhances the transparency of this process. Commissioner Alex Bias requested that staff provide elevation maps to the Commission for review. Commissioner Buster reminded the Commission that the SR-74 project was success in dealing with hundreds of homeowners and businesses because the public expects an existing right-of-way to be upgraded and expanded.. This is an extremely heavy burden for this Commission to select an entirely new alternative when there is an existing one on Cajalco Road that offers more advantages. Commissioner. Daryl Busch stated that the largest number of properties will be taken in the city of Perris. He stated that he has been a resident of Perris for a number of years and a number of the Commissioners are familiar with the areas being discussed He expressed concerns with the process, however he supports conducting the study and moving forward. There were written comments received from Theresa Hoag and Judy Piquet, which were distributed to the Commissioners. M/S/C (Miller/Adams) to designate Alternative 9, the far south alternative, as the Commission's locally preferred alternative for the Mid County Parkway (MCP). No: Buster, Hanna, ;Roberts, and Stone Abstain: Kelly Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes September 12, 2007 Page 18 Chair Henderson restated that the Commission's selection of a locally preferred alternative does not complete the approval process :and encouraged the public to continue their activism. 10. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR FOR DISCUSSION . There were no items pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion. 11. COMMISSIONERS/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 1 1 A. Eric Haley: • Announced the opening of the Blaine Street Bridge; Announced the groundbreaking ceremony for the La Sierra Interchange will be held on September '19, 2007; Briefed the Commission on the upcoming Martin .Luther King Groundbreaking; Recognized Anne Mayer, Deputy Executive Director, for her involvement with the Project Delivery Counsel in: overseeing the progress of Corridor Mobility Improvement Account program; and Recognized Shirley Medina, Program Manager, for her more than 15 years of service with the Commission. Announced that the Commission Workshop previously scheduled for October 11-12, 2007, will be rescheduled to early 2008. Shirley Medina, Program Manager, expressed her gratitude :for the opportunity to work for the Commission. 11 B. Commissioner Dick Kelly announced a dedication ceremony for the Portola Bridge on October 6, sponsored by the :city of Palm Desert and the Coachella Valley Association of Governments. 12. CLOSED SESSION 12A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Pursuant to Subdivision (b) of Government Code Section 54956.9 Significant exposure to litigation. Number of potential cases: 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 M i n u t e s S e p t e m b e r 1 2 , 2 0 0 7 P a g e 1 9 1 2 B . C O N F E R E N C E W I T H R E A L P R O P E R T Y N E G O T I A T O R N e g o t i a t i n g P a r t i e s : S e l l e r : R C T C E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r o r D e s i g n e e B u y e r : E M W S P r o p e r t y D e s c r i p t i o n : A P N 2 9 7 - 1 0 0 - 0 0 3 T h e r e w e r e n o a n n o u n c e m e n t s f r o m C l o s e d S e s s i o n i t e m s . i 1 3 . 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 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 , t h e m e e t i n g a d j o u r n e d a t 1 1 : 5 7 a . m . T h e n e x t C o m m i s s i o n m e e t i n g i s s c h e d u l e d t o b e h e l d a t 9 : 3 0 a . m . , o n W e d n e s d a y , : . O c t o b e r 1 0 2 0 0 7 , 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 , R i v e r s i d e , C a l i f o r n i a , 9 2 5 0 1 . R e s p e c t f u l l y s u b m i t t e d , O s u " ^ ) - - & . t i p . - - 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 AGENDA ITEM 7A RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 10, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Shirley Medina, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Amendment to Contribution Agreement for Interstate 215 Corridor Improvements – Design Sequencing Project for Adjustments to Funding Plan BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 03-31-064-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 03-31-064 (Caltrans No. 08-1207 A/1) to reflect adjustments in Measure A funding; and 2) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The I-215 Corridor Improvement – Design Sequencing project is nearing completion and will begin opening major project segments starting the end of 2007. The original contribution agreement with Caltrans indicates that adjustments to funding would require amending the agreement to reflect fund changes. Commission staff has repeatedly updated funding throughout the construction of the project to provide the utmost flexibility in delivering this project on schedule. The adjustments previously approved by the Commission have been incorporated into the attached draft amendment to Agreement No. 03-31-064 (Caltrans No. 08-1207 A/1). Staff recommends approving the agreement and authorizing the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement. Agenda Item 7A 1 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes No Year: FY 2007/08 Amount: $10,000,000 $20,000,000 Source of Funds: Measure A Budget Adjustment: No Yes GLA No.: 222 31 81301 P3006 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 09/24/2007 Attachment: Agreement No. 03-31-064-01 Agenda Item 7A 2 08-Riv-60-PM 11.5/14.0 08-Riv-91-PM 20.3/21.6 08-Riv-215-PM 37.4/43.9 Widen I-215 from 6 to 8 lanes Construct AUX lanes, truck by-pass Lane, truck climbing lane, and Improve mainline and interchanges EA 334844 District Agreement No. 8-1207 A/1 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT This AMENDMENT NO. 1 to AGREEMENT NO. 8-1207, entered into effective on __________________, 2007, is between the STATE OF CALIFORNIA, acting by and through its Department of Transportation, referred to herein as “STATE,” and the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, a public entity, referred to herein as “RCTC.” RECITALS 1. STATE and RCTC, pursuant to Streets and Highways Code sections 114 and 130, are authorized to enter into a Cooperative Agreement for improvements to the State Highway System within RCTC’s jurisdiction. 2. The parties hereto entered into Agreement 08-1207 on April 9, 2003, under which a State Highway improvement consisting of widening Interstate 215 (I-215) from 6 lanes to 8 lanes, constructing auxiliary lanes, truck by-pass and climbing lane and improving mainline and interchanges on I-215, referred to herein as “PROJECT” was to be partially financed. 3. It has been determined that an increase of $30,000,000 is needed to meet PROJECT obligations and RCTC has agreed to use $30,000,000 of Measure A-Local funds allocated to PROJECT. 4. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement 8-1207 shall remain in effect. This Amendment shall deem to be part of the Agreement. DRAFT: September 21, 2007 13 District Agreement No. 8-1207 A/1 IT IS THEREFORE MUTUALLY AGREED: 1. Under State Agrees, Section I, the following Article 5 is hereby added and made a part of Agreement No. 8-1207 and will read as follows: 5. “To submit an initial billing in the amount of $10,000,000 to RCTC immediately following execution of this Amendment to Agreement. Thereafter, to prepare and submit progress billing statements to RCTC for construction costs.” 2. Under RCTC Agrees, Section II, the following Article 5 is hereby added and made a part of Agreement No. 8-1207 and will read as follows: 5. “Following execution of this Amendment to Agreement, to deposit with STATE upon fifteen (15) days of receipt of invoice, the amount of $10,000,000, using Measure A-Local funds. Said amount shall represent a portion of PROJECT construction costs. Thereafter, to pay the amount as shown in the progress statements provided by STATE.” 3. Exhibits A and B are replaced in their entirety by the attached new Exhibits A and B. SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE: STATE OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE COUNTY DRAFT: September 21, 2007 24 District Agreement No. 8-1207 A/1 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION WILL KEMPTON Director By: __ ERIC HALEY Executive Director By: MICHAEL A. PEROVICH District Director By:_____________________________ Legal Counsel BEST, BEST AND KRIEGER Certified as to Funds: By: District Budget Manager Approved as to Form and Procedure: By: Attorney, Department of Transportation Certified as to Procedure: By: Accounting Administrator DRAFT: September 21, 2007 35 EXHIBIT "A"Contribution Letter for State Administered ProjectsDate 31-Jul-07Local Agency RCTCAgreement No. 08 - 1207State E. A. No. 08-RIV-334841Revision No. 3Local - Federal Fund TypeLocal - Federal Contributor AmountReimbursement Ratio Match Fund Type Match Amount Current Total Previous TotalProposed ChangeCMAQ $8,374,000 88.53% TCRP $1,085,000 $9,459,000 TCRP Subtotal = $1,085,000 CMAQ $6,668,000 88.53% Measure A $864,000 $7,532,000RSTP $13,327,000 88.53% Measure A $1,741,000 $15,068,000Measure A Subtotal = $2,605,000 Grand Total = $28,369,000 $3,690,000 $32,059,000Notes:Local Agency SignatureCaltrans Project Manager Signature1) Identify each Local Federal fund type and match on separate lines with current and previous contributor totals towards the State-Administered project. 2) A separate finance letter is required to identify the type and amount of funds to be authorized, allocated, and/or applied to each phase of the work by STATE.3) An amendment to this contribution letter is required for any change to the type and/or amount of funds contributed towards the State Administered project or changes to the EA.4) Local Agency is responsible for all programming changes to the RTIP, FTIP and/or STIP.D08 05 / 306 7 AGENDA ITEM 7B RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 10, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Technical Advisory Committee Shirley Medina, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Request From the City of Palm Springs for Additional Federal Funds on Gene Autry Trail Widening Project BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE, TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the increase of federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds on the Gene Autry Trail widening project from $1.54 million to $4,038,020. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The attached letter from the city of Palm Springs (City), dated September 4, 2007, is requesting additional federal STP funding on the Gene Autry Trail Railroad Bridge project. This project was originally approved for 2002 State Transportation Improvement Program discretionary funding and was subsequently reprogrammed with federal STP funding due to the state budget crisis that began in 2003. As indicated in the City’s letter, this project has experienced extenuating circumstances in delivery. The original project estimate was developed in 2000. Due to inflation costs and the spike in construction materials over the last few years the project costs increased 71.3%, from $2.2 million to $3,768,600. Another issue the City encountered was related to the timing of the Union Pacific Railroad’s additional main line track improvement, which will also require the City to construct a reinforced concrete wall section in the amount of $1.5 million. Lastly, the Palm Drive/Gene Autry interchange project will connect to the City’s project and will require an elevated road profile, which was not known at the time the project was submitted for funding. The cost associated with the profile is $500,000. The City will also be required to delay its project until after the start of construction of the interchange project. Total cost increases of $3,568,600 result in a total project cost of $5,768,600. Agenda Item 7B 8 The City is requesting an increase of $2,498,020 to the original STP funds of $1.54 million for a total of $4,038,020. The City will maintain the same federal/local share (70% federal and 30% local) funding split with the City funding contribution of $1,730,580. This request was presented and approved at the September 17, 2007 Technical Advisory Committee meeting. Staff recommends support for the increase in STP funds given the unforeseen extenuating circumstances. Due to project delays, there is capacity to add STP funding to this project. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: N/A Year: N/A Amount: $2,498,020 Source of Funds: Surface Transportation Program Budget Adjustment: N/A GLA No.: N/A Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 09/18/2007 Attachment: City of Palm Springs Request Agenda Item 7B 9 10 11 AGENDA ITEM 7C RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 10, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Jerry Rivera, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2008-12 Measure A Five-Year Capital Improvement Plans for Local Streets and Roads for the Cities of Beaumont and Lake Elsinore BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the FY 2008-12 Measure A Five-Year Capital Improvement Plans (CIP) for local streets and roads for the cities of Beaumont and Lake Elsinore as submitted. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Measure A requires each recipient of local streets and roads monies to annually provide to the Commission a five-year plan on how those funds are to be expended in order to receive its Measure A disbursements. In addition, the Coachella Valley and Western County cities and the county must participate in either the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) or Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program. The agencies are required to submit the annual certification of maintenance of effort (MOE) along with documentation supporting the calculation. On April 20, 2007, Commission staff provided the local agencies with Measure A revenue projections for local streets and roads to assist them in preparation of the required CIP. The agencies were asked to submit their CIPs by June 11, 2007, for submission to the Budget and Implementation Committee at its June 25, 2007 meeting and to the Commission on July 11, 2007. The Commission has previously approved the plans for all but three cities. Staff has received the required CIP, MOE and supporting documentation from the cities of Beaumont and Lake Elsinore and is requesting Commission approval of their CIPs. Staff has notified the remaining city, Desert Hot Springs, 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. Agenda Item 7C 12 Attachment: Measure A Capital Improvement Plans for Beaumont and Lake Elsinore Agenda Item 7C 13 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE “A” LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2007/2008 - 2011/2012 Agency: City of Beaumont Prepared by: Public Works Department Date: February 6, 2007 Page 1 of 1 Fiscal Year PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST STATUS MEASURE “A” 2006/2007 and 2007/2008 Palm Avenue, 6th Street to Oak Valley Parkway Rehabilitation $3,087,000 Under Construction $946,000 2008/2009 Pennsylvania Avenue, 6th Street to Oak Valley Parkway Rehabilitation $950,000 Under Design $500,0002009/2010 8th Street, Elm Avenue to Highland Springs Avenue Rehabilitation$1,200,000 Pending Design $525,0002010/2011 Brookside Avenue, Highland Springs Avenue to Beaumont Ave. Rehabilitation $700,000 Pending Design $550,0002011/2012 Oak Valley Parkway, Beaumont Avenue to Cherry Avenue Rehabilitation $750,000 Pending Design $575,000 14 15 16 17 18 19 AGENDA ITEM 7D Agenda Item 7D RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 10, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Jerry Rivera, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2007/08 Measure A Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan Amendment for Local Streets and Roads for the City of Palm Springs BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the amendment to the FY 2007/08 Measure A Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for local streets and roads for the city of Palm Springs as submitted. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Measure A requires each recipient of local streets and roads monies to annually provide to the Commission a five-year plan on how those funds are to be expended in order to receive its Measure A disbursements. In addition, the Coachella Valley and Western County cities and the county must participate in either the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) or Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program. The agencies are also required to submit an annual certification of maintenance of effort (MOE) along with documentation supporting the calculation. The CIP for the city of Palm Springs (City) was approved by the Commission at its July 11, 2007 meeting. Any revisions to the adopted plan must be returned to the Commission for approval. The City applied for and received grant funding for the signal at Indian Canyon Drive/Tamarisk Road. Therefore, the City is requesting to amend its FY 2007/08 CIP to move funding from the Indian/Tamarisk signal project to the next project on its priority list, the Sunrise Way at Alejo Road signal project. Attachment: Letter from the City of Palm Springs with Revised CIP Schedule 20 21 22 23 24 25 AGENDA ITEM 7E RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 10, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: San Jacinto Branch Line Ad Hoc Committee Stephanie Wiggins, Regional Programs Director THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fair Isle Drive Metrolink Station and Box Springs Quarry Property SAN JACINTO BRANCH LINE AD HOC COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to authorize staff to negotiate with Stone Pacific Development regarding the development of a Fair Isle Drive Metrolink station. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Stone Pacific Development is requesting that the Commission authorize the development of the Fair Isle Drive Metrolink station on their property. Development of the station would allow increased densities on the adjacent Gateway Center development, located in the Riverside County unincorporated area near the State Route 60/Interstate 215 interchange. Staff has conducted a feasibility study for the site that evaluated operational aspects and ridership impacts for the station. However, the feasibility study does not address the financial impacts of the station. Stone Pacific Development has submitted a proposal to address the financial challenges of developing a Fair Isle Drive Metrolink station, which involves the disposition of the Commissioned-owned Box Springs Quarry property. Attachments: 1) Fair Isle Drive Commuter Station Feasibility Study 2) Stone Pacific Station Proposal Agenda Item 7E 26 FINAL FAIR ISLE DRIVE COMMUTER STATION PRELIMINARY FEASIBILITY STUDY Executive Summary A station proposed near the Fair Isle Drive Interchange on the I-215 freeway is technically feasible and will attract a substantial ridership base. This new station will re- distribute ridership from both the proposed Alessandro Station and the downtown Riverside station. A station at Fair Isle Drive is also close enough to the UCR campus to serve as a point of access for that destination, although the currently proposed UCR station near Blaine Street and Watkins Drive is substantially closer to the University. Purpose of Study A developer has approached RCTC seeking support for a commuter rail station which would be located near the Fair Isle Drive interchange on the I-215 freeway. The RCTC Perris Valley Line (PVL) lies immediately to the east of the I-215 freeway and is adjacent to a large parcel of land being developed in the Box Springs area. Current plans for the PVL include a station to the north of this site at the University of California at Riverside (UCR) near Watkins Drive and Blaine Street and a station to the south at Alessandro Boulevard. There are no current plans for a station in the Box Springs area. The purpose of this study is to conduct a preliminary feasibility study to determine whether a commuter station at this location is technically feasible and what impacts— positive and negative—it might have on PVL ridership and on access to UCR. The technical feasibility does not address financial feasibility. Station Location The proposal, as initially presented by the developer, is to locate a station along the PVL either north or south of an extension of Fair Isle Drive into the project site. Fair Isle Drive is an interchange on the I-215 freeway. On the east side of the I-215 freeway, Fair Isle Drive terminates and curves into Box Springs Road which parallels the I-215 freeway to the south and east and provides access into Moreno Valley. At this location Fair Isle Drive is substantially higher than the PVL which is at the bottom of a long, sloping hill within the project area. (photo). The developer proposes to extend Fair Isle Drive easterly from its current terminus at Box Springs Road over the PVL line and into the project site (map of Gateway Center). 6/11/07 127 Basic Metrolink Station Requirements In addition to all the specialized hardware required at a commuter rail station, the basic elements are 1) a minimum 750 foot platform located on tangent track, and 2) sufficient parking for at least 500 cars. Since track is relatively curvy in the Box Springs area the track in the vicinity of Fair Isle Drive was examined to determine whether there was sufficient tangent track either north or south of the proposed Fair Isle Drive overpass of the PVL. It appears that there is insufficient continuous tangent track to the south of the Fair Isle Drive over-crossing. It might be possible to re-align the track somewhat on either side of the proposed Fair Isle Drive overpass and create a 750 foot segment of tangent track with a substantial portion of this track directly beneath the overpass. If it were desired to locate a station in this precise location, additional engineering work will be required to confirm whether this is feasible. On the other hand, commencing approximately 400 feet to the north of the Fair Isle Drive extension, there appears to be approximately 2,000 of feet of tangent track. Thus a 750 foot platform could be located anywhere within this segment depending upon related access and parking issues. This section of track is still well within the project area. In fact this segment is located near the middle of the project area on its western boundary. The second major element of a station is parking. The project area is currently undeveloped. While there is a significant elevation differential between the PVL track (and future platform) and the land immediately to the east it is assumed that a parking pad could be provided with sufficient grading or that a parking structure could be provided. For the purposes of this study a minimum of 500 parking spaces appears feasible. PVL Gradient Issues In this section of the PVL, the line has been ascending from the Highgrove area at a relatively constant grade of approximately 2.2% (a gain in elevation of 2.2 feet every 100 feet). This relatively steep railroad grade and the numerous horizontal curves combine to reduce the speed of the trains through Box Springs Canyon. While a Metrolink train has sufficient power to operate at reasonable speed through this area, having to stop and re- accelerate uphill from a station on a steep grade can present some challenges. On the Metrolink system the Vincent Grade/Acton station in the Antelope Valley is located on a 2% grade. The proposed location for this Fair Isle Drive Station has been submitted to Metrolink for its very preliminary review. Metrolink has responded that its preference is that stations be limited to less than 2% grades although from time to time stations have been built with grades up to 2.5%. According to the Metrolink review, “the locomotive engineer can have difficulty stopping on steeper grades and this can create problems with over shooting the platforms and mini highs. If there is not a practical way to flatten the grade at the station to less than 2% the steeper grade and stopping problems can be compensated with a slightly longer platform length (say 800 feet as opposed to 750 feet) and a longer mini-high (elevated handicapped access platform).” 6/11/07 228 Based upon this review, since there appears to be sufficient tangent track to build at least an 800 foot platform and expanded mini-platform for handicapped access, this site is judged technically feasible. Further, if necessary, it might be possible to construct a station track separate from the main track with a combination of somewhat steeper grades approaching the station but a relatively flatter grade at the station itself. Regional Access Issues A key element of an attractive commuter rail station is that it must be located on a good regional roadway network. The I-215 freeway, serving Moreno Valley and providing the most direct access towards freeways serving Los Angeles and Orange Counties, passes immediately to the west of the site of this station. The Fair Isle Drive interchange provides direct access into the site. In addition, per the map provided by the developer, the proposed roadway network within the project site will also provide access into the site from the east. Morton Road borders the project area on the east and connects with Box Springs Road on the south. Box Springs Road changes to Ironwood Avenue as it enters Moreno Valley and is a major east/west roadway north of the State Route 60 freeway. It would be possible to access the commuter rail station from all areas north of the State Route 60 freeway without ever entering the freeway. Regional access to this site is excellent. Potential Ridership Without a station in this location, residents of the surrounding area would likely access the Metrolink system either by driving to the downtown Riverside station (if you live north of State Route 60 in Moreno Valley or in University City at Fair Isle Drive) or by driving to the Alessandro Boulevard station (for those primarily living south of State Route 60 in Moreno Valley). Some commuters may use the UCR station, but only if they are dropped off by others as no parking will be provided at that station. Some small number of commuters living north of State Route 60 may choose to use the Alessandro station but that represents significant “back-tracking” that generally discourages commuters from using such stations. With a station at Fair Isle Drive, it is probable that as much as 50% of the population in the Moreno Valley and 100% of the population in University City at Fair Isle Drive will choose to use this station. For one, such a station is exactly in the direction of travel. For another, egress from the freeway is excellent and directly into the station. For another, there is another access point using Ironwood Avenue which totally avoids the freeway congestion. Finally, virtually all the residents living north of the State Route 60 freeway in Moreno Valley have to travel south to either Ironwood Avenue or the freeway in order to commute to work. There are no other east/west roadways north of Ironwood Avenue that provide as good an access to the freeway or rail network as those two roadways. 6/11/07 329 A ridership forecast for the Perris Valley Line (PVL) has been prepared. This estimate has defined an operating system which includes stations to the south of Fair Isle Drive at Alessandro Boulevard and to the north at UCR, Spruce/Rustin, and Downtown Riverside. The UCR station will have no parking. The model used to forecast ridership for a future commuter rail service on the PVL assigns ridership to a specific station automatically based upon trip distance and total travel time from a home origin to a work destination. In other words, the forecasting model will “search” for the best total travel time link from home to work. In the case of residents near a hypothetical Fair Isle Drive station, this likely means that some residents will have a superior travel time pathway using the Alessandro station but for most near the Fair Isle Drive station the superior travel time pathway might well be the downtown Riverside station. A Fair Isle Drive station would totally change this equation, with the Fair Isle Drive station becoming far more attractive than a downtown Riverside station. The reason for this is that travel to an Alessandro station for residents living north of the State Route 60 freeway involves substantial “back tracking”, traveling away from the ultimate destination, while traveling to a downtown Riverside station involves traveling in the direction of the ultimate destination. A Fair Isle Drive station would be in a position to intercept virtually all of the Moreno Valley traffic otherwise attracted to the downtown Riverside station (the lack of parking at the UCR station and the off-line location of the Spruce/Rustin station would not be attractive to these commuters). A Fair Isle Drive station would likely improve the overall attractiveness of the commuter rail service as well. Even though the current model likely allocates a significant percentage of Moreno Valley users to the downtown Riverside station, there is still a significant travel time penalty associated with using the congested I-215 freeway to access that station. With a Fair Isle Drive station that travel time penalty disappears and the total trip time from the Moreno Valley to the ultimate destination decreases. By decreasing the total travel time the effect is to increase the mode split by some amount between driving and commuting by rail. From a ridership perspective this station is clearly feasible. Environmental Issues In the vicinity of the proposed station, to the immediate west of the railroad right of way, there is an area of springs and extensive vegetation. A new station would not likely encroach upon this area since both the platform and parking would be on the east side of the railroad right of way. Furthermore, the Gateway Center project has been the subject of environmental review by the County of Riverside and I understand the project has some level of government approval. Thus there do not appear to be any substantial environmental obstacles, although clearly issues such as drainage from the project site will have to be addressed as part of any development process. In the Metrolink review of the station site, the engineering staff specifically addressed the potential over-crossing of the PVL by the extension of Fair Isle Drive. Metrolink noted 6/11/07 430 that “the developer needs to set the bridge span and columns for an eventual double tracking and two outboard (outside platform on each track) of this line even though it will only be a single track with a single platform initially.” This will require approximately 70 feet of unobstructed clearance underneath the structure. Vertical clearance must be no less than 23.5 feet from top of rail to the bridge soffit. Relationship of a Fair Isle Drive Station to UCR Station As noted earlier in this review, current plans for the PVL include a station to the north at Blaine Avenue and Watkins Drive adjacent to UCR and to the south a station at Alessandro Boulevard. The station at UCR is planned primarily as either a walk-up or drop-off station for boarding passengers as there will be no parking provided. The principal function of the UCR station is to accommodate students and employees of UCR arriving from points farther south on the PVL line. It is assumed that a shuttle would operate between this station and work place destinations on campus. From the approximate location of the UCR station to the center of campus is about ½ mile. From a new Fair Isle Drive station a University shuttle could either 1) enter the freeway at Fair Isle Drive, then immediately exit at Central Avenue and connect with Watkins Drive for the trip to the University or 2) cross over the freeway at Fair Isle Drive and use Box Springs Road to reach Central Avenue and Watkins Drive. The total distance to the center of campus is approximately 2.7 miles. In addition to the distance, there may be some additional travel time required because of heavy congestion at this freeway interchange during the peak period. One of the obvious questions is whether a new station at Fair Isle could substantially replicate the functions of the planned UCR station. This is clearly a judgment call. From the time the shuttle departed the currently planned UCR station it would likely be in the center of campus in no more than 5 minutes. Furthermore it has the advantage of already seeming to be on campus as the planned UCR station will be across the street from University structures. It is also relatively accessible by foot or bicycle. On the other hand, a Fair Isle station will likely require at least 10-15 minutes to access the center of campus, assuming minimum delays on the freeway portion of the route. A Fair Isle station would also be somewhat problematic to access by foot or bicycle because Watkins Drive travels uphill from the campus and pedestrians and bicyclists would have to compete with motorists making various turning movements as they cross Fair Isle Drive at the I-215. Notwithstanding these concerns, if the Fair Isle Drive station were the only station I believe it would be possible to market the service. It would be a more difficult sell because it is not very close to the University and the commuter would be virtually totally dependent upon the shuttle where with the UCR station a long hike was still a reasonable option. Nevertheless, as a rule of thumb, a connecting shuttle journey from the destination station to job site, is considered feasible and reasonable if it is within the range of 10-15 minutes. 6/11/07 531 Overall Station Assessment Irrespective of the new traffic generated by the development proposed for Box Springs, a Fair Isle Drive Station would be very attractive to existing residents of Moreno Valley. It would compete very well with an Alessandro Station and a downtown Riverside Station for ridership. Access into the station is excellent. The chief technical issue is the 2.2% gradient at the station site. Metrolink concurs that the grade is not a fundamental deterrent if the platform and handicapped mini-platform can be lengthened. The PVL track in this location has a 2,000 foot section of tangent track, of which there is clearly substantially more than the 800 feet suggested by Metrolink to mitigate the relative steepness of the station site. Based upon this preliminary review, a station at Fair Isle Drive appears technically feasible. The technical feasibility does not address financial feasibility. 6/11/07 632 33 34 35 AGENDA ITEM 7F RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 10, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: San Jacinto Branch Line Ad Hoc Committee Stephanie Wiggins, Regional Programs Director THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Property Transfer Agreement/Memorandum of Understanding with March Joint Powers Authority and LNR Riverside, LLC for the Moreno Valley/March Field Metrolink Station SAN JACINTO BRANCH LINE AD HOC COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve the Agreement/MOU No. 08-33-031-00 with March Joint Powers Authority (JPA) and LNR Riverside, LLC (LNR) for the transfer of property for the Moreno Valley/March Field Metrolink station; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The transfer of approximately 14.46 acres of land from LNR Riverside, LLC to the Commission is a requirement of the development agreement between March (JPA) and LNR. Located in the Meridian Business Park near Alessandro Boulevard and Meridian Parkway, the property has been identified as a potential station location for the Perris Valley Line (PVL) project and future statewide high speed rail. Impact for Perris Valley Line This site is proposed as a multi-modal Metrolink station to primarily serve nearby residents and Moreno Valley residents for the future PVL. Adjacent properties are already under development for office/commercial enterprises, increasing the attractiveness of the site as both an origin and destination station. Its proximity to the March Air Reserve Base also provides access to major employers along Interstate 215. Formerly identified as the “Alessandro Station”, this site is included in the federal environmental document and will be included in the state environmental document for the PVL project. Agenda Item 7F 36 Financial Impact A formal appraisal is underway to determine the value of the property. While the property is donated, the Commission is responsible for costs related to the title and closing, currently estimated at $20,000. Attachment: Moreno Valley/March Field Metrolink Station Site Plan Agenda Item 7F 37 38 AGENDA ITEM 7G Agenda Item 7G RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 10, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Min Saysay, Right-of-Way Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement with Spotless Janitorial Services to Provide Cleaning and Grounds Maintenance for the Five Metrolink Stations in Riverside County BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve selection of and award Agreement No. 08-24-023-00 to Spotless Janitorial Services (SJS) to provide cleaning and grounds maintenance services at the five Commission-owned Metrolink stations; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Commission is the owner and operator of five Metrolink stations in Riverside County. Station cleaning and grounds maintenance services are an important component in attracting the Metrolink rider as well as preserving the property investments of the Commission. In June 2007, the Commission authorized staff to release a request for proposals (RFP) for cleaning and grounds maintenance services for the Commission-owned and operated Metrolink stations. Calendar of Events Distribution of RFP June 26, 2007 Deadline for Proposal Submittal by 2:00 p.m. July 24, 2007 Interviews of all Proposers August 14, 2007 Consideration by Budget and Implementation Committee September 24, 2007 Commission Approval of Selection October 10, 2007 39 Selection Process Staff received proposals from four firms. A selection panel was assembled, which consisted of representatives from the Commission staff, Metrolink and Bechtel. The selection panel reviewed all proposals and concluded that all four firms would be invited to be interviewed by the selection panel. The criteria used by the selection panel were based on qualifications of the firm, staffing and project organization, work plan, cost and price, and completeness of response. The evaluation panel ranked the four firms as follows: Top Ranked Spotless Janitorial Services Second Jefferson Transitional Programs Third Woods Maintenance Services, Inc Fourth Kims Cleaning Service After careful evaluation of the proposals based on the criteria stated in the RFP, the panel selected SJS as the top ranked company qualified to provide station cleaning and grounds maintenance services. SJS, as the most responsive bidder, demonstrates a high quality of service with proactive management and a clear understanding of the maintenance of the Metrolink stations. Based on the results of the selection panel, staff recommends the contract be awarded to SJS for the cleaning and grounds maintenance of the Metrolink stations. Cost will be based on a firm fixed price and the term of the contract is three years with two one-year contract extension options to be exercised at the sole discretion of the Commission. The total contract value is $196,380. A budget of $38,185 for FY 2007/08 has been included in the current fiscal year’s budget. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A N/A N/A Year: FY 2007/08 FY 2008/09 FY 2009/10 FY 2010/11 Amount: $ 38,185 $ 65,460 $ 65,460 $ 27,275 Source of Funds: Local Transportation Funds Budget Adjustment: No GLA No.: 103 24 73317 P4001, P4002, P4003, P4004, and P4006 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 09/18/2007 Agenda Item 7G 40 AGENDA ITEM 7H Agenda Item 7H RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 10, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Sheldon Peterson, Program Manager Stephanie Wiggins, Regional Programs Director THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: North Main Corona Satellite Parking Agreements STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 08-25-027-00 between Corona Community LLC and the Commission to provide for 300 leased parking spaces as a satellite parking lot during construction of the North Main Corona parking structure construction; 2) Approve Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) No. 08-25-025-00 between the city of Corona (City) and the Commission to provide for shuttle services to a leased satellite parking lot during construction of the North Main Corona parking structure construction; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Rail Program is requesting to enter into two key agreements in order to provide satellite parking for the North Main Corona Metrolink riders during construction of the future parking structure. North Main Corona Parking Structure The North Main Corona parking structure was approved in 2002 for $11 million of State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and Interregional Improvement Program (IIP) funds. At its September 14, 2006 meeting, the Commission approved building parking structure C at the North Main Corona station as it yielded the highest number of spaces at 1,443 (1,098 structure + 345 east lot) to meet the demand indicated in the ridership forecast. Future plans for building parking structures A and B will be brought back to the Commission at a later time. Additional funding has been approved to provide for the complete estimated construction costs of $25 million. 41 Agenda Item 7H The parking structure’s final design is complete and City approvals have been obtained. Staff received the authorization from the Commission at its September 12, 2007 meeting to advertise for construction bids for the North Main Corona parking structure. With this authorization, it is anticipated that the construction contract could be awarded and construction could begin by the end of this year and last from 18 to 24 months. At its May 9, 2007 meeting, the Commission approved $180,000 to be used for the parking relocation efforts. Parking Relocation Strategy Staff has developed the following parking relocation strategy to offset the 239 parking spaces that will be lost during the 18 to 24 month construction period: 1) Encourage riders to use the Commission subsidized free transit connections provided by the Riverside Transit Agency and Corona Cruiser; 2) Encourage riders to use the West Corona and La Sierra stations, both of which have existing capacity and security; and 3) Provide a local satellite parking lot with shuttle access close to the North Main Corona station. Satellite Parking Agreements With the assistance of the city of Corona Redevelopment Agency, staff has identified the property at 351 W. Rincon Street in Corona, the Edwards Theater property, as an ideal location for a satellite parking lot during construction. The theater has been closed and there are up to 700 parking spaces available. The lot is also less than a half mile from the train station. Staff has worked with the property owner, Corona Community LLC, to develop a parking lease agreement that initially will allow for leasing 300 spaces for $5,000 a month (approximately $17 a space). The impacted area of the station parking lot will be 239 spaces, which will be replaced in the satellite parking lot. To address the needs of the park and ride users and vanpoolers in the area, the Commuter Assistance Program has agreed to partner in the lease for the additional 61 spaces, at a cost of $1,037 a month. The number of spaces and monthly lease costs can be increased or decreased based on demand. The parking lot lease will begin in December 2007, or as soon as construction requires it. Due to site availability, the term will initially be for 18 months. The agreement can be terminated within 30 days as soon as the parking structure is ready or if the property owner determine that it will need the property for development activities. In addition, there will be the need for some facility repairs and maintenance at the lease site since the Commission will be the only users. This includes signage, parking space re- striping, temporary fencing, and parking lot sweeping. It is anticipated that the maintenance costs should be no more than $10,000 for the first year. 42 In order to transfer Metrolink riders back and forth between the train station and the satellite parking lot, staff has developed a MOU with the City for a shuttle service. The City will provide a 14 passenger shuttle bus that will be operated through its Corona Cruiser transit contractor. The shuttle will be scheduled to meet all peak period trains and should be able to leave the station every fifteen minutes. The pass through cost for Corona’s transportation provider will be $48.37 an hour. This would make the anticipated cost for Monday through Friday service for the peak periods of six hours a day to be $6288.10 per month. The term would be for 24 months and could be terminated within 30 days as soon as the parking structure is ready. There is the potential for off peak riders to use the Corona Cruiser Blue Line along Main Street to connect passengers from a stop near the station to the stop near the satellite parking lot. Staff is requesting that the agreement and MOU be approved in order to best accommodate the Metrolink riders who will be displaced during the construction of the North Main Corona parking structure. A comprehensive outreach and communication program will be implemented to ensure that the impacted riders will be aware of their options during construction. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year:FY 2007/08 Amount: $89,276 Source of Funds: Local Transportation Funds Budget Adjustment: No GLA No.: 103 25 86101 P4006 $44,017 103 25 73001 P4006 $38,000 226 41 81002 P2106 $ 7,259 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 09/25/2007 Agenda Item 7H 43 AGENDA ITEM 7I Agenda Item 7I RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 10, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Henry Nickel, Staff Analyst Sheldon Peterson, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Commuter Rail Program Update STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file an update on the Commuter Rail Program. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: North Main Corona Parking Structure Construction Communication Plan With funding now secured for construction of the North Main Corona Metrolink station parking structure, the Commission is now working with local stake holders to secure offsite parking for station patrons displaced during construction. In keeping with its commitment to serving the needs of our passengers, the Commission will implement a comprehensive communications plan to educate station patrons regarding the construction disruptions and alternate parking options. The plan will include a series of flyers combined with banners displayed at the station beginning in mid-October. La Sierra Avenue/State Route 91 Interchange Improvements Communication Plan Construction of the $38 million La Sierra Avenue/State Route 91 Interchange project will commence in October 2007, and is scheduled for completion in July 2009. The project will extend from Diana Avenue/Montlake Drive to Indiana Avenue. Approximately 3,000 feet along State Route 91 will also be affected by the project. Construction of the project will enhance the capacity and operation of the interchange. Both the freeway and the railroad bridges will be replaced with six-lane structures including dual left turn lanes and the freeway ramps will be widened to three lanes. The areas surrounding the ramps will be landscaped. 44 La Sierra Avenue will remain open to traffic during construction; however there may be short periods of time when traffic lanes will be closed. To address the needs of our passengers, the Commission will implement a comprehensive communications plan to educate station patrons regarding the construction disruptions and alternate station access options. Periodic night-time freeway closures and limited ramp closures are expected. Access to properties along the project will be maintained during construction. Toy Train Kickoff Event to Take Place at North Main Corona This year’s Metrolink Holiday Toy Express will kickoff at Riverside’s own North Main Corona station on November 17th. As this year’s host station, the Commission staff will be working alongside Corona city staff and Metrolink to create a memorable event and accommodate the media and the Southern California Firefighters’ Spark of Love Toy Drive, including approximately 15 fire trucks from across Southern California. The Commission will sponsor events including food and entertainment at each Riverside County station. Commissioners are welcome to attend and ride along. Metrolink’s Holiday Toy Express has been delighting audiences for more than ten years – providing a free, enjoyable, community-based holiday experience for the people who live and work in the areas served by Metrolink. This year will be no different as the Holiday Toy Express travels to 50 cities throughout the Southland. The Holiday Toy Express is a 450-ton Metrolink train decorated with giant glittering ornaments, animated displays, and more than 50,000 twinkling lights. 2007 HOLIDAY TRAIN SCHEDULE WEEKEND 1 November Sat 17 North Main Corona 5:00 - 5:45 Riverside 6:45 - 7:15 La Sierra 7:45 - 8:15 WEEKEND 2 November Sat 24 Pedley 5:00 - 5:30 The train travels to Metrolink station cities throughout Southern California presenting a free live musical stage show at each stop; after the show kids of all ages have the opportunity to meet Santa and his friends. The Holiday Toy Express supports the Southern California Firefighters’ Spark of Love Toy Drive, which collects and distributes toys to needy children encouraging audience members to share their holiday spirit by donating a new unwrapped toy at the show. Agenda Item 7I 45 Riverside Line Passenger Trips Riverside Line 3,200 3,600 4,000 4,400 4,800 5,200 5,600 6,000Aug-06Sep-06Oct-06Nov-06Dec-06Jan-07Feb-07Mar-07Apr-07May-07Jun-07Jul-07Aug-07Month# of Trips UP Track Work Daily passenger trips on Metrolink’s Riverside Line for the month of August averaged 5,051, a decrease of 42, 1% less than the month of July. Compared to one year prior, the line averaged an overall daily increase of 544 passenger trips. This is nearly 12% more than a year ago. On T ime P e rfo rman c e (9 5 % Go a l) Riverside Line 70 75 80 85 90 95 100Aug-06Sep-06Oct-06Nov-06Dec-06Jan-07Feb-07Mar-07Apr-07May-07Jun-07Jul-07Aug-07MonthPercentage UP Track Work August on-time performance averaged 96% inbound (-1% from July) and 93% outbound (-1% from July). There were 15 delays greater than five minutes during the month of August. The following are primary causes: Cause # of Delays % of Total Signals/Track/MOW 8 53% Dispatching 1 7% Mechanical 1 7% Operations 5 33% TOTAL 15 100% Agenda Item 7I 46 Inland Empire-Orange County (IEOC) Line Passenger Trips Inland Empire Orange County Line 3,600 3,800 4,000 4,200 4,400 4,600 4,800 5,000Aug-06Sep-06Oct-06Nov-06Dec-06Jan-07Feb-07Mar-07Apr-07May-07Jun-07Jul-07Aug-07Month# of Trips Daily passenger trips on Metrolink’s Inland Empire-Orange County (IEOC) Line for the month of August averaged 4,744, an increase of 156 trips, 3% more than the month of July. The line has increased by 146 daily trips or 3% from a year ago August 2006. On Time Performance (95% Goal) Inland Empire Orange County Line 70 75 80 85 90 95 100Aug-06Sep-06Oct-06Nov-06Dec-06Jan-07Feb-07Mar-07Apr-07May-07Jun-07Jul-07Aug-07MonthPercentage August on-time performance averaged 96% southbound (-2% from July) and 95% northbound (+1% from July). There were 17 delays greater than five minutes during the month of August. The following are primary causes: Cause # of Delays % of Total Signals/Track/MOW 2 12% Dispatching 8 47% Mechanical 1 6% Operations 6 35% TOTAL 17 100% Agenda Item 7I 47 91 Line Passenger Trips 91 Line 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000 2,200 2,400 2,600 2,800Aug-06Sep-06Oct-06Nov-06Dec-06Jan-07Feb-07Mar-07Apr-07May-07Jun-07Jul-07Aug-07Month# of Trips Daily passenger trips on Metrolink’s 91 Line for the month of August averaged 2,113, an increase of 90 trips, 4% more than the month of July. The line has decreased by 311 daily trips or -13% from a year ago August 2006. This is attributed to migration back to the Riverside Line following Union Pacific track upgrades. On Time Performance (95% Goal) 91 Line 70 75 80 85 90 95 100Aug-06Sep-06Oct-06Nov-06Dec-06Jan-07Feb-07Mar-07Apr-07May-07Jun-07Jul-07Aug-07MonthPercentage August on-time performance averaged 99% inbound (+3% from July) and 98% outbound (+1% from July). There were six delays greater than five minutes during the month of August. The following are primary causes: Cause # of Delays % of Total Signals/Track/MOW 2 66% Dispatching 0 0% Mechanical 0 0% Operations 1 34% TOTAL 3 100% Agenda Item 7I 48 Inland Empire-Orange County Weekend Service Summer Season Performance Q1 FY07 Passenger Trips IE OC We e ken d S e rv ice 600 1,000 1,400 1,800 2,200 2,600 7-Jul-0714-Jul-0721-Jul-0728-Jul-074-Aug-0711-Aug-0718-Aug-0725-Aug-071-Sep-078-Sep-07# of Trips FY07 Q1 FY08 Q1 to 9/9/2007 Saturday Sunday Saturday Sunday Total Daily Trips Total Daily Trips 14,554 7,517 11,330 7,775 Avg Trips/Day Avg Trips/Day 1,213 683 1,133 707 Avg Per Train Avg Per Train 202 171 197 164 Peak RT Avg/Train Peak RT Avg/Train 288 171 268 177 Having completed its first year of operation, the Inland Empire-Orange County (IE-OC) weekend service is now completing the peak summer season. With three weeks remaining in the first quarter, Saturday service average ridership is currently down 6.5% from the first quarter of last year and Sunday service average ridership is currently up 3.5%. To transition the service to a regular weekend service, the marketing and promotional budget was reduced significantly compared to the first year efforts. This combined with generally cooler temperatures and lower gasoline costs helps explain the slight decrease in Saturday leisure trips. Metrolink will now take the lead in marketing the weekend service, having recently produced new seat drops aimed at attracting more riders. Connecting Transit Service Performance The Commission’s role in facilitating interconnectivity between Metrolink and connecting transit services is essential to the ongoing viability of the system. These services address the needs of transit dependent riders as well as help mitigate congestion and the necessity for expensive parking capacity at the stations. The Commission is working to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of transit connections. Agenda Item 7I 49 In order to meet these requirements, the Commission has worked with Metrolink and local transit operators to offer connecting services to and from Riverside County Metrolink stations at no cost for those with valid Metrolink tickets. Within Riverside County, services include free transfers to routes operated by Riverside Transit Agency (RTA), RTA’s Commuter Link service and Corona Cruiser. The following graphs show total monthly Metrolink transfer passenger trips on each of the three services. Passenger Trips RTA Fixed Route 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000Sep-06Oct-06Nov-06Dec-06Jan-07Feb-07Mar-07Apr-07May-07Jun-07Jul-07Aug-07Month# of Trips Monthly Metrolink transfer trips on RTA’s connecting fixed routes (1, 3, 15, 16, 21, 29, and 38) totaled 2,966 for the month of August, an increase of 365 trips, 14.03% more than the month of July. Monthly trips have increased by 598 or 25.25% over the last fiscal year. Passenger Trips R TA C o mmuter L ink 4,000 4,600 5,200 5,800 6,400 7,000Sep-06Oct-06Nov-06Dec-06Jan-07Feb-07Mar-07Apr-07May-07Jun-07Jul-07Aug-07Month# of Trips Monthly Metrolink transfer trips on RTA’s Commuter Link routes (202, 204, 206, and 208) totaled 5,134 for the month of August, an increase of 512 trips, 11.08% from the month of July. Monthly trips have increased by 1,479 or 40.47% over the last fiscal year. Agenda Item 7I 50 Passenger Trips Corona Cruiser 100 200 300 400 500 600 700Sep-06Oct-06Nov-06Dec-06Jan-07Feb-07Mar-07Apr-07May-07Jun-07Jul-07Aug-07Month# of Trips Monthly Metrolink transfer trips on the Corona Cruiser totaled 457 for the month of August, a decrease of 37 trips, -7.49% less than the month of July. Monthly trips have increased by 213 or 87.30% over the past fiscal year. Attachments: 1) Metrolink Average Weekday Passenger Trips 2) Metrolink Schedule Adherence Summary – Weekday Service Agenda Item 7I 51 52 53 AGENDA ITEM 7J RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 10, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Tanya Love, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Allocation of Local Transportation Funds for Fiscal Year 2006/07 for the Riverside Transit Agency STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to allocate $208,278 of FY 2006/07 Local Transportation Funds (LTF) to the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) to cover projects identified in the FY 2006/07 capital projects reconciliation. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On an annual basis, staff requests an allocation of LTF funds based on approved Short Range Transit Plans (SRTP), which identify both the operating and capital costs required to support transit services in Riverside County. In reviewing the attached year-end capital balances, Commission staff identified that $208,278 in additional LTF funds is required to cover outstanding capital purchases. As such, staff is requesting that $208,278 in LTF funds be allocated to RTA. There are adequate Western Riverside County LTF funds available to cover this request. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: N/A Year:FY 2006/07 Amount:$208,278 Source of Funds: Local Transportation Funds (Western Riverside: Bus) Budget Adjustment: N/A GLA No.: 601 62 86102 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 09/25/2007 Attachment: Unpaid Capital Projects Agenda Item 7J 54 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY: Unpaid Capital Projects as of FY 2006/07 Project Year Project Description Balance as of 6/30/07 FY 1999/00 Mobility Management-AVL, ITS Project 47,499$ FY 2000/01 Office Integration-ITS Project, Oracle 11i Impvmt 72,526 FY 2001/02 (12) 40-ft CNG Bus (for 2 CNG Trolleys) 531 TOTAL Unpaid Capital Projects 120,556 FY 2006/07 Allocation for Claim in Excess of Carryover Balance 87,722 Additional Total Amount to be allocated to RTA 208,278$ 55 AGENDA ITEM 7K RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 10, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Marlin Feenstra, Program Manager Mark Massman, Bechtel Project Manager Erik Galloway, Bechtel Project Coordinator THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Amendment to the Project Scope and a Project Budget Adjustment with Lim and Nascimento Engineering Corporation to Expand the Scope of the Development of Plans, Specifications, and Cost Estimate for the Construction of the Interstate 215/State Route 60 East Junction Between the Box Springs Overcrossing and Day Street Undercrossing BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve an amendment to the project scope (Attachment 1) for the I-215/SR-60 East Junction project and increase of the project budget (Attachment 2) from $35.35 million to $55.742 million; 2) Approve Agreement No. 07-31-039-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 07-31-039-00, with Lim and Nascimento Engineering Corporation (LAN) based on the negotiated project scope, schedule, and cost that is attached to this agenda item for a base amount of $1,533,452, plus 23.9% contingency amount of $366,548 to cover potential changes in scope for a total not to exceed amount of $1.9 million [$1.682 million of federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program funds and $218,000 of Measure A as local match], which addresses the additional design fees required for expansion of the original project scope to incorporate elements from the Caltrans design sequencing project and additional portions from the Segment 7 project; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute necessary, non-funding related Caltrans cooperative agreements for the project. Agenda Item 7K 56 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Summary At its July 12, 2006 meeting, the Commission approved the award of Agreement No. 07-31-039-00 to LAN for the development of the plans, specifications, and estimates (PS&E) for the construction of two new high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane structures at the I-215/SR-60 East Junction, between Box Springs overcrossing and Day Street undercrossing. This project is necessary to close the gap that will exist between the SR-60 HOV lanes recently constructed by the Commission in Moreno Valley and the HOV lanes on the SR-60/I-215 being constructed as part of the Caltrans design sequencing project on I-215. This gap was created when, due to budget constraints, elements of Segment 7 construction were deleted from the design sequencing project. In recent months, Caltrans has requested that additional Segment 7 elements (defined in Attachment 1) be deferred from the design sequencing project to the I-215/SR-60 East Junction project. Inclusion of these additional elements requires adjustment to both the design and construction budgets as well as the existing design contract with LAN. All of the subject scope of work for this I-215/SR-60 East Junction project was addressed in the environmental impact report/environmental impact statement (EIR/EIS) developed for the I-215 design sequencing project. I-215 Design Sequencing and I-215/SR-60 East Junction Projects The project report for the SR-60/SR-91/I-215 (EA 08-466902) design sequencing project, dated April 27, 2001, was segmented into seven parts. Segment 7 of the project included two pairs of HOV connectors at the East Junction; one pair of connectors was to be between the west and east legs of the interchange and the other pair between the west and south legs. Due to funding constraints, Segment 7 could not be constructed at the same time as the other six segments, which are currently under construction. Caltrans and the Commission agreed to split the work included in Segment 7 into two separate projects; the I-215/SR-60 East Junction HOV connector project and a subsequent project to deliver the balance of the Segment 7 work. Staff and Caltrans reviewed the remaining Segment 7 work and determined that it would be beneficial to the public and adjacent cities to proceed with the design and construction of some portions as part of the I-215/SR-60 East Junction HOV connector project. Agenda Item 7K 57 The design sequencing elements and portions of the Segment 7 project proposed to be included with the I-215/SR-60 East Junction project have already been environmentally cleared as part of the I-215 design sequencing project. These elements are listed in Attachment 1 as additional project scope. The benefits that will result by designing and constructing these elements as part of the I-215/SR-60 East Junction project are: • Improved traffic flow on the westbound SR-60; • Traffic congestion will be addressed on Box Springs Road; • A reduction of “throw away” items of work, (e.g. pavement, guardrail, ramp realignment, etc.) if the original project scope was constructed; • Reduction in the amount of time the westbound Box Springs off ramp is closed for realignment; and • Northbound (westbound 60) Box Springs ramp will be constructed in its ultimate location. If these portions of the Segment 7 project are not designed and constructed as part of the I-215/SR-60 East Junction project, a future environmental re-evaluation may be required. A potential re-evaluation of the environmental document would delay the improvements, and such a delay could have an impact on cost. In order to implement this project in the minimum amount of time, the Commission has requested that Caltrans and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) delegate the authority to allow the Commission to advertise, award, and administer the construction package. Funding/Budget Background At its June 5, 2005 meeting, the Commission approved programming of $2.5 million in funding ($2,213,250 of federal CMAQ program funds and $286,750 of Measure A funds) for the design of the I-215/SR-60 East Junction project. In addition, approximately $28.8 million in State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) funding was committed for construction consisting of $20.733 million in STIP Interregional Improvement Program (IIP) funds and $8.117 million in STIP Region Improvement Program (RIP). At its September 12, 2007 Commission meeting, an additional $4 million was approved for the right-of-way phase for a total project budget of $35.35 million. An amendment to the project budget and consultant contract is necessary to incorporate the additional design sequencing Segment 7 elements and associated right-of-way engineering, which were not identified and included in the original Agreement No. 07-31-039-00. The additional scope is detailed in Attachment 1. Agenda Item 7K 58 The revised project estimate is $55.742 million, which reflects an estimated project cost increase of $20.392 million due to this additional scope. The revised budget is detailed in Attachment 2. Funding for the I-215/SR-60 East Junction project is proposed as follows: PS&E Design CMAQ $3,895,320 1989 Measure A (match) 504,680 Total $4,400,000 Reflects proposed PS&E increase of $1.9 million (total from $2.5 million to $4.4 million) Right-of-Way *CMAQ $3,541,200 1989 Measure A (match) 458,800 Total $4,000,000 *The right-of-way phase was approved at September 12, 2007 Commission meeting. The amount of funds approved for CMAQ was $4 million. This agenda item corrects the CMAQ funds for the right-of-way phase to $3,541,200. The Measure A funds of $458,800 were approved correctly. Construction/Construction Support STIP-IIP $20,733,000 STP-RIP 8,117,000 **Federal STP and/or CMAQ 18,492,000 Total $47,342,000 **Staff is proposing to fund the uncommitted construction amount with federal funding sources such as Surface Transportation Program (STP) and/or CMAQ, whichever funding source is available. Construction estimates are currently being refined and will be brought back to the Commission at a later date. At its January 11, 2006 meeting, the Commission approved the programming for the 2006 STIP and reaffirmed its commitment to maintain funding for the I-215/SR-60 East Junction project. Therefore, staff recommends that the Budget and Implementation Committee approve the additional scope for the project, the Agenda Item 7K 59 revised project budget of $55.742 million, and Amendment No. 1 with LAN for the incorporation of the additional project scope as detailed in Attachment 1. LAN has developed a revised scope, schedule, and cost summary for the I-215/SR-60 East Junction project, which is included in Attachment 3. The total project cost for the proposed scope of work for Amendment No. 1 is $1.9 million. This will bring the total project not to exceed contract value (including the original agreement for $2.5 million and Amendment No. 1 for $1.9 million) to $4.4 million for the PS&E phase. The $1.9 million is proposed to be funded by $1.682 million of CMAQ funds and $218,000 of Measure A as local match. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: No Year:FY 2007/08 Amount:$1,900,000 Source of Funds: CMAQ and Measure A Budget Adjustment: Yes GLA No.: 222 31 41403 P3017 $1,682,000 222 31 81102 P3017 $1,900,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 09/19/2007 Attachments: 1) Additional Project Scope 2) Project Budget 3) LAN Engineering – Additional Scope, Revised Schedule, and Cost Agenda Item 7K 60 ATTACHMENT 1 ADDITIONAL PROJECT SCOPE • Realigning the north frontage road, Box Springs Road, (4-5 lanes wide) • Demolish the existing frontage road and bridge over the Railroad (RR) tracks • Construct a new bridge over the RR tracks for the frontage road • Widen the northbound (NB) I-215 bridge over the RR tracks − Include Caltrans Design Sequencing Construction Elements − East Junction original Bridge Widening Scope (proposed contract change order for Design Sequencing project) − Final Widening of Bridge to its ultimate width • Re-align the NB off-ramp to Box Springs interchange − Realign to ramp’s ultimate location • Add a third lane to the westbound (WB) SR-60 connector to act as a Deceleration Lane about 300m long ( not the full third lane back to Day Street) • Utility Relocation, Coordination and/or Protection • Right of Way Engineering for the acquisition of properties for the − the realignment of Box Springs Road − the widening of WB I-215/SR-60 prior to Box Springs Overcrossing • Environmental Permitting for frontage road relocation and utility relocations 61 ATTACHMENT 2 I-215/SR-60 East Junction Previous Project Budget Additional Budget Required New Projected Budget Right of Way $4,000,000 $0 $4,000,000 Design $2,500,000 $1,900,000 $4,400,000 Roadway Construction $26,675,000 $16,510,000 $43,185,000 Construction Management / Construction Support $2,175,000 $1,982,000 $4,157,000 GRAND TOTAL $35,350,000 $20,392,000 $55,742,000 PROJECT BUDGET SUMMARY I-215/SR-60 East Junction Project IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE EA 08-449311 07-31-039 62 ATTACHMENT 3 LAN ENGINEERING ADDITIONAL SCOPE, REVISED SCHEDULE, AND COST 63 5 / SR-60 East Junction EW HOV Connectors Cost Proposal ESTIMATE PROPOSAL PS&E - Scope Increase NB Ultimate Fee RateScope increaseASSUMPTIONS ClasificationsProject ManagerSenior CivilEngineerCivilEngineerAssist.Civil EngineerSenior BridgeEngineerBridgeEngineerAssist.Bridge EngineerCADDAdmin/Clerical LAN Roll Up SubconsultantTotalsAverage Direct Hourly Rate by Clasification$59.00 $59.00 $47.00 $35.00 $59.00 $47.00 $35.00 $35.00 $25.00Fee Rate = 10.%OH Rate = 123.%$200.00 $160.00 $145.00 $85.86 $160.00 $145.00 $85.86 $85.86 $61.338,984 $1,211,387 12,500 0 $309,184 $0 $1,533,071Task DescriptionsFirm/FirmsAssigned to TaskEstimated Hours per Task Hrs Subtotal Labor SubtotalODC Hrs Subtotal Labor SubtotalODCSubtotalWBS 100 Project Management / Controls Adnl PM for an extra 12-18LAN 50 50100 $17,250$17,250WBS 205 OBT PERMITS/AGREMNTS & ROUTE ADOPTIONS- $0$0WBS 205 Environmental work Redirects $60k from orig budLSA$108,415.00$108,415WBS 205.05 Determine Required Permits Possible deleniation of wetalLAN 5 510 $1,525$1,525WBS 205.10 Obtain Permits Possible 1602 or 401 or 404LAN 10 1020 $2,309$2,309WBS 205.15 Obtain Railroad Agreements RCTC to handel. Already goDouglas Eng.$0WBS 205.25 Prepare Agreement for Materials Sites (if needed) none LAN0- $0$0WBS 100.15 Project Management - PS & E ComponentAdnl PM work on PS&ELAN 7070 $14,000$14,000WBS 185 PREP BASE MAPS & PLAN SHEETS- $0$0WBS 185.05 Review and Update Project Information adnl effortLAN 0 0- $0$0WBS 185.10 Perform Design Surveys Adnl survey work rqd Associated$0$0WBS 185.10 Surveying Coordination/Management RR & Tie-in Associated$0WBS 185.10 Control Survey & Base Data Review R/W acquisition Associated$0WBS 185.10 Prepare Base Mapping Parcel descriptions Associated$0WBS 185.10 Design Data SurveysAssociated$0WBS 185.15 Perform Preliminary Design / Update Geometric Approval Drawings Revise GAD'sLAN 0000- $0$0WBS 185.20 Prepare Engineering ReportsLAN 0 0- $0$0WBS 185.20.10 Hydrology and Hydraulics Report additional effortLAN 5 40 045 $6,800$6,800WBS 185.20.15 Geotechnical Report/Pavement/Materials Frontage Rd additional effort Kleinfelder$24,291$24,291WBS 185.20.15 Geotechnical Report/Pavement/Materials Tie-Back Wall Use Caltrans data Kleinfelder$0$0WBS 185.20.15 Geotechnical Report/Pavement/Materials RCB additional effort Kleinfelder$0$0WBS 185.25 Determine Right of Way Requirements NEW WORK LAN10 10 2040 $4,576$4,576WBS 190 PREP STRUC SITE PLANSNEW WORKLAN 2 4 4 818 $2,307$2,307WBS 210 PREP PRELIM STRUC DSGN DATA - $0$0WBS 210.04 Type Selection Rpt / Mtg - Frontage roadNEW WORKLAN 24 16 100 100 120 120480 $58,466 2,000$60,466WBS 210.05 Type Selection Rpt / Mtg - NB UltNEW WORKLAN 24 16 65 65 75 120365 $43,927$43,927WBS 210.01 LAN- $0$0WBS 210.02 LAN- $0$0WBS 210.03 LAN- $0$0WBS 215.50 Foundation Field Investgation Frontage Rd NEW WORK Kleinfelder$23,329$23,329WBS 215.50 Foundation Field Investgation Tie-back wall Use Caltrans data Kleinfelder$0$0WBS 215.50 Foundation Field Investgation RCB NEW WORK Kleinfelder$0$0WBS 215.55 Foundation Report and Log of Test Borings Frontage Rd NEW WORK Kleinfelder$45,726$45,726WBS 215.55 Foundation Report and Log of Test Borings Tie-Back Wall Use Caltrans data Kleinfelder$0$0WBS 215.55 Foundation Report and Log of Test Borings RCB NEW WORK Kleinfelder$0$0WBS 215 PREP STRUC GENERAL PLANS $0WBS 215.04 Prepare Structure General Plans for Structures - Frontage roadNEW WORKLAN 8 24323240136 $16,262$16,262WBS 215.05 Prepare Structure General Plans for Structures - NB UltNEW WORKLAN 8 24323240136 $16,262$16,262WBS 215.06 Prepare Structure General Plans for Structures - Tie-back wallNEW WORKDokken$8,686$8,686WBS 215.02 LAN- $0$0WBS 215.03 LAN- $0$0WBS 240 PREP DRAFT STRUC PS&E - $0$0WBS 240.04 Prepare Draft Structure PS&E for Structures - Frontage roadNEW WORKLAN 24 320 400 420 4801,644 $191,272 2,000$193,272WBS 240.05 Prepare Draft Structure PS&E for Structures - NB UltNEW WORKLAN 24 290 365 375 4801,534 $177,533 2,000$179,533WBS 240.06 Prepare Draft Structure PS&E for Structures -Tie-back wall NEW WORKDokken$31,425$31,425WBS 240.02 LAN- $0$0WBS 240.03 LAN- $0$0WBS 240.04.15Check Design & Plan Sheets - Frontage RoadNEW WORKLAN 24 100 140 140 120524 $63,423 750$64,173WBS 240.05.15Check Design & Plan Sheets - NB UltNEW WORKLAN 24 85 120 120 100449 $54,689 750$55,439WBS 240.06.15Check Design & Plan Sheets -Tie-back wallNEW WORK Dokken$27,064$27,064WBS 240.02.15 Dokken$0WBS 240.03.15 Dokken$0WBS 250 PREP FNL STRUC PS&E PKG - $0$0WBS 250.10 04 Finalize Structures PS&E Package - Frontage roadNEW WORKLAN 24 105 210 210 260809 $92,403 2,500$94,903WBS 250.10 05 Finalize Structures PS&E Package - NB UltNEW WORKLAN 24 105 210 210 260809 $92,403 2,500$94,903WBS 250.10 06 Finalize Structures PS&E Package - Tie-back wall NEW WORKDokken$5,996$5,996WBS 250.10 02 LAN- $0$0WBS 250.10 03 LAN- $0$0WBS 230 PREP DRAFT PS&E - $0$0WBS 230.05 Prepare Draft Roadway Plans additional effortLAN 40 75 75190 $23,714$23,714WBS 230.15 Prepare Draft Traffic Plans additional effort Lin Consulting$15,486$15,486WBS 230.15 Prepare Draft Traffic Plans (Staging) additional effort LAN 510 15 1040 $5,634$5,634WBS 230.20 Prepare Transportation Management Plan (TMP) additional effort Lin Consulting$0WBS 230.25 Prepare Draft Utility Plans additional effortLAN 5 4045 $4,234$4,234WBS 230.30 Prepare Draft Drainage Plans additional effortLAN 15 40 4095 $11,634$11,634WBS 230.35 Prepare Draft Specifications additional effortLAN 15 201045 $5,913$5,913WBS 230.35 Prepare Draft Specifications additional effort Lin Consulting$894$894WBS 230.40 Prepare Draft PS&E Quantities and Estimates additional effort Lin Consulting$622$622WBS 230.40 Prepare Draft PS&E Quantities and Estimates additional effortLAN 5 5 251045 $4,285$4,285WBS 230.55 Incorporate Structures Draft PS & E additional effortLAN 5 510 $1,525$1,525WBS 230.60 Review and Update Project Information for PS & E Package additional effortLAN 5 510 $1,525$1,52564 5 / SR-60 East Junction EW HOV Connectors Cost Proposal ESTIMATE PROPOSAL PS&E - Scope Increase NB Ultimate Fee RateScope increaseASSUMPTIONS ClasificationsProject ManagerSenior CivilEngineerCivilEngineerAssist.Civil EngineerSenior BridgeEngineerBridgeEngineerAssist.Bridge EngineerCADDAdmin/Clerical LAN Roll Up SubconsultantTotalsAverage Direct Hourly Rate by Clasification$59.00 $59.00 $47.00 $35.00 $59.00 $47.00 $35.00 $35.00 $25.00Fee Rate = 10.%OH Rate = 123.%$200.00 $160.00 $145.00 $85.86 $160.00 $145.00 $85.86 $85.86 $61.338,984 $1,211,387 12,500 0 $309,184 $0 $1,533,071Task DescriptionsFirm/FirmsAssigned to TaskEstimated Hours per Task Hrs Subtotal Labor SubtotalODC Hrs Subtotal Labor SubtotalODCSubtotalWBS 255 CIRCULATE/REV & PREP FNL DISTRICT PS&E PKG - $0$0WBS 255.05 Circulate & Review Draft District PS&E Package additional effortLAN 55 $725$725WBS 255.10 Update PS&E Package additional effortLAN 5 10 1530 $3,538$3,538WBS 255.10 Update PS&E Packageadditional effortLin Consulting$7,910$7,910WBS 255.10 Update PS&E PackageDokken$0$0WBS 255.15 Perform Environmental Reevaluation (if needed)All costs for LSA included unLSA$0PM 10/2.5LSA$0Air Quality Update OptionalLSA$0NES (MI)LSA$0Re-evaluation/ValidationLSA$0Optional Comprehensive Technical Update LSA$0Meetings/Project Management LSA$0WBS 255.20 Prepare Final District PS&E Package additional effort Lin Consulting$4,878$4,878WBS 255.20 Prepare Final District PS&E Package additional effortLAN 170 443 5201,133 $136,080$136,080WBS 255.25 Prepare Geotechnical Information Handout additional effortLAN 55 $725$725WBS 255.30 Prepare Materials Information Handout additional effortLAN 55 $725$725WBS 255.35 Prepare Staking Notes additional effort Associated$1,000$1,000WBS 255.40 Prepare Resident Engineer's File additional effortLAN 5 5 1525 $2,813$2,813WBS 260 PREP CONTRACT DOCS (Ready to List/Advertise) - $0$0WBS 260.05 PS&E Received additional effortLAN 2 57 $1,045$1,045WBS 260.10 Produce Check Prints additional effortLAN 55 $429$429WBS 260.15 Prepare Draft Contract Documents additional effortLAN 10 10 1030 $3,909$3,909WBS 260.15.30 Environmental Certification at RTL no increaseLAN 0 0- $0$0WBS 265 ADVERTISE/OPEN BIDS/AWARD & APPROVE CONTRACT - $0$0WBS 265.05 Prepare Project for Advertising additional effortLAN- $0$0WBS 265.25 Respond to Inquiries (ADVERTISE/AWARD) additional effortLAN- $0$0WBS 100.25 Project Management - Right of Way ComponentNEW WORK4040 $8,000$8,000WBS 200 COORDINATE UTIL - $0$0WBS 200.05 Perform Preliminary Utility Verification additional effortLAN 5 510 $1,229$1,229WBS 200.10 Determine Utility Locations (Potholing) and Prepare Conflict Maps additional effortLAN 5 510 $1,525$1,525WBS 200.10 Potholing and Utility Surveying additional effort Associated$1,000$1,000WBS 200.15 Utility Conflict Resolution additional effortLAN 1010 $1,600$1,600WBS 200.20 Implement Utility Relocation Plan additional effort Douglas Eng.$0$0WBS 200.25 Manage the Utility Relocation additional effort Douglas Eng.$0$0WBS 220PERF R/W ENGRG $0$0WBS 220.05Retrace and Perpetuate Existing Land Net for R/W AcquisitionNEW WORK Associated$0.00$0WBS 220.15Prepare Right of Way Maps (if Required)NEW WORK Associated$0.00$0WBS 300PERF FNL R/W ENGRG ACTIVITIES $0$0WBS 300.05Monument the Right of Way and Prepare Monumentation Mapsadditional effort Associated$1,000.00$1,000WBS 300.35Prepare Right of Way Record Mapadditional effort Associated$1,000.00$1,000WBS 100.20 Project Management - Construction Component 150 40- $33,434$33,434WBS 270 PERF CONSTR ENGRG & GENERAL CONTRACT ADMIN (Support)additional effortLAN 40 50 50 40 10- $25,098$25,098WBS 270 Construction Support additional effort Lin Consulting$462.00$462WBS 285 Construction Support CCO additional effortLAN 50$10,000$10,000WBS 290 Construction Support - Claims additional effortLAN 50$10,000$10,000WBS 295 ACPT CONTRACT/PREP FNL CONSTR EST & PREP FNL RPT additional effortLAN 20 10 10 10 10 10 5- $11,265$11,265WBS 295.15 Prepare As-Built Plans additional effortLAN 40 20 20 350 20- $45,378$45,378 Sub Consultant totalsAE 4,000LSA 108,415LIN 30,252Klien 93,346Dokken 73,171TOTAL 309,18465 AGENDA ITEM 7L RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 10, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Anne Mayer, Deputy Executive Director Michael Blomquist, Toll Project Manager Mark Massman, Bechtel Project Manager Karl Sauer, Bechtel Project Coordinator THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement with Parsons Transportation Group to Provide Preliminary Engineering Services, Project Report, and Environmental Document for Improvements to State Route 91 in the Eastbound Direction and to the State Route 71/91 Interchange from Approximately ¼ Mile West of Green River Road to Serfas Club Drive in the City of Corona BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award Agreement No. 08-31-015-00 to Parsons Transportation Group (Parsons) to provide preliminary engineering services for the preparation of Caltrans project report and environmental document (PR/ED) for the proposed improvements to SR-91 in the eastbound direction and to the SR-71/91 interchange from approximately ¼ mile west of Green River Road to Serfas Club Drive in the city of Corona based on the attached project scope, schedule, and cost for the base amount of $4,605,852 plus a contingency amount of $650,000 (14%), to cover potential changes in scope for a total not to exceed amount of $5,255,852; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; 3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute necessary, non-funding related Caltrans cooperative agreements for the project; and 4) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work as may be required for the project. Agenda Item 7L 66 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In order to initiate project development on the projects identified in the 10-Year Western County Highway Delivery Plan, staff initiated a request for qualifications (RFQ) to create an available list of consultants to perform necessary work on the PR/ED for the new projects. This selection process was completed and ranked a list of firms approved by the Commission at its July 2007 meeting. Staff has proceeded to negotiate with the firms on this approved list in order of ranking and project size as summarized in the following table. Corridor Project Limits Proposed Improvements Total Project Cost (Millions) Status I-215 I-15/I-215 Interchange to Scott Rd. Add 1 mixed flow (MF) lane each direction $62 Contract awarded to PBS&J in July 2007 I-215 Scott Rd. to Nuevo Rd. Add 1 MF Lane each direction $173 Contract awarded to PBS&J in July 2007 I-215 Nuevo Rd. to Box Springs Rd. Add 1 high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane each direction $182 Staff currently negotiating with URS SR-91/ SR-71 Green River Rd. to Serfas Club Dr. Add eastbound collector distributor system and direct connector $99 Staff recommending contract to award Parsons Transportation Group I-10 San Bernardino County Line to SR-60 Add eastbound truck climbing lane $47 Staff to start negotiation with HDR as funds become available Staff has completed negotiations with Parsons and is in concurrence with the attached Parsons scope of work, schedule of services, and respective costs. Therefore, staff recommends that Agreement No. 08-31-015-00 be awarded to Parsons to provide preliminary engineering services for the preparation of PR/ED for the proposed improvements to SR-91 in the eastbound direction and to the SR-71/91 interchange from approximately ¼ mile west of Green River Road to Agenda Item 7L 67 Serfas Club Drive in the city of Corona based on the attached project scope, schedule, and cost for the base amount of $4,605,852 plus a contingency amount of $650,000 (14%), to cover potential changes in scope for a total not to exceed amount of $5,255,852. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2007/08 Amount: $5,255,852 Source of Funds: 2009 Measure A/Commercial Paper Budget Adjustment: No GLA No.: 303 31 81101 P3021 FY2007/08 = $1,000,000 FY2008/09 = $3,000,000 FY2009/10 = $1,255,852 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 09/25/2007 Attachments: 1) Scope of Work 2) Schedule 3) Cost Agenda Item 7L 68 Parsons Page 1 of 53 September 14, 2007 SR-91/SR-71 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PROJECT REPORT & ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT SCOPE OF WORK Parsons has been selected by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) to prepare a Project Report (PR) and Environmental Document (ED) for the SR-91/SR- 71 Interchange Improvement Project, located within the limits of the City of Corona, in Riverside County. This project is a partnership between RCTC and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) District 8. This Scope of Work is based on the approved Caltrans Project Study Report (PSR), dated December 20, 2006 that proposed the following improvements: 1. Replace existing single-lane 30-meter (98-foot) radius east to north (E-N) elongated loop-connector with a 320-meter (150-foot) radius, two-lane direct flyover connector with standard inside and outside shoulders. 2. Reconfigure the existing single-lane south to east (S-E) connector as a two-lane connector by incorporating the roadbed of the existing E-N connector. 3. Construct a three-lane collector-distributor road in the eastbound direction between the Green River Road Interchange and the SR-91/SR-71 Junction. 4. Extend existing fifth mixed-flow lane from approximately 500 meters (1640 feet) east of SR-71 to Serfas Club Drive in the eastbound direction. 5. Extend existing auxiliary lanes from the S-E connector to Serfas Club Drive and from the W-N connector to Serfas Club Drive. 6. Realign and reconstruct the Green River Road and Serfas Club Drive eastbound off-ramps as standard two-lane off-ramps. 7. Construct 700-meter (2297-foot) eastbound auxiliary-lane west of and for the Green River Road eastbound off-ramp. 8. Realign and widen the westbound Serfas Club Drive on-ramp and extend westbound auxiliary-lane approximately 900 meters. Environmental compliance will consist of: 1. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND). 2. Federal Environmental Requirements: federal nexus is through the requirement to obtain a Clean Water Act Section 404 Individual Permit from the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps); as such, compliance work for some federal environmental requirements has been added to this scope. The Corps will approve any federally related compliance document. 69 Parsons Page 2 of 53 There are four projects in various stages of implementation within the same limits of this project that will require continuous coordination and cooperation: 1. Remove & Replace Green River Road Overcrossing – City of Corona. 2. SR-91 Eastbound Auxiliary Lane Project from SR-241 to SR-71 – OCTA. 3. SR-91 Eastbound Restriping from SR-71 to Serfas Club – Caltrans 4. SR-91 Corridor Improvements Project – RCTC It should be assumed that the Green River Road OC Project, the OCTA East Bound Auxiliary Lane Project and the SR-91 East Bound Restriping Project are all completed prior to construction of the SR-91/SR-71 Interchange Improvement Project. The SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project will most likely go to construction after the SR-91/SR-71 Interchange Improvement Project. In August of 2007, RCTC was provided a copy of the circulated PR, ED and Technical Studies for the OCTA East Bound SR-91 Auxiliary Lane Project. The Parsons scope of work has taken into account the studies that have already been completed for the OCTA SR-91 Auxiliary Lane Project. It is anticipated the proposed improvements will require acquisition of approximately 2368 square feet (sf) of additional right-of-way. Total project cost is estimated at $87.362 million. Parsons’ scope of work includes: 1. Development through approval of a Project Report (PR), prepared in compliance with all applicable Caltrans standards. 2. Development through approval of a CEQA IS/MND, prepared in compliance with all applicable Caltrans environmental guidelines. 3. All transportation planning, operational analysis, simulations, and traffic engineering necessary to support the above, with the exception of regional traffic modeling. This will be provided to Parsons by RCTC. It is assumed the Parsons team will develop two alternatives as follows: 1. No Build 2. One (1) Build Alternative. Replace the existing at-grade SR-91/SR-71 Interchange E-N Connector with a direct fly-over connector and construct a collector-distributor (C-D) road and auxiliary lanes at the SR-91/SR-71 Interchange. The Build Alternative may consist of design variations such as alignment skews, bridge types, or geometric configurations, for example. It is anticipated RCTC will issue the Notice to Proceed (NTP) in November 2007. All products prepared, including reports, studies, and plans must address and comply with all applicable requirements of oversight and resource agencies with involvement in this project. Such agencies include Caltrans, California Fish and game (CDFG), the Corps, and the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). RCTC will perform overall project coordination, as well as administrative and policy matters. Caltrans, RCTC, the County of Riverside (County), and the City of Corona (City) will provide 70 Parsons Page 3 of 53 oversight, guidance, and interpretation of matters relating to State, County, and City policies and regulations. In addition, the County and City will provide input on proposed and planned land use and applicable local circulation issues and policies. All work will be performed utilizing US Customary (English) units of measure and will be prepared in accordance with all applicable Caltrans requirements and guidelines. All environmental documentation will be prepared pursuant to the most current guidelines available, including those on the Caltrans Standard Environmental Reference (SER) web page (http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/). In the event environmental requirements change prior to environmental document approval, Parsons will provide RCTC with an assessment of any additional effort required to implement these changes. If it is determined any of the changes, and in turn efforts, are substantive, RCTC recognizes the need to work with Parsons to revise the project scope and cost, accordingly. Services to be provided by others: In July of 2007, RCTC awarded a Consultant Services Agreement to Parsons Brinkerhoff (PB) to provide preliminary engineering services, PR and ED, for proposed improvements to SR-91 from SR-241 to Pierce Street in the City of Riverside. But, because RCTC believed that the delivery of improvements to the SR-71/SR-91 Interchange could be expedited if delivered separately and independently of the overall SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project, RCTC excluded the improvements to the SR- 71/SR-91 Interchange from the PB Agreement to be awarded to another consultant at a later date. The SR-71/SR-91 Interchange Improvement Project was listed as one of the projects as part of a selection process for a pre approved list of 5 consultants to provide preliminary engineering and environmental services. After the selection process was completed RCTC selected and issued an RFP to Parsons to provide preliminary engineering services for the proposed improvements to the SR-71/SR-91 Interchange. Because there is an overlap between PB’s project limits and the SR-71/SR-91 IC Project limits there is a potential for duplication of work effort. Also, Because PB has been given an NTP to start work and to minimize any duplication of work effort, RCTC has decided to give PB the majority or total scope of work, for limited tasks, for both projects. This will require that the schedule for delivery, for these limited work tasks, will need to be coordinated. The following is a partial listing, to be further refined, of the work tasks that PB will perform, all or a majority of the work, for both projects; 150.05.07 Aerial Mapping 71 Parsons Page 4 of 53 Parsons scope includes the following tasks: 100 - PERFORM PROJECT MANAGEMENT 100.05 Project Coordination/Administration/Management Parsons will provide overall project management, coordination, and supervision of project staff to ensure all work is performed in accordance with the scope and requirements of RCTC. The following activities are included in this task: 1. Team and agency coordination by key firms: o Internal management for consistency in approach and for interface with agencies on supporting work o Input on presentation, action item resolution, strategic and policy matters o Formal internal project team coordination meetings (outside of PDT and Trend meetings) o Ongoing risk identification and management o Coordination with and support for project team staff 2. Administrative activities including: o internal project controls setup and management, weekly review of time charges, scope verification and management o development and management of internal project procedures and protocols 3. Sub-consultant agreements 4. Oversight by senior leadership of the technical work program 5. Staff assignment and staff scheduling 6. Attend Board / Committee / Council meetings as requested by RCTC 100.10.10.1 Project Scheduling Parsons will prepare a project schedule that will be maintained for the life of the project and updated as required, but at a minimum, on a monthly basis. The project schedule may be distributed electronically or hard copies at monthly Project Development Team (PDT) meetings. The number of copies will be determined based on the number of anticipated meeting attendees. Deliverables: • Project Schedule 72 Parsons Page 5 of 53 100.10.10.2 Project Charter/Communications Plan/Risk Management Plan Parsons will develop project management tools which are documented in the Project Management Plan (PMP). The PMP is an internal Parsons report, which is prepared at the onset of the project. The PMP includes the Project Charter, a Communications Plan, and a Risk Management Plan. Deliverables: • Project Charter (internal use) • Communications Plan (internal use) • Risk Management Plan (internal use) 100.10.10.3 Monthly Progress Reports/Invoices Parsons will prepare monthly Progress Reports and Invoices to be provided to RCTC. Progress Reports will describe activities undertaken during the billing month, identify and discuss existing and reasonably foreseeable issues with the potential to affect project scope, cost, or schedule, activities planned for the coming months (three month look- ahead), and a discussion of schedule updates/changes. Progress reports and invoices may be provided to RCTC electronically or hard copies distributed during Trend meetings. Deliverables: • Monthly Progress Reports • Invoices 100.10.10.4 Monthly PDT Meetings (24) Parsons will organize monthly PDT meetings for the duration of the project with an anticipated total of 24 PDT meetings. The PDT invitee list will be determined in consultation with RCTC; anticipated invitees include Caltrans and project stakeholders (e.g., County, City of Corona). The purpose of the PDT meetings is to discuss project status, convey and receive information/data, and discuss project issues. 100.10.10.4.1 PDT Meeting Agenda & Meeting Minutes Parsons will prepare and provide (via email) a draft monthly PDT Meeting agenda to RCTC for review and approval before distribution. The approved agenda will then be distributed to the PDT a minimum of 48 hours prior to the meeting. Parsons will also prepare PDT Meeting Minutes for RCTC review and approval no more than five (5) working days after the meeting and will be distributed to the PDT team electronically once approved. Deliverables: • Monthly PDT Meeting Agendas (electronic) • PDT Meeting Minutes (electronic) 73 Parsons Page 6 of 53 100.10.10.5 Bi-weekly Trend Meetings (48) Bi-weekly Trend Meetings will be held with RCTC, for the duration of the project with an anticipated total of 48 meetings. The purpose of these Trend meetings will be to discuss specific project details and issues with RCTC in a forum outside of the larger PDT Meetings. 100.10.10.5.1 Trend Meeting Agenda & Meeting Minutes Parsons will prepare and provide (via email) the Trend Meeting Agenda a minimum of 48 hours prior to the meeting. Parsons will also prepare Trend Meeting Minutes for RCTC review and approval no more than five (5) working days after the meeting. Deliverables: • Bi-Weekly Trend Meeting Agendas (electronic) • Meeting Minutes (electronic) 100.10.10.6 Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Plan Parsons will prepare and maintain a QA/QC Plan (to be reviewed and approved by RCTC) that will be in effect throughout the duration of the project contract. Implementation of the QA/QC Plan will ensure that the reports, plans, studies, estimates, and all other documents submitted are complete, accurate, checked and proofread to meet acceptable quality standards. Deliverables: • Draft QA/QC Plan (electronic) • Final QA/QC Plan (up to 10 copies for distribution) 100.10.10.7 QA/QC Independent Third Party Review Parsons will perform reviews in accordance with the approved QA/QC Plan Continuous quality control reviews by discipline and task managers and their production staff is included in the respective production tasks. The QA / QC Independent Third Party review is for the separate, milestone independent review of major deliverable documents (e.g., Project Study Report, Project Report, Environmental Document and Technical Studies, etc.). 74 Parsons Page 7 of 53 110 - PUBLIC OUTREACH 110.05.1 Design, Create and Administer Project Web Page The Parsons team, in conjunction with RCTC, will develop and maintain the project web page, which will be accessible via the RCTC web site. In addition, the project web page may be hot-linked to nearby cities and agencies, including City of Corona, City of Chino Hills, City of Chino, City of Yorba Linda, City of Anaheim, Orange County Transportation Authority, San Bernardino Associated Governments, and Caltrans. Deliverables: • Project Web Page 110.05.2 Public Communications Plan The Parsons team will prepare a detailed Public Communications Plan for the SR- 91/SR-71 Interchange Improvement Project. A draft and final document will be prepared for review and approval by the Project Team; this draft may be circulated electronically as well as hard copies. This plan will be used to manage all project public communications, focusing upon the technical issues presented, the project alternatives, and the project schedule. The plan will be geared toward communications with key stakeholders, elected officials and the public at large. Deliverables: • Draft Communications Plan (up to 10 copies for review) • Final Communications Plan (up to 20 copies for distribution) 110.05.3 Collateral Public Information Materials The Parsons team will prepare appropriate collateral public information materials to support the PR and ED. This will include project fact sheets, project brochures, PowerPoint presentations, presentation boards, public meeting agendas and other informational hand-outs, as needed. All written materials will also be provided in Spanish. The Parsons team will coordinate with the technical team to ensure project information in all collateral public information materials is current and technically correct. All materials prepared will be reviewed by RCTC prior to any release to the public. Collateral public information materials will available electronically. Deliverables: • Collateral Public Information Materials (electronic) 75 Parsons Page 8 of 53 110.05.4 Community Database The Parsons team will create and maintain the Community Database (or mailing list) for the SR-91/SR-71 Interchange Project. The Parsons team will collect existing contact databases from RCTC, City of Corona, City of Chino Hills, Caltrans and any other local jurisdiction which may have established communication with the surrounding area. In addition, the Community Database will include adjacent property owners, businesses and residents. The Database will be updated, maintained and utilized for all electronic and direct mail communication throughout the project process. Deliverables: • Community Database 110.10 Public Information Meetings (2) The Parsons team will plan, coordinate and execute two (2) Public Information Meetings. Dates for each meeting will be determined in accordance with the project schedule. The Parsons team will provide full logistical support for each meeting, including meeting notices, advertisements, site coordination/planning, logistical support, staffing, a Spanish translator, and written records of each meeting. Parsons will coordinate with RCTC on the logistics detail for each meeting. Deliverables: (each meeting) • Draft meeting exhibits (electronic version) • Final meeting exhibits [up to five (5) 36 inch by 48 inch posters] • PowerPoint presentation (up to 15 slides) • Comment Card or Project Questionnaire (up to 100 copies for distribution) • Public comment log (electronic) • Public Information Meeting Summary Report (up to 20 copies for distribution) 150.05 - DEFINE TRANSPORTATION PROBLEM & ASSESS SITE 150.05.05 Data Collection The Parsons team will collect and review existing data from various sources including Caltrans Districts 8, 12, and Headquarters; RCTC, OCTA, the City, County, and applicable water resource agencies. This data will include, but is not limited to, geotechnical information, survey monuments, traffic data, as-builts, and other studies and reports applicable to the project. The Parsons team will also coordinate with current and future improvement projects adjacent to or within the project limits of this SR-91/SR- 71 Interchange improvement project. These projects include the proposed eastbound outside lane and shoulder widening by OCTA, the current Green River Road overcrossing and ramp reconstruction, SR-91 Eastbound Restriping from SR-71 to Serfas Club, and the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project 76 Parsons Page 9 of 53 150.05.06 Field Review/Recon The Parsons team will perform field reviews/recon as required to verify existing conditions and facilities, collect additional data and information, and identify potential issues and conflicts. 150.05.07 SCOPE TO BE PERFORMED BY OTHERS: Aerial Mapping / Photogrammetry Associated Engineers, as a sub-consultant to PB, has been charged with completing this task within the scope of the SR-91 Corridor Project. Upon completion of this task for the SR-91 Corridor Project, Associated will provide Parsons with the deliverables stated below per the SR-71/SR-91 Interchange Improvement Project approved schedule. Parsons will coordinate with Associated Engineering to ensure the deliverables are compatible with the SR-71/SR-91 Interchange Improvement Project. Deliverables: • Final digital mapping files will be in accordance with Caltrans specifications and will be delivered in 3-D MicroStation design (DGN) and DTM files • Two (2) sets of 9”x9” color contact prints • One (1) CD-ROM containing 1”=50’ planimetrics with 2’ contours and DTM topographic mapping data in DGN format, 0.25’ GSD color orthophotography in .TIF with .TFW format. 150.05.08 Develop Existing Right of Way (R/W) Base Mapping Data Collection of survey records from local agency and State records will be made for relevant R/W data such as record maps, corner records and field notes. Existing R/W alignments from Caltrans will be researched and assembled into an initial geometry base map. Survey analysis of record and measured data will be made to establish and map R/W lines. These will then be added to the geometry base map. The number of hard copy sets for distribution will be determined based on coordination with the RCTC and the PDT. Parsons assumes up to eighteen (18) sheets per set. Deliverables: • R/W Base Mapping (electronic) 150.05.09 Develop Roadway Alignments Field surveys and record data will be combined to produce a base map of existing street and highway alignment geometry. Data Collection of survey records from local agency and State records will be made for relevant survey data such as centerline ties, corner records and field notes. Monument recovery will establish record points for local street centerlines from found monuments or from other evidence, such as corner records and centerline ties. Field Surveys will establish a project survey control network from initial control provided by Caltrans. Additional local control will be established throughout the project and will serve as the basis for all future work. 77 Parsons Page 10 of 53 The existing highway centerline will be researched and assembled into an initial geometric base map. Local street alignments will be field surveyed and developed from all recovered local street centerline monumentation, tied to project survey control. Survey analysis of record and measured data will be made to establish and map street centerlines. These will then be added to the geometric base map. The number of hard copy sets for distribution will be determined based on coordination with the RCTC and the PDT. Parsons assumes up to eighteen (18) sheets per set. Deliverables: • Roadway Alignments Plans (electronic) 150.05.15 Perform Utility Search This task involves collection, assembly and mapping of existing overhead and underground utility lines within the project limits. Parsons will contact utility purveyors for copies of as-builts, atlas or other existing plans of their facilities. Utility maps will be available electronically. The number of hard copy sets for distribution will be determined based on coordination with the RCTC and the PDT. Parsons assumes up to eighteen (18) sheets per set. Deliverables: • Utility record drawings and utility contact list (electronic) 150.05.16 Prepare Existing Utility Base Map Utilizing the record drawings obtained from the utility search and utility field survey, Parsons will map existing utilities within the project limits. The location of these lines will be plotted on the mapping by Parsons and a decision will be made as to which of the lines need to be field located. Potholing of is excluded from this task. The number of hard copy sets for distribution will be determined based on coordination with the RCTC and the PDT. Parsons assumes up to eighteen (18) sheets per set. Deliverables: • Existing Utility Base Map and Layout Sheets (electronic) 160.10 – PERFORM PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING STUDIES 160.10.05 Field Design Surveys Design Data Surveys The Parsons team will produce roadway cross-sections & tie-in surveys (including fence or R/W line shots along SR-91 freeway main ramps and connectors). Parsons will utilize existing site bridge and railroad survey data during this effort. 78 Parsons Page 11 of 53 Drainage Surveys Parsons will locate all existing drainage structures, including inlets and manholes within the project limits. This survey will include flow-line grades, rims, and inverts data. Utility Surveys and Mapping A field survey will be performed to locate and tie in the utility lines. Metro Tech 800 and/or surface features such as valves or manholes will be used to locate subsurface lines. The survey information will be added to the design-mapping file. All surveys will be delivered in 3D format and ASCII point file of survey ties made and will be available electronically. Deliverables: • Site Bridge Survey data (electronic) • Railroad Survey data (electronic) • Drainage Survey data (electronic) • Existing Utility Survey data (electronic) 160.10.10 Prepare Traffic Forecasts/Modeling Parsons assumes that travel demand forecasts data are to be provided by RCTC; demand modeling data provided to Parsons is assumed to be final. Should RCTC provide a revised set of demand modeling data, Parsons will assess and revise the scope and cost for RCTC’s review and approval. Parsons assumes that the traffic forecasts will be prepared using the RCTC Analysis Model. This regional model was developed from the Southern California Association of Government (SCAG) and the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) regional models for use in the Riverside County Measure a Ten Year Implementation Plan and Toll Feasibility Analysis. As such, it includes a greater level of detail in Riverside County than the parent models from which it was derived. Parsons will obtain concurrence from RCTC and Caltrans as to the horizon year of the traffic analysis. Although the current horizon year for regional travel forecasting models, including RCTC’s Transportation Analysis Model, is 2030, 2035 forecasts will be required for analysis purposes, representing 20 years beyond the project opening day. Parsons anticipates applying a methodology consistent with that used in the concurrent SR-91 Widening project that is currently being designed by the PB firm to extend the model-generated forecasts from 2030 to 2035; coordination with PB may be required to ensure consistency between both projects. Parsons will obtain concurrence from RCTC and Caltrans on both the forecasting methodology and the resulting traffic volume forecasts. Traffic forecasts will be prepared to satisfy the specific requirements of each component of the traffic analysis. Average Daily Traffic (ADT) and AM and PM peak hour traffic volume forecasts will be generated for Baseline and Build conditions for incorporation into the detailed traffic engineering, environmental analysis, and engineering design tasks. Separate traffic forecasts will be prepared for 2015 (Opening Day) and 2035 (Horizon Year) conditions for the two project scenarios. The existing year is assumed to be 2007. Results of this study will be summarized in the Traffic Analysis Report. 79 Parsons Page 12 of 53 Deliverables: • Traffic Forecast Model Output for Year 2035 (electronic) 160.10.11 Traffic Modeling [OPTIONAL SCOPE] Alternatively, Parsons also has the capability to utilize the RCTC Transportation Analysis Model to prepare the forecasts, if RCTC determines this is the preferred approach. Parsons would obtain the model datasets needed to run the model from RCTC and prepare the 2015 and 2030 forecasts for the two project scenarios. Results of this study will be summarized in the Traffic Analysis Report. Deliverables: • Traffic Forecast Model Output for Years 2015 and 2030 (electronic) 160.10.15 Prepare Geometric Plans for Project Alternatives Parsons will review of the design provided in the Project Study Report and consider and identify potential design modifications that will enhance the overall operations and be consistent with the project purpose and need. From this review an initial design will be developed and presented to stakeholders for their concurrence. This task will also take into consideration minor modifications to the initial design that may arise as a result of recommendations provided in the Value Analysis. This task does not include substantial modifications that may arise as a result of recommendations provided in the Value Analysis such as an additional alternative. Upon concurrence of the initial design and minor modifications recommended from the Value Analysis. Parsons will prepare geometric layout plans at 1” = 50’ scale (approximately 1”=100’ for reduced plans) for the Build Alternative only. Eighteen (18) sheets will be drafted in accordance with the Caltrans Plans Preparation Manual (updated version November, 2006 including errata updates to July, 2007). Sheet drawings will be included in the Project Report. This task will be completed in coordination with Task 180.05.20 Geometric Approval Drawings (GAD) for the Build Alternative. Lane, shoulders, and buffer widths will be dimensioned. R/W requirements will be shown. Retaining wall and sound wall locations will be shown with approximate heights. Daylight limits of standard 1:2 or 1:4 slopes will be delineated. Typical Cross Sections sheets will be prepared in accordance with the Caltrans Plans Preparation Manual. Profiles and Superelevation diagram sheets will be provided for ramps and connectors for the build alternative. Eighteen (18) sheets will be drafted in accordance with the Caltrans Plans Preparation Manual. Profiles will also be provided for mainline widening utilizing aerial topographic mapping and record drawing information. The number of hard copy sets for distribution will be determined based on coordination with the RCTC and the PDT. Parsons assumes eighteen (18) Layout sheets, eight (8) Typical Cross Section sheets, and eighteen (18) Profile and Super-elevation sheets for each set Deliverables: • Geometric plans for the Build Alternative 80 Parsons Page 13 of 53 160.10.16 Prepare Construction Staging Concept Plans Parsons will prepare construction staging concept plans for the Build Alternative. The construction staging concept plans will depict overall construction sequencing showing where construction will occur and where traffic will be maintained during construction (i.e. identify opened lanes of travel and general construction areas). The construction staging concept plans consist of an overview. Details will be developed during task 180.05.25 “Comprehensive Construction Staging and Implementation Plan for the Build Alternative.” The concept stage construction plans will be prepared at 1”=200’ scale (approximately 1”=400’ for reduced plans). Up to five construction stages and 25 sheets of the Construction Staging Concept Plan Up to five stages will be drafted. The number of hard copy sets for distribution will be determined based on coordination with the RCTC and the PDT. Parsons assumes up to 25 sheets for each set. Deliverables: • Construction Staging Concept Plan 160.10.20 Perform Value Analysis (VA) It is anticipated that a VA study will be done for this project per Caltrans and FHWA guidelines. It is assumed that the VA procedures, identification of the VA team, conducting the analysis, and preparing the draft and final VA report, would be done by Caltrans. Parsons will provide the services of the Project Manager, one Senior Specialist, and one Project Engineer for a period of six (6) days to participate in the VA team meetings. Parsons will also provide the services of the Roadway Lead Engineer for three (3) days to participate in the VA team meeting. Parsons will also provide copies of project information and data that will be available at the time the VA study will be conducted. 160.10.25 Perform Preliminary Hydrology Studies The site traverses the Santa Ana River and its tributaries, Wardlow Wash and Fresno Creek. A conceptual hydrology and hydraulic study will be performed for both off-site and on-site drainage systems. The off-site system evaluation will be based on off-site flow rates provided by the County, FEMA, and/or Caltrans. A conceptual on-site drainage system will be developed using gross acreage determinations tributary to the proposed systems shown on the Drainage Concept Plans noted herein. The analysis will be based on a cubic feet per second (cfs)/acre basis. A qualitative assessment will be made for existing cross drainage systems to assess any potential deficiencies and possible upsizing. A detailed hydrology and hydraulic analysis is not included in the scope of work. Deliverables: • Draft Conceptual Hydrology and Hydraulic Study (up to 20 copies for review) • Final Conceptual Hydrology and Hydraulic Study (up to 20 copies for distribution) 81 Parsons Page 14 of 53 160.10.26 Prepare Drainage Concept Plans Existing freeway drainage systems shall be reviewed and plotted on drainage layout sheets based on information available on record drawings from Caltrans. On-site drainage facilities for the widening shall be evaluated and identified in a qualitative manner for the Build Alternative. No profiles will be provided. For determining the extent of on-site drainage improvements, Parsons will identify critical locations for drainage inlets (i.e., sumps, superelevation reversal points, and on/off ramps), and develop conveyance systems to accommodate the inlet locations and to route the drainage to proposed treatment BMPs. Rough estimates of design discharges will be developed on gross acreage determinations tributary to the proposed drainage systems on a cfs/acre basis. These values will be used to provide preliminary sizing of the drainage systems within the project site. The capacity of existing storm drain systems will be estimated using normal depth calculations to determine if the existing facilities have adequate capacity to accommodate increases in storm water run off resulting from the project. Deliverables: • Draft Concept Drainage Plans (up to 20 copies for review) • Final Concept Drainage Plans (up to 20 copies for distribution) 160.10.27 Storm Water Data Report In accordance with the Project Planning and Design Guide dated May 2007, a Storm Water Data Report (SWDR) will be prepared. The SWDR is to include the following information: Project description, identification of the receiving water bodies, geotechnical information, proposed improvements, disturbed soil areas, characteristics of the hydrologic regime, existing water quality data, surface and ground water beneficial uses, impaired water bodies, groundwater characteristics, TMDLs, pollutants of concern, proposed design pollution prevention BMPs, proposed treatment BMPs , construction BMPs, source control BMPs, costs and checklists. The report will be used as a guide for runoff management during and after construction and will dictate many of the features required for the overall drainage system. The SWDR will be signed by the Project Engineer, then submitted to Caltrans for review and approval by the District/Regional Design Storm Water Coordinator, the designated Landscape Representative, the designated Maintenance Representative, and final approval by the Project Manager to verify that storm water quality design issues have been addressed, and the data is complete, current, and accurate. The SWDR will be prepared and revised at the Draft and Final PR phases. Parsons assumes two reviews iterations for both the Draft and Final SWDR. Deliverables: • Draft Storm Water Data Report (up to 20 copies for review) • Final Storm Water Data Report (up to 20 copies for distribution) 82 Parsons Page 15 of 53 160.10.35 Perform Traffic Operational Analysis A simulation model will be developed to perform operational analysis of traffic characteristics for the Build Alternative against Opening Year 2015 No Project conditions. The operational model will be calibrated and validated to existing traffic conditions and utilized to evaluate opening day and future year traffic characteristics. In addition, the operational model will be applied in the construction-related traffic operations analysis. The study area for the SR-71/91 Interchange Improvement Project traffic simulation will extend on SR-91 from west of Green River Road to east of Serfas Club Drive, and on SR-71 south of Euclid Ave (SR-83). Simulation models require input data beyond requirements specified for traditional regional travel demand models. Existing traffic data will be collected to supplement the development, calibration and validation of the operational simulation model including peak period travel time runs, daily traffic flows by incremental time periods, intersection peak period turning movement counts, etc. Geometric considerations including lane and shoulder widths will be collected from as-built plans, engineering diagrams and schematics. HOV/express lane access point and auxiliary lanes will also be identified for coding into the base year simulation network. The data collection requirements will be integrated into the overall data collection program described in Task 160.10.70. The simulation model will be calibrated to existing traffic conditions as documented by existing travel data through the interchange area. The model will be calibrated directionally by peak period to ensure reasonable simulation forecasts are generated for the AM and PM peak periods in both the eastbound and westbound directions on SR-91 as well as the northbound and southbound directions on SR-71. Reasonable simulation forecasts are determined through accurate simulation model calibration. The simulation model will be calibrated to replicate travel speeds and traffic volumes during the peak periods by direction for the study area network. Replicating base year measured travel data to within a range of 10% of measured values over several simulation model runs ensures that the tool will provide reasonable future forecasts. Base trip seed matrices will be extracted from the regional model and sliced into five, ten or fifteen minute increments as appropriate. Seed matrices will be adjusted based on existing traffic counts for the study area ramps to ensure reasonable replication of traffic volumes. The model will be validated by directional peak period speeds and volumes at select points. Simulation results will be analyzed for the Baseline and the Build Alternative to evaluate specific components including weaving issues associated with HOV/express lane access, system and arterial interchanges and general mainline traffic operations. In addition, animated features of the simulation model will be applied for use in technical and public meetings. The operational model, which provides visual analysis of detailed traffic operational characteristics, will be incorporated into the public outreach program as a tool to educate the public on the project and future traffic operations. The simulation model results will be prepared for presentation at technical and/or public meetings. For the purposes of this scope of services, it is assumed that the simulation models will be presented at up to two (2) technical meetings and two (2) public meetings. A technical memorandum will be prepared to document calibration and validation methodology and results of the simulation analysis. 83 Parsons Page 16 of 53 The operational analysis will need specific geometric assumptions to evaluate operational characteristics within the study area. The traffic team will participate in up to 6 staff-level meetings to provide coordination with other related projects in the area surrounding the project. The traffic analysis will also include a localized traffic analysis of the Corona arterial system that is likely to be impacted by improvements to the SR-71/91 interchange area and construction-related activities. A simulation model will be developed that evaluates peak hour traffic impacts on the City’s arterial system from Project-related improvements. The simulation will be developed in Synchro and include up to 20 signalized intersections. The local traffic simulation team will participate in up to 4 team meetings during the development and evaluation of local traffic conditions. The local study area will be defined through application of the regional traffic and project simulation models. Arterial corridors through the City of Corona that are impacted by diverted and construction-related activities will be identified. Parsons will work closely with the City of Corona Traffic Engineering Department to confirm the extents of the study area and specific arterial corridors and intersections to be included in the local simulation model. The local simulation model data collection will be incorporated into the overall traffic analysis data collection program discussed in task 160.10.70. Existing information including peak period travel times, volumes, signal timings, intersection and arterial geometrics will be collected where appropriate within the City of Corona. Our project team will coordinate closely with Corona Traffic Management Center staff to obtain existing data. Local traffic conditions will be evaluated under three scenarios: Existing Conditions, Construction-Related Activities and Opening Year 2015. Existing traffic conditions will be documented for AM and PM peak hours for the local study arterials and 20 intersections based on existing traffic data. Construction-related traffic analysis will be performed in Task 160.10.96. Opening year 2015 traffic forecasts will be developed from the regional and project simulation models for application in the local traffic analysis. Local traffic conditions will be evaluated and documented for opening year AM and PM peak hour intersection 2015 conditions with and without the proposed project. Mitigation measures and strategies to maximize traffic flow and mobility through the City’s circulation system will be recommended for implementation. The mitigation strategies will be developed in coordination with the Project Team and City of Corona. Strategies will be outlined and integrated into the existing Corona Traffic Management Center structure where appropriate and feasible. Results of this study will be summarized in the Traffic Analysis Report. 160.10.40 Prepare Right of Way Data Sheets The Parsons team will prepare R/W Data Sheets in accordance with Exhibit 4-EX-1 (REV March 2004) of the Caltrans Right of Way Manual (updated March 2007) for two the Build Alternative including the following information: 84 Parsons Page 17 of 53 1. R/W Cost Estimate 2. Parcel Data 3. Utility Facility Conflicts (Provided by Parsons) 4. Railroad Facility Conflicts (Provided by Parsons) 5. Identification of previously unidentified hazardous materials (Provided by Parsons) 6. Displacement requirements 7. Borrow or Disposal Sites required (Provided by Parsons) 8. Potential relinquishments and/or abandonments 9. Existing and/or potential airspace sites 10. Estimated R/W schedule and lead time Deliverables: • R/W Data Sheets (up to 20 copies for distribution) 160.10.41 Determine Right of Way Requirements The Parsons team will determine R/W requirements for the Build Alternative. R/W requirements will be established in Microstation format and tabulated in an Excel spreadsheet with parcel number identification and area of take required. Deliverables: • Tabulated R/W Requirements (electronic) 160.10.45 Assess Utility Relocation Requirements Contacts will be made with each utility company affected and a preliminary determination of relocation requirements will be made. Conceptual relocation alignments will be shown on the utility base maps. Prior rights determination is not included in this scope of work. Records of coordination with each utility company will be available electronically. Deliverables: • Conceptual Utility Relocation Requirements (electronic) 160.10.50 Perform Railroad Study Identify impacted rail lines, operation requirements and expansion plans and prepare a Railroad Information Sheet in accordance with Exhibit 4-EX-1 (REV March 2004) of the Caltrans Right of Way Manual (updated March 2007) for the Project Report describing the railroad facilities and types of agreements and rights required from the railroads. The Railroad information sheets will be available electronically. 85 Parsons Page 18 of 53 Deliverables: • Railroad Information Sheet (electronic) 160.10.70 Perform Traffic Studies A traffic study will be prepared to analyze and evaluate study area traffic operations and performance. The results will be documented under separate cover as a technical report. This technical report will be used for traffic data dependent studies (air quality, noise, et. al.) and will be included as an Appendix to the environmental document. An administrative draft will be prepared and distributed for review by Caltrans, RCTC, and the PDT. Following receipt of comments on the administrative draft, a second draft of the traffic technical report will be prepared to respond to comments on the administrative draft. An additional 20 copies of the Draft Traffic Technical Report distributed for final review by FHWA, Caltrans, RCTC and project consulting team members. One original, 50 copies and an electronic version of the Final Traffic Technical Report will be prepared for copying and distribution to the public by other members of the project team. The initial component to development of the traffic studies is collection of existing data to support the traffic analysis. A data collection program will be developed that takes advantage of existing data sources including Caltrans data, Caltrans Freeway Performance Measurement System (PeMS) data and local jurisdictions. Existing reports related to traffic activity through the SR-91 Corridor and the SR-71/91 interchange will be obtained and reviewed. Traffic assumptions pertinent to study area will be documented. Field reconnaissance will be performed to confirm circulation system characteristics including number of lanes, intersection geometry and control, etc. The field reconnaissance will supplement existing data from local jurisdictions, Caltrans and aerial sources. Peak hour traffic counts will be conducted to supplement existing data for up to 20 study area intersections and daily traffic counts will be conducted at up to 20 roadway/ramp segments. A preliminary traffic capacity analysis will be performed for 2035 No Project conditions and for the Build Alternative. Traffic analysis will include accident analysis, mainline analysis, ramp merge-diverge analysis, ramp intersection analysis, arterial intersection analysis and arterial segment analysis. The following components of the circulation system will be evaluated: System Interchanges AM and PM peak-hour traffic forecasts will be prepared for the SR-91 system interchange at State Route 71 (SR-71) and State Route 241 (SR-241). Traffic forecasts for all mainline segments, ramps, and collector-distributor roads in the interchange areas will be included. Freeway Mainline Directional AM and PM peak-hour traffic forecasts will be prepared for the SR-91 mainline auxiliary and collector-distributor roads and the HOV/express lane facility. Arterial Streets Arterial segments will be analyzed based on ADT conditions with forecast volumes that are post-processed in accordance with SCAG and OCTA standards. For the purposes of this scope of services, it is assumed that ADT forecasts will be prepared for up to 12 arterial roadway segments. 86 Parsons Page 19 of 53 Intersections For the purposes of this scope of services, it is assumed that AM and PM peak-hour intersection turning movements will be prepared for 20 intersections. In general the study area will include the following intersections: SR-91 interchanges with crossing arterial streets and two key intersections, immediately north and south of the SR-91 service interchange. Local Corona arterial intersections on key potential SR-91 detour corridors including but not limited to Ontario Avenue, Magnolia Avenue, Green River Road, Hidden Valley Parkway, Harrison Street, Sixth Street and Railroad Street. Additional intersections may be identified during the course of the study, as necessary, to analyze project impacts, up to a total of 20. The methodology for the preparation of the traffic analysis will be described, including the following: 1. Description of alternatives 2. Travel demand modeling process 3. Study area 4. Detailed traffic forecasts 5. Capacity analysis 6. Significance thresholds for traffic impacts 7. Recommended improvements/mitigation 8. Level of significance after mitigation Roadway capacity analysis will be conducted using methods described in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) for the mainline, system and arterial interchanges, and intersections. Arterial street segments will be analyzed using daily street segment volume-to-capacity ratios with capacities to be developed based on local jurisdiction and agency standards. Deliverables: • Draft Traffic Analysis Report (up to 20 copies for review) • Final Traffic Analysis Report (up to 50 copies for distribution) 160.10.80 Prepare Geotechnical Information This task will be performed in two phases. Findings of investigations, preliminary considerations for design, potential impacts, and general design and construction recommendations (sufficient for Advance Planning Studies and Type Selection) will be documented in two reports. A District Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Report that addresses cuts, fills, retaining walls, sound walls, signs, drainage facilities, and pavement structural design will be prepared for review and comment by the Project Team, followed by modification and submittal to Caltrans, RCTC, and other agencies. Parsons anticipates that there will be up to 2 submittals of the Draft of this technical report, a final and a revised final. The second report is a series of Structures Preliminary 87 Parsons Page 20 of 53 Geotechnical Reports for each of the bridges subject to improvement in this project. All reports will be prepared in accordance with Caltrans procedures, regulations, materials, policies, and format. All reports will be signed by a licensed geotechnical engineer. Deliverables: • Preliminary Geotechnical Information Report (Earthwork, Cuts, Fills, Retaining Walls, Sound Walls, Pavement Structures) (up to 20 sets for distribution) • Preliminary Bridge Foundation Reports for each of the following bridges: (up to 20 sets for distribution) Br. No. 56-0587 Route 91/71 Separation Widen one side Br. No. 56-0634 West Prado OH Widen one side Br. No. 56-0637 Prado OH Widen two sides Br. No. 56-NEW West Prado OH (EB onramp) New structure Br. No. 56-NEW E91-N71 Connector New structure 160.10.85 Structure Advance Planning Study Parsons will perform Advance Planning Study (APS) for each structure to evaluate the type of structure, foundation and its constructability, calculations of horizontal and vertical clearances, staging, preliminary construction durations, structure cost and structural interaction with roadway and railroad facilities. Parsons will develop the APS report based on Caltrans’ Memo to Designers (MTD) 1-8 and Caltrans’ Office of Specially Funded Projects’ (OSFP) Information and Procedures Guide, including a preliminary seismic retrofit assessment of the existing bridge structures. The APS report will include a viable structure type which will be evaluated for each of the structures listed below for the purposes of establishing cost and scope of bridge work involved. Each APS report will include the following for each bridge: a bridge Advance Planning Study exhibit, structure plans for E91-N71 Connector, consultant prepared Advance Planning Study Checklist, and Itemized cost estimates consistent with Project Report requirements The structures that will be studied are: Br. No. 56-0587 Route 91/71 Separation Widen one side Br. No. 56-0634 West Prado OH Widen one side Br. No. 56-0637 Prado OH Widen two sides Br. No. 56-NEW West Prado OH (EB onramp) New structure Br. No. 56-NEW E91-N71 Connector New structure Deliverables: • APS Report (up to 20 copies for distribution). 88 Parsons Page 21 of 53 160.10.95 Prepare Preliminary Transportation Management Plan Parsons will develop a preliminary Transportation Management Plan (TMP) to include information about potential strategies to manage the transportation system in and around the project area. Caltrans’ District 8 TMP Data Sheet will be utilized to identify these strategies and to develop a cost estimate for TMP items proposed for the project. The TMP data sheets and report will be attached to the Project Report (PR). Deliverables: • TMP Data Sheet (electronic) • Preliminary TMP Report (up to 20 copies for distribution) 160.15 – PREPARE DRAFT PROJECT REPORT 160.15.05 Prepare Cost Estimates for Alternatives Parsons will provide cost estimates for the Build Alternative based on Caltrans Project Development Procedures Manual guidelines for Project Report cost estimates. An independent review of the cost estimates will be performed. Deliverables: • Project Report Cost Estimates (electronic) 160.15.10 Prepare Fact Sheets for Exceptions to Design Standards Parsons will identify all non-standard design features based on the Design Checklist (DIB 78-02) for the Build Alternative. Fact Sheets will be prepared for exceptions to Mandatory and Advisory standards for the Build Alternative only. 160.15.10.01 Prepare Draft Advisory Design Exception Fact Sheet Preparation of the Advisory Fact Sheet is anticipated to include up to five Design Exception Features. A comment matrix will be developed and the comments responded to for a total of three review cycles. Parsons assumes up to three submittals for this deliverable. Deliverables: • Draft Advisory Fact Sheet (up to 20 copies for review) 160.15.10.02 Prepare Final Advisory Design Exception Fact Sheet The Final Fact Sheets for Mandatory and Advisory design exceptions will be submitted for signature approval. Parsons assumes one submittal for this deliverable. Deliverables: 89 Parsons Page 22 of 53 • Final Advisory Fact Sheet (up to 20 copies for distribution) 160.15.10.03 Prepare Draft Mandatory Design Exception Fact Sheet Preparation of the Mandatory Fact Sheet is anticipated to include up to five Design Exception Features. A comment matrix will be developed and the comments responded to for a total of three review cycles. Parsons assumes up to three submittals for this deliverable. Deliverables: • Draft Mandatory Fact Sheet (up to 20 copies for review) 160.15.10.04 Prepare Final Mandatory Design Exception Fact Sheet The Final Fact Sheets for Mandatory and Advisory design exceptions will be submitted for signature approval. Parsons assumes one submittal for this deliverable. Deliverables: • Final Mandatory Fact Sheet (up to 20 copies for distribution) 160.15.20 Prepare Draft Project Report Parsons will prepare a Draft Project Report based on the Project Development Procedures Manual (PDPM) Appendix K dated February 18, 2000. All information prepared as part of Task 160.10 will be incorporated into the Project Report as required by the PDPM. A preliminary Draft Project Report will be submitted to RCTC and Caltrans for review and comment. Following receipt of one consolidated set of comments, Parsons will provide responses in a matrix format. A comment review workshop will be held with the respondents to review their comments and resolved any issues. Two submittals of the draft are anticipated before a Final Draft Project Report will be prepared and submitted for review and signature approval. Deliverables: • Preliminary Draft Project Report (up to 50 copies for review) • Final Draft Project Report (up to 50 copies for distribution) 160.15.25 Circulate, Review and Approve Draft Project Report Once the Final Draft Project Report has been submitted for review and approval, the project manager or his designee will work with RCTC and Caltrans to obtain the appropriate signatures. If issues or questions arise during the approval phase, the Parsons team will work with RCTC and/or Caltrans staff to answer any remaining questions, provide additional information, and obtain signatures. Parsons will modify the Final Draft Project Report as appropriate. 90 Parsons Page 23 of 53 Deliverables: • Signed Draft Project Report (up to 10 copies for distribution) ENVIRONMENTAL UNDERSTANDING AND ASSUMPTIONS Parsons assumes that the scope of the environmental document for this project is limited to only compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and applicable state environmental laws, regulations and policies. Parsons assumes that there is no FHWA/Caltrans-NEPA involvement for this project, therefore, Caltrans-NEPA delegation procedures and deliverables are not included as part of this scope. Parsons will prepare an updated scope of work and cost estimate, which will be submitted to RCTC. Based on a preliminary assessment of the project and the conceptual design presented in the December 2006 PSR, Parsons assumes that an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) will be the appropriate level of environmental documentation for the project. If the Initial Study finds that there are unmitigable significant impacts under CEQA and that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required, Parsons will prepare an updated scope of work and cost estimate, which will be submitted to RCTC. Parsons assumes that Caltrans will act as the CEQA Lead Agency and RCTC will be a Responsible Agency as defined under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15367 and 15381. This scope assumes that an individual permit (IP) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) will be required for this project. Parsons assumes an IP will be required because the conceptual alternative described in the PSR proposes improvements in the vicinity of Waters of the United States (Santa Ana River and its tributaries). The issuance of an IP under Section 404 is considered to be a federal administrative action. This federal administrative action will trigger compliance requirements with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other federal environmental laws, regulations, and policies. Although the environmental document will focus only on CEQA and state environmental requirements, compliance with NEPA and other federal laws are also included and discussed in this scope as part of the regulatory permit application requirements. Furthermore, this scope also assumes that various other regulatory permits will be required prior to commencement of project construction activities (Section 401 of the CWA and Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code – Streambed Alteration Agreement). Parsons will perform the necessary studies and provide the required information, to the best extent of this scope, to facilitate the issuance of the permits. This scope and associated cost estimates does not include the actual preparation and submittal of the regulatory permit applications. If desired by RCTC, Parsons can provide the permitting services as an addition to the scope and cost estimate at a later stage of the project development process. Since Caltrans is the Lead Agency pursuant to CEQA and since the project will occur on the state highway system, Parsons assumes that Caltrans standards and requirements will apply to each environmental task performed for this project. Although Parsons will utilize all appropriate guidance materials as necessary, Parsons understands that the Caltrans Standard Environmental Reference website (SER) will be the principal basis for studies and reports prepared for this project. 91 Parsons Page 24 of 53 165.05 - PERFORM ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING AND SELECT ALTERNATIVES FOR STUDY 165.05.05 Review Project Information Parsons will collect, examine, and distribute to appropriate internal staff any pertinent existing information to support the environmental services for the project. Pertinent existing information may consist of the following: PID documents, preliminary project plans, records of previous agency/public coordination, and environmental reports/documents for previous projects in the area, environmental resource maps, and copies of relevant environmental policies, laws, regulations, and other guidance materials. Under this task, Parsons will also create an environmental project file system and an internal electronic file directory. 165.05.10 Perform Public and Agency Scoping and Community Outreach Process 165.05.10.01 Prepare and Publish Notice of Initiation of Studies Parsons will prepare and distribute a Notice of Initiation of Studies (NOIS) letter; the NOIS will inform the recipient about the project, provide a brief project description, and solicit scoping comments on the project. The NOIS may also serve as an invitation to a public scoping meeting. Parsons will prepare a draft NOIS for RCTC and Caltrans review; a final NOIS will be prepared once the draft has been approved. The NOIS will be distributed to elected officials, appropriate agencies, and interested members of the public. Parsons will develop a NOIS distribution list through coordination with RCTC and Caltrans; the NOIS distribution list will be subsequently used as the general project distribution list. Parsons will distribute up to 100 copies of the NOIS through the US mail. Parsons will maintain a log of comments or questions received subsequent to the distribution. Deliverables: • Draft NOIS (electronic) • Final NOIS (up to 100 copies for distribution) • NOIS Comment Log (electronic) • Project Distribution List (electronic) 165.05.10.02 Prepare and Conduct Agency Scoping Meeting Parsons will prepare for and, in conjunction with RCTC and Caltrans, conduct up to three (3) formal agency scoping meeting to initiate, establish, and maintain communication with the regulatory agencies. These meetings will confirm the direction and scope of the environmental studies. In addition to formal scoping meetings, Parsons will conduct ongoing agency consultation meetings to facilitate the project delivery and regulatory permit process. Parsons will coordinate with RCTC on the logistics details for each meeting. Parsons will prepare and distribute pre-meeting materials which may consist of a meeting invitation notice, meeting agenda, and a project description. Parsons will prepare up to five (5) poster size meeting exhibits for 92 Parsons Page 25 of 53 each formal scoping meeting. Subsequent to each agency scoping meeting, Parsons will prepare meeting minutes and maintain an agency scoping meeting file. Deliverables: • Pre-Meeting materials • Up to five (5) 36 inch by 48 inch meeting exhibits • Agency Scoping Meeting Minutes file (electronic) 165.05.20 Prepare Base Maps for Environmental Evaluation Parsons will prepare base maps to be used during the environmental analysis. Base maps will provide the basis for other environmental resource specific maps that will be prepared in conjunction with other environmental technical tasks in this scope. Base maps will be available in both electronic format and hard copies. Parsons will obtain map layer files necessary for this task; map layer files may consist of aerial mapping data, topographic data, parcel data, environmental resource data, and external development design data. Parsons will also create all necessary project map files. These project map files will consist of: design data for the current alternatives, existing and proposed R/W boundaries, a general environmental study area boundary, and environmental and jurisdictional boundaries. Parsons assumes that one Build Alternative will be considered for this project. Deliverables: • Base mapping files • Project Vicinity Map (electronic) • Project Location Map (electronic) • Project Alternative Maps (electronic) • Project R/W Map (electronic file) • Environmental/Jurisdictional Boundary Maps (electronic) 165.10 - PERFORM GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES The Parsons team will perform environmental technical studies and prepare technical reports and other work products documenting study results in support of the environmental document. This task will include coordination with RCTC, Caltrans, regulatory agencies, and the public to collect and analyze information. Parsons shall also attend meetings and provide additional documentation, when necessary, to respond to requests by regulatory agencies. Depending on the extent and complexity of additional tasks required by the regulatory agencies that are not covered under this scope, Parsons will prepare an updated scope of work and estimate of cost, which will be submitted to RCTC. Studies under this task will be performed according to Caltrans guidance and templates found in the SER. Parsons will conduct each technical study to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and all other environmental and permit requirements for the project. Parsons assumes that reports and sections prepared under this task will require no more than two (2) review iterations with Caltrans. If the concept plans for the project are revised after the technical studies 93 Parsons Page 26 of 53 have been conducted, additional analysis, field work, and report preparation may be required and the scope and budget may be modified appropriately. The following environmental technical reports will be prepared under this scope: - Visual Impact Analysis - Traffic Noise Analysis Report - Air Quality Study Report - Water Quality Report - Historic Resources Compliance Report (includes Archaeological Survey Report, Historic Resources Evaluation Report, and Area of Potential Effects map) - Initial Site Assessment - Natural Environment Study (includes Biological Assessment and Wetland Delineation Report) All of the above-noted studies will be prepared as stand-alone technical reports. Each technical report shall include a draft and final report of findings, site descriptions, exhibits/photographs of survey sites, and other relevant information including the following report sections: introduction, purpose, methods (protocols followed), study results, and mitigation recommended. The key findings of each technical report will be summarized in the environmental document. 165.10.10 Obtain Right of Entry for Environmental Studies Parsons will perform preparatory work required for RCTC to obtain rights of entry for access to private and public lands as needed for environmental technical studies. Parsons will identify where access to private or public properties are required based on the project footprint and environmental areas of effect. Parsons will prepare a draft right of entry request letter (ROE letter) for RCTC and Caltrans review; a final ROE letter will be prepared once the draft has been approved. Parsons assumes the publication of up to fifty (50) ROE letters for distribution. Fees to property owners are not included as part of this scope and estimates. Each ROE letter will specify general activities that will occur on the property and the duration of the right to enter. Parsons, in conjunction with RCTC, will distribute each letter via certified mail. Under this task, Parsons will maintain a ROE letter response log and a ROE database which will track the status of the ROE coordination for each parcel. Parsons will prepare electronic ROE status maps using to assist with the location which parcels may be entered during environmental field studies; ROE status maps will be continually updated when new information becomes available. Project staff will be provided copies of approved ROE letters and current ROE status maps prior to field studies. Deliverables: • Draft ROE letter (electronic) • Final ROE letter (up to 50 copies for distribution) • ROE Letter Response Log (electronic) • ROE Status Maps (electronic) 94 Parsons Page 27 of 53 165.10.15 Perform Land Use Studies Parsons will perform land use studies by first assessing existing and planned land use categories and zoning in the project study area and adjacent municipalities by obtaining and consulting existing applicable documents such as General Plans, Area Plans, and Zoning Maps. Parsons will identify state, regional, and local plans, and as well as future development data and assess the project for compatibility. Under this task, Parsons will, in conjunction with RCTC, consult with municipalities and local developers to identify future developments in the study area. Design data obtained during this study may be digitized and converted into GIS files for mapping assessment applications. This task will create maps for the Build Alternative showing existing land use, future land use, and zoning. 165.10.16 Perform Utility/Service Studies Parsons will perform utility and service studies by identifying existing utility systems and social/community services and centers through literature searches, field studies, and coordination with utility and service providers. Data in the utility relocation plan that will be prepared for the project will be considered in this study. This task will create maps for the Build Alternative that will depict the location of utilities, community services, and sensitive uses in the project area. Parsons will perform coordination with service providers such as hospitals, law enforcement, and fire services. 165.10.20 Perform Visual Impact Analysis Parsons will prepare a Visual Impact Analysis (VIA) to document the aesthetic and scenic studies performed for the project. The potential visual impacts from the project will be evaluated through the use of up to five (5) computer-generated renderings depicting various key views. These computer generated renderings will require photographs obtained during field studies. This task will create maps for the Build Alternative which will depict the location of key views used for the visual analysis. The VIA will be prepared to conform to the guidance provided in the “FHWA Visual Impact Assessment for Highway Projects” guide and the guidance and templates provided in the SER. The studies and the preparation of the VIA will be conducted by or under the supervision of a licensed landscape architect. Parsons will prepare a draft VIA for RCTC and Caltrans review; a final VIA will be prepared once the draft has been approved. Parsons assumes the production of up to twenty (20) copies of the Final VIA for distribution. Deliverables: • Draft Visual Impact Analysis (up to 10 copies for review for each review cycle) • Final Visual Impact Analysis (up to 20 copies for distribution) 165.10.25 Perform Noise Study Parsons will prepare a Traffic Noise Analysis Report to document the noise studies performed for the project. The analysis will address existing and future noise conditions and will be conducted to conform to the guidance provided in the Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol for New Highway Construction and Reconstruction Projects, October 1998 and guidance and templates provided in the SER. Applicable Caltrans and the City of Corona (City) noise and land use compatibility criteria for the project area will be 95 Parsons Page 28 of 53 reviewed considered in the analysis.. Noise standards in the Caltrans Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) and the City noise ordinances will be addressed in this study. Existing sensitive uses in the project vicinity will be located and described. Areas with potential future noise impacts will be identified using land use information, aerial photographs, and field reconnaissance. Existing road traffic noise will be calculated as the baseline, using traffic data from the project traffic study and live traffic counts during noise measurements. Existing ambient noise levels will be measured to establish the noise environment at any sensitive receptors within the study area. Short-term noise measurements (15-minute) will be made at up to ten (10) locations and long-term measurements (24-hour) at up to three (3) locations. All proposed monitoring locations will be determined in conjunction with Caltrans. Observations of noise sources and other noise correlates will be noted during each measurement period. This task will create maps for the Build Alternative that will depict the location of noise receivers. Noise impacts from construction sources will be analyzed based on the equipment expected to be used, length of a specific construction task, equipment power type (gasoline or diesel engine), horsepower, load factor, and percent of time in use. EPA recommended noise emission levels will be used for the construction equipment. The construction noise impact will be evaluated in terms of maximum levels (Lmax), and the frequency of occurrence at adjacent sensitive locations. Analysis requirements will be based on the sensitivity of the area and the requirements of city noise ordinances. This scope does not include noise studies that may be required to assess traffic noise impacts to biological receivers such as nesting birds. The most recent version of the Traffic Noise Model (TNM), the Sound32 replacement, will be used to evaluate the traffic noise levels associated with existing conditions and the future No Build and Build Alternative. The model traffic data input will be from the project traffic study and live traffic counts during noise measurements. Noise abatement measures to reduce short- and long-term project adverse impacts below significant levels will be determined where necessary. The feasibility of the noise abatement measure will be evaluated. A preliminary reasonableness analysis will also be provided. Parsons will prepare a draft Noise Impact Study Report for RCTC and Caltrans review; a Final Noise Impact Study Report will be prepared once the draft has been approved. Parsons assumes the publication of up to twenty (20) copies of the Final Noise Impact Study Report for distribution. Deliverables: • Draft Noise Impact Study Report (up to 10 copies for review for each review cycle) • Final Noise Impact Study Report (up to 20 copies for distribution) 165.10.30 Perform Air Quality Study Parsons will prepare the Air Quality Study Report to be consistent with the Caltrans transportation project level Carbon Monoxide (CO) protocol, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA’s) Fugitive Dust Conformity Rule, and the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. Baseline and project setting meteorological and air quality data in the South Coast Air Basin from the California Air Resources Board (ARB) and climate and air quality profile 96 Parsons Page 29 of 53 data from the SCAQMD will be used to describe the existing ambient air quality. Air quality impacts from demolition, grading, and construction sources will be analyzed based on the equipment used, length of time for a specific construction task, equipment power type (gasoline or diesel engine), equipment emission factors approved by the EPA (AP-42 Handbooks), horsepower, load factor, and percentage of time in use. Exhaust and dust emissions from worker commutes and equipment travel will be calculated based on available information for these activities. Fugitive dust emissions, resulting from wind erosion of exposed soil and soil storage piles, grading operations, and vehicles traveling on paved and unpaved roads, will be addressed. Asphalt paving emissions will be calculated when specific data are available. An analysis of greenhouse gas emissions for purposes of AB32 compliance will be prepared. Parsons will evaluate the proposed project’s impacts to long-term particulate matter concentrations and mobile source air toxics (MSAT) using the Transportation Conformity Guidance for Qualitative Hot-spot Analysis in PM2.5 and PM10 Non-attainment and Maintenance Areas (EPA, March 2006) and the Interim Guidelines on Air Toxic Analysis in NEPA Documents (FHWA, February 2006). These analysis procedures are expected to conform to the compliance requirements by the ARB. Traffic in the project area is expected to increase due to area growth. It is also possible that some traffic currently using other routes would be attracted to the improved roadway. A detailed CO hot spot analysis using the CALINE4 model will be conducted based on the peak traffic hour along this road, and projected turn volumes at impacted intersections in the project vicinity. Parsons, in conjunction with RCTC and Caltrans, will identify feasible recommended mitigation measures, as needed based on the impact analysis. Parsons will prepare a draft Air Quality Study Report for RCTC and Caltrans review; a Final Air Quality Study Report will be prepared once the draft has been approved. Parsons assumes the publication of up to twenty (20) copies of the Final Air Quality Study Report for distribution. Deliverables: • Draft Air Quality Study Report (up to 10 copies for review for each review cycle) • Final Air Quality Study Report (up to 20 copies for distribution) 165.10.35 Perform Water Quality Studies and Floodplain Evaluation The proposed project will entail construction within the existing Santa Ana River flood plain immediately downstream of Prado Dam and at its confluence with Wardlow Wash and Fresno Creek. Proposed roadway improvements will encroach on the flood plain of the river and of Wardlow Wash. In this area, the flood plain comprises flood control channels, culverts, and bridges. Parsons will perform a floodplain evaluation in accordance with CEQA assessment requirements. Parsons will utilize the Caltrans Floodplain Encroachment Evaluation Guidelines, by reviewing the most recent Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Federal Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) of the Project area and identifying the limits of the base (100-year) floodplain and regulatory floodway. Coordination with the City of Corona, Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Caltrans, and FEMA will be conducted as necessary to obtain flood limits, hydrology and flow rates for the various flow regimes in the area. This 97 Parsons Page 30 of 53 report shall include hydraulic modeling of pre- and post-project hydraulic conditions for construction within the flood plain and any proposed flood control improvements needed to mitigate water surface increases that may result from the proposed improvements. Hydraulic models used at this stage will be limited to a distance of 500 feet upstream and 500 feet downstream of proposed structures. This flood risk assessment will be summarized in the environmental document. 165.10.36 Prepare Water Quality Assessment Report (WQAR) Parsons will prepare a water quality, hydrology, and stormwater runoff analysis by reviewing and documenting existing available records to describe ambient conditions in nearby water channels, both natural and man-made. Water quality data for both surface and groundwater shall be used from published records. Rough hydrologic calculations (suitable for determination of estimated stormwater runoff volumes) shall be performed based upon topography and preliminary engineering plans. The impacts of the project shall be evaluated and potential mitigation measures to alleviate both short-term (during construction) and long-term impacts shall be identified. Parsons will prepare a description of the affected watersheds. Parsons will collect and summarize existing publicly available water quality data from Riverside County and the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Parsons will assess applicable water quality standards, considering designated beneficial uses, the watershed objectives, the existing and pending Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for the Santa Ana River. Parsons will identify the potential sources of urban runoff pollutants from the existing roadway. Parsons will assess potential short-term impacts to receiving water quality that could occur during construction. The assessment of short term impacts will include a discussion of the potential for sediment and other substances associated with building materials and construction activities to enter the waterway if uncontrolled by appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs). Parsons will identify the potential for the project to impact water quality standards, TMDLs, and criteria associated with other water quality regulations. Parsons will also assess potential long-term impacts to the waterways from the operation of the highway once it has been improved. The improvements will accommodate increased vehicle traffic; therefore, the potential for an increased pollutant load to the waterways will be assessed in light of the BMPs that are part of the project design. Using projected traffic data and existing publicly available estimates of vehicle pollutants in storm water runoff from similar projects, Parsons will qualitatively identify the potential long-term project impacts to water quality. The technical report and section in the ED will describe the regulatory compliance requirements that must be met including compliance with: - California General Construction Activities Storm Water Permit; - Section 404 of the Clean Water Act under U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) jurisdiction; - Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (Water Quality Certification) through the Santa Ana RWQCB; 98 Parsons Page 31 of 53 - TMDLs (existing and under development); and - Riverside County area wide municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. As necessary, mitigation measures will be identified to help reduce any potential significant impacts to a level of insignificance. The alternative mitigation measures will be identified, but detailed design or specifications for mitigation measures are not part of this scope of work. Similarly, our scope does not include preparation of various environmental permits that may be required for the project. If desired by RCTC, Parsons can provide these services as an addition to the scope and cost estimate, at a later phase in the project development process. Parsons will prepare a draft Water Quality Assessment Report (WQAR) for RCTC and Caltrans review; a Final WQAR will be prepared once the draft has been approved. Parsons assumes the publication of up to twenty (20) copies of the Final WQAR for distribution. Deliverables: • Draft Water Quality Assessment Report (up to 10 copies for review for each review cycle) • Final Water Quality Assessment Report (up to 20 copies for distribution) 165.10.45 Prepare Summary of Geotechnical Report Parsons will summarize key information from the project geotechnical report. This summary will include geologic setting, major faults, seismicity, ground shaking, topography, groundwater levels and the groundwater regime, soil conditions and the presence of bedrock. 165.10.50 Perform Preliminary Site Investigation for Hazardous Waste Parsons will perform a hazardous materials and waste technical study which will follow the Caltrans guidelines for Initial Site Assessments (ISA) and Preliminary Site Investigations (PSI). The purpose of the study is to identify contamination at sites suspected of containing hazardous materials or waste. It is recommended that surveys for Aerially Deposited Lead (ADL), Asbestos-Containing Materials (ACM), and Lead- Based Paint (LBP) be conducted during a later phase of the project (i.e., during final design). This scope of work and associated cost estimate does not include surveys for ADL, ACM, and LBP. Parsons will review available current and historical documents pertinent to land use and activities conducted in or near the project site. Topics of interest to be investigated will include: chemical usage or inventories; waste management records; Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) activities; Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) activities; and health and safety operations. Parsons will perform site reconnaissance of the SR-91 and SR-71 corridors to visually and physically observe and document conditions within and near the project limits. Photograph documentation of potential hazardous materials issues will be completed. 99 Parsons Page 32 of 53 Parsons will perform a file search and records review of federal, state, and local regulatory agency electronic databases. This database search identifies locations that are regulated under various environmental laws, notably CERCLA, RCRA, and Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The records search will also identify locations where a release of hazardous substances may have occurred. A review of historical information sources will be conducted to evaluate whether prior land uses may pose an environmental concern within or near any properties within the project area. These historical information sources will include, as available: historical aerial photographs, fire insurance maps, and historical topographic maps. In addition, environmental lien data will be obtained for up to 25 parcels that may be considered for full or partial acquisition. To the extent practical, interviews will be conducted with current property owners or personnel of up to ten (10) properties to determine the historical and current use of subject properties and surrounding areas, as well as any available information concerning the potential presence of hazardous materials. The parcels selected for owner/occupant interviews would be limited to parcels outside of the existing R/W that may be considered for full or partial acquisition, and/or parcels anywhere along the project alignment that are suspected or known to contain hazardous materials. Parsons will evaluate available information collected concerning the project site and its surroundings to identify Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs). According to the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) E 1527-05, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process (Phase I ESA), RECs are defined as “the presence or likely presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products on a property under conditions that indicate an existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products into structures on the property or into the ground, groundwater, or surface water of the property.” Significant findings from the above-stated tasks will be summarized in a stand-alone ISA technical report, and recommendations will be made for additional site assessment activities, if needed. Parsons will prepare a draft ISA for RCTC and Caltrans review; a Final ISA will be prepared once the draft has been approved. Parsons assumes the publication of up to twenty (20) copies of the Final ISA for distribution. Deliverables: • Draft Initial Site Assessment (up to 10 copies for review for each review cycle) • Final Initial Site Assessment (up to 20 copies for distribution) 165.10.65 Prepare Paleontology Identification Report Parsons will prepare a Paleontological Identification Report to document paleontological studies performed for the project. Parsons will perform a literature/records review will focus on the entire project study area. The literature review will include all pertinent paleontologic and geologic literature. The records review will include a check of the Regional Paleontologic Locality Inventory (RPLI), an Argus©-based computerized database and archive of maps housed at the San Bernardino County Museum (SBCM). 100 Parsons Page 33 of 53 Parsons will then perform field studies to confirm findings made during the literature search should the literature search indicate a potential for high paleontological sensitivity. A spot-check field reconnaissance will confirm literature interpretations by delineating geologic units exposed at the surface along the proposed project alternatives and improvement areas. If resources are present, the significance of the resources will be assessed. Documentation with GPS of any paleontological resources encountered, including their regional context, will be performed. No collection of resources will occur during the field reconnaissance. Deliverables: • Draft Paleontological Identification Report (up to 10 copies for review for each review cycle) • Final Paleontological Identification Report (up to 20 copies for distribution) 165.15 - BIOLOGICAL STUDIES The Parsons team will perform biological studies and prepare documentation to demonstrate compliance with CEQA and the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) and as well as NEPA, CWA, and the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) in relationship to the regulatory permits that will be required for the project. The studies performed under this task are also intended to show consistency with the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). The Parsons team, in conjunction with the RCTC and Caltrans, will conduct agency consultation that is necessary for this process. 165.15.05 Prepare Biological Assessment (BA) The Parsons team will prepare an abbreviated BA according to established procedures for conducting a consultation under Section 7 of FESA (Section 7) and the MSHCP. The BA will include a MSHCP consistency report and an approval from the Western Riverside County Conservation Approval Authority (RCA) which will provide take authority under Section 10 of FESA (Section 10). Compliance with the Section 10 Take Authority for the MSHCP is presumed to be sufficient for United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to issue a Biological Opinion under Section 7. The Parsons team, in conjunction with RCTC and Caltrans, will perform any necessary coordination with the appropriate agencies related to this task. Parsons will submit a draft copy of the BA to RCTC and Caltrans for review; a final BA will be prepared once the draft has been approved. The BA will ultimately be appended to the Natural Environment Study Report (NESR). The Corps may adopt the BA prepare under this task to support their permitting requirements. Deliverables: • Biological Assessment (will be attached to the NESR) 165.15.06 Perform Habitat Assessment The Parsons team will perform a habitat assessment of the project area by first reviewing existing information including previous biological reports related to the project 101 Parsons Page 34 of 53 area and documents related to the MSHCP. A focused literature review will be conducted on occurrences and habitats of federal and state listed species and designated critical habitat areas. These federal and state listed species include the least Bell’s vireo (LBV), southwestern willow flycatcher, and the Santa Ana River woollystar. Habitat assessments will also be performed for federal and state species of concern, such as the western pond turtle, coast range newt, yellow-billed cuckoo, burrowing owl, and other raptor species that could occur in the area. Assessments for riparian and riverine habitats and wildlife migration corridors will be performed as part of this task. Following the review of existing information, the proposed project area will be systemically surveyed to characterize on-site biological resources, including habitat types and the possible presence or absence of suspected sensitive species. The potential presence of any special status plant or wildlife, or sensitive habitat will be mapped and documented using Global Positioning Systems (GPS) units. Vegetation/habitat maps for the Build Alternative will be prepared to document the location of naturally occurring communities and possible habitats supporting listed and sensitive species. Based upon the site survey, a comprehensive inventory of site flora and fauna will be compiled. This scope does not include any focused surveys for any specific species or habitat. As part of conducting the habitat assessment for this project, the Parsons team will review all proposed improvements against the Western Riverside County MSHCP’s biological goals and objectives, including Section 7.5., Guidelines for Siting and Design of Planned roads within the Criteria Area and Public/Quasi-Public Lands, to demonstrate consistency with the Plan. The Parsons team will prepare an MSHCP Consistency Report for the project. The MSHCP Consistency Report will be appended to the Biological Assessment (BA). Deliverables: • Biological Vegetation and Habitat Map (electronic) • MSHCP Consistency Report (will be attached to the BA) 165.15.10 Prepare Jurisdictional Waters Delineation Study The Parsons team will coordinate with and prepare documentation for the United States Army Corps of Engineers (CORPS) in support of regulatory permit applications required for the project. This scope assumes the following regulatory permits will be required for the project: Individual Permit (IP) pursuant to Section 404 of the CWA (Section 404), a Section 401 Water Quality Certification, and a 1602 of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) code Streambed Alteration Agreement. The Parsons team will perform a wetlands delineation report which will summarize the results of the jurisdictional waters delineation study. As part of the jurisdictional waters delineation study, a feasibility plan and a conceptual mitigation plan will be prepared. The wetlands delineation report will ultimately be appended to the NESR that will be prepare for the project. Deliverables: • Wetland Delineation Report(will be attached to the NESR) 102 Parsons Page 35 of 53 165.15.20 Prepare Natural Environment Study Report (NESR) The Parsons team will prepare an NESR consistent with Caltrans guidance and templates in the SER and will include information developed for the BA, the Wetlands Delineation Report, and the MSHCP Consistency Report. The NESR will be the master biological document covering compliance with biological study and consultation requirements, as well as providing language and mitigation measures for use in the Environmental Document. Deliverables: • Draft Natural Environment Study Report (up to 10 copies for review for each review cycle) • Final Natural Environment Study Report (up to 20 copies for distribution) 165.20 - CULTURAL RESOURCE STUDIES The Parsons team will perform cultural studies and prepare documentation to demonstrate compliance with CEQA and Section 5024 of the California Public Resources Code and as well as NEPA and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106) in relationship to the regulatory permits that will be required for the project. The Parsons team, in conjunction with the Corps, RCTC and Caltrans, will conduct Native American consultation that is necessary for this process. 165.20.05.05 Prepare Area of Potential Effects (APE) Map The Parsons team will prepare an Area of Potential Effects (APE) map which will be used to define the scope of studies and areas to be evaluated for the cultural resources analysis. The APE map will be included in the Historic Resources Compliance Report (HRCR) that will be prepared for the project. Parsons, in conjunction with RCTC, will perform any necessary coordination with Caltrans and the Corps to facilitate approval of the APE map. The APE map will be prepared to meet Caltrans requirements as described in the SER. Deliverables: • Draft Area of Potential Effects Map (up to 10 copies for review for each review cycle) • Final Area of Potential Effects Map (will be attached to the HRCR) 165.20.09 Perform Native American and Agency Coordination The Parsons team will prepare the consultation letters necessary for the Native American Tribal coordination process. The Parsons team, at the discretion of Corps, RCTC, and Caltrans, will conduct the Native American coordination through the distribution of the coordination letters and follow-up phone calls. The Parsons team will maintain coordination and comment response log and team will prepare responses to comments received for RCTC and Caltrans review. At the discretion of Corps, RCTC and Caltrans, The Parsons team will provide responses to commenting Native American 103 Parsons Page 36 of 53 Tribes. Parsons will distribute up to 25 response letters through the US certified mail. Under this task, The Parsons team will also consult interested parties including non- federally recognized Native American groups and local historical and archaeological societies to support the cultural resources studies. Deliverables: • Draft Native American consultation letter (electronic) • Final Native American consultation letter (up to 25 copies for distribution) • Draft interested party consultation letter (electronic) • Final interested party consultation letter (up to 25 copies for distribution) • Native American coordination and comment response log (electronic) 165.20.10 Perform Historical, Architectural and Archaeological Resource Studies (HRCR/HRER/ASR) The Parsons team will conduct an archaeological and historical records review and literature search at the Eastern Information Center (EIC) and the San Bernardino Archaeological Information Center (SBAIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System to determine whether previously recorded cultural resources are known to exist within the project area. The objectives of this archival research will be to establish the extent and status of cultural resources previously documented within the project area; and to note what site types might be expected to occur within the project area based on the existing data from known cultural resource sites located within a one half-mile radius. The Parsons team will conduct Phase-1 cultural resources studies which will entail a complete and intensive archaeological survey of approximately 18 acres of the project area. Survey transect spacing will range from 30 to 50 feet, and all landforms likely to contain or exhibit archaeologically or historically sensitive cultural resources will be inspected carefully to ensure that visible, potentially important cultural resources are discovered and documented. Additionally, the surveyor will investigate any unusual contours, soil changes, distinctive vegetation patterns, features (e.g., road cuts, ditches, and stream cuts), and other potential cultural site markers. For purposes of this scope of work, it is anticipated that up to two (2) archaeological sites will be discovered that would require documentation. Following the resource identification efforts, The Parsons team will prepare the Archaeological Survey Report (ASR) that reports the results of the archaeological literature research and survey efforts. The ASR will contain documentation of the research and field methods, an overview of the environment, ethnography, and prehistory, description of identified prehistoric archaeological resources (if any), and findings and conclusions. The ASR will also contain a bibliography, preparers’ qualifications, and maps. This ASR will ultimately be appended to the Historic Resource Compliance Report (HRCR). A joint Historic Resources Evaluation Report will also be prepared to document the study for historic archaeological and man-made cultural resources. Parsons assumes an evaluation of up to five (5) properties for this task. The HRER will conform to Caltrans standards. 104 Parsons Page 37 of 53 The Parsons team will prepare an HRCR that summarizes the cultural resource studies that have been performed for the project. The HRCR is the summary document used by Caltrans for consultation and decision-making and serves as the supporting documentation CEQA compliance. Parsons may prepare this report to also document compliance with NEPA and Section 106 pending coordination with the Corps to support regulatory permitting requirements. The HRCR documents completion of the identification phase, completion of the California Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligibility evaluation of resources within the APE. The HRCR will include the ASR and the HRER as attachments. A draft HRCR will be provided for RCTC and Caltrans review; a final HRCR will be prepared once the draft has been approved. Parsons assumes the production of up to twenty (20) copies of the Final HRCR for distribution. Deliverables: • Draft Historic Resources Compliance Report (up to 10 copies for review for each review cycle) • Final Historic Resources Compliance Report (up to 20 copies for distribution) 165.25 - PREPARE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT (DED) Parsons will prepare the draft environment document subsequent to RCTC and Caltrans approval of each technical study. Parsons assumes that an Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) will be the appropriate type of draft environmental documentation required for the project. This scope assumes that Caltrans will be the Lead Agency under CEQA and will be the ultimate approving agency for the IS/ND. Parsons assumes that RCTC will be a Responsible Agency under CEQA and will have partial discretionary approval authority of the IS/MND. The preparation of the IS/MND will be conducted according to Caltrans guidance and templates provided in the SER. Parsons assumes that the guidance provided in the SER and the CEQA guidelines will be sufficient for compliance with CEQA. Parsons can incorporate into the IS/MND as appropriate additional federal elements related to requirements for regulatory permits needed for the project pending coordination with the Corps. Parsons assumes that reviews of reports and sections prepared under this task will require no more than two review iterations with Caltrans. If the concept plans for the project are revised after the technical studies or IS/MND has been conducted, additional analysis, field work, and report preparation may be required and the scope and budget may be modified appropriately. 165.25.05 Prepare Draft Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration Parsons will prepare the administrative draft IS/MND based on guidance and templates provided in the SER and the CEQA guidelines. The IS/MND will contain a project description, discussion of environmental effects, and discussion of mitigation measures. Parsons will coordinate with RCTC and Caltrans on the most appropriate format and outline for the IS/MND. Parsons will conduct and internal environmental quality control/quality assurance reviews prior to distributing the administrative draft IS/MND for RCTC and Caltrans 105 Parsons Page 38 of 53 review. The Parsons internal QA/QC process involves: one (1) environmental lead reviewer, one (1) peer reviewer, one (1) engineering lead reviewer, and one (1) technical editor reviewer. Subsequent to the internal review period, Parsons will distribute the administrative draft IS/MND to RCTC and Caltrans for a screen-check review. Parsons expects no more than two review iterations during this screen-check review period. Parsons will incorporate comments received during the screen-check review and will perform a final internal review with one (1) environmental lead reviewer and one (1) technical editor reviewer prior to the final administrative draft review submittal to RCTC and Caltrans to obtain approval to circulate the environmental document. Deliverables: • Administrative Draft IS/MND (up to 10 copies for review for each review cycle) 165.25.25 Obtain Approval to Circulate Under this task, Parsons will perform any necessary coordination or focused reviews to obtain approval to circulate the IS/MND. Parsons may prepare and conduct up to one (1) document review meeting with Caltrans. During the document review meeting, Parsons will discuss with Caltrans reviewers, which will include technical resource staff such as the project biologist or project historian, any comments that were provided and are still outstanding. This document review meeting is intended to streamline the approval of the IS/MND for circulation. In this task, Parsons will obtain, through coordination with RCTC and Caltrans, necessary approvals to circulate the IS/MND. 175.05 - CIRCULATE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT (DED) 175.05.10 Prepare Notice of Availability Parsons will prepare a bilingual (English/Spanish) draft “Notice of Availability” (NOA) for RCTC and Caltrans review; a Final NOA will be prepared once the draft has been approved. The NOA will inform the public that the IS/MND is ready for public review and comment and will provide locations where hard copies are available or where electronic copies may be accessed. Parsons will distribute the NOA to recipients listed in the project general distribution list to initiate the IS/MND circulation period. Parsons will distribute up to 100 copies of the NOA through the US mail. Parsons will also publish the NOA in up to two newspapers at two different dates. The NOA will be published at a time where the public will have an adequate time of opportunity to review the IS/MND and provide comments prior to the comment closing date. Parsons may include a notice of opportunity for a public hearing to satisfy NEPA requirements related to regulatory permits that will be required for the project. An opportunity for a public hearing will be added pending coordination with the Corps. Deliverables: • Draft Notice of Availability (electronic) • Final Notice of Availability (up to 100 copies for distribution) 175.05.15 Publish And Circulate DED 106 Parsons Page 39 of 53 Prior to circulation of the IS/MND, Parsons, in conjunction with RCTC and Caltrans, will compile a document distribution list. Parsons may utilize the general project distribution list that was developed during the public and agency scoping process. Parsons will prepare up to fifteen (15) copies of the IS/MND and up to fifteen (15) electronic copies of the document in a CD for submittal to the State Clearinghouse Office (SCH). Parsons will prepare the transmittal letter and the Notice of Completion (NOC) form to the SCH. Parsons will prepare up to twenty five (25) copies of the IS/MND for agency distribution and up to twenty-five (25) electronic copies of the document in a CD for public distribution. Parsons will also prepare up to ten (10) copies of the IS/MND for public review at publicly accessible locations. These locations will be determined in conjunction with RCTC and Caltrans. Parsons will also provide an electronic copy of the IS/MND for public download through the RCTC website. Deliverables: • Final Draft IS/MND (up to 50 copies for distribution) • CD containing the IS/MND (up to 40 copies for distribution) • Notice of Completion 175.10 - PREPARE FOR AND HOLD PUBLIC MEETINGS Under direction from RCTC and the Corps, Parsons will make all necessary preparations for Public Meetings, including a Public Hearing. Parsons will provide full logistical support for each meeting, including preparation of meeting notices and advertisements, site coordination and planning, sign in sheets, and staffing (bilingual). Parsons will prepare up to five (5) poster size exhibits and a PowerPoint slide presentation to be used during the meeting. Comments will be solicited through the provision of comment cards and the availability of a bilingual court reporter. Parsons will conduct the specific tasks listed below as part of this general task description. 175.10.10 Arrange for Public Hearing Logistics 175.10.20 Prepare and Publish Notices of Public Hearing and Availability of DED 175.10.35 Hold Public Hearing 175.10.40 Prepare and Distribute Record of Public Hearing Deliverables: • Draft meeting exhibits (electronic) • Final meeting exhibits [up to five (5) 36 inch by 48 inch posters] • PowerPoint presentation (up to 15 slides) • Draft Comment Card or Project Questionnaire • Public Meeting Comment Log • Public Meeting Summary Report 107 Parsons Page 40 of 53 175.15 - RESPOND TO PUBLIC COMMENTS AND CORRESPONDENCE 175.15.05 Respond to Public Comments & correspondence Parsons will prepare responses to all comments received during the IS/MND public review period. Comments may be categorized into similar topics that would warrant similar responses. All comments received (verbal, written, email, etc.) will be addressed and included in the final IS/MND. Some responses will also be prepared as correspondence for mailing to the commenting party. Parsons will distribute up to 25 response letters through the US certified mail. Parsons will maintain a log of comments or questions received during the circulation of the IS/MND. Deliverables: • IS/MND Comment Log (electronic) • Responses to comments letters (up to 25 copies for distribution) 180.05 – PREPARE & APPROVE PROJECT REPORT 180.05.05 Update Draft Project Report Upon completion of the Response to Comments on the Environmental Document, the Draft Project Report will be updated to reflect any changes resulting from the public review and comment period. A Draft Final Project Report will be submitted to RCTC and Caltrans for review and comment. Following receipt of one consolidated set of comments, a comment review workshop will be held with the respondents to review their comments and provide appropriate responses. A Final Project Report will be prepared and submitted for review and approval. Deliverables: • Draft Final Project Report (up to 25 copies for review) • Final Project Report (up to 50 copies for review) 180.05.10 Review and Approve Project Report Once the Final Project Report has been submitted for review and approval, the project manager or his designee will work with RCTC and Caltrans to obtain the appropriate signatures. If issues or questions arise during the approval phase, the Parsons team will work with RCTC and/or Caltrans staffs to answer any remaining questions, provide additional information, and obtain signatures as appropriate. Parsons will modify the Final Draft Project Report as appropriate. Deliverables: • Signed Project Report (up to 25 copies for distribution) 108 Parsons Page 41 of 53 180.05.15 Review and Update Storm Water Data Report The Storm Water Data Report will be reviewed for consistency with current requirements and updated to incorporate necessary changes for the Build Alternative. Parsons will prepare the Storm Water Data Report based on existing Caltrans guidance. Deliverables: • Storm Water Data Report (up to 20 copies for distribution) 180.05.20 Geometric Approval Drawings (GAD) for Selected Alternative Parsons will design the roadway geometry including horizontal and vertical geometry for ramps, connectors and cross streets, including profile and superelevation diagrams. Parsons will prepare a geometric approval drawing (GAD) for one alternative in accordance with the District 8 – Design - Quality Control/Quality Assurance Plan – Attachment B – Geometric Approval Drawing Process dated May, 2003. The following subtasks are consistent with this document. 180.05.20.01 Design Information Bulletin (DIB) 78-1 DIB 78-1 will be utilized to identify potential Design Exceptions. Every aspect of the roadway design will be reviewed to ensure that the proposed roadway is designed to the latest standards. DIB 78-1 will be included in the required GAD submittal package. Deliverables: • DIB 78-1 (will be included in the GAD submittal package) 180.05.20.02 GAD Scoping Meeting To initiate the GAD process, a GAD scoping meeting will be scheduled. For this meeting a GAD package will be provided to discipline reviewers one week prior to the scheduled meeting. Deliverables: • GAD Scoping Meeting minutes (electronic) 180.05.20.03 GAD Submittal Package Preparation For every review of the GAD, a package will be provided which includes a project narrative, a response to comments matrix, Mandatory and Advisory Fact Sheets, Design Information Bulletin 78-01 Design Checklist, Truck Turning Diagrams, and the GAD. The number of sets for distribution will be determined based on coordination with the RCTC and the PDT. 109 Parsons Page 42 of 53 Deliverables: • GAD Submittal Packages 180.05.20.04 GAD Layout Sheets The GAD Layout Sheet will be prepared at a 1”=100’ scale and plotted on two 96 inch long sheets. Sheets will include lane and shoulder widths, existing and proposed R/W, retaining wall and soundwall locations, daylight limits of standard 1:2 or 1:4 slopes, typical sections, preliminary drainage features, and traffic information. Deliverables: • GAD Layout Sheets (will be included in the GAD submittal package) 180.05.20.05 Profile and Superelevation Diagrams Two additional 96 inch long sheets will be used for the Profile and Superelevation Diagrams. The Profiles and Superelevation Diagrams will be developed for the ramps and connectors for the Build Alternative profiles will also be developed for the mainline widening. Deliverables: • GAD Profile and Superelevation Diagrams (will be included in the GAD submittal package) 180.05.20.06 Typical Cross Sections Typical Cross Sections will be developed for each of the ramps, collector-distributor roads and the mainline widenings. The Typical Cross Sections will be included on the GAD Layout Drawing. Deliverables: • Typical Cross Sections (will be included in the GAD submittal package) 180.05.20.07 Truck Turn Diagrams As a requirement for the GAD Submittal Package, Truck Turn Diagrams will be provided on 8 ½” x 11” sheets. Deliverables: • Truck Turn Diagrams (will be included in the GAD submittal package) 110 Parsons Page 43 of 53 180.05.20.08 Sight Distance Analysis A Sight Distance Analysis will be performed at the interchange locations to ensure that the sight distance standards are met. Sight Distance Exhibits will be provided in the GAD Submittal Package. Deliverables: • Sight Distance Exhibits (will be included in the GAD submittal package) 180.05.20.09 Response to Reviewer’s Comments To ensure reviewer comments are satisfactorily addressed, a response to comments matrix will be prepared for each review of the GAD. This matrix will be included in the GAD Submittal Package. Deliverables: • Response to Comments Matrix (will be included in the GAD submittal package) 180.05.20.10 Plan Revisions Based upon comments received by discipline reviewers, the GAD will be revised up to three times. The revised GAD will be submitted with each GAD Submittal Package. Up to four submittals (three review cycles) of the GADs are anticipated. 180.05.25 Comprehensive Construction Staging and Implementation Plan for the Build Alternative Parsons will prepare a comprehensive construction staging plan and implementation plan for the Build Alternative. The construction staging plan will be prepared at 1”=100’ scale (approximately 1”=200’ for reduced plans). The construction staging plans will include cross-section views for each stage of construction to illustrate the spatial relationship of travel lanes with construction operations and existing roadways. Proposed work that is under construction or completed will be shown in each stage of construction. Parsons will investigate the optimal sequence of major construction operations to maximize construction progress, to minimize traffic delay with given space constraints. The optimum distance of construction (closures) for each stage based on CA4PRS schedule and traffic delay analysis will be identified. Parsons will identify in plan format any potential detour route(s) for each stage of construction, including any temporary pavement or roadways used during construction. This task will also incorporate and expand on previous efforts for schedule analysis, constructability analysis, and traffic management plans. The implementation plan shall include a traffic-schedule integration analysis to determine the preferred staging alternative, recommendations for phasing construction activities, and recommended alternative contracting methods and acceleration techniques such as Design-Build and Incentives/Disincentives contracts. 111 Parsons Page 44 of 53 Deliverables: • Construction Staging Plans for Build Alternative (up to 20 copies for distribution) • Implementation Plan (up to 20 copies for distribution) 180.15 - COMPLETE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT 180.15.10 Prepare and File Notice of Determination (CEQA) Subsequent to the IS/MND circulation, and when all comments have been received and outstanding issues have been resolved, a draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) will be prepared for RCTC and Caltrans review. A final MND will be prepared for Caltrans and RCTC adoption once the draft has been approved. Subsequent to the adoption of the final MND, Parsons will prepare a draft Notice of Determination (NOD) for RCTC and Caltrans review; a Final NOD will be prepared and processed through the SCH when the draft NOD has been approved. During this task, Parsons will maintain a comment log for comments received during the NOD review period. Parsons will prepare responses to comments received; responses may be appended to the final document and, at the discretion of RCTC and Caltrans, Parsons will prepare and mail a response letter to the originator of the comment. Parsons will distribute up to 25 response letters through the US certified mail. Fees related to the SCH process are not included as part of this scope. Parsons will produce up to twenty (20) copies of the MND and NOD for submittal to the California Transportation Commission (CTC). Parsons will prepare the CTC transmittal letter on behalf of RCTC and Caltrans and will be submitted in an electronic format. Deliverables: • Draft Negative Declaration (electronic) • Final Negative Declaration (scanned / electronic) • Draft Notice of Determination (electronic) • Final Notice of Determination (electronic) • CTC Environmental Package (20 copies of MND and NOD) • CTC Transmittal Letter (electronic) • NOD Comment Log (electronic) • Responses to comments letters (up to 25 copies for distribution) 180.15.20 Environmental Commitments Record (ECR) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Record (MMRR) Parsons will prepare a draft Environmental Commitment Record (ECR) and Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Record (MMRR) in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15097. The will be used to document compliance with the required and recommended mitigation measures for the project during the next phases of the project. The ECR/MMRR will contain a description of the mitigation measures described in the IS/MND and conditions in the regulatory permits that have been issued for the project. For each mitigation measure, the ECR/MMRR will include the following: description of the mitigation measure, the timing of implementation, the performance objectives, the requirements for verification of compliance, the party responsible for verifying compliance, and a summary of the potential impacts of the recommended mitigation 112 Parsons Page 45 of 53 measures. Parsons will prepare a draft ECR/MMRR for RCTC and Caltrans review; a final version will be prepared once the draft has been approved. Deliverables: • Draft ECR/MMRR (up to 10 copies for review) • Final ECR/MMRR (up to 20 copies for distribution) 113 Parsons Page 46 of 53 List of Deliverables: 100.10.10.1 Project Scheduling • Project Schedule (electronic) 100.10.10.2 Project Charter/Communications Plan/Risk Management Plan • Project Charter (internal use) • Communications Plan (internal use) • Risk Management Plan (internal use) 100.10.10.3 Monthly Progress Reports/Invoices • Monthly Progress Reports (electronic) • Invoices (electronic) 100.10.10.4.1 PDT Meeting Agenda & Meeting Minutes • Monthly PDT Meeting Agendas (electronic) • PDT Meeting Minutes (electronic) 100.10.10.5.1 Trend Meeting Agenda & Meeting Minutes • Bi-Weekly Trend Meeting Agendas (electronic) • Meeting Minutes (electronic) 100.10.10.6 Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Plan • Draft QA/QC Plan (electronic) • Final QA/QC Plan (up to 10 copies for distribution) 110.05.1 Design, Create and Administer Project Web Page • Project Web Page 110.05.2 Public Communications Plan • Draft Communications Plan (up to 10 hard copies for review) • Final Communications Plan (up to 20 copies for distribution) 110.05.3 Collateral Public Information Materials • Collateral Public Information Materials (electronic) 110.05.4 Community Database • Community Database 114 Parsons Page 47 of 53 110.10 Public Information Meetings (2) (each meeting) • Draft meeting exhibits (electronic version) • Final meeting exhibits [up to five (5) 36 inch by 48 inch posters] • PowerPoint presentation (up to 15 slides) • Comment Card or Project Questionnaire (up to 100 copies for distribution) • Public comment log (electronic) • Public Information Meeting Summary Report (up to 20 copies for distribution) 150.05.08 Develop Existing Right of Way (R/W) Base Mapping • R/W Base Mapping (electronic) 150.05.09 Develop Roadway Alignments • Roadway Alignments Plans (electronic) 150.05.15 Perform Utility Search • Utility record drawings and utility contact list (electronic) 150.05.16 Prepare Existing Utility Base Map • Existing Utility Base Map and Layout Sheets (electronic) 160.10.05 Field Design Surveys • Site Bridge Survey data (electronic) • Railroad Survey data (electronic) • Drainage Survey data (electronic) • Existing Utility Survey data (electronic) 160.10.10 Prepare Traffic Forecasts/Modeling • Traffic Forecast Model Output for Year 2035 (electronic) 160.10.11 Traffic Modeling [OPTIONAL SCOPE] • Traffic Forecast Model Output for Years 2015 and 2030 (electronic) 160.10.15 Prepare Geometric Plans for Project Alternatives • Geometric plans for the Build Alternative 160.10.16 Prepare Construction Staging Concept Plans • Construction Staging Concept Plan 115 Parsons Page 48 of 53 160.10.25 Perform Preliminary Hydrology Studies • Draft Conceptual Hydrology and Hydraulic Study (up to 20 copies for review) • Final Conceptual Hydrology and Hydraulic Study (up to 20 copies for distribution) 160.10.26 Prepare Drainage Concept Plans • Draft Concept Drainage Plans (up to 20 copies for review) • Final Concept Drainage Plans (up to 20 copies for distribution) 160.10.27 Storm Water Data Report • Draft Storm Water Data Report (up to 20 copies for review) • Final Storm Water Data Report (up to 20 copies for distribution) 160.10.40 Prepare Right of Way Data Sheets • R/W Data Sheets (up to 20 copies for distribution) 160.10.41 Determine Right of Way Requirements • Tabulated R/W Requirements (electronic) 160.10.45 Assess Utility Relocation Requirements • Conceptual Utility Relocation Requirements (electronic) 160.10.50 Perform Railroad Study • Railroad Information Sheet (electronic) 160.10.70 Perform Traffic Studies • Draft Traffic Analysis Report (up to 20 copies for review) • Final Traffic Analysis Report (up to 50 copies for distribution) 160.10.80 Prepare Geotechnical Information • Preliminary Geotechnical Information Report (Earthwork, Cuts, Fills, Retaining Walls, Sound Walls, Pavement Structures) (up to 20 sets for distribution) • Preliminary Bridge Foundation Reports for each of the following bridges: (up to 20 sets for distribution) Br. No. 56-0587 Route 91/71 Separation Widen one side Br. No. 56-0634 West Prado OH Widen one side Br. No. 56-0637 Prado OH Widen two sides Br. No. 56-NEW West Prado OH (EB onramp) New structure Br. No. 56-NEW E91-N71 Connector New structure 116 Parsons Page 49 of 53 160.10.85 Structure Advance Planning Study • APS Report (up to 20 copies for distribution) 160.10.95 Prepare Preliminary Transportation Management Plan • TMP Data Sheet (electronic) • Preliminary TMP Report (up to 20 copies for distribution) 160.15.05 Prepare Cost Estimates for Alternatives • Project Report Cost Estimates (electronic) 160.15.10.01 Prepare Draft Advisory Design Exception Fact Sheet • Draft Advisory Fact Sheet (up to 20 copies for review) 160.15.10.02 Prepare Final Advisory Design Exception Fact Sheet • Final Advisory Fact Sheet (up to 20 copies for distribution) 160.15.10.03 Prepare Draft Mandatory Design Exception Fact Sheet • Draft Mandatory Fact Sheet (up to 20 copies for review) 160.15.10.04 Prepare Final Mandatory Design Exception Fact Sheet • Final Mandatory Fact Sheet (up to 20 copies for distribution) 160.15.20 Prepare Draft Project Report • Preliminary Draft Project Report (up to 50 copies for review) • Final Draft Project Report (up to 50 copies for distribution) 160.15.25 Circulate, Review and Approve Draft Project Report • Signed Draft Project Report (up to 10 copies for distribution) 165.05.10.01 Prepare and Publish Notice of Initiation of Studies • Draft NOIS (electronic) • Final NOIS (up to 100 copies for distribution) • NOIS Comment Log (electronic) • Project Distribution List (electronic) 165.05.10.02 Prepare and Conduct Agency Scoping Meeting • Pre-Meeting materials • Up to five (5) 36 inch by 48 inch meeting exhibits • Agency Scoping Meeting Minutes file (electronic) 117 Parsons Page 50 of 53 165.05.20 Prepare Base Maps for Environmental Evaluation • Base mapping files • Project Vicinity Map (electronic) • Project Location Map (electronic) • Project Alternative Maps (electronic) • Project R/W Map (electronic file) • Environmental/Jurisdictional Boundary Maps (electronic) 165.10.10 Obtain Right of Entry for Environmental Studies • Draft ROE letter (electronic) • Final ROE letter (up to 50 copies for distribution) • ROE Letter Response Log (electronic) • ROE Status Maps (electronic) 165.10.20 Perform Visual Impact Analysis • Draft Visual Impact Analysis (up to 10 copies for review for each review cycle) • Final Visual Impact Analysis (up to 20 copies for distribution) 165.10.25 Perform Noise Study • Draft Noise Impact Study Report (up to 10 copies for review for each review cycle) • Final Noise Impact Study Report (up to 20 copies for distribution) 165.10.30 Perform Air Quality Study • Draft Air Quality Study Report (up to 10 copies for review for each review cycle) • Final Air Quality Study Report (up to 20 copies for distribution) 165.10.36 Prepare Water Quality Assessment Report (WQAR) • Draft Water Quality Assessment Report (up to 10 copies for review for each review cycle) • Final Water Quality Assessment Report (up to 20 copies for distribution) 165.10.50 Perform Preliminary Site Investigation for Hazardous Waste • Draft Initial Site Assessment (up to 10 copies for review for each review cycle) • Final Initial Site Assessment (up to 20 copies for distribution) 165.10.65 Prepare Paleontology Identification Report • Draft Paleontological Identification Report (up to 10 copies for review for each review cycle) • Final Paleontological Identification Report (up to 20 copies for distribution) 118 Parsons Page 51 of 53 165.15.05 Prepare Biological Assessment (BA) • Biological Assessment (will be attached to the NESR) 165.15.06 Perform Habitat Assessment • Biological Vegetation and Habitat Map (electronic) • MSHCP Consistency Report (will be attached to the BA) 165.15.10 Prepare Jurisdictional Waters Delineation Study • Wetland Delineation Report(will be attached to the NESR) 165.15.20 Prepare Natural Environment Study Report (NESR) • Draft Natural Environment Study Report (up to 10 copies for review for each review cycle) • Final Natural Environment Study Report (up to 20 copies for distribution) 165.20.05.05 Prepare Area of Potential Effects (APE) Map • Draft Area of Potential Effects Map (up to 10 copies for review for each review cycle) • Final Area of Potential Effects Map (will be attached to the HRCR) 165.20.09 Perform Native American and Agency Coordination • Draft Native American consultation letter (electronic) • Final Native American consultation letter (up to 25 copies for distribution) • Draft interested party consultation letter (electronic) • Final interested party consultation letter (up to 25 copies for distribution) • Native American coordination and comment response log (electronic) 165.20.10 Perform Historical, Architectural and Archaeological Resource Studies (HRCR/HRER/ASR) • Draft Historic Resources Compliance Report (up to 10 copies for review for each review cycle) • Final Historic Resources Compliance Report (up to 20 copies for distribution) 165.25.05 Prepare Draft Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration • Administrative Draft IS/MND (up to 10 copies for review for each review cycle) 175.05.10 Prepare Notice of Availability • Draft Notice of Availability (electronic) • Final Notice of Availability (up to 100 copies for distribution) 119 Parsons Page 52 of 53 175.05.15 Publish And Circulate DED • Final Draft IS/MND (up to 50 copies for distribution) • CD containing the IS/MND (up to 40 copies for distribution) • Notice of Completion 175.10 – Prepare for and Hold Public Meetings • Draft meeting exhibits (electronic) • Final meeting exhibits [up to five (5) 36 inch by 48 inch posters] • PowerPoint presentation (up to 15 slides) • Draft Comment Card or Project Questionnaire • Public Meeting Comment Log • Public Meeting Summary Report 175.15.05 Respond to Public Comments & correspondence • IS/MND Comment Log (electronic) • Responses to comments letters (up to 25 copies for distribution) 180.05.05 Update Draft Project Report • Draft Final Project Report (up to 25 copies for review) • Final Project Report (up to 50 copies for review) 180.05.10 Review and Approve Project Report • Signed Project Report (up to 25 copies for distribution) 180.05.15 Review and Update Storm Water Data Report • Storm Water Data Report (up to 20 copies for distribution) 180.05.20.01 Design Information Bulletin (DIB) 78-1 • DIB 78-1 (will be included in the GAD submittal package) 180.05.20.02 GAD Scoping Meeting • GAD Scoping Meeting minutes (electronic) 180.05.20.03 GAD Submittal Package Preparation • GAD Submittal Packages 180.05.20.04 GAD Layout Sheets • GAD Layout Sheets (will be included in the GAD submittal package) 120 Parsons Page 53 of 53 180.05.20.05 Profile and Superelevation Diagrams • GAD Profile and Superelevation Diagrams (will be included in the GAD submittal package) 180.05.20.06 Typical Cross Sections • Typical Cross Sections (will be included in the GAD submittal package) 180.05.20.07 Truck Turn Diagrams • Truck Turn Diagrams (will be included in the GAD submittal package) 180.05.20.08 Sight Distance Analysis • Sight Distance Exhibits (will be included in the GAD submittal package) 180.05.20.09 Response to Reviewer’s Comments • Response to Comments Matrix (will be included in the GAD submittal package) 180.05.25 Comprehensive Construction Staging and Implementation Plan for the Build Alternative • Construction Staging Plans for the Build Alternative (up to 20 copies for distribution) • Implementation Plan (up to 20 copies for distribution) 180.15.10 Prepare and File Notice of Determination (CEQA) • Draft Negative Declaration (electronic) • Final Negative Declaration (scanned / electronic) • Draft Notice of Determination (electronic) • Final Notice of Determination (electronic) • CTC Environmental Package (20 copies of MND and NOD) • CTC Transmittal Letter (electronic) • NOD Comment Log (electronic) • Responses to comments letters (up to 25 copies for distribution) 180.15.20 Environmental Commitments Record (ECR) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Record (MMRR) • Draft ECR/MMRR (up to 10 copies for review) • Final ECR/MMRR (up to 20 copies for distribution) 121 IDWBSTask NameDurationStartFinish1M040Notice to Proceed0 daysMon 11/19/07Mon 11/19/072100Project Management530 daysMon 11/19/07Fri 11/27/093110Public Outreach & Agency Coordination530 daysMon 11/19/07Fri 11/27/094150.05Define Transportation Problem & Assess Site80 daysMon 11/19/07Fri 3/7/085150.05.05Data Collection20 daysMon 11/19/07Fri 12/14/076150.05.06Field Reviews20 daysMon 11/19/07Fri 12/14/077150.05.07Aerial Mapping/Photogrammetry (By RCTC/PB)0 daysMon 11/19/07Mon 11/19/078150.05.08Develop Existing Right of Way Mapping40 daysMon 12/17/07Fri 2/8/089150.05.09Develop Alignments40 daysMon 12/17/07Fri 2/8/0810150.05.15Perform Utility Search40 daysMon 12/17/07Fri 2/8/0811150.05.16Prepare Existing Utility Base map20 daysMon 2/11/08Fri 3/7/0812160.10Perform Preliminary Engineering Studies220 daysMon 11/19/07Fri 9/19/0813160.10.05Field Design Surveys40 daysMon 11/19/07Fri 1/11/0814160.10.10Prepare Traffic Forecasts/Modeling60 daysMon 11/19/07Fri 2/8/0815160.10.15Prepare Geometric Plans for Project Alternatives120 daysMon 11/19/07Fri 5/2/0816160.10.16Prepare Construction Staging Concept Plans40 daysMon 2/11/08Fri 4/4/0817160.10.20Perform Value Analysis60 daysMon 12/17/07Fri 3/7/0818160.10.25Perform Preliminary Hydrology Studies40 daysMon 3/10/08Fri 5/2/0819160.10.26Prepare Drainage Concept Plans40 daysMon 5/5/08Fri 6/27/0820160.10.27Prepare Storm Water Data Report40 daysMon 5/5/08Fri 6/27/0821160.10.35Perform Traffic Operational Analysis60 daysMon 2/11/08Fri 5/2/0822160.10.40Prepare Right of Way Data Sheet40 daysMon 4/7/08Fri 5/30/0823160.10.41Determine Right of Way Requirements40 daysMon 2/11/08Fri 4/4/0824160.10.45Assess Utility Relocation Requirements90 daysMon 3/10/08Fri 7/11/0825160.10.50Perform Railroad Study60 daysMon 3/10/08Fri 5/30/0826160.10.70Perform Traffic Studies60 daysMon 5/5/08Fri 7/25/0827160.10.70.1Agency Review30 daysMon 7/28/08Fri 9/5/0828160.10.70.2Update Study10 daysMon 9/8/08Fri 9/19/0829160.10.80Prepare Geotechnical Information60 daysMon 12/17/07Fri 3/7/0830160.10.85Prepare Structures Advance Planning Studies80 daysMon 3/10/08Fri 6/27/0831160.10.95Prepare Preliminary Transportation Management Plan40 daysMon 3/10/08Fri 5/2/0832160.15Prepare Draft Project Report (DPR)250 daysMon 2/11/08Fri 1/23/0933160.15.05Prepare Cost Estimates for Alternatives60 daysMon 5/5/08Fri 7/25/0834160.15.10Prepare Fact Sheets for Exceptions to Design Standards80 daysMon 3/10/08Fri 6/27/0835160.15.20Prepare Draft Project Report90 daysMon 2/11/08Fri 6/13/0836160.15.20.1Agency Review30 daysMon 6/16/08Fri 7/25/0837160.15.20.2Update Report10 daysMon 7/28/08Fri 8/8/0838160.15.25Circulate, Review & Approve Draft Project Report120 daysMon 8/11/08Fri 1/23/0939165.05Perform Environmental Scoping60 daysMon 11/19/07Fri 2/8/0840165.05.05Review Project Information20 daysMon 11/19/07Fri 12/14/0741165.05.10Perform Public & Agency Scoping & Community Outreach40 daysMon 12/17/07Fri 2/8/0811/1911/1911/2711/1911/2711/1912/1411/1912/1411/1912/172/812/172/812/172/82/113/711/191/1111/192/811/195/22/114/412/173/73/105/25/56/275/56/272/115/24/75/302/114/43/107/113/105/305/57/257/289/59/89/1912/173/73/106/273/105/25/57/253/106/272/116/136/167/257/288/88/111/2311/1912/1412/172/8AugSepOctNovDecJanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDecJanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDecJanFebMarAprMayJun200820092TaskCritical TaskProgressMilestoneSummaryRolled Up TaskRolled Up Critical TaskRolled Up MilestoneRolled Up ProgressSplitExternal TasksProject SummaryGroup By SummaryDeadlinePARSONSSR-91/SR-71 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECTPROJECT REPORT & ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTDRAFTPage 1September 14, 2007122 IDWBSTask NameDurationStartFinish42165.05.20Prepare Base Maps For Environmental Evaluation20 daysMon 1/14/08Fri 2/8/0843165.10Perform General Environmental Studies280 daysMon 12/17/07Fri 1/9/0944165.10.10Obtain Right of Entry For Environmental Studies40 daysMon 12/17/07Fri 2/8/0845165.10.15Perform Land Use Studies40 daysMon 2/11/08Fri 4/4/0846165.10.16Perform Utility/Service Studies40 daysMon 2/11/08Fri 4/4/0847165.10.20Perform Visual Impact Analysis40 daysMon 6/30/08Fri 8/22/0848165.10.20.1Agency Review30 daysMon 8/25/08Fri 10/3/0849165.10.20.2Update Study10 daysMon 10/6/08Fri 10/17/0850165.10.25Perform Noise Study40 daysMon 9/22/08Fri 11/14/0851165.10.25.1Agency Review30 daysMon 11/17/08Fri 12/26/0852165.10.25.2Update Study10 daysMon 12/29/08Fri 1/9/0953165.10.30Perform Air Quality Study40 daysMon 9/22/08Fri 11/14/0854165.10.30.1Agency Review30 daysMon 11/17/08Fri 12/26/0855165.10.30.2Update Study10 daysMon 12/29/08Fri 1/9/0956165.10.35Perform Water Quality Studies & Floodplain Evaluation40 daysMon 6/30/08Fri 8/22/0857165.10.35.1Agency Review30 daysMon 8/25/08Fri 10/3/0858165.10.35.2Update Study10 daysMon 10/6/08Fri 10/17/0859165.10.36Prepare Water Quality Assessment Report40 daysMon 6/30/08Fri 8/22/0860165.10.36.1Agency Review30 daysMon 8/25/08Fri 10/3/0861165.10.36.2Update Report10 daysMon 10/6/08Fri 10/17/0862165.10.45Prepare Summary of Geotechnical Report40 daysMon 3/10/08Fri 5/2/0863165.10.50Perform Preliminary Site Investigation For Hazardous Waste40 daysMon 2/11/08Fri 4/4/0864165.10.50.1Agency Review30 daysMon 4/7/08Fri 5/16/0865165.10.50.2Update Study10 daysMon 5/19/08Fri 5/30/0866165.10.65Prepare Paleontology Identification Report40 daysMon 2/11/08Fri 4/4/0867165.10.65.1Agency Review30 daysMon 4/7/08Fri 5/16/0868165.10.65.2Update Report10 daysMon 5/19/08Fri 5/30/0869165.15Biological Studies100 daysMon 2/11/08Fri 6/27/0870165.15.05Prepare Biological Assessment60 daysMon 2/11/08Fri 5/2/0871165.15.05.1Agency Review30 daysMon 5/5/08Fri 6/13/0872165.15.05.2Update Assessment10 daysMon 6/16/08Fri 6/27/0873165.15.06Prepare Habitat Assessment60 daysMon 2/11/08Fri 5/2/0874165.15.06.10Prepare MSHCP Consistency Report60 daysMon 2/11/08Fri 5/2/0875165.15.06.10.1Agency Review30 daysMon 5/5/08Fri 6/13/0876165.15.06.10.2Update Report10 daysMon 6/16/08Fri 6/27/0877165.15.10Prepare Jurisdictional Waters Delineation Report60 daysMon 2/11/08Fri 5/2/0878165.15.10.1Agency Review30 daysMon 5/5/08Fri 6/13/0879165.15.10.2Update Report10 daysMon 6/16/08Fri 6/27/0880165.15.20Prepare Natural Environment Study Report60 daysMon 2/11/08Fri 5/2/0881165.15.20.1Agency Review30 daysMon 5/5/08Fri 6/13/0882165.15.20.2Update Report10 daysMon 6/16/08Fri 6/27/081/142/812/172/82/114/42/114/46/308/228/2510/310/610/179/2211/1411/1712/2612/291/99/2211/1411/1712/2612/291/96/308/228/2510/310/610/176/308/228/2510/310/610/173/105/22/114/44/75/165/195/302/114/44/75/165/195/302/115/25/56/136/166/272/115/22/115/25/56/136/166/272/115/25/56/136/166/272/115/25/56/136/166/27AugSepOctNovDecJanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDecJanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDecJanFebMarAprMayJun200820092TaskCritical TaskProgressMilestoneSummaryRolled Up TaskRolled Up Critical TaskRolled Up MilestoneRolled Up ProgressSplitExternal TasksProject SummaryGroup By SummaryDeadlinePARSONSSR-91/SR-71 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECTPROJECT REPORT & ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTDRAFTPage 2September 14, 2007123 IDWBSTask NameDurationStartFinish83165.20Cultural Resource Studies180 daysMon 2/11/08Fri 10/17/0884165.20.05.05Prepare Area of Potential Effects (APE) Map40 daysMon 2/11/08Fri 4/4/0885165.20.05.05.1Agency Review30 daysMon 4/7/08Fri 5/16/0886165.20.05.05.2Update Map10 daysMon 5/19/08Fri 5/30/0887165.20.09Perform Native American & Agency Coordination60 daysMon 6/2/08Fri 8/22/0888165.20.10Perform Historical, Architectural, & Archaeological Resource Studies100 daysMon 4/7/08Fri 8/22/0889165.20.10.1Agency Review30 daysMon 8/25/08Fri 10/3/0890165.20.10.2Update Studies10 daysMon 10/6/08Fri 10/17/0891165.25Prepare Draft Environmental Document (DED)120 daysMon 1/12/09Fri 6/26/0992165.25.05Prepare Draft IS/MND60 daysMon 1/12/09Fri 4/3/0993165.25.25Obtain Approval To Circulate60 daysMon 4/6/09Fri 6/26/0994175.05Circulate Draft Environmental Document (DED)60 daysMon 6/29/09Fri 9/18/0995175.05.10Prepare Notice of Availability20 daysMon 6/29/09Fri 7/24/0996175.05.15Publish & Circulate DED40 daysMon 7/27/09Fri 9/18/0997175.10Prepare For & Hold Public Hearing51 daysMon 6/29/09Mon 9/7/0998175.10.10Arrange For Public Hearing Logistics30 daysMon 6/29/09Fri 8/7/0999175.10.20Prepare & Publish Notices30 daysMon 6/29/09Fri 8/7/09100175.10.35Hold Public Hearing1 dayMon 8/10/09Mon 8/10/09101175.10.40Prepare & Distribute Record of Public Hearing20 daysTue 8/11/09Mon 9/7/09102180.05Prepare & Approve Project Report330 daysMon 5/5/08Fri 8/7/09103180.05.05Update Draft Project Report60 daysMon 1/26/09Fri 4/17/09104180.05.05.1Agency Review40 daysMon 4/20/09Fri 6/12/09105180.05.10Revise & Approve Project Report40 daysMon 6/15/09Fri 8/7/09106180.05.15Review & Update Storm Water Data Report60 daysMon 1/26/09Fri 4/17/09107180.05.20Geometric Approval Drawings (GAD)120 daysMon 5/5/08Fri 10/17/08108180.05.25Comprehensive Construction Staging Plan60 daysMon 5/5/08Fri 7/25/08109180.15Complete Environmental Document60 daysTue 9/8/09Mon 11/30/09110180.15.10Prepare & File Notice of Determination (NOD)40 daysTue 9/8/09Mon 11/2/09111180.15.20Environmental Commitments Record (ECR)20 daysTue 11/3/09Mon 11/30/09112M200Project Approval & Environmental Document (PA&ED)0 daysMon 11/2/09Mon 11/2/092/114/44/75/165/195/306/28/224/78/228/2510/310/610/171/124/34/66/266/297/247/279/186/298/76/298/78/108/119/71/264/174/206/126/158/71/264/175/510/175/57/259/811/211/311/3011/2AugSepOctNovDecJanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDecJanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDecJanFebMarAprMayJun200820092TaskCritical TaskProgressMilestoneSummaryRolled Up TaskRolled Up Critical TaskRolled Up MilestoneRolled Up ProgressSplitExternal TasksProject SummaryGroup By SummaryDeadlinePARSONSSR-91/SR-71 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECTPROJECT REPORT & ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTDRAFTPage 3September 14, 2007124 SR-91/SR-71 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECTPARSONSKHALIL SABASummaryTotal HoursTotal CostTotal HoursTotal CostTotal HoursTotal CostTotal HoursTotal CostTotal HoursTotal CostTotal HoursTotal CostTotal HoursTotal CostTotal HoursTotal CostTotal Cost100 PERFORM PROJECT MANAGEMENT2222 $437,366 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 $439,588100.05 Project Coordination/Administration/Management2222 $437,366 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$439,588100.10 PROJECT MANAGEMENT2556 $486,242 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 200 $26,456 0 $0 0 $0 $515,454100.10.10.1 Project Scheduling300 $50,904 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$51,204100.10.10.2 Project Charter/Communications Plan/Risk 200 $37,909 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$38,109100.10.10.3 Monthly Progress Reports96 $15,487 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$15,583100.10.10.4 Monthly PDT Meetings (24)256 $46,604 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 200 $26,456 0 $0 0 $0$73,516100.10.10.4.1 Agenda & Meeting Minutes144 $22,885 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$23,029100.10.10.5 Bi-weekly "Trend" Meetings (48)288 $56,340 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$56,628100.10.10.5.1 Agenda & Meeting Minutes202 $40,219 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$40,421100.10.10.6 Quality Assurance Program270 $52,818 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$53,088100.10.10.7 QA/QC Independent Third Party Review800 $163,076 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$163,876110 PUBLIC OUTREACH176 $36,712 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 764 $74,737 0 $0 0 $0 $112,389110.05.1 Design Create & Administer Web Page30 $6,633 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 130 $12,500 0 $0 0 $0$19,293110..05.2 Communications Plan30 $6,633 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 248 $23,809 0 $0 0 $0$30,720110.05.3 Collateral Materials30 $6,633 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 108 $10,905 0 $0 0 $0$17,676110.05.4 Community Database30 $6,633 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$6,663110.10 Public Information Meetings56 $10,180 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 108 $10,905 0 $0 0 $0$21,249150 DEVELOP PROJECT STUDY REPORT - PROJECT 0$0150.05 Define Transportation Problem and Assess 1526 $205,872 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 504 $53,892 0 $0 $261,794150.05.05 Data Collection - Obtain and Review Existing 190 $23,731 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$23,921150.05.06 Field Review/Recon112 $15,702 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$15,814150.05.07 Aerial Mapping/Photogrammetry0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$0150.05.08 Develop Existing R/W Mapping26 $3,527 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 504 $53,892 0 $0$57,949150.05.09 Develop Alignments26 $3,527 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$3,553150.05.15 Perform Utility Search90 $13,048 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$13,138150.05.16 Prepare Existing Utility Base Map1082 $146,337 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$147,419160 PERFORM PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING STUDIES AND PREPARE DRAFT ENGINEERING PROJECT REPORT160.10 PERFORM ENGINEERING STUDIES9106 $1,174,813 430 $47,492 572 $72,874 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 2617 $295,837 132 $13,037 $1,616,910160.10.05 Field Design Surveys36 $4,627 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 2617 $295,837 0 $0$303,117160.10.10 Prepare Traffic Forecasts/Modeling252 $30,732 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$30,984160.10.11 Traffic Modeling294 $41,052 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$41,346160.10.15 Prepare Geometric Plans for Project 2404 $289,724 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$292,128160.10.16 Prepare Construction Staging Concept Plans 748 $85,967 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$86,715160.10.20 Perform Value Analysis224 $35,035 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$35,259160.10.25 Perform Preliminary Hydrology Studies434 $56,457 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$56,891160.10.26 Prepare Drainage Concept Plans894 $117,336 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$118,230160.10.27 Prepare Storm Water Data Report434 $57,844 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$58,278MBA AEPARSONS CONVERSEARELLANOTY LINPARAGONASSOCIATED7M.A3.MB.SR-91-SR-71 Cost 2007-09-14.xls1 of 3125 SummaryTotal HoursTotal CostTotal HoursTotal CostTotal HoursTotal CostTotal HoursTotal CostTotal HoursTotal CostTotal HoursTotal CostTotal HoursTotal CostTotal HoursTotal CostTotal CostMBA AEPARSONS CONVERSEARELLANOTY LINPARAGONASSOCIATED160.10.35 Perform Traffic Operational Analysis536 $63,199 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$63,735160.10.40 Prepare Right of Way Data Sheet16 $2,427 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 132 $13,037$15,612160.10.41 Determine Right of Way Requirements630 $67,678 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$68,308160.10.45 Assess Utility Impacts and Relocation 720 $100,039 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$100,759160.10.50 Perform Railroad Study304 $53,147 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$53,451160.10.70 Perform Traffic Studies332 $41,312 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$41,644160.10.80 Prepare Geotechnical Information24 $3,455 430 $47,492 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$51,401160.10.85 Prepare Structures Advanced Planning 560 $86,439 0 $0 572 $72,874 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$160,445160.10.95 Prepare Preliminary Transportation 264 $38,344 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$38,608160.15 PREPARE DRAFT ENGINEERING PROJECT 2850 $366,377 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 $369,227160.15.05 Prepare Cost Estimates for Alternatives348 $37,081 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$37,429160.15.10 Prepare Fact Sheet for Exceptions to Design 880 $146,479 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$147,359160.15.20 Prepare Draft Engineering Project Report1460 $164,127 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$165,587160.15.25 Circulate, Review and Approve Draft 162 $18,690 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$18,852165.05 PERFORM ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING AND 852 $105,620 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 $106,472165.05.05 Review Project Information80 $7,300 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$7,380165.05.10 Perform Public and Agency Scoping and 320 $47,666 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$47,986165.05.20 Prepare Maps for Environmental Evaluation452 $50,654 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$51,106165.10 PERFORM GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL 2674 $315,046 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 $317,720165.10.10 Obtain Right of Entry for Environmental 192 $17,853 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$18,045165.10.15 Perform Community Impact Analysis, Land 88 $7,991 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$8,079165.10.16 Perform Utility/Service Studies88 $7,991 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$8,079165.10.20 Perform Visual Impact Analysis528 $60,288 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$60,816165.10.25 Perform Noise Study404 $54,129 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$54,533165.10.30 Perform Air Quality Study and Health Risk 348 $40,927 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$41,275165.10.35 Perform Water Quality Studies and 550 $74,312 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$74,862165.10.36 Prepare Water Quality Assessment Report132 $17,512 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$17,644165.10.45 Prepare Summary of Geotechnical Report32 $2,321 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$2,353165.10.50 Perform Preliminary Site Investigation for 272 $28,073 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$28,345165.10.65 Prepare Paleontology Identification Report40 $3,648 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$3,688165.15 BIOLOGICAL STUDIES 248 $33,662 0 $0 0 $0 676 $66,326 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 $100,912165.15.05 Prepare Biological Assessment48 $6,626 0 $0 0 $0 44 $6,613 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$13,331165.15.06 Perform Habitat Assessment64 $10,388 0 $0 0 $0 148 $14,537 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$25,137165.15.10 Prepare Jurisdictional Waters Delineation 48 $6,787 0 $0 0 $0 282 $26,078 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$33,195165.15.20 Prepare Natural Environment Study Report88 $9,861 0 $0 0 $0 202 $19,098 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$29,249165.20 CULTURAL RESOURCE STUDIES752 $92,776 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 257 $19,752 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 $113,537165.20.05.05 Prepare Area of Potential Effects (APE) 80 $11,484 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$11,564165.20.09 Perform Native American & Agency 88 $13,422 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$13,510165.20.10 Perform Historical, Architectural and 584 $67,870 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 257 $19,752 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$88,463165.25 PREPARE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL 320 $42,488 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 $42,808165.25.05 Prepare Draft IS/MND240 $30,923 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$31,163165.25.25 Obtain Approval to Circulate80 $11,564 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$11,644175 CIRCULATE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL 175.05 CIRCULATE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL 212 $23,863 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 $24,0757M.A3.MB.SR-91-SR-71 Cost 2007-09-14.xls2 of 3126 SummaryTotal HoursTotal CostTotal HoursTotal CostTotal HoursTotal CostTotal HoursTotal CostTotal HoursTotal CostTotal HoursTotal CostTotal HoursTotal CostTotal HoursTotal CostTotal CostMBA AEPARSONS CONVERSEARELLANOTY LINPARAGONASSOCIATED175.05.10 Prepare Notices Regarding Public Hearing(s) 52 $5,355 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$5,407175.05.15 Publish And Circulate DED160 $18,509 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$18,669175.10 PREPARE FOR AND HOLD PUBLIC MEETINGS154 $18,497 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 54 $5,452 0 $0 0 $0 $24,157175.10.10 Arrange for Public Hearing Logistics66 $7,069 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$7,135175.10.20 Prepare and Publish Notices of Public Hearing 28 $3,268 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$3,296175.10.35 Hold Public Hearing24 $3,915 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 54 $5,452 0 $0 0 $0$9,445175.10.40 Prepare and Distribute Record of Public 36 $4,246 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$4,282175.15 RESPOND TO PUBLIC COMMENTS AND 160 $18,453 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 $18,613175.15.05 RESPOND TO PUBLIC COMMENTS AND 160 $18,453 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$18,613180 PREPARE AND APPROVE PROJECT REPORT180.05 PREPARE AND APPROVE PROJECT REPORT 3296 $432,326 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 $435,622180.05.05 Update Draft Project Report876 $104,560 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$105,436180.05.10 Review and Approved Project Report132 $15,716 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$15,848180.05.15 Review and Update Storm Water Data Report140 $23,612 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$23,752180.05.20 Geometric Approval Drawings for Selected 1376 $183,673 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$185,049180.05.25 Comprehensive Construction Staging and 772 $104,765 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$105,537180.15 COMPLETE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT120 $12,020 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 $12,140180.15.10 Prepare and File Notice of Determination 72 $7,049 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$7,121180.15.20 Environmental Commitments Record (ECR)48 $4,971 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0$5,019Total Hours 27224 430 572 676 257 1018 3121 132 33,430Total "Fully Loaded" Labor Cost$3,802,133 $47,492 $72,874 $66,326 $19,752 $106,645 $349,729 $13,037 $4,477,9883% Subcontractor Fee (Labor) $20,276$20,276Total ODC's$55,625 $1,515 $1,017 $4,150 $12,409 $29,855 $690 $2,328 $107,5883% Subcontractor Fee (ODC) $0$0TOTAL COMPANY COSTS$3,878,034 $49,007 $73,891 $70,476 $32,161 $136,500 $350,419 $15,365 $4,605,8527M.A3.MB.SR-91-SR-71 Cost 2007-09-14.xls3 of 3127 AGENDA ITEM 7M RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 10, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Aaron Hake, Staff Analyst John Standiford, Public Affairs Director THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: State and Federal Legislative Update BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Adopt an OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED position on SB 974 (Lowenthal); 2) Adopt proposed amendments to SB 974 and authorize staff to transmit the amendments to state leaders; 3) Approve a priority list of projects for funding by any container fee revenue; 4) Adopt an OPPOSE position on the following federal bills: a) S.2019 (Hutchison, R-Texas); b) H.R. 3510 (Peterson, R-Pennsylvania); 5) Adopt a SUPPORT position of the SR-241 Foothill South toll road extension; and 6) Receive and file the State and Federal Legislative Status Report. State Legislative Update SB 974 (Lowenthal) – Container Fees The final weeks of the legislative session included a flurry of activity surrounding goods movement. As the Assembly held up a Senate bill to implement the Trade Corridor Improvement Fund (TCIF), focus quickly shifted to legislation regarding container fees. Commission staff and representatives were involved in negotiations on bill language that would have committed at least $600 million of container fee revenue to grade separations in Riverside County. While remaining neutral on the legal and policy merits of a legislated container fee, Commission representatives sought to maximize Riverside County’s benefit from any bill dealing with revenue for goods movement projects. Agenda Item 7M 128 These efforts were put on hold when Senator Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach), the author of the container fee legislation, and Governor Schwarzenegger reached an agreement to put the bill aside and work together over the fall on the issue. Looming in the backdrop was the prospect of the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach unveiling an agreement with the private sector on a voluntary container premium that could supplant the need for a legislated container fee if Riverside County grade separations are adequately funded. A day later, amendments were made to Senator Lowenthal’s bill without guaranteed funding for Riverside County while creating a regionally imbalanced joint powers authority responsible for allocating container fee revenue. While acknowledging Senator Lowenthal’s expressed intentions to serve the needs of Riverside County, staff finds the current version of the bill, SB 974, to be problematic. Further, staff believes that it is important for the Commission to register a position on SB 974 ahead of discussions in Sacramento this fall. While it is likely that a legislated container fee will be tied up in courts for years before it is implemented and the prospects of a Governor’s veto loom large, the Commission and its allies should seek to remain active in any dialogue over new revenue for goods movement projects from any source. Further, the Commission’s official participation in bills such as SB 974 can inform the negotiations surrounding voluntary private container premiums and other funding sources. Therefore, staff has provided as an attachment to this item a summary and analysis of SB 974, as well as a recommended position and amendments that would better recognize the goods movement priorities of Riverside County. Based on the attached analysis of SB 974 as amended on September 5, 2007, staff recommends the Commission adopt an OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED position on the bill. Further, staff recommends the Commission adopt the amendments and project list contained in the attachment and relay them to state leaders who will be involved in crafting SB 974 this fall and next year. End-of-Session Recap of Commission-Sponsored Bills The Commission was very active in the 2007 legislative session, sponsoring two bills, which would ultimately require an additional year of work in the capitol. The Commission partnered with the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) to co-sponsor AB 1295, authored by Assemblyman Todd Spitzer. The purpose of the bill is to allow OCTA to modify the franchise which governs the express lanes on SR-91 so that the Commission can proceed with extending the express lanes into Riverside County, and to authorize the Commission to collect tolls on the Riverside County extension. Reflecting the two counties’ continuing alliance, elected officials and staff worked throughout the session with Mr. Spitzer to advance the legislation. The bill cleared the Assembly Transportation Committee with the help of Chairman Pedro Nava Agenda Item 7M 129 (D-Santa Barbara), but stalled in Assembly Appropriations Committee. Both agencies continue to work with members of the legislature to allow much needed improvements to SR-91 to go forward. On a concurrent path, authorization for planned express lanes on Interstate 15 continues to move forward with the California Transportation Commission (CTC). The I-15 project will be approved through a process established in 2006 by Speaker Fabian Nunez’s AB 1467. The Speaker’s bill calls for the CTC to develop eligibility criteria for four new high occupancy toll (HOT) lane projects. Following CTC’s finding of eligibility, the I-15 project will require separate legislation to finalize the Commission’s authority to move forward, which the Commission intends to seek in 2008. Finally, the Commission sought legislation to enhance the delivery of the Perris Valley Line (PVL) Metrolink extension. Assemblyman John Benoit (R-Palm Desert) authored AB 1240 to authorize the Commission to utilize existing contracting authority available to transit agencies throughout California, including the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA). The legislation stalled when public employee unions opposed the bill. The Commission continues to work with Assemblyman Benoit and SCRRA to shape a proposal that will enable the Commission to better deliver the PVL. Relinquishment of SR-79 and SR-111 Awaits Governor’s Decision A bill authored by Senator Jim Battin (R-La Quinta) to relinquish portions of SR-79 and SR-111 to the cities of Temecula, San Jacinto and Hemet and La Quinta, Indian Wells, Indio and Palm Desert respectively, is now on the Governor’s desk. This bill would provide cities with greater local control in setting transportation priorities for their residents. Federal Legislative Update Senate Approves Transportation Appropriations Before recessing for religious holidays in mid September, the U.S. Senate approved the FY 2008 transportation appropriations bill. The bill includes funding for key Commission priorities: • PVL Metrolink Extension: $3 million from Senator Feinstein; and • Alameda Corridor East grade separations in the city of Riverside: $1 million from Senators Boxer and Feinstein. The House of Representatives approved its version of the FY 2008 transportation appropriations bill in June; the two chambers will next hold conference to work out Agenda Item 7M 130 differences between the two bills before sending a final product to the President’s desk. However, the final bill will likely spend more than President Bush has requested in his proposed FY 2008 budget, which sets-up a possible veto from the President. Texas Senators Introduce Legislation Prohibiting Toll Programs on Interstate Highways Republican Senators Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn of Texas have introduced S.2019 in the U.S. Senate to prohibit the implementation of new tolling programs on highways built using federal funds. Although the Senators are responding to developments in Texas regarding that state’s aggressive direction towards privatizing infrastructure, if enacted, S.2019 could inhibit the Commission’s implementation of planned express lanes on I-15. Absent a larger legislative vehicle such as a federal transportation reauthorization bill, it will be difficult for S.2019 to move forward; the bill could also merely be a tool for political posturing. Nonetheless, due to its potential adverse impact on the Commission’s adopted delivery plans, staff recommends the Commission adopt an OPPOSE position on S.2019. Representative John Peterson (R-Pennsylvania) has also introduced mirroring legislation in the House of Representatives, likely in response to that state’s desire to toll I-80. For the same reasons as S.2019, staff recommends an OPPOSE position to H.R. 3510. Staff suggests that these bills’ authors could amend the legislation to be limited in scope to interstate highways in their home states or exclude the tolling of new capacity from prohibition. Transportation Corridor Agencies Request Commission Support of SR-241 Extension The final segment of the Foothill-Eastern toll corridor is often referred to as the Foothill- South – a 17-mile extension of the existing SR-241 toll road between Rancho Santa Margarita and San Onofre. The current Foothill and Eastern toll corridors are widely used by many Riverside County commuters who travel to jobs in Irvine and other locations in Orange County and serve as an alternative to the heavily congested SR-55. The Foothill-South extension will probably not be used as extensively by Riverside County residents as the northern portion of SR-241 and 261; however, it is the last component of an effective toll road system that has improved mobility throughout the region. Approximately eight years ago, Congress approved legislation to allow the United States Navy to provide an easement to allow for the location of a significant portion of this tollway extension to be located on federal land. Recently, Congresswoman Susan Davis of San Diego attached an amendment to the Defense Authorizations Bill that will undermine this easement and could undo years of Agenda Item 7M 131 environmental review regarding this corridor and jeopardizes its viability. The appropriations bill has been approved by the House of Representatives, but has yet to be taken up by the Senate. Given the fact that many of nation’s defense forces are in harm’s way, defense bills always receive overwhelming support and can be considered veto-proof. As a result they are often saddled with amendments that aren’t always germane to the bill’s main purpose. This proposed Foothill-South facility has been controversial for many years, but the Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA) has been diligent in responding to environmental concerns regarding this corridor. Originally, the facility was first incorporated in Orange County’s Master Plan of Highways in 1981, resulting in more than 26 years of consideration. Some proponents have suggested that this might be one of the most heavily reviewed and studied transportation corridors in the history of the nation. The Foothill-Eastern TCA has been working with various government agencies and business groups to garner support for the project and receive Senate support to remove the anti-toll road provision in the appropriations bill. Local Riverside County Congressional Representatives Ken Calvert and Darrell Issa have been especially vocal advocating this position and have expressed concerns regarding the long-term impacts if the corridor is not constructed. This facility has been included in the Regional Transportation Plan for a number of years and its elimination will impact the overall plan, its transportation and air quality modeling. Also, Commissioner Jeff Miller, Chairman of the bi-county State Route 91 Advisory Committee, has been active in supporting the SR-241 Foothill South extension. While recognizing that there is significant environmental opposition to this project, failing to build a project that has been planned for more than 20 years will have an impact on Southern California’s overall mobility. Moreover, as Riverside County considers new transportation corridors both within the county and connecting to neighboring counties, the use of parliamentary maneuver to amend an Authorizations Bill to affect a local project is especially disturbing. Staff recommends that the Commission join many other organizations and local governments in formal support of the development of the Foothill-South. The Commission need not endorse a specific alignment or project details, but should express the Commission’s support for the facility. The support position would be communicated to California’s Senators in advance of the Senate’s consideration of the Defense Authorizations Bill. Other supporters already on record include the Automobile Club of Southern California, California Chamber of Commerce, American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), the Building and Construction Trades Council and the California Labor Federation. Among those opposed to the Foothill-South are the Surfrider Foundation and the Sierra Club. Commission staff has received formal written correspondence from the TCA, which is the lead agency on the SR-241 extension Agenda Item 7M 132 project, requesting the Commission’s support of the project. OCTA has also officially supported the project. Concern over the future of the project has been heightened in recent months as a provision has been inserted in the House version of the FY 2008 Defense appropriations Act, which would eliminate an easement from the federal government, which is needed to complete the project. Congressmen Ken Calvert (R-Corona) and Darrel Issa (R-Vista) have been high profile supporters of the project and leaders against the amendment to the defense bill. Additionally, the project’s website indicates over 8,000 individual Southern California residents have officially registered their support for the extension. Attachments: 1) SB 974 (Lowenthal) Summary, Analysis, Amendments, Project List 2) Correspondence from TCA 3) OCTA Letter of Support for SR-241 4) Legislative Matrix Agenda Item 7M 133 SB 974 (Lowenthal) Summary, Analysis, Proposed Amendments, and Project List Summary Senate Bill 974 (Lowenthal) imposes a $30 per twenty-foot equivalent (TEU) container fee on each container processed through the ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland. The intent of the container fee is to generate new revenue for projects that mitigate against air quality and infrastructure impacts of increasing trade volumes through the ports. Considering the high impact on Riverside County of goods moving along the Alameda Corridor East, especially at at-grade crossings, the container fee proposed in SB 974 is a potential funding source for the Commission’s prioritized program of grade separations. SB 974 authorizes the container fee to be levied at both San Pedro Bay ports beginning January 1, 2009. The revenue is to be collected by each port and remitted in equal halves to two separate funds. Half of the revenue will be dedicated to the “San Pedro Bay Ports Mitigation Relief Trust Fund,” which will be available for expenditure by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) for the purposes of mitigating air pollution caused by the movement of container cargo to and from the ports. The other half of the revenue will be dedicated to the “San Pedro Bay Ports Congestion Relief Trust Fund.” This fund will be available for expenditure by a new joint-powers authority created by SB 974, named the Southern California Goods Movement Authority. The exclusive purpose of the congestion relief fund is for funding infrastructure projects that improve the flow and efficiency of container cargo to and from the ports. SB 974 explicitly states that at-grade crossings on the Alameda Corridor East in Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange, and Los Angeles Counties are eligible for funding from the congestion relief trust fund, as well as Colton Crossing, on-dock infrastructure at the ports, and rail capacity enhancements that do not disproportionately impact low- income communities. Projects that improve air quality are to be given priority for funding. The bill does not specify if non-container fee matching funds are required. The Southern California Goods Movement Authority is created by SB 974 as the responsible entity for developing a one-time list of infrastructure projects to be funded by container fees. The Authority consists of nine voting members, six of which represent Los Angeles County. SB 974 gives one vote to each of the following entities: (1) Port of Los Angeles, (2) Port of Long Beach, (3) City of Los Angeles, (4) City of Long Beach, (5) Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, (6) Alameda Corridor East Construction Authority, (7) Orange County Transportation Authority, (8) Riverside County Transportation Commission, (9) San Bernardino Associated Governments. Action by the Authority requires only a majority vote. 134 Between January 1, 2008 and April 1, 2008 the Authority is required to develop a priority list of projects to be funded by the container fee and submit it to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) for approval. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) must also be consulted. The CTC must approve a project list by September 1, 2008. The Authority can remove projects from the list which are fully funded or are deemed no longer worthy of funding; however, the bill does not appear to allow projects to be added or exchanged after CTC approval. The Authority is also required to hold public hearings to receive input on the project list, with at least one hearing to be held near the ports. Analysis Although the language of SB 974 mandates the Authority to take into account the entire rail corridor servicing the ports, the governing structure gives de minimis influence to the non-Los Angeles County corridor, let alone the Riverside County. The impact of goods movement on the Alameda Corridor East in Riverside, San Bernardino and Orange Counties is well documented and widely acknowledged by elected and administration officials in Sacramento. Yet, SB 974 does not go far enough to recognize the air quality, congestion, and quality of life burdens borne by the residents of Riverside County. SB 974 lacks a sunset date for the container fee or a definition of how much revenue is to be collected over the life of the program and what is the total expected value of the projects to be funded. Without definitions of how much revenue is to be raised and what volume of projects is to be funded, there arises uncertainty as to what should be the scope of the one-time project list. Further, the one-time project list does not contain flexibility for projects to be added or swapped when projects become fully funded or higher priorities arise over the course of the program. In short, the legislation leaves a great deal of latitude over the scope of the program to a regionally imbalanced governing board, but only gives it one chance before projects are set in stone. Finally, SB 974 requires the new joint-powers authority to “consult” with SCAG in developing the project list. SCAG’s consultation role is left vague in the legislation. Consultation could be interpreted a variety of ways that could add additional bureaucratic processes on top of this new government entity and complicate decision- making. Allowing broad latitude for participation by another organization has the potential to further diminish Riverside County’s position to ensure necessary funding to goods movement projects in the Inland Empire. Staff recommendation Based on the above analysis of SB 974 as amended on September 5, 2007, staff recommends the Commission adopt an OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED position on the bill. Further, staff recommends the Commission propose the following amendments to state leaders who will be involved in crafting SB 974 this fall and next year: 135 • Guarantee a minimum level of funding in statute to each county on the Alameda Corridor East for an initial round of goods movement projects, with project selection for this initial round determined by each county; • Provide regional balance in representation on the board of the Southern California Goods Movement Authority, recognizing the significant impacts of goods movement on Riverside County; • Provide flexibility for project lists to be modified after their adoption to reflect changing priorities and funding situations; • Specify a non-container fee matching requirement for projects funded by container fees; and • Delete the requirement that SCAG be consulted in the adoption of project lists. Further, staff recommends the Commission adopt the following list of grade separations as the top-priority projects which should be funded as part of any voluntary agreement or legislation that creates revenue for goods movement via a container fee or “premium”. This list is consistent with the Commission’s adopted Grade Separation Funding Strategy (October 2006). Priority Project Jurisdiction Cost (M) 1 Columbia Ave/BNSF & UP Grade Separation City of Riverside $21.0 2 Sunset Ave/UP Grade Separation City of Banning $21.0 3 Ave 48/Dillon Rd/UP Grade Separation Cities of Coachella/Indio $21.7 4 Chicago Ave/BNSF & UP Grade Separation City of Riverside $48.7 5 Magnolia Ave/BNSF Grade Separation County of Riverside $26.7 6 3rd Street/BNSF & UP Grade Separation City of Riverside $31.7 7 McKinley St/BNSF Grade Separation City of Corona $109.2 8 Magnolia Ave/UP Grade Separation City of Riverside $27.2 9 Iowa Ave/BNSF & UP Grade Separation City of Riverside $19.0 10 Adams St/BNSF Grade Separation City of Riverside $24.0 11 Auto Center Dr/BNSF Grade Separation City of Corona $27.0 12 Clay St/UP Grade Separation County of Riverside $25.0 13 Center St/BNSF & UP Grade Separation County of Riverside $36.3 14 Streeter Ave/UP Grade Separation City of Riverside $33.7 15 Madison St/BNSF Grade Separation City of Riverside $19.0 16 Jurupa Rd/UP Grade Separation County of Riverside $26.5 17 Riverside Ave/UP Grade Separation City of Riverside $27.0 18 Hargrave St/UP Grade Separation City of Banning $25.2 19 Smith Ave/BNSF Grade Separation City of Corona $31.4 20 7th St/BNSF & UP Grade Separation City of Riverside $23.0 21 Tyler St/BNSF Grade Separation City of Riverside $27.0 22 22nd St/UP Grade Separation City of Banning $23.0 23 San Gorgonio Ave/UP Grade Separation City of Banning $23.5 136 24 Palmyrita Av/BNSF & UP Grade Separation City of Riverside $23.0 25 Spruce St/BNSF & UP Grade Separation City of Riverside $27.0 TOTAL $747.8 137 San Joaquin Hills Foothill/Eastern Corridor Agency Corridor Agency Chairman: Chairman: Jim Dahl Lance MacLean San Clemente Mission Viejo August 28, 2007 The Honorable Terry Henderson RCTC Chairwoman Riverside County Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Dear Chairwoman Henderson: As Chairman of the Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency, I am writing to request your support of the completion of the Foothill Transportation Corridor South, State Route 241. This is the final 16 mile segment of Orange County’s public toll road system and would provide direct access from State Route 91 in Riverside to Interstate 5 just south of the Orange/San Diego County line. The Foothill-South project has been on the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways since 1981. After six years of analysis by federal resource agencies, an alignment was chosen in 2006 that accommodates the needs of the traveling public and also provides the most environmentally sensitive road possible. The Orange County Transportation Authority’s long- term plans assume that the 241 will be completed. Completing the 241 will benefit all drivers throughout the Southern California region – whether it’s commuters from the Inland Empire or commercial truck traffic from San Diego – by providing a complete congestion-free option to the I-5 through Orange County. Again, I respectfully request your support of the completion of the 241, which is crucial to the quality of life and economic future of the Southern California region. Sincerely, Lance MacLean Chairman Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency Thomas E. Margro, Chief Executive Officer 125 PACIFICA, SUITE 100, IRVINE, CA 92618-3304 • P.O. BOX 53770, IRVINE, CA 92619-3770 • 949/754-3400 FAX 949/754-3467 www.thetollroads.com Members: Aliso Viejo • Anaheim • Costa Mesa • County of Orange • Dana Point • Irvine • Laguna Hills • Laguna Niguel • Laguna Woods • Lake Forest Mission Viejo • Newport Beach • Orange • Rancho Santa Margarita • Santa Ana • San Clemente • San Juan Capistrano • Tustin • Yorba Linda 138 139 140 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - POSITIONS ON STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION Revised: 8/20/07 Legislation/ Author Description Bill Status Position Date of Board Adoption STATE LEGISLATION AB 291 (Jeffries &Benoit) This bill relinquishes state control of the portions of SR-74 within Lake Elsinore city limits to the City Lake Elsinore. Held under submission in Senate Appropriations Committee – 08/30/07 Support 04/11/07AB 1240 (Benoit) This bill authorizes the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) to use design-build contracting in the delivery of the Perris Valley Line Metrolink Extension. RCTC is the sponsor of this bill. Hearing cancelled at request of author. Two-year bill. Support 04/11/07AB 1351 (Levine) This bill establishes guidelines for the expenditure of the $1 billion of State-Local Partnership Funding in Proposition 1B. The bill is consistent with the intent of Prop. 1B in supporting self-help counties, such as Riverside, match sales tax dollars with state dollars on large projects on the state highway system. Held under submission in Senate Appropriations Committee – 08/30/07 Support 06/13/07AJR 14 (Jeffries) This joint resolution calls on the President of the U.S. and Congress to enact federal legislation that ensures a substantial increment of new revenues from customs duties and importation fees is dedicated to goods movement projects in California and other impacted states. Enrolled and chaptered by Secretary of State – 07/03/07 Support 04/11/07SB 9 (Lowenthal) This bill is an evolving vehicle for establishing a process for the selection of transportation projects to be funded from the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIF) of Proposition 1B. The TCIF is a $2 billion fund. Held under submission in Senate Appropriations Committee – 08/30/07 Monitor 01/10/07SB 19 (Lowenthal) This bill will be a vehicle for establishing conditions and criteria for projects to be funded under the $1 billion account created by Proposition 1B dedicated to reducing emissions related to goods movement. Approved by Assembly Transportation Committee, amended, and referred to Assembly Appropriations Committee – 07/19/07 Monitor 01/10/07SB 45 (Perata) This bill will establish the application process for allocations from the Transit System Safety, Security, and Disaster Response Account from Proposition 1B. Amended to become an education bill. Monitor 01/10/07SB 47 (Perata) This bill will establish the eligibility, matching fund requirements, and application process for Proposition 1B funds under the $1 billion State-Local Partnership Program. The State-Local Partnership Program is to be administered by the California Transportation Commission (CTC). Referred to Rules Committee - 01/18/07 Monitor 01/10/07141 Legislation/ Author Description Bill Status Position Date of Board Adoption SB 53 (Ducheny) This bill requires Caltrans to establish performance measures that will allow the department to issue an annual rating of the overall quality of the state highway system. Caltrans would be required to report to the Legislature on how resource, staffing, and programming decisions impact the overall condition of the state highway system (in terms of distressed lane miles, bridge conditions, and life cycle costs). SB 53 would require Caltrans to consult with agencies such as RCTC in developing its performance measures. Placed on inactive file on request of Assemblymember Bass – 09/04/07 Support 2/14/07SB 56 (Runner) This bill establishes a 10-year pilot program for design-build projects, administered by the CTC. Held in Senate Appropriations Committee under submission – 06/01/07 Support 2/14/07SB 224 (Battin) This bill relinquishes state control of SR-111 and SR-79 to local jurisdictions. SR-111 is relinquished within the city limits of La Quinta, Indian Wells, Indio, and Palm Desert. SR-79 is relinquished within the city limits of Temecula, San Jacinto and Hemet. Enrolled and to Governor’s desk – 09/11/07 Support 04/11/07SB 375 (Steinberg) This bill would require regional transportation planning agencies to adopt “preferred growth scenarios” that reduce vehicle miles traveled per household. The amount of reduced vehicle miles traveled to be reduced would be part of an emissions inventory to be completed by CARB. Additional provisions would require the CTC to adopt guidelines for the use of travel demand models that meet a number of standards and would require the state to ensure that projects that are included in the Federal Transportation Improvement Program reflect this orientation toward “preferred growth scenarios.” Held under submission in Assembly Appropriations Committee – 08/30/07 Oppose 06/13/07SB 748 (Corbett) This bill establishes the criteria for the State-Local Partnership program created when voters approved Proposition 1B. The bill broadly defines agencies who may apply for funding from the program and also broadly includes voter-approved taxes as eligible matching funds. Set for first hearing in Assembly Appropriations Committee, cancelled at request of author – 08/30/07 Oppose Unless Amended 06/13/07 SB 872 (Ackerman) This bill establishes the criteria for the State-Local Partnership program created when voters approved Proposition 1B. The bill allocates $200 million per year statewide over five FY’s beginning FY 10-11. Funding goes only to self-help counties and to projects with a minimum cost of $25 million. Held in Senate Appropriations Committee under submission – 05/31/07 Support 04/11/07142 Legislation/ Author Description Bill Status Position Date of Board Adoption FEDERAL LEGISLATION H.R. 1475 (McGovern, D-MA) This bill equalizes the fringe benefit employers may offer their employees tax-free for transit reimbursement and parking reimbursement to $200/month. Presently, employers may reimburse parking up to $175/month while transit may only be reimbursed up to $100/month. Referred to House Ways & Means Committee; Referred to House Oversight and Government Reform Committee – 03/12/07 Support 04/11/07H.R. 2701 (Oberstar, D-MN) This bill provides addresses ways that transportation policy can help mitigate climate change and improve energy efficiency. The bill includes additional transit funding and an increased federal share of CMAQ projects. A new mechanism for negotiating with railroads is also part of the legislation Markup scheduled in Transportation & Infrastructure Committee for 06/20/07 Monitor 07/11/07 143 AGENDA ITEM 8 Agenda Item 8 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 10, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreements for Internal Audit Services BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve the selection process and award Agreement No. 08-19-028-00 to KPMG LLP to perform internal audit services and on-call internal audit services; 2) Award Agreement No. 08-19-029-00 to Thompson, Cobb, Bazilio & Associates, P.C. and Agreement No. 08-19-030-00 to Mayer Hoffman McCann P.C. to perform on-call internal audit services; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The FY 2007/08 budget for the Finance Department includes the goal to develop and maintain an organization accountability program encompassing financial and operational functions. One of the initiatives related to this goal is the implementation of an internal audit program. The initial focus of the internal audit program is a business risk analysis and assessment that will result in the development of an audit plan. All departments and operations will be evaluated during the risk assessment phase. Areas assessed as high or medium risk are projects that are likely to be considered in the development of the audit plan. Commission management and the Audit Ad Hoc Committee will have significant involvement in the review of the risk assessment, development, and final approval of an audit plan with the internal auditor. In addition to the core internal audit activity related to financial and operational audits, other projects that may be required periodically include construction and 144 Agenda Item 8 engineering audits, investigative reviews, contract closeouts, special reviews, and administrative assistance. Based on the depth of resources that would be required for such an internal audit program, staff released a request for proposal (RFP) for internal audit services on July 12, 2007. The Calendar of Events was as follows: Distribution of RFP July 12, 2007 Pre-Proposal Conference August 1, 2007 Proposals were Delivered to Commission Prior to 2 p.m. August 27, 2007 Evaluation Committee Review of Proposals September 6, 2007 Interviews Held for Short-Listed Firms September 17, 2007 Selection Process Staff received seven proposals by the required date and time. An evaluation panel consisting of Commission finance and program staff as well as a Metrolink finance representative reviewed the proposals based on qualifications of the firm, staffing and project organization, work plan, cost and price, and completeness of response. After the review of the proposals, the evaluation panel determined that four firms submitted high quality proposals and invited those firms for interviews on September 17, 2007. During the interviews, the evaluation panel carefully considered the personnel of the proposed project team, understanding of the services required by the Commission and demonstrated capacity to complete the proposed scope of work. As it relates to the primary focus of the internal audit program for a risk assessment and audit plan, the panel ranked the four interviewed firms as follows: Top Ranked KPMG LLP Second Deloitte Third Thompson, Cobb, Bazilio & Associates, P.C. Fourth Mayer Hoffman McCann P.C. Accordingly, staff recommends the award of Agreement No. 08-19-028-00 to KPMG LLP for internal audit services. Since staff anticipates an increased need for other internal audit services related to construction and engineering awards and contract close-outs as well as other reviews and assistance, the panel ranked the four firms for on-call internal audit services as follows: 145 Agenda Item 8 Top Ranked Thompson, Cobb, Bazilio & Associates, P.C. Second Mayer Hoffman McCann P.C. Third KPMG LLP Fourth Deloitte Staff recommends that on-call internal audit services be awarded to the three top ranked firms. Therefore, staff recommends the award of Agreement No. 08-19-029-00 to Thompson, Cobb, Bazilio & Associates, P.C. (TCBA); Agreement No. 08-19-030-00 to Mayer Hoffman McCann P.C. (MHM); and the award of Agreement No. 08-19-028-00, including the internal audit services discussed previously, to KPMG LLP. As on-call internal audit services are required, a proposed scope of work will be presented to each firm for a cost and work plan proposal. The most responsive firm will be awarded a task order. These three agreements are anticipated to be three-year contracts with two one-year options. The amounts included in the contracts are $500,000 for KPMG LLP and $100,000 each for TCBA and MHM. At this time, staff is completing the negotiation of the agreement terms with KPMG LLP; a draft agreement is included as an attachment. The final agreements with TCBA and MHM are also included as attachments. The FY 2007/08 budget includes expenditures of $150,000 for internal audit services. Due to the anticipated increase in project related contracts, staff recommends an increase in budgeted expenditures of $50,000 for contract and other audits. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes No N/A Year: FY 2007/08 FY 2007/08 FY 2008/09+ Amount: $150,000 $50,000 TBD Source of Funds: Measure A, Local Transportation Funds, Motorist Services Funds Budget Adjustment: No Yes N/A GLA No.: S 19 65401 P1001 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 09/18/2007 Attachments: 1) KPMG LLP Draft Agreement No. 08-19-028-00 2) TCBA Agreement No. 08-19-029-00 3) MHM Agreement No. 08-19-030-00 146 (Draft) Agreement No. 08-19-028-00 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AGREEMENT FOR INTERNAL AUDIT SERVICES WITH KPMG LLP 1. PARTIES AND DATE. This Agreement is made and entered into this day of , 200_, by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ("the Co- mmission") and KPMG LLP ("Contractor"), a LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP. 2. RECITALS. 2.1 Contractor desires to perform and assume responsibility for the provision of certain professional consulting services required by Commission on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. Contractor represents that it is a professional contractor, experienced in providing internal audit services to public clients, is licensed in the State of California, and is familiar with the plans of Commission. 2.2 Commission desires to engage Contractor to render certain consulting services for the Internal Audit Project ("Project") as set forth herein. 3. TERMS. 3.1 General Scope of Services. Contractor promises and agrees to furnish to Commission all labor materials, tools, equipment, services, and incidental and customary work necessary to fully and adequately provide professional consulting services and advice on various issues affecting the decisions of Commission regarding the Project and on other programs and matters affecting Commission, hereinafter referred to as "Services". The Services are more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. All Services shall be subject to, and performed in accordance with, this Agreement, the exhibits attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and all applicable local, state, and federal laws, rules and regulations. 3.2 Term. The term of this Agreement shall be from November 1, 2007 to October 31, 2010, with an option of performing internal audit services for two additional one-year periods through October 31, 2012, unless earlier terminated as provided herein. 147 Contractor shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement and shall meet any other established schedules and deadlines. 3.3 Schedule of Services. Contractor shall perform the Services expeditiously, within the term of this Agreement, and in accordance with a schedule to be mutually agreed upon by both parties for each of the Services. Contractor represents that it has the professional and technical personnel required to perform the Services in conformance with such conditions. In order to facilitate Contractor's conformance with the Schedule, the Commission shall respond to Contractor's submittals in a timely manner. Upon request of the Commission, Contractor shall provide a more detailed schedule of anticipated performance to meet the Schedule of Services. 3.4 Independent Contractor; Control and Payment of Subordinates. The Services shall be performed by Contractor under its supervision. Contractor will determine the means, method and details of performing the Services subject to the requirements of this Agreement. Commission retains Contractor on an independent contractor basis and Contractor is not an employee of Commission. Contractor retains the right to perform similar or different services for others during the term of this Agreement. Any additional personnel performing the Services under this Agreement on behalf of Contractor shall not be employees of Commission and shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive direction and control. Contractor shall pay all wages, salaries, and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their performance of Services under this Agreement and as required by law. Contractor shall be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such additional personnel, including, but not limited to: social security taxes, income tax withholding, unemployment insurance, and workers' compensation insurance. 3.5 Conformance to Applicable Requirements. All work prepared by Contractor shall be subject to the approval of Commission. 3.6 Substitution of Key Personnel. Contractor has represented to Commission that certain key personnel will perform and coordinate the Services under this Agreement. Should one or more of such personnel become unavailable, Contractor may substitute other personnel of at least equal competence and experience upon written approval of Commission, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. In the event that Commission and Contractor cannot agree as to the substitution of key personnel, Commission shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement for cause, pursuant to provisions of Section 3.16 of this Agreement. The key personnel for performance of this Agreement are as follows: Lynn McKenzie, Partner, and Michael VanBruaene, Manager. 3.7 Commission’s Representative. Commission hereby designates Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer, or his or her designee, to act as its representative for the performance of this Agreement ("Commission’s Representative"). Commission's representative shall have the power to act on behalf of Commission for all purposes under this Agreement. Contractor shall not accept direction from any person other than Commission's Representative or his or her designee. 2 148 3.8 Contractor’s Representative. Contractor hereby designates the Chief Financial Officer, or his or her designee, to act as its representative for the performance of this Agreement ("Contractor’s Representative"). Contractor’s Representative shall have full authority to represent and act on behalf of the Contractor for all purposes under this Agreement. The Contractor’s Representative shall supervise and direct the Services, using his or her best skill and attention, and shall be responsible for all means, methods, techniques, sequences and procedures and for the satisfactory coordination of all portions of the Services under this Agreement. 3.9 Coordination of Services. Contractor agrees to work closely with Commission staff in the performance of Services and shall be available to Commission's staff, consultants and other staff at all reasonable times. 3.10 Standard of Care; Licenses. Contractor shall perform the Services under this Agreement in a skillful and competent manner, consistent with the standard generally recognized as being employed by professionals in the same discipline in the State of California. Contractor represents and maintains that it is skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform the Services. Contractor warrants that all employees and subcontractors shall have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. Finally, Contractor represents that it, its employees and subcontractors have all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services and that such licenses and approvals shall be maintained throughout the term of this Agreement. Contractor shall perform, at its own cost and expense and without reimbursement from Commission, any Services necessary to correct errors or omissions which are caused by the Contractor’s failure to comply with the standard of care provided for herein, and shall be fully responsible to the Commission for all damages and other liabilities provided for in the indemnification provisions of this Agreement arising from the Contractor’s errors and omissions. 3.11 Laws and Regulations. Contractor shall keep itself fully informed of and in compliance with all local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations in any manner affecting the performance of the Project or the Services, including all Cal/OSHA requirements, and shall give all notices required by law. Contractor shall be liable for all violations of such laws and regulations in connection with Services. If the Contractor performs any work knowing it to be contrary to such laws, rules and regulations and without giving written notice to Commission, Contractor shall be solely responsible for all costs arising therefrom. Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold Commission, its officials, directors, officers, employees and agents free and harmless, pursuant to the indemnification provisions of this Agreement, from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with such laws, rules or regulations. 3 149 3.12 Insurance. 3.12.1 Time for Compliance. Contractor shall not commence work under this Agreement until it has provided evidence satisfactory to the Commission that it has secured all insurance required under this section. In addition, Contractor shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work on any subcontract until it has secured all insurance required under this section. 3.12.2 Minimum Requirements. Contractor shall, at its expense, procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the Agreement by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. Contractor shall also require all of its subcontractors providing Services under this Agreement, as may be applicable, to procure and maintain the same insurance for the duration of the Agreement. Such insurance shall meet at least the following minimum levels of coverage: (A) Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as the latest version of the following: (1) General Liability: Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001); (2) Automobile Liability: Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form number CA 0001, code 1 (any auto); and (3) Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability: Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer’s Liability Insurance. (B) Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits no less than: (1) General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this Agreement/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit; (2) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage; and (3) if Contractor has an employees, Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability: Workers’ Compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California. Employer’s Practices Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident. 3.12.3 Professional Liability. Contractor shall procure and maintain, and require its sub-consultants to procure and maintain during the term of this Agreement, errors and omissions liability insurance appropriate to their profession. Such insurance shall be in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per claim. 3.12.4 Insurance Endorsements. The insurance policies shall contain the following provisions, or Contractor shall provide endorsements on forms approved by the Commission to add the following provisions to the insurance policies: (A) General Liability. The general liability policy shall be endorsed to state that: (1) the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and 4 150 agents shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the Services or operations performed by or on behalf of the Contractor, including materials, parts or equipment furnished in connection with such work; and (2) the insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents, or if excess, shall stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the Contractor’s scheduled underlying coverage. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents shall be excess of the Contractor’s insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it in any way. (B) Automobile Liability. The automobile liability policy shall be endorsed to state that: (1) the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the ownership, operation, maintenance, use, loading or unloading of any auto owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor or for which the Contractor is responsible; and (2) the insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents, or if excess, shall stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the Contractor’s scheduled underlying coverage. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents shall be excess of the Contractor’s insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it in any way. (C) Workers’ Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents for losses paid under the terms of the insurance policy which arise from work performed by the Contractor. (D) All Coverages. Each insurance policy required by this Agreement shall be endorsed to state that: (A) coverage shall not be suspended, voided or canceled except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the Commission; and, (B) any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies, including breaches of warranties, shall not affect coverage provided to the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents. 3.12.5 Deductibles and Self-Insurance Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the Commission. If the Commission does not approve the deductibles or self-insured retentions as presented, Contractor shall guarantee that, at the option of the Commission, either: (1) the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents; or, (2) the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigation costs, claims and administrative and defense expenses. 3.12.6 Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best’s rating no less than A:VIII, licensed to do business in California, and satisfactory to the Commission. 5 151 3.12.7 Verification of Coverage. Contractor will make available for review by the Commission, in a local office of Consultant, original certificates of insurance and endorsements effecting coverage required by this Agreement. 3.13 Safety. Contractor shall execute and maintain its work so as to avoid injury or damage to any person or property. In carrying out its Services, the Contractor shall at all times be in compliance with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations, and shall exercise all necessary precautions for the safety of employees appropriate to the nature of the work and the conditions under which the work is to be performed. Safety precautions as applicable shall include, but shall not be limited to: (A) adequate life protection and life saving equipment and procedures; (B) instructions in accident prevention for all employees and subcontractors, such as safe walkways, scaffolds, fall protection ladders, bridges, gang planks, confined space procedures, trenching and shoring, equipment and other safety devices, equipment and wearing apparel as are necessary or lawfully required to prevent accidents or injuries; and (C) adequate facilities for the proper inspection and maintenance of all safety measures. 3.14 Fees and Payment. 3.14.1 Compensation. Contractor shall receive compensation, including authorized reimbursements not to exceed ten percent (10%) of total fees, for all Services rendered under this Agreement at the rates set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto. The total compensation shall not exceed FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000) without written approval of Commission's Executive Director (“Total Compensation”). Extra Work may be authorized, as described below, and if authorized, will be compensated at the rates and manner set forth in this Agreement. 3.14.2 Payment of Compensation. Contractor shall submit to Commission a monthly statement which indicates work completed and hours of Services rendered by Contractor. The statement shall describe the amount of Services and supplies provided since the initial commencement date, or since the start of the subsequent billing periods, as appropriate, through the date of the statement. Commission shall, within 45 days of receiving such statement, review the statement and pay all approved charges thereon. 3.14.3 Reimbursement for Expenses. Contractor shall not be reimbursed for any expenses unless authorized in writing by Commission. 3.14.4 Extra Work. At any time during the term of this Agreement, Commission may request that Contractor perform Extra Work. As used herein, "Extra Work" means any work which is determined by Commission to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which the parties did not reasonably anticipate would be necessary at the execution of this Agreement. Contractor shall not perform, nor be compensated for, Extra Work without written authorization from Commission's Executive Director. 6 152 3.15 Accounting Records. Contractor shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to all costs and expenses incurred and fees charged under this Agreement. All such records shall be clearly identifiable. Contractor shall allow a representative of Commission during normal business hours, upon reasonable advance notice, and with Contractor personnel present, to examine, audit, and make transcripts or copies of such records and any other documents created pursuant to this Agreement. Contractor shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to the Agreement for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment under this Agreement. 3.16 Termination of Agreement. 3.16.1 Grounds for Termination. Commission may, by written notice to Contractor, terminate the whole or any part of this Agreement at any time and without cause by giving written notice to Contractor of such termination, and specifying the effective date thereof. Upon termination, Contractor shall be compensated only for those services which have been fully and adequately rendered to Commission through the effective date of the termination, and Contractor shall be entitled to no further compensation. Contractor may not terminate this Agreement except for cause. 3.16.2 Effect of Termination. If this Agreement is terminated as provided herein, Commission may require Contractor to provide all finished Documents and Data, as defined below, and other information of any kind prepared by Contractor in connection with the performance of Services under this Agreement. Contractor shall be required to provide such document and other information within fifteen (15) days of the request. 3.16.3 Additional Services. In the event this Agreement is terminated in whole or in part as provided herein, Commission may procure, upon such terms and in such manner as it may determine appropriate, services similar to those terminated. 3.17 Delivery of Notices. All notices permitted or required under this Agreement shall be given to the respective parties at the following address, or at such other address as the respective parties may provide in writing for this purpose: CONTRACTOR: COMMISSION: Riverside County KPMG LLP Transportation Commission 355 South Grand Avenue 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Riverside, CA 92501 Attn: Lynn McKenzie Attn: Eric Haley Such notice shall be deemed made when personally delivered or when mailed, forty-eight (48) hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class postage prepaid and 7 153 addressed to the party at its applicable address. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred, regardless of the method of service. 3.18 Ownership of Materials/Confidentiality. 3.18.1 Documents & Data. This Agreement creates an exclusive and perpetual license for Commission to copy, use, modify, reuse, or sub-license any and all copyrights and designs embodied in plans, specifications, studies, drawings, estimates, materials, data and other documents or works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, including but not limited to, physical drawings or data magnetically or otherwise recorded on computer diskettes, which are prepared or caused to be prepared by Contractor for the Commission as work product required under this Agreement (“Documents & Data”). Contractor shall require all subcontractors to agree in writing that Commission is granted an exclusive and perpetual license for any Documents & Data the subcontractor prepares under this Agreement. Contractor represents and warrants that Contractor has the legal right to grant the exclusive and perpetual license for all such Documents & Data. Contractor makes no such representation and warranty in regard to Documents & Data which were prepared by design professionals other than Contractor or provided to Contractor by the Commission. Commission shall not be limited in any way in its use of the Documents & Data, provided that such use is within the purposes intended by this Agreement. 3.18.2 Intellectual Property. In addition, Commission shall have and retain all right, title and interest (including copyright, patent, trade secret and other proprietary rights) in all plans, specifications, studies, drawings, estimates, materials, data, computer programs or software and source code, enhancements, documents, and any and all works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium or expression, including but not limited to, physical drawings or other data magnetically or otherwise recorded on computer media (“Intellectual Property”) prepared or developed by or on behalf of Contractor for the Commission as work product required under this Agreement as well as any other such Intellectual Property prepared or developed by or on behalf of Contractor for the Commission as work product required under this Agreement. The Commission shall have and retain all right, title and interest in Intellectual Property developed or modified under this Agreement whether or not paid for wholly or in part by Commission, whether or not developed in conjunction with Contractor, and whether or not developed by Contractor. Contractor will execute separate written assignments of any and all rights to the above referenced Intellectual Property upon request of Commission. 8 154 Contractor shall also be responsible to obtain in writing separate written assignments from any subcontractors or agents of Contractor of any and all right to the above referenced Intellectual Property. Should Contractor, either during or following termination of this Agreement, desire to use any of the above-referenced Intellectual Property, it shall first obtain the written approval of the Commission. All materials and documents which were developed or prepared by the Contractor for general use prior to the execution of this Agreement and which are not the copyright of any other party or publicly available and any other computer applications and Contractor’s administrative communications, records, files and working papers relating to the services performed under this Agreement, shall continue to be the property of the Contractor. However, unless otherwise identified and stated prior to execution of this Agreement, Contractor represents and warrants that it has the right to grant the exclusive and perpetual license for all such Intellectual Property as provided herein. Commission further is granted by Contractor a non-exclusive and perpetual license to copy and use any and all Intellectual Property otherwise owned by Contractor which is the basis or foundation for any derivative, collective, insurrectional, or supplemental work created under this Agreement, in connection with the Commission’s use of the work product provided to it under this Agreement. 3.18.3 Use of Work Product. Further, the Commission acknowledges and agrees that any advice, recommendations, information or work product provided to the Commission by Contractor under this Agreement is for the sole use of the Commission and its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants and agents and may not be relied upon by any third party. Except for disclosures that are required by law, or are otherwise permitted by this Agreement, the Commission will not disclose or permit access to such advice, recommendations, information or work product to any third party without Contractor’s prior written consent. 3.18.4 Confidentiality. All ideas, memoranda, specifications, plans, procedures, drawings, descriptions, computer program data, input record data, written information, and other Documents and Data either created by or provided to Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement shall be held confidential by Contractor. Such materials shall not, without the prior written consent of Commission, be used by Contractor for any purposes other than the performance of the Services. Nor shall such materials be disclosed to any person or entity not connected with the performance of the Services or the Project, except for disclosures that are required by law, legal process, or to fulfill professional standards or obligations, provided that Contractor shall provide ten (10) days notice to the Commission prior to any such disclosure. Nothing furnished to Contractor which is otherwise known to Contractor or is generally known, or has become known, to the related industry shall be deemed confidential. Contractor shall not use Commission's name or insignia, photographs of the Project, or any publicity pertaining to the Services or the Project in any magazine, trade paper, newspaper, television or radio production or other similar medium without the prior written consent of Commission. 9 155 3.19 Cooperation; Further Acts. The Parties shall fully cooperate with one another, and shall take any additional acts or sign any additional documents as may be necessary, appropriate or convenient to attain the purposes of this Agreement. 3.20 Indemnification. Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, agents and volunteers free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to any negligence or willful misconduct of Contractor, its officials, officers, employees, agents, consultants and contractors arising out of or in connection with the performance of the Services, the Project or this Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all consequential damages and attorneys fees and other related costs and expenses. Contractor shall defend, at Contractor's own cost, expense and risk, any and all such aforesaid suits, actions or other legal proceedings of every kind that may be brought or instituted against Commission or its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, agents and volunteers. Contractor shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against Commission or its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, agents and volunteers, in any such suit, action or other legal proceeding. Contractor shall reimburse Commission and its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, agents and/or volunteers, for any and all reasonable legal expenses and costs incurred by each of them in connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity herein provided. Contractor's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by Commission or its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, agents and volunteers. . 3.20.1 Limitation of Liability. Contractor's liability to the Commission for consequential damages under the indemnification provision contained in section 3.20 shall be limited to two (2) million dollars. 3.21 Alternative Dispute Resolution. Any controversy or claim arising out of or related to this Agreement or the Services (including any such matter involving any parent, subsidiary, affiliate, successor in interest, or agent of RCTC or of Contractor) shall be submitted to voluntary non-binding mediation, in accordance with the dispute resolution procedures set forth in Exhibit "C" attached hereto. 3.22 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire Agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior negotiations, understandings or agreements. This Agreement may only be modified by a writing signed by both parties. 3.23 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in Riverside County. 3.24 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement. 10 156 3.25 Commission's Right to Employ Other Contractors. The Commission reserves the right to employ other consultants in connection with this Project. 3.26 Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding on the successors and assigns of the parties, and shall not be assigned by Contractor without the prior written consent of Commission. 3.27 Prohibited Interests. 3.27.1 Solicitation. Contractor maintains and warrants that it has not employed nor retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Contractor, to solicit or secure this Agreement. Further, Contractor warrants that it has not paid nor has it agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Contractor, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, Commission shall have the right to rescind this Agreement without liability. 3.27.2 Conflict of Interest. For the term of this Agreement, no member, officer or employee of Commission, during the term of his or her service with Commission, shall have any direct interest in this Agreement, or obtain any present or anticipated material benefit arising therefrom. 3.28 Equal Opportunity Employment. Contractor represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and it shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex or age. Such non-discrimination shall include, but not be limited to, all activities related to initial employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination. Contractor shall also comply with all relevant provisions of Commission's Disadvantaged Business Enterprise program, Affirmative Action Plan or other related Commission programs or guidelines currently in effect or hereinafter enacted. 3.29 Subcontracting. Contractor shall not subcontract any portion of the work or Services required by this Agreement, except as expressly stated herein, without prior written approval of the Commission. Subcontracts, if any, shall contain a provision making them subject to all provisions stipulated in this Agreement. 3.30 No Waiver. Failure of Commission to insist on any one occasion upon strict compliance with any of the terms, covenants or conditions hereof shall not be deemed a waiver of such term, covenant or condition, nor shall any waiver or relinquishment of any rights or powers hereunder at any one time or more times be deemed a waiver or relinquishment of such other right or power at any other time or times. 11 157 [Signatures on following page] 12 158 SIGNATURE PAGE TO AGREEMENT FOR INTERNAL AUDIT SERVICES IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement was executed on the date first written above. RIVERSIDE COUNTY KPMG LLP TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: __________________________ By: ____________________________ Terry Henderson Lynn McKenzie Chair Partner Approved as to Form: By: ____________________________ Best, Best & Krieger LLP General Counsel 13 159 EXHIBIT "A" SCOPE OF SERVICES The selected audit firm (Contractor) will effectively be responsible for the internal audit function of the Commission and report directly to the audit oversight committee designated by the Commission. The Accounting and Human Resources Manager is designated as the day to day staff coordinator of the internal audit program matters; the Chief Financial Officer will serve as the liaison to the audit oversight committee designated by the Commission. All departments and operations of the Commission may be subject to these audits and reviews. The Contractor will 1) propose recommendations that may increase operational efficiency and effectiveness as a result of these audits, 2) provide management with an independent, fair, objective, and reliable assessment of the Commission’s management practices, and compliance with established policies and procedures, and 3) work interactively with Commission management to ensure that prevailing business practices make the best use of the resources available to the agency. The Contractor will be required to determine internal controls environment, assess risks, and develop an annual audit work plan/budget subject to the approval of the audit oversight committee designated by the Commission. Based on the approved annual audit work plan, the Contractor will provide internal audit services to the Commission. Should additional assignments be required during the year, these assignments will be arranged through and issued through the Commission’s Accounting and Human Resources Manager. The following areas are intended to be guidelines as to the type of assignments that may be addressed by the Contractor: • Financial/Compliance Audits – These audits include an evaluation as to the adequacy of the internal controls, adherence to vendor contract provisions, and accuracy of the data presented. These audits may be specific accounts, grants or vendors, providing good or services to the Commission. • Operational Audits – Operational audits are reviews of any part of the organizations operating procedures and methods for the purpose of evaluating the efficiency, effectiveness, and economy of the subject audit area. These audits can include an evaluation of the organizational structure, procurement, maintenance, marketing, computer utilization, or any other area in the organization. • Construction and Engineering Audits – Audits of construction or engineering projects may include reviews of existing construction or engineering contracts for compliance with the terms of the contract or pre-award/post-award reviews of construction related projects. • Information Systems Audits – Information systems audits of Commission applications, including potential reviews of hardware and software and A-1 160 related controls. These reviews may be related to a proposed system development project or to an existing application. • Investigative Reviews – These reviews would generally involve employees or vendors and include reviewing the accuracy and completeness of information provided to the Commission. • Contract Closeout – These audits involve reviewing the contract for goods/services received by the Commission and validation of charged billed to the Commission. • Special Reviews – These reviews will be performed as requested by management or the audit oversight committee designated by the Commission. • Administrative Assistance – Administrative assistance in the areas of policy and procurement development (both office and program related), review and improvement of business practices, and development and implementation of operating procedures and other assistance needed. The Contractor will report to the audit oversight committee designated by the Commission on a quarterly basis as to the status of current internal audits and progress on improvements recommended by previous audits. An audit report will be issued for each scope-defined audit. The contents of the audit report will vary depending on the issues or problems disclosed and the nature of the audit. All formal reports from the Contractor will be first reviewed with the audit oversight committee designated by the Commission. Each audit report will contain, as a minimum, the following elements: • The objective and scope of the engagement; • A management summary of the results of the audit; • The specific findings, with adequate descriptions of weaknesses identified; • The appropriate and reasonable recommendations to correct the identified weaknesses; and • Response to findings and recommendations by responsible Commission Manager and Director. A-2 161 B-1 162 EXHIBIT "B" COMPENSATION Contractor’s hourly rates, which are fully loaded and include all overhead, for the Services to be performed from November 1, 2007 through October 31, 2010 shall be at the following hourly rates: Professional Level Hourly Rate Internal Audit Partner $ 350 Internal Audit Senior Manager $ 275 Internal Audit Manager $ 240 Internal Audit Senior Associate $ 175 Internal Audit Associate $ 140 Subject Matter Specialist Senior Manager $ 300 Subject Matter Specialist Manager $ 275 Subject Matter Specialist Senior Associate $ 200 Contractor shall be reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses at cost at an amount not to exceed 10% of total professional fees. Hourly rates for the Services to be performed during each of the two one-year option periods shall be determined during the exercise of such option periods. The estimated professional fees and out-of-pocket expenses to develop the initial risk assessment and audit plan, including approximately 15 departmental/program interviews, and to perform three audits included in such audit plan approximate $150,000. These estimated professional fees are dependent on the nature and scope of the audits to be performed. C-1 163 EXHIBIT "C" DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCEDURES The following procedures shall be used to resolve any controversy or claim ("dispute") as provided in this Agreement. If any of these provisions are determined to be invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall remain in effect and binding on the parties to the fullest extent permitted by law. 1. Non-Binding Mediation. A dispute shall be submitted to non-binding mediation by written notice to the other party or parties. In the mediation process, the parties will try to resolve their differences voluntarily with the aid of impartial mediator, who will attempt to facilitate negotiations. The mediator will be selected by agreement of the parties. If the parties cannot agree on a mediator, a mediator will be designated by JAMS/Endispute at the request of a party. Any mediator so designated must be acceptable to all parties. Non-binding mediation will be conducted as specified by the mediator and agreed upon by the parties. The parties agree to discuss their differences in good faith and to attempt, with the assistance of the mediator to reach an amicable resolution of the dispute. The mediation will be treated as a settlement discussion and therefore, will be confidential. The mediator may not testify for any party in any later proceeding relating to the dispute. No recording or transcript shall be made of the mediation proceedings. Each party will bear its costs in the mediation. The fees and expenses of the mediator will be shared equally by the parties. The mediation shall be completed within 60 days. 2. If the dispute is not resolved within 60 days by non-binding mediation, an action may be filed in Superior Court by either party hereto. C-1 164 Agreement No. 08-19-029-00 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AGREEMENT FOR INTERNAL AUDIT SERVICES WITH THOMPSON, COBB, BAZILIO & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 1. PARTIES AND DATE. This Agreement is made and entered into this day of , 200_, by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ("the Co- mmission") and THOMPSON, COBB, BAZILIO & ASSOCIATES, P.C. ("Consultant"), a District of Columbia corporation. 2. RECITALS. 2.1 Consultant desires to perform and assume responsibility for the provision of certain professional consulting services required by Commission on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. Consultant represents that it is a professional consultant, experienced in providing internal audit services to public clients, is licensed in the State of California, and is familiar with the plans of Commission. 2.2 Commission desires to engage Consultant to render certain consulting services for the Internal Audit Project ("Project") as set forth herein. 3. TERMS. 3.1 General Scope of Services. Consultant promises and agrees to furnish to Commission all labor materials, tools, equipment, services, and incidental and customary work necessary to fully and adequately provide professional consulting services and advice on various issues affecting the decisions of Commission regarding the Project and on other programs and matters affecting Commission, hereinafter referred to as "Services". The Services are more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. All Services shall be subject to, and performed in accordance with, this Agreement, the exhibits attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and all applicable local, state, and federal laws, rules and regulations. 3.2 Term. The term of this Agreement shall be from November 1, 2007 to October 31, 2010, with an option of performing internal audit services for two additional one-year periods through October 31, 2012, unless earlier terminated as provided herein. 165 Consultant shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement and shall meet any other established schedules and deadlines. 3.3 Schedule of Services. Consultant shall perform the Services expeditiously, within the term of this Agreement, and in accordance with a schedule to be mutually agreed upon by both parties for each of the Services. Consultant represents that it has the professional and technical personnel required to perform the Services in conformance with such conditions. In order to facilitate Consultant's conformance with the Schedule, the Commission shall respond to Consultant's submittals in a timely manner. Upon request of the Commission, Consultant shall provide a more detailed schedule of anticipated performance to meet the Schedule of Services. 3.4 Independent Contractor; Control and Payment of Subordinates. The Services shall be performed by Consultant under its supervision. Consultant will determine the means, method and details of performing the Services subject to the requirements of this Agreement. Commission retains Consultant on an independent contractor basis and Consultant is not an employee of Commission. Consultant retains the right to perform similar or different services for others during the term of this Agreement. Any additional personnel performing the Services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall not be employees of Commission and shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Consultant shall pay all wages, salaries, and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their performance of Services under this Agreement and as required by law. Consultant shall be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such additional personnel, including, but not limited to: social security taxes, income tax withholding, unemployment insurance, and workers' compensation insurance. 3.5 Conformance to Applicable Requirements. All work prepared by Consultant shall be subject to the approval of Commission. 3.6 Substitution of Key Personnel. Consultant has represented to Commission that certain key personnel will perform and coordinate the Services under this Agreement. Should one or more of such personnel become unavailable, Consultant may substitute other personnel of at least equal competence and experience upon written approval of Commission. In the event that Commission and Consultant cannot agree as to the substitution of key personnel, Commission shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement for cause, pursuant to provisions of Section 3.16 of this Agreement. The key personnel for performance of this Agreement is as follows: Michael deCastro, Principal. 3.7 Commission’s Representative. Commission hereby designates Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer, or his or her designee, to act as its representative for the performance of this Agreement ("Commission’s Representative"). Commission's representative shall have the power to act on behalf of Commission for all purposes under this Agreement. Consultant shall not accept direction from any person other than Commission's Representative or his or her designee. 2 166 3.8 Consultant’s Representative. Consultant hereby designates Michael deCastro, or his or her designee, to act as its representative for the performance of this Agreement ("Consultant’s Representative"). Consultant’s Representative shall have full authority to represent and act on behalf of the Consultant for all purposes under this Agreement. The Consultant’s Representative shall supervise and direct the Services, using his or her best skill and attention, and shall be responsible for all means, methods, techniques, sequences and procedures and for the satisfactory coordination of all portions of the Services under this Agreement. 3.9 Coordination of Services. Consultant agrees to work closely with Commission staff in the performance of Services and shall be available to Commission's staff, consultants and other staff at all reasonable times. 3.10 Standard of Care; Licenses. Consultant shall perform the Services under this Agreement in a skillful and competent manner, consistent with the standard generally recognized as being employed by professionals in the same discipline in the State of California. Consultant represents and maintains that it is skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform the Services. Consultant warrants that all employees and subcontractors shall have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. Finally, Consultant represents that it, its employees and subcontractors have all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services and that such licenses and approvals shall be maintained throughout the term of this Agreement. Consultant shall perform, at its own cost and expense and without reimbursement from Commission, any Services necessary to correct errors or omissions which are caused by the Consultant’s failure to comply with the standard of care provided for herein, and shall be fully responsible to the Commission for all damages and other liabilities provided for in the indemnification provisions of this Agreement arising from the Consultant’s errors and omissions. 3.11 Laws and Regulations. Consultant shall keep itself fully informed of and in compliance with all local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations in any manner affecting the performance of the Project or the Services, including all Cal/OSHA requirements, and shall give all notices required by law. Consultant shall be liable for all violations of such laws and regulations in connection with Services. If the Consultant performs any work knowing it to be contrary to such laws, rules and regulations and without giving written notice to Commission, Consultant shall be solely responsible for all costs arising therefrom. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold Commission, its officials, directors, officers, employees and agents free and harmless, pursuant to the indemnification provisions of this Agreement, from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with such laws, rules or regulations. 3 167 3.12 Insurance. 3.12.1 Time for Compliance. Consultant shall not commence work under this Agreement until it has provided evidence satisfactory to the Commission that it has secured all insurance required under this section. In addition, Consultant shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work on any subcontract until it has secured all insurance required under this section. 3.12.2 Minimum Requirements. Consultant shall, at its expense, procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the Agreement by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. Consultant shall also require all of its subcontractors to procure and maintain the same insurance for the duration of the Agreement. Such insurance shall meet at least the following minimum levels of coverage: (A) Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as the latest version of the following: (1) General Liability: Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001); (2) Automobile Liability: Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form number CA 0001, code 1 (any auto); and (3) Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability: Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer’s Liability Insurance. (B) Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: (1) General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this Agreement/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit; (2) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage; and (3) if Consultant has an employees, Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability: Workers’ Compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California. Employer’s Practices Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident. 3.12.3 Professional Liability. Consultant shall procure and maintain, and require its sub-consultants to procure and maintain, for a period of five (5) years following completion of the Project, errors and omissions liability insurance appropriate to their profession. Such insurance shall be in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per claim. 3.12.4 Insurance Endorsements. The insurance policies shall contain the following provisions, or Consultant shall provide endorsements on forms approved by the Commission to add the following provisions to the insurance policies: (A) General Liability. The general liability policy shall be endorsed to state that: (1) the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the Services or operations 4 168 performed by or on behalf of the Consultant, including materials, parts or equipment furnished in connection with such work; and (2) the insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents, or if excess, shall stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the Consultant’s scheduled underlying coverage. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents shall be excess of the Consultant’s insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it in any way. (B) Automobile Liability. The automobile liability policy shall be endorsed to state that: (1) the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the ownership, operation, maintenance, use, loading or unloading of any auto owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant or for which the Consultant is responsible; and (2) the insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents, or if excess, shall stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the Consultant’s scheduled underlying coverage. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents shall be excess of the Consultant’s insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it in any way. (C) Workers’ Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents for losses paid under the terms of the insurance policy which arise from work performed by the Consultant. (D) All Coverages. Each insurance policy required by this Agreement shall be endorsed to state that: (A) coverage shall not be suspended, voided or canceled except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the Commission; and, (B) any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies, including breaches of warranties, shall not affect coverage provided to the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents. 3.12.5 Deductibles and Self-Insurance Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the Commission. If the Commission does not approve the deductibles or self-insured retentions as presented, Consultant shall guarantee that, at the option of the Commission, either: (1) the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents; or, (2) the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigation costs, claims and administrative and defense expenses. 3.12.6 Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best’s rating no less than A:VIII, licensed to do business in California, and satisfactory to the Commission. 5 169 3.12.7 Verification of Coverage. Consultant shall furnish Commission with original certificates of insurance and endorsements effecting coverage required by this Agreement on forms satisfactory to the Commission. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy shall be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All certificates and endorsements must be received and approved by the Commission before work commences. The Commission reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. 3.13 Safety. Consultant shall execute and maintain its work so as to avoid injury or damage to any person or property. In carrying out its Services, the Consultant shall at all times be in compliance with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations, and shall exercise all necessary precautions for the safety of employees appropriate to the nature of the work and the conditions under which the work is to be performed. Safety precautions as applicable shall include, but shall not be limited to: (A) adequate life protection and life saving equipment and procedures; (B) instructions in accident prevention for all employees and subcontractors, such as safe walkways, scaffolds, fall protection ladders, bridges, gang planks, confined space procedures, trenching and shoring, equipment and other safety devices, equipment and wearing apparel as are necessary or lawfully required to prevent accidents or injuries; and (C) adequate facilities for the proper inspection and maintenance of all safety measures. 3.14 Fees and Payment. 3.14.1 Compensation. Consultant shall receive compensation, including authorized reimbursements, for all Services rendered under this Agreement at the rates set forth in Exhibit "C" attached hereto. The total compensation shall not exceed ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($100,000) without written approval of Commission's Executive Director (“Total Compensation”). Extra Work may be authorized, as described below, and if authorized, will be compensated at the rates and manner set forth in this Agreement. 3.14.2 Payment of Compensation. Consultant shall submit to Commission a monthly statement which indicates work completed and hours of Services rendered by Consultant. The statement shall describe the amount of Services and supplies provided since the initial commencement date, or since the start of the subsequent billing periods, as appropriate, through the date of the statement. Commission shall, within 45 days of receiving such statement, review the statement and pay all approved charges thereon. 3.14.3 Reimbursement for Expenses. Consultant shall not be reimbursed for any expenses unless authorized in writing by Commission. 3.14.4 Extra Work. At any time during the term of this Agreement, Commission may request that Consultant perform Extra Work. As used herein, "Extra Work" means any work which is determined by Commission to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which the parties did not reasonably anticipate would be 6 170 necessary at the execution of this Agreement. Consultant shall not perform, nor be compensated for, Extra Work without written authorization from Commission's Executive Director. 3.15 Accounting Records. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to all costs and expenses incurred and fees charged under this Agreement. All such records shall be clearly identifiable. Consultant shall allow a representative of Commission during normal business hours to examine, audit, and make transcripts or copies of such records and any other documents created pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to the Agreement for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment under this Agreement. 3.16 Termination of Agreement. 3.16.1 Grounds for Termination. Commission may, by written notice to Consultant, terminate the whole or any part of this Agreement at any time and without cause by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination, and specifying the effective date thereof. Upon termination, Consultant shall be compensated only for those services which have been fully and adequately rendered to Commission through the effective date of the termination, and Consultant shall be entitled to no further compensation. Consultant may not terminate this Agreement except for cause. 3.16.2 Effect of Termination. If this Agreement is terminated as provided herein, Commission may require Consultant to provide all finished or unfinished Documents and Data, as defined below, and other information of any kind prepared by Consultant in connection with the performance of Services under this Agreement. Consultant shall be required to provide such document and other information within fifteen (15) days of the request. 3.16.3 Additional Services. In the event this Agreement is terminated in whole or in part as provided herein, Commission may procure, upon such terms and in such manner as it may determine appropriate, services similar to those terminated. 3.17 Delivery of Notices. All notices permitted or required under this Agreement shall be given to the respective parties at the following address, or at such other address as the respective parties may provide in writing for this purpose: 7 171 CONSULTANT: COMMISSION: Thompson, Cobb, Bazilio & Riverside County Associates, P.C. Transportation Commission 21250 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 500 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Torrance, CA 90503 Riverside, CA 92501 Attn: Michael deCastro Attn: Eric Haley Such notice shall be deemed made when personally delivered or when mailed, forty-eight (48) hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class postage prepaid and addressed to the party at its applicable address. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred, regardless of the method of service. 3.18 Ownership of Materials/Confidentiality. 3.18.1 Documents & Data. This Agreement creates an exclusive and perpetual license for Commission to copy, use, modify, reuse, or sub-license any and all copyrights and designs embodied in plans, specifications, studies, drawings, estimates, materials, data and other documents or works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, including but not limited to, physical drawings or data magnetically or otherwise recorded on computer diskettes, which are prepared or caused to be prepared by Consultant under this Agreement (“Documents & Data”). Consultant shall require all subcontractors to agree in writing that Commission is granted an exclusive and perpetual license for any Documents & Data the subcontractor prepares under this Agreement. Consultant represents and warrants that Consultant has the legal right to grant the exclusive and perpetual license for all such Documents & Data. Consultant makes no such representation and warranty in regard to Documents & Data which were prepared by design professionals other than Consultant or provided to Consultant by the Commission. Commission shall not be limited in any way in its use of the Documents & Data at any time, provided that any such use not within the purposes intended by this Agreement shall be at Commission’s sole risk. 3.18.2 Intellectual Property. In addition, Commission shall have and retain all right, title and interest (including copyright, patent, trade secret and other proprietary rights) in all plans, specifications, studies, drawings, estimates, materials, data, computer programs or software and source code, enhancements, documents, and any and all works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium or expression, including but not limited to, physical drawings or other data magnetically or otherwise recorded on computer media (“Intellectual Property”) prepared or developed by or on behalf of Consultant under this Agreement as well as any other such Intellectual Property prepared or developed by or on behalf of Consultant under this Agreement. 8 172 The Commission shall have and retain all right, title and interest in Intellectual Property developed or modified under this Agreement whether or not paid for wholly or in part by Commission, whether or not developed in conjunction with Consultant, and whether or not developed by Consultant. Consultant will execute separate written assignments of any and all rights to the above referenced Intellectual Property upon request of Commission. Consultant shall also be responsible to obtain in writing separate written assignments from any subcontractors or agents of Consultant of any and all right to the above referenced Intellectual Property. Should Consultant, either during or following termination of this Agreement, desire to use any of the above-referenced Intellectual Property, it shall first obtain the written approval of the Commission. All materials and documents which were developed or prepared by the Consultant for general use prior to the execution of this Agreement and which are not the copyright of any other party or publicly available and any other computer applications, shall continue to be the property of the Consultant. However, unless otherwise identified and stated prior to execution of this Agreement, Consultant represents and warrants that it has the right to grant the exclusive and perpetual license for all such Intellectual Property as provided herein. Commission further is granted by Consultant a non-exclusive and perpetual license to copy, use, modify or sub-license any and all Intellectual Property otherwise owned by Consultant which is the basis or foundation for any derivative, collective, insurrectional, or supplemental work created under this Agreement. 3.18.3 Confidentiality. All ideas, memoranda, specifications, plans, procedures, drawings, descriptions, computer program data, input record data, written information, and other Documents and Data either created by or provided to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement shall be held confidential by Consultant. Such materials shall not, without the prior written consent of Commission, be used by Consultant for any purposes other than the performance of the Services. Nor shall such materials be disclosed to any person or entity not connected with the performance of the Services or the Project. Nothing furnished to Consultant which is otherwise known to Consultant or is generally known, or has become known, to the related industry shall be deemed confidential. Consultant shall not use Commission's name or insignia, photographs of the Project, or any publicity pertaining to the Services or the Project in any magazine, trade paper, newspaper, television or radio production or other similar medium without the prior written consent of Commission. 3.19 Cooperation; Further Acts. The Parties shall fully cooperate with one another, and shall take any additional acts or sign any additional documents as may be necessary, appropriate or convenient to attain the purposes of this Agreement. 3.20 Attorney's Fees. If either party commences an action against the other party, either legal, administrative or otherwise, arising out of or in connection with this 9 173 Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to have and recover from the losing party reasonable attorney's fees and costs of such actions. 3.21 Indemnification. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, agents and volunteers free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to any alleged negligent acts, omissions or willful misconduct of Consultant, its officials, officers, employees, agents, consultants and contractors arising out of or in connection with the performance of the Services, the Project or this Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all consequential damages and attorneys fees and other related costs and expenses. Consultant shall defend, at Consultant's own cost, expense and risk, any and all such aforesaid suits, actions or other legal proceedings of every kind that may be brought or instituted against Commission or its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, agents and volunteers. Consultant shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against Commission or its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, agents and volunteers, in any such suit, action or other legal proceeding. Consultant shall reimburse Commission and its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, agents and/or volunteers, for any and all legal expenses and costs incurred by each of them in connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity herein provided. Consultant's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by Commission or its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, agents and volunteers. The indemnification language above shall apply except as to design professional services, as defined in Civil Code section 2782.8, including any architect, landscape architect, and engineer or land surveyor services, provided pursuant to this Agreement. As to such Services, to the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, volunteers, and agents free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to any alleged negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Consultant, its officials, officers, employees, agents, consultants, and contractors arising out of or in connection with the performance of the Services, including without limitation the payment of all consequential damages, expert witness fees, and attorneys fees and other related costs and expenses. Consultant shall defend, at Consultant’s own cost, expense and risk, any and all such aforesaid suits, actions or other legal proceedings of every kind that may be brought or instituted against the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, agents, consultants, employees and volunteers. Consultant shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against the Commission or its directors, officials, officers, agents, consultants, employees and volunteers, in any such suit, action or other legal proceeding. Consultant shall reimburse the Commission and its directors, officials, officers, agents, consultants, employees and volunteers, for any and all legal expenses and costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees, incurred by each of them in connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity herein provided. Consultant’s obligation to 10 174 indemnity shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by the Commission or its directors, officials, officers, agents, consultants, employees and volunteers. 3.22 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire Agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior negotiations, understandings or agreements. This Agreement may only be modified by a writing signed by both parties. 3.23 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in Riverside County. 3.24 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement. 3.25 Commission's Right to Employ Other Consultants. The Commission reserves the right to employ other consultants in connection with this Project. 3.26 Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding on the successors and assigns of the parties, and shall not be assigned by Consultant without the prior written consent of Commission. 3.27 Prohibited Interests. 3.27.1 Solicitation. Consultant maintains and warrants that it has not employed nor retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, to solicit or secure this Agreement. Further, Consultant warrants that it has not paid nor has it agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, Commission shall have the right to rescind this Agreement without liability. 3.27.2 Conflict of Interest. For the term of this Agreement, no member, officer or employee of Commission, during the term of his or her service with Commission, shall have any direct interest in this Agreement, or obtain any present or anticipated material benefit arising therefrom. 3.28 Equal Opportunity Employment. Consultant represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and it shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex or age. Such non-discrimination shall include, but not be limited to, all activities related to initial employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination. Consultant shall also comply with all relevant provisions of Commission's Disadvantaged Business Enterprise program, Affirmative Action Plan or other related Commission programs or guidelines currently in effect or hereinafter enacted. 11 175 3.29 Subcontracting. Consultant shall not subcontract any portion of the work or Services required by this Agreement, except as expressly stated herein, without prior written approval of the Commission. Subcontracts, if any, shall contain a provision making them subject to all provisions stipulated in this Agreement. 3.30 No Waiver. Failure of Commission to insist on any one occasion upon strict compliance with any of the terms, covenants or conditions hereof shall not be deemed a waiver of such term, covenant or condition, nor shall any waiver or relinquishment of any rights or powers hereunder at any one time or more times be deemed a waiver or relinquishment of such other right or power at any other time or times. [Signatures on following page] 12 176 SIGNATURE PAGE TO AGREEMENT FOR INTERNAL AUDIT SERVICES IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement was executed on the date first written above. RIVERSIDE COUNTY THOMPSON, COBB, BAZILIO & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ASSOCIATES, P.C. By: __________________________ By: ____________________________ Terry Henderson Michael de Castro Chair Principal Approved as to Form: By: ____________________________ Best, Best & Krieger LLP General Counsel 13 177 EXHIBIT "A" SCOPE OF SERVICES The selected audit firm (Consultant) will report directly to the audit oversight committee designated by the Commission. The Accounting and Human Resources Manager is designated as the day to day staff coordinator of the internal audit program matters; the Chief Financial Officer will serve as the liaison to the audit oversight committee designated by the Commission. The following areas are intended to be guidelines as to the type of assignments that may be addressed by the Consultant: • Construction and Engineering Audits – Audits of construction or engineering projects may include reviews of existing construction or engineering contracts for compliance with the terms of the contract or pre-award/post-award reviews of construction related projects. • Information Systems Audits – Information systems audits of Commission applications, including potential reviews of hardware and software and related controls. These reviews may be related to a proposed system development project or to an existing application. • Investigative Reviews – These reviews would generally involve employees or vendors and include reviewing the accuracy and completeness of information provided to the Commission. • Contract Closeout – These audits involve reviewing the contract for goods/services received by the Commission and validation of charges billed to the Commission. • Special Reviews – These reviews will be performed as requested by management or the audit oversight committee designated by the Commission. • Administrative Assistance – Administrative assistance in the areas of policy and procurement development (both office and program related), review and improvement of business practices, and development and implementation of operating procedures and other assistance needed. The Consultant will report to the audit oversight committee designated by the Commission on a quarterly basis as to the status of current internal audits and progress on improvements recommended by previous audits, if applicable. An audit report will be issued for each scope-defined audit. The contents of the audit report will vary depending on the issues or problems disclosed and the nature of the audit. All formal reports from the Consultant will be first reviewed with the audit oversight committee designated by the Commission. Each audit report will contain, as a minimum, the following elements: • The objective and scope of the engagement; A-1 178 " A m a n a g e m e n t s u m m a r y o f t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e a u d i t ; " T h e s p e c i f i c f i n d i n g s , w i t h a d e q u a t e d e s c r i p t i o n s o f w e a k n e s s e s i d e n t i f i e d ; " T h e a p p r o p r i a t e a n d r e a s o n a b l e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s t o c o r r e c t t h e i d e n t i f i e d w e a k n e s s e s ; a n d " R e s p o n s e t o f i n d i n g s a n d r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s b y r e s p o n s i b l e C o m m i s s i o n M a n a g e r a n d D i r e c t o r . A - 2 1 7 9 EXHIBIT "C" COMPENSATION Consultant’s hourly rates, which are fully loaded and include all overhead, for the Services to be performed from November 1, 2007 through October 31, 2008 shall be at the following hourly rates: Professional Level Hourly Rate Partner/Project Manager $ 175 Audit Manager $ 115 Supervisory Auditor $ 95 Senior Auditor $ 85 For each subsequent contract year, the above fully loaded hourly rates may be adjusted, upon Commission approval, by no more than the Consumer Price Index (CPI) percentage increase (not to exceed 5%) as published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics for the Los Angeles County/Orange County urban areas. Consultant shall be reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses at cost at an amount not to exceed 10% of total professional fees. Hourly rates for the Services to be performed during each of the two one-year option periods shall be determined during the exercise of such option periods. A task order will be issued for each audit project based on a cost proposal submitted by Consultant and accepted by the Commission. Compensation shall not exceed amount indicated in the task order. C-1 180 Agreement No. 08-19-030-00 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AGREEMENT FOR INTERNAL AUDIT SERVICES WITH MAYER HOFFMAN McCANN P.C. 1. PARTIES AND DATE. This Agreement is made and entered into this day of , 200_, by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ("the Co- mmission") and MAYER HOFFMAN McCANN P.C. ("Consultant"), a Missouri corporaton. 2. RECITALS. 2.1 Consultant desires to perform and assume responsibility for the provision of certain professional consulting services required by Commission on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. Consultant represents that it is a professional consultant, experienced in providing internal audit services to public clients, is licensed in the State of California, and is familiar with the plans of Commission. 2.2 Commission desires to engage Consultant to render certain consulting services for the Internal Audit Project ("Project") as set forth herein. 3. TERMS. 3.1 General Scope of Services. Consultant promises and agrees to furnish to Commission all labor materials, tools, equipment, services, and incidental and customary work necessary to fully and adequately provide professional consulting services and advice on various issues affecting the decisions of Commission regarding the Project and on other programs and matters affecting Commission, hereinafter referred to as "Services". The Services are more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. All Services shall be subject to, and performed in accordance with, this Agreement, the exhibits attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and all applicable local, state, and federal laws, rules and regulations. 3.2 Term. The term of this Agreement shall be from November 1, 2007 to October 31, 2010, with an option of performing internal audit services for two additional one-year periods through October 31, 2012, unless earlier terminated as provided herein. 181 Consultant shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement and shall meet any other established schedules and deadlines. 3.3 Schedule of Services. Consultant shall perform the Services expeditiously, within the term of this Agreement, and in accordance with a schedule to be mutually agreed upon by both parties for each of the Services. Consultant represents that it has the professional and technical personnel required to perform the Services in conformance with such conditions. In order to facilitate Consultant's conformance with the Schedule, the Commission shall respond to Consultant's submittals in a timely manner. Upon request of the Commission, Consultant shall provide a more detailed schedule of anticipated performance to meet the Schedule of Services. 3.4 Independent Contractor; Control and Payment of Subordinates. The Services shall be performed by Consultant under its supervision. Consultant will determine the means, method and details of performing the Services subject to the requirements of this Agreement. Commission retains Consultant on an independent contractor basis and Consultant is not an employee of Commission. Consultant retains the right to perform similar or different services for others during the term of this Agreement. Any additional personnel performing the Services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall not be employees of Commission and shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Consultant shall pay all wages, salaries, and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their performance of Services under this Agreement and as required by law. Consultant shall be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such additional personnel, including, but not limited to: social security taxes, income tax withholding, unemployment insurance, and workers' compensation insurance. 3.5 Conformance to Applicable Requirements. All work prepared by Consultant shall be subject to the approval of Commission. 3.6 Substitution of Key Personnel. Consultant has represented to Commission that certain key personnel will perform and coordinate the Services under this Agreement. Should one or more of such personnel become unavailable, Consultant may substitute other personnel of at least equal competence and experience upon written approval of Commission. In the event that Commission and Consultant cannot agree as to the substitution of key personnel, Commission shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement for cause, pursuant to provisions of Section 3.16 of this Agreement. The key personnel for performance of this Agreement are as follows: Marcus D. Davis, Shareholder; Sam Perera, Project Manager; and Rich Longacre, Field Manager. 3.7 Commission’s Representative. Commission hereby designates Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer, or his or her designee, to act as its representative for the performance of this Agreement ("Commission’s Representative"). Commission's representative shall have the power to act on behalf of Commission for all purposes under this Agreement. Consultant shall not accept direction from any person other than Commission's Representative or his or her designee. 2 182 3.8 Consultant’s Representative. Consultant hereby designates Marcus D. Davis, or his or her designee, to act as its representative for the performance of this Agreement ("Consultant’s Representative"). Consultant’s Representative shall have full authority to represent and act on behalf of the Consultant for all purposes under this Agreement. The Consultant’s Representative shall supervise and direct the Services, using his or her best skill and attention, and shall be responsible for all means, methods, techniques, sequences and procedures and for the satisfactory coordination of all portions of the Services under this Agreement. 3.9 Coordination of Services. Consultant agrees to work closely with Commission staff in the performance of Services and shall be available to Commission's staff, consultants and other staff at all reasonable times. 3.10 Standard of Care; Licenses. Consultant shall perform the Services under this Agreement in a skillful and competent manner, consistent with the standard generally recognized as being employed by professionals in the same discipline in the State of California. Consultant represents and maintains that it is skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform the Services. Consultant warrants that all employees and subcontractors shall have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. Finally, Consultant represents that it, its employees and subcontractors have all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services and that such licenses and approvals shall be maintained throughout the term of this Agreement. Consultant shall perform, at its own cost and expense and without reimbursement from Commission, any Services necessary to correct errors or omissions which are caused by the Consultant’s failure to comply with the standard of care provided for herein, and shall be fully responsible to the Commission for all damages and other liabilities provided for in the indemnification provisions of this Agreement arising from the Consultant’s errors and omissions. 3.11 Laws and Regulations. Consultant shall keep itself fully informed of and in compliance with all local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations in any manner affecting the performance of the Project or the Services, including all Cal/OSHA requirements, and shall give all notices required by law. Consultant shall be liable for all violations of such laws and regulations in connection with Services. If the Consultant performs any work knowing it to be contrary to such laws, rules and regulations and without giving written notice to Commission, Consultant shall be solely responsible for all costs arising therefrom. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold Commission, its officials, directors, officers, employees and agents free and harmless, pursuant to the indemnification provisions of this Agreement, from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with such laws, rules or regulations. 3 183 3.12 Insurance. 3.12.1 Time for Compliance. Consultant shall not commence work under this Agreement until it has provided evidence satisfactory to the Commission that it has secured all insurance required under this section. In addition, Consultant shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work on any subcontract until it has secured all insurance required under this section. 3.12.2 Minimum Requirements. Consultant shall, at its expense, procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the Agreement by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. Consultant shall also require all of its subcontractors to procure and maintain the same insurance for the duration of the Agreement. Such insurance shall meet at least the following minimum levels of coverage: (A) Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as the latest version of the following: (1) General Liability: Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001); (2) Automobile Liability: Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form number CA 0001, code 1 (any auto); and (3) Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability: Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer’s Liability Insurance. (B) Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: (1) General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this Agreement/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit; (2) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage; and (3) if Consultant has an employees, Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability: Workers’ Compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California. Employer’s Practices Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident. 3.12.3 Professional Liability. Consultant shall procure and maintain, and require its sub-consultants to procure and maintain, for a period of five (5) years following completion of the Project, errors and omissions liability insurance appropriate to their profession. Such insurance shall be in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per claim. 3.12.4 Insurance Endorsements. The insurance policies shall contain the following provisions, or Consultant shall provide endorsements on forms approved by the Commission to add the following provisions to the insurance policies: (A) General Liability. The general liability policy shall be endorsed to state that: (1) the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the Services or operations 4 184 performed by or on behalf of the Consultant, including materials, parts or equipment furnished in connection with such work; and (2) the insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents, or if excess, shall stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the Consultant’s scheduled underlying coverage. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents shall be excess of the Consultant’s insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it in any way. (B) Automobile Liability. The automobile liability policy shall be endorsed to state that: (1) the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the ownership, operation, maintenance, use, loading or unloading of any auto owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant or for which the Consultant is responsible; and (2) the insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents, or if excess, shall stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the Consultant’s scheduled underlying coverage. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents shall be excess of the Consultant’s insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it in any way. (C) Workers’ Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents for losses paid under the terms of the insurance policy which arise from work performed by the Consultant. (D) All Coverages. Each insurance policy required by this Agreement shall be endorsed to state that: (A) coverage shall not be suspended, voided or canceled except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the Commission; and, (B) any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies, including breaches of warranties, shall not affect coverage provided to the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents. 3.12.5 Deductibles and Self-Insurance Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the Commission. If the Commission does not approve the deductibles or self-insured retentions as presented, Consultant shall guarantee that, at the option of the Commission, either: (1) the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents; or, (2) the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigation costs, claims and administrative and defense expenses. 3.12.6 Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best’s rating no less than A:VIII, licensed to do business in California, and satisfactory to the Commission. 5 185 3.12.7 Verification of Coverage. Consultant shall furnish Commission with original certificates of insurance and endorsements effecting coverage required by this Agreement on forms satisfactory to the Commission. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy shall be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All certificates and endorsements must be received and approved by the Commission before work commences. The Commission reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. 3.13 Safety. Consultant shall execute and maintain its work so as to avoid injury or damage to any person or property. In carrying out its Services, the Consultant shall at all times be in compliance with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations, and shall exercise all necessary precautions for the safety of employees appropriate to the nature of the work and the conditions under which the work is to be performed. Safety precautions as applicable shall include, but shall not be limited to: (A) adequate life protection and life saving equipment and procedures; (B) instructions in accident prevention for all employees and subcontractors, such as safe walkways, scaffolds, fall protection ladders, bridges, gang planks, confined space procedures, trenching and shoring, equipment and other safety devices, equipment and wearing apparel as are necessary or lawfully required to prevent accidents or injuries; and (C) adequate facilities for the proper inspection and maintenance of all safety measures. 3.14 Fees and Payment. 3.14.1 Compensation. Consultant shall receive compensation, including authorized reimbursements, for all Services rendered under this Agreement at the rates set forth in Exhibit "C" attached hereto. The total compensation shall not exceed ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($100,000) without written approval of Commission's Executive Director (“Total Compensation”). Extra Work may be authorized, as described below, and if authorized, will be compensated at the rates and manner set forth in this Agreement. 3.14.2 Payment of Compensation. Consultant shall submit to Commission a monthly statement which indicates work completed and hours of Services rendered by Consultant. The statement shall describe the amount of Services and supplies provided since the initial commencement date, or since the start of the subsequent billing periods, as appropriate, through the date of the statement. Commission shall, within 45 days of receiving such statement, review the statement and pay all approved charges thereon. 3.14.3 Reimbursement for Expenses. Consultant shall not be reimbursed for any expenses unless authorized in writing by Commission. 3.14.4 Extra Work. At any time during the term of this Agreement, Commission may request that Consultant perform Extra Work. As used herein, "Extra Work" means any work which is determined by Commission to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which the parties did not reasonably anticipate would be 6 186 necessary at the execution of this Agreement. Consultant shall not perform, nor be compensated for, Extra Work without written authorization from Commission's Executive Director. 3.15 Accounting Records. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to all costs and expenses incurred and fees charged under this Agreement. All such records shall be clearly identifiable. Consultant shall allow a representative of Commission during normal business hours to examine, audit, and make transcripts or copies of such records and any other documents created pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to the Agreement for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment under this Agreement. 3.16 Termination of Agreement. 3.16.1 Grounds for Termination. Commission may, by written notice to Consultant, terminate the whole or any part of this Agreement at any time and without cause by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination, and specifying the effective date thereof. Upon termination, Consultant shall be compensated only for those services which have been fully and adequately rendered to Commission through the effective date of the termination, and Consultant shall be entitled to no further compensation. Consultant may not terminate this Agreement except for cause. 3.16.2 Effect of Termination. If this Agreement is terminated as provided herein, Commission may require Consultant to provide all finished or unfinished Documents and Data, as defined below, and other information of any kind prepared by Consultant in connection with the performance of Services under this Agreement. Consultant shall be required to provide such document and other information within fifteen (15) days of the request. 3.16.3 Additional Services. In the event this Agreement is terminated in whole or in part as provided herein, Commission may procure, upon such terms and in such manner as it may determine appropriate, services similar to those terminated. 3.17 Delivery of Notices. All notices permitted or required under this Agreement shall be given to the respective parties at the following address, or at such other address as the respective parties may provide in writing for this purpose: 7 187 CONSULTANT: COMMISSION: Riverside County Mayer Hoffman McCann P.C. Transportation Commission 2301 Dupont Drive, Suite 200 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Irvine, CA 92663 Riverside, CA 92501 Attn: Marcus D. Davis Attn: Eric Haley Such notice shall be deemed made when personally delivered or when mailed, forty-eight (48) hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class postage prepaid and addressed to the party at its applicable address. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred, regardless of the method of service. 3.18 Ownership of Materials/Confidentiality. 3.18.1 Documents & Data. This Agreement creates an exclusive and perpetual license for Commission to copy, use, modify, reuse, or sub-license any and all copyrights and designs embodied in plans, specifications, studies, drawings, estimates, materials, data and other documents or works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, including but not limited to, physical drawings or data magnetically or otherwise recorded on computer diskettes, which are prepared or caused to be prepared by Consultant under this Agreement (“Documents & Data”). Consultant shall require all subcontractors to agree in writing that Commission is granted an exclusive and perpetual license for any Documents & Data the subcontractor prepares under this Agreement. Consultant represents and warrants that Consultant has the legal right to grant the exclusive and perpetual license for all such Documents & Data. Consultant makes no such representation and warranty in regard to Documents & Data which were prepared by design professionals other than Consultant or provided to Consultant by the Commission. Commission shall not be limited in any way in its use of the Documents & Data at any time, provided that any such use not within the purposes intended by this Agreement shall be at Commission’s sole risk. 3.18.2 Intellectual Property. In addition, Commission shall have and retain all right, title and interest (including copyright, patent, trade secret and other proprietary rights) in all plans, specifications, studies, drawings, estimates, materials, data, computer programs or software and source code, enhancements, documents, and any and all works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium or expression, including but not limited to, physical drawings or other data magnetically or otherwise recorded on computer media (“Intellectual Property”) prepared or developed by or on behalf of Consultant under this Agreement as well as any other such Intellectual Property prepared or developed by or on behalf of Consultant under this Agreement. 8 188 The Commission shall have and retain all right, title and interest in Intellectual Property developed or modified under this Agreement whether or not paid for wholly or in part by Commission, whether or not developed in conjunction with Consultant, and whether or not developed by Consultant. Consultant will execute separate written assignments of any and all rights to the above referenced Intellectual Property upon request of Commission. Consultant shall also be responsible to obtain in writing separate written assignments from any subcontractors or agents of Consultant of any and all right to the above referenced Intellectual Property. Should Consultant, either during or following termination of this Agreement, desire to use any of the above-referenced Intellectual Property, it shall first obtain the written approval of the Commission. All materials and documents which were developed or prepared by the Consultant for general use prior to the execution of this Agreement and which are not the copyright of any other party or publicly available and any other computer applications, shall continue to be the property of the Consultant. However, unless otherwise identified and stated prior to execution of this Agreement, Consultant represents and warrants that it has the right to grant the exclusive and perpetual license for all such Intellectual Property as provided herein. Commission further is granted by Consultant a non-exclusive and perpetual license to copy, use, modify or sub-license any and all Intellectual Property otherwise owned by Consultant which is the basis or foundation for any derivative, collective, insurrectional, or supplemental work created under this Agreement. 3.18.3 Confidentiality. All ideas, memoranda, specifications, plans, procedures, drawings, descriptions, computer program data, input record data, written information, and other Documents and Data either created by or provided to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement shall be held confidential by Consultant. Such materials shall not, without the prior written consent of Commission, be used by Consultant for any purposes other than the performance of the Services. Nor shall such materials be disclosed to any person or entity not connected with the performance of the Services or the Project. Nothing furnished to Consultant which is otherwise known to Consultant or is generally known, or has become known, to the related industry shall be deemed confidential. Consultant shall not use Commission's name or insignia, photographs of the Project, or any publicity pertaining to the Services or the Project in any magazine, trade paper, newspaper, television or radio production or other similar medium without the prior written consent of Commission. 3.19 Cooperation; Further Acts. The Parties shall fully cooperate with one another, and shall take any additional acts or sign any additional documents as may be necessary, appropriate or convenient to attain the purposes of this Agreement. 3.20 Attorney's Fees. If either party commences an action against the other party, either legal, administrative or otherwise, arising out of or in connection with this 9 189 Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to have and recover from the losing party reasonable attorney's fees and costs of such actions. 3.21 Indemnification. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, agents and volunteers free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to any alleged negligent acts, omissions or willful misconduct of Consultant, its officials, officers, employees, agents, consultants and contractors arising out of or in connection with the performance of the Services, the Project or this Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all consequential damages and attorneys fees and other related costs and expenses. Consultant shall defend, at Consultant's own cost, expense and risk, any and all such aforesaid suits, actions or other legal proceedings of every kind that may be brought or instituted against Commission or its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, agents and volunteers. Consultant shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against Commission or its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, agents and volunteers, in any such suit, action or other legal proceeding. Consultant shall reimburse Commission and its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, agents and/or volunteers, for any and all legal expenses and costs incurred by each of them in connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity herein provided. Consultant's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by Commission or its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, agents and volunteers. The indemnification language above shall apply except as to design professional services, as defined in Civil Code section 2782.8, including any architect, landscape architect, and engineer or land surveyor services, provided pursuant to this Agreement. As to such Services, to the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, volunteers, and agents free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to any alleged negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Consultant, its officials, officers, employees, agents, consultants, and contractors arising out of or in connection with the performance of the Services, including without limitation the payment of all consequential damages, expert witness fees, and attorneys fees and other related costs and expenses. Consultant shall defend, at Consultant’s own cost, expense and risk, any and all such aforesaid suits, actions or other legal proceedings of every kind that may be brought or instituted against the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, agents, consultants, employees and volunteers. Consultant shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against the Commission or its directors, officials, officers, agents, consultants, employees and volunteers, in any such suit, action or other legal proceeding. Consultant shall reimburse the Commission and its directors, officials, officers, agents, consultants, employees and volunteers, for any and all legal expenses and costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees, incurred by each of them in connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity herein provided. Consultant’s obligation to 10 190 indemnity shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by the Commission or its directors, officials, officers, agents, consultants, employees and volunteers. 3.22 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire Agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior negotiations, understandings or agreements. This Agreement may only be modified by a writing signed by both parties. 3.23 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in Riverside County. 3.24 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement. 3.25 Commission's Right to Employ Other Consultants. The Commission reserves the right to employ other consultants in connection with this Project. 3.26 Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding on the successors and assigns of the parties, and shall not be assigned by Consultant without the prior written consent of Commission. 3.27 Prohibited Interests. 3.27.1 Solicitation. Consultant maintains and warrants that it has not employed nor retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, to solicit or secure this Agreement. Further, Consultant warrants that it has not paid nor has it agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, Commission shall have the right to rescind this Agreement without liability. 3.27.2 Conflict of Interest. For the term of this Agreement, no member, officer or employee of Commission, during the term of his or her service with Commission, shall have any direct interest in this Agreement, or obtain any present or anticipated material benefit arising therefrom. 3.28 Equal Opportunity Employment. Consultant represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and it shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex or age. Such non-discrimination shall include, but not be limited to, all activities related to initial employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination. Consultant shall also comply with all relevant provisions of Commission's Disadvantaged Business Enterprise program, Affirmative Action Plan or other related Commission programs or guidelines currently in effect or hereinafter enacted. 11 191 3.29 Subcontracting. Consultant shall not subcontract any portion of the work or Services required by this Agreement, except as expressly stated herein, without prior written approval of the Commission. Subcontracts, if any, shall contain a provision making them subject to all provisions stipulated in this Agreement. 3.30 No Waiver. Failure of Commission to insist on any one occasion upon strict compliance with any of the terms, covenants or conditions hereof shall not be deemed a waiver of such term, covenant or condition, nor shall any waiver or relinquishment of any rights or powers hereunder at any one time or more times be deemed a waiver or relinquishment of such other right or power at any other time or times. [Signatures on following page] 12 192 SIGNATURE PAGE TO AGREEMENT FOR INTERNAL AUDIT SERVICES IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement was executed on the date first written above. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MAYER HOFFMAN McCANN P.C. By: __________________________ By: ____________________________ Terry Henderson Marcus D. Davis Chair Shareholder Approved as to Form: By: ____________________________ Best, Best & Krieger LLP General Counsel 13 193 EXHIBIT "A" SCOPE OF SERVICES The selected audit firm (Consultant) will report directly to the audit oversight committee designated by the Commission. The Accounting and Human Resources Manager is designated as the day to day staff coordinator of the internal audit program matters; the Chief Financial Officer will serve as the liaison to the audit oversight committee designated by the Commission. The following areas are intended to be guidelines as to the type of assignments that may be addressed by the Consultant: • Construction and Engineering Audits – Audits of construction or engineering projects may include reviews of existing construction or engineering contracts for compliance with the terms of the contract or pre-award/post-award reviews of construction related projects. • Information Systems Audits – Information systems audits of Commission applications, including potential reviews of hardware and software and related controls. These reviews may be related to a proposed system development project or to an existing application. • Investigative Reviews – These reviews would generally involve employees or vendors and include reviewing the accuracy and completeness of information provided to the Commission. • Contract Closeout – These audits involve reviewing the contract for goods/services received by the Commission and validation of charges billed to the Commission. • Special Reviews – These reviews will be performed as requested by management or the audit oversight committee designated by the Commission. • Administrative Assistance – Administrative assistance in the areas of policy and procurement development (both office and program related), review and improvement of business practices, and development and implementation of operating procedures and other assistance needed. The Consultant will report to the audit oversight committee designated by the Commission on a quarterly basis as to the status of current internal audits and progress on improvements recommended by previous audits, if applicable. An audit report will be issued for each scope-defined audit. The contents of the audit report will vary depending on the issues or problems disclosed and the nature of the audit. All formal reports from the Consultant will be first reviewed with the audit oversight committee designated by the Commission. Each audit report will contain, as a minimum, the following elements: • The objective and scope of the engagement; A-1 194 " A m a n a g e m e n t s u m m a r y o f t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e a u d i t ; " T h e s p e c i f i c f i n d i n g s , w i t h a d e q u a t e d e s c r i p t i o n s o f w e a k n e s s e s i d e n t i f i e d ; " T h e a p p r o p r i a t e a n d r e a s o n a b l e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s t o c o r r e c t t h e i d e n t i f i e d w e a k n e s s e s ; a n d " R e s p o n s e t o f i n d i n g s a n d r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s b y r e s p o n s i b l e C o m m i s s i o n M a n a g e r a n d D i r e c t o r . A - 2 1 9 5 EXHIBIT "C" COMPENSATION Consultant’s hourly rates, which are fully loaded and include all overhead, for the Services to be performed from November 1, 2007 through October 31, 2010 shall be at the following hourly rates: Professional Level 11/1/07-10/31/08 11/1/08-10/31/09 11/1/09-10/31/10 Shareholder $ 140 $ 144 $ 148 Senior Manager $ 120 $ 124 $ 128 Manager $ 110 $ 113 $ 116 Senior Associate $ 95 $ 98 $ 101 Associate $ 85 $ 88 $ 91 Consultant shall be reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses at cost at an amount not to exceed 10% of total professional fees. Hourly rates for the Services to be performed during each of the two one-year option periods shall be determined during the exercise of such option periods. A task order will be issued for each audit project based on a cost proposal submitted by Consultant and accepted by the Commission. Compensation shall not exceed amount indicated in the task order. C-1 196 AGENDA ITEM 9 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 10, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Shirley Medina, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: 2009 Measure A $300 Million Western Riverside County Regional Arterial Call for Projects BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to direct staff to release a call for projects for 2009 Measure A Western Riverside County Regional Arterial funds in the amount of $300 million. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The 2009 Measure A identified $300 million over the life of the measure to fund regional arterial projects in Western County. The intent of this program is to fund capacity enhancements that are identified on the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) backbone network including roadways specifically listed in the ordinance and included in the call for projects (Attachment 1). The 2009 Measure A Western County Regional Arterial funds are also intended to complement TUMF backbone funded projects where additional TUMF funding above the eligibility amount may be needed. Measure A Regional Arterial funds are not meant to replace committed TUMF or local funding. The 2009 Measure A call for projects was developed by staff and a subcommittee of the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). The subcommittee reviewed prior calls for projects as a basis to develop the Western County Regional Arterial call for projects. The schedule for the call for projects is as follows: TAC Approval September 17, 2007 Commission Approval October 10, 2007 Release of Call for Projects October 17, 2007 Deadline for Project Applications December 15, 2007 Convene TAC for Project Evaluations January, 2008 Commission Approval of Selected Projects for Funding February, 2008 Agenda Item 9 197 Agencies will be allowed to submit three projects each. The county of Riverside will be allowed to submit three projects per supervisorial district. The target date for implementation of the approved projects is by 2015. While the funding source for the selected projects is 2009 Measure A Western County Regional Arterial funds, it may be necessary to issue debt to finance these projects. Some projects may commence prior to the July 1, 2009 effective date of the 2009 Measure A; therefore, an increase in the commercial paper program amount may be necessary to advance projects that are ready before the 2009 Measure A begins. Additionally, the call for projects is based on the $300 million of revenues expected to be generated over the 30-year term of the 2009 Measure A; however, the implementation date for the selected projects is by 2015. Accordingly, it may be necessary to issue long-term debt to finance the costs of these projects that will be completed during the first 10-year period of the 2009 Measure A. Finally, the financing of all or part of the $300 million may have a significant impact on the $500 million debt limitation for the 2009 Measure A. The intent of this call for projects is to program the entire $300 million 2009 Measure A Western County Regional Arterial funds and implement the approved projects within the first 10 years of the 2009 Measure A. The fiscal impact of the call for projects on the 2009 Measure A Western County Regional Arterial program is uncertain, and the estimated cost of the approved projects cannot be determined until all project submittals are evaluated. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: N/A Year: FY 2009-15 Amount: $300,000,000 Source of Funds: 2009 Measure A Regional Arterial Budget Adjustment: N/A GLA No.: 266 72 81XXX Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 09/19/2007 Attachment: Draft 2009 Measure A Western County Regional Arterials $300 Million Call for Projects Agenda Item 9 198 - DRAFT - 2009 MEASURE A WESTERN COUNTY REGIONAL ARTERIALS $300 MILLION CALL FOR PROJECTS The 2009 Measure A included a category of funding for the Regional Arterial System. The Regional Arterial System component is described in Ordinance 02-001 as follows: “The freeway and state highway system can no longer be expected to handle the traffic demands for travel between and through the cities of the Western County area, with the development projected for the future. A system of regional arterials (major local roadways) with limited access, freeway interchanges, grade separations, and coordinated traffic signals are needed to supplement the highway backbone system. The Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG), in conjunction with the cities and the County, has developed this system of roadways to meet this need. This roadway system will be periodically updated by the Commission, or the WRCOG, to reflect actual development trends. Funding to widen existing roads and construct new roads on this system will be funded by an estimated $300 million in revenues generated by Measure A and by matching revenues to be generated by the cities and County implementing a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) administered by the Commission or the WRCOG. Examples of the roadways on the regional arterial system that may be eligible to receive Measure A and TUMF funding for widening and other improvements to increase capacity and traffic flow are: • Van Buren Blvd from I-215 to SR-60 • Alessandro Blvd from I-215 westerly to Central Ave • Central Ave from Alessandro Blvd to Van Buren Blvd • Arlington Ave from Central Ave to Van Buren Blvd • Green River Rd from Dominguez Ranch Rd to SR-91 • Foothill Parkway from Lincoln Ave to Green River Rd • Scott Rd from SR-79 to I-215 • Clinton Keith Rd from SR-79 to I-215 • Date Street from SR-79 to I-15 • SR-79/I-10 Interchange Improvements and possible bypass to I-10 • Ramsey St from Banning City Limits to Field Rd • Ramona Expressway from San Jacinto to I-215 • Cajalco Rd from I-215 to I-15 • Perris Blvd from SR-74 to San Bernardino Co Line • Pyrite Street from San Bernardino County Line to SR-60 199 - DRAFT - • Schleisman Rd from San Bernardino County Line to I-15 and Arlington Avenue • Domenigoni Pkwy from State St to I-215 • Railroad Canyon/Newport Road from I-215 to I-15 The final scope and project limits of all improvements proposed for the regional arterial system will be determined through noticed public hearings, environmental clearance process, and agreement with affected agencies.” Project Eligibility and Basic Assumptions: • Projects listed in the Measure A ballot and/or included in the “backbone” TUMF network are eligible for this Call for Projects. • Measure A Regional Arterial funding should not replace already committed TUMF or Local funds. A local fund commitment is represented as funds appropriated in the agency’s annual budget that is adopted by the council/board. • It is the intention of the Regional Arterial program to match the Measure funds on a dollar for dollar (50%) basis. However, projects will still be eligible if the match is lesser than 50%. More points will be given to projects with higher match rates. • Agencies may submit up to three (3) project applications. The County of Riverside may submit up to three (3) project applications per supervisorial district. • The target construction date for projects that are approved under this call for projects is 2015. Projects must demonstrate that they can begin construction by 2015. • RCTC will monitor project progress and will rescind fund allocations if reasonable progress is not being made. • Measure A Regional Arterial funds will be made available for ALL project phases (PA&ED, PS&E, R/W, and Construction). • RCTC staff will review project schedules to determine if they are reasonably feasible. Adjustments to schedules may be made by RCTC staff for programming purposes where appropriate. • The Scope of Work under this call for projects is for capacity enhancements. Rehabilitation and maintenance work/costs are not eligible for Measure A Regional Arterial funds. Work activities that are part of and within the limits of a capacity enhancement project (e.g. 200 - DRAFT - rehabilitation/overlays, curb gutter, sidewalk, etc.) are eligible project costs. Landscaping, irrigation, and other “softscape” activities are not eligible. • Projects funded by the Measure A Regional Arterial program will continue to be included in the TUMF calculation to ensure that Measure funding does not replace TUMF funding. EVALUATION CRITERIA The following criteria will be used to evaluate project applications: I. Emphasis on Measure A Program Projects listed on the Measure A Ballot and/or included in the backbone TUMF network that are not expected to be funded from anticipated revenues. Scoring: 0 to 3 points, 0 if not applicable Indicators Points If project is on Measure A Ballot AND TUMF Backbone 3 If project is on Measure A Ballot only 2 If project is on TUMF Backbone only 1 Total number of points given will not exceed 3. II. Regional Significance Projects that are regional, multi-jurisdictional, identified on the Congestion Management Program System, CETAP network in Western Riverside County, or Western Riverside County TUMF Backbone network. Project applicants are required to submit 2030 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) using a transportation computer model consistent with the Southern California Association of Governments’ (SCAG) regional transportation model. Project applicants should obtain 2030 ADT numbers from WRCOG. Project applicants have the option to provide supplemental information if the model results show 2030 ADT to be unrealistic (e.g. model results for the year 2030 are at or near current traffic conditions). The Evaluation Committee will consider the supplemental information; however, it is not guaranteed that the information will be used to substitute model information. 201 - DRAFT - Scoring: 0 to 3 points, 0 if not applicable The Scoring delineation for ADT in the year 2030 is as follows: 2030 ADT Points 50,000 and above 3 30,000 – 49,999 2 10,000 – 29,999 1 9,999 – and below 0 If an agency wishes to provide supplemental information regarding ADT, they may do so in the space below. Supplemental information regarding ADT: III. Project Readiness Project applicants will provide project implementation status. Projects closest to construction will be given the highest level of points. Points will be given based on documentation of completed phases or work in progress. Scoring: 0 to 3 points, 0 if not applicable The Scoring delineation is as follows: Level of Project Readiness Points Ready for construction, r/w certified 3 Completed Design 2 Completed Environmental 1 Preliminary Work 0 Describe the project implementation status and provide documentation of completed work or work in progress: 202 - DRAFT - IV. Safety Project applicants must describe how the project will improve safety. Scoring: 0 to 3 points, 0 if project will not result in safety improvement Projects will be scored on a 0 – 3 point range based upon the qualitative information that describes how the project will eliminate or significantly reduce an existing or future safety problem. The Evaluation Committee will determine what constitutes high, medium, and low safety benefits at the time of project evaluations. Provide a qualitative description on how the project will improve safety: V. Congestion Mitigation Project Applicants must provide detailed information on how the project will improve congestion: The Project will provide Congestion Mitigation as follows: Congestion Mitigation will be measured by Level of Service. Project applicants are required to submit 2030 LOS from the WRCOG TUMF model network. 203 - DRAFT - LOS for project:_______________ Project applicants have the option to provide supplemental information if model results show 2030 LOS does not accurately depict the overall congestion benefit that the project will yield. The Evaluation Committee will consider the supplemental information; however, it is not guaranteed that the information will be used to substitute model information. Supplemental information regarding LOS/Congestion benefit: Scoring: 0 to 3 points 3 points = High Congestion Benefit 2 points = Medium Congestion Benefit 1 point = Low Congestion Benefit 0 point = No Congestion Benefit The TAC Evaluation Committee will determine high, medium, and low congestion benefits at the time of project evaluations. VI. Matching Funds Projects need to maximize TUMF eligibility costs. Projects that include local match funds will be given points based on the percentage of local funds committed to the total project cost. Local match funds must be committed by the local agency through a resolution or council/board action. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program funds that will be designated as local match must be committed through a WRCOG or RCTC board action. Scoring: 0 to 5 points, Percent Points 75% and above 5 60% - 74% 4 50% - 59% 3 30% - 49% match 2 204 - DRAFT - 10% - 29% match 1 9% or less 0 VII. System Continuity Projects that will complete the continuity of an existing road system. Examples of projects under System Continuity include: 1. Elimination of bottle-necks (lane widening and interchange improvements); 2. Gap closures (new connections); and 3. Elimination of obstruction (grade separation, bridge over roadway, river, storm drain channel, etc.). Scoring: 0 – 3 points. 0 if not applicable Indicator Points Multi-jurisdictional (project located in more than one jurisdiction, and freeway interchanges) 3 Gap Closure 2 Full elimination of obstruction/bottleneck 2 Partial elimination of obstruction 1 If the project meets more than one of the above indicators, the points will be summed. Total number of points given will not exceed 3. Project Applicants must complete the information below: Describe how the project meets the System Continuity criterion: Describe which of the above indicator(s) this project meets: 205 - DRAFT - Other related System Continuity Benefits: Number of Existing Lanes: Number of Lanes after the improvement: 206