Loading...
05 May 24, 2010 Western Riverside County Programs and Projects89191 RECORDS RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA TIME: 1:30 p.m. DATE: Monday, May 24, 2010 LOCATION: BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside W- COMMITTEE MEMBERS -V Karen Spiegel, Chair / Steve Nolan, City of Corona Bonnie Flickinger, Vice Chair / Jesse Molina, City of Moreno Valley Bob Botts / Don Robinson, City of Banning Wallace Edgerton / Darcy Kuenzi, City of Menifee Malcolm Miller / Kathy Azevedo, City of Norco Daryl Busch / Al Landers, City of Perris Steve Di Memmo / Vacant, City of San Jacinto Scott Farnam / Bridgette Moore, City of Wildomar Bob Buster, County of Riverside, District 1 Marion Ashley, County of Riverside, District V W. STAFF eV Anne Mayer, Executive Director John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director W- AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY -4t Air Quality, Capital Projects, Communications and Outreach Programs, Congestion Management Program (CMP), Intermodal Programs, Motorist Services (ie. SAFE/Freeway Service Patrol), New Corridors, Regional Agencies/Regional Planning, Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program related to Western Riverside County and other areas as may be prescribed by the Commission. Comments are welcomed by the Committee. if you wish to provide comments to the Committee, please complete and submit a Speaker Card to the Clerk of the Board. 11.36.54 • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE www.rctc.org AGENDA * *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 1:30 p.m. Monday, May 24, 2010 BOARD ROOM County Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor Riverside, California In compliance with the Brown Act and Government Code Section 54957.5, agenda materials distributed 72 hours prior to the meeting, which are public records relating to open session agenda items, will be available for inspection by members of the public prior to the meeting at the Commission office, 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor, Riverside, CA, and on the Commission's website, www.rctc.org. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Government Code Section 54954.2, if you need special assistance to participate in a Committee meeting, please contact the Clerk of the Board at (951) 787-7141. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to meeting time will assist staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility at the meeting. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS - Each individual speaker is limited to speak three (3) continuous minutes or less. The Committee may, either at the direction of the Chair or by majority vote of the Committee, 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. Also, the Committee may terminate public comments if such comments become repetitious. in addition, the maximum time for public comment for any individual item or topic is thirty (30) minutes. Speakers may not yield their time to others without the consent of the Chair. Any written documents to be distributed or presented to the Committee shall be submitted to the Clerk of the Board. This policy applies to Public Comments and comments on Agenda Items. Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee May 24, 2010 Page 2 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 - APRIL 26, 2010 6. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS (The Committee may add an item to the Agenda after making a finding that there is a need to take immediate action on the item and that the item came to the attention of the Committee subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action adding an item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the Committee. If there are less than 2/3 of the Committee members present, adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote. Added items will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda.) DESIGNATION OF A LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE FOR THE STATE ROUTE 91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Overview This item is for the Committee to: Page 1 1) Designate Alternative 2, the General Purpose (GP) + Express Lanes alternative, as the Commission's locally preferred alternative for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP); and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 8. AGREEMENT WITH LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. AND ICF INTERNATIONAL FOR ON -CALL ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES Overview This item is for the Committee to: Page 11 1) Award the following agreements to provide on -call environmental consulting services for a three-year term in an amount not to exceed $600,000 each, for a total aggregate amount of $1,200,000: a) Agreement No. 10-31-083-00 to LSA Associates, Inc; and b) Agreement No. 10-31-101-00 to ICF International; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission; 3) Authorize the Executive Director, to execute task orders awarded to. these consultants under the terms of the agreements; and 4) Forward to the Commission for final action. • • • Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee May 24, 2010 Page 3 9. AMENDMENTS TO AGREEMENTS WITH DAVID EVANS & ASSOCIATES, PROJECT DESIGN CONSULTANTS, AND PSOMAS FOR ON -CALL RIGHT OF WAY ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING SERVICES Page 68 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the following agreements for on -call right of way engineering and surveying services for the aggregate amount of $450,000; a) Agreement No. 07-33-143-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 07-33-143-00, with David Evans & Associates; b) Agreement No. 07-33-145-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 07-33-145-00, with Project Design Consultants; and c) Agreement No. 07-33-144-02, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 07-33-144-00, with Psomas; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 10. PROPOSED METROLINK BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 Overview This item is for the Committee to: Page 70 1 } Adopt the preliminary FY 2010/11 Metrolink operating and capital budget; 2) Allocate the Commission's funding commitment to the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) in an amount not to exceed of $8 million including contingency, in Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds for train operations and maintenance of way, and $1,224,700 for capital projects to be funded by Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5307 funds; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee May 24, 2010 Page 4 11. AMENDMENT TO COMMISSION'S COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM FISCAL• YEAR 2006/07 AND FISCAL YEAR 2009/10 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLANS Page 75 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Amend the FY 2006/07 Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) to reflect a reallocation of $4 million in Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5307 program funds originally approved for the North Main Corona parking structure to the Perris Valley Line (PVL) project; 2) Amend the Commission's Commuter Rail Program's FY 2009/10 SRTP to reflect allocation of $9.975 million in FTA Section 5309 program funds and deobligation of $8.8 million in Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds and $1.175 million in State Transit Assistance (STA) funds for the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) rail car procurement project and reduction of LTF Capital Improvement Program expenditures by $480,000; 3) Approve reductions to budgeted revenues and expenditures in the LTF, STA, Rail Operations, and Rail Capital funds; and 4) Forward to the Commission for final action. 12. FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 MEASURE A COMMUTER ASSISTANCE BUSPOOL SUBSIDY FUNDING CONTINUATION REQUESTS Overview This item is for the Committee to: Page 80 1) Authorize payment of $1,645/month maximum per buspool for the period July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2011 to the existing Corona, Mira Loma, and Riverside buspools; 2) Require subsidy recipients to meet monthly buspool reporting requirements as supporting documentation to receive payments; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 13. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA 14. COMMISSIONERS / STAFF REPORT Overview • This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and staff to report • on attended and upcoming meeting/conferences and issues related to Commission activities. Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee May 24, 2010 Page 5 • 15. ADJOURNMENT AND NEXT MEETING The next Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee meeting is scheduled to be held at 1:30 p.m., Monday, June 28, 2010, Board Chambers, First Floo r, County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE ROLL CALL May 24, 2010 Present Absent County of Riverside, District I O County of Riverside, District V O City of Banning O City of Corona O City of Menifee O City of Moreno Valley ,� O City of Norco O City of Perris O City of San Jacinto � O City of Wildomar O RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS SIGN -IN SHEET MAY 24, 2010 NAME AGENCY E MAIL ADDRESS -c-c\---°- (0.- P (..,, (--Do n-P 2 t' �cE d6, Z i o et: _)----) _ e(--. t1 % i` �_ C� ob t3d-Vs � �-o� IV kw l c.f � � l �eA At of -Go g 6(i/fzect /0-0041i69;/- 7-� �r✓N. � e.Ij I41.2 cs-R.... AAl E,vi 1%4'4-c-EcV is\".'i1-r LU7:"( l44f4 L--(:_"--7 fr C-r-- n VQt,,,/ e/7._ ccc,f_};17 `5122/&---1, Ywisim--a 0,j 6 SoN 3ekwv:1-0 • AGENDA ITEM 5 MINUTES • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE Monday, April 26, 2010 MINUTES 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting of the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee was called to order by Chair Karen Spiegel at 1:33 p.m., in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California, 92501. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE • 3. • At this time, Vice Chair Bonnie Flickinger led the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee in a flag salute. ROLL CALL Members/Alternates Present Marion Ashley Bob Botts Daryl Busch Bob Buster Wallace Edgerton Scott Farnam Bonnie Flickinger Karen Spiegel Members Absent Steve Di Memmo Malcolm Miller 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no requests to speak from the public. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - FEBRUARY 22 AND MARCH 22, 2010 M/S/C (Flickinger/Farnam) to approve the minutes of February 22 and March 22, 2010, as submitted. Abstain: Spiegel - March 22, 2010 RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes April 26, 2010 Page 2 6. ADDITIONS / REVISIONS John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director, requested the Committee add "State Route 60/Interstate 215 East Junction Interchange Local Match Requirement" as a late breaking item. This item arose after the agenda was posted and mailed, and there is a need for this item be addressed by the Committee at this time. M/S/C (Busch/Botts) to add "State Route 60/Interstate 215 East Junction Interchange Local Match Requirement" to the agenda. 7. TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE PROGRAM FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS FOR STATE ROUTE 74/INTERSTATE 215 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR CONSTRUCTION AND RIGHT OF WAY Shirley Medina, Programming and Planning Manager, provided a brief overview of the TUMF program funding agreement with Western Riverside Council of Governments for 74/215 interchange improvement project for construction and right of way. M/S/C (Ashley/Busch) to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 10-31-090-00 with Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) for $8.8 million in Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Central Zone funding for the construction phase of the 74/215 interchange improvement project; 2) Approve Amendment No. 05-31-566-02, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 05-31-566-00, with WRCOG to increase the right of way phase by $1.8 million to be funded with $900,000 of TUMF Central Zone funds and $900,000 of Measure A funds to address a cost increase; 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission; and 4) Forward to the Commission for final action. • • RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes April 26, 2010 Page 3 • 8. • • AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE STATE ROUTE 74/INTERSTATE 215 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IN THE CITY OF PERRIS, AND CONSTRUCTION DESIGN SUPPORT Lisa DaSilva, Capital Projects Manager, provided an overview of the agreement for construction of the 74/215 interchange improvement project and the amendment for construction design support. In response to Chair Spiegel's question, Lisa DaSilva clarified the difference between in the final numbers. John Standiford announced the groundbreaking ceremony will take place in June and details will follow. M/S/C (Busch/Ashley) to: 1) Award Agreement No. 10-31-030-00 for the construction of the 74/215 interchange improvement project in the city of Perris (Perris) to Skanska USA Civil West (Skanska) for the amount of $13,439,004 plus a contingency amount of $1,343,996 for potential change orders during construction, for a total not to exceed contract authorization of $14,783,000; 2) Approve Agreement No. 07-31-122-04, Amendment No. 4 to Agreement No. 07-31-122-00, with David Evans and Associates, Inc. (DEA) to perform additional design support during the construction of the 74/215 interchange improvement project in the city of Perris for the additional amount of $204,087 resulting in a revised not to exceed amount of $3,303,749; 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission; and 4) Forward to the Commission for final action. RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes April 26, 2010 Page 4 9. AGREEMENTS WITH QUALIFIED CONTRACTORS TO PROVIDE ON -CALL • RIGHT OF WAY APPRAISAL SERVICES FOR RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND AGRICULTURAL PROPERTIES Min Saysay, Right of Way Manager, presented Agenda Items 9 and 10 concurrently. He provided a brief summary of the scope of work for the agreements with qualified contractors to provide on -call right of way appraisal services for residential, commercial, industrial, and agricultural properties. At Vice Chair Flickinger`s request, Min Saysay clarified the appraisal review process. M/S/C (Farnam/Buster) to: 1) Award the following agreements to provide on -call right of way appraisal services for a three-year term, and two one-year options to extend the agreements, in an amount not to exceed an aggregate value of $950,000; a) Agreement No. 10-51-048-00 with Lidgard and Associates; b) Agreement No. 10-51-064-00 with Mason & Mason Real Estate Appraisers & Consultants; c) Agreement No. 10-51-065-00 with Donahue Hawran & Malm LLC; d) Agreement No. 10-51-066-00 with R.P. Laurain & Associates; e) Agreement No. 10-51-067-00 with Riggs & Riggs, Inc.; f) Agreement No. 10-51-068-00 with Hennessey & Hennessey LLC; and g) Agreement No. 10-51-069-00 with Robert Shea Perdue Real Estate Appraisal; 2) Authorize the Executive Director, or designee, to execute task orders awarded to contractors under the terms of the agreements; 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements, including option years, on behalf of the Commission; and 4) Forward to the Commission for final action. • • RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes April 26, 2010 Page 5 10. AGREEMENTS WITH QUALIFIED CONTRACTORS TO PROVIDE ON -CALL RIGHT OF WAY APPRAISAL REVIEW SERVICES FOR RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND AGRICULTURAL PROPERTIES M/S/C (Farnam/Buster) to: 1) Award the following agreements to provide on -call right of way appraisal review services for a three-year term, and two one- year options to extend the agreements, in an amount not to exceed an aggregate value of $500,000; a) Agreement No. 10-51-051-00 with Donahue Hawran & Maim LLC; b) Agreement No. 10-51-070-00 with R.P. Laurain & Associates; c) Agreement No. 10-51 071-00 with Mason & Mason Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants; d) Agreement No. 10-51-072-00 with Hennessey & Hennessey LLC; and e) Agreement No. 10-51-073-00 with Overland Pacific & Cutler Inc.; 2) Authorize the Executive Director, or designee, to execute task orders awarded to contractors under the terms of the agreements; 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements, including option years, on behalf of the Commission; and 4) Forward to the Commission to final action. 11. AGREEMENT FOR UTILITY RELOCATION FOR THE STATE ROUTE 60/INTERSTATE 215 EAST JUNCTION HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE LANES CONNECTOR Gina Gallagher, Senior Staff Analyst, provided a brief overview of the agreement for utility relocation for the 60/215 East Junction interchange improvement project. M/S/C (Busch/Ashley) to: 1) Authorize the Executive Director, or designee, to execute an agreement, pursuant to legal counsel review, for utility relocation for the 60/215 East Junction high occupancy vehicle lanes connector project once the design and replacement location are finalized; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes April 26, 2010 Page 6 12. AGREEMENT WITH RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY TO REPAINT THE NORTH • MAIN CORONA PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager, provided a brief overview of the agreement with Riverside Transit Agency to repaint the North Main Corona pedestrian bridge. M/S/C (Busch/Edgerton) to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 10-25-091-00 for a right of entry and reimbursement agreement with Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) to allow for the painting of the North Main Corona pedestrian bridge for a total contract amount not to exceed $175,000; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 13. AGREEMENTS FOR FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL TOW TRUCK SERVICE Brian Cunanan, Commuter Assistance Manager, provided an overview of the freeway service patrol (FSP) program and the agreements for FSP tow truck • service. M/S/C (Farnam/Busch) to: 1) Award Agreement No. 10-45-059-00 to Pepe's Towing Service for tow truck service on Beat No. 1 of the FSP program for a three-year term, and two one-year options to extend the agreement, for a total contract amount not to exceed $1,453,000; 2) Award Agreement No. 10-45-060-00 to Pepe's Towing Service for tow truck service on Beat No. 26 of the FSP program for a three-year term, and two one-year options to extend the agreement, for a total contract amount not to exceed $969,000; 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements, including options years, on behalf of the Commission; and 4) Forward to the Commission for final action. Abstain: Ashley • • • RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes April 26, 2010 Page 7 14. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL COSTS Brian Cunanan provided a brief overview of the cooperative agreement with the State of California Department of Transportation for the reimbursement of construction FSP costs. M/S/C (Busch/Farnam) to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 10-45-085-00 with the State of California Department of Transportation (Ca!trans) for FSP in various construction areas in the County; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 15. FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL FOR FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL SUPERVISION Brian Cunanan provided a brief overview of the funding agreement with the Department of California Highway Patrol for FSP supervision. At Commissioner Daryl Busch's request, Brian Cunanan explained the CHP overtime audit process. M/S/C (Busch/Ashley) to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 10-45-084-00 with the Department of CHP to provide overtime supervision and operation of a FSP program in Riverside County; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes April 26, 2010 Page 8 16. CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE/SOCIAL SERVICES TRANSPORTATION • ADVISORY COMMITTEE Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director, provided a brief overview of the membership of the Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee. M/S/C (Flickinger/Buster) to: 1) Renew the memberships of Michelle Anglin, Peter Benavidez, Jim Collins, Fortunato Penilla, and Eunice Lovi; 2► Appoint LoreIle Moe -Luna as the new Consolidated Transportation Service Agency representative from Riverside Transit Agency(RTA); 3) Approve the memberships for the Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee (CAC/SSTAC) effective January 1, 2010; and 4► Forward to the Commission for final action. 17. CITY OF CORONA JUMP START FUNDING FOR GRADE CROSSINGS Tanya Love, Goods Movement Manager, presented an overview of the reallocation of funds for the city of Corona jump start funding for grade separation projects. M/S/C (Farnam/Busch) to: 1) Reallocate $500,000 in funding from the Smith Avenue and Railroad Street to the McKinley Avenue grade separation project; 2) Approve Agreement No. 08-33-014-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 08-33-014-00, with the city of Corona (Corona) deleting Smith Avenue and Railroad Street from the project list; 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 4) Forward to the Commission for final action. • • RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes April 26, 2010 Page 9 • 18. LATE BREAKING - STATE ROUTE 60/INTERSTATE 215 EAST JUNCTION INTERCHANGE LOCAL MATCH REQUIREMENT Shirley Medina provided an overview on the 60/215 East Junction interchange local match requirement. M/S/C (Flickinger/Ashley) to: 11 Approve Measure A funds to match federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds programmed to the 60/215 East Junction interchange project; 2) Authorize the Executive Director to execute the cooperative agreement amendment with Caltrans to include Measure A match funds; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 19. COMMISSIONERS / STAFF REPORT 19A. Commissioner Flickinger commented on the restriping of the carpool lanes on the SR-60 in Moreno Valley. • 20. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 2:1 1 p.m. Respectfully submitted, BLL V o0, Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board • AGENDA ITEM 7 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 24, 2010 TO: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee FROM: Khalid Bazmi, Toll Projects Manager THROUGH: Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director SUBJECT: Designation of a Locally Preferred Alternative for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Designate Alternative 2, the General Purpose (GP) + Express Lanes alternative, as the Commission's locally preferred alternative for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP); and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Since 2007, the Commission has been working on the SR-91 CIP in partnership with Ca[trans, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), the cities of Corona, Norco, Riverside, and Anaheim, and federal and state resource agencies. Early analyses and discussion for this potential corridor were initiated and studied as part of the Riverside County - Orange County Major Investment Study that was completed in 2005. The SR-91 CIP study team is completing the combined draft environmental impact report/environmental impact statement (EIR/EIS) to comply with both state and federal requirements, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) respectively, and engineering technical studies for two build alternatives. Subsequent geometric variations to the primary alternatives were also identified and evaluated. Now that the technical studies are nearing completion and sufficient information is available for comparison of the project alternatives, staff recommends the Commission designate a locally preferred alternative (LPA). What is the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA)? The project sponsor may choose to designate its LPA once it has determined that one of the project alternatives studied best satisfies the stated need and purpose for the project. Agenda Item 7 Designation of the LPA is consistent with both state and federal environmental processes and does not minimize or compromise the legally prescribed environmental process. All build alternatives carried in the EIR/EIS for consideration are still analyzed and presented at comparable levels of detail. Benefits of Designating an LPA By designating an LPA, the project sponsor publicly discloses which alternative under consideration is favored earlier in the environmental process than by not designating an LPA. This provides all interested parties with the most current project information and project sponsor tendencies, thereby allowing comments to surface earlier with the goal of minimizing delays to the environmental schedule. Designation of an LPA may also facilitate advanced and early and advanced acquisition of rights of way needed for the project and maintain our design -build procurement schedule. Risks of Designating an LPA At -risk efforts that are proposed to be conducted whether or not an LPA designation is made are as follows: At -risk design -build procurement will proceed based on the LPA designation, but bid document rework could be required if the LPA turns out to not be the selected project alternative. At -risk limited acquisition of right of way parcels may occur if they become available on the open market. If project alternative selection later renders the parcels unnecessary, they will need to be sold at market value. DISCUSSION: Project Alternatives In addition to the no -build alternative, there are two build alternatives - Alternative 1: General Purpose Lanes Alternative and Alternative 2: General Purpose + Express Lanes Alternative - that were developed and evaluated through a collaborative process with the project development team. Attachment 1 depicts the two build alternatives. Both build alternatives include interchange and local road system modifications, as well as construction of auxiliary lanes (merging/weaving lanes) at several locations. Key features of Alternative 1: General Purpose Lanes Alternative includes the following features: Construction of an additional general purpose lane in each direction of SR-91 between SR-241 in Orange County. and Pierce Street in the city of Riverside. Agenda Item 7 • 2 • • Construction of direct High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane connectors from eastbound SR-91 to southbound 1-15 and from northbound 1-15 to westbound SR-91. One HOV lane in each direction on 1-15 would extend south to Ontario Avenue from SR-91. Alternative 2, the General Purpose + Express Lanes Alternative, includes the following features: • Construction of an additional general purpose lane in each direction of SR-91 between SR-241 in Orange County and Pierce Street in the city of Riverside. (Same as Alternative 1) • Conversion of the existing SR-91 HOV lane to a tolled Express Lane from the Orange/Riverside County line to 1-15 transitioning back to an HOV lane before Pierce Street. • Addition of a second tolled Express Lane on SR-91 from the Orange/Riverside County Line to 1-15. • Construction of direct tolled Express Lane connectors from eastbound SR-91 to southbound 1-15 and from northbound 1-15 to westbound SR-91. One tolled Express Lane in each direction on 1-15 would extend south to Cajalco Road from SR-91. • Construction of direct tolled Express Lane connectors from eastbound SR-91 to northbound 1-15 and from southbound 1-15 to westbound SR-91. One tolled Express Lane in each direction on 1-15 would extend north to Hidden Valley Parkway from SR-91. In addition to other non -build alternatives, the build alternatives provide a reasonable range of alternatives to address and analyze the stated project need and purpose. It should be noted, however, that any of these alternatives (including the no -project alternative) may ultimately be selected the decision making bodies. Key proposed milestones to date include: 1) Agreement on two primary build alternatives (December 2006); 2) Execution of an interagency project approval and environmental document agreement (January 2008); 3) Evaluation of design variations on two primary build alternatives (October 2008); and 41 Project phasing concept for timely delivery of maximum benefit with available resources (September 2009). Refer to Attachment 3 for more information on the project phasing plan. Again, this plan would only be implemented in the event that a build -alternative is eventually approved. Agenda Item 7 3 Designation of the Locally Preferred Alternative Alternative 2 Alternative 2, the GP + Express Lanes alternative, is the staff recommended LPA because it appears to better satisfy the need and purpose of the project. Key elements of the need and purpose statements are included in Attachment 2, and will be presented in the draft EIR/EIS. While both build alternatives achieve much of the stated project purpose, Alternative 2 appears to improve travel times and reduce congestion more than Alternative 1. Alternative 2 also provides increased flexibility in project funding which, if the project is ultimately approved, would enable project benefits to be realized sooner than would be possible under Alternative 1. Alternative 1 funding is envisioned to be primarily from Measure A, augmented by federal, state, and local fund sources that can be applied to the project. Alternative 2 adds toll revenue bonds and the use of a federal Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act ITIFIA) loan as major, potential additional funding sources that can be applied to the project. While Alternative 2 has a higher construction cost than Alternative 1, financial modeling demonstrates that the additional cost can be more than offset by the projected toll revenues if the project is ultimately approved. Environmental Process The designation of the LPA does not minimize or compromise the legally prescribed environmental process. All build and no -build alternatives being analyzed and considered in the draft EIR/EIS are still treated and presented at comparable levels of detail. The draft EIR/EIS will be released in the summer of 2010 for public and agency comment and review. All comments received will be considered and addressed prior to the Commission's action on any alternative and certification of the EIR under CEQA. The design build contract for final design and construction would occur only after environmental review under CEQA and NEPA approval is obtained. The Committee's selection of a locally preferred alternative in no way commits decision makers to approving the project, but is instead a way to provide more focused environmental review and increase public disclosures related to the potential build alternatives. Following the Commission's action, the Commission will request concurrence from Ca!trans las the NEPA delegated agency) on identification of the locally preferred alternative in the Final EIR/EIS. A request will be made pursuant to the provisions of SAFETEA-LU Section 6002, and in the belief that the public is better served by early disclosure of a locally preferred alternative. Since the SAFETEA-LU section 6002 process requires a 30-day notification and comment period to and from the participating agencies, staff will bring this action for final approval to the Commission at the July 14, 2010 meeting. Agenda Item 7 4 • CONCLUSION: By designating Alternative 2 as the LPA prior to circulation of the draft EIR/EIS the public is made aware of the project sponsor's preference for the project, thereby allowing comments to surface earlier with the goal of providing a more complete analysis of potential environmental issues. Attachments: 1) SR-91 CIP Build Alternatives Map 2) Draft Environmental Document Need and Purpose Statement (excerpt) 3) Project Phasing Plan Agenda Item 7 5 Attachment 1 - SR-91 CIP Build Alternatives Map • State Highways • Interstate Highways • SR-91 Corridor . Improvement vrNed Alternative 1: GP Lanes Alternative Alternative 2: GP + Express Lanes Alternative LEGEND: General Purpose Lanai Express Lene SR-91 Corridor improvement Project 6 May 2010 6 • • • Attachment 2 — MP Need and Purpose Statement (excerpt) Purpose of the Proposed Project The proposed SR-91 CIP is intended to achieve the following objectives: 1. Improve the vehicle, person, and goods movement travel times on SR-91 and I-15 to more effectively serve existing and future travel demand between and within Riverside and Orange Counties consistent with the RCTC Measure A 10-Year Delivery Plan. 2. Implement a part of the 2003 State Route 91 Implementation Plan. 3. Provide improvements on SR-91, 1-15 and intersecting local roads to more effectively serve existing and forecast intraregional travel demand and to reduce diversion of regional traffic from the freeways into the surrounding communities. 4. Provide maximum benefits to the traveling public within the project limits as soon as funding is available. 5. Accommodate the Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAR) National Network for trucks: Need for the Proposed Project SR-91 is continuing to experience increased congestion as a result of population growth in Riverside County and the increase in jobs in Orange County. As a result, based on demographic projections, traffic volumes on SR-91 are expected to increase by approximately 50 percent, which would result in continuing congestion and delays on S R-91. Population and employment in Riverside and Orange Counties are projected to increase substantially by 2035. As discussed earlier, Riverside County is a major source of affordable housing in southern California and Orange County has become a primary location of employment opportunities in addition to the existing employment centers in Los Angeles County. The existing travel demand in the SR-91 corridor has led to a heavy directional commute pattern between Riverside and Orange/Los Angeles Counties that is projected to continue in the future. The growing population and relatively affordable housing market in Riverside County, coupled with increasing employment opportunities in Orange County, have resulted in a large number of Riverside County residents commuting to jobs in Orange County. Based on long-term regional population and employment projections, this commute pattern is expected to continue into the future. 7 SR-91 is the only major highway corridor that provides the home -to -work connection for Riverside County residents working in Orange County. State Route 74 (SR-74, Ortega Highway) is approximately 20 mi south of SR-91 and carries only about 12,000 vehicles per day (vpd). In addition, SR-74, Metrolink, OCTA, Riverside Transit Agency (RTA), and recreational trails connect Orange and Riverside Counties. SR-91 is currently used by more than 280,000 vpd at the Orange/Riverside County line, and this volume continues to grow. At the same time, travel speeds on SR-91 are well below 30 miles per hour (mph) during the lengthy morning (westbound) and evening (eastbound) peak travel periods in this corridor. Traffic in this corridor is forecast to increase by around 50 percent by 2035, further exacerbating the already long travel times and congestion in this corridor. Improvements are necessary to address existing and projected deficiencies regarding mobility, access, goods movement, and freeway capacity on SR-91 within the Major Investment Study (MIS) corridor. Existing deficiencies, traffic congestion, and travel delays on SR-91 are anticipated to grow as a result of the projected traffic demand, which will be generated by forecasted increases in population, housing, employment, and intercounty travel affecting both Riverside and Orange Counties, as estimated by the SCAG RTP (2008). SR-91 is the only major highway that links Riverside and Orange Counties. However, with the downturn in the local, regional, and State economies, sales tax revenues have decreased substantially since approximately 2007 As a result, forecast levels of available Measure A sales tax revenues are not currently projected to be generated at the rate originally estimated in the Measure A 10-Year Delivery Plan for the foreseeable future. Because of the reduced sales tax revenues, to provide transportation improvements as early as possible on SR-91 and 1-15 within available funding levels, RCTC developed a phasing plan for the SR-91 CIP to allow construction that matches the of available funds and to provide immediate benefits to travelers on SR-91 and 1-15 through phased implementation of the project. The phasing plans for the alternatives under consideration would result in the improvements in those alternatives being constructed in phases, starting with an Initial Project in 2015 and ending with completion of all the project components in the Ultimate Project by 2035. • • 8 • • Attachment 3 — Conceptual Project Phasing Plan Need for a Conceptual Phasing Plan Implementation of Alternative 2 is proposed in several phases over a 20-year period beginning with the Initial Project and culminating in the Ultimate Project. Separate projects would be identified and programmed to incorporate the components of the phasing plan for the improvements on SR-91 and 1-15 under Alternative 2 between the Initial Project in 2015 and completion of the Ultimate Project by 2035. The conceptual phasing plan for Alternative 2 is shown in Figure C-1. The following background assumptions were made regarding the phasing plan for Alternative 2: ■ All the project components and features in Alternative 2 would be constructed no later than 2035. No components in Alternative 2 would be removed from the phasing plan. • The analyses for the Initial and Ultimate Projects would also include a comparison to 2015 No Project conditions. ■ The Initial Project features and components would provide independent utility and would have logical termini. Since the majority of the funding for Alternative 2 will come from toll revenue bonds and Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loans, the exact amount that can be raised will not be known until the project is ready to be financed. In addition, because delivery of the project is proposed to be a best value design -build contract, the exact cost of Alternative 2 will not be known until the design -build proposals are received and evaluated. As a result, there will need to be flexibility in defining the Initial Project to be constructed and the timing and scope of the project components in the following phases. The Initial Project described in this phasing plan is the minimum project that could provide early benefits to the traveling public with logical termini and independent utility. If the design -build price and funds available from toll revenue bonds and TIFIA loans could provide for early construction of additional phases of the project, then RCTC would have the option of adding phases with the Initial Project. SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project 1 April 2010 Figure C-1: Conceptual Phasing Plan for Alternative 2 5R-91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT A proieddc dt'e Riverside Cuunry''rr anlport<tloo Ccmmisron Initlal Profect Future Phased Improvements PHASING KEY MAP CITY OF CORONA Future Phased Improvements Phase 1-Tolled Express Lane Direct Connectors to and from 1-15 North Phase 2-General Purpose Lanes from SR-241 to SR-71 Phase S-SR-7Ij5R-91 Interchange improvements .Phase 4-SR-91 Improvements east of 1-15 Phase 5-Extend Toiled Express lanes on 1-15 from Ontario Avenue to Gujarat Road 6l 6 crcrmxo"co M CKI MVALLEY MM. awcdt r. "This is a conceptual phasing schedule only, which was generated for potential planning purposes. RCTC is still in the midst of the environmental review process for the project, and may ultimately select a no -build alternative or any numberof other alternatives depending on the results of that environmental analysis, public comment, and other factors." SR-91 Corridor improvement Project 2 10 April 2010 • Identification of a Locally Preferred E Alternative for SR-91 CIP Project Presentation to RCTC Programs and Projects Committee May 24, 2010 Project Overview Project Boundaries SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project VORGA- LINIAk ANhNI IN Project Overview Project Alternatives x idil111 1111 " Alternative 2 LEGEND . GENERAL PURPOSE [ARE IR:PRESS LANE Add one General Purpose Lane and extend two Tolled Express Lanes in each direction Presentation Outline -Project Boundaries and Alternatives (Alternative 1 and Alternative 2) -Project Schedule -What is a Locally Preferred Alternative( LPA)? -Benefits of designating an LPA -Risks of designating an LPA •Staff recommended LPA and reasons -Project Video •Qsln Project Overview Project Alternatives Alternative 1 LEGEND G-x"�..:E GENERAL PURPOSE LANE Add one General Purpose Lane in each direction Project Schedule • Aug 2010 - Public Circulation of Draft Environmental Document • Sep 2010 — Public Hearing: • Jan 2011— Design-Build'RFPP • Mar 2011 —Select Project Preferred Alternative. • Sep 2011- Project Approval/Environmental Document, Record of Decision • Decemtier 2011- Award Design -Build.. Contract • March 2012- Begin Final Design/Start'Construction • 2016 Additional Lanes Open to Traffic. 1 What is a Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA)? • A locally preferred alternative (LPA) may be designated when the project sponsor has determined, as in the present case, that one of the project alternatives studied best satisfies the stated need and purpose for the project Risk of Designating an LPA? • At -risk D-B procurement will proceed based on the LPA designation, but bid document rework could be required if the LPA turns out to not be the selected project alternative • At -risk acquisition of right of way parcels may occur if they become available on the open market. If the project alternative selection later renders the parcels unnecessary, they will need to be sold at market value Why Alternative 2? Need and Purpose • Improve; the vehide, person, and goods movement travel times on SR-91 and I-15 to serve a dsbng and future travel demand between and within Riverside and Orange Counties consistent with the RCC Measure A 10-YearDelivery Plan and SR-91 Implementation Plan. • Provide improvements on SR-91, I-15, and local streets to more effectively serve existing and forecast Intraregional travel demand and to reduce diversion of regional traffic from the freeways Into the surrounding communities. • Provide maximum benefits to traveling public within the project limits as soon as funding Is available Benefits of Designating an LPA z- • Provides early disclosure to the public • Allows the public and agencies to provide focused input • Facilitates advanced and early acquisition of fights -of - way • Helps maintain aggressive project delivery schedule Staff Recommended LPA ,11 dI41t111�fi�l.a�r Alternative 2 LEGEND MA GENERAL PURPOSE LANE an EXPRESS LANE Add one General Purpose Lane and extend two Tolled Express Lanes in each direction Staff Recommended LPA (Six minute video showing ALT 2F to be attached to the presentation) 2 3 AGENDA ITEM 8 • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 24, 2010 TO: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee FROM: Lisa DaSilva, Capital Projects Manager THROUGH: Marlin Feenstra, Project Delivery Director SUBJECT: Agreement with LSA Associates, Inc. and ICF International for On - Call Environmental Consulting Services STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Award the following agreements to provide on -call environmental consulting services for a three-year term in an amount not to exceed $600,000 each, for a total aggregate amount of $1,200,000: a. Agreement No. 10-31-083-00 to LSA Associates, Inc; and b. Agreement No. 10-31-101-00 to ICF International; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission; 3) Authorize the Executive Director, to execute task orders awarded to these consultants under the terms of the agreements; and 4) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Commission has a requirement for the provision of comprehensive on -call consulting services related to various environmental and archaeological services including, but not limited to, coordination with resources agencies, review of NEPA and CEQA documents, permitting preparation, monitoring and documentation of environmental commitments, and support of the Western Riverside County Multispecies Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) projects. While the Commission typically has most of the environmental related consulting services described above accomplished through in contracts for the preliminary engineering/environmental phase (or PA/ED phase) of a project, there are occasions in which these services will be needed outside the environmental phase. Examples of this include the need for permitting prior to construction, or construction monitoring or mitigation. Agenda Item 8 11 The purpose of this procurement is to provide the Commission with these comprehensive on -call professional environmental consulting services for a variety of Commission projects. Selection Process A request for qualifications (RFQ) for on -call environmental consulting services was issued on March 10, 2010, and a pre -submittal conference was held on March 18, 2010, to describe the project to and respond to any questions from potential offerors. Ten firms — Michael Brandman Associates, RBF Consulting, UlstraSystems, PCR Services Corporation, STV, ICF International (ICF), LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA), Willdan Engineering, Chambers Group, Inc., and CES — submitted statements of qualification (SOO) prior to the April 6, 2010 deadline. An evaluation committee was appointed to review the SOQs received and to conduct firm interviews. The evaluation committee members included representatives from the Commission staff, Bechtel, and Caltrans. Based on the committee's evaluation of written SOQ submittals, and pursuant to the terms of the RFQ, the committee shortlisted four of the ten offerors and invited those firms to the interview portion of the evaluation and selection process. The short listed firms included: • LSA Associates, Inc. • ICF International • RBF Consulting • Michael Brandman Associates Interviews with the above referenced firms were conducted on April 29, 2010, and, after final scoring by the evaluation committee, LSA and ICF were ranked the two most qualified firms. Staff has determined that it is in the best interest of the Commission to award contracts to two qualified firms, in order to mitigate potential conflict of interest issues that may arise as a result of a selected consultant's prior participation on developing task order requirements. The third and fourth most qualified firms were RBF Consulting and Michael Brandman Associates respectively. Based on their respective rankings, Commission staff requested that both LSA and ICF submit a rate proposal for on -call environmental consulting services. Due to the broad scope and undetermined level of effort associated with on -call services contracts of this type, a schedule or definitive cost proposal was not requested of the firms. Staff received the firms' rate proposals on May 10, 2010. Staff initiated a cost/price analysis based on historical rates paid by the Commission for similar services, and pricing offered to other public agencies for comparable services. The purpose of the cost/price analysis is to ensure the proposed rates are fair and reasonable and comparable to rates offered by the firms to other public Agenda Item 8 • • • 12 • entities for similar types of work and that the proposed rates reflect current economic conditions. It is staff's intent to complete the negotiation process prior to the June 9, 2010 Commission meeting, and at that time, provide an updated agenda item detailing the results of the negotiation process and a recommendation for award to both LSA and ICF. This item will include the general scope, anticipated cost, and details from the negotiation process. If staff is unable to reach an agreement with LSA and/or ICF at the completion of the negotiation process, staff will terminate negotiations with one or both of these firms and request an award to the third or fourth highest ranked firm, if necessary. Recommendation Staff recommends Agreement No. 10-31-083-00 be awarded to LSA Associates and Agreement No. 10-31-101-00 be awarded to ICF International for on -call environmental consulting services for a three-year term and total aggregate amount that is not to exceed $1,200,000. Scope and cost for specific tasks will be negotiated based on the fixed labor rates that are currently being established under final negotiations with both LSA and ICF. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2010l11 Amount: $250,000 FY 2011/12+ $950,000 Source of Funds: Measure, ARRA, RIP, STIP Budget Ad ustment: No 003015 81115 222 31 003022 81115 262 31 GL/Project Accounting No.: 003023 81115 262 31 003999 81 115 262 31 Fiscal Procedures Approved: ti:4441,,,_14101 ) Date: 05/13/10 Attachments: 1) Sample Contract Form 2) Draft Cost Proposal (LSA Associates) 3) Draft Cost Proposal (ICF International) Agenda Item 8 13 ATTACHMENT 1 EXHIBIT "A" SCOPE OF WORK ON -CALL ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES 1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION 1.1 Background 1.1.1 The RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (Commission) is requesting Statements of Qualifications (SO()) from qualified professionals for on -call consulting services relating to environmental and archaeological services. The Commission intends to contract with a qualified environmental consulting firm to provide comprehensive on -call professional environmental consulting services for Commission projects. Most on -call environmental services will be for projects that have completed the preliminary engineering phase including the environmental clearance. 1.1.2 The on -call contract, if awarded, will be for two years with an opportunity to extend the agreement for a one-year period at the Commission's sole discretion. 1.1.3 The Commission reserves the right to suspend consultant(s) at the project manager's sole discretion based on performance or underperformance. 1.1.4 Funding for the contract resulting from this RFP may come from federal, state and/or local funds. The Consultant will be required to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF WORK 2.1 Consultant Responsibilities shall include, but not be limited to the following: 2.1.1 Review and re-evaluation project specific environmental documents in accordance with NEPA and CEQA, including preparation of appropriate documentation (environmental re-evaluation, CEQA addenda, etc.) 2.1.2 Review and provide input on specific environmental documents, technical reports and studies as requested by COMMISSION staff (i.e., air quality, water quality, noise, cultural resources, biology, and Section 4(f)). 2.1.3 Permitting services including preparation of permit packages(s) and submittal to permitting agency(ies); coordination with permitting agency(ies); and shepherding permits(s) through their respective approval process(es). Exhibit A A-2 14 2.1.4 Monitoring and document implementation of the environmental commitments during construction (i.e., archaeological, paleontological, and biological commitments). 2.1.5 Support of Western Riverside County Multispecies Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) projects' compliances including preparation of documentation needed to support consistency determination process. 2.1.6 Coordination with the resources agencies on specific issues. 2.1.7 Other environmental services as requested by COMMISSION staff. 2.1.8 Consultant may be required to meet with and coordinate their efforts with Commission staff, Commission legal counsel, other consultants or Caltrans staff; participate in office or project site meetings. 2.1.9 If any legal issues exist during the course of the appraisal assignment, Appraiser shall request legal opinion. All legal opinions shall be rendered by Commission's legal counsel. 2.1.10 If hazardous waste is discovered on the property, Appraiser shall seek further direction from the Commission. 2.2 MATERIALS TO BE FURNISHED BY COMMISSION All software, data, reports, surveys, drawings, and other documents furnished to the OFFER by COMMISSION for the OFFER's use in the performance of services shall be made available only for use in performing the assignment and shall remain the property of COMMISSION. All such materials shall be returned to COMMISSION upon completion of services, termination of the agreement, or others such time as COMMISSION may determine. 2.3 PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES The quantity and qualifications of personnel to be assigned will be determined by the scope of the Task Order request and the degree of difficulty of required tasks to be performed. All personnel and personnel assignments shall be subject to approval by COMMISSION. Exhibit A A-3 • 15 • 2.4 THIRD PARTY RELATIONSHIPS 2.4.1 This Contract is intended to provide on -call services for Plan projects. In the development of the Plan projects, COMMISSION has worked closely with various professional Offerors, agencies, and others in the development of the project documents and other project related materials. COMMISSION, however, is solely responsible for and will be the sole point of contact for all contractual matters related to the Task Orders. OFFEROR shall take direction only from COMMISSION and shall regularly inform only COMMISSION of Task Order progress, outstanding issues, and all related matters. 2.4.2 During the course of the contract, OFFEROR may find occasion to meet with resource agencies, local jurisdictions, or Ca!trans representatives, the design engineer, or other third parties who have assisted with the various Plan projects. These entities may, from time to time, offer suggestions and/or recommendations regarding the Plan project or elements of the project. While COMMISSION enjoys a close relationship with and has considerable confidence in the capabilities of these other parties, OFFEROR shall not act on any suggestions, solicited or unsolicited, without obtaining specific direction from COMMISSION. All oral and written communication with outside agencies or Offerors related to the project shall be directed only to COMMISSION. Distribution of project related communications and information shall be at the sole discretion of COMMISSION representatives. 3.0 TASK ORDER PROCEDURES 3.1 DEFINITIONS 3.1.1 The term Consultant shall refer to the firm or firms that are awarded the contract for environmental consulting services. 3.1.2 A Task Order is utilized by the parties to establish, outline, and authorize a particular job or task. 3.2 INITIATING TASK ORDERS 3.2.1 The Commission's project manager will issue Task Orders to the Consultant. 3.2.2 The Commission's REQUEST FOR TASK ORDER SUBMITTALS. Upon a request for a Task Order Proposal by the designated Commission project manager, contractor shall develop a plan and SUBMIT A TASK ORDER proposal for the requested services. The Task Order shall include a time schedule, number of labor hours, and labor classification(s) to provide the requested services. Exhibit A A-4 16 3.2.3 Review and Award of Task Orders The Commission's designated project manager will review the submitted Task Order (TO) to ensure that the submittal is complete, consistent with the Commission's written or oral request for services, the personnel assigned are acceptable, the schedule is acceptable, that all costs proposed are appropriate, and that the item is in compliance with contractual requirements. The project manager will award the Task Order if it is determined to be fair and reasonable. If required, the Commission's project manager will conduct negotiations to address exceptions and clarify costs. The fully executed Task Order will serve as the record of negotiations. 3.2.4 Completion Schedule The contractors' performance of services shall commence under each Task Order only upon written authorization by the Commission's designated project manager. 3.2.5 Contractor shall complete the services within the time frame specified on a particular Task Order. The duration of a particular Task Order may not exceed 12 months, unless otherwise approved in writing, or extend beyond the terms of the governing agreement. Exhibit A A-5 • 17 • • • AGREEMENT NO. 10-31-083- 00 MODEL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AGREEMENT FOR ON -CALL ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES WITH ( CONSULTANT 1 1. PARTIES AND DATE. This Agreement is made and entered into this _ day of 200_, by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ("the Commission") and ( NAME OF FIRM 1 ("Consultant'), a ( LEGAL STATUS OF CONSULTANT e.g., CORPORATION 1. 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 conducting studies specifically related to safety and security to public clients and is familiar with the scope of services of Commission. 2.2 Commission desires to engage Consultant to render certain consulting services for the conduct of Security, Surveillance and Emergency Response Study ("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. B-7 18 3.2 Term. The term of this Agreement shall be from to , unless earlier terminated as provided herein. 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 the Schedule of Services set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 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 or Sub -Consultants. Consultant has represented to Commission that certain key personnel and sub -consultants will perform and coordinate the Services under this Agreement. Should one or more of such personnel or sub - consultants become unavailable, Consultant may substitute other personnel or sub -consultants 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 or sub -consultants, Commission shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement for cause, pursuant to provisions of Section 3.16 of this Agreement. The key personnel and sub -consultants for performance of this Agreement are as follows: 3.7 Commission's Representative. Commission hereby designates f INSERT NAME OR TITLE 1, 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. 3.8 Consultant's Representative. Consultant hereby designates j INSERT B-8 • • • 19 • NAME OR TITLE j, 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. 3.12 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 B-9 20 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 Employers 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. Employers 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 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 B-10 • 21 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. 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. B-11 22 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 j INSERT WRITTEN DOLLAR AMOUNT 1 ($j INSERT NUMERICAL DOLLAR AMOUNT j) 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 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 B-12 • • 23 • 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: CONSULTANT: Attn: COMMISSION: Riverside County Transportation Commission rd 4080 Lemon Street, 3 Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Attn: Executive Director 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. B-13 24 • 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. 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 B-14 25 • 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 Attomey'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 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 attorney's 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, 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 B-15 26 enforcing the indemnity herein provided. Consultant's obligation to 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. 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 B-16 • • 27 • approval of the Commission. Subcontracts, if any, shall contain a provision making them subject to all provisions stipulated in this Agreement. 3.30 Prevailing Wages. By its execution of this Agreement, Consultant certified that it is aware of the requirements of Califomia Labor Code Sections 1720 et seq. and 1770 et seq., as well as California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 16000 et seq. ("Prevailing Wage Laws"), which require the payment of prevailing wage rates and the performance of other requirements on certain "public works" and "maintenance" projects. If the Services are being performed as part of an applicable "public works" or "maintenance" project, as defined by the Prevailing Wage Laws, and if the total compensation is $1,000 or more, Consultant agrees to fully comply with such Prevailing Wage Laws. The Commission shall provide Consultant with a copy of the prevailing rate of per diem wages in effect at the commencement of this Agreement. Consultant shall make copies of the prevailing rates of per diem wages for each craft, classification or type of worker needed to execute the Services available to interested parties upon request, and shall post copies at the Consultant's principal place of business and at the project site. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the Commission, its elected officials, officers, employees and agents free and harmless from any claims, liabilities, costs, penalties or interest arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with the Prevailing Wage Laws. 3.31 Employment of Apprentices. This Agreement shall not prevent the employment of properly indentured apprentices in accordance with the California Labor Code, and no employer or labor union shall refuse to accept otherwise qualified employees as indentured apprentices on the work performed hereunder solely on the ground of race, creed, national origin, ancestry, color or sex. Every qualified apprentice shall be paid the standard wage paid to apprentices under the regulations of the craft or trade in which he or she is employed and shall be employed only in the craft or trade to which he or she is registered. If Califomia Labor Code Section 1777.5 applies to the Services, Consultant and any subcontractor hereunder who employs workers in any apprenticeable craft or trade shall apply to the joint apprenticeship council administering applicable standards for a certificate approving Consultant or any sub -consultant for the employment and training of apprentices. Upon issuance of this certificate, Consultant and any sub -consultant shall employ the number of apprentices provided for therein, as well as contribute to the fund to administer the apprenticeship program in each craft or trade in the area of the work hereunder. The parties expressly understand that the responsibility for compliance with provisions of this Section and with Sections 1777.5, 1777.6 and 1777.7 of the California Labor Code in regard to all apprenticeable occupations lies with Consultant. 3.32 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. 3.33 Eight -Hour Law. Pursuant to the provisions of the California Labor Code, eight hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work, and the time of service of any worker employed on the work shall be limited and restricted to eight hours during any one calendar day, and forty hours in any one calendar week, except when payment for overtime is made at not B-17 28 less than one and one-half the basic rate for all hours worked in excess of eight hours per day ("Eight -Hour Law"), unless Consultant or the Services are not subject to the Eight -Hour Law. Consultant shall forfeit to Commission as a penalty, $50.00 for each worker employed in the execution of this Agreement. by him, or by any sub -consultant under him, for each calendar day during which such workman is required or permitted to work more than eight hours in any calendar day and forty hours in any one calendar week without such compensation for overtime violation of the provisions of the California Labor Code, unless Consultant or the Services are not subject to the Eight -Hour Law. [signatures on following page] B-18 • 29 SIGNATURE PAGE TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AGREEMENT FOR ON -CALL RIGHT OF WAY APPRAISAL SERVICES FOR RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, AGRICULTURAL AND RAILROAD PROPERTIES WITH [ CONSULTANT ] IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement was executed on the date first written above. RIVERSIDE COUNTY CONSULTANT TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION [INSERT NAME OF CONSULTANT] By: [INSERT NAME], Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Best, Best & Krieger LLP General Counsel Exhibit "A" Scope of Services Exhibit "B" Schedule of Services Exhibit "C" Compensation Signature Name Title [ INSERT 1 [ INSERT ] B-19 30 LSA • LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. 20 EXECUTIVE PARK, SUITE 200 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92614 May 10, 2010 949.553.0666 TEL 949.553.8076 FAX Mr. Greg Moore Procurement and Assets Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 BERKELEY CARLSBAD FORT COLLINS D 1� FRESNO PALM SPRINGS POINT RICHMOND ECEOWE u 11 RIVERSIDE ROCKLIN SAN LUIS OBISPO S. SAN FRANCISCO ATTACHMENT 2 RIVERSIDE I Ci3I'Y Y TRANSPORTATION CC1.4 K: !ON Subject: On -Call Environmental Consulting Services: Request for Cost Proposal (RFQ No.10-31-083-00) Dear Mr. Moore: As requested, LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) is providing its direct labor costs and rates and additional direct costs in accordance with the Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) Attachment "A" (Compensation and Payment) and Form 60. LSA has reviewed Attachment "A" and understands that it will become part of the agreement between RCTC and LSA. Also included are the equivalent documents for our two subconsultants: CH2MHill and GroupDelta. LSA looks forward to starting work on this contract. Please contact me at (949) 553-0666 if you need additional information. Sincerely, LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. isa Williams Project Manager Attachment: Attachment "A" (Compensation and Payment) for LSA Associates, Inc. Attachment "A" (Compensation and Payment) for CH2MHil1 "Form 60" for GroupDelta 05/10/10 «LAPROPOSAL1222 I TriA I -RCTC On -Calf Environmental1Compensation and Payment.docw PLANNING f ENVIRON132TAL SCIENCES DESIGN • ATTACHMENT "A" COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT LSA Associates, Inc. For the satisfactory performance and completion of the Services under this Agreement, the Commission will pay the Consultant compensation as set forth herein. 1) ELEMENTS OF COMPENSATION. Compensation for the Services will be comprised of the following elements: a) Direct Labor Costs; b) Fixed Fee; and c) Additional Direct Costs. a) DIRECT LABOR COSTS. Direct Labor casts shall be pail in an amount equal to the product of the Direct Salary Costs and the Multiplier which are defined as follows: i) DIRECT SALARY COSTS Direct Salary Costs are the base salaries and wages actually paid to the Consultant's personnel directly engaged in performance of the Services under the Agreement. (The range of hourly rates paid to the Consultant's personnel appears in Section 2 below.) ii) MULTIPLIER The Multiplier to be applied to the Direct Salary Costs to determine the Direct Labor Costs is 2.6765 , and is the sum of the following components: (1) Direct Salary Costs (2) Payroll Additives 1 0 0 % 88.67% The decimal ratio of Payroll Additives to Direct Salary Costs. Payroll Additives include all employee benefits, allowances for vacation, sick leave, and holidays, and company portion of employee insurance and social and retirement benefits, all federal and state payroll taxes, premiums for insurance which are measured by payroll costs, and other contributions and benefits imposed by applicable laws and regulations. 33 (3) Overhead Costs 78.98% The decimal ratio of allowable Overhead Costs to the Consultant firm's total direct salary costs. Allowable Overhead Costs include general, administrative and overhead costs of maintaining and operating established offices, and consistent with established firm policies, and as defined in the Federal Acquisitions Regulations, Part 31.2. (4) Profit 9 % (addressed as a percentage) TOTAL MULTIPLIER b) FIXED FEE. 2.927 (sum of (a)(ii)(1), (2) and (3) multiplied by the percentage of profit) i) The Fixed Fee is the Profit as determined in Section (a)(ii)(4). The Maximum Fixed Fee under this Agreement is ***Not applicable. On-caK contract) and shall not exceed this amount without written approval of the Commission's Executive Director. c) ADDITIONAL DIRECT COSTS. Additional Direct Costs directly identifiable to the performance of the services of this Agreement shall be reimbursed at the rates below, or at actual invoiced cost. Rates for identified Additional Direct Costs are as follows: ITEM Reproduction (8.5 x 11) B/W Reproduction (8.5 x 11) Color Reproduction (11 x 17) B/W Reproduction (11 x 17) Color CD Production Plotting Mileage On Road Mileage Off -Road GPS Unit Sound Meter Aerial Photos REIMBURSEMENT RATE $0.10 per page $1.00 per page $0.16 per page $2.50 per page $5.00 per CD $3.75 per sf $0.50 per mile $0.65 per mile $100.00 per day $75.00 per day $200.00 per photo Travel by air and travel in excess of 100 miles from the Consultant's oHice nearest to the Commission's office must have the Commission's prior written approval to be reimbursed under this Agreement_ 34 • 2) DIRECT SALARY RATES Direct Salary Rates, which are the range of hourly rates to be used in determining Direct Salary Costs in Section (a)(i) above, are given below and are subject to the following: a) Direct Salary Rates shall be applicable to both straight time and overtime work, unless payment of a premium for overtime work is required by law, regulation or craft agreement, or is otherwise specified in this Agreement. In such event, the premium portion of Direct Salary Costs will not be subject to the Multiplier defined in Paragraph (1)(a) above. b) Direct Salary Rates shown herein are in effect for one year following the effective date of the Agreement. Thereafter, they may, with prior approval from the Commission, be adjusted annually to reflect the Consultant's adjustments to individual compensation. POSITION OR CLASSIFICATION RANGE OF HOURLY RATES Principal 42.30 86.72 Associate 32.66 47.03 Senior Planner/Environ/Biologist/Cultural/Air-Noise/Trans/GIS 24.59 54.34 Planner/EnvironBiologist/Cultural/Air-Noise/Trans/GIS 23.75 35.97 Assistant PlannerBnvironBiologist/Cultural/Air-Noiserfrans/GIS 18.00 30.40 Senior Field Crew/Field Crew 15.00 24.59 Research Assistant/Technician 10.00 15.00 Graphics 21.58 40.95 Office Assistant 14.25 21.72 Word Processing/Technical Editing 20.19 27.57 c) The above rates are for the Consultant only. All rates for subconsultants to the Consultant will be. in accordance with the Consultant's cost proposal. 3) INVOICING. a) Each month the Consultant shall submit an invoice for Services performed during the preceding month. The original invoice shall be submitted to the Commission's Executive Director with two (2) copies to the Commission's Project Coordinator. b) Charges shall be billed in accordance with the terms and rates included herein, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Commission's Representative. 35 c) Base Work shall be charged separately, and the charges for each task and Milestone listed in the Scope of Services, shall be listed separately. The charges for each individual assigned by the Consultant under this Agreement shall be listed separately on an attachment to the invoice. d) A charge of $500 or more for any one item of Additional Direct Costs shall be accompanied by substantiating documentation satisfactory to the Commission such as invoices, telephone logs, etc. e} Each copy of each invoice shall be accompanied by a Monthly Progress Report and spreadsheets showing hours expended by task for each month and total project to date. f) Each invoice shall indicate payments to DBE subconsultants or supplies by dollar amount and as a percentage of the total invoice. Each invoice shall include a certification signed by the Consultant's Representative or an officer of the firm which reads as follows: g) I hereby certgy that the hours and salary rates charged in this invoice are the actual hours and rates worked and paid to the employees listed. Signed Title Date Invoice No. 4) PAYMENT a) The Commission shall pay the Consultant within four to six weeks after receipt by the Commission of an original invoice. Should the Commission contest any portion of an invoice, that portion shall be held for resolution, without interest, but the uncontested balance shall be paid. b) The final payment for Services under this Agreement will be made only after the Consultant has executed a Release and Certificate of Final Payment. • 36 • • • ATTACHMENT "A" COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT CH2M HILL ELEMENTS OF COMPENSATION. Compensation for the Services will be comprised of the following elements: a) Direct Labor Costs; b) Fixed Fee; and c) Additional Direct Costs. a) DIRECT LABOR COSTS. Direct Labor costs shall be paid in an amount equal to the product of the Direct Salary Costs and the Multiplier which are defined as follows: i) DIRECT SALARY COSTS Direct Salary Costs are the base salaries and wages actually paid to the Consultant's personnel directly engaged in performance of the Services under the Agreement. (The range of hourly rates paid to the Consultant's personnel appears in Section 2 below.) ii) MULTIPLIER The Multiplier to be applied to the Direct Salary Costs to determine the Direct Labor Costs is 2.363 , and is the sum of the following components: (1) Direct Salary Costs 1.0 (2) Payroll Additives included in overhead below The decimal ratio of Payroll Additives to Direct Salary Costs. Payroll Additives include all employee benefits, allowances for vacation, sick leave, and holidays, and company portion of employee insurance and social and retirement benefits, all federal and state payroll taxes, premiums for insurance which are measured by payroll costs, and other contributions and benefits imposed by applicable laws and regulations. 37 CH2M HILL 5/10/10 (3) Overhead Costs 1.363 The decimal ratio of allowable Overhead Costs to the Consultant firm's total direct salary costs. Allowable Overhead Costs include general, administrative and overhead costs of maintaining and operating established offices, and consistent with established firm policies, and as defined in the Federal Acquisitions Regulations, Part 31.2. (4) Profit 9% Total Multiplier b) ADDITIONAL DIRECT COSTS. 2.576 (sum of (a)(ii)(1), (2), and (3) multiplied by the percentage of profit) Additional Direct Costs directly identifiable to the performance of the services of this Agreement shall be reimbursed at the rates below, or at actual invoiced cost. Rates for identified Additional Direct Costs are as follows: ITEM REIMBURSEMENT RATE Per Diem Car mileage Rental Car Travel Outside Reprographic Services Postage/Shipping Courier Service Other Rentals, supplies, purchases Actual Cost 0.50 or current IRS rate Actual Cost Actual Cost Actual Cost Actual Cost Actual Cost Actual Cost Travel by air and travel in excess of 100 miles from the Consultant's office nearest to the Commission's office must have the Commission's prior written approval to be reimbursed under this Agreement. Page 2 of 3 • • 38 CH2M HILL 5/10/10 2) DIRECT SALARY RATES Direct Salary Rates, which are the range of hourly rates to be used in determining Direct Salary Costs in Section (a)(i) above, are given below and are subject to the following: a) Direct Salary Rates shall be applicable to both straight time and overtime work, unless payment of a premium for overtime work is required by law, regulation or craft agreement, or is otherwise specified in this Agreement. In such event, the premium portion of Direct Salary Costs will not be subject to the Multiplier defined in Paragraph (1)(a) above. b) Direct Salary Rates shown herein are in effect for one year following the effective date of the Agreement. Thereafter, they may, with prior approval from the Commission, be adjusted annually to reflect the Consultant's adjustments to individual compensation. POSITION OR CLASSIFICATION RANGE OF HOURLY RATES Senior Consultant!Technologist $57.02 - $103.98 Project Manager $57.02 - $103.98 Task Manager/Sr. Engineer/Scientist/Planner $40.58 - $91.57 Staff Engineer/Scientist/Planner $24.32 - $58.31 Jr. Engineer/Scientist/Planner $17.73 - $42.83 Staff Technician/CADD $15.71 - $54.11 Technical Editor $20.79 - $58.31 Office/Clerical/Accounting $15.85 - $38.98 Page 3 of 3 39 CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL (Services) MTA "FORM sr PAGE 1 OF 2 Name of Propose, GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Service to be Furnished Geotechnicei Services And Hazardous Waste Studies Home Office Address 32 Mauchly, Suite B - Irvine, CA 92618 On -Cali Environmental Consulting Services RFQ No. 10 31-083-00 Division(s) / Location(s) Where Work is to be Performer Total Amount of Proposal $0 Contract No. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF COST ELEMENTS 1. Direct Labor (Specify) Principal Engineer Estimated Hours 0 Rate ( Hour 80.53 Est. Cost ($) $0.00 Total Est. Cost ($) Senior Project Staff Technician CADD Clerical 0 0 0 0 0 0 43.99 37.82 21.63 27.62 28.85 17.10 $0.00 $0.00 $0.0D $0.00 $0.0D $0.00 TOTAL HOURS 0 Total Direct LabGG: $0.00 2. Labor Overhead O.H. Rate x Base = Est. Cost OVERHEAD 2.11 0.00 $0.00 Total Labor 3_ Traver Est. Cost $0.00 a. Transportation b. Per Diem or Subsistence $0.00 Total Travel 4. Subcontractors/ Subconsuffants" Est. Cost 0 D D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Subcontractors 0 5. Other Di ect Costs' $0.00 TOTAL DIRECT COST AND OVERHEAD $0.00 6. General & Admin. Expense of item nos. 7_ Fee (9%) TOTAL ESTIMATED COST AND FEE ) $0.00 $0.00 • Itemize on second page of "Form 60" " Attach "Form 60" for all proposed subcontractors 40 • CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL (Professional Services) "FORM 60" PAGE 2 OF 2 SUPPORTING SCHEDULE ITEM NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION Mileage Travel EST. COST ($) $0.50 Postage, stripping Data search (EDR) Outside expenses Outside subcontractor at cost at cost at cost at cost et cost Type name and Title Shah Ghanbari, President Signature . Zkiv su 1 Name of firm Group Delta Consultants, Inc. Date of submission 5/7/2010 41 ATTACHMENT ICF INTERNATIONAL May 10, 2010 Mr. Greg Moore Procurement and Assets Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, California 92501 Subject: RFQ No. 10-31-083-00, Response to Request for Cost Proposal Dear Mr. Moore: ICF International (previously ]ones & Stokes Associates, Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of ICF International) is pleased to submit this Cost Proposal to the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the Commission) to provide on -call environmental consulting services. At the Commission's request, we have reviewed the "Compensation and Payment" provisions (Attachment A) and provided the completed Form 60. Acknowledgement of review of Attachment A and completed Form 60s are also provided for each subconsultant on our team. We look forward to entering into negotiations regarding the abovementioned contract and are excited about this opportunity to continue our work with the Commission. Should you have any questions about the enclosed materials, please contact Brian Calvert, Project Manager/Director, 949-333-6600, or at bcalvert@icfi.com. Sincerely, Charles Smith, AICP Vice President / �. Brian Calvert Project Manager/Director 1 Ada Parkway, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 9261B 949.333.6600 949.333.6601 fax icli.com 42 FORM 60 CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL (Services) RCTC "FORM 60" PAGE 1 OF 2 NAME OF PROPOSER • nes 8 Stokes Associates, a wholly owned subsidiary of ICF International DMstor•syLOCAT10Nts) WHERE SERVICES ARE TO BE PERFORMED 1 Ada. Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92618 NOME OFFICE ADDRESS 1 Ada, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92618 COMPACT No. 10-31-083-00 SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED • n-Call Environmental Consulting Services PROPOSAL $0 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF COST ELEMENTS 1. DIRECT LABOR ESTIMATED RATFJHOUR EST. COST ($) TOTAL EST. Calvert, Brian 0 $63.89 $0.00 • •arson, Keturah 0 $37.26 $0.00 Lafontaine, Jean 0 $46.62 $0.00 Isecki, Lee 0 $74.41 $0.00 -appadaSanaryan, Daniela 0 $50.00 $0.00 ''antka, Mari 0 $43.47 $0.00 risal, Shilpa 0 $39.97 $0.00 •.per, Keith 0 $51.88 $0.00 • ' Victor 0 $24.13 $0.00 Hatcher, Shannon 0 $43.51 $0.00 upta, Nina 0 $23.21 $0.00 • naya, Mario 0 $19.81 $0.00 Larsen, Scott 0 $25.66 $0.00 6larcak, Richard 0 $77.52 $0.00 •aul, Daniel 0 $32.99 $0.00 • nderson, Carson 0_ $38.82 $0.00 Bursan, Andrew 0 $22.92 $0.00 Robinson, Mark 0 $49.88 $0.00 Bever, Mic 0 $52.89 $0.00 Wood, Catherine 0 $26.54 $0.00 ong, Michelle 0 $25.00 $0.00 hattuck, Paul 0 $21.20 $0.00 cCormick, Donna 0 $64.81 $0.00 Campbell, Kurt 0 $39.68 $0.00 Flores, Marisa 0 $25.00 $0.00 Klutz, Korey 0 $47.57 $0.00 Schorr, Erin 0 $45.59 $0.00 Romich, Mikael 0 $41.91 $0.00 Hickman, James 0 $33.79 $0.00 Mangrich, Makela 0 $38A7 $0.00 Svitenko, Kim 0 $41A9 $0.00 Richards, Phillip 0 $36.71 $0.00 Mustain, Soraya 0 $23.25 $0.00 Belliappa, Nam 0 $30.33 $0.00 Clendenin, Gary 0 $55.02 $0.00 Hardie, Peter 0 $31.21 $0.00 iider, James 0 $47.67 $0.00 Campbell, Patricia 0 $49.65 $0.00 Duchardt, Amanda 0 $35.21 $0.00 Jameson, Megan 0 $40.85 $0.00 Higginson. Mindy 0 $25.10 $0.00 Randall, Lisa 0 $25.64 $0.00 43 FORM 60 Mathias, John 0 $25A9 $0.00 Martin, Nate 0 $32.83 $0.00 'McKee, Alice . 0 $30.00 $0.00 Langenfeld, Peter 0 $33.69 $0.00 :Cherry, Thomas 0 $43.65 $0.00 Ryan, Thomas 0 $60.00 $0.00 Klnoshlfta, Glen 0 $28.72 $0.00 Knight, Albert 0 $28.00 $0.00 Lauko, Kimberly 0 $23.00 $0.00 Mitchell, Robin 0 $22.00 $0.00 'Rahn, Jonathan 0 $22.00 $0.00 Blake Safford 0 $28.72 $0.00 Niranjala Kottachchi 0 $28.72 $0.00 Richard Serrano 0 $28.72 $0.00 James Allen 0 $33.08 $0.00 ' $0.00 $0.00 TOTAL DIRECT LABOR ... r Y.:��,7.r, .- $0.00 2. LABOR OVERHEAD OH RATE x BASE = EST. COST 193.09% $0.00 $0.00 TOTAL LABOR OVERHEAD � � �' �St� �. �" $0.00 3. TRAVEL' EST. COST a. Transportation $0 b. Per Diem or Subsistence $0, - TOTAL TRAVEL _. $0.00 4. SUBCONTRACTORS/SUPPLIERS" EST. COST a TOTAL SUBCONTRACTORSISUPPLIERS YFy... '-' $Q.()Q 5. OTHER DIRECT COSTS' TOTAL DIRECT COST AND OVERHEAD $0.00 6. GENERAL a ADMIN. EXPENSE (10% OF ITEM NOS 3, 4 and 5) $0.00 7. FEE: (10% OF ITEM NOS. 1 and 2) $0.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST AND FEE $0.00 ' ITEMIZE ON SECOND PAGE OF 'FORM 60' " ATTACHED IS TORN 60' FOR ALL PROPOSED SUBCONTRACTORS 44 CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL (Services) RCTC "FORM so- PAGE 2 OF 2 SUPPORTING SCHEDULE ,. ITEM NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION - EST. COST ($) I 1 Per Diem actual 2 Car mileage $0.50/mile 3 Rental Car actual 4 Travel actual 5 Photocopies (Black & White) $0.08 to $0.16/page 6 Photocopies (Color) $0.16 to $0.32Jpage 7 Photographs/ actual 8 Postage/Shipping actual 3 Courier Service actual 10 Other Rentals, supplies, purchases actual TYPE NAME AND TITLE Charles Smith, AICP, Vice President SIGNATURE r NAME OF FIRM Jones & Stokes Associates, a wholly owned subsidary of ICF International DATE OF SUBMISSION May 10, 2010 • 45 • A\ AIRIELJLAN4 ASSOCIATES A Community R:Lrri”). tg. Cositartnirtrtion< StrotegitMorkrting May 5, 2010 Anna Buenung Proposal Coordinator ICF International 1 Ada, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92618 Dear Anna: This letter acknowledges that we have received, reviewed and appmve the "Compensation and Payment" provisions (Attachment A) sent to Arellano Associates by ICF International in regards to the RCTC On -Call project. Please let us know if you require any additional information. Genoveva Are Principal I3791 ROSWELL AVENUE, ??A • (—JUNO, CALIFORNIA • 91710-6502 14-10N1, (9C9) h27.?17d • FAX 009) 62$.i1.?0q \C'WW.ARC•1.LANOASSOCIATLS.COM 46 FORM 60 -- - CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL (Services) RCTC 'FORM 60" PAGE 1 OF 2 NAME OF PROPOSER Are lan0 Associates DNPSIORSYLCCADDlig1VNIFRB SERVIGESARETOBE PERFORMED Chino, CA HONE OFACEADDRESS 113791 Roswell Avenue, Suite A, Chino, CA 01710 CONTRACT NO. 104141133-00 SERIACESTO BE PERFORMED On -Call Environmental Consulting Services PROPOSAL $0 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF COST ELEMENTS 1. DIRECT LABOR ESTIMATED RATEHOUR EST. COSTS) TOTAL EST. -Cheryl Donahue $90.00 $0 Raul Velazquez $61.00 $0 Melissa Holguin $51.00 $0 $0 $0 SO $0 $0 S0 $D $0 $o $O $D $0 SO SO SO $0 $0 TOTAL DIRECT LABOR --.u-�'s` -, r- .< am '. u'-„ �.. . - =,..,, , $0 2. LABOR OVERHEAD OH RATE x BASE _ EST. COST 60.00% $0 $0 TOTAL LABOR OVERHEAD _ c�+�.{.• t $O 3. TRAVEL' (see page twofer aem(ree costs) EST. COST a. Transportation Actual b. PO( Diem Or Subsistence $0 TOTAL TRAVEL or r " Actual _ _.L^-.A>m 4. SUBCONTRACTORS/SUPPLIERS" EST. COST vso�... . _._ wn 44 -yam k .y a r_'i'a. TOTAL SUBCONTRACTORS/SUPPLIERS - w. .: �3: $0 S. OTHER DIRECT COSTS' (see page Iwo for Bemaed costs) Actual TOTAL DIRECT COST AND OVERHEAD 6. GENERAL S ADMIN. EXPENSE (0%OF REM NOS. 3, 4 and 5) 7. FEE: (10% OF REM NOS.1 end21 $D , TOTAL ESTIMATED COST AND FEE • owes W tECdMPASE OF 11510V60' ArrAC,IED IS TOALIea' FOR Mt PROPOSED e1RCAITRAC1085 • 47 CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL (Services) RCTC "FORAA60" PAGE 2 OF 2 SUPPORTING SCHEDULE rrEM NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION EST. COST ($) 1 Per Diem Actual 2 Car mileage Actual 3 Rental Car Actual 4 Travel Actual 5 Photocopies (Black & White) Actual 6 Photocopies (Color) Actual 7 Photographs Actual 8 other reprographic Services Actual 9 Postage/Shipping Actual 10 Courier Service Actual 11 Other Rentals, supplies, purchases Actual 12 Newspaper Advertising Actual 13 Graphic Design/Website Development Actual 14 15 16 17 c TYPE NAME AND TITLE Genoveva Arellano, Principal S162 T R 14(7 / -- NAME OF FIRM I Arellano Associates DATE OF SUB SSION May 6, 2010� 48 CORRIDOR ANALYSIS April 7, 2010 Ref: On -Call Environmental Consulting Services (Sub consultant contract) RCTC I HAVE REVIEWED FORM 60, CONRACF PRICING PROPOSAL (SERVICES) AND THE INFORMATION IS CORRECT AS OF THIS DATE. PLEASE NOTE THAT CORRIDOR ANALYSIS OPENED BUSINESS ON JANUARY 1, 2010 AND DOES NOT HAVE A ONE YEAR ACCOUNTING HISTORY YET. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: DUNCAN T. BUSH, SR OWNER 29305 HIGHLAND BOULEVARD, MORENO VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92555 Duncan Bush0CorridorAnalysis.com (951)-333-3540 CELL (951)-247-1000 MAIN (951)-247-1002 FAX • 49 I I • FORM 60 CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL (Services) RCTC 'FORM W PAGE 1 OF 2 IMMME OF PROPOSER Corridor Analysis (Right of Way Services) SERVICESARE TO BE PERFORMED HOME OFF)DEADt 29305 Higldand Boulevard Morello Valley, CA 92555 aoNmACT NO. 10-31.063-00 SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED On Cal Environmental Consulting Services PROPOSAL $0 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF COST ELEMENTS 1. DIRECT LABOR ESTIMATED RATE/HOUR EST. COST IQ TOTAL EST. Duncan T. Bush - Right of Way Project Manager $62.50 $0 Daniel Bush - Right of Way Technidan $13.00 $0 Open - Right of Way Agent $32.70 $0 Open - Administrative Support $19.23 $0 SO $0 $0 $0 $0 $O $O $0 $0 $0 $0 1 SO $O _ $0 $0 W TOTAL DIRECT LABOR ",hu,,;�r,Y'`?'r ix,5fi � e-le-"'�c T . <=ya "r , $0. 2. LABOR OVERHEAD OH RATE x BASE = EST. COST 150.00% $0 $0 TOTAL LABOR OVERHEAD E0 3. TRAVEL' (see Pave hvo for Bombed coats) EST. COST a. Transportation $0. b. Per Diem or Substslence u1 TOTAL. TRAVEL R ''' ._ -,y° $0 a. SUBCONTRACTORS/SUPPLIERS EST. COST NONE :s,1?-w. - 9 ?r TOTAL SUBCONTRACTORS/SUPPLIERS ��a $0 5. OTHER DIRECT COSTS' (see papa two for Bemued Costs) TOTAL DIRECT COST AND OVERHEAD $0 S. GENERAL 6 ADM IN. EXPENSE (10%OF ITEM NOS. 3.4 and 5) $0 7. FEE: 0096OF REM NOS.1 and 2) $0 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST AND FEE $0 . ITETSRE ITV SECOND PAGE OF VOILA SV ATTACHED IS 7ORNI Sa FOR ALL PROPOSED SUBCONTRACTORS 50 CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL (Services) RCTC "FORM sow PAGE 2 OF 2 i SUPPORTING SCHEDULE ITEM NO. RBN DESCRIPTION - EST. COST (S) 1 Per Diem 2 Car mileage (Fedral Rate - Currently $0.50) 3 Rental Car 4 Travel 5 Photocopies (Black 8 White) /copy 6 Photocopies (Color) /copy 7 Photographs/ 8 other reprographic Services 9 Postage/Shipping Actual 10 Courier Service Actual 11 Other Rentals,' supplies, purchases Actual 12 Property Research ($250 per month times actual months used) Actual 13 14 15 16 . 17 �-______ TYPE NAME AND TITLE Duncan T. Bush, Principle SIG TU `, �/�keery,� (_ ,e.' NAME OF FIRM Corridor Analysis DATE OF SUBMISSION May 5, 2010 51 Ill GROUP Geo:ethnical Engineering Geology H drogenlogr Earthquake Engineering hinter/Ws Testing & Inspection Forensic Services May 5, 2010 ICF International 1 Ada, Suite 100 Irvine, Califomia 92618 Attention: Brian Calvert Subject: Cost — Form 60 RCTC On -Call Environmental Consulting Services RFQ No. 10-31-083-00 GDC Proposal No.1E10-040 Dear Brian: At your request, Group Delta Consultants, Inc. (CDC) is pleased to provide the cost proposal (Form 60) for our services. The overhead rate is based on our recent audit byRCTC. We also reviewed and agreed with the "Attachment A - Compensation and Payment'_ provisions. We look forward to being your consultant on this project. Please feel free to call us if you have any questions. Sincerely, GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. }Piv\c^,--u Shah Ghanbari, P.E. President 32 Monthly. Smile l) ♦ Irvine, California 92618-2336 ♦ (949) 450.21(101140r ♦ (94.9)451).2106 fax Torrance. California (310) 320.5100 ♦ Ontario. California 1.9091 6064500 ♦ 5'nn Metro, California (858) 524-1500 stare. ErotrpDrUa-cno 52 FORM 60 CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL (Services) RCTC "FORM 60" PAGE 1 OF 2 NAME OF PROPOSER Group Delta Consultants, Mc onnsi sse.oCATION(s) WHERE SERVICES ARE TO RE PERFORMED Oeotechnical and Hazardous Waste HOME OFRCE ADDRESS Meuddy, Suite B Maine, CA 92618 cctrmAcr No. 1031-083.00 SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED e n-Call Environmental Consulting Services PROPOSAL $0 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF COST ELEMENTS 1. DIRECT LABOR ESTIMATED RATE/HOUR EST. COST (S) TOTAL EST. Principal $80.53 $0 -nior $43.99 $0 Prolect $37.62 $0 Staff $21.63 $0 echnician $27.62 $0 Cadd $28.85 $0 Support $17.10 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL DIRECT LABOR >.. 8,'%,c';a ; r „x„� , .,, , � yp }°y'r'F� $O 2. LABOR OVERHEAD OH RATE xBASE = EST. COST Overhead 211.00% $0 $0 TOTAL LABOR OVERHEAD .. ,.s`x t. w..ti� t .... :_.i. m $O 3. TRAVEL' (see page Iwo for Itemized costs) EST. COST .. a. Transportation $0 b. Per Diem or Subsistence $0 TOTAL TRAVEL ^�+.'..;'..�'. $0 4. SUBCONTRACTORS/SUPPLIERS— EST. COST NONE TOTAL SUBCONTRACTORS/SUPPLIERS"- .. $0 5. OTHER DIRECT COSTS' (see page two for itemized costs) TOTAL DIRECT COST AND OVERHEAD $0 6. GENERAL. B ADMIN. EXPENSE (0% OF REM NOS. 3, 4 and 5) $0 7. FEE: (10% OF ITEM NOS. 1 and 2) $0 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST AND FEE $D • ITEMIZE ON SECOND PANE OF TORN rye• " ATTACHED'S FORM Br FOR ALL PROPOSED SUBCONTRACTORS 53 CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL (Services) RCTC "FORM 60" PAGE 2 OF 2 SUPPORTING SCHEDULE ITEM NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION EST. COST ($) 1 Per Diem cost 2 Car mileage $0.50 3 Rental Car cost 4 Travel cost 5 Photocopies (Black 8 White) $0.00 6 Photocopies (Color) $0.10 7 Photographs/ cost 8 other reprographic Services cost 9 Postage/Shipping cost 10 Courier Service cost 11 Other Rentals, supplies, purchases cost 12 Suhcontrcators cost TYPE NAME AND TITLE Shah Ghanbari - President SIGNATURE IIN- ,Q16 ,l NAME OF FIRM Group Delta Consultants, Inc. DATE OF SUBMISSION May 6, 2010 54 • ITERIgif=s-- • • May 5, 2010 Ana Buening ICF International 1 Ada, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92618 Subject: Iteris Review of RCTC Compensation and Payment Terms Dear Ms. Buening Iteris has reviewed Attachment A, Compensation and Payment. We have the following comments on Attachment A: • We do not believe that this attachment matches a standard Form 60 in that it includes the use of a Multiplier that includes the sum of Direct Salary Costs, Payroll Additives, Overhead Costs and Profit. A section corresponding to a standard Form 60 would consist of an Overhead multiplier expressed as a percentage of Direct Salary Costs. This overhead may consist of both a payroll additive element and a labor overhead element, or in our case, simply a single labor overhead element. The profit should not be included in this section since it is addressed in the section titled "Fixed Fee". Before agreeing to the terms noted in this Attachment, we believe it needs to be modified to be in conformance with the Form 60 provisions, and it should not mix the Cost Plus Fixed Fee provisions with the Labor Multiplier. We will be pleased to work with the team to resolve this issue. Sincerely, Iteris, Inc. Gary Hamrick Vice President 55 FORM 60 CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL (Services) RCTC "FORM 60' PAGE 1 OF 2 NAME OF PROPOSER hens, Inc. DNIMONISYLOCA110663)WHERE SERVICES ARE 70DEPERFORMED HOAE oFFEE ADDRESS 1700 Carnegie Avenue, Suite 100 LA, Ontario, Santa Ana, Long Beach'', Santa Are. CA 92705 evrrlRAm ma 10-31-033-00 SERVICES 70 eE FERFORLED On -Call Environmental Consulting Services PROPOSAL $0 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF COST ELEMENTS 1. DIRECT LABOR ESTIMATED RATE/HOUR EST. COST (5) TOTAL EST. Nigger/ Davidian - $77.48 $0 Steven Greene $68.24 $0 Rob Olson $58.78 $0 ) Ali Banava $44.80 $0 Ashwin SOW $37.22 $0 Vamshi Akkintepally $40.30 SO Wahid Farhat $34.16 $0 Gina Escahante $26.12 $0 Rajat Parashar $33.58 $0 Omar Erroa $30.48 $0 Michael Wuliorst $33.78 $0 Shaumik Pal $46.14 $0 _ Mehul Champaneri $3526 $0 Beatrice Vega $78.54 $g Deepak Kaushik $39.90 SO $0 $0 SO $0 $0 $o TOTAL DIRECT LABOR :',AmtAP- �� SO 2. LABOR OVERHEAD OH RATE x BASE = EST. COST 169.77% $0 $0 TOTAL LABOR OVERHEAD �€ n?: � g�,;��. NO $0 3. TRAVEL' (see page two for Itemized costa) EST. COST a. Transportation SO 0. Per Diem or Subsidence SO TOTAL TRAVEL 4. SUBCONTRACTOR&SUPPLIERS•• EST. COST NONE TOTAL SUBCONTRACTORS/SUPPLIERS _ .. $O 5. OTHER DIRECT COSTS- (see page twofor itemized costs) TOTAL DIRECT COST AND OVERHEAD $0 j 6. GENERAL S ADmIN EXPENSE (014 OF ITEM NOS. 3, 4 and 5) SO 1 7. FEE: (10%OF ITEM NOS. 1 and 2) SO j TOTAL ESTIMATED COST AND FEE SO ' ITEMIZE ON SECOND PAGE OF 'FORM EP - ATTACHED IS TORN BIZ POE ALL PROPOSED SUBCONTRACTORS 56 • CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL (Services) RCTC "FORM 60" PAGE 2 of 2 SUPPORTING SCHEDULE ITEM NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION EST. cosr is) 1 Per Diem 2 Car mileage 0.505/mile 3 Rental Car actual 4 Travel actual 5 Photocopies (Black & White) N/C 6 Photocopies (Color) N/C 7 Photographs/ 8 Outside reprographic Services actual 9 Postage/Shipping actual 10 Courier Service actual 11 Other Rentals, supplies, purchases 12 Traffic counts actual 13 14 15 16 17 TYPE NAME AND TITLE Gary Hamrick SIGNATURE ��-- NAME OF FIRM !tens, Inc. DATE OF SUBMISSION 5/5/2010 57 SAN DIEGO NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM BALBOA PARK - SAN DIEGO SOCIETY OF NATURAL HISTORY - ESTABLISHED 1874 6 May 2010 Ms. Anna Buening ICF International 1 Ada, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92618 RE: RCTC On -Call Environmental Contract Dear Ms. Buening: The Department of PaleoServices at the San Diego Natural History Museum has reviewed and acknowledged the Compensation and Payment provisions (Attachment "A") portion of the above referenced contract. If you have any additional questions, please contact Tom Demdr6, Director of PaleoServices, at 619-255-0232 or tdemere@sdnlxm.ora. Sincerely, George Brooks-Gonyer Vice President, COO/CFO San Diego Natural History Museum Post Office Box 121390 * San Diego, Cnlirontin 92112-1390 • Telephone 619-255-0232 * FAX 619-255.0344 * www.sdnlon.org 58 • • FORM 60 CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL (Services) RCTC `FORM Mr PAGE 1 OF 2 NAME OF PROPOSER San Diego Natural l story Museum, Department of PaleoSenvicea DIViSONISPLOCATtoNtS) WHERE SERVIESARE TO BE PERFORMED NOMEOFFICEADDRESS ' 1788 El Prado . n Diego. CA 92101 comma= no. 10.31.083-00 '.. SERVICES TOSE PERFORMEo On -Call Environmental ConsuMng Services PROPOSAL $0 DETAILED DESORPTION OF COST ELEMENTS 1.. DIRECT LABOR ESTIMATED RATE/HOUR EST. COSTS) TOTAL EST. tomes Demerit $50.00 $0 ino Calvano $25.00 $0 ' Margaret Canino $17.10 $0 `John Planner $19.35 SO Christopher Melee $18.00 SO Kesler Randall $18.90 SO 'Bled Riney $23.40 SO -at Sena $20.25 SO PA Siren $27.00 $0 lissa Soetaert $22.00 SO SO I SO SO SO SO SO $O $D SO $0 $0 TOTAL DIRECT LABOR ..... .... .....y.1::-.V:,.43.;? zM1;`yj�?x� , $0 2. LABOR OVERHEAD OH RATE x BASE = EST. COST 22.80% SO SO I f TOTAL LABOR OVERHEAD .. ?2,*':-.;.' '' » ;. . - - " $O 3. TRAVEL' tsee page two Tor Bemired costs) EST. COST a. Transportation $0 b. Per Diem or Subsistence $0 TOTAL TRAVEL ',.. ' :,' ','= $0 4. SUBCONTRACTORSISUPPLIERS^ EST. COST NONE'-:: I TOTAL SUBCONTRACTORS/SUPPLIERS $0 5. OTHER DIRECT COSTS' (see page two for Ilamized costs) TOTAL DIRECT COST AND OVERHEAD $0 S. GENERAL AADMIN. EXPENSE (17.71%OF ITEM NOS. 3.4 end 51 $0 7. FEE t9.5% OF ITEM NOS.1 and 2) $O j TOTAL ESTIMATED COST AND FEE $0 • NEMISE ON SECOND PAGE OF 'POEM MP ' — ATIACNED IS TORSI Sr FOR ALL PROPGSED SUPCONINACTORS _ I 59 CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL (Services) RCTC "FORM 60" PAGE 2 OF 2 SUPPORTING SCHEDULE ITEM NO.. ITEM DESCRIPTION EST. COST IS) 1 Per Diem $130 2 Car mileage $0.50 3 Rental Car $50 4 Travel at cost 5 Photocopies (Black & White) $0.10/ .. 6 Photocopies (Color) $020/cop 7 Photographs/ at cost 8 other reprographic Services at cos 9 Postage/Shipping at cos I 10 Courier Service 11 Other Rentals, supplies, purchases 12 13 14 15 16 17 TYPE NAME AND TITLE Tom Demere, Director, Department of PaleoServices SIGN�AT E ,j '���9-^�.- 11A0- ncaj /1'tl NAME OF FIRM San Diego Natural History Museum DATE OF SUBMISSION May 6, 2010 I • 60 • • TRC May 6, 2010 Ms. Anna Buening Proposal Coordinator ICF INTERNATIONAL 1 Ada, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92618 Re: Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) - On -Call Environmental Contract Dear Ms. Buening: Please be advised that TRC Solutions, Inc. (TRC) has received notification that the ICF International (ICF) team of which we were part of was selected to negotiate a contract for the above referenced On -Call project with the RCTC. As such TRC has been requested to prepare and submit to ICF a completed form 60 for the referenced project. The completed form 60 has prepared and is included as an attachment to this letter. Additionally, this letter serves as - written acknowledgement of TRC's review of the "Compensation and Payment" provisions (Attachment A) related to the completed form 60. Thank you for the opportunity to support this project. Please let me know if you require any additional information related to our part of the submittal. I can be reached at (949)341-7443. Steven M. Ferrara Vice President TRC Solutions, Inc. 123 Technology Drive, Irvine CA. 92618 • (949)727-9336 61 FORM 60 d CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL _ (Services} RCTC "FORM 60- PAGE 1 OF 2 OMSIOMSyLOCATION(S) WHERE SERVICES ARE TO BE PERFORMED NAME OF PROPOSER TRC Solutions, Inc. HOME OFFICE ADDRESS 123 Technology Drive Irvine, CA 92618 cOHrancrua 10-31-033-00 SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED On -Call Environmental Consulting Services PROPOSAL $0 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF COST ELEMENTS 1. DIRECT -MICR ESTIMATED FLAW/HOUR EST. COST($) TOTAL EST. David Lennon (Senior Project Manager) 0 $60.79 $0 Kathy Stevens (Senior Project Manager) 0 $46.64 $0 Stephanie Wemette (Project Manager) 0 $36.46 $0 Jerome Jaminel (SdtAAx Project Scientist) 0 $43A2 $0 Marc Cassiity (Senior Project Scientist) 0 $43.09 $0 Alex Torres (Senior Staff Engineer) 0 $35.00 $0 Ryan Villanueva (Staff Scientist) 0 $24.34 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 - $0 .$0 SO $o $0 $0 SD $0 So TOTAL DIRECT LABOR a,^Ba a 2 - �f, "-,x .',- - v' i„ $0 2. LABOR OVERHEAD OH RATE x BASE = EST. MST 173.12% $0 $0 TOTAL LABOR OVERHEAD , ' .r;`. ' s+2 �� ±s ' �%h°r $0 3. TRAVEL' (see papa Iwo for ilentted costs) EST. COST a. Transportation $0 b. Per Diem or Subsistence $0 TOTAL TRAVEL ' �s :'Wi*,:r, $0 4. SUBCONTRACTORS/SUPPLIERS— EST. COST NONE & F � 4ig'' , t.ii.7S-1'; e: Y-` TOTAL SUBCONTRACTORS/SUPPLIERS ': $0 5. OTHER DIRECT COSTS' (see page Iwo for itemized Costs) $0 TOTAL DIRECT COST AND OVERHEAD $0 6. GENERAL &ADMIN. EXPENSE (3%OF ITEM NOS. 3, 4 and 5) $0 7. FEE: (10% OF REM NOS. 1 and 2) W TOTAL ESTIMATED COST AND FEE $0 • ITEMIZE ONSECONDPAGE OF'TOM 60- - ATTACHED IS 'FORM Se FOR AM PROPOSED SUBCONTRACTORS • 62 CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL (Services) RCTC "FORM 60" PAGE 2 OF 2 SUPPORTING SCHEDULE ITEM NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION EST. COST IS/ 1 Per Diem actual cost 2 Car mileage $0.50 3 Rental Car actual cost 4 Travel actual cost 5 Photocopies (Black & White) $0.05/copy 6 Photocopies (Color) $0.55/copy 7 Photographs/ actual cost 8 other reprographic Services/ blue print (outside services) actual cost 9 Postage/Shipping $25 10 Courier Service $100 11 Other Rentals, supplies, purchases actual cost 12 13 14 15 16 17 i I TYPE NAME AND TITLE Steven M. Ferrara Vice President SIGNATU � - � �, C'J U %ll NAME OF FIRM TRC Solutions, Inc. DATE OF SUBMISSION May 6, 2010 63 7YLININTERNATIONAL engineers I planners I scientists May 5, 2010 • Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, P Floor P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 SUBJECT: ROTC On -Cat) Contract — Compensation and Payment Provision Acknowledgement To whom it may concern: I, Allison K. Bagby, Vice President and Corporate Controller of T.Y. Lin International certify that I have reviewed the Commission's "Compensation and Payment" provisions. Sincerely, T.Y. Lin International Allison K. Bagb Vice President, Corporate Controller Two Horrison Street, Suite 500 I San Francisco. Coldornia 94105 I T 415.291.3700 I F 415.433.0807 I www.lylin.com 64 FOR CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL (Services) RCTC -FORM 60" PAGE 1 OF 2 NAME OF PROPOSER - T.Y. Lin International DIVISION(SyLOCATION(S) WHERE SERVICES ARE TO BE PERFORMED HOME OFFICE ADDRESS 3550 Vine Street, Suite 120 Riverside County Riverside, CA 92507 cowman*. 10-31-083-00 SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED On -Call Environmental Consulting Services PROPMAI $0 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF COST ELEMENTS 1. DIRECT LABOR ESTIMATED RATE/HOUR EST. COST ($) TOTAL EST. Anthony, Ken $30.00 $0 Antonucci, Gary $87.50 $0 .Ashley, Mark $113.94 $0 Barsis, Kristen $21.45 $0 Boctor, Patrick $43.45 $0 Brungraber, Griffin $31.25 $0 Chittaphong, Kham $21.00 $0 Colcol. Oscar $32.50 $0 Cole, Jared $44.85 $0 Dekker, Garrett $30.00 $0 Durant, Wade $57 80 $0 Femon, Clark $91.35 $0 Fitzwilliam, Daniel $52.90 $0 Flint, Timothy $39.90 $0 Fukuhara, Tom $50.50 $0 Fuller, Tim . $30.00 $0 Gilbert, Michael $50A5 $0 Gnip, Tatyana $23.45 $0 Goedhart, Pieter $36.30 $0 Gblchoobian, Roya $55.20 $0 Gonzalez, Rodrigo $70.90 $0 Griffith, David $65.85 $0 Grosz, Lynn $31.50 $0 Hopper, Leslie $80.90 $0 Kim, Jeffrey $57.05 $0 Kjolsing, Eric $34.35 $0 LaHaye, Jeremy $45.35 $0 Lopez Toro, Carolina $30.00 $0 Lustig, Christine $26.50 $0 Makley, Brett $44 95 $0 Martin, Ivan $23.00 $0 Matthys. Darnell $26.25 $0 McKibben -Bea, Connie $40.05 $0 Monsefan, Arash $33.65 $0 Munz, Ryan $30.30 $0 Padilla, Bertha $15.00 $0 Park, Hoon $44.00 $0 Peng, Henry $52.80 $0 Razon, Samantha $18.00 $0 Rochelle, Brian $41.35 $0 65 FORM 60 'Rucker, Jim $69.85 $0 )Sales, Cathy $34.65 $0 Sanchez, Anthony $50.35 $0 Sanchez, Ruben $21.00 $0 Kristirra $16.50 $0. (Schuh Shamble, Alfred (Noel) $31.30 $0 Smith, Joseph $90.00 $0 Smith, Pete $47.35 $0 Stephens, Brett $32,00 $0 Stone, Archie (Nelson) $75.00 $0 Tognoli, Joseph $83,30 $0 Toledo, Andy $32.70 $0 Wang, Yihong $36.95 $0 $D TOTAL DIRECT LABOR s t �rii -.v�i'+`il�?'i �x � s ; $0 2. LABOR OVERHEAD OH RATE x BASE = f EST COST 164.68% $0 $0 TOTAL LABOR OVERHEAD 4.��. _ 'snr•5 $O 3. TRAVEL' (see page hvo For itemized frosts) EST. COST a. Transportation $0 b. Per Diem or. Subsistence $0 - - TOTAL TRAVEL .;.xV .�:;r',te; $0 4. SUBCONTRACTORS/SUPPLIERS" - EST. COST NONE vFs . i . ' -ft TOTAL SUBCONTRACTORS/SUPPLIERS .s �;r*�,'",•:->-.��:>;;:r"- $0 5. OTHER DIRECT COSTS` (see page two for itemized costs) - TOTAL DIRECT COST AND OVERHEAD $0 6. GENERAL 8 ADMIN. EXPENSE (10%OF ITEM NOS. 3.4 and 5) $0 7. FEE: (10% OF REM NOS. 1 and 2) $0 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST AND FEE $0 • ITEMIZE ON SECOND PAGE OF 'FORM SO, •• ATTACHED IS "FORM SW FOR ALL PROPOSED SUBCONTRACTORS 66 CONTRACT PRICING PROPOSAL (Services) ROTC "FORM cr PAGE 2 OF 2 SUPPORTING SCHEDULE REM NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION EST. COST (S) 1 Per Diem Actual Cost 2 Car mileage Current IRS Rate 3 Rental Car Actual Cost 4 Travel Actual Cost 5 Photocopies (Black & White) Actual Cost 6 Photocopies (Color) Actual Cost 7 Photographs! Actual Cost 8 Other reprographic Services Actual Cost 9 Postage/Shipping Actual Cost 10 Courier Service Actual Cost 11 Other Rentals, supplies, purchases Actual Cost 12 13 14 15 16 17 I TYPE NAME AND TITLE Allison K. Bagby, Vice President/Corporate Controller SIG RE ' !'� NAME OF FIRM .Y. Lin International DATE O' SUBMISSIO May 6, 20 67 • AGENDA ITEM 9 • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 24, 2010 TO: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee FROM: Min Saysay, Right of Way Manager THROUGH: Marlin Feenstra, Project Delivery Director SUBJECT: Amendments to Agreements with David Evans & Associates, Project Design Consultants, and Psomas for On -Call Right of Way Engineering and Surveying Services STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the following agreements for on -call right of way engineering and surveying services for the aggregate amount of $450,000; a) Agreement No. 07-33-143-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 07-33-143-00, with David Evans & Associates; b) Agreement No. 07-33-145-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 07-33-145-00, with Project Design Consultants; and c) Agreement No. 07-33-144-02, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 07-33-144-00, with Psomas; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its June 13, 2007 meeting, the Commission awarded agreements to David Evans & Associates, Project Design Consultants, and Psomas for on -call right of way engineering and surveying services. The consulting firms provide services to support current Commission projects and future Measure A projects. Right of way engineering and surveying companies provide boundary maps, monumentation maps, survey control maps, records of survey, parcel or appraisal maps, lot line adjustments, subdivision maps, legal descriptions and deeds. Current and anticipated right of way engineering and survey services allow staff the flexibility to respond in a timely manner to accommodate the Commission's capital projects program. Examples include projects such as the Perris Valley Line, various locations on railroad property where current activities may require the Agenda Item 9 68 determination of property lines, and various other capital projects where survey and staking for individual properties are not included in the overall scope of services for the design. The contracts for these services and the awarding of the work on a rotating, as -needed basis, are in accordance with the terms of the Commission policies and state law. The original aggregate budget for the three agreements is $300,000, which was based on an estimate of the work that would be required for the past three years. At this time, $181,442 has been expended and $1 18,558 obligated. Staff has estimated that for the next fiscal year, $450,000 will be needed to cover anticipated engineering and survey work. This cost for the additional work noted above has been included in the annual budget for FY 2010/11. All three companies agreed to reduce their profit margin by 30% effective upon approval of the amendment to the agreement. Staff recommends approval of amendments with David Evans & Associates, Project Design Consultants, and Psomas for right of way engineering and surveying services. The total not to exceed amount for the three amendments is an aggregate of $450,000, which brings the total aggregate amount of the contracts to $750,000. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2010/11 Amount: $450,000 Source of Funds: 1989 Measure A Budget Adjustment: no GL/Project Accounting No.: 003800 81403 00066 0000 221 33 81401 $450,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: -,,_11.bv."016a4,1 Date: 05/18/10 Agenda Item 9 • 69 AGENDA ITEM 10 • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: May 24, 2010 TO: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee FROM: Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager THROUGH: Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director SUBJECT: Proposed Metrolink Budget for Fiscal Year 2010/11 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Adopt the preliminary FY 2010/11 Metrolink operating and capital budget; 2) Allocate the Commission's funding commitment to the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) in an amount not to exceed of $8 million including contingency, in Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds for train operations and maintenance of way, and $1,224,700 for capital projects to be funded by Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5307 funds; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: By virtue of the joint powers agreement, the five member agencies, which comprise the SCRRA, must formally commit to fund their proportionate shares of commuter rail operating and capital costs. Each member agency must approve the budget before adoption of a final budget by the Metrolink Board, no later than June 30, 2010. Service and funding levels are limited by the policy and budget constraints of the member agencies and are negotiated each year. FY 2009/10 Metrolink Review • Hired a new Chief Executive Officer (CEO), John E. Fenton, who has an extensive railroad and safety background; • Continued aggressive safety efforts to follow up on the Peer Safety Review recommendations and performed increased efficiency testing; • Installed inward and outward video cameras in rail cars to improve safety and supervision; • Further developed of the Positive Train Control program and released the bid package for the vendor integrator contract; Agenda Item 10 70 • Experienced reductions in ridership and revenue caused by economic factors, with the Inland Empire -Orange County (IEOC) Line showing significant drops that have only recently begun to stabilize; • With the loss of ridership and fare revenue, worked through extensive budget issues that resulted in a service cut impacting two midday weekday IEOC trains and some reductions in weekend service. A 6% fare increase and a reformatted fare policy was also instituted; • Successfully negotiated train operating contractor change to Amtrak; • Completed Phase 1 of the Eastern Maintenance Facility in Colton; and • Received delivery of first new passenger rail cars with the latest crash resistant technology designed to provide maximum passenger safety. FY 2010/11 Looking Forward • Continue safety focus; the new CEO has identified safety as SCRRA's highest priority. The CEO has also stated that he intends to focus on cost control; • Commence Amtrak's role as the operating contractor on July 1, 2010; • Develop an updated strategic plan for Metrolink; • Receive further delivery and rollout into service of the new passenger rail cars; and • Award of the contract for positive train control development and implementation. Riverside County Service Impact Proposed for FY 2010/11 Three Metrolink commuter rail lines traverse Riverside County: the Riverside Line, the IEOC Line, and the 91 Line. The FY 2010/11 draft Metrolink budget proposes no additional changes in service levels at this time. With the economic slowdown and drop in sales tax revenue, Metrolink has thoroughly reviewed the costs and benefits of various service changes. A number of different scenarios were proposed to the Metrolink Board as part of the budget development process. The Metrolink Board ultimately took action to approve several service adjustments, impacting the San Bernardino and Ventura lines. In addition, the Board approved a 6% fare increase and multiple fare policy adjustments in order to move forward with a more balanced budget. Commission's FY 2010/11 Operating Subsidy Obligation The current SCRRA request of the Commission is for $7,092,200 for operations and maintenance of way, which represents a $151,600 increase or 2.18% over the FY 2009/10 amended budget. Staff has proposed a conservative funding obligation for the SCRRA operating subsidy in the annual proposed budget in the amount of $8 million. This amount includes a significant contingency to address Agenda Item 10 • • • 71 unforeseen expenses due to the recession and other potential liabilities that may arise in the upcoming year. Staff's recent experience shows that this conservative budgeting is helpful as it provides the Commission with flexibility to meet its obligations as they might arise in the current economic climate. For example, at the beginning of FY 2009/10, the Commission approved the subsidy obligation of $7 million for operations while the request from SCRRA was for $6.5 million. Due to ridership and revenue drops that occurred over time during the fiscal year, the budget requirement of the Commission for its operating subsidy obligation had grown to $6.9 million by midyear. While this amount was within the Commission's original budgeted amount, it still represented a significant unanticipated obligation. Staff does not expect to fully expend the contingency set aside for the FY 2010/11 budget, and, should a large unforeseen demand against this contingency be presented, staff will return to the Commission with a report. As with past funding, the operating subsidy will come from LTF set aside for rail operations. Operating Cost Overview The overall Metrolink FY 2010/11 operating budget is $173,330,400 or 5.09% greater than the amended FY 2009/10 budget. The following elements represent the various changes: • An increase in the operating contract expenses based on the new contractor's rates, resulting in $4.6 million or 16% line item budget increase over the previous year. • An increase in the cost of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel resulting in a $2.6 million or 21 % line item budget impact over the previous year. • An increase in equipment maintenance expenses due to new locomotives and rail cars. This increase is $1.1 million or 5% over the previous year. • An increase in maintenance of way expenses including track and signal contracts of $1.5 million or 6% over the previous year. • An increase in the agency's insurance program by $1.3 million or 9% over the prior year. Capital Contribution The Commission's new capital and capital renovation obligation for FY 2009/10 is projected at $1,224,700. This will be funded using FTA 5307 grant funds used for various projects including rehabilitation and renovation of rolling stock and track projects, ticket vending machine replacements, and maintenance of way technology improvements. Agenda Item 10 72 Summary Financial Subsidy Impact to Commission The proposed Commission operating subsidy is $8 million. The SCRRA request of $7,092,200 represents 4% of the $173,330,400 Metrolink operating budget and will be funded with LTF funds. The total capital rehabilitation project subsidy of $1,224,700 represents 4.9% of the $25,085,966 capital rehabilitation budget and will be funded with FTA 5307 funds. The FTA Section 5307 funds do not pass - through the Commission and are received directly by SCRRA. Systemwide In FY 2010/11, Metrolink will celebrate its 18th year providing Metrolink commuter rail service in Southern California. Opening with three lines and 12 stations in October 1992, the SCRRA today operates over 512 route miles on seven lines, serving 55 stations in six counties. Average weekday ridership is projected to total over 42,000 one-way trips. The resulting fare box revenue is projected at $76 million or 5.8% over the current year amended budget. The system anticipates a relatively flat projection for weekday riders. Fare revenues represent 43.7% of total operating expenses. Member agency contributions of $81.8 million for operations represent approximately 47% of total operating expenses resulting in revenue recovery in the budget of 52.9%, one of the higher revenuerecovery ratios among commuter rail properties nationwide. In 2004, the Metrolink Board approved a 10-year fare restructuring program that began July 1, 2005, and changed the method for calculating fares to one based on the driving mileage between stations. The 10-year fare restructuring program included an underlying average annual fare increase of 3.5%. To address potential budget shortfalls, the Board approved a 6% fare increase for FY 2010/11 and made a number for fare modifications designed to stabilize fare revenue. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2010/11 Amount: $8,000,000 Operations - LTF Source of Funds: Capital -FTA Section 5307 funds which do not pass through Budget Adjustment: No Commission. GLA No.: 004199 103 25 86101 86101 $8,000,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \yit�,,44,0,1,�,.� Date: 05/13/10 Attachment: SCRRA FY 2009/10 Budget Operating Subsidy Allocation by County Agenda Item 10 73 (%Z0'Z) (t'SZt) 5'££Z`9 %Lt17 L'16£ I•tLi`6 _ 3/48T'Z 9'151 . 9'0b6`9 , — %01'6Z b'0£917 8765`51 (%£L'Z) (I'L80`I) • 5'£88`6£ — %60'S 0'I96`£ 51/Z8`LL _.. Ans43 a8vinaand (asnawal)pseaaaul ;a8png papa unr OT-600Z AA 8'L0I`9$ 8'S9S`6$ Z'Z60`LS Z'£ZZ`OZ$ 'p'96L`8£$ b'S8L`T8$ aoys:►or,�uno,(saos, £'SIS`£S S'ES£`ZT$ b'ZLS`SS L'b88`6I$ O'6IZ`OS$ 6'bbS`[6S sannaaag mei, Z'bEL b'IS 6'Z8E 8'917VZ —� 0'9II`I 1'Ebl Z'IT1 E'E86`0T 0'0 T'[TI Z'1E 1'0E17`5 L'8Ll`Z 0'69Z 1'E56 01417'91 1'OLO'L Z1L8 6'EI54T 8'9SL`Ob 0'660`1I L'ZSt` I E'Z66'Z 0'100`9L AeM;o-aoueualmejA[ 811peiad()=Iv0 SunlaledsIQ xoclalegssolo sanctanau l'SZ9`6$ b'6I6'TZS 91799`ZTS 0110V011 t'STO`68$ b'0£E`ELTS MOW VIII sasnadzg MAL _ L'LSL E'610`Z VLEL`1 6'80T`S$ 9'£99`Z 5'0En L'105`£ 9`EZL`EI$ 6'99b`I 9'856`1 V'S89 L'£55'8$ 0'551/tr 8'1705`E 1'690`9 I'6L0`9Z$ i 6'Ib8`6 £'9179`6 S'82L`5l 9'86L`ES$ 0'58I`61 9'651`61 8'TZL`LZ 0179Z`L0l$ aousinsui saowag 7g. uoT nsF. uare deb jo-aaaeualuteyi swfmaS 35' suollslad0 IrPu.L sasuadza, aisgs JIJA aaugg OVI N'S aisgg aLI I arn% VIDO a1n is WENDY' IPOI d3 'BPI • • 00000 A N110) As NOLLVDO'PIV MINIM ONLINI 3a0 IaDa119 11110Z "HVRA Wand )1.1110H.Lf1V'IIV1i'1V141015721 MHO/1 V) N la11S110S • '4.ffirmmnse Metrolink Budget FY 2010/11 " Systemwide Ridership - - Average Weekday System Ridership* since FY 2000 L IEOC Line Ridership 1ROC Line Average Weekday Ridership 4. ..... .... &le oe ... 4...':f• ... . • • . • :. • .:•'.4•.:'...*-• • ..p;;;;.e .& aePO4,,, , lr!!':9"".L'.' :;',4Y "0*.4.,=, • • ./ "..c,': ..","4.• sue`c(aVe-;"77/..TP./1.°,::....4:-..,: .,,,...... ..../ ......... .,, 6.. • -,-.:S. . .„ _ ' ' ' !keys? , _ , , _ _ 1"-A MMTN7 °LINK 1 1 3 it Riverside Line Ridership = '11" rafrti; RIverside. line Average Weekday Rideishig 91 Line Ridership _ St Line Average Weekday Ridership ess ye ia "s s sts 2011 Operating Budget • Avg. Daily Ridership 41,787 (Flat) • Avg. 6% Fare Increase • Additional Fare Policy Changes • Service Reductions affecting RCTC/ Riverside Communities • Operating Budget $173.3 M (5.09% u ) • Fare Revenues = 44% of Operating Costs • Member Agencies' subsidy = 47% of total costs • Positive Train Control • Inward facing Cameras in Locomotives • Increased Efficiency Testing • Increase Safety Oversight_ • Automatic Train Stops • Safer Rail Cars RCTC Stations �?�tllull;:�fluti( Metrolink Update • Hired New CEO — John Fenton • Agency Reorganization • Even Stronger Safety Focus • New Operations Contractor — Amtrak • Economic Factors Impacting Budget • IEOC weekend and Midday Service Reductions in February 2010 RCTC Impact Metrolink combined operating and capital budgets total $198.3 M ($173.3 M operating + $25 M capital) RCTC operating subsidy of $8.0 M is 4%share, this includes $900,000 contingency for budget purposes. • RCTC capital subsidy of $1.2 M is 4.9% share • Total RCTC subsidy allocation is $9.3 M ($8.0 M of LTF + $1.2 M of Federal funds) • Sales Tax and LTF Revenues are down this year, need to utilize reserves Rail Operations Issues £hali�ii<< Going Forward... • Station operations cost increasing • Additional operations cost of four stations with PVL • Station Rehabilitation Program • Security Assessment • Need for Property Management 2 Questions? 3 AGENDA ITEM 11 RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 24, 2010 TO: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee FROM: Henry Nickel, Staff Analyst Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager THROUGH: Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director SUBJECT: Amendment to Commission's Commuter Rail Program Fiscal Year 2006/07 and Fiscal Year 2009/10 Short Range Transit Plans STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Amend the FY 2006/07 Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) to reflect a reallocation of $4 million in Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5307 program funds originally approved for the North Main Corona parking structure to the Perris Valley Line (PVL) project; 2) Amend the Commission's Commuter Rail Program's FY 2009/10 SRTP to reflect allocation of $9.975 million in FTA Section 5309 program funds and deobligation of $8.8 million in Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds and $1.175 million in State Transit Assistance (STA) funds for the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) rail car procurement project and reduction of LTF Capital Improvement Program expenditures by $480,000; 3) Approve reductions to budgeted revenues and expenditures in the LTF, STA, Rail Operations, and Rail Capital funds; and 4) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Rail Program is requesting amendments to its FY 2006/07 and FY 2009/10 Commuter Rail SRTPs as follows: FY 2006/07 SRTP Proposed Amendment 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 by the ridership forecast. To complete the funding plan for the parking structure, $16 million in federal Section 5307 funds were requested. The construction phase is now near completion and based on accounting of outstanding approved change orders, an estimated $4 million in Section 5307 funds remain. The Rail Program is Agenda Item 11 75 now requesting approval to reallocate the remaining balance of $4 million in Section 5307 funds from the North Main Corona parking structure project to the PVL project to cover needed funds for construction management of the new rail line. Federal Sec 5307 Funding North Main Corona Parking Structure. Perris Valley Line Project Total Original Plan Request $16,000,000 ($4,000,000) $ 2, 500,000 $18, 500,000 FY 2009/10 SRTP Proposed Amendment 4,000,000 $0 Modified Plan $12,000,000 6,500,000 $18,500,000 The approved FY 2009/10 SRTP included allocation of $8.8 million in LTF and $4.5 million in STA funds for the purchase of new rail cars for Metrolink, as well as $500,000 in LTF for the Capital Improvement Plan project. Currently, the Commission maintains significant reserve funds in federal Section 5309. Due to reduced LTF and STA revenues this year and given the need to make these fund sources available for future operating needs, the following modifications to the FY 2009/10 SRTP, as shown on Attachment 2, Tables 2a and 2b are requested: • Reflect allocation of $9.975 million in FTA Section 5309 and deobligate $8.8 million in LTF funds and $1.175 million in STA funds for the SCRRA rail car procurement project; and • Reduce LTF Capital Improvement Program expenditures by $480,000. These changes resulted in a combined decrease of $10.455 million in LTF and STA expenditures with the additional use of $9.975 million in Section 5309 funding, which will be accessed directly by SCRRA and will not flow through the Commission's account records. The net change in the Rail Program's capital expenditure plan is a decrease of $480,000 for FY 2009/10. There is no impact to the farebox recovery ratio and to other Productivity Improvement Program indicators since the monies are designated for capital expenditures only. Agenda Item 11 • 76 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2009/10 Amount: $10,455,000 Source of Funds: LTF - Western County Rail Budget Ad ustment: Yes 601 62 86102 $9,280,000 241 62 86102 $1,175,000 GLA No.: 004199 86102 103 25 86102 $9,975,000 004199 90701 221 33 90701 $480,000 004199 401 40102 103 25 40102 $8,800,000 004199 415 41510 103 25 41502 $1,175,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \41,t4uosittet, Date: 05/17/10 Attachments: 1) FY 2006/07 Operating and Capital Assistance by Funding Source 2) FY 2009/10 Operating and Capital Assistance by Funding Source Agenda Item 11 77 • RCTC Commuter Rail FY 2006/07 OPERATING and CAPITAL ASSISTANCE BY FUNDING SOURCE Table 1 - Operating Assistance Table 1a. Currently Approved O ATTACHMENT Project Description Total LTF STA MeasureA Sec 5307 - Riv- San. Bernardino Section 5309 Other SCRRAOPerahng Subsidy $ 5,508,700.00 $ 5,508,700.00 RCTC Rail Operations $ 1.597.900.00 $ 1,597,900.00 Total: Operating $ 7,106,600.00 $ 7,106,600.00 0 0 0 0 0 Table lb. Modified Operating Funding Plan SCRRA Operafng Subsidy $ 5508,700.00 $ 5.508.700.00 RCTC Rail Operations $ 1.597.900.00 $ 1,597,900.00 Total: Operating $ 7.106600.00 $ 7,106,600.00 0 0 0 0 0 DIFFERENCE BET. CURRENTLY APPROVED & MODIFIED OPERATING PLAN $ - s - s - s - s Table 2 - Capital Assistance Table 2a. Currently Approved Capital Funding Plan Proled Description Total LTF STA Measure A Sec 5307 - RH- San. Bernardino Section 5309 Other SCRRA Rehab/Renovation FY07-RCTC Share $ 1,125,894 $ 405.986 $719,908 RCTC's share of OCTA's FY07 Rehab & Renovation 75,341 $ 75.341 Eastern Area Maintenance Facility -RCTC Share 2,261,000 $ 2.261,000 SCRRA Electronic Passenger Information System - RCTC Share 0 156.762 $ 1156,762) Penis Valley Line - Preiminary Engineering FY 07 10,574 800 8,074,800 $:.;_ 2500;00'0 RCTC Stab Capital Improvement Program FY 07 500 000 500.000 NMCorona Parking Structure(added per SRTP Amendment approved 5/9/071 29771,489 747714 3,523,775 .'.. 16.000.000 9.500.000 Total: Capital $ 44.308,524 $ 1404476 $ 3.523775 $ 8,074,800 $ 21085,565 $ - $10,219908 Table 2b. Modified Capital Funding Plan Protect Description Total LTF STA Measure A Sec 5307 - Riv- San. Bernardino Section 5309 Other SCRRA Rehab/Renova6on FY07 -RCTC Share $ 1.125,894 $ 405,986 $719.908 RCM's share of ()CIA's FY07 Rehab & Renovation 75341 $ 75,341 Eastern Area Maintenance Facility -RCTC Share 2261,000 $ 2 261 000 SCRRA Electronic Passenger Information System - RCTC Share 0 156,752 $ (156.762) Penis Valley Line- Preliminary Engineering and Construction Management 14574,800 8,074.800 $ 6 500 000 RCTC Station Capital Improvement Program FY 07 500 000 500,000 NMCorona Parking Structuretadded per SRTP Amendment approved 5/9/07) 25 771 489 747.714 3.523,775 12 000 000 9,500,000 Total: Capital $ 44,308,524 $ 1 404,476 $ 3,523 775 $ 8,074,800 $ 21.085,565 $ - $10,219,908 DIFFERENCE BET. CURRENTLY APPROVED & MODIFIED CAPITAL PLAN - s s $ $ 78 • RCTC Commuter Rail FY 2009/10 OPERATING and CAPITAL ASSISTANCE BY FUNDING SOURCE Table 1 - Operating Assistance Table 1a. Currently Approved Operating Fundi ATTACHMENT Project Description Total LTF STA Prop 1B PTMISEA Measure A Sec 5307-Rs- San. Bernardino Section 5309 Other SCRRA Operating Subsidy $ 7.000.000 $ 7.000,000 Transit Connections 280,000 280,000 RCTC Rail Operations 1,093,000 1,093,000 RCTC Station Opera Ong 2,610,600 2,610,600 Total: Operating 10,983,600 10,983,600 0 0 0 0 0 0 Table lb. Modified Operating Funding Plan SCRRA Operating Subsidy $ 7,000,000 $ 7,000900 Transit Connections 280,000 280,000 RCTC Rail Operations 1.093,000 1,093,000 RCTC Station Operating 2,610,600 2,610,600 Total: Operating 10,983,600 10,983,600 0 I) 0 0 0 DIFFERENCE BET. CURRENTLY APPROVED& MODIFIED OPERATING PLAN $ - $ - $ - $ Table 2 - Capital Assistance Table 2a. Current N Approved Capital Funding Project Description Total LTF STA Prop 1B PTMISEA Measure A Sec 5307 - Riv- San. Bernardino Section 5309 Other SCRRA Rehab- RCTC Share $ 1,396,600 $ 1,396,600 Perris Valley Line Engineering & Conslruction 15,000,000 5,000,000 10,000,000 Perris Valley Greenway TE Grant 2,358.000 1,245,000 1.113.000 SCRRA Rail Car Procurement 13,300,000 '.;$,soc ice - :aSoaoDa a;1 ,..- Riverside Layover Facility 11.000.000 11.000,000 RCTC Station Rehab and Renovation 900,000 210000 6134,000 La Sierra Parking Lot Expansion 2.050.537 1,670 637 379.900 Capital Improvement Program 500,O =... -.,,�_ 09690 -,.,. _5 Penis MulNnodal Transit Center 1.300.000 800,000 500,000 BNSF 4111 Main 5900,000 5 000,000 Penns Valley Line - Development & Support (SRTP Amendment approved 8/24/09) 14,050,000 14 050,000 Total: Capital $ 66,855,137 $ 9,516,000 $ 4,500,000 $ 3,154,637 $ 37,174,900 $ 11,396,600 $ - $ 1,113,000 Table 2b. Modified Capital Funding Plan Project Description Total LTF STA Prop 1B PTMISEA Measure A Sec 5307 - Riv- San. Bernardino Section 5309 Other SCRRA Rehab-RCTC Share $ 1,396.600 $ 1,396,600 Perris Valley Line Engineering & Construction 15.000,000 5,000,000 10.000,000 Penis Valley Greenway TE Grant 2,358900 1 245,000 1,113,000 SCRRA Rail Car Procurement 13,300,000 - ` 3.325.000 9,975,000 Riverside Layover Facility 11,000.000 11 000 000 RCTC Station Rehab and Renovation 900,000 216,000 684.000 La Siena Parking Lot Expansion 2,050 537 1,670,637 379,900 Capital Improvement Program 20000 20,000 Perris Mulitmodal Transil Center 1,300 000 800,000 500,000 BNSF 4th Main 5,000,000 5,000 000 Perris Valley Line - Development & Support (SRTP Amendment approved 8/24/09) 14 050 000 14 050,000 Total: Capital $ 66,375,137 $ 236,000 $ 3,325,000 $ 3,154,637 $ 37,174,900 $ 11,396,600 $ 9,975,000 $1.113,000 DIFFERENCE BET. CURRENTLY APPROVED & MODIFIED CAPITAL PLAN $ (480,000) $ (9,280,000) $(1,175,000) $ - $ - 5 - $ 9,975,000 $ 79 AGENDA ITEM 12 While the monthly cost of each buspool varies according to the number of route miles and the resulting negotiated service price, the Commission's monthly subsidy reflects a subsidy rate of 14%. - Average Monthly Buspool Fare Per Rider $251.00 RCTC Subsidy Per Seat $35.00 Subsidy Rate 14% Unlike some of the other Commission approved ridesharing incentives, which have a limited term, the buspool subsidy is on going. To renew its annual subsidy, an existing buspool is required to: • Request in writing, continuation of funding from the Commission for the new fiscal year; • Consistently meet minimum ridership requirements; and • Submit monthly ridership reports throughout the year. The three existing buspools have completed all the requirements for funding as forth by the Commission including the submittal of monthly ridership reports and annual funding continuation requests. They have consistently exceeded the minimum ridership level of 25 riders per month and have collectively averaged 40 riders/month/buspool this current fiscal year. Buspools Average Riders/Month Corona Mira Loma Riverside 49 30 41 Roundtrip Distance —134 mi —123 mi —110 mi Annual Miles Saved 1,401,303 923,032 1,415,454 Annual One -Way Trips Reduced 25,432 14,960 21,032 65,308 Estimated Pounds of Emissions Reduced 3,739,789 Miles Saved 61,424 Trips Reduced In reducing the number of vehicles' on SR-91 during peak periods, the buspool program saved more than 3.7 million miles and 65,308 pounds of vehicle emissions in FY 2009/10. The buspool subsidy proves to be an effective use of Measure A Commuter Assistance funds and a budget of $100,000 is proposed for FY 2010/11. Based on the established monthly $1,645/month per buspool subsidy policy, the funds will support the continuation of the three existing buspools plus two new start-up buspools. Agenda Item 12 • • 81 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2010/11 Amount: $100,000 Source of Funds: Measure A Budget Adjustment: No GL/Project Accounting No.: 002187 81030 263 41 81002 Fiscal Procedures Approved: .\".(1,24,4,0, Date: 05/13/10 Attachments: 1) Corona Renewal Request 2) Mira Loma Renewal Request 3) Riverside Renewal Request Agenda Item 12 82 ATTACHMENT 1 Marcia Pasquarella 2705 Monserat Circle Corona; CA. 92881 May 4, 2010 Attn.: Brian Cunanan, Commuter Assistance Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA. 92502-2208 Dear Mr. Cunanan, In compliance with the requirements of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), I am requesting an extension of funding for the period of July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2011 for the Corona to El Segundo Commuter Bus -pool ("Corona Bus -pool'). 1 am the bus -pool operator and coordinate this bus -pool independently from any employer. The monthly cost to operate this bus -pool from Odyssey is $245 per person. RCTC provides a $35 monthly subsidy per seat and the remaining $210 is provided between the riders and their employers. The following; is the Corona bus -pool schedule: AM Departure AM Arrival PM Departure PM Arrival Corona Park & Ride Lot El Segundo El Segundo Corona Park & Ride Lot 4:50 a.m. 5:45 a.m. 3:30 p.m. 5:15 p.m. Information on this bus -pool is available with rideshare programs at Boeing, Raytheon; Aerospace Corporation, and the Los Angeles Air Force base. Employees receive this information through direct mailings, newsletter articles and electronic messaging from these employers. These employers' rideshare programs also share this information with other local employee transportation coordinators. Thank you for your continued support of this successful bus -pool program. Sincerely, Marcia Pasquarclla Corona Bus -pool Operator 83 ATTACHMENT HARLAN ALPERT Send correspondences to: Aerospace Corporation 2350 E. El Segundo Blvd. EI Segundo, CA 90245-4691 May 03, 2010 Attn.: Brian Cunanan, Commuter Assistance Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Dear Mr. Cunanan, In compliance with the requirements of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (ROTC), I am requesting an extension of funding for the period of July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2011 for the "Mira Loma" (Mira Loma/Corona) to El Segundo Commuter Buspool. I am the buspool operator and coordinate this buspool independently from any employer. The monthly cost to operate this buspool from Tour Coach is $254. RCTC provides a $35 monthly subsidy per seat. and the remaining $219 is provided between the riders and their employers. The following is the Mira Loma/Corona Buspool schedule: AM Departure AM Departure AM Arrival PM Departure PM Arrival PM Arrival Mira Loma Corona Park & Ride Lot El Segundo El Segundo Corona Park & Ride Lot Mira Loma (Monday — Thursday) (Friday) 4:10 a.m. 4:10 a.m. 4:25 a.m. 4:25 a.m. 5:30 a.m. 5:30 a.m. 3:00 p.m. 4:30 p.m. 4:45 p.m. 2:30 p.m. 4:00 p.m. 4:15 p.m. Information on this buspool is available with rideshare programs at Raytheon, Boeing, Aerospace Corporation, and the Los Angeles Air Force base. Employees receive this information through direct mailings, newsletter articles, and electronic messaging from these employers. These employer rideshare programs also share this information with other local employee transportation coordinators. Thank you for your continued support of this successful buspool program. Harlan Alpert Mira Loma Buspool Operator 84 05/15/2810 05:01 3186472539 COMPONENT ENGINEERIN KATHLEEN MARTIZEN Send correspondences to: Raytheon Company 2000 E. El Segundo Blvd. El Segundo, CA 90245-4501 May 17, 2010 Attn.: Brian Cunanan, Commuter Assistance Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Dear Mr. Cunanan, PAGE 81/01 ATTACHMENT 3 In compliance with the requirements of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (ROTC), I am requesting an extension of finding for the period of July 1, 2010 to .tune 30, 2011 for the "Riverside" to El Segundo Commuter Buspool. I am the buspool operator and coordinate this buspool independently from any employer. The monthly cost to operate this buspool from Raytheon is $254.00 RCTC provides a $35 monthly subsidy per seat and the remaining $219.00 is provided between the riders and their employers. The following is the Riverside to El Segundo Buspool schedule: AM Departure AM Departure AM An3val PM Depan me PM. Arrival PM Arrival Galleria at Tyler, Riverside Corona Park & Ride Lot Raytheon, El Segundo Raytheon, El Segundo Corona Park & Ride Lot Calleri.a at Tyler, Riverside 4:15 a.m. 4:25 a.m. 5:20 a.m. 3:00 p.m. 4:30 p.m. 4:45 p.m. Information on this buspool is available with rideshare programs at Raytheon, Hoeing, Aerospace Corporation. and the Los Angeles Air Force base. Employees receive this information through direct mailings, newsletter articles, and electronic .messaging from these employers. These employers rideshare programs also share this information with other local employee transportation coordinators. Thank you for your continued support of this successful buspool program.. Sincerely, Kathleen Martinez. Riverside Ruspool Coordinator 85