HomeMy WebLinkAboutGHD, Inc. 2017-12-21COU No. 1718-161
AGREEMENTFOR
PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES
(Design Professional]
This Agreement, made and entered into this 2Is+ day of DCiG . , 2017 ("Effective Date"), by
and between CITY OF UKIAH, CALIFORNIA, hereinafter referred to as "City" and GHD Inc., a
corporation organized and in good standing under the laws of the state of California, hereinafter
referred to as "Consultant".
RECITALS
This Agreement is predicated on the following facts:
a. City requires consulting services related to the preparation of the Northwestern Pacific Rail
Trail Phase 2 bid documents.
b. Consultant represents that it has the qualifications, skills, experience and properly licensed to
provide these services, and is willing to provide them according to the terms of this
Agreement.
C. City and Consultant agree upon the Scope -of -Work and Work Schedule attached hereto as
Attachment "A", describing contract provisions for the project and setting forth the completion
dates for the various services to be provided pursuant to this Agreement.
TERMS OF AGREEMENT
1.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
1.1 The Project is described in detail in the attached Scope -of -Work (Attachment "A").
2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES
2.1 As set forth in Attachment "A".
2.2. Additional Services. Additional services, if any, shall only proceed upon written agreement
between City and Consultant. The written Agreement shall be in the form of an Amendment to
this Agreement.
3.0 CONDUCT OF WORK
3.1 Time of Completion. Consultant shall commence performance of services as required by the
Scope -of -Work upon receipt of a Notice to Proceed from City and shall complete such services
within 192 calendar days from receipt of the Notice to Proceed. Consultant shall complete the
work to the City's reasonable satisfaction, even if contract disputes arise or Consultant
contends it is entitled to further compensation.
3.2 Non -Discrimination.
A. Consultant's signature affixed hereto, and dated, shall constitute a certification under
penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that Consultant has, unless
exempt, complied with, the nondiscrimination program requirements of Government
Code Section 12990 and Title 2, California Administrative Code, Section 8103.
B. During the performance of this Contract, Consultant and its subconsultants shall not
unlawfully discriminate, harass, or allow harassment against any employee or applicant
for employment because of sex, race, color, ancestry, religious creed, national origin,
physical disability (including HIV and AIDS), mental disability, medical condition (e.g.,
cancer), age (over 40), marital status, and denial of family care leave. Consultant and
subconsultants shall insure that the evaluation and treatment of their employees and
applicants for employment are free from such discrimination and harassment.
Consultant and subconsultants shall comply with the provisions of the Fair Employment
and Housing Act (Gov. Code §12990 (a -f) et seq.) and the applicable regulations
promulgated thereunder (California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section 7285 et seq.).
The applicable regulations of the Fair Employment and Housing Commission
implementing Government Code Section 12990 (a -f), set forth in Chapter 5 of Division
4 of Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations, are incorporated into this Contract by
reference and made a part hereof as if set forth in full. Consultant and its
subconsultants shall give written notice of their obligations under this clause to labor
organizations with which they have a collective bargaining or other Agreement.
4.0 COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES
4.1 Basis for Compensation. For the performance of the professional services of this Agreement,
Consultant shall be compensated based on actual cost plus a fixed fee, with a maximum dollar
amount of $268,338, as set forth in Consultant's Cost Proposal (Attachment "B"). Actual costs
shall be reimbursed in accordance with the Cost Proposal, including labor costs, employee
benefits, travel, equipment rental costs, overhead and other direct costs incurred by the
Consultant in the performance of the work. The fixed fee is non-adjustable for the term of the
contract, except in the event of a significant change in the scope of work and such adjustment
is made by contract amendment.
4.2 Changes. Should changes in compensation be required because of changes to the Scope -of -
Work of this Agreement, the parties shall agree in writing to any changes in compensation.
"Changes to the Scope -of -Work" means different activities than those described in Attachment
"A" and not additional time to complete those activities than the parties anticipated on the date
they entered this Agreement.
4.3 Sub -contractor Payment. The use of sub -consultants or other services to perform a portion of
the work of this Agreement shall be approved by City prior to commencement of work. The
cost of sub -consultants shall be included within maximum dollar amount set forth in Section
4.1.
4.4 Terms of Payment. Payment to Consultant for services rendered in accordance with this
contract shall be based upon submission of monthly invoices for the work satisfactorily
performed prior to the date of invoice less any amount already paid to Consultant, which
amounts shall be due and payable thirty (30) days after receipt by City. The invoices shall
provide a description of each item of work performed, the time expended to perform each task,
the fees charged for that task, and the direct expenses incurred and billed for. A pro rata
portion of the fixed fee will be included in the monthly progress payments. Invoices shall be
accompanied by documentation sufficient to enable City to determine progress made and the
expenses claimed.
Drsieu I'intS�cs:1ercenx•nt-Nocember'_U. ]008
5.0 ASSURANCES OF CONSULTANT
5.1 Independent Contractor. Consultant is an independent contractor and is solely responsible for
its acts or omissions. Consultant (including its agents, servants, and employees) is not City's
agent, employee, or representative for any purpose.
It is the express intention of the parties hereto that Consultant is an independent contractor
and not an employee, joint venturer, or partner of City for any purpose whatsoever. City shall
have no right to, and shall not control the manner or prescribe the method of accomplishing
those services contracted to and performed by Consultant under this Agreement, and the
general public and all governmental agencies regulating such activity shall be so informed.
Those provisions of this Agreement that reserve ultimate authority in City have been inserted
solely to achieve compliance with federal and state laws, rules, regulations, and interpretations
thereof. No such provisions and no other provisions of this Agreement shall be interpreted or
construed as creating or establishing the relationship of employer and employee between
Consultant and City.
Consultant shall pay all estimated and actual federal and state income and self-employment
taxes that are due the state and federal government and shall furnish and pay worker's
compensation insurance, unemployment insurance and any other benefits required by law for
himself and his employees, if any. Consultant agrees to indemnify and hold City and its
officers, agents and employees harmless from and against any claims or demands by federal,
state or local government agencies for any such taxes or benefits due but not paid by
Consultant, including the legal costs associated with defending against any audit, claim,
demand or law suit.
Consultant warrants and represents that it is a properly licensed professional or professional
organization with a substantial investment in its business and that it maintains its own offices
and staff which it will use in performing under this Agreement.
5.2 Conflict of Interest. Consultant understands that its professional responsibility is solely to City.
Consultant has no interest and will not acquire any direct or indirect interest that would conflict
with its performance of the Agreement. Consultant shall not in the performance of this
Agreement employ a person having such an interest. If the City Manager determines that the
Consultant has a disclosure obligation under the City's local conflict of interest code, the
Consultant shall file the required disclosure form with the City Clerk within 10 days of being
notified of the City Manager's determination.
6.0 INDEMNIFICATION
6.1 Insurance Liability. Without limiting Consultant's obligations arising under Paragraph 6.2
Consultant shall not begin work under this Agreement until it procures and maintains for the
full period of time allowed by law, surviving the termination of this Agreement insurance
against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, which may arise from or in
connection with its performance under this Agreement.
A. Minimum Scope of Insurance
Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
Ursien ProlS�cs:1m'cenirnt-\'a�anbrr '_n. '_unA
PAUL L1F 5
1. Insurance Services Office ("ISO) Commercial General Liability Coverage Form
No. CG 20 10 10 01 and Commercial General Liability Coverage — Completed
Operations Form No. CG 20 37 10 01.
2. ISO Form No. CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, Code 1 "any
auto" or Code 8, 9 if no owned autos and endorsement CA 0025.
3. Worker's Compensation Insurance as required by the Labor Code of the State
of California and Employers Liability Insurance.
4. Errors and Omissions liability insurance appropriate to the consultant's
profession. Architects' and engineers' coverage is to be endorsed to include
contractual liability.
B. Minimum Limits of Insurance
Consultant shall maintain limits no less than:
1. General Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily
injury, personal injury and property damage including operations, products and
completed operations. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form
with a general aggregate limit is used, the general aggregate limit shall apply
separately to the work performed under this Agreement, or the aggregate limit
shall be twice the prescribed per occurrence limit.
2. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily
injury and property damage.
3. Worker's Compensation and Employers Liability: Worker's compensation limits
as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability
limits of $1,000,000 per accident.
4. Errors and Omissions liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence.
C. Deductibles and Self -Insured Retentions
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the
City. At the option of the City, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such
deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects to the City, its officers, officials,
employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing
payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense
expenses.
D. Other Insurance Provisions
The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
1. General Liability and Automobile Liability Coverages
a. The City, it officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be
covered as additional insureds as respects; liability arising out of
activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant, products and
completed operations of the Consultant, premises owned, occupied or
UcslW" ] mW.S sAgrc .m .i -Noce b,. _iL 200S
PA(ila OF %
used by the Consultant, or automobiles owned, hired or borrowed by the
Consultant for the full period of time allowed by law, surviving the
termination of this Agreement. The coverage shall contain no special
limitations on the scope -of -protection afforded to the City, its officers,
officials, employees or volunteers.
b. The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as
respects to the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers.
Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers,
officials, employees or volunteers shall be in excess of the Consultant's
insurance and shall not contribute with it.
Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not
affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or
volunteers.
d. The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured
against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to
the limits of the insurer's liability.
2. Worker's Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage
The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its
officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from Consultant's
performance of the work, pursuant to this Agreement.
3. Professional Liability Coverage
If written on a claims -made basis, the retroactivity date shall be the effective
date of this Agreement.
4. All Coverages
Each Insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that
coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in
coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified
mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City.
E. Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with admitted California insurers with an A.M. Best's rating of
no less than A- for financial strength, AA for long-term credit rating and AMB -1 for
short-term credit rating.
F. Verification of Coverage
Consultant shall furnish the City with Certificates of Insurance and with original
Endorsements effecting coverage required by this Agreement. The Certificates and
Endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by
that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The Certificates and Endorsements are to
be on forms provided or approved by the City. All Certificates and Endorsements are
to be received and approved by the City before Consultant begins the work of this
Agreement. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all
Uc�i¢n PrulS� ce:lercemrnl-\ora be, 2H, 2009
required insurance policies, at any time. If Consultant fails to provide the coverages
required herein, the City shall have the right, but not the obligation, to purchase any or
all of them. In that event, after notice to Consultant that City has paid the premium, the
cost of insurance may be deducted from the compensation otherwise due the
contractor under the terms of this Contract.
G. Subcontractors
Consultant shall include all sub -contractors or sub -consultants as insured under its
policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each sub -contractor
or sub -consultant. All coverage for sub -contractors or sub -consultants shall be subject
to all insurance requirements set forth in this Paragraph 6.1.
6.2 Indemnification. Notwithstanding the foregoing insurance requirements, and in addition
thereto, Consultant agrees, for the full period of time allowed by law, surviving the termination
of this Agreement, to indemnify the City for any claim, cost or liability that arises out of any
negligent act or omission or the willful misconduct of Consultant and its agents in the
performance of services under this contract, but this indemnity does not apply to liability for
damages for death or bodily injury to persons, injury to property, or other loss, arising from the
negligence, willful misconduct or defects in design by the City, or arising from the active
negligence of the City.
"Indemnify," as used herein includes the expenses of defending against a claim, and the
payment of any settlement or judgment arising out of the claim. Defense costs include all
costs associated with defending the claim, including, but not limited to, the reasonable fees of
attorneys, investigators, consultants, experts and expert witnesses, and litigation expenses.
References in this paragraph to City or Consultant, include their officers and employees.
7.0 CONTRACT PROVISIONS
7.1 Documents and Ownership of Work. All documents furnished to Consultant by City and all
documents or reports and supportive data prepared by Consultant under this Agreement are
owned and become the property of the City upon their creation and shall be given to City
immediately upon demand and at the completion of Consultant's services at no additional cost
to City. Deliverables are identified in the Scope -of -Work, Attachment "A". All documents
produced by Consultant shall be furnished to City in digital format and hardcopy. Consultant
shall produce the digital format, using software and media approved by City.
7.2 Governing Law. Consultant shall comply with the laws and regulations of the United States,
the State of California, and all local governments having jurisdiction over this Agreement. The
interpretation and enforcement of this Agreement shall be governed by California law and any
action arising under or in connection with this Agreement must be filed in a Court of competent
jurisdiction in Mendocino County.
7.3 Entire Agreement. This Agreement plus its Attachment(s) and executed Amendments set
forth the entire understanding between the parties.
7.4 Severability. If any term of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction,
the remainder of this Agreement shall remain in effect.
7.5 Modification. No modification of this Agreement is valid unless made with the agreement of
both parties in writing.
:) sgn h,ASA&,m ,a t No bc, 20.'_00S
Wi1 6 OF S
7.6 Assignment. Consultant's services are considered unique and personal. Consultant shall not
assign, transfer, or sub -contract its interest or obligation under all or any portion of this
Agreement without City's prior written consent.
7.7 Waiver. No waiver of a breach of any covenant, term, or condition of this Agreement shall be
a waiver of any other or subsequent breach of the same or any other covenant, term or
condition or a waiver of the covenant, term or condition itself.
7.8 Termination. This Agreement may only be terminated by either party: 1) for breach of the
Agreement; 2) because funds are no longer available to pay Consultant for services provided
under this Agreement; or 3) City has abandoned and does not wish to complete the project for
which Consultant was retained. A party shall notify the other party of any alleged breach of
the Agreement and of the action required to cure the breach. If the breaching party fails to
cure the breach within the time specified in the notice, the contract shall be terminated as of
that time. If terminated for lack of funds or abandonment of the project, the contract shall
terminate on the date notice of termination is given to Consultant. City shall pay the
Consultant only for services performed and expenses incurred as of the effective termination
date. In such event, as a condition to payment, Consultant shall provide to City all finished or
unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs and
reports prepared by the Consultant under this Agreement. Consultant shall be entitled to
receive just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily completed hereunder,
subject to off -set for any direct or consequential damages City may incur as a result of
Consultant's breach of contract.
7.9 Execution of Agreement. This Agreement may be executed in duplicate originals, each
bearing the original signature of the parties. Alternatively, this Agreement may be executed
and delivered by facsimile or other electronic transmission, and in more than one counterpart,
each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which together shall constitute one and
the same instrument. When executed using either alternative, the executed agreement shall
be deemed an original admissible as evidence in any administrative or judicial proceeding to
prove the terms and content of this Agreement.
8.0 NOTICES
Any notice given under this Agreement shall be in writing and deemed given when personally
delivered or deposited in the mail (certified or registered) addressed to the parties as follows:
Mr. Tim Eriksen
City of Ukiah
Department of Public Works
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482-5400
9.0 SIGNATURES
Mr. William Silva
GHD
2235 Mercury Way, Suite 150
Santa Rosa, CA 95407
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement the Effective Date:
D-,% c,Agnt-Nocemb,, 20. 2008
CONSULTANT
IMMM
12/19/2017
William Silva Date
PRINCIPAL
IRS IDN Number: 98-0425935
CITY OF UKIAH
Sage Sangiacomo Date
CITY MANAGER
ATTEST
/u,
i
CITY CLERK Date
APPROVED AS TO FO
i
i
Davi apport Date
CITY ATTORNEY
VIII gn 1);,'6cceAgreemenl-\uIembcr 1U. 11108
'A6F R f 8
ATTACHMENT A
2. Project approach and schedule
Northwestern Pacific Rail Trail
Background
In 1999, the City of Ukiah began to plan anew Class I trail
adjacent to the Northwestern Pacific (M/VP) railroad tracks in
the North Coast Railroad Authority (NCRA) right-of-way ,R ^A0
corridor. The trail concept appeared !n the City's 1999 Bicycle
Master Plan, comp'.eted by GHD teaming par.ner
The project was ranked as the highest
pr oriry in the B cycle Master Pan and in the 2006 Mendocino
County Regional Bkeway Plan. The planning for the overall
NWP Rail Trail Project was furtner developed in the 2002
Rail Trail Feasib+Gty Study, also completed by Alta, as well as
in the 2012 Mendocino County Rail-w:th-Trail Corridor Plan
(2C12 Trail Corridor Pian), which was completed by Alta and
GHD.
The NWP Rat Trail project has broad communi,y support
and, of critical importance, *he support of the NCRA, With -n
the City of Ukiah, the NWP Rail Trail project was divided into
three segments, to be implemented in three phases
• Phase 1: Clara St-eet in the north to Gobbi Street in the
south
• Phase 2: Gobbi Street in the north to Commerce Drive it
Vie south
• Phase 3: Brush Street in the north to Clara Street in the
south
In 2012, the City selected the GHD/Alta team to deliver
Phase 1 of the project, which was the first rail -with -trail
protect to be designed and const•ucted within the NCRA
R;W in Mendocino County, involving surveying and mapping:
preparation of the Trail Corridor Management Plan, Safety
Plan, and Trail Policy; a public workshcp; and the complete
design. Construction of Phase 1 completed in 2015, with
GHD providing construction management and nspec;ion
services.
GHD also ass steel the Ciy in obtaining California Public
Utilities Commission (CPUC) approvals, and in creating a
License Agreement heiween the City and NCRA for the
fu-ther development of the NWP Rail Trail projer%t. a 25 -year
agreement that is critical to the overall success of this three
phase endeavor by granting the C`.ty a non-exclusive license
to access and utifze the NCRA R.NV to construct, operate,
and maintain a Class I trail (in addition to outlining other
requirements).
Most of the de:ai ed requirements referenced in the
agreement are described in the NCRA Policy & Procedures
Manual, §0907 Trail Projects on the NWP Line Rights
of -Way: Design, Construction, Safety, Operations, and
Maintenance Guidelines (Rail -with -Trail Guidelines). These
guidelines encompass requirements for',icensing, permitting.
and planning for trail projects in the NCRA R/W. Two of
the key plannirg documents required by these guidelines
are a feasibility study and safety plan. GHD incorporated
the feasibility s*udy and safety plan dccumentation ;n the
Phase 1 Trail Corridor Management Plan, a eocument that
addresses management issues throughout the study area
relating to use and design of the facility. This study and
documentation are also reeded for Phase 2:
Citv of Ukiah i Nortnwestern Pacific Rail Trail Prase 2 (No. 17-121 1 3
The feasibility study was required to demonstrate a
project's comprehensive viability, as well as to present an
alternatives analysis. The 2012 Mendocino County Rail with
Trail Corridor Plan meets this requirement, and identifies this
Phase 2 project segment as a Segment No, S9.
The safety plan lays out engineering standards, trespassing
and crime prevention strategies, signage, access points,
and methods/processed for coordination with police and
fire protection. GHD and Alta has together completed these
documents for previous projects, including for, as previously
mentioned, the Phase 1 portion of this project.
Phase 2 Project Understanding
In 2016 the City received an Active Transportation Program
(ATP) grant from the State of California (administered
through Caltrans) to complete the Phase 2 segment.
The ATP program consolidates existing federal and State
transportation prograrns and funding with the purpose of
encouraging increased use of active (non -motorized) modes
of transportation, covering costs associated with Project
Approval and Environmental Documentation (PA&ED), R/W
(if required), and Plans, Specifications and Estimate (PS&E)
phases.
In ,June 2016, the City completed the Phase 2 environmental
documentation through a CEOA Notice of Exemption. The
project was determined to be Categorically Exempt under
Section 15303 (Class 3, new construction of small facilities)
and Section 15304 (Class 4, construction of a bicycle/multi-
use trail within an existing right-of-way).
The Phase 2 trail segment is approximately 4,170 feet (0.79
miles), and encompasses several culvert crossings, a new
bridge over Doolin Creek, and new mid -block pedestrian
crossings at Talmage Road and Commerce Drive. Unlike
the Phase 1 project at•gnment, which was located on the
west side of the NWP railroad tracks, the Phase 2 alignment
is proposed on the east side of the tracks. This alignment
has several advantages, as well as a couple of potential
challenges. These opportunities and constraints are
described below, under "Approach".
The City has established a schedule for the project, with
the goal of completing design in April 2018 so it can be
included in the California Transportation Commission (CTC)
board meeting (June 27-28, 2018 in Sacramento) packet
for approval. This schedule item is an important goal for
the City, as it will ensure that construction moves forward
during Summer 2018. Achieving this schedule is contingent
on overcoming key project issues, which are also described
below, under "Approach".
The GHD and Alta team has a very deep understanding of
4 GHD Pror)osal
this project, developed over the past 15 years, and so is able
to leverage a tremendous amount of recent experience with
the City of Ukiah on Phase 1 of the Northwestern Pacific
Rail Trail project, as well as many other similar rail -with -
trail projects (described in Section 3 and Section 6 of this
proposal) to successfully meet the ambitious schedule and
deliver all project components to the satisfaction of the City.
Within the past five years, we have also worked directly with
NCRA and NWPCO staff on the development of numerous
rail -with -trail projects in Northern California. GHD and Alta
trail designs have become the centerpiece of communities,
and we recognize the potential for currently underutilized
land to increase in value as the trail gains popularity, which
includes opportunities for trail -front businesses.
Additionally, Alta is recognized nationwide as a leader in the
development of trail projects within railroad rights-of-way.
They have published reports, in collaboration with the U.S.
Department of Transportation, that examine safety, design,
and liability issues associated with the development of shared
use paths and other trails within or adjacent to active railroad
and transit rights-of-way.
Phase 2 Approach
In preparing our proposal, we met with the City multiple times
to discuss specific details and potential challenges regarding
the Phase 2 project. We walked and photo -documented (the
evidence of which you can find throughout this section) the
entire Phase 2 alignment, as well as obtaining and reviewing
all background documentation, including NCRA R/W
mapping and the applicable policies, goals, and objectives
outlined in the 2014 Ukiah Bicycle and Pedestrian Master
Plan (prepared by Alta).
Through a combination of our unique historic understanding
of the project and our recent investigative efforts, we have
identified some key challenges within Phase 2. The following
section identifes these key challenges and GHD's proposed
approach to each.
Schedule Constraints: To meet the schedule established
for this project, it is critical that the approach be efficiently
executed with each task. As noted in Section 3, GHD's
project management and design team has worked with
the City on numerous projects, several of which are under
construction. We have an established relationship with
City staff, as well as with the City's Project Manager on this
project (Ben Kageyama), enabling us to focus on the project
immediately and quickly move from the feasibility study into
the detailed design phase, as outlined in the RFP (No. 17-12).
The project team can only meet the schedule (See the end
of this Becton.) if able to immediately start on the project
and -apidly complete both the topographic survey and
flood zone analysis. A portion of the Phase 2 mapping was
previously completed by GHD as a part of the Transportation
Improvements for Redwood Business Park project (City
Specification 17-09), which is currently under construction.
We will build on this existing basemap Mh a detailed
topographic survey of features within the project area in order
`o complete the trait and drainage design. We propose to
conduct a focused topographic survey on the east side of the
railroad tracks where the alignment is designated in the ATP
grant app'ication. in order to quickly complete the survey,
we will use a combination of aerial drone and truck -mounted
equipment (with limited manual survey) at specifica'ly and
strategically chosen locations, such as at Doolin Creek The
survey will be completed by GHD's in-house resources. This
survey approach will reduce survey costs and allow us to
quickly focus the Corridor Management Plan and Preliminary
130'/0? Des'gn.
Preliminary Design and Lighting Standards: Key goals
of the Pre irn:nary Design are to verity that the minimum
o'fset of the trail improvements from the centerline of the
railroad tracks is met, to confirm that RNV and flood zone
requirements are achieved, and to reflect all of the proposed
amenities on the plans and in the opinion of probable
construction cost. Some of these amenities include bencnes
and trash receptacles, crossing details, barriers, and lighting
standards. In particular, the pedestrian lighting standards to
be used in Phase 2 warrant research.
Tne lighting standards installed in Phase 1 are the IPL Series
manufactured by Firstlight Technologies, a solar powered
LED integrated architectural area light specifically designed
for use in recreational bikeway/pathway and public space
lighting applications. These lights used a lead acid battery
to store solar energy generated during the day, but, after
about one year of installation, the City noted that many
of the ba`teries were failing, resulting in a dark or dir-'ly lit
tra l at night. The City has been in contact with Firstlight
echnologies, who recognized that this was an issue, and
has since replaced the lead acid batteries with lithium ion
batteries that have an 8- to 10 -year life cycle.
. _s -m Pacific Rail Tral Phase 2 (No 17-121 1 S
w,
a
f�.3
ti
Mi
. _s -m Pacific Rail Tral Phase 2 (No 17-121 1 S
The GHD team will work with the City to confirm the preferred
lighting standard type, and develop a specification that
addresses the performance issues that have occurred with
the Phase 1 lights, potentially including an extended warranty
on the batteries.
Rights -of -Way: Based on the current concept alignment, a
potential R/W need exists on the north side of the Talmage
Road crossing. The concept drawings included in the
ATP application and the City's RFP (No. 17-12) show a
change in trail alignment at this location to avoid existing
rail equipment (signal, gate, cantilever, and an electrical
service). This change in alignment could result in the trail
encroaching on the private property to the east, necessitating
R/W acquisition or an easement, which could potentially
add months to the project schedule, requiring a schedule
extension and a later CTC approval date.
From our field review and measurements at the Talmage
Road crossing, it appears that the existing rail signal/gate
and an electrical service are in conflict with the proposed trail.
A minimum clear distance of 23 feet is needed to construct
the proposed 10 -foot -wide trail with 2 -foot -wide shoulders
and maintain a 9 -foot offset from the centerline of the tracks.
Clear distance at this location is currently limited to about
18 feet. If NCRA is agreeable to removing the rail signal/
gate and an electrical service, then the trail alignment could
be maintained entirely within the NCRA R/W. The existing
cantilever will remain. The City could commit to completing a
future trail improvement for relocation of the gate and service
when NCRA restores rail service in Ukiah. This approach will
avoid impactful delays in the schedule associated with W'1N
appraisal and acquisition efforts on a Caltrans-administrerd
project.
Proposed Alignment: Having completed the Preliminary
Design, we will be able to quickly focus attention on the
key issues and proceed confidently with the development
of the proposed alignment. GHD and Alta will develop the
design to meet or exceed rail -with -trail guidelines, paying
close attention to details. For example, although rail -with -
61 GHD Proposal
trail guidelines allow the trail to be set back a minimum of
8.5 feet from the centerline of the track, the offset should
oe increased to allow for the placement of trail signing. The
concept for the project is to maintain a minimum of 9.0
feet from the centerline of the track. This allows signs to be
adjacent to the trail while still staying outside of the required
setback. Our intersection details will also be developed
so that they are suitable for submission to the CPUC for
changes to the at -grade crossings (GO88B Modification of
an Existing Rail Crossing).
Environmental and Drainage Impacts: The proposed trail
alignment was developed to minimize environmental impacts
and disturbance of existing drainage patterns by locating it
away from the edge of the R/W where many large trees are
present, as well as to utilize existing drainage paths. The
Phase 2 trail alignment is generally located downslope of the
tracks, which is also the same general direction of drainage
in the project area. Our site-speafic drainage review indicates
that drainage improvements should be fairly straightforward
to address during design. There are several large drainage
structures south of Gobbi Street that can be used, as well as
drainage ditches and vegetated swales that will provide some
stormwater treatment prior to discnarg ng to the City's storm
drain system. The tram will cross several existing culverts
within 600 feet south of Gobbi Street and a box culvert made
of railroad ties located about 600 feet north of Cherry Street.
These culverts are not anticipated to be encountered or
impacted by the design.
We will use the new data collected during the topographic
survey and continue the approach of avoiding impacts
as much as practical. This will reduce the need for costly
drainage improvements and reduce the potential for having -o
revisit the City's CEQA analysis. Where the drainage options
in the project area are limited, we will seek to balance the
ruroff created by the construction of the trail with vegetated
buffers to improve the infiltration adjacent to the trail to avoid
any increase in the amount of runoff. i he estimated area
of disturbance of the project is anticipated to oe very close
to, but less than, 1 acre. We will seek to minimize the input
where practical to keep the disturbance area less than one
acre to help avoid having to develop a Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan (SW'PPP) and the rest of the NPDES
stormwater regulatory requiremerts. The effort to prepare a
SWPPP, if needed. is included in our proposal.
Doolin Creek: The bridge over Doolin Creek is an important
feature of the project Confirming the existing ground
elevation in the vicinity of the proposed br dge relative to the
FEMA flood elevation is critical to determining the amount of
fill material required to establish the bridge deck above the
flood eleva'ion. This element of the project has the potential
to require a California Department of Fish and W]dlife (CDRVr
Streambed Alteration Agreement if the irnprovements
substantially change the creek bank. This is an item integral
to maintaining the schedule, and if it is determined that a
CDFW permit is needed, we will require an extension to the
schedule and CTC approval date.
A primary goal of our proposed approach is to quickly
complete the topographic survey and address this potental
issue as early as possible.
Phase 2 Scope of Work
The proposed scope of work to complete the planning
and design of Phase 2 of the Northwestern Pacific Rail
Trail project is described in the following tasks, as we!1 as
in Figure 2.3, which lays out a flowchart of our proposed
scope. We welcome the City's review of the proposed scope
and are ooen to discussing ary charges which may better
suit the project needs.
Task '1. Project Management
GHD will be responsible for managing the coordinated effort
of both GHD and Alta staff. This task includes the efforts
required for GHD's Project Manager, with administrative
assistance, to marage the project contract, coordinate
team personnel and sub -consultants, maintain the project
schedule, coordinate and perform quality assurance and
quality control reviews, prepare invoicing, and attend field
and deliverable review meetings.
GHD will organize and facilitate a kick-off meeting with the
City, Alta, and other key rnernbers of the project learn. The
purpose of the kickoff meeting w 11 be to:
• Discuss the project goals;
• Discuss and refine the project's scope of work and
schedule as needed;
• Corfirm roles and responsibilities;
• Confirm the expectations of the City;
• Confirm the schedule for project status meetings;
• Confirrn and request ava.lable background data.
Task 2. Review and Evaluate Existing Documents and
Data
The GHD team will review and summarize existing data from
the s to visits, previous studies and plans, survey and record
information, and relevant City planning documents. GHD will
specifically review:
• ATP grant application
• 2012 Mendocino County Rail with Trail Corridor Plan
(prepared by GHD and Alta)
• NCRA Raikwith-Tra] Guidelines
• License Agreement between the City and NCRA
• 1999 and 2014 Ukiah Bicycle and Pedestrian Master
C,tv of Ukiah I Northwestern Paafic Rail Trail Phase 2 (No. 17-12) 1 7
1 Collect Data 1
Review (e) docs & data
RNV/Easement Research
Topographic Survey
Drainage Study
Geotech Recmmendations
Planning Documents
Review (e) docs & data
Revise Feasibility Study
Safety Plan and Trail Policy
Trail Corridor Mngmnt Plan
Optional Tasks
- Supplemental CEQA Document
- SWPPP
- Comprehensive Landscape and
Amenity Streetscape Design
Legend
City Lk Tasks OPTIONAL Final Presentation to I
City Council
Design E7—nng NCRA Renow
1
Apr Data Gathering Planning Docs i
L
2018
Plans (prepared by Alta)
• 2002 Ukiah NWP Rail Trail Feasibility Study (prepared by
Alta)
Reviews by NCRA/CPUC
Communicate as Needed
with NCRA
I Walk Alignment with NCRA I
if Necessary
Communicate as Needed
with CPUC
OPTIONAL Present to Council
Final Enaineerina
Pavement Section Design
Grading and Drainage Design
Street Crossing Design
- Bamer/Fence Design
- Signing and Striping Plan
Lighting and Electrical Design
Landscape and Amenity Design
GHD will also review other relevant zoning ordinances and
General Plan policies, addressing data gaps with further field
review and data collection from the City, NCRA, and local
8 1 GI if) Proposal
agencies, if necessary.
1 Revisit 30% Plans/Est 1
Cross check 30% w/ NCRA
Rail -with -Trail Guidelines
I Cross check 30% w/ I
zoning, land use codes, etc
Cross check 30% w/ New
Survey Data
Review City's CEQA
documentation
Revise 30% Design Submittal P&E
60°x6 Design Submittal PSE
90% Design Submittal PSE
100% Design Submittal PSE
Specific items to be resolved for project context include:
• Adjacent land uses (both existing and future)
• Access points (vehicular and bike/pedestrian)
• Street crossing conditions/configurations
• Potential environmental impacts
Figure 2.3. Proposed Phase 2 Scope
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Dec
— — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Issue RFQ
2017
SOQ Submittal Date
N
Consultant Selected
d
a
Consultant NTP Issued
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Jan
Kick Off Meeting:
2018Review
(e) 30% Plans
1 Collect Data 1
Review (e) docs & data
RNV/Easement Research
Topographic Survey
Drainage Study
Geotech Recmmendations
Planning Documents
Review (e) docs & data
Revise Feasibility Study
Safety Plan and Trail Policy
Trail Corridor Mngmnt Plan
Optional Tasks
- Supplemental CEQA Document
- SWPPP
- Comprehensive Landscape and
Amenity Streetscape Design
Legend
City Lk Tasks OPTIONAL Final Presentation to I
City Council
Design E7—nng NCRA Renow
1
Apr Data Gathering Planning Docs i
L
2018
Plans (prepared by Alta)
• 2002 Ukiah NWP Rail Trail Feasibility Study (prepared by
Alta)
Reviews by NCRA/CPUC
Communicate as Needed
with NCRA
I Walk Alignment with NCRA I
if Necessary
Communicate as Needed
with CPUC
OPTIONAL Present to Council
Final Enaineerina
Pavement Section Design
Grading and Drainage Design
Street Crossing Design
- Bamer/Fence Design
- Signing and Striping Plan
Lighting and Electrical Design
Landscape and Amenity Design
GHD will also review other relevant zoning ordinances and
General Plan policies, addressing data gaps with further field
review and data collection from the City, NCRA, and local
8 1 GI if) Proposal
agencies, if necessary.
1 Revisit 30% Plans/Est 1
Cross check 30% w/ NCRA
Rail -with -Trail Guidelines
I Cross check 30% w/ I
zoning, land use codes, etc
Cross check 30% w/ New
Survey Data
Review City's CEQA
documentation
Revise 30% Design Submittal P&E
60°x6 Design Submittal PSE
90% Design Submittal PSE
100% Design Submittal PSE
Specific items to be resolved for project context include:
• Adjacent land uses (both existing and future)
• Access points (vehicular and bike/pedestrian)
• Street crossing conditions/configurations
• Potential environmental impacts
• Future trail extension along Airport Road to the south
When authorized to proceed with the project, the GHD team
will contact CDFW to determine if they will require the City to
submit a permit application for a Section 1002 Streambed
Alteration Agreement. If so, we have included an optional
task to prepare the permit application and coordinate with
CDFVV.
Deliverables:
• No s^ecific de iverabies for this task: the results of this
task v. 11 he reflected in other deliverab es. below
Assumptions:
0 The City ,v!II provide access to relevant documents, GIS
data, and other documents, as needed, to complete this
t a zi <.
Task 3. Geotechnical Investigation and Survey
Limited Geotechnical Investigation: Based on a review of
ava,'ac!e geotec'nnical and geo!og�c information, as well as
past project geotechnical studies nearby, Gt-+D i_rncerstands
the bridge site over Doo!in Creek is underlain oy Quaternary
a luvium consisting of soft to stiff clay and silt to 15 to 20 feet.
The silt and clay is likely underla n by mediurn dense sand
and gravy;!. The site is in a region of high seismicty.
The obe: 'ive of the GHD team's geotechnical investigation
is to eva'uate and understand the geology and geotechnical
engineering properties of the s to to provide geotecnrical
recomrrendat ons for foundation design, pavement
design, retaining wall design, and earthwork. All work will
be under the responsible charge of a Chris Trumbull, our
team's'icensed Geotechnical Engineer. Exploration will
include up to five (5) borings drilled to depths of 10 to
50 feet in the pathway alignment;one at the south end
of the trail segment, by Hastings Ave.; two just north of
the Talmage Rd. intersection; one approximately ha,fway
beM,een the Gobbi St. intersection and near where Cnerry
St. dead -ends into the trail segment; and one at the north
end of the trail segment, near Gobbi St.). Samples will be
obtained for lithology development and laboratory testing.
The borings will be drilled and backfiilled with grout under
the guidelines of the Mendocino County Environmental
Healtn Department g,iidelines. GHD will facilitate laboratory
testing for strength corrosion, index, and pavement, as
well as provide engineering analysis for soil compressibility,
expansion, liquefaction, earthwork, foundations retaining
walls, and oavements. GHD will then summarize findings
and conclusions in a design -level geotechnical investigation
report, which will include characteristics of the soil and
gror.tndwater conditions, a pian showing boring locations,
seismicity and geology, liquefaction potential, expansion
potential, corrosivity, and lab test data. The report will also
include recommendations for questionable soils (expansive,
compressible, liqueflab:e), earthwork, trenches, foundation
bearing and lateral capacities, settlement, CBC seismic
design values, and flexible pavement section thickness
alternatives.
Right -of -Way and Easment Research: The GHD team
will complete research and review of City mapping and
adjacent parcel boundaries, as well as of the NCRA RNV,
to document the locations of the existing railroad R/W and
City of Ukiah R/W, with the goal of designing the trail corridor
irnprovemen's to be within either the railroad FR/W or the City
of Ukiah R/VV GHD is in receipt of the NCRA RM mapping
for the Phase 2 condor, and has previously completed partial
mapping of the RNV between Commerce Drive and Talmage
Road for the Transportation Improvements for Redwood
Business Park project.
Project Control Survey: The GHD team will, establish project
survey control and prepare R/W mapping for the project. Ou-
surveyors, Richard Maddock and John Wunschel, will set
horizontal and vertical control points for project mapping in
accordance with City of Ukiah horizontal and vertical control
requirements, which also entails locating monuments on
streets adjacent to the railroad R/W, if practical. A "Survey
Control Data Sneet"—which will be semi-permanent in
nature so as to serve as project control during construction,
or subsequent survey activities—will exhibit these survey
control points. Our surveyors will make field measurements
using GPS and conventional survey methods on the same
horizontal basis as the Transportation Improvements for
Redwood Business Park project, which will allow the work to
seamlessly be brought irto the City's GIS system, which is
based upon the California State Plane Coordinate System.
The horizontal datum will be based on the North Amercar
Datum 83 (NAD 83). The vertical datum will be based on the
North Amercan Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88), which
is cors's'ent with the most recent FEMA flood mapping in
Ukiah. GHD will ensure that all surveying and mapping s in
compliance with City w Ukiah standards, or with Caltrans
standards when not otherwise specified by the City. All of the
control can be located by GPS methods at one time.
Mobile LiDAR Topographic Mapping: The GHD team
proposes mobile LiDAR topograph c mapping that would
cover the project site and immediate surrounding area.
GHD v,A1 set control using Globa' Positioning System (GPS)
methods. GHD w 11 map the project limits using a vehicle or
pedestrian, mounted mobile UDAR system. A scalable point
cloud of the project will be provided and georeferenced
to the project datum. The LiDAR mapping will be suitable
for compiling a topographic map with the following
specifications:
Citi of Ukiah : Northwestern Pacific Rail TraI Phase 2 No. 17-12) 19
• Finish mapping scale 1 inch = 20 feet
• Contours at 1 -foot intervals
GHD will acquire data on all areas obstructed by tree cover
or heavy vegetation via ground-based surveys. In addition
to topography, the resultant map will show planimetric
features such as roads, railroad tracks, crossing signals,
buildings, fences, power poles, trees, brush, and other
features according to standard practice. Accuracy will equal
or exceed National Map Accuracy Standards for topographic
maps compiled by mobile LiDAR methods.
Supplemental Topographic Field Surveys: The mobile
LiDAR mapping will be supplemented with ground-based
topographic surveys in obstructed areas and at conforms,
utility features, and drainage. GHD will provide field
verifications of topographic features, such as trees, fences,
etc. This survey will, at a minimum, include:
• Cross sections of the trail corridor and crossing streets
at 50' intervals (surface data will be sufficient to create a
Triangular Irregular Network (TIN] for Civil 3D design);
• Surface evidence of the storm drain system (ditches,
culverts, catch basins, drop inlets with flow line
elevations);
• Surface evidence of utilities;
• Power poles, rail equipment, guy wires, and overhead
lines;
• Fencing and gates;
• Street lights, signs, striping, pavement legends, and
markings;
• Mailboxes, driveway, and ramps;
• Tree trunk locations and diameter.
CAD File Set-up and TIN: The GHD team will prepare
computer files to include field control points, topographic
surveys, utility data, property surveys, and preparation of the
TIN used for three-dimensional calculations (.e., earthwork,
cross-sections, and profiles).
Vegetation/Tree Survey: Kristine Gaspar, GHQ's
environmental scientist, will oversee the identification of
trees along critical segments of the NCRA RW, compiling
a description of the trees and identifying any potential
constraints to the trail location created by trees. She will use
a handheld GPS location device to map these vegetative
resources as they are evaluated. The tree locations will be
included in the base map.
Drainage Study: The GHD team will conduct field and
office research to evaluate the drainage systems adjacent
to the trail prior to beginning the mapping effort. Available
drainage studies will be reviewed. Topographic mapping will
include the structures and open ditch conveyances adjacent
to the eastern side of the railroad. Runoff calculations for
the 10 -year design storm event will be performed and
10 1 GHD Pr000sal
used to verify drainage system sizing. A brief, written
drainage memorandum will summarize the constraints and
recommendations for the drainage improvements necessary
for the construction of the trail, including addressing flood
zones and the Doolin Creek bridge crossing. The GHD team
will use this drainage study to guide the design to address
drainage needs.
Deliverables:
• Draft and Final Geotechnical Investigation Report
• Survey Control Base Map and Topographic Map in 2016
AutoCAD Civil 3D file format point files and the surface
model (DTM)
Drainage memorandum report summarizing existing
drainage structures and their capacities where currently
known, estimated design runoff, and conveyances,
including any identified drainage deficiencies;
recommendations for the design of the drainage for the
new trail facility will be included
Assumptions:
• No Record of Survey is required.
• All work will be within existing NCRA and City of Ukiah
RM/ and no additional property boundaries will be
mapped except at roadway intersections.
• LID improvements are not required for the project.
• Access to the project site is provided to GHD for
geotechnical exploration; encroachment permits or rights
of entry are provided to GHD.
• Rail safety training or coordination is not required.
• Drill sites are accessible by a truck -mounted drill rig.
• Drill spoils may be left on site.
Task 4. Trail Corridor Management Plan, Safety Plan,
and Trail Policy
The NCRA has developed its own set of guidelines, which
are part of the NCRA Policy & Procedures Manual. These
guidelines are §0907 titled "Trail Projects on the NWP Line
Rights -of -Way: Design, Construction, Safety, Operations, and
Maintenance Guidelines." The GHD team understands that
NCRA's top priority remains the safe operation of freight and
passenger rail service, and that any new trail cannot impact
this priority. This set of guidelines outlines the requirements of
the NCRA for clearance, access, maintenance, fencing, and
other requirements within their R./W.
GHD and Alta developed the Trail Corridor Management Plan
for the Northwestern Pacific Rail Trail project Phase 1 for the
City of Ukiah, which will form the basis of the Trail Corridor
Management Plan for Phase 2. GHD and Alta also authored
the 2012 Mendocino Rail -with -Trail Corridor Plan, which
addresses the feasibility study requirements of the Corridor
Management Plan.
Drawing from these experiences, the GHD team will update
the Phase 1 Corridor Management Plan to meet the NCRA
Rail -with -Trail Guidelines for Pnase 2. The Plan will contain
all required NCRA materials in a single comprehensive
document, including Feasibility Study, Corridor Management
Pian, Safety Plan, Trail Policy, and Maintenance Plan. The
GHD team will base the safety assessment on "Crime
Prevention Through Environmental Design" (CPTED)
principles to reduce opportunities for crime, perception
of crime, and undesired behavior which may occur in the
corridor. GHD will work Min the City to develop a "Trail
Policy" to condense the above content into a policy that can
be adopted by the City and/or included in future General.
Plan Updates. The document will include a table outlining
the pertinent portions of the guidelines and how the Corridor
Management Plan specifically complies.
GHD will customize specific design recommendations for the
project, and will consider access points, public walkways and
paths, improving sight Imes, eliminating entrapment areas,
implementing barriers such as fenccng and hostile vegetator)
to reduce incidences of trespass and control access,
implementing uniform and efficient lighting where needed,
and establishing a routine maintenance program.
In addition to implementing design measures to deter crime
and mprove safety, GHD uncie,stands that integrated
enforcement and education components can increase the
overall success and use of a trail. GHDwill work with the City
and local law enforcement to outline an emergency response
services olan. GHD may also recommend an add tional
complement of enforcement and education programs that
may include volunteer trail patrols, adopt -a -trail programs,
"Share the Tra I" education, interpretive walks, and grcuo
rides. Volunteer trail patrols can receive safety training and
assist the City by reporting suspicious activity, posting
incident reports, and reporting trail maintenance issues.
The plan w 11 also address a number of other topics, sucn
as ADA accessibility requirements, potential issues of
trail user conflicts, interpretive signage opportunities, risk
management, facility preservat on strategies, emergency
response, barrier design, and a long-term maintenance
component that will outline recommendations of how the trail
shou d be maintainee and operated.
Deliverables:
• Draft and Fnal Trail Corridor Management Plan (inc!uding
Safety Plan and —rail Policy that meets the requiremen's
of the NCRA)
Assumptions:
• The specific topics to be addressed in the above Plan will
be re -confirmed with the City during the Kick off Meeting.
• The City will provide access to relevant documents, GIS
data, and other documents as needed to complete this
task.
City Public Works and Law Enforcement staff will
be available to provide direction throughout the
development of this task.
Task 5. Preliminary (30%) Design
Our team is very familiar with the rail trail planning documents
as well as the Phase 1 project plans and studies—after all,
we helped prepare them. This material will be reviewed, and
discussed again at the kick-off meeting to verify if anything
has changed or if new information is available. Once the new
survey base map has been completed, GHD will review the
new mapping to confirm that the preliminary design does
not conflict w'th any existing site features, including railroad
infrastructure, environmental constraints, RMI, or mapped
utilities.
GHD will: collaborate with Alta to review the preliminary plans
inc uded with the ATP grant application. GHD and Alta will
prepare a pre'iminary trail design to meet the requirements
of the local codes, the NCRA Rail -with -Trail Gu delines, the
License Agreement between the City and NCRA, and the
intended design and use of the trail and surrounding lands.
Once developed, the GHD team will subm t the preliminary
pans with a cover letter to the following ertties for their
rev ev:
• City of Ukiah
• NCRA
• Utility companies
We will request that the City, the NCRA, and the utility
companies provide summarized, written comments on
the preliminary plans. An engineer's opinion of probable
construction cost will also be prepared and submitted.
Following completion of the Preliminary Desgn. GHD will
review the CEQA Categorical Exemption (CatEx) for the
project in the context of the Preliminary Design. The GHD
team will also review the CEQA code sections cited tha-
were used to qualify the project as a Cat Ex. Based on past
experience with similar projects, we have observed that the
trail should have minimal environmental impacts. Therefore,
it is the GHD team's assumption that the City's CatEx will be
sufficient, and therefore we are not aware of any additional
CEQA work ;hat would be necessary. If addit onal CEQA
efforts are needed, however, they cannot be quantifed at ths
time. If determined to be recessary, we proposed to develoo
a supplemental CEQA scope during Preliminary Design
GHD's recent experience with similar projects involving
bridges over creeks indicates that the Doolin Creek
pedestrian bridge may require regulatory environmental
permits (CDFW Section 1602) dependirg on the specific
City of Ukiah I Norhwestem Paci'ic Rail Tra'l Phase 2 No 17-12' 1 11
improvements needed to construct the bridge and any
associated fills required at or near the creek bank, or within
the riparian corridor, to elevate the bridge deck above the
FEMA flood elevation. This proposed scope includes effort
in an optional task to complete and submit the Section 1602
Streambed Alteration Agreement permit and associated
documentation.
Deliverables:
• Preliminary Plans
Cover letter and Request for Review of Updated
Preliminary Plans
Preliminary Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
Assumptions:
• There are no meetings associated with this task.
Task 6. Engineering Design (60%, 90%, and Final)
Once comments have been received by the City, NCRA,
and utility companies for the 30% design submittal, the GHD
team will proceed with the development of the 60% design.
Depending on the timing of these comments, GHD may
request authorization to proceed with the 60% design sooner
n order to meet the City's deadline for design completion.
The engineering design will take into account review
comments received on the 30% design, which will be
incorporated into the plans, technical specifications, and
an opinion of probable construction cost. Submittals will be
made to the City and NCRA for review at the 60% and 90%
stages of completion. The final submittal will be the stamped
and signed final bid documents for submission to Caltrans for
CTC approval.
Engineering design will include:
• Trail alignment and setbacks
• Design of trail cross sections throughout the corridor for
each type of typical cross section
• Pavement section design
• Intersection designs at the intersections of Talmage Road
and Commerce Drive
• Location of trail amenities and amenity details to be
included in the project
• Trail lighting at intersections as needed to comply with
required safety lighting standards
• Grading and drainage
• Wayfinding and interpretive sign locations
• Location and typical details for fencing
• Location and type of proposed bollards and barriers
• Signing and striping
• Landscaping design
Construction Plans: The project will be designed using
English Standard units in AutoCAD Civil 3D at a scale of 1
12 1 GHD Pr000sal
inch = 20 feet depicting the preferred alignment. Electronic
copies of the graphic files will be provided in PDF and/or
AutoCAD format using GHD's AutoCAD standards, including
project folder structures, layer names, line styles and font
resources, color tables, etc.
GHD will develop the Construction Plans 22" x 34" sheets
that allow 50% scaled reduction to 11 " x 17" sheets. Design
plans will include the title sheet, sheet index, notes/symbols
and abbreviations, typical cross sections, civil site plan
and profiles, demolition, site and grading plans for each
intersection design, civil and typical details, lighting, signing
and striping, landscaping, erosion control, and other sheets
and details as necessary for a constructible project and to
convey the design intent. All final plans will be stamped and
signed by a California Licensed Professional Civil Engineer.
Construction plans will be submitted to the City for review at
the 60% and 90% stages. Review comments received will be
addressed in the 90% and Final submittals.
Specifications: GHD will prepare technical specifications
using the City's standard format for technical specifications
(Sections 12 and 13 of the City boilerplate construction
contract). The technical specifications will be developed and
submitted to the City for review at the 60% and 90% stages.
Review comments received will be addressed in the 90% and
final 100% submittals.
Engineers Opinion of Probable Construction Cost: GHD
will prepare the Engineer's Opinion of Probable Construction
Costs using standard engineering estimate procedures for
each design submittal (30%, 60%. 90%, and Final). Actual
construction costs may vary due to availability of labor,
eq uipment, materials, or market conditions. Applicable
review comments received will be addressed in the 90%
and final 100% submittals. An appropriate contingency and
qualifications will be included with each estimate.
Deliverables:
60% Submittal will include five (5) hard copies of 11"
x 17" plans, specifications, and opinion of probable
construction costs, submitted with electronic PDF files
90% Submittal will include five (5) hard copies of 11
x 17" plans, specifications, and opinion of probable
construction costs, submitted with electronic PDF files
100% Submittal will include the final plans, specifications,
and opinion of probable construction costs ready for
bidding purposes, submitted as PDF electronic files,
AutoCAD electronic files of the plans, one (1) set of
stamped and wet -signed 22" x 34" reproducible mylar
plans, one (1) copy -ready set of specifications, 10 copies
of 22" x 34" plans on bond, 10 copies of 11 " x 17" plans
on bond, and 10 copies of bound specifications
Assumptions:
• The City will provide an electronic copy (MS Word format)
of their current front end contract requ rements, technical
specifications, ana bid forms.
• The project is anticipated to disturb less than 1 acre,
therefore a SWPPP is not needed. An optional task for
SWPPP preparation is included s'nould the disturbed
area necessitate SWPPP compliance.
• The City will provide content and theme for interpretive
signs: Alta will provide artwork.
• Landscaping will be minor and limited to areas near
scope of work assumes nor more than 20 hours of effort
after submittal. In addition, it is not yet clear the extent of
mitigation that may be required or if a mitigation monitoring
plan would be necessary Therefore a mitigation plan is not
included in this scope of work. if the City requires assistance
with follow-up information requests from the resource
agencies, after submittal of the applica'ions, or with a
mitigation monitoring plan, an amendment to this scope of
work can be provided.
street crossings, based on the available budget. Related Deliverables:
irrigation will oe limited to drip irrigation, if necessary, at 0 CDFW permit application
those locations.
• The lighting des!gn assumes that the IPI_ Series
manufactured by Firstlight Technologies will be used.
This lighting standard is the same standard installed
,ry th the Phase 1 project. They are a solar -powered LED
integrated architectural area light. Design will be provided
to meet i-egulatory -equirernen's. This scope of services
assumes no electrical service is required.
• The trail design will conform to the following design
standards where applicable:
o FHWA/FRA 'Best Practices" for Planning and
Designing Rails-with-Trai s
o AAS: -ITC Guide for the Development w Bicycle
Facilities
o Ca!ifor-iia Manua' on Uni�orrn Traffic Control Devices
o Caltrans Chapter 1000: Planning and Designing
Bicycle Facilites
e ,vith Disabilities Act
Task 7. California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Permit Application (Optional)
GHD will prepare a CDFW Section 1602 Lake and
Streamhed pare
Agreement application fo- the
proposed Doohn Creek bridge crossing "i he application
package wiil include a clear project and impact description
and appropriate figures indicating the site location and work
to be performed. A biological resources evaluation will be
a required component of the aoplication A GHD biologist
will visit the site and prepare a basic biological resource
study, identifying the hacitat at the creek crossing as well as
potential species that could occur at both the bridge crossing
and within 100 feet of the footprint of the bridge. The work
will be focused to the creek crossing, as t'nat will ce the
subject of the 1602 application
The study also will provide a recommendation as to
replacement plantings for any riparian} trees that would be
removed. This scope of work accommodates one (1) site visit
with CDr N.
However, the level of effo t `or additional follow-up work
after submittal of the application is difficult to predict. This
Assumptions:
• The City will pay the perrnit application fee.
• No more than 20 hours of follow-up incuiries would be
required once the appPcation package Is subm tied to
CDFvV.
• No Mitigation and Monitoring Plan will be required, other
than replacement of trees that are removed.
• No jurisdictional waters would be impacted and no
impacts would occur below the ordinary high water
mark of Doolin Creek Therefore, a permit with the U.S.
Army Corps of Engrnee-s would not be required and a
Regional Water Q+iality Control Board Section X01 would
riot be required.
• The entire length o` the trail alignment is not subject to
jurisdiction by CDFW and therefore does not need to be
included in the biological resource study.
• The City has completed the CEQA process paid the
required filing fees, and has documentation to this effect.
Task 8. Project Storrnwater Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) (Optional)
The GHD team (featuring three State of California Qualified
SWPPP Developers) will prepare a site-specific risk
assessment to determine risk level for the SWPPP. The r'.sk
level is a function of the erosive potential of the soil and
receiving water body risk during periods of soil exposure.
Risk level 2 will require sampling of stormwater for pH and
sediment, and s,gnfficantly more effort than a Risk level 1
site. Risk level 3 sites may require bioassesment studies of
the receiving water body, and active stormwater treatment
systems. It is assumed the project will be a Risk level 2.
GHD will prepare the SWPPP document assuming the
project is Risk level 2. The SWPPP will include site maps and
water pollution control drawings, a Constniction Site Visual
Monitoring Program, a Sampling and Analysis Plan for ron-
vis'ble pollutants, a Sampling and Analysis Plan for pH and
sediment., a Construction Site Non Visible Pollutant Sampling
Program, selection of appropriate BMPs for Erosion and
Sediment Control and for Construction Site Management,
and preparation of a partial! water pollution control schedule
Civ of Uka"i I Northvvestern Pacific Ra -I Trail Phase 2 !No. 17-121 1 13
(WPCS).
Other required documentation will be provided partially
complete, such as the Rain Event Action Plan (REAP),
site inspection forms, and contractor or material suppliers
notification forms. This documentation would be finalized
following project bid. The project SWPPP will include
certifications for GHD's SWPPP Developer.
GHD will provide Notice of Intent (NOI) information suitable to
initiate the waste discharge permit process using the State's
Stormwater Multiple Application and Report Tracking System
(SMARTS). GHD will also provide assistance during the initial
use of the SMARTS system via phone or email.
Deliverables:
r Lwh'•4
nfw :e.n Pa,,` Rad?ral Fha, 2
'n.L
'a.L N.n+re
O.ver+�
tint
Fsv,t
1 rrj
' Consuham Selection
12 days
Mm 11/6/17
Tue 12/5/17
/ 'R
[Davin Award / Notice to Proceed
0 days
Tue 12/19/17
Tue 12/:9,', 7
- .
Txk 1 Proien Manage...
88 days
Wed 12123117
Fn 4/20/12
+ ,
4c,— Vanagerrent
88 days
Wed 12/70/17
'n V;2 /'.i
-s;
(;uko11 Vee!,ng
C days
Thu 17/71/17
Thu 12,7'/ 7
R
Tnk 2 Review E+i.Mg Doo Is Data
a days
Wed 12/]0)17
T e 1/21'.9
t 4q
Task 3 Gentesh Investigation L Survey
32 day,
Wed 12120/17
Thu 2/1,111
a R
Geu:ed,`eld nve pion
1S day,
Fri 12/22/17
Thu V,I/.9
7 '4
nlwra,ory Ter ng & Report
15 days
Fn 1112/18
Thu 211/13
Sub— Gro 11 n _ga R.'_
0 drys
Thu 211/18
Thu 211118
+1 ,
R/W and Easement 4esearch
5 days
'Wed 12/20/17
Tue 11/76,+17
1: 4q
Filo Tdpo S_.Y
5 days
Fri 12/22/17
Thu 12/28/17
t
Jcgeta[ion Sun '
1 dry
F,i 12/22/17
F,. 12,122/17
:+ t
Develop 8aservp
5 days
Fri 12/29/17
Thu 1!4/18
.. K
D..age Srudy
14 days
_H 1/5/18
Wed in,11118
! S
Submal Drai.vge S:udy
0 hys
Wed 1/24/18
Wed 1/24!'.e
Task 4. Trod Corridor Management Plan
42 day,
Wed 12/20/17
Thu 2/15/18
1'+
reav61dy Study
15 days
Wed 12/20117
Tue 119/18
I
Corr dor Na•agnnent Plan
12 day,
Wed 1/131:8
Thu 1125/18
.-
SA,y Plan and T,.4 Puk y
12 days
Wed 1/10/:8
Thu 1/25/18
..
Cau,x Preoen:mn (CPT - D)
12 days
Wed 1/10/18
Thu 1125118
..
Sub—. Drah T-1 Co da Management Plan
0 days
Thu 1125/18
Thu 1125118
•
G,y & %GAA R- of 0 -ft CVP
5 days
r.i 1/76118
Thu 211/18
Finaf CMD
10 days
Fri 2/7/11
Thu 2/15/18
.. +�
Subnut `i ,I CVP
0day,
Thu?/15/i8
M. 2115/18
Task S Preliminary (30%) Daslgn
20 days
Fri 1)3/12
Thu 211118
,.
hepae 30%PI."&
5 days
Fri 1/5/11
Th. 1/25/18
.e
Suhnv, 3C%plan,&E]hmat<
0day,
Th. 112511R
Thu 1!25/18
..
G:y & NCRA Rey,ew of 30%0esigo & CMP
S days
Fn 1/26/18
Thu 2/1/18
. ►
30%Design I— V ening
0 days
Thu 2/1/18
Thu 2/1/18
.�
task 6- Fngioeer.V Design(60%, 90%& Final)
50 days
Fn 2/26118
Thu 4/5/18
hepae 60%PS&E
20days
'd1/76/18
Thu 2/22118
i !
Su6mr• 60% PS&E0
days
Thu 2/27!18
Thu 2/22118
++
G!, & \CAA Re— c1 60S Des.gn
S drys
',12!23/11
Thu 3/1/18
s
60%Dewgn Remew V ..ting
0 days
Thu 3/1/18
Thu 3/:/18
.6 ar
Pr .e 91%PS&E
15 days
=d 2/23/18
Thu 3/15/18
Sul, 90%PS&E
0d.0
Thu 3/15/11
Thu 3/15118
;a r4
City & %CRA Re New of 9U%Design
S days
Fri 3116/18
Thu 3/22/18
39
90% 0—g" Review Vicetu,g
0 days
Thu 3/22/18
Thu 3122/18
+D
Prepae Fina, PS&E
15 days
Fri 3/16/18
Thu 415/18
+l R
Submit rival PS&E0
days
Thu 4/S/18
Thu 4/5/18
47
Task 7-.Ftn—m Agency Perrn.ttir.l optiti-1)
60 days
Fn 1/26/18
Thu 4/19/18
+. .
Task 8 SWPPP (Optloru))
10 days
Fri 3/23/18
Thu 4/5111
44 at
Submh Fatal to Cah,ans for CTC Appm-1
0 days
Thu 4/19118
Thu 4/19/18
4`. ay
CTC Pmlect Approval
0 drys
Thu 6/2P/1 R
Thu 6/78/18
,W) 1,
14 1 GHD Pr000sal
Pat. 1
• SWPPP document in electronic PDF format
vfM, 3a ;I < W" so ?I '1° lot
Schedule
N 12/19
1 12/21
TL ,
T
0 211
1
f �7
4 1/25
in
4' 211
is
4; 2/22
�IIO
3/1
.m
w 3/15
3122
-4/5
a
74J'3
3. Project team
GHD Inc.
GHD is one of the v✓o,ld's leading engineering and
environmental consulting companies. Established n
1928. GHD employs more than 8,500 people across five
continents, serving clients in the markets of water, energy
and resources, environment, property and buildings, and
transportation Wholly owned by its people, GHD is a global
^ehvork of engineers, scientists, technicians, landscape
architects, and planners collaborating to deliver international
expertise and sustainable outcomes for local clients and
regional communities. With a staff of over 400 professionals
on the West Coast, GHD possesses deep local knowledge
and experience but is able to expand on our regional
capabilities by leveraging the expertise of over 8,500 people
all around the world.
GHD has a deep history serving clients along the northern
Ca!ifornia Coastal Zone from our offices in Santa Rosa,
Roseville, Eureka, San Francisco, Sacramento, Concord,
Emeryville, and Cameron Park. This project will be led by our
management staff in Santa Rosa, less than an hour's drive
from the project.
GHD will be the lead firm on this project, coordinating a
team that welcomes long-term partner
Together, our two firms completed Phase 1 of
this Northwestern Pacific Rail Trail pro;ect for the City of
Ukiah, and will bring this knowledge and familiarity witn the
project to Phase 2, able to begin immediately and without
unnecessary delay regarding data collection or getting up to
speed with project detals.
Trail and Transportation Experience
S nce 1928. GHD has provided exceptional multi -disciplinary
engineering, transpertat on, and environmental services
to the public via projects for municipal. State, and federa'
clients. Our extens've experience :n both Ukiah and
throughout California providing holistic services makes L's
ideally suited to assess needed pedestrian and bicycle
pathway improvements for the Ukiah community.
Working closely with our engineering staff are GHD's
experienced traffic engineers who assist with all aspects of
transportation planning. Our firm has managed numerous
transportation studies and design projects, transforming
travel corridors to serve more livable conditions, creating
traffic calming schemes, and designing traffic control systems
which favor local bicyclists and pedestrians. We specialize in
designing active transportation improvements to create safer
communities for motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians alike, as
well as utiliz ng ex sting infrastructure to promote safety and
non -motorized transportation. We have worked on several
such rail -with -trail and Safe Routes for Schools projects for
the Mendocino Council of Governments; SMART; the cities
of Arcata, Eureka, Rio Dell, Cloverdale, and Fortuna; arid
for Humboldt County, all within the past five years. Many of
these projects are described, in detail, in Section 6 of this
proposal.
Citv of Ukiah I Noi?hiostem Parci'jL: Had frail Flral-e 2 tNo 1 7-12i 115
We have also developed similar transportation infrastructure
projects for the Smith River Rancheria, the Elk Valley
Rancheria, and Karuk Tribe. Our work with the Elk Valley
Rancheria, developing their non -motorized transportation
access plan in Humboldt County, was greatly enhanced by
our public outreach approach, which clearly documented the
Tribe's goals and desires and allowed us to develop feasible
pathways to address them.
Caltrans Local Assistance: For Phase 2, we have also
assigned Josh Wolf as our Caltrans Local Assistance
Liaison, a senior engineer with over 13 years of experience
conducting liaison and coordination services with Caltrans
staff regarding transportation infrastructure improvements all
over the State. Accordingly, he is a graduate of the Caltrans
Local Assistance Resident Engineers Academy (March 2009
and January 2016) and the Caltrans Local Assistance Federal
Aid Series (February 2015). Mr. Wolf served as a key advisor
for Phase 1 of the Northwestern Pacific Rail Trail, assisting
with the Caltrans PA&ED phase, and has guided numerous
trail projects (Humboldt Bay Trail) through Caltrans right-of-
way, in addition to working with Caltrans oversight staff and
funding entities on transportation projects for the City of Fort
Bragg, the Smith River Rancheria, the City of Trinidad, and
the Elk Valley Rancheria. Mr. Wolf will be assisted by David
Caisse, who shares similar experience and training.
Environmental Permitting: Though we anticipate the
environmental compliance process to be minimal in Phase
2, we know it is important to have expertise on our team
should specific challenges arise. GHD clearly understands
the environmental planning, compliance, and permitting
process; our engineers work in tandem with our diverse
staff of biologists, ecologists, and geologists, who are
experts in all phases of environmental analysis pursuant to
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Our environmental
staff are adept at performing field studies, preparing initial
study (IS)/environmental checklists, environmental impact
reports (EIRs) and statements, and the development and
implementation of mitigation and environmental monitoring
programs. GHD maintains well-established relationships
with regulatory agencies, including the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (USACE), U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, NOAA
Fisheries, California Department of Fish & Wildlife (CDFW),
State Historic Preservation Office, and Regional Water Quality
Control Boards. Our efforts will be tailored to the needs
of this project and we'll use our familiarity with regulatory
agencies to streamline the permitting process.
Working with the City of Ukiah
GHD has been working with the City of Ukiah for over
a decade, primarily in the context of transportation
improvements, though our staff has also completed sanitary
sewer master plans and Letter of Map Revisions (LOMB)
on, notably, Doolin Creek (which has a bridge that is an
important part of this Phase 2), amongst a wide variety of
other multidisciplinary work. This includes Phase 1 of the
Northwestern Pacific Rail Trail project, but also covers such
experience as:
• Redwood Business Park Transportation Improvements
• Talmage Interchange Roundabout Conceptual Designs
• Perkins Street and Orchard Avenue Intersection
Improvements
• Replacement Well fro and New Well 49 Project
Additionally, GHD has completed County work located in
Ukiah, furthering our understanding of both the region and
the relationships therein between municipal and regional
agencies and entities:
• Rail -with -Trail Corridor Plan j Mendocino Council of
Governments (MCOG)
• Single Route I Mendocino County DOT
• Hill Road Bridge j Mendocino County DOT
• Comptche Road Slide I Mendocino County DOT
16 1 GHD Proposal
• Mendocino County Courthouse Infrastructure Project Highway Administration (FHWA): Rails with Trails: Lessons
Phases 1, 2, and 3 1 Mendocino County Learned. It developed the best practices for RWT projects,
• Transit Operations and Maintenance Facility Mendocino which involve trails and bike paths located on or near active
Transit Authority (MTA) railroad corridors.
This experience with and within the City, combined with
our experience in tails -related projects, transportation
infrastructure, and environmental permitting, as well as with
our first-hand, extensive knowledge of the project from
inception through Phase 1, enables GHD to provide the
City of Ukiah with unparalleled service—balanc ng budget,
schedule. and the City's goals—regard ng Phase 2 of the
Nortn,,vestern Pacif'c Rail Trail project.
As shov%n on the organizational chart in this section, Alta
Plarring + Design w.'h support GHD with Planning and
Pubbc Outreach. Alta is North America's leading multi -modal
trarsoortation firm, specializing in 'he planning, design, and
mplementation of bicycle, pedestrian, greenway, park, and
trail corridors and systems. Founded in 1996, A to has more
than 2i;0 staff in 30 offices across North A.meca. We are
committed to trars`orming communities, one trip at a time,
one step at a time, and one street, intersection, and pa,k at
a time.
Alta provides complete trail master planting and design
services, nc'uding alternatives analysis, environmental
remediat'on, property acquisition strategies, construction
engineering and adminst,ation, permitting, accurate cost
estimation, maintenance and management plans, and
furding strategies. Alta _rnderstands the specfic needs
of trail users and have experience with trails in a wide
range of environments and at different project scales.
Alta has developed regional trails and networks, as well
as neighborhood links, in rail corridors, street corridors,
environn-entally sensitive areas, urban cores, parks, and rural
and industrial areas.
Rai! -with -Trail (RWT) Experience
In 2002, Alta led a major three-year study for the Fede,al
From there, Alta has worked on dozens of RWT projects
across the nation and has partnered extensively with GHD
These partnerships, and related trail projects, include:
• Rail -with -Trail Corridor Plan I MCOG
• Arcata Rail -with -Trail Connectivity project I City of Arcata
• Eureka Waterfront Rail -with -Trail I Redwood Community
Action Agency
• Paci`ic Coast Bike Route j Mendocino County
• SR 128 Corridor Valley Trail Feasibility Study I Mendocino
Council of Governments
• Jchn Campbell Memorial Greenway I City of=ortuna
• Orick Levee Trail' Redwood Communty Action Agency
As a national Fader in RW 1_ and a specialist in non-mo`.orized
transportation, Alta brings unparalleled experience to Phase
2 of this project.
Working with the City of Ukiah
Alta's ex:per,ence vvitn une City of U-,ian encompasses
all ohases for this Northwestern Pacific Rail Trail projec-,
including the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, in
which Alta first identif ed the priority of implementing the
Northwestern Pacific Ra l Trail project
Alta then developed and delivered the Northwestern Pacific
Rail Trail Feasibility Study, which prepared a preliminary
design and cost esbma:es for the approximately 1.5 -mile rail -
with -trail facility. This work set the stage for the Northwestern
Pacific Rail Trail Phase 1 project, on which GHD and Alta
teamed to provide a fuli suite of environmental, engineering,
and permitting services (as well as stormwater pollution
prevention plan (SWPPP] preparation), for the City's Class 1,
ADA -accessible, non -motorized trail along the North Coast
Railroad Authority (NCRA) Railroad Corridor between Gobbi
Street and Clara Avenue in Ukiah.
Simply put: There is no other team who knows this project as
well as GHD-Alta. We are un'quely posit oned to continue our
successful work rvth Phase 2.
� r ..: tori �_;I i � ,c�i i �iil ,�,f _-
C �r ( � ,- , i �I- �i l� I � I �� i � -� h�,''I 'Z �; t��r r 'it �. _i��C.i l� r��-I �,> _,,, j��.j t�.� Cc,'��p�;tf=1 Ci ''•�'�'�-.
T - ,(y
t ) ;: k —
�' (;) �'�'.., j.p�H; i� �,� '��i I�:.I i )dv f .1`_ �f �1 c.5 t,)(-'
jD i'1"_j Alt: -i.
Ciw of Ukiah 1 Pacifc Rail Trail Phase 2 (No, 17-1 Zt I 17
Team organization
The following organizational chart shows the personnel we
have assembled for the City of Ukiah's Northwestern Pacific
Rail Trail Phase 2 project, Following the org chart are brief
biographical descriptions of each team member's experience,
as well as the work each team member will accomplish.
We are also welcoming the expertise of Alt:;
to our team, whose staff are indicated below with a
color. Detailed project experience and applicable
certifications/education are shown on our resumes at the end
of this section.
Bill Silva, PE, QSD/QSP
Lead Liaison
Josh Wolf, PE, QSD/
OSP
Support
David Caisse, PE,
QSD/QSP
Availability: According to the City of Ukiah's RFP No.
17-12, the GHD and Alta team must provide current and
previous work assignments. GHD is at any given time
undergoing dozens of work assignments and managing a
pipeline that extends years into the future. For the purposes
of efficiency and brevity, we've elected to not provide such
a comprehensive list. Instead, please find the Phase 2
budgeted man-hours for each assigned staff member below
as evidence of GHD's commitment to the availability of all
staff over the course of the project's life. We take these
commitments seriouslyand ensure that both GHD and Alta
staff will be fully available to serve the City for all project
needs.
Lead
Kristine Gaspar
Pat Tortora, PE, LEED AP
Lead
Richard Maddock,
PLS
Support
John Wunschel, PLS
Lead
Mary Stewart, PLA
Support
Mike Rose, PLA
Brian Burchfield, PLA
Matt Kennedy, PE, TE
David Caisse, PE, QSD/
QSP
Lead
Chris Trumbull, PE,
GE, D.GE
GHD Team Member Man Hours (Detailed man hours are included in the sealed fee proposal.)
Bill Silva
Pat Tortora
21 Kristine Gaspar
74
256 Richard Maddock
64
Matt Kennedy
32 John Wunschel
72
David Caisse
18 Chris Trumbull
36
Jos^ Wolf
40 Steve Grupico
122
18 1 GHD Pr000sal
Lead
Pat Tortora, PE,
LEED AP
Support
Steve Grupico, PE,
LEED AP
Local Assistance Procedures Manual ATTACHMENT B Exhibit 10-H
Cost Pr000sal
EXHIBIT 10-H COST PROPOSAL (EXAMPLE 41) PAGE 1 OF 2
ACTUAL COST -PLUS -FIXED FEE OR LUMP SUM (FIRM FIXED PRICE) CONTRACTS
(DESIGN, ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES)
Note: Mark-ups are Not Allowed
Consultant GHD Inc. Contract No. Date 128;2017
DIRECT LABOR
Classification/Title
Name
hours
Actual Hourly Rate
Total
Principal in Charge
Bill Silva
21
$96.01
52.016.21
Project Manager
Pat Toitora
256
$60.10
S15.185.60
Q \ QC Manager
Matt Kennedy
32
$64.66
$2.069.12
QA/QC
David Caisse
18
$45.68
$822.24
Caltrans Coord
Josh Wolf
40
$55.94
$2,237.60
Limronmental Permittin_
Kristine Gaspar
74
$47.93
$3.546.82
Biologist
Jessica Nadolski'varies
80
$45.78
$3.662.40
Land Sunryor
Richard Maddock
64
$42.25
$2.704.00
Land Sun cyor
John Wunschel
72
$40.01
$2,880.72
Sr. Geotechnical Engineer
Chris Trumbull
36
$64.17
$2,310.12
Geotechnical Engineer
Tony Quintrall
51
$52.88
$2,696.88
Geotechnical Support
Dave Mebrahtom
28
$28.85
$807.80
Civil Engineer
Steve Grupico
122
$59.62
$7,273.64
Staff Engineer
Briana Artita
430
$35.58
$15,299.40
Structural Engineer
Steve Burns
60
$52.88
$3.172.80
CAD Technician
Chris Bach/varies
66
$37.50
$2,475.00
Admin
Felicia Ballard/varies
42
$21.10
$886.20
LABOR CON I N
a) Subtotal Direct Labor Costs
b) Anticipated Salary Increases (see page 2 for sample)
FRINGE BENEFITS
d) Fringe Benefits (Rate 33.80% )
IN, DIRECT COSTS
I) Overhead (Rate: 133.19%
h) General and Administrative (Rate: 0.00%
FEE (Profit)
q) (Rate:
15.00°„ )
OTHER DIRECT COSTS (ODC)
Description
1)
Travel/Mileage Costs (supported by consultant
actual costs)
m)
Equipment Rental and Supplies (itemize)
- geotech lab
- Misc repro
- geotech test and driller
n)
Permit Fees (itemize), Plan sheets (each), Test
Holes (each). etc.
$70,246.55
$0.00
c) TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS [(a) + (b)] $70,246.55
e) Total Fringe Benefits
[(c) x (d)] $23,743.33
g) Overhead [(c) x (i)] $93,554.36
i) Gen & Admin [(c) x (h)] $0.00
j) Total Indirect Costs [(e) + (g) + (i)]
k) TOTAL FIXED PROFIT [(c) + Q)] x (q)]
Unit(s) Unit Cost Total
1100 $0.54 $588.50
2 $400.00 $800.00
1 $2,079.00 $2,079.00
1 $1,721.00 $1,721.00
1 $10.684.00 $10,684.00
1 $0.00 $0.00
$117,297.69
$28,131.64
LPP 15-01 JanuarN 14, 2015
Local Assistance Procedures Manual
o) Subconsultant Costs (attach detailed cost proposal
in same format as prime consultant estimate for
each subconsultant) 1
$36,790.00 $36,790.00
Exhibit 10-11
p) Total Other Direct Costs [(I) + (m) + (n) + (o)] $52,662.50
TOTAL COST [(c) + 0) + (k) + (p)] $268,338
NOTES:
• Employees subject to prevailing wage requirements to be marked with an *.
• ODC items should be based on actual costs and supported by historical data and other documentation.
• ODC items that would be considered "tools of the trade" are not reimbursable.
• ODC items should be consistently billed directly to all clients, not just when client will pay for them as a direct cost.
• ODC items when incurred for the same purpose, in like circumstances, should not be included in any indirect cost pool or
in overhead rate.
Page I of 5
EXHIBIT 10-H COST PROPOSAL (EXAMPLE #1) PAGE 2 OF 2
ACTUAL COST -PLUS -FIXED FEE OR LUMP SUM (FIRM FIXED PRICE) CONTRACTS
(SAMPLE CALCULATIONS FOR ANTICIPATED SALARY INCREASES)
Consultant GHD Inc. Contract No. Date 12/8/2017
I. Calculate Average Hourly Rate for Ist year of the contract (Direct Labor Subtotal divided by total hours) 43077
Direct Labor Subtotal Total Hours Avg Hourly 5 Year Contract
per Cost Proposal per Cost Proposal Rate Duration
$70,246.55 1492 = $47.08 Year I Avg I Iourly Rate
2. Calculate hourly rate for all years (Increase the Average hourly Rate for a year by proposed escalation %)
Avg Hourly Rate
Proposed Escalation
Total Hours
Year 1 $47.08 +
3% =
$48.49
Year 2 Avg Hourly Rate
Ycar 2 $48.49 +
3% _
$49.95
Year 3 Avg Hourly Rate
Year 3 $49.95 +
3% _
$51.45
Year 4 Avg Hourly Rate
Year 4 $51.45 +
3%
$52.99
Year 5 Avg Hourly Rate
3. Calculate estimated hours per year (Multiply estimate % each year by total hours)
LPP 15-01 January 14, 2015
Estimated %,
Total Hours
Total Hours
Completed Each Year
per Cost Proposal
per Year
Year 1
100.000%,
*
1492.0
= 1492.0
Estimated Hours Year 1
Year 2
0.001%,
*
1492.0
= 0.0
Estimated Hours Year 2
Year 3
0.00%,
*
1492.0
= 0.0
Estimated Hours Year 3
Year 4
0.00°/,
*
1492.0
= 0.0
Estimated Hours Year 4
Year 5
0.001%,
*
1492.0
= 0.0
Estimated Hours Year 5
Total
100%,
Total
— 1492.0
4. Calculate
Total Costs including Escalation
(Multiply Average Hourly Rate by
the number of hours)
Avg Hourly Rate
Estimated hours
Cost per Year
(calculated above)
(calculated above)
Year l
$47.08
*
1492
= $70,246.55
Estimated Homs Year l
Year 2
$48.49
*
0
= $0.00
Estimated Hours Year 2
LPP 15-01 January 14, 2015
Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 10-H
Year 3 $49.95 * 0 = $0.00 Estimated Hours Year 3
Year 4 $51.45 * 0 = $0.00 Estimated Hours Year 4
Year 5 * = Estimated Hours Year 5
Total Direct Labor Cost with Escalation = $70,246.55
Direct Labor Subtotal before Escalation = $70,246.55
Estimated total of Direct Labor Salary Increase = $0.00 Transfer to Page 1
NOTES
• This is not the only way to estimate salary increases. Other rnethods will be accepted if they clearly indicate the % increase,
the # of years of the contract, and a breakdown of the labor to be performed each year.
• An estimation that is based on direct labor multiplied by salary increase "/o multiplied by the # of years is not acceptable.
(i.e. S250,000 x 2 x 5 yrs = S25.000 is not an acceptable mcthodology)
• This assumes that one year will be worked at the rate on the cost proposal before salary increases are granted.
Page 2 of 5
LPP 15-01 Januar% 14, 2015
Local Assistance Procedures Manual
EXHIBIT 10-H COST PROPOSAL (EXAMPLE 41) PAGE 1 OF 2
ACTUAL COST -PLUS -FIXED FEE OR LUMP SUM (FIRM FIXED PRICE) CONTRACTS
(DESIGN, ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES)
Note: Mark-ups are Not Allowed
Consultant Alta Planning + Design. Inc. Contract No. Date 12 8 1017
DIRECT LABOR
Exhibit 10-11
Cost Prouosal
Classification/Title
Name
hours
Actual Hourly Rate
Total
Project Manager
Mary Stewart
42.5
$40.16
$1,706.80
Principal
Mike Rose
13
$63.10
$820.30
Senior Desinger
Brian Burchfield
106
$36.43
$3,861.58
Designer - Level I
Various
112
$26.39
$2,955.68
Engineer I
Various
22
$31.601
$695.20
Planner I
Various
22
$26.181
$575.96
LABOR COSTS
a) Subtotal Direct Labor Costs
b) Anticipated Salary Increases (see page 2 for sample)
FRINGE BENEFITS
d) Fringe Benefits (Rate 38.50% )
INDIRECT COSTS
f) Overhead (Rate: 0.00%
h) General and Administrative (Rate: 151.20%
FEE (Profit
$10,615.52
$0.00
c) TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS [(a) + (b)[ $10,615.52
e) Total Fringe Benefits
[(c) x (d)] $4,086.98
g) Overhead [(c) x (f)] $0.00
i) Gen & Admin [(c) x (h)] $16,050.67
j) Total Indirect Costs [(e) + (g) + (i)]
q) (Rate:
15.00°/ )
k) TOTAL FIXED PROFIT [(c) + 0)] x (q)]
OTHER DIRECT COSTS (ODC)
Description
Unit(s) Unit Cost
Total
I)
Travel/Mileage Costs (supported by consultant
actual costs)
1 51,425.00
$1,425.00
m)
Equipment Rental and Supplies (itemize)
2 $0.00
$0.00
n)
Permit Fees (itemize), Plan sheets (each), Test
Holes (each), etc.
4 $0.00
$0.00
o)
Subconsultant Costs (attach detailed cost proposal
in same format as prime consultant estimate for
each Subconsultant)
5 $0.00
$0.00
p) Total Other Direct Costs [(I) + (m) + (n) + (o)]
TOTAL COST [(c) + 0) + (k) + (p)]
$20,137.64
$4,611.69
$1,425.00
$36,789.86
NOTES:
• Employees subject to prevailing wage requirements to be marked with an *.
• ODC items should be based on actual costs and supported by historical data and other documentation.
• ODC items that would be considered "tools of the trade" are not reimbursable.
• ODC items should be consistently billed directly to all clients, not just when client will pay for them as a direct cost.
• ODC items when incurred for the same purpose, in like circumstances, should not be included in any indirect cost pool or
in overhead rate.
LPP 15-01 January 14, 2015
Local Assistance Procedures Manual Exhibit 10-11
Page 1 of 5
EXHIBIT 10-H COST PROPOSAL (EXAMPLE 41) PAGE 2 OF 2
ACTUAL COST -PLUS -FIXED FEE OR LUMP SUM (FIRM FIXED PRICE) CONTRACTS
(SAMPLE CALCULATIONS FOR ANTICIPATED SALARY INCREASES)
Consultant Alta Planning + Design. Inc. Contract No. Date 12/8/2017
1. Calculate Average Hourly Rate for 1st year of the contract (Direct Labor Subtotal divided by total hour 43077
Direct Labor Subtotal Total Hours Avg Hourly 5 Year Contract
per Cost Proposal per Cost Proposal Rate Duration
$52,870.64 444 = $119.08 Year I Avg Hourly Rate
2. Calculate hourly rate for all years (Increase the Average Hourly Rate for a year by proposed escalation
Avg Hourly Rate
Proposed Escalation
Total Hours
Total Hours
Year 1 $119.08 +
00/o -
$119.08
Year 2 Avg Hourly Rate
Year 2 $119.08 +
V/0
$119.08
Year 3 Avg Hourly Rate
Year 3 $119.08 +
V' l
$119.08
Year 4 Avg Hourly Rate
Year $119.08 +
W/0
$119.08
Year 5 Avg Hourly Rate
3. Calculate estimated hours per year (Multiply estimate % each year by total hours)
4. Calculate Total Costs including Escalation (Multiply Average Hourly Rate by the number of hours)
Estimated "/,()
Total Hours
Total Hours
Completed Each Year
per Cost Proposal
per Year
(calculated above) (calculated above)
Year 1
100.00° *
444.0
444.0
Estimated Hours Year I
Year 2
0.00" .1 *
444.0
- 0.0
Estimated Hours Year 2
Year 3
0.00" 1, *
444.0
= 0.0
Estimated Hours Year 3
Year 4
0.00, O *
444.0
= 0.0
Estimated Hours Year 4
Year 5
0.001,11, *
444.0
= 0.0
Estimated Hours Year 5
Total
10006
Total
= 444.0
4. Calculate Total Costs including Escalation (Multiply Average Hourly Rate by the number of hours)
NOTES
• This is not the only way to estimate salary increases. Other methods will be accepted if they clearly indicate the % increase.
the # of years of the contract, and a breakdown of the labor to be performed each year.
• An estimation that is based on direct labor multiplied by salary increase °/6 multiplied by the # of years is not acceptable.
(i.e. S250,000 x 2% x 5 yrs = S25,000 is not an acceptable methodology)
• This assumes that one year will be worked at the rate on the cost proposal before salary increases are granted.
LPP 15-01 Januar% 14, 2015
Avg Hourly Rate Estimated hours
Cost per Year
(calculated above) (calculated above)
Year 1
$119.08 * 444
= $52,870.64
Estimated Hours Year 1
Year 2
$0.00 * 0
= $0.00
Estimated Hours Year 2
Year 3
$0.00 * 0
= $0.00
Estimated Hours Year 3
Year 4
$0.00 * 0
= $0.00
Estimated Hours Year 4
Year 5
$0.00 * 0
= $0.00
Estimated Hours Year 5
Total Direct Labor Cost with Escalation
= $52,870.64
Direct Labor Subtotal before Escalation
= $52,870.64
Estimated total of Direct Labor Salary
= $0.00
Transfer to Page 1
NOTES
• This is not the only way to estimate salary increases. Other methods will be accepted if they clearly indicate the % increase.
the # of years of the contract, and a breakdown of the labor to be performed each year.
• An estimation that is based on direct labor multiplied by salary increase °/6 multiplied by the # of years is not acceptable.
(i.e. S250,000 x 2% x 5 yrs = S25,000 is not an acceptable methodology)
• This assumes that one year will be worked at the rate on the cost proposal before salary increases are granted.
LPP 15-01 Januar% 14, 2015
City of Ukiah
NWP Rail Trail Phase 2
December 5, 2017
ne me pmstemeo aoove is an estimate. we welcome the opportunity to discuss me proposeo scope and tee and we are open to negotiating any changes the uty, reels wouia paper sun me project needs. p.ae,a. r
1492 Total fee (wf Options) $268,338
215676 $268.338
$82,991.27 PAGED
$156,585.81 PSBE
Wo Options
$185,346.43 PSM
w/ Options
RM
Task
Task 1.2 K,ck-Off Meatim
Task 2: Rtvlwmd �szluass Existing Docurmints and Data
Task 3.1: Rlqli� and Easement Research
Task 3.4 Ba",ap
Task 4.2: Safety Plan and Tmil Policy
fl
Task 6.12. 60% Plans
Task 6.13:60% Specifications_
Task 6.14:60% Estimates
Task 6.15� Submit 60% PS&E to City
Task 6,16: 90% Plans
Task 6.17 90% Spe�ificatiorsi
Task 6.22; Final Estimates
Task 6.23: Submit Final PS&E to City
Uul
Task 8A SWPPP
TOTAL HOURS
0®000®00®0
000000000mm000000
�
ne me pmstemeo aoove is an estimate. we welcome the opportunity to discuss me proposeo scope and tee and we are open to negotiating any changes the uty, reels wouia paper sun me project needs. p.ae,a. r
1492 Total fee (wf Options) $268,338
215676 $268.338
$82,991.27 PAGED
$156,585.81 PSBE
Wo Options
$185,346.43 PSM
w/ Options