Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - CC - 2014.10.06City Council City of Burlingame Meeting Agenda - Final BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 Council Chambers7:00 PMMonday, October 6, 2014 CLOSED SESSION - 5:45 p.m. - Conference Room A Approval of the Closed Session Agenda (Government Code 54956.9(a) and (d)(4)a. Closed Session Community Forum: Members of the public may address the Council on any item on the Closed Session Agenda at this time. b. Adjournment into Closed Sessionc. Conference with Labor Negotiator Pursuant to Government Code §54957.6(a) City Negotiators: Leslie Loomis, Lisa Goldman, Glenn Berkheimer (IEDA), Employee Organization: Teamsters d. Conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Litigation - Gov. Code §54956.9(a) and (d) (4): One Case e. Note: Public comment is permitted on all action items as noted on the agenda below and in the non-agenda public comment provided for in item 7. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision of a name, address or other identifying information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. All votes are unanimous unless separately noted for the record. 1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 p.m. - Council Chambers 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 3. ROLL CALL 4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION 5. UPCOMING EVENTS 6. PRESENTATIONS Presentation by Burlingame Aquatics Cluba. Page 1 City of Burlingame Printed on 10/2/2014 October 6, 2014City Council Meeting Agenda - Final 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS, NON-AGENDA Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. Members of the public wishing to suggest an item for a future Council agenda may do so during this public comment period. The Ralph M . Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. 8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR Consent calendar items are usually approved in a single motion, unless pulled for separate discussion . Any member of the public wishing to comment on an item listed here may do so by submitting a speaker slip for that item in advance of the Council’s consideration of the consent calendar. Approve the City Council Meeting Minutes of September 15, 2014a. 9-15-14UnapprovedminAttachments: Extension of the Parks and Recreation Commission Application Deadlineb. Staff ReportAttachments: Authorization to Provide Crossing Guard Services to Our Lady of Angels Schoolc. Staff ReportAttachments: Adoption of a Resolution Approving a Professional Services Agreement with Hatch Mott MacDonald for Construction Management Services Related to the Burlingame Water and Sanitary Sewer Systems Improvements for the US Highway 101/Broadway Interchange Project, and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement d. Staff Report Resolution Professional Services Agreement Attachments: Adoption of a Resolution Awarding a Contract to Timberline Tree Service, Inc. for Tree Pruning and Stump Removal (City Project #84210) and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement e. Staff Report Resolution Bid Summary Sheet Timberline Tree Service, Inc Proposal Contract Attachments: 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Public Comment) There are no Public Hearings.a. 10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS (Public Comment) Page 2 City of Burlingame Printed on 10/2/2014 October 6, 2014City Council Meeting Agenda - Final Adoption of a Resolution Approving a Professional Services Agreement with URS Corporation for Engineering Services Related to the Preparation of the Broadway Grade Separation Project Study Report, and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement a. Staff Report Resolution Professional Services Agreement Attachments: Discuss Next Steps Regarding City Council Vacancy and Set Date for Interviewsb. Staff Report 2005 Resolution Attachments: 11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Council Members report on committees and activities and make announcements. 12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS 13. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Commission Minutes: Library, August 19, 2014a. 14. ADJOURNMENT Notice: Any attendees wishing accommodations for disabilities please contact the City Clerk at (650)558-7203 at least 24 hours before the meeting. A copy of the Agenda Packet is available for public review at the City Clerk's office, City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. before the meeting and at the meeting. Visit the City's website at www.burlingame.org. Agendas and minutes are available at this site. Next Special City Council Meeting - City Council Vacancy Interviews - TBD; Special City Council Meeting - Saturday, October 18, 2014 - Broadway Community Meeting; Next Regular City Council Meeting - Monday, October 20, 2014 VIEW REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING ONLINE AT WWW.BURLINGAME.ORG - GO TO "CITY COUNCIL VIDEOS" Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection at the Water Office conter at City Hall at 501 Primrose Road during normal business hours. Page 3 City of Burlingame Printed on 10/2/2014 Burlingame City Council September 15, 2014 Unapproved Minutes 1 BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Unapproved Minutes Regular Meeting of September 15, 2014 1. CALL TO ORDER A duly noticed regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date in the City Hall Council Chambers. Mayor Brownrigg called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG Led by Dale Perkins. 3. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Brownrigg, Deal, Keighran, Nagel, Ortiz MEMBERS ABSENT: None 4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION CA Kane advised that Council met in Closed Session, and there was no reportable action at this time. 5. UPCOMING EVENTS Mayor Brownrigg reviewed the upcoming events taking place in the City. 6. PRESENTATION Beautification Commissioner Chair Leslie McQuaide reviewed the previous winners of the Landscape Award and introduced fellow Beautification Commissioners Richard Kirchner, Anne Hinckle, Mary Hunt and Karen Dittman. Mayor Brownrigg and Ms. McQuaide presented the business landscape award to Crosby-N Gray Funeral Home and the award was accepted by John Crosby. Ms. McQuaide also introduced local artist, Dale Perkins who provided his watercolor renderings of the winning design to Crosby-N Gray, to each Councilmember and the Beautification Commissioners. Mr. Crosby spoke and thanked the Mayor and the Beautification Commission for the award. b. RECOGNITION OF COUNCILMEMBER JERRY DEAL FOR TWENTY YEARS OF SERVICE TO THE BURLINGAME COMMUNITY Mayor Brownrigg requested that everyone join the Councilmembers in a round of applause as they bid farewell to Councilmember Jerry Deal. Burlingame City Council September 15, 2014 Unapproved Minutes 2 Senator Jerry Hill and Assemblyman Kevin Mullin spoke and thanked Jerry for all his community service and involvement with the various Regional Boards and they presented Jerry with a Proclamation. Brian Perkins read Congresswoman Jackie Speier’s statement that was entered into the Congressional Record recognizing Jerry for his time in public office. Mayor Brownrigg asked if any members of the public would like to speak, and Burlingame resident Alex Mortazavi spoke. Councilmembers Ann Keighran, Terry Nagel and Ricardo Ortiz all spoke and expressed their gratitude to Councilmember Deal for his good nature and guidance. Mayor Brownrigg presented Councilmember Deal with a City Proclamation outlining his achievements while on the City Council and the Planning Commission. Councilmember Deal spoke and thanked Jerry Hill, Kevin Mullin and Brian Perkins for being there. Councilmember Deal thanked his wife JoAnn, his fellow Councilmembers, and said he enjoyed his tenure as a Councilmember and serving on the various boards. He also thanked the staff and said Burlingame is very fortunate to have such talented individuals working for the City. 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS Burlingame residents Cynthia Cornell and Cynthia Wukotich spoke on behalf of Burlingame renters on the high cost of rents in Burlingame. The following Burlingame residents spoke about the trees that were trimmed on Toledo Court: Martha Loftis, Gabriela, Diedre Shaw, Lynn Israelit, Ray Marshall, Simon Yu, Juan Gala, Mateo Gala, Byron. CM Goldman spoke and reviewed the process of the City’s tree permits and advised that the City has hired two independent Arborists to advise the City on the permit process. She further advised that the permit process has already been changed to help prevent situations like this from happening again. Burlingame resident Linda Ryan spoke about windows on a house behind her house. Burlingame resident Jeff Londer spoke about the Council vacancy interview process. There were no further comments from the floor. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Brownrigg removed item 8a and asked if any members of the public wished to remove any items from the consent calendar, and there were no requests. Councilmember Deal made a motion to adopt items 8b, c, d, e, and f; seconded by Vice Mayor Nagel. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. a. APPROVE THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 2, 2014 CC Kearney requested Council approve the City Council meeting minutes of September 2, 2014. Mayor Brownrigg requested that the wording for item 10a be amended to say that Councilmembers concurred that the go it alone cost was too expensive, but if it could be defrayed with sponsorship, it might be worth pursuing. Vice Mayor Nagel made a correction to item 8f to change Peninsula Healthcare District to say Mills-Peninsula Hospital. Burlingame City Council September 15, 2014 Unapproved Minutes 3 Vice Mayor Nagel made a motion to adopt item 8a; seconded by Councilmember Deal. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0 b. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANT PD Captain Eric Wollman requested Council adopt Resolution No. 78-2014. c. ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 15.04 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE TO UPDATE WATER SUPPLY CROSS-CONNECTION AND BACKFLOW PREVENTION STANDARDS IN COMPLIANCE WITH TITLE 17 OF THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Ordinance No. 1903. d. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AWARDING A PURCHASING CONTRACT TO ONE WORKPLACE L. FERRARI LLC FOR LIBRARY FURNITURE PL Harding requested Council adopt Resolution No. 79-2014. e. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION AWARDING A CUSTOM CASEWORK PURCHASING CONTRACT TO ROSS MCDONALD CO., INC. PL Harding requested Council adopt Resolution No. 80-2014. f. GRANT AUTHORITY TO THE CHIEF OF POLICE TO PROMULGATE A POLICY FOR THE WAIVER OF ALARM REGISTRATION PENALTIES, FALSE ALARM FEES, AND REGISTRATION FEES PC Wood and CA Kane requested authority be granted to the Chief of Police to promulgate a policy for the waiver of alarm registration penalties, false alarm fees, and registration fees. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. PUBLIC HEARING AND ADOPTION OF THE DOWNTOWN BURLINGAME AVENUE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014-2015 FinDir Augustine reviewed the staff report and requested Council hold a public hearing and determine whether a majority protest had been made and, if not, adopt the Resolution approving and levying the assessments. FinDir Augustine asked CC Kearney how many protests were received and CC Kearney reported that two protests were received. Mayor Brownrigg opened the public hearing. There were no comments from the floor, and the hearing was closed. Burlingame City Council September 15, 2014 Unapproved Minutes 4 Councilmember Keighran made a motion to adopt Resolution No. 81-2014; seconded by Councilman Ortiz. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. b. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS APPROVING THE OUR LIBRARY OUR FUTURE NAMING OPPORTUNITIES POLICY AND NAMING THE LIBRARY’S TEEN ROOM THE HOEFER TEEN ROOM PL Harding reviewed the staff report and gave a brief update on the Library project and said they are ahead of schedule and below budget. PL Harding said that the Trustees and the Library Foundation have raised almost $700,000 of the $1 million for their portion of the project. PL Harding requested Council approve naming the Teen Room the “Hoefer Teen Room” in recognition of Melanie and Kurt Hoefer’s $100,000 pledge towards the Library’s capital campaign. Ms. Harding also requested that Council approve suspending the Community Recognition Policy, as it applies to the Library Millennium Project fundraising campaign, to facilitate raising the $1 million. There was Council discussion concerning the Community Recognition Policy and CM Goldman provided clarification about the policy and the process for public input. Mayor Brownrigg opened the public hearing and Library Capital Campaign Manager Patty Anixter spoke. There were no further comments from the floor, and the hearing was closed. Vice Mayor Nagel said that another reason the Community Recognition Policy should be revised is that it includes the Walk of Fame policy that never materialized. Councilmember Keighran made a motion to adopt Resolution No. 82-2014 approving the Our Library Our Future naming opportunities policy for the Library’s $1 million Capital Campaign and adopt Resolution No. 83-2014; naming the Library’s Teen Room the Hoefer Teen Room in recognition of the $100,000 donation by Melanie and Kurt Hoefer; seconded by Councilman Deal. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. 10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a. CONSIDERATION OF A RISK-BASED ANALYSIS OF GENERAL FUND RESERVES FinDir Augustine reviewed the staff report and advised that in March 2014 the City contracted with the Research and Consulting Center of the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) for assistance in conducting a risk-based analysis of its General Fund reserve levels. FinDir Augustine gave a very thorough overview of the findings of the GFOA that identified revenue volatility, public safety, and extreme events as the primary risk factors. The secondary risk factors identified were legal claims, debt, and pensions and other post employment benefit (OPEB). FinDir Augustine also reviewed reserve recommendations and factors relevant to reserve targets. Council questions and discussion followed and FinDir Augustine addressed their comments and concerns. Council thanked FinDir Augustine for a very thorough report and presentation. Mayor Brownrigg opened the item for public comment and Burlingame resident and business owner Lorne Abramson spoke. Burlingame City Council September 15, 2014 Unapproved Minutes 5 b. CONFIRMATION OF PRIORITY RANKINGS FOR UNFUNDED NEEDS INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS AND DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE FUNDING OPTIONS CM Goldman reviewed the staff report and she and FinDir Augustine gave a presentation on the project rankings, funding approaches, and financing options. CM Goldman requested Council review its rankings for the projects, confirm the priority order, discuss possible funding options, and discuss how many projects it wishes to pursue at this time. Council discussion followed and the Council ranked the downtown parking garage as the number one, the Community Center was number two, new City Hall ranked third. The Council agreed that it is worth pursuing a public/private partnership for building a parking structure and a new City Hall. Council also agreed to look for funding for a new Community Center and Bayside Park and gave permission to hire a financial consultant for assistance. CM Goldman advised that City staff can look for grants to fund the smaller projects. Mayor Brownrigg opened the item for public comment and Burlingame resident and business owner Ross Bruce spoke. 11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Council reported on various events and committee meetings they each attended on behalf of the City. 12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS 13. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS a. Commission Minutes: Planning, August 11 and August 25, 2014 b. Department Reports: Building, August 2014; Finance, July 2014 c. Letter from Burlingame Neighborhood Network gratefully acknowledging the City’s recent donation 14. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Brownrigg adjourned the meeting at 10:09 p.m. and invited everyone to join the Councilmembers for a farewell reception in the lobby for Councilmember Deal. Respectfully submitted, Mary Ellen Kearney City Clerk 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: MEETING DATE: October 6, 2014 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: October 6, 2014 From: Ana Maria Silva, Executive Assistant – (650) 558-7204 Subject: Extension of the Parks and Recreation Commission Application Deadline RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council consider extending the deadline for Parks and Recreation Commission applications to November 7, 2014. BACKGROUND The original deadline for applications for the Parks and Recreation Commission was September 19, 2014. The City received two applications by that date, for two vacant seats. DISCUSSION Commissioner Eaton has since advised staff that he is resigning from the Commission. Staff therefore recommends that the City Council extend the deadline to November 7, 2014, in the hopes of attracting additional applicants. The November 7 deadline will allow applicants an opportunity to attend the October 16, 2014 Parks and Recreation Commission meeting. Staff will advise past applicants on the two-year waitlist of the extended deadline. In addition, staff will send a second press release to local newspapers and place a notice in the City’s eNews. FISCAL IMPACT None. 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: MEETING DATE: October 6, 2014 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: October 6, 2014 From: Lisa K. Goldman, City Manager – (650) 558-7243 Subject: Approval to Provide Crossing Guard Services to Our Lady of Angels School RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve providing a crossing guard to Our Lady of Angels School during the before and after-school periods. BACKGROUND The City currently provides crossing guards at eight Burlingame School District schools as well as St. Catherine of Siena School to help students and their parents safely cross streets near school sites. Our Lady of Angels recently approached the City about adding a crossing guard before and after school at the intersection of Hillside and Cortez. DISCUSSION The City has long provided crossing guards at school sites throughout Burlingame. Last fiscal year, the City Council approved an agreement with the Burlingame School District in which the District agreed to split the cost of any new crossing guard they requested. The Principal of Our Lady of Angels School recently approached the City to request that a crossing guard be stationed at the intersection of Hillside and Cortez before and after school given the high volume of cars traveling on Hillside and the large number of students and adults crossing the street at that intersection. The School has agreed to split the cost of the new crossing guard with the City on a 50-50 basis. FISCAL IMPACT The cost to add an additional crossing guard to the City’s complement of guards is $9,307 for the school year. The City’s share of this cost would have been $4,653.50 had the crossing guard been in place for the entire school year. Assuming City Council approval of this request, the actual cost will be slightly less since the crossing guard likely will not start until mid-October, at the earliest. 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: MEETING DATE: October 6, 2014 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: October 6, 2014 From: Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works – (650) 558-7230 Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Approving a Professional Services Agreement with Hatch Mott MacDonald for Construction Management Services Related to the Burlingame Water and Sanitary Sewer Systems Improvements for the US Highway 101/Broadway Interchange Project and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving a professional services agreement with Hatch Mott MacDonald (HMM) for construction management services related to the Burlingame Water and Sanitary Sewer Systems Improvements for the US Highway 101/Broadway Interchange Project in the amount of $297,219, and authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement. BACKGROUND City staff has been working with Caltrans and their design consultant, URS Corporation, over the last two years to develop the project scope for the replacement of several City owned underground water and wastewater utilities within the limits of the US Highway 101/Broadway Interchange project. The US101/Broadway Interchange work includes relocation and improvements of several City owned underground utilities as follows:  Relocation and replacement of approximately 1,250 linear feet of existing 8-inch diameter asbestos concrete pipe (ACP), 12-inch diameter polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe, and 6-inch diameter cast iron pipe (CIP) water mains with new 12-inch diameter PVC pipe;  Relocation and installation of new water main valves, water meters, domestic and irrigation services, and fire hydrants;  Relocation and replacement of approximately 1,650 linear feet of existing 6-inch diameter vitrified clay pipe (VCP), 8-inch diameter ACP, and 24-inch diameter VCP sanitary sewer gravity mains with new PVC pipe of similar sizes;  Relocation and replacement of approximately 1,850 linear feet of existing 6-inch diameter VCP, 16-inch diameter PVC, and 33-inch diameter sanitary sewer outfall force mains with new PVC mains of similar sizes; and  Relocation and installation of new sanitary sewer manholes, cleanouts, and laterals. Approval of Professional Services Agreement with Hatch Mott MacDonald October 6, 2014 2 DISCUSSION In May 2014, staff issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for construction management and inspection services and received responses from five qualified consulting engineering firms. Staff reviewed the qualifications of the firms, and ranked HMM as the most qualified firm for the Broadway Interchange Project based on their extensive experience in construction management and inspection of similar water main and sanitary sewer main projects. Staff has negotiated the following scope of services with HMM:  Perform daily construction on-site inspections and quality control services for 132 full working days and 44 part-time working days based on Caltrans’ contractor construction schedule;  Coordinate with Caltrans, Project Contractors, URS, and City staff to track project schedules, updates and revisions as necessary;  Prepare daily notes and reports of construction activities, produce photographic and video record of the project;  Prepare and maintain construction field drawings of Burlingame water and sanitary sewer improvements;  Attend and represent the City at the weekly construction progress meetings;  Review and provide comments on submittals, and request for information related to Burlingame water and sanitary sewer portions of the project;  Review and negotiate contract change orders associated with Burlingame water and sanitary sewer work; and  Perform project close out inspection and develop final punch list. Staff has negotiated a professional service fee in the amount of $297,219 for the above scope of services. The estimated total construction cost of the US Highway 101/Broadway Interchange project is $44,991,508, of which approximately $4,150,000 is related to the City’s underground utilities improvements. HMM’s professional fee amount represents approximately 7.2% of the estimated construction cost of the City’s underground utilities improvements portion of the US Highway 101/Broadway Interchange project. The fee amount is well within the industry standards for similar project scopes. The project construction for the underground utilities portion of the US Highway 101/Broadway Interchange project is scheduled to begin in October 2014 and is estimated to be completed by December 2015. FISCAL IMPACT Estimated Project Expenditures: The following are the estimated project construction management and inspection expenditures: Construction Management and Inspection $297,219 Approval of Professional Services Agreement with Hatch Mott MacDonald October 6, 2014 3 Contingency (15%) $ 44,781 Contract Administration $120,000 Total Estimated Expenditures $462,000 Funding Availability: There are adequate funds available in the Water and Sewer Enterprise Funds Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to complete the work as follows: Broadway Interchange Water System Improvements Project No. 83940 $ 70,000 Broadway Interchange Sanitary Sewer Improvements CIP Project No. 83550 $392,000 Total Funding $462,000 Exhibits:  Resolution  Professional Services Agreement with Hatch Mott MacDonald RESOLUTION NO. __ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH HATCH MOTT MACDONALD FOR THE BURLINGAME WATER AND SANITARY SEWER SYSTEMS IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE US HIGHWAY 101/BROWADWAY INTERCHANGE PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT CITY PROJECT NO. 83550 RESOLVED, by the CITY COUNCIL of the City of Burlingame, California and this Council does hereby FIND, ORDER and DETERMINE AS FOLLOWS: 1. The public interest and convenience require execution of the agreement cited in the title above. 2. The City Manager be, and is hereby, authorized to sign said agreement for and on behalf of the City of Burlingame. 3. The City Clerk is hereby ordered and instructed to attest such signature. _____________________________ Mayor I, MARY ELLEN KEARNEY, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 6th day of October, 2014 and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: _____________________________ City Clerk 1 Exhibit “A” Proposed Scope of Construction Period Services Highway 101 Broadway Interchange Improvements Project Bayshore Highway Water and Sanitary Sewer Main Relocations and Rollins Road Sanitary Sewer Main Relocation City of Burlingame, California Project Understanding and Overview Hatch Mott MacDonald (HMM) will provide Construction Management Services for the relocation of the City of Burlingame’s (the City) water and sanitary sewer main relocations in Bayshore Hwy and sanitary sewer main relocations in Rollins Road (Project) to accommodate the construction of the new Broadway Interchange. The relocation of the utilities will be performed with the interchange improvements project administered by the Department of Transportation (Caltrans), project number 04000006841. To protect the City’s assets and provide assurances that all material, construction complete in place of all water and sanitary sewer mains and appurtenances, testing, disinfection, and transferring of services are done in accordance with the City’s standard specifications and design criteria, HMM will provide the following services to the City:  Construction Field Engineering and Inspection Services  Construction Coordination with Caltrans and Contractor (City Liaison) The fee for construction services assumes 132 full inspection days and 44 part time working days to ramp up the activities and review the submittals along with providing final punch list and acceptance of the work. Proposed Tasks The proposed scope of services will include the tasks outlined within this section. 1.0 Construction Field Engineering and Inspection Services On-Site Inspection The HMM inspector will be on-site for the construction activities by making visits to the site at intervals appropriate to the various stages of construction to observe the progress and quality of the executed work of the Contractor. Based on observations during the inspection services, HMM shall determine in general if such work is proceeding in accordance with the Contract, City Standard Specifications and Design Criteria. Inspection is required primarily to ensure that the project is constructed in substantial conformance with the Contract Drawings and Specifications. The inspector will include comments and observations pertaining to the Contractors’ performance with daily reports. In this manner, a body of information will be compiled that will be useful in measuring progress and schedule compliance and will also serve as a baseline should a claim situation arise. HMM will not supervise, direct or have control over the Contractors’ work. Nor shall HMM have authority over or responsibility for the following: the means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of construction selected by the Contractor, the safety precautions or safety programs incident to the work of the Contractor or for site safety generally, or for any failure of the Contractor to comply with laws, rules, regulations, ordinances, codes or orders applicable to the Contractor furnishing and performing their work. As the on-site representative for the City, the HMM inspector will assist Caltrans Public Information Officer respond to questions from residents in a manner agreed to by the City ahead of time. The HMM inspector will 2 monitor the Contractor for conformance with the contract requirements for notifying residents of construction activities. Reviewing Contractor’s Project Master CPM Schedule HMM team (Coordinator and Inspector) will review the Contractors’ schedules, monitor the work, and provide comments to Caltrans Resident Engineer. HMM team will track the Contractors’ schedule updates and revisions. Records and Logs Written records will be primarily in the form of standard reports, which will ensure consistency and continuity of approach. Notes will be taken in the field and these will provide the basis of formal reports, as needed. Notes will be filed in the form of daily reports in a template sent to the City for approval ahead of construction. These daily reports will be prepared after the completion of each work shift but normally no later than the end of the following working day. A hard copy of the report will be signed by the inspector, filed, and included in the weekly correspondence file. In addition to keeping written records of the work, the inspector will maintain a photographic record of the project. The Contractor is solely responsible for site condition surveys while the inspector’s photographs are considered complementary to the daily reports. Photographs will be taken at intervals throughout the shift and be appended to the daily reports. Photographs should record operations during the shift, and conditions of interest, particularly where they involve damage or bad practice. The photographs will be cataloged with an entry detailing the photographer, date and time taken, location, and description of the content. For some operations, a video may be preferable to still photographs. Videos will be cataloged with similar information. Quality Assurance The HMM Inspector will confirm that quality control is being performed by the Contractor. The HMM Inspector will observe the work and record his observations as described above. A key element of the inspection process will be the acceptance or rejection of work. Work will generally be acceptable if workmanship has been in accordance with the technical specifications and if the results of materials or equipment tests confirm compliance with applicable performance levels. In the event that a situation arises whereby there is non-compliance, either real or potential, the issue will be brought to Caltrans RE. The initial focus will be on correcting the non-compliance without recourse to formal procedures. However, if the Contractor does not resolve or correct the problem within a reasonable period of time or if the Contractor further compounds the problem, the HMM Inspector will issue a Non-Conformance Notice (NCN) to the Contractor through Caltrans RE. The NCN will require the Contractor to propose a method for rectification. 2. Construction Coordination with Caltrans and Contractor (City Liaison) Weekly Meetings The weekly progress meetings will be the main forum for dialog between Caltrans, HMM, and the Contractor. The prime focus at the meetings will be on safety, quality, performance, and schedule. HMM will attend the weekly meetings on behalf of the city and will review any document related to the Project. HMM will also bring to the Contractor any issue related to the Project. HMM will use this meeting to bring to the Contractor’s attention any public concerns or issues that the City may have received. Submittals/Requests for Information The Contract requires the submission of various types of submittals. The work to which each applies cannot be started until the submittal has been reviewed. HMM will review all submittals related to the Project and provide 3 comments to the Engineer of Records. HMM team will coordinate the review period with the Engineer of Records to provide the comments in a timely fashion to keep the project on schedule. Submittals will be checked to ensure that they are complete and contain the correct references before being entered into the system. Thereafter, their progress through the system will be tracked to keep all parties aware of the submittal’s status and the need to maintain schedule. The submittals will be reviewed for conformance with the design. HMM will review all RFIs related to the Project that are submitted to the Engineer of Records. HMM will confirm that RFI’s related to the Project are addressed according to the Contract Documents and the City’s requirements. An RFI log for the Project will be maintained daily. Should the response to an RFI appear to have the potential to impact the contract schedule or cost, the issue will be brought up with the City. Where appropriate, alternatives will be suggested and explored. Under the terms of the contract, notification of any changes or potential changes will need to be given by the Contractor. Since Caltrans is the contract administrator, Caltrans will be handling these changes. However, for any change or claim related to the Project, HMM will represent the City, coordinate with the City, and then respond. HMM will negotiate with the Contractor the cost and schedule the contract changes initiated by the City. Site Visits Two site visits are budgeted for the Construction Manager. Progress Payments In order to process progress payments, the Contractor will need to provide verification of quality and a breakdown of lump sums and quantities of the various bid items. This will be used to agree on progress payments. HMM will coordinate with Caltrans RE the review of the Contractors’ invoices for items related to the Project and provide feedback to the City. This review will include quality control test results and quantities of measured work to establish the correct billing amount for the month. Review of pay requests will be very much tied to the requirements of the Contract. Negotiate Contract Changes Initiated by the City HMM will negotiate with the Contractor through Caltrans any contract change order to add, delete, or modify the design as requested or initiated by the City for the Project. HMM team will review any Contractor’s request for any additional compensation for work related to the Project. HMM team will inform the City of such actions. As Built Plans HMM team will keep track of any changes made in the field to the any of the Project’s elements and record these changes on the contract plans. These changes will later be submitted to the Engineer of Records to prepare the final as-built plans. 4 3. Optional inspection Services for City Waterline Extension in Airport Boulevard On-Site Inspection This optional service includes seven additional days of inspection, construction report, and punch lists. Negotiate Contract Changes Initiated by the City Also included in this optional service is time for HMM to help negotiate the Contractor’s change order with Caltrans or a new agreement directly with the City to complete the proposed waterline extension in Airport Boulevard, currently being designed in-house by the City. Fees for Proposed Services The foregoing proposed scope of services will be performed on a time and materials, reimbursable, not to exceed fee basis per the attached Hourly Rate Schedule. Expenses will be invoiced at costs plus a 10% handling fee. The fees proposed to perform the services described above amount to $297,219. The City will be invoiced monthly based on actual hours and costs completed during each billing cycle. Invoices are due and payable within 30 days of presentation. Proposed Schedule The foregoing proposed scope of services will be completed within 8 months of the Contractor’s date of authorization of notice to proceed. Schedule of Charges   Hatch Mott MacDonald Hourly Rates                           *Other Direct Costs are reimbursable at cost plus 10%. Role Hourly Rate Construction Manager $ 265.00 Senior Field Engineer/Technical Expert $190.00 Inspector $ 135.00 GIS Tech/CAD $103.00 Administrative Staff $ 84.00 City of BurlingameCaltrans Highway 101 - Broadway Interchange Improvements Project Contract No. 04000006841Inspection and Construction Support Services Tracie Sakakihara, Senior Project Manager Ray Akkawi Construction Manager Senior Field Engineer/Technical Expert Inspector GIS Tech/CAD Admin. Hourly Rate 210$ 265$ 190$ 135$ 103$ 84$ Hours Cost1.0 Inspection Services1.1 On-Site Daily Inspection for 132 full time + 44 part time working days 80 1,408 1,488 205,280$ 1.2 Construction Reports / Punch Lists176 176 23,760$ 2.0 Construction Coordination with Caltrans and Contractor2.1 Attend Construction Progress Meetings (28) 5656 14,840$ 2.2 Respond to RFI's (10)4 10 20 8 42 6,862$ 2.3 Submittal Reviews (30) 4 15 30 8 57 9,537$ 2.4 Perform Site Visits (2)44 1,060$ 2.5 Review Progress Payments2 20 22 3,230$ 2.6 Track "As-Built" changes40 20 60 7,460$ LABOR SUBTOTAL:8 87 80 1,694 20 16 1,905 272,029$ Other Direct Costs (ODCs)/Reimbursables @ 10% markupMileage and tolls10,800$ Reproduction100$ Miscellaneous Field Gear100$ BASE TOTAL:283,029$ 3.0 Optional Inspection Services for Waterline Extension in Airport Blvd.3.1 Daily Inspection for 7 working days 63 63 8,505$ 3.2 Construction Reports / Punch Lists7 7 945$ 3.3 Negotiate the change order1616 4,240$ 0-$ LABOR SUBTOTAL:0 16 0 70 0 0 86 13,690$ Other Direct Costs (ODCs)/Reimbursables @ 10% markupMileage and tolls500$ TOTAL Optional Waterline:14,190$ GRAND TOTAL:8 103 80 1,764 20 16 1,991297,219$ 181 Metro Drive, Suite 510San Jose, CA 95110T (408) 572-8800 Total Estimated Labor/ Other Direct Costs (ODCs) 9/16/20141 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: MEETING DATE: October 6, 2014 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: October 6, 2014 From: Margaret Glomstad, Parks and Recreation Director – (650) 558-7307 Bob Disco, Parks Supervisor – (650) 558-7333 Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Awarding a Contract to Timberline Tree Service, Inc. for Tree Pruning and Stump Removal (City Project #84210) and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution awarding a contract to Timberline Tree Service, Inc. for the tree pruning and stump removal project and authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement. BACKGROUND The Tree Pruning and Stump Removal project for fiscal year 2014-2015 was approved as part of the Parks and Recreation Department operating budget. The scope of work consists of: pruning performed primarily on Eucalyptus and other large trees throughout the city, which requires the use of high climbers as well as aerial lifts; Sycamore tree grid pruning; and stump removal/grinding on City property and rights-of-way at various locations. It also allows for safety and emergency removals at various locations on an as-needed basis. All work will be evenly distributed over the life of the contract. The project was first advertised for bids on July 16, 2014. The bids were opened on August 11, 2014, and five bids were received ranging from $292,110 to $741,880. Staff determined that rejection of all bids and re-bidding the contract was in the best interest of the City. At its September 2, 2014 meeting, the Council adopted a resolution rejecting all bids for the Tree Pruning and Stump Removal 2014-2015 Contract and authorized staff to re-advertise the project to obtain new bids. DISCUSSION The 2nd notification for bidding was advertised on September 4, 2104. On September 25, 2014, two bids were opened for this project. Bidders were instructed to bid a lump sum cost on each of 13 separate sections of tree maintenance and tree removal as well as costs for stump removal/grinding throughout the city. The City of Burlingame reserves the right to select any, all, or none of the section bids, depending upon available funding. There is a provision for emergency Tree Pruning and Stump Removal Contract 2014-15 October 6, 2014 2 call outs if necessary during the life of the contract. The contract also includes an option for the City to renew the contract, at its sole discretion, for one year, provided the current year’s work is satisfactory. Timberline Tree Service, Inc. submitted the lowest responsible bid and met all requirements of the bid. The total project cost as submitted by Timberline is $314,020. FISCAL IMPACT Funds in the amount of $269,000 have been allocated in the Parks and Recreation Department’s FY 2014-2015 operating budget. There are also funds in the Capital Improvement Project budget in the amount of $50,000 for Eucalyptus tree safety and emergency removals. These budgeted amounts are sufficient to cover the $314,020 cost of the project bid. Exhibits:  Resolution  Bid Summary Sheet  Timberline Tree Service, Inc. Proposal  Contract RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AWARDING A CONTRACT TO TIMBERLINE TREE SERVICE, INC. FOR TREE PRUNING AND STUMP REMOVAL (CITY PROJECT #84210) AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the City of Burlingame Parks and Recreation Department on September 4, 2014 re -advertis ed for a Tree Pruning and Stump Removal Contract in the local newspapers and contractor clearing houses for soliciting bids; and WHEREAS, on September 25, 2014, at 2pm, all bids received were opened in public in the office of the Parks and Recreation at 850 Burlingame Ave, California; and WHEREAS, the bid of Timberline Tree Service, Inc. was determined to be the lowest responsive and responsible bid for the total itemized job in the amount of $314,020; and WHEREAS, under the terms of the bid documents, the City reserves the right to award, and City shall award, only those portions of the bid items for which the City has funding. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: 1. Timberline Tree Service is determined to have submitted the lowest responsive and responsible bid for the Tree Pruning and Stump Removal 2014-2015, City Project No.84210, and the same is hereby accepted. 2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute an agreement with Timberline Tree Service for the performance of said work, in the form attached to this resolution. Mayor I, Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do h ereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council held on the 6th day of October, 2014, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Councilmembers: ABSENT: Councilmembers: ________________________________ Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk Tree Pruning and Stump Removal Contract 2014-2015 City of Burlingame - Project #84210 September 25, 2014 Bid Opening Results Timberline Professional Tree Care Section 1 25,800.00 25,000.00 Section 2 60,000.00 117,000.00 Section 3 20,000.00 19,000.00 Section 4 1,900.00 2,600.00 Section 5 20,000.00 53,600.00 Section 6 2,000.00 2,400.00 Section 7 85,000.00 126,000.00 Section 8 49,520.00 125,000.00 Section 9 2,300.00 2,700.00 Section 10 2,300.00 1,920.00 Section 11 1,800.00 2,800.00 Section 12 20,000.00 20,000.00 Sub total 290,520.00$ 498,020.00$ Stump 23,500.00 24,000.00 Grand Total 314,020.00$ 522,020.00$ AGREEMENT FOR TREE PRUNING & STUMP REMOVAL 2014-15 CITY PROJECT NO. 84210 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into in the City of Burlingame, County of San Mateo, State of California on_______________, by and between the CITY OF BURLINGAME, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called "City", and Timberline Tree Service, Inc. hereafter called "Contractor," WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the City Council authorized and the Department of Parks and Recreation issued, an invitation for bids for Tree Pruning and Stump Removal 2014-15, City Project No. 84210; and WHEREAS, on September 25, 2014, at 2:00p.m, all bids received were opened in public, in the office of the Burlingame Recreation Center at 850 Burlingame Avenue, Burlingame, California; and WHEREAS, the bid of Timberline Tree Service, Inc. was determined to be the lowest responsive and responsible bid for the total itemized job in the amount of $314,020.00; and WHEREAS, under the terms of the bid documents, the City reserves the right to award, and City shall award, only those portions of the bid items which the City has funding. WHEREAS, City and Contractor desire to enter into this agreement for the construction of said improvements; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED by the parties hereto as follows: 1. Scope of work. Contractor shall perform the work as described on BID SUMMARY SHEET – 1 (TREE PRUNING & REMOVAL) AND BID SUMMARY SHEET - 2 (STUMP REMOVAL): TREE PRUNING & STUMP REMOVAL 2014-15, CITY JOB NO. 84210 2. The Contract Documents. The Complete contract consists of the following documents: This Agreement, Notice Inviting Sealed Bids, copies of the prevailing wage rates on file with the Director of Public Works, the accepted Bid, the complete plans, profiles, detailed drawings and the complete General Provisions and Special Provisions set forth in the State of California Standard Specifications for Construction of Local Streets and Roads, July 2002 edition, as promulgated by the California Department of Transportation, and all bonds, and are hereinafter referred to as the Contract Documents. All rights and obligations of City and Contractor are fully set forth and described in the Contract Documents, which are hereby incorporated as if fully set forth herein. All of the above described documents are intended to cooperate so that any work called for in one, and not mentioned in the other, or vice versa, is to be executed the same as if mentioned in all said documents. 3. Contract Price. The City shall pay, and the Contractor shall accept, in full, payment of the work sections agreed to be done, not to exceed the sum of Three Hundred Fourteen Thousand and Twenty dollars, ($314,020.00). Said price is determined by the unit (section) prices contained in Contractor's Bid. In the event work is performed or materials furnished in addition to those set forth in Contractor's Bid and the Specifications, such work and materials will be paid for at the unit (section) prices therein contained. Said amount shall be paid in progress payments as provided in the Contract Documents. The City is not obligated to engage Contractor for the entirety of the work described in the bid documents, and may request work to be completed on individual items as determined within the discretion of the City and subject to funding availability. 4. Provisions Cumulative. The provisions of this Agreement are cumulative and in addition to and not in limitation of any other rights or remedies available to the City. 5. Notices. All notices shall be in writing and delivered in person or transmitted by certified mail, postage prepaid. Notices required to be given to the City shall be addressed as follows: MARGARET GLOMSTAD PARKS & RECREATION DIRECTOR CITY OF BURLINGAME 850 Burlingame Avenue Burlingame, California 94010 Notices required to be given to Contractor shall be addressed as follows: TIMBERLINE TREE SERVICE, INC. STEVE WILLETT 350 Lang Road Burlingame, CA 94010 6. Interpretation. As used herein, any gender includes the other gender and the singular includes the plural and vice versa. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, two identical counterparts of this Agreement, consisting of three (3) pages, including this page, each of which counterparts shall for all purposes be deemed an original of this Agreement, have been duly executed by the parties hereinabove named on the day and year first hereinabove written. CITY OF BURLINGAME “CONTRACTOR” By _____________________________ By ___________________________ ATTEST: _____________________________________ City Clerk Approved as to form: ______________________________________ City Attorney 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM NO: MEETING DATE: October 6, 2014 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: October 6, 2014 From: Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works – (650) 558-7230 Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Approving a Professional Services Agreement with URS Corporation for Engineering Services Related to the Preparation of the Broadway Grade Separation Project Study Report, and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving a professional services agreement with URS Corporation for engineering services related to the preparation of the Broadway Grade Separation Project Study Report (PSR) in the amount of $791,240, and authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement. BACKGROUND On September 13, 2013, the City submitted a competitive grant application under the San Mateo County Measure A Grade Separation Program to seek funds for developing a PSR for the Broadway Grade Separation Project. The City’s application competed successfully against other projects in the County, and, on November 7, 2013, the San Mateo County Transportation Authority awarded the City of Burlingame $1,000,000 in Measure A funds for the project. This total grant amount takes into account all costs associated with the consultant work in performing the project studies and preparing the PSR, as well as the costs for City and CalTrain staff time in reviewing and developing the project. The overall project scope includes a comprehensive and well-defined PSR, which will include development of feasible project alternatives and cost estimates for the Broadway Grade Separation. The scope of work also includes a comprehensive public outreach program to seek public input in the development and review of project alternatives. Further, the work includes close coordination with Caltrain and Union Pacific Rail Road to ensure that all current and future railroad operations are adequately studied in the PSR. DISCUSSION On June 6, 2014, the City issued a request for proposals for professional services related to the Broadway Grade Separation Project, and on July 8, 2014, the City received three proposals from qualified firms. A panel consisting of City and CalTrain staff reviewed the proposals and Broadway Grade Separation Project Study Report October 6, 2014 2 interviewed the firms. Based on the consulting team’s high understanding of the overall project, project needs, a well-defined scope of work, and the quality of the proposal, the panel selected the URS Corporation as the top qualified firm to perform the work. Staff negotiated the project scope of services with URS Corporation in the amount of $791,240. The professional services fee amount is consistent with the industry standards for performing engineering and design services based on the scope and complexity of the project. The scope of professional services is divided into five distinct tasks, with multiple sub-tasks and deliverables. The following is a basic outline of the scope of work, for which the details are included in the attached agreement. 1. Project Management o Monthly Progress Reports o Project Development Team meetings o Project Scheduling o Project Quality Management plans 2. Data Collection and Investigations o Base Map & Surveys o As-Built Research o Review of Existing Studies o Accident Data o Traffic Forecasting & Analysis o Right-of-Way Research o Utility Research 3. Preliminary Engineering and Alternative Analysis o Geotechnical Investigations o Structure Advanced Planning Studies o Hydraulic & Groundwater Analysis o Economic & Community Impact Analysis o Constraints Analysis o Preliminary Cost Estimates & Cost Risk Assessment o Screening Process & Criteria o Recommendation of a Preferred Alternative 4. Public Outreach o Development of a Public Outreach Plan o Public Outreach Meetings o Artist Renderings o Webpage & Fact Sheets o Web Survey Tool o Compilation & Stakeholder Database o Community Outreach Summary Report Broadway Grade Separation Project Study Report October 6, 2014 3 5. Project Study Report o Draft & Final Report with 15% Design Plans Upon execution of the agreement, staff will coordinate with the URS consultant team to prepare for the first of several public outreach meetings, beginning in November/December of this year. The work undertaken under this PSR is anticipated to be completed by the end of 2015. FISCAL IMPACT: The estimated project cost of the PSR is $1,000,000 and is funded 100% by the San Mateo County Measure A Grant. Exhibits: 1. Resolution 2. Professional Services Agreement RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH URS CORPORATION FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES RELATED TO THE BROADWAY GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT STUDY REPORT, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT City Project No. 82530 RESOLVED, by the CITY COUNCIL of the City of Burlingame, California and this Council does hereby FIND, ORDER and DETERMINE AS FOLLOWS: 1. The public interest and convenience require execution of the agreement cited in the title above. 2. The City Manager be, and is hereby, authorized to sign said agreement for and on behalf of the City of Burlingame. 3. The City Clerk is hereby ordered and instructed to attest such signature. _____________________________ Mayor I, MARY ELLEN KEARNEY, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 6th day of October, 2014 and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: _____________________________ City Clerk Page 1 of 8 AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES WITH URS CORPORATION FOR BROADWAY GRADE SEPARATION PSR CITY PROJECT NO. 82530 THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this ___________ day of ____________, 2014, by and between the City of Burlingame, State of California, herein called the "City", and URS CORPORATION, a Nevada Corporation, dba URS Corporation Americas engaged in providing PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN services herein called the "Consultant". RECITALS A. The City is considering conducting undertaking activities for the consultant engineering design services for the Broadway Grade Separation Project Study Report (PSR). B. The City desires to engage a professional engineering consultant to provide engineering services because of Consultant=s experience and qualifications to perform the desired work, described in Exhibit A. C. The Consultant represents and affirms that it is qualified and willing to perform the desired work pursuant to this Agreement. AGREEMENTS NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HERETO AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Scope of Services. The Consultant shall provide professional engineering services such as preliminary engineering, public outreach, project management and technical support in the development of the Project Study Report, and as detailed in “Scope of Work” of the attached Exhibit A of this agreement. 2. Time of Performance. The services of the Consultant are to commence upon the execution of this Agreement with completion of all work as set forth in Exhibit A. 3. Compliance with Laws. The Consultant shall comply with all applicable laws, codes, ordinances, and regulations of governing federal, state and local laws. Consultant represents and warrants to City that it has all licenses, permits, Page 2 of 8 qualifications and approvals of whatsoever nature which are legally required for Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep in effect or obtain at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, and approvals which are legally required for Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant shall maintain a City of Burlingame business license. 4. Sole Responsibility. Consultant shall be responsible for employing or engaging all persons necessary to perform the services under this Agreement. 5. Information/Report Handling. All documents furnished to Consultant by the City and all reports and supportive data prepared by the Consultant under this Agreement are the City's property and shall be delivered to the City upon the completion of Consultant's services or at the City's written request. All reports, information, data, and exhibits prepared or assembled by Consultant in connection with the performance of its services pursuant to this Agreement are confidential until released by the City to the public, and the Consultant shall not make any of these documents or information available to any individual or organization not employed by the Consultant or the City without the written consent of the City before such release. The City acknowledges that the reports to be prepared by the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement are for the purpose of evaluating a defined project, and City's use of the information contained in the reports prepared by the Consultant in connection with other projects shall be solely at City's risk, unless Consultant expressly consents to such use in writing. City further agrees that it will not appropriate any methodology or technique of Consultant which is and has been confirmed in writing by Consultant to be a trade secret of Consultant. 6. Compensation. Compensation for Consultant's professional services shall not exceed $791,240.00; and payment shall be based upon City approval of each task. Billing shall include current period and cumulative expenditures to date and shall be accompanied by a detailed explanation of the work performed by whom at what rate and on what date. Also, plans, specifications, documents or other pertinent materials shall be submitted for City review, even if only in partial or draft form. 7. Availability of Records. Consultant shall maintain the records supporting this billing for not less than three (3) years following completion of the work under this Agreement. Consultant shall make these records available to authorized Page 3 of 8 personnel of the City at the Consultant's offices during business hours upon written request of the City. 8. Project Manager. The Project Manager for the Consultant for the work under this Agreement shall be Etty Mercurio, Project Manager. 9. Assignability and Subcontracting. The services to be performed under this Agreement are unique and personal to the Consultant. No portion of these services shall be assigned or subcontracted without the written consent of the City. 10. Notices. Any notice required to be given shall be deemed to be duly and properly given if mailed postage prepaid, and addressed to: To City: Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 To Consultant: Ramsey Hissen, Vice-President URS Corporation 1333 Broadway, Suite 800 Oakland, CA 94612 or personally delivered to Consultant to such address or such other address as Consultant designates in writing to City. 11. Independent Contractor. It is understood that the Consultant, in the performance of the work and services agreed to be performed, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the City. As an independent contractor he/she shall not obtain any rights to retirement benefits or other benefits which accrue to City employee(s). With prior written consent, the Consultant may perform some obligations under this Agreement by subcontracting, but may not delegate ultimate responsibility for performance or assign or transfer interests under this Agreement. Consultant agrees to testify in any litigation brought regarding the subject of the work to be performed under this Agreement. Consultant shall be compensated for its costs and expenses in preparing for, traveling to, and testifying in such matters at its then current hourly rates of compensation, unless such litigation is Page 4 of 8 brought by Consultant or is based on allegations of Consultant's negligent performance or wrongdoing. 12. Conflict of Interest. Consultant understands that its professional responsibilities is solely to the City. The Consultant has and shall not obtain any holding or interest within the City of Burlingame. Consultant has no business holdings or agreements with any individual member of the Staff or management of the City or its representatives nor shall it enter into any such holdings or agreements. In addition, Consultant warrants that it does not presently and shall not acquire any direct or indirect interest adverse to those of the City in the subject of this Agreement, and it shall immediately disassociate itself from such an interest should it discover it has done so and shall, at the City=s sole discretion, divest itself of such interest. Consultant shall not knowingly and shall take reasonable steps to ensure that it does not employ a person having such an interest in this performance of this Agreement. If after employment of a person, Consultant discovers it has employed a person with a direct or indirect interest that would conflict with its performance of this Agreement, Consultant shall promptly notify City of this employment relationship, and shall, at the City=s sole discretion, sever any such employment relationship. 13. Equal Employment Opportunity. Consultant warrants that it is an equal opportunity employer and shall comply with applicable regulations governing equal employment opportunity. Neither Consultant nor its subcontractors do and neither shall discriminate against persons employed or seeking employment with them on the basis of age, sex, color, race, marital status, sexual orientation, ancestry, physical or mental disability, national origin, religion, or medical condition, unless based upon a bona fide occupational qualification pursuant to the California Fair Employment & Housing Act. 14. Insurance. A. Minimum Scope of Insurance: i. Consultant agrees to have and maintain, for the duration of the contract, General Liability insurance policies insuring him/her and his/her firm to an amount not less than: One million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per occurrence and two million dollars ($2,000,000) aggregate for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage in a form at least as broad as ISO AOccurrence@ Form CG 0001. Page 5 of 8 ii. Consultant agrees to have and maintain for the duration of the contract, an Automobile Liability insurance policy ensuring him/her and his/her staff to an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. iii. Consultant agrees to have and maintain, for the duration of the contract, professional liability insurance in amounts not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) each claim/aggregate sufficient to insure Consultant for professional errors or omissions in the performance of the particular scope of work under this agreement. iv. 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 the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses. B. General and Automobile Liability Policies: i. The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insured as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of Consultant, premises owned or used by the Consultant. The endorsement providing this additional insured coverage shall be equal to or broader than ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85 and must cover joint negligence, completed operations, and the acts of subcontractors. This requirement does not apply to the professional liability insurance required for professional errors and omissions. ii. The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be endorsed to be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurances maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. Page 6 of 8 iii. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. iv. The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom a claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. C. In addition to these policies, Consultant shall have and maintain Workers' Compensation insurance as required by California law. Further, Consultant shall ensure that all subcontractors employed by Consultant provide the required Workers' Compensation insurance for their respective employees. D. All Coverages: Each insurance policy required in this item shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by mail, has been given to the City (10 days for non-payment of premium). Current certification of such insurance shall be kept on file at all times during the term of this agreement with the City Clerk. E. Acceptability of Insurers: Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a Best's rating of no less than A-:VII and authorized to do business in the State of California. F. Verification of Coverage: Upon execution of this Agreement, Contractor shall furnish the City with certificates of insurance and with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. 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 approved by the City. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before any work commences. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. 15. Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, (including without limitation, California Civil Code sections 2782 and 2782.6), Consultant shall save, keep and hold harmless indemnify and defend the City, its officers, employees, authorized agents and volunteers from all damages, liabilities, penalties, costs, or Page 7 of 8 expenses in law or equity, including but not limited to attorneys= fees, that may at any time arise, result from, relate to, or be set up because of damages to property or personal injury received by reason of, or in the course of performing work which arise out of, pertain to, or relate to, directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Consultant, or any of the Consultant=s officers, employees, or agents or any subconsultant. This provision shall not apply if the damage or injury is caused by the sole negligence, active negligence, or willful misconduct of the City, its officers, agents, employees, or volunteers. 16. Waiver. No failure on the part of either party to exercise any right or remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any other right or remedy that party may have hereunder, nor does waiver of a breach or default under this Agreement constitute a continuing waiver of a subsequent breach of the same or any other provision of this Agreement. 17. Governing Law. This Agreement, regardless of where executed, shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of California. Venue for any action regarding this Agreement shall be in the Superior Court of the County of San Mateo. 18. Termination of Agreement. The City and the Consultant shall have the right to terminate this agreement with or without cause by giving not less than fifteen (15) days written notice of termination. In the event of termination, the Consultant shall deliver to the City all plans, files, documents, reports, performed to date by the Consultant. In the event of such termination, City shall pay Consultant an amount that bears the same ratio to the maximum contract price as the work delivered to the City bears to completed services contemplated under this Agreement, unless such termination is made for cause, in which event, compensation, if any, shall be adjusted in light of the particular facts and circumstances involved in such termination. 19. Amendment. No modification, waiver, mutual termination, or amendment of this Agreement is effective unless made in writing and signed by the City and the Consultant. 20. Disputes. In any dispute over any aspect of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees, as well as costs not to exceed $7,500 in total. Page 1 of 14 Scope of Work Introduction This document summarizes the scope of services for preparation of Preliminary Engineering, Public Outreach and Project Study Report for the Broadway Grade Separation Project (Project) in the City of Burlingame, in San Mateo County. Broadway is a major gateway to the City of Burlingame with direct connection to the Downtown Business District, the Rollins Road Industrial District, and numerous auto dealerships, hotels, and hospitality services. The concentration of these major destinations generates high traffic volumes that are compounded by the at-grade railroad crossing serving Caltrain and Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) which experiences some of the worst traffic congestion in the area. This at-grade railroad crossing needs improved safety and circulation, reduced congestion, and increased operational efficiency. Scope of Services (SOS) The Scope of Services (SOS) is divided into the five tasks summarized below. Submittals will be made in the number and type specified in the scope of service and follow City of Burlingame and Caltrain standards/requirements. Task #1 – Project Management The URS Team will provide project management for each task for the duration of the Project (assumed to be 12 months). Management activities will consist of administration, coordination, attending meetings, scheduling and quality control as stated in the following paragraphs. The scope includes the preparation of Project Execution Plan binder for the project. This Project Execution defines the roles and responsibilities of all team members including subconsultants and subcontractors, task scopes, budgets, schedules, communications, and project staff contact information. Invoicing and Monthly Progress Reports URS will prepare monthly invoices that will include progress reports in a format that San Mateo County Transportation Authority (SMCTA) will accept for reimbursement. URS will assist the City with preparing the SMCTA monthly reporting documents required for grant reimbursement. Fees For Proposed Services The scope of services described herein will be performed on a time and materials, reimbursable, not-to-exceed fee basis per the hourly rate schedule at the end of scope of services. The fees proposed to perform the services described above amount to $791,240. The City will be invoiced monthly based on actual hours and costs completed during each billing cycle. Invoices are due and payable within 30 days of presentation. Meetings Kick-off Meeting Upon notice-to-proceed (NTP) from the City, URS will schedule a kick-off meeting and site visit with the project team to review scope, schedule, quality procedures and project development team members. URS will prepare an agenda and issue it to attendees prior to the meeting. Attendees at this meeting will include URS, APEX, WRECO and City Staff and may include staff from Caltrain. Page 2 of 14 Progress Meetings To keep the project on track with budget and schedule, URS will conduct monthly progress meetings to confirm project objectives, scope, approach, milestones, schedule, staffing, support services, and coordination requirements. These meetings will be conducted via teleconference or in person at either URS or City offices.  9 Meetings Anticipated o APEX to attend up to 9 o WRECO to attend up to 4 Project Development Team (PDT) The project has several stakeholders with whom close coordination and consensus will be required. To expedite and promote coordination and consensus, monthly PDT meetings will be held that will include major stakeholders such as Caltrain. These meetings will also serve to inform other stakeholders of project progress and issues. For efficiency, these meetings will be coordinated with the monthly progress meetings and be conducted after the progress meetings.  9 Meetings Anticipated o APEX to attend up to 9 o WRECO to attend up to 4 Scheduling URS will prepare a detailed Critical Path Method (CPM) schedule for this phase of the project. Microsoft Project will be the software used for this task. A 3-month look ahead project schedule will be provided each month at the PDT meeting. An updated schedule will be provided on a monthly basis and included with the monthly progress report. Quality Assurance/Quality Control URS will prepare a project specific Quality Management Plan (QMP) to ensure URS and its subcontractors deliver services that are consistent with a professional standard of care that meets the City of Burlingame’s expectations. The QMP document will contain quality procedures and instructions. Deliverables:  Monthly progress reports and invoices  Meeting agenda and meeting minutes  Project Schedule  Quality Management Plan Page 3 of 14 Task #2 –Data Collection and Investigations URS will collect data to establish the existing conditions of the project site. Base Map and Surveys Field survey information of existing key features will be collected from as-built information made available from the City and Caltrain. The data will be critical in determining how existing facilities could affect different alternatives. This scope of services assumes that topographic mapping will be available and additional surveys will not be required and access onto the Caltrain right-of-way will not be needed for surveying or data collection. Topographic mapping to be used in this phase of work will be based on the existing data from the US101/Broadway Interchange project as well as recent survey and planimetric mapping work conducted by Caltrain along the rail corridor. This task assumes that no field surveys within the Caltrain operating right-of-way will be conducted. If mapping is not available, base mapping will be augmented with publically available aerial images for this phase of the project. URS will make recommendations on obtaining additional aerial photography and base mapping for the final design phase of work. As-Built Research Existing as-built data for roadways, private and public utilities, right of way information and adjacent facilities will be researched and compiled to document issues such as subsurface geotechnical conditions, groundwater levels, and adjacent foundations. This research will serve as one of the resources for establishing the existing conditions of the project site. Review Existing Studies URS will review existing studies and reports to ensure that issues identified in these studies are addressed. These studies include:  Engineering Studies (1965 and 1977): URS will review these engineering studies to ensure that design issues in these reports are addressed.  Grade Separation Footprint Study (2009): URS will review the grade separation footprint study to ensure that design issues and constraints are addressed. Accident Data URS will contact the City and Caltrain to collect any recent accident data in the vicinity of the at-grade crossing. This information will serve as the basis of the need for the project from a safety standpoint. Traffic Forecasting and Analysis URS will prepare future traffic forecasts using the City’s travel demand outputs. During the PSR phase, URS will use existing available data and perform high level analysis for the existing conditions. For future conditions, we will analyze a “No Build Alternative” and at least one Build alternative using future demands from the City model or County model. Right-of-Way Research Using existing record map information, the properties will be mapped in the vicinity of the proposed grade separation and a list of property owners and stakeholders will be compiled. Alternatives will be evaluated based on potential right-of-way impacts. Property surveys and title searches would be conducted in a latter phase of the project development and are not a part of this preliminary engineering phase. Utility Research URS will conduct an Underground Service Alert (USA) North inquiry to identify the utility companies with facilities within the project area. URS will draft letters for City signature to contact utility owners to obtain the most recent Page 4 of 14 as-built information. Using the existing as-built information in the area, a utility map and matrix will be developed to identify utilities that could be impacted by the project. This initial utility information would become the basis for tracking and coordinating with utilities throughout project development. This task assumes that no access to Caltrain right-of-way will be required and that no pot holing of utilities will be conducted. URS will make recommendations on the utility surveys and potholing that should be conducted for the final design phase of work. Design Criteria and Design Basis Memorandum UPRR and Caltrain have operational requirements and constraints associated with track design and operations that is part of their design criteria. The design criteria and operational constraints will be documented in a design basis memorandum that will be used in the risk matrix to screen and evaluate alternatives. Deliverables:  Base mapping  Preliminary Traffic Report  Preliminary Utility Plans  Preliminary ROW Maps  Design Criteria Memo Page 5 of 14 Task #3 – Preliminary Engineering and Alternative Analysis Geotechnical Investigations The geotechnical investigation will focus on a number of parameters that may affect the cost and constructability of bridge and retaining wall structures. The investigation will incorporate the results of research of other improvements in the area, including geotechnical borings from previous studies and projects. These parameters include:  Foundation alternatives and types  Groundwater levels  Liquefaction  Seismicity and seismic hazards  Settlement  Excavation support alternatives This task assumes no new field investigation will be conducted. URS will make recommendations on geotechnical investigations required for the final design phase of work Structure Advanced Planning Studies Advance Planning Studies are an important element in the project’s deliverables. A structure that carries railroad operations is required for an underpass alternative, and a structure that carries vehicular traffic is required for an overhead alternative. In both cases, structure evaluation during the PSR phase will need to consider the following key design elements:  Structure geometry  Foundation type  Construction staging and traffic handling during construction  Constructability and method of construction  UPRR/Caltrain operational constraints  Utility clearances  Aesthetics  Cost Hydraulic and Groundwater Analysis Drainage systems will collect and convey the runoff generated by the proposed improvements as well as handle potential groundwater infiltration. The runoff due to the reworked impervious surface area shall be detained into a designed hydromodification system to mimic the existing drainage patterns or conditions. The runoff generated within the City’s right-of-way will be conveyed to the nearest existing public storm drain system. Alternatives with a significant amount of excavation will be evaluated to determine the need for a pump station due to high tailwater likely to be encountered within the project. WRECO will perform hydrologic and hydraulic studies, and preliminary floodplain assessment for the purpose of providing the team with the relevant hydraulic data for their preliminary drainage, bridge structure and foundation and pump station design.  Request Data and Site Reconnaissance. WRECO will review available data, including as-builts and previous studies, provided by the City of Burlingame (City) and the Project Team. WRECO will also conduct a field reconnaissance to assess existing conditions in vicinity of the project sites.  Hydrologic and Drainage System Assessment. WRECO will review FEMA FIRM to determine impacts to floodplains and review available geotechnical data to identify groundwater issues resulting from the Project improvements. WRECO will perform a preliminary floodplain risk assessment to assess the potential floodplain impacts from the proposed Project alternative alignments and potential mitigation measures. WRECO will analyze pump station requirements and determine a preliminary cost associated with them. Page 6 of 14  Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulic Study Report. WRECO will prepare a Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulic Study Report to document findings for floodplain and pump station needs. Economic and Community Impact Analysis URS economic and community impact (ECI) analysts will provide an impact analysis that will summarize our findings and if necessary include appropriate allowances in the construction cost estimate to account for the project’s potential short term adverse economic impacts (e.g. from business interruption or displacement). The analysis will also consider the potential positive short-term employment and revenues economic impacts from the construction on the City’s economy as well as the various expected long-term economic benefits for the Broadway Business District. The ECI analysis will primarily focus on developing preliminary high-level assessment of the potential costs and benefits of the project. At this stage, it is expected that the ECI analysis would be predominantly qualitative with any key differences between alternatives noted. If possible, some order of magnitude estimates may be developed to provide an indication of relative impact magnitudes between impact types and/or between the conceptual alternatives. When appropriate the ECI will identify typical state and federal approved methodologies and unit benefit values generally applicable for more detailed ECI analysis. The ECI analysis will also be careful to consider the potential differences between peak and off-peak periods when the traffic performance differences between the alternatives may be greatly reduced. Benefit factors to be considered will include the aggregate travel time savings for private and commercial vehicles using the rail crossing from reduced waiting times and traffic congestion. The potential related benefits of avoided fuel cost savings and air quality impacts of reduced traffic idling would also be assessed. The potential for future safety benefits from the improved rail crossing will also be investigated. The potential applicability of other economic and community impacts such as reliability, livability and community cohesion would also be qualitatively assessed. Given the relatively limited nature of the traffic improvement, the effects on the Broadway Business District’s market area and workforce access between the alternatives maybe expected to be very minor. Nonetheless, the CBI will assess the expected positive influence on the District’s future economic development. The CBI will also qualitatively assess the potential benefit from the possible increased operation of the Broadway Caltrain station that could occur with a future grade-separated crossing. The ECI analysis findings will be primarily presented in a matrix that will facilitate comparisons between alternative by benefit type and provide concise identification of each cost’s and benefit’s expected type and relative magnitude. Constraints Analysis A preliminary project constraints analysis will be prepared. This analysis will determine the critical project-specific issues that could affect project feasibility, cost, and constructability. Any grade separation alternative will require significant coordination with rail operators to minimize operational impacts during and after construction. An existing archaeological site on Carolan Avenue in the vicinity of the project site will be a factor in the constraints analysis. Also, the existing Broadway Caltrain Station has historical significance and will need to be a part of this analysis. Examples of other possible constraints include:  UPRR and Caltrain operations  Environmentally sensitive areas  Rights-of-way  Community and Stakeholders Concerns  Visual and noise impacts  Existing Utility  Funding Page 7 of 14 An analysis will be conducted to evaluate the risk associated with the estimated project cost. Some of those item that impact the cost includes labor and material price escalation, institutional and regulatory changes, unanticipated environmental mitigations, and disproportional changes in right-of-way cost, etc. A qualitative analysis of each potential risk factor will be conducted. The final estimated project cost will include due considerations for these risks with appropriate factors applied to the project cost to provide a mean average within standard deviation for project cost estimates. Preliminary Cost Estimates and Cost Risk Assessment URS will prepare Preliminary Construction Estimates for the selected viable alternatives. Estimates will be prepared using a format acceptable to City and Caltrain. URS will prepare a list of construction work items required based on the selected viable alternatives. The cost estimate will identify construction work items, quantities, unit costs, and summarize the estimated total Project cost, including allowances for supplemental work, owner furnished materials, expenses, mobilization, contingencies and escalation. Screening Process and Criteria After the existing information is collected, the previous studies evaluated and the key issues identified, URS will work with the City to identify feasible alternatives. There will likely require one or more iterations during the development process based on input from the stakeholders and community. The alternatives will then undergo a thorough screening process. A detailed review of the alternatives serves two main purposes:  It minimizes the time spent on an infeasible alternative. It is conceivable that a “fatal flaw” in one or more of the alternatives will be discovered during the early developmental stage. If so, URS will document the decision to eliminate the alternative from further consideration and the rationale for doing so. This documentation is important because it will minimize the time spent on the alternative in the future if the alternative is revisited.  It ensures that the feasible alternatives are refined to an extent that eliminates the discovery of a design flaw in the future. This screening also saves time on rework of an alternative at a later stage of development. Each alternative is expected to have its share of advantages and disadvantages. URS will develop each alternative; receive input from the stakeholders; refine each alternative; summarize the costs of each alternative; and list the pros and cons of each alternative in a clear and concise format to better enable the City to make a decision on a preferred alternative. The following analyses and investigations will help the project team determine the pros and cons of each alternative. Recommendation of a Preferred Alternative After the completion of the analysis for each alternative, URS will summarize all of the elements (overall cost, advantages, and disadvantages) in a straightforward and easy-to-understand matrix format. After considering feedback from the City and all stakeholders, we will propose a recommended alternative that contains the most beneficial features and, at the same time, the fewest obstacles for a successful project for the City to advance to the next phase. Deliverables:  Geotechnical Memorandum (Draft and Final)  Advanced Planning Studies for Structures  Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulic Study Reports (Draft and Final)  Alternative Analysis Study (Draft and Final) that will include o Economic and Community Analysis Study o Constraint Analysis o Screening Criteria o Preliminary Cost Estimates Page 8 of 14 Task #4 – Public Outreach An outreach process designed to keep the community informed and to solicit input from a broad range of stakeholders will be an integral part of this project. Stakeholders include local residents and businesses in proximity to downtown Burlingame and organizations that represent special interest groups such as bicyclists (including commuter and recreational bicyclists). Many community interests need to be considered in this project. Also, the more formal interests of local enforcement agencies and SMCTA will need to be considered. Development of Public Outreach Plan The URS team will develop a Public Outreach Plan outlining project goals, messages, tools and techniques, project protocols, an anticipated schedule for activities, and contact information. The public outreach plans will identify the mailing list and distribution methods anticipated for the project. The cost estimate assumes that newspaper adds, emails, mass mailing up to 2000 for each of the 3 public meetings anticipated. It is assumed that the City planning department will furnish the mailing list to be used for the project. Public Outreach Meetings The URS team will prepare for, facilitate, and attend up to three (3) formal Public Outreach meetings and two (2) City Council meetings for a total of five meetings. Public outreach meetings would be held at the Public Library facilities and City Council meetings would be at regularly scheduled council meetings. This task assumes that there will be no cost to the project team for use of these facilities. The five meetings would be as follows: Outreach Meeting #1  Initial public outreach to define the project scope and goals and initiate public input on the criteria and constraints associated with the project. This meeting would occur within 2 months of NTP. The presentation materials would include: o Aerial photo of the project area with photos of key constraints o Video(s) of the traffic congestion that occurs during gate down times Outreach Meeting #2  The next public meeting will bring forward several alternatives that have been identified to date and solicit input from the community and stakeholders on issues. The presentation materials would include: o Exhibits of alternatives developed to date  Listing of pros /cons  Draft Screening criteria o Have video of the traffic congestion that occurs during gate down times o Have exhibits of other grade separation examples similar the alternatives being presented o Have exhibits of aesthetic treatments and other measures that can mitigate visual impacts Outreach Meeting #3 – City Council Meeting Following the public outreach meeting #2, URS and APEX will summarize the events and make a presentation to City Council on the status of the project and anticipated next steps. Outreach Meeting #4  This meeting would take the input from the previous meetings and refine alternatives. The presentation would include: o Exhibits of refined alternatives developed to date  Listing of pros /cons  Draft Screening criteria Page 9 of 14  Animation of traffic flow for preferred alternatives  Artist rendering for preferred alternatives showing potential architectural treatments and landscaping features o Have video of the traffic congestion that occurs during gate down times o Have exhibits of other grade separation examples similar the alternatives being presented o Have exhibits of aesthetic treatments and other measures that can mitigate visual impacts Outreach Meeting #5 – City Council Meeting Following the public outreach meeting #4, URS and APEX will summarize the events and make a presentation to City Council on the status of the project and the recommended alternative. The breakdown of effort for the above meetings is as follows:  APEX will prepare the agenda and format of the meetings  APEX will facilitate the meetings  URS will prepare presentation and meeting materials  URS, with input and review from APEX, will prepare a written summary of each meeting that will document the input from attendees and materials presented.  URS will make copies of the meeting notices and the City will send out mailings (the cost of postage is not included in our scope) Artist Rendering For the third public outreach meeting, an artist rendering of the preferred alternative will be developed to show how aesthetic features can be used to enhance the alternative. Webpage and Fact Sheets URS will prepare a project information data sheet (Fact Sheet) that will be uploaded on the City’s website. URS will prepare a draft for the City’s review prior to public distribution. This Fact Sheet will be updated after each public outreach meeting and uploaded to the website – this will not be mailed out. Copies of the Fact Sheet will be made available at the public outreach meetings. A project webpage will be developed by City IT team; however the URS team will provide the contents to upload to the City’s project webpage. Web Survey Tool The URS team will assemble a public survey using already established survey tools on the City’s website. This initial survey will be used to get weigh in from the public on the project goals and will be used for the first public outreach meeting. This survey will be another tool to develop a comprehensive stakeholder list. It is anticipated that the survey will contain up to eight (8) questions with an additional area for comments. It is not anticipated that they web survey will be used for subsequent public outreach meetings. Compilation and Stakeholder Database In coordination with the City, URS will prepare a database that lists interested/concerned stakeholders. This database will be used to distribute project materials and public notices. It is assumed that the maximum number of mailings will not exceed 2000 for each public meeting. It is assumed that the City planning department will furnish the mailing list to be used for the project. Specific Outreach Meetings In addition to the public outreach meetings described above, URS will make one presentation each to the followings project stakeholders:  Chamber of Commerce  Rotary Club Page 10 of 14  Broadway Business Improvement  Apartment Homeowners Association  Acura Dealership  Porsche-Audi Dealership Community Outreach Summary Report The URS team will create a short summary of the details of all public outreach meetings for the project, including any input received from attendees. This report is anticipated to be ten pages or less. Deliverables:  Public Outreach Plan  Fact Sheet  Artist’s Rendering of Preferred Alternative  Public Outreach Summary Report (Draft and Final) Page 11 of 14 Task #5 – Project Study Report The PSR documents the need for the project, summarizes key points from the traffic studies, preliminary design alternatives, constraint analysis and summarizes scope, cost and geometric approvals enabling project development to advance to the final design Phase of design. The PSR will be prepared in compliance with City and Caltrain standards. The following topics are typically covered in the PSR.  Introduction  Recommendation  Background  Purpose and Need  Viable and Rejected Alternatives  Phased Construction Opportunities  Preliminary Plans  Traffic Studies  Preliminary Cost Estimates  Funding / Scheduling  Right-of-Way Requirements  Other Considerations URS will submit a Draft PSR, receive and review comments, address comments, and then finalize the PSR. The intent of the Final PSR is to provide a realistic cost estimate for the preferred alternative. Conceptual design plans will be developed in a well-organized fashion and to a level of detail that will allow the City’s to make a smooth transition into final design. Draft and Final Report with 15% Design Plans A PSR will be prepared, including the 15% Conceptual Design Plans, which will encompass all of the aforementioned elements, with a focus on providing the necessary information to prepare a complete funding package. The URS team understands that the goal of this project is to prepare a competitive funding package and that the components of the PSR will support this effort. URS will prepare and submit 15% Design Plan Sheets in English units. The Plan Sheets include: 1. Typical Cross Sections 2. Plan and Profile Plans 3. Existing Utility Plans 4. Preliminary Structure Plans (Advance Planning Study) 5. Pavement Delineation Plans Deliverables:  Project Study Report (Draft and Final)  15% Design Plans Page 12 of 14 ASSUMPTIONS Detailed assumptions are presented in the text of this document. The following summarizes some of the key assumptions made in developing an estimate of labor hours and schedule. Project Limits  On Broadway to conform to proposed intersections (California Drive and Carolan Avenue) Project Management  Project management activities are provided for a 12-month period starting from Notice-To-Proceed. Project Alternatives  Three build alternatives and a No Build Alternative shall be studied Design Exception Fact Sheets  No formal design exception fact sheets will be prepared, however a list of non-standard design items will be submitted for City review and concurrence Right of Entry  Encroachment permit applications to perform design activities within Caltrain and City right-of-way shall be prepared by URS for City’s signature. It is anticipated that there will be no permit fees. Public Outreach Meeting Facilities  Public outreach meetings will be held in the Public Library at no charge to the project team.  City council meetings will be coordinated with regularly scheduled City council meetings. Mailing List  City planning department will furnish the mailing list to be used for the project and the mailing list will not exceed 2000 mailings Mapping  Mapping shall be in English units Geotechnical  No preliminary foundation reports are included  No subsurface exploration or laboratory testing shall be performed Pavement  Existing pavement does not require any analysis or testing  Life Cycle Cost Analysis is not included Traffic Studies  No traffic signal design or signal warrant are included Environmental Studies  Environmental study or process is not included in the scope of work. Structure  Only advance planning studies will be performed Page 13 of 14 Units  All project deliverables shall be prepared in English units. Right of Way  Right-of-Way Maps shall be available from City and Caltrain. Landscaping  No landscaping design is included in the project Exclusions: Any other services not specifically listed in the scope will be considered additional work for which a separate scope, fee and schedule will be prepared. Page 14 of 14 Hourly Rates Description Hourly Rate Principal-In-Charge 291.50 Project Manager 238.50 Principal Project Engineer 222.60 Sr. Project Engineer 190.80 Project Engineer 153.70 Staff Engineer 98.05 CAD 127.20 Admin 79.50 Geotechnical Sr. Engineer 198.75 Geotechnical Engineer 121.90 Structures Manager 243.80 Bridge Engineer 214.65 Structure CAD 111.30 Sr. Traffic Engineer 127.20 Traffic Engineer 92.75 Survey PM 145.75 Survey Technician 98.05 Sr. Rail Designer 198.75 Rail Designer 159.00 Staff Rail Designer 106.00 Broadway Grade Separation Project Preliminary Engineering, Public Outreach, Project Study Report Phase Project Budget Summary Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Task 4 Task 5 TOTAL Project Management Data Collection and Investigations Preliminary Engineering and Alternative Analysis Public Outreach Project Study Report LABOR URS (Civil)$63,600 $69,918 $86,136 $43,449 $138,182 $401,284 URS (Geotech)$0 $3,975 $39,273 $0 $11,925 $55,173 URS (Structures)$0 $5,851 $70,437 $0 $32,351 $108,639 URS (Traffic)$0 $27,274 $3,053 $0 $3,053 $33,379 URS (Surveying)$0 $13,674 $0 $0 $0 $13,674 URS (Rail)$5,565 $8,904 $20,829 $0 $42,400 $77,698 SUBCONSULTANTS APEX Strategies $23,830 $0 $0 $36,450 $3,200 $63,480 WBE WRECO $0 $0 $17,800 $0 $0 $17,800 UDBE Sub Fee $477 $0 $356 $729 $64 $1,626 DIRECT COSTS Printing $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,324 $2,324 Postage, Travel, Misc.$2,500 $500 $0 $1,300 $0 $4,300 Outreach Expenses $0 $0 $0 $11,500 $0 $11,500 ODC Fee $50 $10 $0 $256 $46 $362 TOTAL $96,022 $130,106 $237,883 $93,684 $233,545 $791,240 URS Corporation 9/29/2014 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: MEETING DATE: October 6, 2014 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: October 6, 2014 From: Lisa K. Goldman, City Manager – (650) 558-7243 Subject: Discuss Next Steps Regarding City Council Vacancy and Set Date for Interviews RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council discuss the next steps in filling the vacant City Council seat and set a date for the interviews. BACKGROUND On July 24, 2014, Councilmember Jerry Deal announced his intention to resign from the City Council, effective September 21, 2014. His term of office expires in 2015. DISCUSSION When a vacancy occurs in a City Council office, State law requires that the Council either fill the vacancy by appointment within 60 days, or call for a special election. On August 18, the City Council voted to fill the vacancy by appointment, rather than by special election, given the high cost of holding a special election. In July 2005, the City Council adopted the attached Resolution and procedures for appointments to vacancies in the office of City Councilmember or City Clerk. (The City Clerk was an elected position at the time but became an appointed position in 2013. Vacancies in this position are now filled by the City Manager.) On September 2, 2014, the City Council discussed the matter and set September 22 at 5 p.m. as the deadline for the receipt of applications for the vacant seat. Eight Burlingame residents submitted applications by the deadline. The applicants are: Ross Bruce Russ Cohen John Eaton Pat Giorni John Martos John Root Laurie Simonson Eric Storey City Council Vacancy October 6, 2014 2 In addition to setting the deadline for applications at the September 2 meeting, the City Council also discussed when and where to hold the interviews. The Council agreed that the interviews should be held in the City Council Chambers so that they could be videotaped, but did not select a date for the interviews. The Council preferred to wait to see how many peopled applied and whether the number, if deemed unmanageable, should be culled in some way. The Council must now determine whether or not it wishes to reduce the number of applicants interviewed in some way, and when it wishes to hold the interviews. One of the applicants is out of town through October 13. If the Council wishes to interview all of the applicants, then it must hold the interviews after October 13. October 14 is a Planning Commission meeting (moved to a Tuesday due to the Columbus Day holiday), so that date is unavailable. There are no City Board or Commission meetings on October 15, and the City Council Chambers are free. There is a Park and Recreation Commission meeting on October 16, so that date is not recommended. If the Council wishes to wait until a Saturday, then staff recommends considering October 25 since October 18 is the date of the Broadway Community Meeting, scheduled from 9 a.m. to noon. There is a citywide emergency response exercise on October 25, so staff recommends holding the interviews after the conclusion of that event, which is scheduled to be held from 9 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. Interviews on that date could begin around 11 a.m. or 11:30 a.m. FISCAL IMPACT Exhibit:  2005 City Council vacancy resolution BURL i NOAME : Library Board of Trustee Minuter August 19, 2014 `I. Call to Order President Rosenthal called the meeting to order at 5:40pm. IL Roll Call Trustees Present: Kerbey Altmann (by phone), Betsy Corcoran (Recording Secretary), Debra Donaldson, Mike Nagler, Lisa Rosenthal (by phone), Staff Present: Pat Harding, City Librarian Brad McCulley, Reference and Adult Services Manager Public Present: Jim Cannon, Kris Cannon III. Introduction of New Board Members President Rosenthal welcomed new board members Kerbey Altmann and Mike Nagler and asked them to introduce themselves. • Mike Nagler noted that he is a member of the Library Foundation Board and is managing the in-library bookstore. He thought it would be an honor and a privilege to serve on the Library Board of Trustees. Libraries and public schools are the centerpiece of democracy. • Kerbey Altmann grew up around books & libraries. His children also enjoy libraries. Kerbey has a degree in Information Science and hopes to use it to the advantage of the library. As a board,member, he hopes to improve people's familiarity with reading. • Trustees Donaldson, Corcoran & Lisa reintroduced themselves. IV. Library Board of Trustees Minutes July 15, 2014 The Trustees approved the minutes of the July 15, 2014 meeting. M/S/C (Donaldson/Corcoran) V. Correspondence and Information A. Statistics & Related Issues (Highlights) • President Rosenthal was pleased with the sellout attendance for Family Fun Nights especially since there were two sessions for each event. Having two events on the same evening created an opportunity for more children to attend the programs. • Adult programs were also well attended. Trustee Donaldson especially enjoyed the Yosemite program. • 110 people attended the author event featuring Jo Jo Moyes. Pat noticed that the audience was comprised of a younger demographic. • Trustee Corcoran noted that in July even before construction began, there was a drop in circulation to -9.5%-from July 2013. As previously discussed by the board, circulation is expected to decline during the construction period. The Trustees will revisit this issue after construction is completed. 480 Primrose Road Burlingame•California 940io-4o83 Phone(650)558-7474'Fax(650)342-6295•www.bu4ingame.org/library • Pat noted that the library staff is open to new ideas and suggestions from the Trustees but due to daily issues related to the construction, implementation is difficult and often not possible at this time. All new ideas and suggestion will be re-visited after the construction project is completed. B. Duncan Fund Quarterly Statement The Trustees reviewed the April 1 , June 30, 2014 quarterly statement of the Duncan Fund. The terms of the Duncan Fund stipulate that the Burlingame Public Library is only entitled to request monies from the "Balance Available for Grants". The Library does not have access to the entire fund balance. In the past, the Library has requested 4 grants to fund Library capital projects. • 1991 $ 60K for Administration & Construction projects • 2004 $ 150K for Easton remodel • 2005 $ 36K to complete the Easton remodel • 2013 $ 100K for the Capital Campaign - Our Library, Our Future Pat requested that the Trustees consider applying for a grant from the Duncan Fund managed by the Silicon Valley Community Foundation to provide additional funding to the capital campaign. Grant Application for Our Library, Our Future will be an agenda item for the September 16th meeting. A historical report on how the Library has used funds from the Duncan Fund in the past will be included in the September board packet. C. Current Status of Capital Campaign Funds • The campaign has raised $680K to date. • A campaign mailer will be sent to 12,000 households in mid-September. The annual report will follow in mid-November. Results from the mailings will give us a better picture of where the campaign stands financially. VI. From the Floor - Public Comments Kris Cannon commented that it is very exciting to have two new board members who are community involved and have a long interest in the library. We are very happy to have you serve the people of Burlingame. VII. Reports A. City Librarians Report (Highlights) 1 . Staff - Cathy Somerton, Children's Librarian, is retiring the end of September. Recruitment for her position will begin August 4th. Kim Day will manage the Teen Librarian duties and Kelly Mackewicz will direct Children's services. Leslie Loomis, Human Resource Director, has met with staff members Brad McCulley, John Piche, Tommy McMahon, Kelly Mackewicz, Geralyn O'Brien, Jeff Mikulik, Amy Gettle, and Kim Day to develop succession plans for career goal setting. 2. Millennium Project - Zolman Construction began work on Monday, August 1 lth. in the Reference and Administration area and Fiction. Carpet installation is scheduled for the last week of August. 3. Donor Wall • Pat is discussing the design of the donor wall with the architects and signage people. • The Donor Wall will be located in the foyer at the left side of the front doors. 2 4. Public Comments on Construction- Pat noted that the public has not expressed any serious concerns over the construction. Lighting in the large type area was an issue which was resolved by having facilities put a higher wattage bulb in the lamps. Some patrons were concerned that the library would be closed. A large, colorful sign on the front lawn plus signage in the library has resolved this issue. B. Foundation Report • Children's Holiday Tea- Due to the construction,the tea will be held at the Easton Library. Cindy Montgomery has volunteered to be the chairperson. Lisa Rosenthal is looking for authors. • Book & Author Luncheon-The luncheon is tentatively scheduled to be held at the Peninsula Gulf and Country Club on May 2nd. A task force has been formed to explore the idea of expanding the event or changing the format. VIII. Unfinished Business A. Little Libraries A Burlingame Hillside neighborhood group spearheaded by Leslie Kramer of the Foundation is interested in backing "Little Libraries". Pat has agreed to speak to the group. However, there are only 26 "Little Libraries" for all of the Peninsula Library System. Burlingame has 3. Volunteers from Genentech & Google originally agreed to make 200 but the plan has stalled. The Foundation will supply children's books and volunteers will be checking on refilling the "Little Libraries". B. Quarter Racing The machine is located near the Children's room. It will probably be more popular when story time begins in September. Mountain View library collects approximately $400 per month. IX. New Business Naming Recognition for Our Library, Our Future A. Current Recognition Policy 1. The Hoefer Family would like to be officially recognized in the Teen Room. Pat provided the Trustees with some of the key points of the Community Recognition Policy which was approved by the City Council in 2004. On September 15th, Pat will present a staff report to the City Council requesting Council suspend the 2004 Community Recognition policy and use the Our Library, Our Future Capital Campaign naming opportunities policy. 2. Librarian's Formal Request to Trustees Pat requested that the Trustees approve the naming of the Teen Room as the "Hoefer Teen Room". The Hoefer Family is a long time donor. They have generously donated $100K to fund the Teen Room and have it named on their behalf. 3. Trustee Action The Trustees unanimously passed the motion of Trustee Corcoran to name the Teen Room the "Hoefer Teen Room" and requested that the City Council approve the naming of the Teen Room in honor of the Hoefer Family. M/S/C (Corcoran/Nagler) 3 B. Nomination and Election of Officers for 2014-2015 Trustee Rosenthal nominated Deborah Donaldson to serve as President of the Library Board of Trustees and Betsy Corcoran to serve as Secretary from September 2014 to June 30, 2015. The nomination was seconded by Trustee Nagler. The Trustees passed a motion to elect Deborah Donaldson as President and Betsy Corcoran as Secretary. M/S/C (Rosenthal/Nagler) X. Announcements Trustee Corcoran proposed the Staff Annual Party be placed on the September agenda. XI. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 6:50pm. M/S/C (Corcoran/Nagler) The next meeting of the Library Board of Trustees will be on September 16, 2014 at 5:30PM in the Lane Community Room. Respectfully Submitted Patricia Harding City Librarian 4