Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20- Public Works ORIGINAL CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION From: Robert Eisenbeisz, City Engineer Subject: Resolution authorizing the execution of Amendment No. 6 to Professional Services Dept: Public Works Agreement with ICF Jones & Stokes for Professional Environmental Services for the Date: 08/10/10 design of the Mt. Vernon Avenue Viaduct over the BNSF Railroad(SSO4-12). File: 1.7121 MCC Date: September 7,2010 Synopsis of Previous Council Action: 07/06/10 Resolution No. 2010-235 adopted approving Amendment No. 5 to services agreement with ICF Jones & Stokes, Inc. for Professional Environmental Services for the design of the Mt. Vernon Avenue Viaduct over the BNSF Railroad. 02-17-09 Resolution No. 2009-31 adopted approving Amendment No. 4 to services agreement with Jones & Stokes, Inc. for Professional Environmental Services for the design of the Mt.Vernon Avenue Viaduct over the BNSF Railroad. 09-04-07 Resolution No. 2007-368 adopted approving Amendment No. 3 to services agreement with Myra L. Frank & Associates, Inc. for Professional Environmental Services for the design of the Mt.Vernon Avenue Viaduct over the BNSF Railroad. 01-08-07 Resolution No. 2007-13 adopted approving Amendment No. 2 to services agreement with Myra L. Frank & Associates, Inc. for Professional Environmental Services for the design of the Mt.Vernon Avenue Viaduct over the BNSF Railroad. 12-04-04 Resolution No. 2004-400 adopted approving Amendment No. 1 to services agreement with Myra L.Frank & Associates, Inc. for Professional Environmental Services for the design of the Mt.Vernon Avenue Viaduct over the BNSF Railroad. 12-01-03 Resolution No. 2003-326 adopted approving a services agreement with Myra L.Frank& Associates, Inc. for Professional Environmental Services for the design of the Mt. Vernon Avenue Viaduct over the BNSF Railroad. Recommended Motion: Adopt Resolution. Robert Eisenbeisz Contact Person: Robert Eisenbeisz, City Engineer Phone: 5203 Supporting data attached: Staff Report, Resolution Ward(s): 1 & 3 &Exhibit A FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: $92,258 Source: (Acct. No.) 242-160-5504-7121-0025 Acct. Description: Mt. Vernon Grade Separation at BNSF (SSO4-12) Finance: +f'es o 0/O Agenda Item No. ID I Oq -07-2-010 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION STAFF REPORT Subject: Resolution authorizing the execution of Amendment No. 6 to Professional Services Agreement with ICF Jones & Stokes for Professional Environmental Services for the design of the Mt. Vernon Avenue Viaduct over the BNSF Railroad(SSO4-12). Background: On December 1, 2003, a Professional Environmental Services Agreement in the not-to-exceed amount of $123,524.00 was approved with Myra L. Frank and Associates for environmental services related to the Mt. Vernon Bridge Project. Shortly thereafter, the environmental firm of Jones& Stokes Associates acquired Myra L. Frank and Associates. On December 20, 2004, Amendment No. 1 to the Services Agreement was approved for additional environmental services related to the Mt. Vernon Bridge Project. Amendment No. I increased the total contract amount by $45,375.00. On January 8, 2007, Amendment No. 2 was approved in the amount of $20,000 to compensate the firm for additional environment studies not covered in the original Agreement or Amendment No. 1. On September 4, 2007, Amendment No. 3 was approved in the amount of$83,925 to compensate the firm for additional environment studies not covered in the original agreement or Amendment Nos. 1 &2. Amendment No. 3 also established the expiration date of the Agreement as December 1, 2009. On February 17, 2009, Amendment No. 4 was approved authorizing compensation for complying with requirements from Caltrans concerning the Community Impact Assessment (CIA), the Paleontological Identification Report (PIR) and Paleontological Evaluation Report. (PER), the Section 4(f) historic resources document, the noise assessment, the Initial Site Assessment (ISA), the Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) and update of the Environment Assessment (EA) all of which were not anticipated at the time of the original proposal or previous amendments,but were later identified as being required by Caltrans staff. Subsequent to the approval of Amendment No. 4, Jones and Stokes was acquired by ICF and the organization assumed the name ICF Jones& Stokes. On May 29, 2009 Caltrans staff completed their second review of the draft EA and issued comments which identified more new issues, including questions about Environmental Justice, Traffic, and Hazardous Material. These new comments resulted in six to nine months of delay to the project schedule. The traffic comments were unclear and required a follow-up meeting with Caltrans to obtain clarification. The traffic comments were not clarified until mid July 2009, and at that time it was determined that in order to address the comments, a new traffic study would be required. City staff engaged the services of a consultant traffic engineer to complete the new traffic study, which, again, added further delays to the project. 2 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION STAFF REPORT—Continued The traffic study was completed in November of 2009. In addition to the draft EA, Caltrans staff issued additional comments relative to the VIA, CIA, Paleontology, and the Initial Site Assessment (for Hazardous Materials) (ISA). Most of the CIA comments relate to the four parcels west of the bridge and south of the BNSF facility. The ISA related comments indicated that the ISA document was over one year old and had to be updated. This required coordination with the BNSF because Caltrans staff was requesting a site investigation that would disrupt the railroad operation. It took 6 months to get a letter from BNSF indicating that they would not allow us to do what Caltrans staff was requesting because it would adversely disrupt their freight service. The consultant was able to update the ISA without entering the BNSF facility by conducting a visual evaluation from the existing bridge. Without the BNSF letter, this would not have been accepted by Caltrans staff. This issue was not resolved until December 2009 and the EA could not be resubmitted for a 3rd review until then. On December 14, 2009 the revised draft EA document was submitted to Caltrans for a 3rd review. The document contained the sections that previously were not included. The revised draft EA document would have been submitted much sooner had it not been for the recent requests to update the Traffic and the ISA checklist: The newly requested information resulted in delaying the submittal of the revised EA document for a 3rd review because Caltrans staff required the complete EA document to be submitted at one time, with the applicable sections updated. On February 4, 2010 Caltrans staff completed their 3rd review of the EA document and issued an additional round of comments. City staff requested a workshop meeting to go over the comments one-by-one with the consultants present so that the requested wording changes could be made to Caltrans staff satisfaction during the meeting using a laptop computer. The hope was that final resolution of the wording could be accomplished without having to continue the back and forth iterations of submittals and responses; however, Caltrans staff refused to participate in the workshop. The only significant issues raised in the latest comments appear to be related to the CIA and Environmental Justice. Our consultants feel that there is not an Environmental Justice issue involved with the four parcels because the area is fairly homogeneous with respect to the socioeconomic makeup of the area. On May 11, 2010, the City received twelve (12) pages of comments from the Caltrans Local Assistance NEPA QC Reviewer. Several years ago Caltrans established the position of NEPA QC Reviewer in order to fulfill its responsibilities under the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) NEPA delegation program. This program delegates all responsibility for NEPA compliance to Caltrans for federally funded projects in California. The Local Assistance NEPA QC Review is a final compliance check before the EA can be circulated. The length of comment list appears long,but most are simply clarifications that can be easily corrected. On July 6, 2010, Amendment No. 5 to the Services Agreement was approved extending the term of the Agreement to December 31, 2010. This Amendment did not involve any additional cost to the City. 3 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION STAFF REPORT—Continued Staff had hoped that the EA could be certified as early as November of 2010, however, our new estimate of the EA certification date is now March 2011 due to delays incurred complying extensive requirements of Caltrans. ICE Jones & Stokes is now requesting Amendment No. 6, increasing the fee by the amount of $92,258 in order to be compensated for extra work responding to extensive Caltrans reviews which were not anticipated in the firms original Agreement or Amendments thereto. The extra work is detailed in Attachment "A" attached to the proposed Amendment. Since the services of ICF Jones & Stokes will be needed until the document is certified, staff is also recommending that the Agreement for Services be extended to June 30, 2011 in the event of other unforeseen delays The EA must be certified before the City can obtain permission from Caltrans to proceed with final design and right-of-way acquisition. Staff is now estimating that construction of the bridge replacement project can start in 2012 and be completed by 2014. Financial Impact: Sufficient funds to cover the cost of this Amendment are available in the FY 2010/11 budget in Account No. 242-160-5504-7121-0025. The following is a summary of costs to date: a) Services Agreement approved per Reso. No. 2003-326 . . . . . . $ 123,524.00 b) Amendment No. 1, per Reso.No. 2004-400 . . . . . . . . . . .... . . 45,375.00 c) Amendment No. 2,per Reso.No. 2007-13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,000.00 d) Amendment No. 3, per Reso. No. 2007-368. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83,925.00 e) Amendment No. 4, per Reso. No. 2009-31 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98,020.00 f) Amendment No. 5,per Reso No. 2010-235 ...................... 0.00 g) Amendment No. 6(this request) ............. ...................... 92,258.00 Total not-to-exceed amount . . . . . . . . . . . . . $463,102.00 Recommendation: Adopt Resolution. Attachments: Exhibit"A"—Amendment No. 6 to Services Agreement. 4 Copy 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO APPROVING 3 AMENDMENT NO. 6 TO SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH ICF JONES & STOKES FOR PROVISION OF PROFESSIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FOR THE 4 DESIGN OF THE MT. VERNON AVE.VIADUCT OVER THE BNSF RAILROAD. 5 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY 6 OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: 7 SECTION 1. That the City Manager is authorized to execute Amendment No. 6 to the 8 Services Agreement with ICF Jones & Stokes for provision of professional environmental 9 services for the design of Mt. Vernon Ave. Viaduct over the BNSF Railroad (attached and 10 incorporated herein as Exhibit"A"). 11 SECTION 2. This Amendment No. 6 shall not take effect or become operative until 12 13 fully signed and executed by the parties and no party shall be obligated hereunder until the time 14 of such full execution. No oral agreements, amendments, modifications or waivers are intended 15 or authorized and shall not be implied from any act or course of conduct of any party. 16 SECTION 3. The authorization to execute Amendment No. 6 is rescinded if the parties 17 to the contract fail to execute it within sixty(60)days of passage of the resolution. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 I RESOLUTION ... APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 6 TO SERVICES 2 AGREEMENT WITH ICF JONES & STOKES FOR PROVISION OF PROFESSIONAL NVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FOR THE DESIGN OF THE MT. VERNON AVE. g VIADUCT OVER THE BNSF RAILROAD. 4 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the Mayor and 5 Common Council of the City of San Bernardino at a meeting thereof, held 6 n the day of 2010,by the following vote,to wit: 7 Council Members: AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT 8 9 MARQUEZ 10 DESJARDINS 11 BRINKER 12 SHORETT 13 KELLEY 14 JOHNSON 15 16 MC CAMMACK 17 18 City Clerk 19 The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this day of 2010. 20 21 Patrick J. Morris, Mayor City of San Bernardino 22 23 Approved as to form: 24 JAMES F. PENMAN, City Attorney 25 By. 27 28 2 - Exhibit"A" AMENDMENT NO.6 TO SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this day of 2010, between ICF Jones & Stokes formerly known as Jones & Stokes, formerly known as Myra L. Frank/Jones & Stokes, and also formerly known as Myra L. Frank & Associates, Inc. ("Contractor") and the CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ("City)". WITNESSETH: A. WHEREAS, on December 1, 2003, the Mayor and Common Council of City adopted Resolution No. 2003-326, approving a Services Agreement with Contractor for Professional Environmental Services for the design of the Mt. Vernon Avenue Viaduct over the BNSF Railroad;and, B. WHEREAS, on December 20, 2004, the Mayor and Common Council of City adopted Resolution No. 2004-400, approving Amendment No. 1 to Services Agreement with Contractor for Professional Environmental Services for the design of the Mt. Vernon Avenue Viaduct over the BNSF Railroad; and, C. WHEREAS, on January 8, 2007, the Mayor and Common Council of City adopted.Resolution .No. 2007-13, approving Amendment No. 2 to Services Agreement. with © Contractor for Professional Environmental Services for the design of the Mt. Vernon Avenue Viaduct over the BNSF Railroad; and, D. WHEREAS, on September 4, 2007, the Mayor and Common Council of City adopted Resolution No. 2007-368, approving Amendment No. 3 to Services Agreement with Contractor for Professional Environmental Services for the design of the Mt. Vernon Avenue Viaduct over the BNSF Railroad; and, E. WHEREAS, on February 17, 2009, the Mayor and Common Council of City adopted Resolution No. 2009-31, approving Amendment No. 4 to Services Agreement with Contractor for Professional Environmental Services for the design of the Mt. Vernon Avenue Viaduct over the BNSF Railroad;and, F. WHEREAS, on July 6, 2010, the Mayor and Common Council of City adopted Resolution No. 2010-235, approving Amendment No. 5 to Services Agreement with Contractor for Professional Environmental Services for the design of the Mt. Vernon Avenue Viaduct over the BNSF Railroad; and, G. WHEREAS, the said Services Agreement, as amended, is valid until December 31,2010; and H. WHEREAS, Contractor, by letter dated August 5, 2010 (Attachment "A'), has requested a sixth amendment to increase the not-to-exceed fee and to extend the term of the Agreement due to delays beyond the control of the Contractor or City; and Exhibit"A" Amendment No.6 to Services Agreement—ICF Jones&Stokes Page 2 of 3 I. WHEREAS,City anticipates that the services of Contractor will be needed through June of 2011. NOW THEREFORE,the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Section 2 of said Services Agreement is amended to read as follows: Over the term of this Amendment No. 6, Contractor shall be paid an additional amount of $92,258.00 for Amendment No.6 as indicated in Attachment B for a not-to-exceed total compensation of $463,102.00 for all work contemplated under the terms of this Agreement as Amended as follows: a) Services Agreement approved per Reso. No. 2003-326 . . . . . . $ 123,524.00 b) Amendment No. 1,per Reso.No. 2004400 . . . . . . . . . . .... . . 45,375.00 c) Amendment No. 2,per Reso.No. 2007-13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,000.00 d) Amendment No. 3,per Reso.No. 2007-368. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 83,925.00 ® e) Amendment No. 4,per Reso.No. 2009-31 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98,020.00 f) Amendment No. 5,per Reso No. 2010-235 ...................... 0.00 g) Amendment No. 6(this request) ..................................... 92.258.00 Total not-to-exceed amount . . . . . . . . . . .$463,102.00 2. Section 4 of said Services Agreement shall be amended as follows: The term of this Agreement shall end on June 30, 2011, unless further extended by written agreement of the parties. 3. All other terms and conditions of said Services Agreement approved by Resolution No. 2003-326, Resolution No. 2004-400, Resolution No. 2007-13, Resolution No. 2007-368, Resolution No. 2009-31 and Resolution No. 2010-235 shall remain unchanged. 0 Exhibit "A" Amendment No.6 to Services Agreement—ICF Jones&Stokes Page 3 of 3 AMENDMENT NO.6 TO SERVICES AGREEMENT IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date shown below. ICF JONES & STOKES Date: by: Signature Print Name/Title CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO © Date: by: Charles E. McNeely City Manager ATTEST: Rachel Clark, City Clerk Approved as to form: James F. Penman City Attorney By: ATTACHMENT A 'CF INTERNATIONAL August 5, 2010 Mr. Robert Eisenbeisz City Engineer City of San Bernardino 300 North D Street San Bernardino,CA 92418-0001 SUBJECT: Request for Amendment No.6 Mt.Vernon Ave.Bridge Service Agreement Dear Mr. Eisenbeisz: This is a request for Amendment No. 6 to our existing Service Agreement with the City of San Bernardino for the Mt.Vernon Avenue Bridge project. SCOPE OF WORK Our scope of work comprises the following activities associated with the preparation and processing of environmental documentation for the Mt.Vernon Avenue Bridge project: Technical Studies Community Impact Assessment (CIA) Previous Amendment No.4 assumes one round of review of the CIA.The CIA was resubmitted in December 2009 per May 2009 Caltrans comment, completing the one round of review. (The delay in submittal was due to the lack of completed traffic numbers required to fully address Caltrans comments.)Additional Caltrans comments to the CIA are pending. We will respond to pending comments and submit the CIA for one additional round of review by AECOM and Caltrans.The cost estimate has been updated to include this additional round of review and the final copies. Additionally, the cost estimate includes the following tasks not previously scoped: (1) CIA submittal in March 2010 based on February 2010 Caltrans comments (2) CIA submittal in June 01758........4 Ame,,S 02W — 4n Diego,CA 92111 — 8%5n8W — 850.5180573 br — id6mm Mr. Robert Eisenbeisz August 5, 2010 Page 2 2010 based on May 2010 Caltrans comments (3) Revisions of property acquisition/construction easement figure previously prepared by LAN Engineering based on May 2010 Caltrans comments and (4) Revisions per AECOM comments received in November/December 2009 and twice in February 2010. Section 4(f) Previous Amendment No. 4 assumes two rounds of Caltrans review and approval and no new comments beyond those identified in Caltrans letter dated 11/25/08. The Section 4(f)study has was resubmitted in March 2009 and December 2009, completing the two rounds of review assumed in Amendment No. 4. This scope assumes that no additional revisions to the Section 4(f)analysis will be required. The cost estimate includes the following tasks not previously scoped: (1) May 2010 Section 4(f) revision per comments received from Christie Hammond (submittal to Caltrans pending)and(2) Revisions per AECOM comments. Noise Study Report (NSR) Previous Amendment No. 4 assumes an update of the NSR. In lieu of the update, a technical. opinion was provided by ICF to address Caltrans comments dated 11/25/2008. The technical t opinion was submitted for one round of review by AECOM. New comments regarding the NSR were received in May 2010. This scope assumes that a June 2010 technical memorandum sufficiently addresses the recent comments and a revised NSR is not warranted. The cost estimate includes the following tasks not previously scoped: (1) Technical memorandum prepared June 2010 per May 2010 Caltrans comment which has been submitted to both AECOM and Caltrans. Initial Site Assessment(ISA)/Asbestos Containing Materials/Lead Based Paint (ACM/LBP) Previous Amendment No. 4 assumes the ISA would be submitted for one round of review, without revisions to the ACM/LBP report. The October 2009 ISA was revised and resubmitted in January 2010 for one round of review per Amendment No. 4. This scope assumes no additional revisions to the ISA or ACM/L8P Report. The cost estimate includes the following tasks not previously scoped: (1) Revision of ACM/LBP report. Scoping Summary Report The original contract and amendments do not include a scope for the preparation of a Scoping Summary Report. This report was initially prepared by Myra Frank and Associates and subsequently finalized/submitted in Spring 2010 by ICF. This scope assumes no additional revisions to the Scoping Summary Report are required. ICF Mr. Robert Eisenbeisz August 5, 2010 Page 3 The cost estimate includes the following tasks not previously scoped: (1) Preparation and submittal of Scoping Summary Report. Other Technical Studies With the exception of the CIA, we understand that all technical studies have been approved by Caltrans and that no further revisions will be required. The cost estimate assumes that updates, or preparation of new technical studies will not be required for issue areas such as: (1) Water Quality(2)Location Hydraulics (3)Geotechnical Report(4)Air Quality(5) Relocation Impacts and (6)Traffic. Draft Environmental Assessment(EA) Previous Amendment No. 4 assumes two rounds of review and that submittal #1 (March 2009) and submittal #2 (December 2009) would address both Caltrans environmental project management review and Caltrans NEPA Delegation QC review. The EA is currently in NEPA Delegation QC review and this scope assumes 2 additional rounds of review prior to submitting final documents to Caltrans. The cost estimate has been updated to include: • Submittal #4 of the EA (submittal pending, in response to Caltrans May 2010 comments), • Submittal#5 of the EA for review,and • Submittal#6 of the final Draft EA requiring no subsequent revisions. Additionally, the cost estimate includes the following tasks not included in the original scope of work:(1) March 2010 submittal#3 of the EA (2) Five additional copies of the EA for submittal#1 (3) Revisions per AECOM review prior to Caltrans submittals #1, #2, and #3 and (4) Complete document reformat due to changing Caltrans guidance on Cumulative Impacts. Draft Environmental Document Circulation Public Meeting Attendance The original contract assumes attendance at one public meeting during Draft Environmental Document Circulation only and attendance at a 2004 public scoping meeting was not scoped. The cost estimate includes the following tasks not included in the original scope of work: (1) Attendance at 2004 public scoping meeting and (2)Public meeting attendance by one additional lead planner, upon request by City or AECOM. NOTE: Only a Notice of Opportunity for public hearing is required for NEPA compliance; however, based on recent experience with Caltrans District 8, it is assumed an open forum informal public hearing will be required and the meeting would be attended by two ICF lead planners and 1 ICF Principal Architectural Historian. ICF Mr. Robert Eisenbeisz - August 5, 2010 _ Page 4 Public Meeting Logistics The original contract assumes City will reserve the meeting location and provide any other items required for the hearing (e.g., tables and chairs, court reporter [if required], and audio/visual equipment). It is assumed this scope remains unchanged. Document Distribution The original contract assumed only one CD during DED distribution. Based on recent experience with Caltrans District 8, distribution of CD's (containing electronic copies of the environmental document) may be required to property owners directly affected by acquisition or temporary construction easement. The cost estimate has been updated to include CD distribution to a maximum of 20 property owners. The original contract does not include payment of newspaper notices, sufficient reproduction of the combined Notice of Availability(NOA)/Notice of Public Hearing(or Notice of Opportunity for Public Hearing), postage for the NOA, postage for DED distribution, or preparation of an electronic copy of the Draft EA for posting on the Caltrans District 8 and/or City website. The scope assumes the NOA will be distributed to property owners and tenants within a 0.25 mile radius of the project area. The cost estimate has been updated to include these items. t The original contract assumes the City would be responsible for distributing the document to the 90 addresses on the distribution list and State Clearinghouse, along with the NOA (to approximately 1000 addresses within % mile radius of the project area) and assumes only 50 copies would be provided for distribution. The cost estimate has been updated to include reproduction and distribution of the 105 copies of the DED and approximately 1000 copies of the NOA. The cost estimate also includes the following tasks not previously scope& (1) Previous coordination of cost estimates for newspaper articles and (2) Materials for DED distribution. Additionally, per Caltrans request, a full distribution list, including property owner addresses, was provided per November 2008 and May 2009 Caltrans comment. At the time of the upcoming scheduled DED distribution, this distribution list will be outdated and will require updates. The cost estimate has been updated to include an updated distribution list with current property owner addresses. Record of Public Hearing The original contract does not include a scope for preparation of a Record of Public Hearing. Based on recent experience with Caltrans District 8, a Record of Public Hearing would be required. The cost estimate has been updated to include preparation and submittal of the Record of Public Hearing. It is assumed that this document will be submitted for one round of review prior to submitting final copies. ICF Mr. Robert Eisenbeisz August 5, 2010 . Page 5 Final Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact(Final EA/FONSI) The original scope assumes one review cycle of the Final EA/FONSI and deliverables would be limited to only 1 hardcopy and 1 electronic copy of the Final EA. The cost estimate has been updated to include: • 2 additional rounds of review,including 3 rounds for internal AECOM review • 12 copies of the Final EA/FONSI with each submittal preparation of an electronic copy of the Final EA/FONSI for posting on the Caltrans District 8 and/or City website The original scope did not identify preparation of response letters in reply to comments received during public circulation, should formal letters be required by Caltrans District 8. The estimate has been updated to include a maximum of 20 response letters (up to two pages in length) per comments received during public circulation. Responses will be coordinated between the City,AECOM and Caltrans. PDT Meeting Attendance Previous Amendment No.4 did include attendance at monthly PDT meetings. The cost estimate has been updated to include: • Nine monthly PDT meetings attended by Project Director Brian Calvert through March 2011. Additionally,the cost estimate includes the following meetings not included in the original scope of work: five PDT meetings attended by Project Director Brian Calvert through June 30,2010 Deliverables Community Impact Assessment (CIA) • 1 Copy - CIA (electronic), for AECOM review prior to Caltrans submittal, in response to pending Caltrans comments • 5 Copies - CIA for Caltrans review, in response to pending Caltrans comments; includes City and AECOM copies • 1 Copy-CIA(final)(electronic),for AECOM review • 5 Copies-CIA(final),with no subsequent revisions;includes City and AECOM copies Caltrans EA Submittal#4 Environmental Document only • 1 Copy - EA (electronic), for AECOM review prior to Caltrans submittal, in response to Caltrans May 2010 comments • 5 Copies-EA for Caltrans review, in response to Caltrans May 2010 comments; includes City and AECOM copies 'KF Mr.Robert Eisenbeisz August 5, 2010 Page 6 Caltrans EA Submittal#5 Environmental Document only . 1 Copy-EA(electronic),for AECOM review prior to Caltrans submittal . 5 Copies—EA for Caltrans review;includes City and AECOM copies Caltrans EA Submittal#6 for approval to circulate Full final submittal EA and Technical Reports,with no subsequent revisions . 1 Copy- EA(electronic),for AECOM review prior to Caltrans submittal . 12 Copies-Environmental Document; includes City and AECOM copies . 7 Copies-Historic Property Survey Report; includes City and AECOM copies . 7 Copies- Finding of Effect;includes City and AECOM copies . 7 Copies-Memorandum of Agreement; includes City and AECOM copies . 7 Copies-Natural Environment Study; includes City and AECOM copies . 7 Copies-Noise; includes City and AECOM copies . 7 Copies-Hazardous Waste Initial Site Assessment; includes City and AECOM copies . 7 Copies-Community Impact Assessment; includes City and AECOM copies . 7 Copies - Section 4(f) — within Environmental Document; includes City and AECOM copies . 7 Copies-Visual Impact Assessment;includes City and AECOM copies . 7 Copies - Paleontological Identification Report (PIR) and Paleontological Evaluation Report(PER); includes City and AECOM copies Circulation Documents . 20 CD's for property owners affected by temporary construction easement or property acquisition . Notice of Availability(NOA) . Newspaper Articles formatted for three different publications . Electronic copy of the Draft EA for posting on the Caltrans District 8 and/or City website Record of Public Hearing . 1 Copy - Record of Public Hearing (electronic), for AECOM review prior to Caltrans submittal . 5 Copies-Record of Public Hearing for Caltrans review; includes City and AECOM copies . 1 Copy - Final Record of Public Hearing (electronic), for AECOM review prior to Caltrans submittal . 5 Copies - Final Record of Public Hearing, with no subsequent revisions; includes City and AECOM copies Caltrans FINAL EA/FONSI Submittal#1 . 1 Copy-Final EA/FONSI(electronic),for AECOM review prior to Caltrans submittal . 12 copies of the Final EA/FONSI for Caltrans review; includes City and AECOM copies NOTE: Labor associated with Final EA/FONSI submittal#1 was included in the original contract. ICF Mr.Robert Eisenbeisz . August 5, 2010 Page 7 Caltrans FINAL EA/FONSI Submittal #2 • 1 Copy-Final EA/FONSI (electronic),for AECOM review prior to Caltrans submittal • 12 copies of the Final EA/FONSI for Caltrans review; includes City and AECOM copies Caltrans FINAL EA/FONSI Submittal#3 1 Copy-Final EA/FONSI (electronic),for AECOM review prior to Caltrans submittal • 12 copies of the Final EA/FONSI,with no subsequent revisions; includes City and AECOM copies STAFFING The ICF Jones & Stokes contact person for this scope of services described above is lean Lafontaine,at(619)602-8685. COST ESTIMATE ICF Jones & Stokes proposes to provide the attached services on a time and materials basis for $92,258. The attached spreadsheet provides the details of our estimated cost. Upon approval of this amendment,our agreement with the City of San Bernardino will be amended as follows: Services Agreement approved per Reso.No.2003-326 $123,524 Amendment No. 1, dated 12/20/2004 45,375 Amendment No. 2, dated 1/8/2007 20,000 Amendment No. 3, dated 9/12/2007 83,925 Amendment No.4, dated 2/19/2009 98,020 Amendment No. 5, dated 7/6/2010(contract extension only) 0 Subtotal: $370,844 Amendment No. 6(Proposed) 92 258 Total(Revised) $463,102 Should you need additional information,please call Jean Lafontaine at(619) 602-8685. Sincerely, Charles Smith,AICP Vice President '1CF a all I -I at a, all. 4 is I a' a' -I as i i if I . . . . . . . . . . . it i ... ...... ...lijj ; 1111 r: I i T i III a. p I i I z It: z I I I a p1m 101 1EA IWGYf '=i A. + ... ...... ... 4 4 4 i 4. . .+.}.i-L. ... ... IIi jlllJttl p I I II , ti 114 Tt I II II t HA-1 A I rt -4., .4. -1 4 !-1- .1. A; J. .21 tt ++ 4-1" . . .j44- 4 1z 1 1 t �-T- is +A1 . . . . . -4-4 ..... ..... f9, .44+�r 4 4 ... ... ... ... ... I q A- 7{I l 44A i i +1;i L t+ is y! if r . . . . t q p I I I 4. i.f + . . . . . . . . . . . P r F q i I I I I I q I p t I p I t I q I I I z I I F I p I p I p I q i I i I m I I p I I I p I I p z I I q It[s I p q F z is t sa t 144 t q I I I Y,dl I i I it i 1 it ai Mll! ji i i I ji a If iy3j If s -Mal 9 t, r H 4. j4 f.. jj i X21! a i1i I I J.] H. 44.: t 1, fi ...... W...:; 2 M-4 I �1 15 a � � j \ / \ / � - . . i fir ]a] 9 Ira mill I HII JIM