HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 3599City of Palo Alto (ID # 3599)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 6/3/2013
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Counci l Priority: Emergency Preparedness
Summary T itle: Amendment No. 1 to Newell Road Bridge Design Contract
Title: Adoption of a Budget Amendment Ordinance in the Amount of
$167,000 to CIP Project PE-12011, Newell Road/San Francisquito Creek Bridge
Project, to begin an EIR Process Evaluating Project Alternatives, Approval of
Contract Amendment No. One to Contract No. C12142825 in the Amount of
$167,000 with NV5, Inc. for a Traffic Study and Alternatives Analysis for the
Newell Road/San Francisquito Creek Bridge Project, Capital Improvement
Program Project PE-12011, and Approval of Amendment No. One to the Cost
Share Agreement with the Santa Clara Valley Water District Providing for
Contri bution of Local Matching Funds for the Newell Road/San Francisquito
Creek Bridge Project
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Public Works
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council:
1.Approve the attached Budget Amendment Ordinance in the amount of
$167,000 (Attachment A) to provide an additional appropriation for the
Newell Road/San Francisquito Creek Bridge Replacement Project, Capital
Improvement Program Project PE-12011;
2.Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute
Amendment No. One to Contract No. C12142825 with NV5, Inc.
(Attachment B) in a not-to-exceed amount of $167,000 for a traffic study
and alternatives analysis for the Newell Road/San Francisquito Creek Bridge
Replacement Project (PE-12011), including $151,929 for basic services and
City of Palo Alto Page 2
$15,071 for additional services;and
3.Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to sign
Amendment No. One to the cost share agreement with the Santa Clara
Valley Water District (District) (Attachment C)providing that the District will
contribute the local funds matching the Caltrans Highway Bridge Program
grant for the design of the Newell Road/San Francisquito Creek
replacement bridge.
Background
The abutments of the existing Newell Road Bridge over San Francisquito Creek are
located within the creek bed, causing a flow constriction in the channel that
prevents it from accommodating the estimated 1% (100-year) flow event. The
Newell Road Bridge is one of the bridges under study by the San Francisquito
Creek Joint Powers Authority (JPA) that needs to be removed or replaced in order
to provide 1% flood conveyance capacity in the creek and increased flood
protection to area residents and businesses. Furthermore, the bridge was
constructed in 1911 and is considered functionally obsolete. The traffic lanes are
substandard, the sight distances from the bridge are poor, and the bridge has no
provision for bicycle or pedestrian traffic. On July 11, 2011, Council approved a
budget appropriation for a new capital improvement project to replace the
Newell Road Bridge and authorized staff to accept Caltrans Highway Bridge
Program grant funds to pay for the majority of project costs. On April 9, 2012,
Council approved a contract with Nolte Associates, Inc. in the amount of $519,177
for the design and environmental assessment of the replacement bridge (Nolte
Associates, Inc. has since changed its corporate name to NV5, Inc.). Council also
approved a cost share agreement with the District providing for contribution of
local matching funds to supplement the Caltrans grant funding.
Staff and the design consultant developed preliminary design alternatives for
replacement of the existing Newell Road/San Francisquito Creek bridge. The
preliminary bridge designs included a 32-foot-wide roadway (two traffic lanes
with accomodation for bicyclists) and standard 5-foot-wide sidewalks on both
sides of the bridge. Two potential bridge alignment configurations (one following
the existing bridge alignment and one that would realign the bridge to connect
directly with Newell Road in East Palo Alto) were offered for consideration.
City of Palo Alto Page 3
Staff presented the preliminary bridge designs at a joint meeting of the Crescent
Park and Duveneck/St Francis neighborhood associations, at a special community
meeting, and at a study session of the Architectural Review Board. During those
meetings,members of the public expressed concern regarding the potential
impacts of the project on the surrounding neighborhood. Their concerns included
potential increased traffic speeds and volumes along Newell Road, the visual
impact of a larger bridge structure, privacy issues for properties abutting the
bridge, and the indirect but related issue of overflow parking by East Palo Alto
residents on Palo Alto streets near the bridge. There was widespread public
desire for staff to identify and analyze multiple bridge alternatives, including
various bridge widths and alignments, varied levels of accommodations for
motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians, and a non-replacement option, before
proceeding with project design and environmental assessment.
On January 8, staff held a community meeting at the Lucie Stern Community
Center attended by over 200 residents of Palo Alto and East Palo Alto. At that
meeting, the City Manager committed to pausing the project development
process in order to conduct a thorough analysis of potential project alternatives
and a full environmental impact report (EIR) analyzing potential project impacts.
Discussion
Following the January 8 community meeting, staff directed NV5 to stop work on
project design. Staff has been coordinating with NV5 and staff from the City of
East Palo Alto, Santa Clara Valley Water District, San Francisquito Creek JPA, and
Caltrans to develop the scope and cost for the attached contract amendment.
Staff from the participating agencies concur that the tasks outlined in the contract
amendment comprise the logical next steps in the project development process
for the Newell Road Bridge Replacement Project. The proposed scope of work
includes an alternatives analysis covering a broad range of potential project
alternatives, an enhanced traffic study that will identify the traffic-related impacts
of the various project alternatives, and an inclusive public outreach process. The
goal of the alternatives analysis is to use a fact-based, transparent public process
to identify feasible project alternatives to be further studied through the EIR
process.
City of Palo Alto Page 4
The alternatives analysis and enhanced traffic study will include tasks 1 through 4
as summarized below. The alternatives analysis will describe, analyze, and screen
the following project alternatives:
§No project (leave existing bridge in place)
§Removal of existing bridge without replacement
§New bicycle/pedestrian bridge
§New bicycle/pedestrian bridge with limited emergency vehicle access
§New bi-directional, one-lane vehicle bridge with traffic signal access control
§New two-lane vehicle bridge using existing bridge alignment
§New two-lane vehicle bridge realigned to line up with Newell Road in East
Palo Alto
§New two-lane bridge with a partial realignment
1.Development of a detailed Project Purpose and Need Statement, which will
identify the criteria that will be used to screen the potential project
alternatives. A draft Project Purpose and Need Statement will be
presented at a community meeting for public input before it is finalized.
2.Execution of an enhanced traffic study that includes counts of existing
vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle traffic as well as documentation of existing
parking patterns on streets in the vicinity of the Newell Road Bridge.
Industry-standard computer-based traffic models will be used to predict
the traffic-related affects of each of the project alternatives for use in the
alternatives analysis.
3.Preparation of conceptual layouts and project descriptions for each of the
potential project alternatives, including a high-level assessment of potential
environmental impacts of each alternative.
4.Execution of an alternatives analysis that screens the eight project
alternatives using the criteria in the Purpose and Need Statement and the
results of the traffic study to identify feasible project alternatives to be
carried forward for more detailed analysis in the project EIR. A draft
Alternatives Analysis Report will be presented at a community meeting for
City of Palo Alto Page 5
public input before it is finalized.
The alternatives analysis will be an inclusive process coordinated with staff from
the City of East Palo Alto, Santa Clara Valley Water District, and the San
Francisquito Creek JPA. It should be noted that since the Newell Road Bridge
literally bridges the boundary between the cities of Palo Alto and East Palo Alto,
the project must ultimately be approved by both jurisdictions. Consequently,
outreach for the community meetings will include mailings to residents in both
Palo Alto and East Palo Alto in an effort to gather valuable input from both
communities and to reach mutual consensus on the feasible project alternatives
to be addressed in the project’s environmental document. Following completion
of the alternatives analysis, staff will return to Council requesting an additional
amendment to the NV5 contract for preparation of an EIR. The cost of the EIR is
expected to be in the range of $200,000 to $250,000.
Staff met with Caltrans Office of Local Assistance representatives to request that
they amend the existing Highway Bridge Program grant for the Newell Road
Bridge Replacement Project to include the cost of the alternatives analysis and
enhanced traffic study. Caltrans recently notified staff that they have approved
an amendment to the grant that will cover 88.53% of the cost of the expanded
scope of work. Staff has also reached agreement with Santa Clara Valley Water
District staff on an amendment to the existing cost share agreement under which
the District will cover the remaining 11.47% of the cost of the alternatives
analysis. The amended cost share agreement is attached.
Timeline
The alternatives analysis and enhanced traffic study are expected to be
completed within approximately three to four months. It will take up to one year
to complete the EIR and the final construction documents. The construction of
the Newell Road Bridge project, which will require a road closure for the duration
of construction,is planned for Spring/Summer 2015. This timing is consistent
with the planned execution of the JPA’s related flood control improvements.
Caltrans is expected to replace the West Bayshore Road/San Francisquito Creek
bridge and close that road during the Spring/Summer of 2014. Due to the limited
number of access points into the portion of East Palo Alto west of Highway 101, it
City of Palo Alto Page 6
would not be possible to close Newell Road and West Bayshore Road
simultaneously, so the 2015 schedule for the Newell Road project is ideal. The
Santa Clara Valley Water District/JPA project to replace the Pope-Chaucer
Street/San Francisquito Creek bridge is also tentatively scheduled for
Spring/Summer 2015. Current plans are to keep Pope-Chaucer Street open
during that bridge work.
Resource Impact
Funds for this contract amendment will be added to the project budget from the
Infrastructure Reserve via the attached Budget Amendment Ordinance (BAO).
The amended Caltrans Highway Bridge Program grant will provide reimbursement
for 88.53% of eligible project costs. The attached amendment to the cost sharing
agreement provides that the District will reimburse the City for the remaining
11.47% of project costs. As a result of the BAO, the Infrastructure Reserve
balance will temporarily decrease to $12,785,070. Reimbursement to the
Infrastructure Reserve will be accomplished through progress payments provided
by Caltrans and the District.
Environmental Review
Because the Caltrans Highway Bridge Program grant funds originate from the
federal government, the environmental assessment of the Newell Road/San
Francisquito Creek Bridge Replacement Project must be conducted to comply
with both the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).The existing contract contains provisions for
NV5, Inc. to conduct the special technical studies required for the Caltrans
Highway Bridge Program and to prepare a mitigated negative declaration as the
CEQA compliance document for the project. Due to the heightened level of
community concern surrounding the project, however, staff now believes that a
full environmental impact report (EIR) should be prepared in order to ensure a
robust consideration of the potential environmental impacts of the project. Staff
will return to Council for approval of an additional contract amendment for EIR
preparation following the completion of the alternatives analysis.
cc:John Doughty, East Palo Alto Community Development Department
City of Palo Alto Page 7
Kamal Fallaha, City of East Palo Alto Public Works Division
Brent Butler, City of East Palo Alto Planning Division
Len Materman, San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority
Chris Elias, Santa Clara Valley Water District
Norman Beamer, Crescent Park Neighborhood Association
Karen White, Duveneck/St. Francis Neighborhood Association
Attachments:
·A-Budget Amendment Ordinance (DOC)
·B -Amendment No. One to Contract No. C12142825 (PDF)
·C -Amendment No. One to SCVWD Cost Share Agreement (PDF)
Attachment A
ORDINANCE NO.xxxx
ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2013 TO
PROVIDE AN APPROPRIATION OF $167,000 TO CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECT NUMBER PE-12011, NEWELL
ROAD/SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. The Council of the City of Palo Alto finds and
determines as follows:
A. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 12 of Article
III of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, the Council on
June 18, 2012 did adopt a budget for fiscal year 2013; and
B.In fiscal year2012, the Council appropriated $539,000
for CIP Project PE-12011, Newell Road/San Francisquito Creek
Bridge Replacement, for the design and environmental
assessment for the replacement of the functionally-obsolete
Newell Road bridge over San Francisquito Creek. On April 9,
2012, Council approved a contract with Nolte Associates, Inc.
(now known as NV5, Inc.) to perform this work; and
C. In response to the community’s desire to identify and
analyze multiple bridge alternatives, the contract with NV5,
Inc. requires an amendment to include the changes in the scope
and cost of the work to be performed;and
D. The proposed scope of work includes an alternatives
analysis covering a broad range of potential project
alternatives, an enhanced traffic study that will identify the
traffic-related impacts of the various project alternatives,
and an inclusive public outreach process; and
E. An additional appropriation of $167,000 for CIP
Project PE-12011, Newell Road/San Francisquito Creek Bridge
Replacement, is needed for the changes in scope described
above; and
G. City Council authorization is needed to amend the 2013
budget as hereinafter set forth.
SECTION 2.The sum of One Hundred Sixty-Seven Thousand
Dollars ($167,000) is hereby appropriated to CIP Project PE-
12011, Newell Road/San Francisquito Creek Bridge Replacement.
SECTION 3.One Hundred Sixty-Seven Thousand Dollars
($167,000)is hereby transferred from the Capital Fund
Infrastructure Reserve, leaving a balance of $12,785,070.
SECTION 4. A request submitted to Caltrans has been
approved for the Infrastructure Reserve to be reimbursed by
grant funding from the Caltrans Highway Bridge Program for
88.53 percent of this additional appropriation. The Santa
Clara Valley Water District(SCVWD) will provide reimbursement
for the remaining 11.47 percent of the cost.
SECTION 5. As specified in Section 2.28.080(a) of the
Palo Alto Municipal Code, a two-thirds vote of the City
Council is required to adopt this ordinance.
SECTION 6. As provided in Section 2.04.330 of the Palo
Alto Municipal Code, this ordinance shall become effective
uponadoption.
SECTION 7.Because the Caltrans Highway Bridge Program
grant funds originate from the federal government, the
environmental assessment of the Newell Road/San Francisquito
Creek Bridge Replacement Project must be conducted to comply
with both the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). NV5, Inc. will
assist staff with the preparation of the required
environmental documents. The appropriate environmental review
document will be brought to Council for consideration at the
time of the awarding of the construction contract for the
project.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
_________________________
City Clerk
__________________________
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
Senior Assistant City
Attorney
__________________________
City Manager
__________________________
Director of Public Works
__________________________
Director of Administrative
Services
1 Revision July 25, 2012
AMENDMENT NO. ONE TO CONTRACT NO. C12142825
BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND NV5, INC.
This Amendment No. One to Contract No. C12142825 (“Contract”) is entered into
June 04, 2013, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal
corporation (“CITY”), and NV5, Inc., a California Corporation, located at 2025 Gateway Place,
Suite 156, San Jose, CA 95110 (“CONSULTANT”).
R E C I T A L S:
WHEREAS, the Contract was entered into between the parties for the provision of
professional engineering design and environmental assessment services in connection with the
Newell Road/San Francisquito Creek Bridge Replacement Project (“Project”); and
WHEREAS, the parties wish to amend the Contract to increase the scope of services
to include an alternatives analysis and associated traffic study, increase compensation, and extend
the contract schedule;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and
provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree:
SECTION 1. Section 1, SCOPE OF SERVICES, is hereby amended to read as
follows:
“CONSULTANT shall perform the Services described in the attached Exhibit “A-1”
as an addition to the Scope of Services described in “Exhibit A” of the original Contract and in
accordance with the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. The performance of all
Services shall be to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY”
SECTION 2. Section 2, TERM, is hereby amended to read as follows:
“The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through the
duration of the construction support services rendered by CONSULTANT for the
Project.”
SECTION 3. Section 4, NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION, is hereby amended
to read as follows:
“The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Basic
Services described in Exhibit “A-1”, in addition to the Basic Services described in “Exhibit A” of
the original Contract, including payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall
not exceed six hundred twenty-three thousand nine hundred six dollars ($623,906). In the event
Additional Services are authorized, the total compensation for Basic Services and Additional
Services and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed six hundred eighty-six thousand one hundred
seventy-seven dollars ($686,177). The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out in
“Exhibit C” (“COMPENSATION”) of the original Contract, “Exhibit C-2”, (”AMENDMENT NO.
ONE COMPENSATION”), and “Exhibit C”-1” (“HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE”) of the original
Contract, which are attached to and made a part of this Agreement.
Additional Services for this Contract Amendment , if any , s hall be authori z ed in
accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibits "C" and "C-2". Con sultant s hall not
receive any compensation for Additional Services perfonned w ith out the prior written author ization
of CITY. Additional Services sha ll mean any work that is not determined by CITY to be nece ssary
for the proper completion of the Project, but wh ich is not included wi thin the Scope of Services
described in Ex hibit "A" or Exhibit "A-J "."
SECTION 4. The following exhibit(s) to the Contract is/are hereby ame nd ed to read
as se t forth in the a ttac hm ent(s) to thi s Amendment, which are incorporated in full by thi s reference :
a. Exhibit "A-J" entitl ed "AMEN DMENT NO. ONE SCOPE OF SERV ICES ".
b. Exhibit "B-J " entit led "AMENDMENT NO. ONE SCHEDULE OF
PERFORMANCE".
c. Ex hi bit "C-2" entitled "AMENDMENT NO. ONE COMPENSATION "
SECTION 5. Except as herein modified , all other provisions of the Contract,
includin g any exhib it s and subsequent amendments thereto, shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF , the parties have by t heir duly authori zed repre se ntatives
executed this Ame ndm en t on the date first above wr itt en.
CITY OF PALO ALTO NV5, I NC.
C it y Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM :
Senior Asst. C ity Attorney
Attachments:
EXHIBIT "A-I ":
EXHIBIT "B-1 ":
EXHIBIT "C-2 ":
AMENDME NT NO . ONE SCOPE OF SERVICES
AMENDMENT NO. ONE SC HEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
AMENDMENT NO. ONE COMPENSATION
2 Revision Jul y 25, 2012
EXHIBIT “A-1” – Amendment No. One Scope of Services
Palo Alto Newell Road Bridge Alternatives Analysis
Scope of Work
March 11, 2013
As discussed in the City of Palo Alto’s (City’s) public meeting on 1/8/13 at the Lucie Stern Community
Center, and indicated in documents published on City’s official website (under News Details), the
following eight (8) project alternatives are included in this scope of work:
• No project (leave existing bridge in place)
• Removal of existing bridge without replacement
• New bicycle/pedestrian bridge
• New bicycle/pedestrian bridge with limited emergency vehicle access
• New bi-directional one lane vehicle bridge with traffic signal control
• New two lane vehicle bridge using existing bridge alignment
• New two lane vehicle bridge realigned to line up with Newell Road in East Palo Alto
• New two vehicle bridge with a partial realignment
In response to public input and in order to screen feasible alternatives, an Alternatives Screening
Analysis, including the alternatives described above, will be prepared. While all eight (8) alternatives will
be considered, it is assumed that some of the alternatives may not meet the project purpose & need, thus it
is assumed that fewer alternatives would be carried forward into the project’s environmental document
stage. The alternative chosen to be carried forward would be included in the project’s Preliminary
Environmental Study (PES). The PES will provide Caltrans with sufficient information to determine what
class of action (what level document type) will be required for NEPA clearance (the determination of the
class of action is made by the District Local Assistance Engineer [DLAE]). At this point in time, we
anticipate that the CEQA document will be an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) which will be
followed by preparation of a NEPA document anticipated to be a routine Environmental Assessment
(EA).
Per the City’s request, the estimated cost to prepare an EIR that includes one (1) project alternative (and
up to three [3] alternatives analyzed at a lesser level) is $200,000. The estimated cost to prepare an EIR
that includes four (4) project alternatives analyzed at an equal level is $250,000. This estimated cost does
not include preparation of the Alternatives Screening Analysis Report that is the subject of this scope of
work, supporting technical studies/reports, or NEPA documentation.
Task 1.1.2 Alternatives Screening Analysis Project Management
NV5 and ICF will continue to manage the development of the technical analysis and engineering for the
Newell Road Bridge Project alternatives screening analysis. This task includes time for providing the
City strategic advice on the environmental process for CEQA/NEPA clearance.
Task 1.1.2.1 Team Meetings
NV5 and ICF will attend up to three (3) one (1) hour Project Team calls and two(2) in-person meetings
(assumed to be two(2) hours or less) to support the Alternatives Screening Process (refer to Task 4.7.1.2
and Task 4.7.1.4). NV5 will continue to coordinate the team meetings, prepare the meeting agendas, set
action items, and prepare meeting notes. ICF will review and provide input on meeting notes as requested.
Attendance by NV5 and ICF staff at additional internal Project Team conference calls, in-person
meetings, or public/community meetings can be included on an ad-hoc basis under a separate scope and
budget.
Task 1.5.2 Alternatives Screening Analysis Public Outreach
The city will be responsible for the public communication and outreach program for the Alternatives
Screening process.. NV5 and ICF will provide the technical information (described in Task 4.7, Task
8.2.2 and Task 8.4) for this program as it is developed.
Task 4.7 Alternatives Screening Analysis Process
ICF will assist the City with the Alternatives Screening Analysis Process by providing the following
scope of services.
Task 4.7.1 Project Description, Purpose and Need, and Alternatives Screening
Analysis Report
Task 4.7.1.1 Prepare Project Description/ Purpose and Need.
ICF will work with NV5 and the City to review the Project Description, which will include reviewing the
Project’s Purpose & Need. The City (and the City of East Palo Alto and other project partners as
appropriate) will prepare the initial draft Project Description, fully describing each alternative to be
studied and inserted into the Alternatives Screening Analysis Report. This is a critical deliverable in that
the Purpose & Need will be used to screen the alternatives carried forward into the environmental
document. ICF assumes that the refinement process (determining the completeness of the descriptions)
will require up to two (2) rounds of review (Draft and Revised), prior to sharing with the public (see Task
4.7.1.2). To the greatest extent possible, reviews should be concurrent and comments should be
consolidated. After the Project Description (Purpose & Need) has been internally reviewed and approved,
it will be shared with the community in a public meeting coordinated by the City.
Task 4.7.1.2 Public Meeting on Project Description, Purpose & Need, and
Alternatives Screening Analysis Process
The City will conduct a public meeting to review the Project Description, Purpose & Need, and the
proposed Alternatives Screening Analysis Process. ICF and NV5 will attend this meeting and, if desired,
ICF can contract for a court reporter and/or translation services under separate scope and budget. The
events of the meeting will be summarized by the City and provided to NV5 and ICF.
Meetings
• Attendance by NV5 and ICF at two (2) meetings (one [1] strategy pre-meeting, one [1] Project
Description, Purpose & Need, and Alternatives Analysis Process Public Meeting)
Task 4.7.1.3 Draft and Final Alternatives Screening Analysis Report –
Environmental Section
NV5 will lead the preparation of an Alternatives Screening Analysis Report as described in Task 8.4.2.
ICF will support NV5 in the preparation of the Alternatives Screening Analysis Report by providing a
brief qualitative analysis of the relative environmental effects of the proposed alternatives. This analysis
will include a separate section that considers NEPA-level screening criteria only, including environmental
justice.
Task 4.7.1.4 Public Meeting on the Alternatives Screening Analysis Process and
Results of the Alternatives Screening Analysis Report
As described in Task 1.1.2.1, NV5 and ICF will attend this meeting and if desired, ICF can contract for a
court reporter and/or translators under separate scope and budget. The events of the meeting will be
summarized by the City and provided to NV5 and ICF.
Meetings
• Attendance by NV5 and ICF at two (2) meetings (one [1] strategy pre-meeting, and one [1]
Alternatives Screening Analysis Process and Results of Alternatives Screening Analysis Report
Public Meeting)
Task 4.7.1.5 Update the Preliminary Environmental Study (PES)
After completion of the Alternatives Screening Analysis Report (and screening of the alternatives), ICF
will revise and update the PES form to address one (1) or more alternatives for review by the Project
Team. ICF will revise the current PES form package with an updated Project Description (Purpose &
Need), description of changes to design, replacement of figures, and edits to existing text as needed. ICF
anticipates that the PES may undergo up to two (2) rounds of review (one [1] round of review with the
Project Team, and one [1] round of review with Caltrans). Upon completion, Palo Alto will re-submit the
PES to Caltrans Local Assistance for review and signature.
Deliverable
• Draft, Revised, and Final PES form.
Task 8.2.2 Alternatives Screening Analysis Traffic
Study
TJKM will take the lead on preparing a Traffic Impact Analysis that includes analyzing traffic conditions
for the eight (8) project alternatives.
Each analysis will include the following study elements:
• Analyzing 14 intersections for level of service impacts against the proposed bridge configurations
under three scenarios: existing, near-term cumulative (2025), and cumulative (2035)
• Analyze up to nine residential streets for traffic intrusion using the Traffic Infusion on Residential
Environments (TIRE) methodology due to potential shifts in traffic patterns with respect to the
various bridge alternatives
• A Parking Inventory and Occupancy count, with a qualitative discussion of parking conditions
with respect to adjacent ADT and the potential effects of a no-vehicle bridge
• Recommendations for mitigations to significant impacts and options to preserve the current
Quality of Life and protect the current level of residential traffic volumes
Task 8.2.2.1 Study Intersections
The City has identified the following intersections for analyzing for traffic impacts as part of the Newell
Road Bridge project. The base project study intersections include:
• Newell Rd & Edgewood Drive
• Newell Rd & Hamilton Ave
• Newell Rd and Channing Ave
• Newell Rd & Woodland Ave (East Palo Alto)
• University Ave & Woodland Ave (East Palo Alto)
• University Ave & E Crescent Drive
• University Ave & Center Drove
• Hamilton Ave & W Crescent Drive
• Channing Ave & Saint Francis Drive
• Saint Francis Drive & Embarcadero Rd
• W. Bayshore Rd & Newell Rd
• W. Bayshore Rd & Woodland Ave
• W. Bayshore Rd & Channing Ave
• W. Bayshore Rd & Embarcadero Rd
For each study intersection, TJKM will collect peak-hour turning movement count data. Peak hour
turning movement count data shall be collected for both the AM peak period (7:00AM-10:00AM) and
PM peak period (5:00PM-8:00PM).
TJKM will analyze traffic impacts from the project site for each bridge configuration using either
TRAFFIX or other traffic evaluation software approved by City staff. TJKM will be responsible for
analyzing the following traffic scenarios:
• 2013 Existing Traffic Year
• 2020 Near-Term Background Traffic
• 2035 Future Traffic
The City will make available near-term and future traffic volumes for select intersections including:
University Avenue & Woodland Avenue, University Avenue & Chaucer Street (Non-Study Intersection),
and the Newell Road Bridge itself. TJKM will be responsible for using the existing condition traffic data
collected for the project and the city-furnished forecast data to develop growth factors and analyze all the
project intersection lists.
Task 8.2.2.2 Traffic Infusion on Residential Environment (TIRE)
The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for the Newell Bridge will include a TIRE analysis of adjacent
residential streets to evaluate and identify potential increases in vehicle volumes due to the various bridge
configuration alternatives.
As part of this task, the consultant will collect 48-hour Average Daily Traffic (ADT) and speed counts for
each of the proposed TIRE Study Corridors:
• Edgewood Drive –
o Southwood Drive to Newell Road
o Newell Road to Jefferson Drive
• Hamilton Avenue
o Middlefield Rd to Center Drive
o Center Drive to Newell Road
o Newell Road to Jefferson Drive
o Greer Road to Wildwood Lane
• East Crescent Drive
o University Avenue to Southwood Drive
• Center Drive
o University Avenue to Hamilton Avenue
• W Crescent Drive
o University Avenue to Hamilton Avenue
• Newell Road
o Edgewood Drive to Channing Avenue
o Woodland Avenue to W. Bayshore Road (EPA)
• Channing Avenue
o Middlefield Rd to Newell Road
• Woodland Avenue
o Cooley Avenue to Clarke Avenue (EPA)
TIA Study Scenarios
The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for the Newell Bridge will be prepared in compliance with the Valley
Transportation Authority (VTA) – TIA Study Guidelines. Each of the study intersections will be
analyzed to determine Level of Service (LOS) per the VTA guidelines for each of the following scenarios
for each of the eight project alternatives:
Existing Conditions: LOS using TJKM collected data using either a Traffix or Synchro traffic
simulation model
Background 2020: LOS using TJKM collected data and consultant-developed forecast measures
from adjacent intersection data furnished by the City
Future 2035: LOS using TJKM collected data and consultant-developed forecast measures
from adjacent intersection data furnished by the City
Any study intersection that is determined to potentially have significant traffic impacts by exceeding the
City’s, and/or other agency’s standards of significance, when traffic is added due to a change from the
existing Newell Bridge Configuration (Background 2020 and Future 2035), will be analyzed for initial
appropriate mitigation measures. Mitigation measures will be identified by TJKM with input from the
City or the appropriate agency in which the study intersection is located. Each significantly impacted
intersection will be analyzed to determine the level of mitigation required.
Task 8.2.2.3 Bicycle and Pedestrian Operations Analysis
TJKM will collect bicycle and pedestrian counts and observations at the Newell Road Bridge during at
least three periods of the day (a.m., school and p.m. peak hours), and provide a detailed description of the
existing bicycle and pedestrian operations that are directly connected to the existing bridge which may
potentially be impacted by each of the project alternatives.
Task 8.2.2.4 Parking Analysis
TKM will conduct an on-street parking supply and occupancy count for existing conditions, provide a
qualitative discussion related to the operations of the parking conditions and patterns, and provide an
evaluation of how each project alternative may affect parking. The parking count will consist of
occupancy at the study segments every two hours in a typical day (6AM, 8AM, 10AM, Noon, 2PM, 4PM,
6PM, 8PM, and 10PM). The streets that will be evaluated as part of the parking analysis include:
• Newell Road – Bridge to Dana Avenue
• Edgewood Road – Southwood Drive to Patricia Lane
• Hamilton Avenue – Center Drive to Patricia Lane
• Woodland Avenue – Cooley Avenue to Clarke Avenue (EPA)
Task 8.2.2.5 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Integration
Upon completion of the project the TJKM will finalize the TIA report and be available to assist the NV5,
ICF, and the City of Palo Alto in the preparation of an EIR.
Task 8.4 Alternatives Screening Analysis Alternatives
Development and Screening Report
Task 8.4.1 Conceptual Plan Development
NV5 will prepare conceptual plans of six (6) of the eight (8) build project alternatives. Plans for
the no project (leave existing bridge in place) and removal of existing bridge without
replacement alternatives will not be developed. The purpose of the plans will be to depict the
overall scope of each alternative to determine the extent of the work and a budgetary number for
the anticipated construction cost. NV5 will consider ways to increase pedestrian/bicycle safety
and ease of access to the extent practicable in developing the conceptual plan for each
alternative. Each conceptual plan will include a depiction of the proposed path of travel for
pedestrians and bicyclists through the Newell/Woodland intersection and across the bridge.
Task 8.4.2 Alternatives Screening Analysis Report Development
NV5 will prepare an Alternatives Screening Analysis Report comparing the eight (8) project alternatives:
ICF will support NV5 in the preparation of the brief qualitative environmental section of the report as
described in Task 4.7.1.3. The Alternatives Screening Analysis Report will summarize the Project
Description and Purpose & Need, include a description of the alternatives, methodology for screening the
alternatives, alternatives evaluation, and conclusions and recommendations.
At this time the Project Team has no preferred alternative. The report will summarize the analysis data,
including the Alternatives Screening Analysis Traffic Study (Task 8.2.2), and consider the feasibility and
the qualitative environmental impacts/effects of the alternatives.
The conclusions of the Alternatives Screening Analysis Report will be shared with the public as described
in Task 4.7.1.4.
Deliverables
• Admin Draft and Draft Alternatives Screening Analysis Report
Task 8.4.3 Final Alternatives Screening Analysis Report
The Alternatives Screening Analysis Report will be finalized after the second public meeting.
Deliverable
• Final Alternatives Screening Analysis Report.
EXHIBIT “B-1”
AMENDMENT NO. ONE SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
CONSULTANT shall perform the Services so as to complete each milestone within the number
of days/weeks specified below. The time to complete each milestone may be increased or
decreased by mutual written agreement of the project managers for CONSULTANT and CITY
so long as all work is completed within the term of the Agreement. CONSULTANT shall
provide a detailed schedule of work consistent with the schedule below within 2 weeks of receipt
of the notice to proceed.
Milestones Completion
No. of Weeks
From NTP
1. Project Management 16
4. Environmental Studies 16
8. Preliminary Engineering and Type Selection 16
EXHIBIT “C-2”
AMENDMENT NO. ONE COMPENSATION
The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed
in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the
budget schedule below. Compensation shall be calculated based on the hourly rate
schedule attached as Exhibit C-1 up to the not to exceed budget amount for each task set
forth below.
The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services
described in Exhibit “A-1” (“Basic Services”) and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed
$151,929. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Basic Services, including reimbursable
expenses, within this amount. In the event CITY authorizes any Additional Services, the
maximum compensation shall not exceed $167,000. Any work performed or expenses
incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of
compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost to the CITY.
CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks and categories of work as outlined and budgeted
below. The CITY’s project manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget
amounts between any of the tasks or categories listed below provided the total
compensation for Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, does not exceed
$151,929 and the total compensation for Additional Services does not exceed $15,071.
BUDGET SCHEDULE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT
Task 1 $31,697
(Project Management)
Task 4 $29,142
(Environmental Clearance Documents)
Task 8 $91,090
(Preliminary Engineering & Type Selection)
Sub-total Basic Services $151,929
Reimbursable Expenses (included in total above)
Total Basic Services and Reimbursable expenses $151,929
Additional Services (Not to Exceed) $ 15,071
Maximum Total Compensation $167,000
REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES
The administrative, overhead, secretarial time or secretarial overtime, word processing,
photocopying, in-house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses are
included within the scope of payment for services and are not reimbursable expenses.
CITY shall reimburse CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost.
Expenses for which CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed are:
A. Travel outside the San Francisco Bay area, including transportation and meals, will be
reimbursed at actual cost subject to the City of Palo Alto’s policy for reimbursement of
travel and meal expenses for City of Palo Alto employees.
B. Long distance telephone service charges, cellular phone service charges, facsimile
transmission and postage charges are reimbursable at actual cost.
All requests for payment of expenses shall be accompanied by appropriate backup
information. Any expense anticipated to be more than $500 shall be approved in advance
by the CITY’s project manager.
ADDITIONAL SERVICES
The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced, written
authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY’s project manager’s
request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of
services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT’s proposed maximum
compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services based on the rates set
forth in Exhibit C-1. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum
compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY’s project manager
and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional
services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement.
Principal Project Discipline Senior Associate Assistant Survey Two CADD Project
In Manager Lead Engineer Engineer Engineer Manager Man Tech Administrator Nolte
Charge Crew Total Subconsultants Total
TASK TASK DESCRIPTION $252 $225 $205 $149 $105 $95 $193 $238 $105 $91 Fee Fee
Phase I - Preliminary Engineering , NEPA / CEQA Documentation
1 Project Management $0
1.1 Project Management 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
1.1.2 Alternatives Project Management 0 24 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $8,680 $6,678 $15,358
1.2 Meetings 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $3,600 $0 $3,600
1.3 Quality Assurance / Quality Control 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
1.4 Project Schedule 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
1.5 Public Outreach 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
1.5.2 Alternatives Analysis Public Outreach 0 16 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $6,880 $5,859 $12,739
1.6 Agency Coordination 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal - Task 1 0 56 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $19,160 $12,537 $31,697
2 Existing Document Review
2.0 Existing Document Review 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal - Task 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
3 Utility Coordination
3.0 Utility Coordination 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal - Task 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
4 Environmental Clearance Documents
4.1 Prepare Purpose and Need Statement 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
4.2 Prepare Admin Draft and Draft I.S.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
4.3 Prepare Admin Final and Final I.S.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
4.4 Prepare Cat. Exclusion for NEPA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
4.5 Prepare Draft and Final Tech Studies/Memoranda 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
4.6 Project Mgmt and Mtgs.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
4.7 Alternatives Analysis Screening Process (Includes 360 Degree Photos)0 0 0 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 $2,304 $26,838 $29,142
Subtotal - Task 4 0 0 0 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 $2,304 $26,838 $29,142
5 Survey and Base Mapping
5.1 Topographic Survey 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
5.2 Right-of-Way Constraints Map 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
5.3 Acquisition Plats and Legal Descriptions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal - Task 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
6 Location Hydraulic Study/Bridge Hydraulic Report
6.1 Preliminary Design/Hydraulics Analysis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
6.2 Location Hydraulics Study 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
6.3 Bridge Hydraulic Report 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
Contract Plans & Details 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal - Task 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
7 Geotechnical Investigations
7.1 Research and Data Collection 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
7.2 Field Exploration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
FEBRUARY 22, 2013
NEWELL ROAD at SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK BRIDGE REPLACEMENT - CITY OF PALO ALTO
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS FEE ESTIMATE
Nolte Associates, Inc. 3/11/2013 - 5:33 PM N:\SJB036700 - Newell\Administration\Change Orders\Alternatives Analysis\20130308 Draft 3 Submittal\Alternatives Analysis Fee.xls - Sum Fee Estimate Page 1 of 2
Principal Project Discipline Senior Associate Assistant Survey Two CADD Project
In Manager Lead Engineer Engineer Engineer Manager Man Tech Administrator Nolte
Charge Crew Total Subconsultants Total
TASK TASK DESCRIPTION $252 $225 $205 $149 $105 $95 $193 $238 $105 $91 Fee Fee
FEBRUARY 22, 2013
NEWELL ROAD at SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK BRIDGE REPLACEMENT - CITY OF PALO ALTO
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS FEE ESTIMATE
7.3 Laboratory Testing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
7.4 Soil Analysis / Evaluation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
7.5 Prepare Draft Foundation Report 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
7.6 Prepare Final Foundation Report 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal - Task 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
8 Preliminary Engineering and Type Selection
8.1 Bridge Type Selection Report 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
8.2 Traffic Study 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
8.2.2 Alternatives Analysis Traffic Study 0 16 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $5,240 $53,802 $59,042
8.3 35% Preliminary Plans and Estimate 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
8.4 Alternatives Analyses - Alternatives Development 0 44 0 24 88 16 0 0 64 12 $32,048 $0 $32,048
Subtotal - Task 8 0 60 8 24 88 16 0 0 64 12 $37,288 $53,802 $91,090
Phase II - Final Design & Permitting
9 Final Design & PS&E Development
9.1 65% Bridge / Structural Design 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
9.2 Roadway Design 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
9.3 Traffic Control/Construction Staging Plans 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
9.4 65% Plans, Special Provisions, & Construction Cost Estimate Preparation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
9.5 First (65%) PS&E Submittal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
9.6 Independent Design Check 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
9.7 Response to Review Comments / 90% PS&E Submittal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
9.8 Second (90%) PS&E Submittal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
9.9 Third (100%) PS&E Submittal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal - Task 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
10 Regulatory Agency Permitting
11.1 Section 404, Nationwide Permit Authorization 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
11.2 Section 401, Water Quality Certification 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
11.3 Section 1602, Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
11.4 Environmental Commitment Record 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal - Task 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
11 Construction Bid Assistance
12.1 Bidding Assistance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
12.2 Construction Support Services 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal - Task 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0
TOTALS 0 116 40 24 88 24 8 0 64 12 $58,752 $93,177 $151,929
Nolte Associates, Inc. 3/11/2013 - 5:33 PM N:\SJB036700 - Newell\Administration\Change Orders\Alternatives Analysis\20130308 Draft 3 Submittal\Alternatives Analysis Fee.xls - Sum Fee Estimate Page 2 of 2
Date printed 3/8/2013 8:48 PM Approved by Finance { PENDING }PaloAlto_NewellRoad_Cost_020413_QualitativeScreening.xls
Table 1. Cost Estimate for Newell Road Bridge Project Alternatives Screening Analysis
(Qualitative Environmental Screening, No Visual Sims, No Public Outreach)
Walter Ric Fukasawa Chr Bouler Kar
Senior
Advisor
Project
Manager
Deputy
Project
Manager
Task Proj Dir Sr Consult III
Assoc
Consult III Subtotal
Editor / Pub
Spec Invoicing Subtotal Labor Total
Direct
Expenses Total Price
Project Mgmt Activities $0 $0 $0
1.1.2 Alternatives Screening Analysis Project Mgmt 12 20 $5,940 6 $420 $6,360
Alternatives Screening Analysis Report $0 $0 $0
4.7.1.1 Prepare Project Description and Purpose & Need 4 12 18 $5,020 2 $190 $5,210
4.7.1.2 Public Mtg on Proj Descrip, Purpose & Need, Alt Analysis Process 6 6 4 $2,790 $0 $2,790 $0
4.7.1.3 Draft Alts Screening Report (Qualitative Screening Only)10 40 20 $11,200 6 $570 $11,770
4.7.1.4 Public Mtg on Alt Analysis & Alts Screening Rpt 6 6 4 $2,790 $0 $2,790 $0
4.7.1 3 Final Alts Screening Report 4 6 8 $2,830 2 $190 $3,020
Preliminary Environmental Study $0 $0 $0
4.7.1.7 Preliminary Environmental Study 4 10 16 $4,450 2 $190 $4,640
Total hours 46 100 70 12 6
ICF E&P 2012 Billing Rates $220 $165 $120 $95 $70
Subtotals $10,120 $16,500 $8,400 $35,020 $1,140 $420 $1,560 $36,580
Direct Expenses
523.02 Reproductions $136
523.04 Postage and Delivery $100
523.05 Travel, Auto, incld. Mileage at current IRS rate (.555/mile)$300
529.00 Other Reimbursable Expenses $300
Mark up on all non-labor costs and subcontractors:$84
Direct expense subtotal $920
Total price $37,500
Labor Classification
Production Staff
Employee Name
Project Role
TJKM Transportation Consultants
Budget - Proposal for Newell Road Bridge Replacement EIR Project
February 21, 2013
Sr.
Associate Principal Sr Engr Asst.
Engineer
Graphics/
Clerical
Hourly Rate $ 190.00 $ 220.00 $ 140.00 $ 115.00 $ 85.00
TASKS Hours Hours Hours Hours Hours Hours Cost
Existing Traffic Condition - 14 int.6 8 14 $ 2,060
Det. Potential Impact of 8 Future Alt.- $ -
- 2020 & 2035 w/ 8 Alt (16x2 PH scenarios)20 40 10 70 $ 10,550
Growth Factors & Mitigation Measures 12 2 16 30 $ 4,960
TIRE Analysis (13 segments)8 16 4 28 $ 4,220
Bike/Ped Analysis 6 6 4 16 $ 2,440
Parking Analysis 6 6 4 16 $ 2,440
Prepare Draft Traffic Report 20 2 16 4 12 54 $ 7,960
Final Report/Coordination/Conf. meeting 24 4 12 2 42 $ 7,290
Labor Total 102 8 112 34 14 270 $41,920
DIRECT EXPENSES Cost
Counts: 11 intersections (3 hr x2) 11 $ 4,356
Counts: 3 ped/bike counts at bridge (3 peak period x2)3 $ 1,620
Counts: 2-day ADT/Speed for TIRE (13) 13 $ 2,574
Counts: parking occupancy analysis (18 hr) 18 $ 660
Mileage @ $0.55/mile 200 $ 110
Direct Expenses Total $ 9,320
TOTAL $ 51,240
Quantitiy
TOTALS
AMENDMENT NO. ONE TO COST SHARE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN CITY OF PALO ALTO AND SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
REGARDING NEWELL ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
This Amendment No. One to the Cost Share Agreement dated April 9, 2012, (the
“Agreement”) is entered into on____________, 2013, by and between the City of Palo Alto, a
charter city and a municipal corporation of the State of California (“CITY”), and the Santa Clara
Valley Water District, a state of California Special District (“DISTRICT”).
R E C I T A L S:
WHEREAS, the Agreement was entered into between the parties to memorialize the
District’s agreement to pay the local matching funds associated with project planning and design
to the City and the City’s agreement to manage the engineering and environmental assessment
phase of the Newell Road Bridge Replacement Project (“Project”); and
WHEREAS, the District agreed to fund 11.47% (the local share for a Caltrans Highway
Bridge Program Grant) of the cost of the City’s design and environmental assessment contract
for the Project; and
WHEREAS, at the time the Agreement was entered into, the design contract for the
Project was for $522,143, and the District’s matching share contribution was $59,890; and
WHEREAS, the City is amending the design contract to add $167,000 to the contract
amount, and as a result, the District’s matching share will increase by $19,155, to a revised total
of $79,045; and
WHEREAS, the parties wish to amend the Contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and
provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree:
The District will increase its local match funding for the Project in an amount not
to exceed $19,155, as invoiced by the City. As a result, the District’s matching share will not
exceed a total of $79,045.
Except as herein modified, all other provisions of the Agreement, including any
exhibits shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have by their duly authorized
representatives executed this Amendment on the date first above written.
[Signatures on Next Page]
CITY OF PALO ALTO
By: ____________________________
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________
Senior Assistant City Attorney
APPROVED:
_______________________________
Director of Public Works
SANTA CLARA VALLEY
WATER DISTRICT
By:__________________________
Chief Executive Officer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________
Senior Assistant District Counsel
AMENDMENT NO. ONE TO COST SHARE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN CITY OF PALO ALTO AND SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
REGARDING NEWELL ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
This Amendment No. One (Amendment), effective as of the date it is fully
executed by the parties, amends the terms and conditions of the Cost Share Agreement Between
City of Palo Alto (City) and Santa Clara Valley Water District (District) Regarding Newell Road
Bridge Replacement Project dated April 9, 2012 , (Agreement).
RE CIT A L S:
WHEREAS, the Agreement was entered into between the parties to memorialize the
District's agreement to pay City the local matching funds associated with planning and design
and the City's agreement to manage the engineering and environmental assessment phase of the
Newell Road Bridge Replacement Project ("Project"); and
WHEREAS, City received a Caltrans Highway Bridge Program Grant for preliminary
engineering for the Project and the District agreed to fund 11.47% of the Grant as local matching
funds as required by the Grant; and
WHEREAS, City and its design consultant are amending their agreement to add scope in
response to public input regarding identifying and analyzing various alternatives for the Newell
Road Bridge replacement; preparing an enhanced traffic study; and conducting an expanded
public outreach process; and
WHEREAS , City and District desire to amend the Agreement to provide for District to
increase its financial contribution of local matching funds con'elating to the increased
compensation to be provided to City's design consultant.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and
provisions of this Amendment No. One and notwithstanding anything to the contrary stated in
the Agreement, City and District hereby agree as follows:
1. Section II, DUTIES, 2 .1 is hereby amended to increase District's local matching
portion to an amount not to exceed $79,045.00 as invoiced by the City.
2 . All other terms and conditions of the Agreement not otherwise amended as stated
in this Amendment No. One remains in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have set forth below their consent to the terms and
conditions of this Amendment No. One to Agreement #A35815 through the signatures of their
duly authorized representatives.
Amendment No. One to Cost Share Agreement
Newell Road Bridge Replacement Project
City of Palo Alto and SCVWD
June 2013 Page 1 of 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
By: __________________ __
City Manager
Date: ___________ _
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Senior Assistant City Attorney
APPROVED:
Director of Public Works
Amendment No . One to Cost Share Agreement
Newell Road Bridge Replacement Project
City of Palo Alto and SCVWD
June 2013
SANTA CLARA V ALLEY
WATER DISTRICT / ~ BY ~
ChIef Exec lye Officer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_~~~"~O'dv,.~=-_S ~ 'Jo -13
Senior Assistant District Counsel
Page 2 of 2