Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/15/1994, C-3 - PROJECT STUDY REPORT (PSR) FOR PRADO ROAD INTERCHANGE lull^` II�IIIIIIIII �ylppl'II II MEETING DATE: III II'A�I�II CItJ of san suis oBispo FEBRUARY 15, 1994 uCOUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TEM NUMBER:d-.5 FROM: Michael McCluskey, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Project Study Report (PSR) for Prado Road Interchange CAO RECOMMENDATION: By motion: 1) Authorize soliciting of Request for Proposals for preparation of Project Study Report; 2) Authorize City Administrative Officer to execute a contract with the top rated consultant, if within the $75,000 budget DISCUSSION: Why a Project Study Report? As a first step toward constructing a new interchange at Prado Road or modifying existing State highway facilities, a Project Study Report (PSR) must be prepared. The PSR analyzes existing and future traffic conditions, identifies optional designs for modifications to the State highway system, evaluates the performance of these designs, and makes specific findings and recommendations. Once the PSR is accepted by Caltrans a project report is prepared and, once that is approved, detailed design work is undertaken followed by construction. The construction of a new interchange at Route 101 and Prado Road is identified in the draft Circulation Element. The interchange is needed to serve growth envisioned by the draft Land Use Element. More specifically, the interchange will provide direct access to new commercial development west of Route 101 and south of the Central Coast Plaza Shopping Center. How is a PSR Prepared? Attached Exhibit 1 outlines the PSR process. The. first step in the process is for the City to ask Caltrans to prepare the PSR. Staff has done this and, as expected, Caltrans has responded that it does not have staff available to perform the work. Therefore, City staff has prepared the attached scope of work for the Council's review and concurrence. This scope of work has been sent to Caltrans, and received approval as to scope. After advertising, the list of consultants will be narrowed and a group of finalists will be interviewed by City staff and a representative of Caltrans. The final recommendation will be made to the CAO. After all documents are in order, the consultant will begin preparation of the PSR in accordance with Caltrans' prescribed guidelines. The City has requested that the PSR specifically address interchange geometrics which require as little open space acquisition as possible. The PSR, mainly a study of geometric design, will also address potential environmental impacts in broad terms. Detailed environmental review and analysis is the major component of the next step design: the project report. After approval of the project report by Caltrans and the City Council, preparation of plans and specifications is authorized and then fatally construction. C mfl�►r►►��ullill�ppn ������� city of San LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT PSR Page Two FISCAL IMPACTS: The City has received SLOCOG approval of a grant to support up to $75,000 of the PSR's cost using State Highway Account (SHA) funds. Costs greater than $75,000 will be the City's responsibility with reimbursement by area developers. Should cost estimates from consultants exceed $75,000, staff will solicit participation from applicants of development projects and return to the City Council for final approval. However, recent similar projects in the county lead staff to believe the budgeted amount should be sufficient. SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETING THE PSR: The preparation of a PSR involves local, regional, state, and federal agencies. Once the final scope of the project has been agreed to by Caltrans and a Consultant hired, it is the staff's goal that the PSR be completed within ten months. The completed PSR will be submitted to the City Council for concurrence prior to final submittal to Caltrans for approval. Attachments: Exhibit 1: Flow Chart of the PSR Process Exhibit 2: Draft Scope of Work: Prado Road/Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Project Study Report psrprado/mm2 �3- Page 13 Project Study Report Guidelines September 1991 . FLOWCHART FOR THE PREPARATION OF PROJECT STUDY REPORTS TIMI LLNE c�i•-d-D•n) . . CE !.D MS43R LYdl Rq.eu CT r .7 7 . .. Prepare PSR 34 CTAM" er►e16ar s Red STS No PSR esu be esmpkkd Y a anvil resaia crer..a P"Pers PSR TSR PROCESS.wd apse w SCOPE.• STANDARDS 1 7 Buis PSR PSR Preparation 76 140 Armek Mak PDT. Perform Es6iaeevia6 ]eadia Derekp Anarsrnearl E•vve■mnLa Eve.weia.C -0kswLSsSlet,DrafCo . .Feel _J 10 71 Ce.pkee PSR 1 7 SOpmit is CT DsWu N D■uit Review 30 •(temaseaY we PSR-ithee 60 Dale) Dee PSA seed NO Reriwas 7 u 1s Revise - _ w IS 70 Dkusti Reviews •(70 Duret Dime Direekr I 1 Appee•e 177 days 7Tf dare . (6 tdaaua) (17 Maus) • lafsrmatiw be( )Oppiire da aver uas CT prepared PSR'S Note: Timm shove are 'rypieal' tar w Time Perkd ideadfkd is etaue nwy be longer or shorts depending UPOK propa compiesiry. PSR PREPARATION PROCEDURES Exhibit 1 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FRA DO ROAD/LOS OSOS ROAD INTERCHANGE PROJECT STUDY REPORT (PROJECT NO. 94-08A) A INTRODUCTION The City of San Luis Obispo is requesting proposals to prepare a Project Study Report for a proposed Prado Road interchange at its existing intersection with Highway 101. The existing Prado Road currently terminates at its westerly point with Highway 101. A proposal is to build a full freeway interchange to extend Prado Road westerly towards the area known as the Central Coast Plaza and eventually Madonna Road. It is the intent of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo to preserve as much open space as possible. In that vein, the City has a preference for construction of a "single point diamond interchange" as the least amount of additional right-of-way is required. The Consultant shall be free to propose other geometric designs, however, the Consultant should remember that the City's emphasis is on right-of-way preservation. The City has no bias towards a Prado Road overpass or a Highway 101 overpass of Prado Road. Because the spacing of the proposed freeway interchange of Prado Road and Highway 101 is less than existing standards, the City and Caltrans readily acknowledge that an exception will have to be approved by the California Department of Transportation to allow the interchange to construction. Caltrans, District 5 , has indicated that the exception could be received if auxiliary lanes were provided on both sides of the freeway from the existing Madonna Road interchange to the existing Los osos valley Road interchange. It will be incumbent upon the proposer to show capabilities to achieve approval of the required exception. E. SUBMITTAL DEADLINE AND PRE-SUBMI TIL CONFERENCE Your (4) copies of Consultant proposals must be received by the City Clerk's Office no later than Proposals must be delivered or mailed to: City of San Luis Obispo City Clerk's Office 955 Morro Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 1 C�3� ff The City will hold a pre-submittal conference in San Luis Obispo on beginning at 1:00 p.m. at the Public Works Department, 955 Morro Street, San Luis Obispo, CA. The purpose of this conference is to enable perspective consultants to view existing materials, ask staff questions, and review in the field the State and local street network within the project study area. Consultants that wish to attend the pre-submittal conference should contact Pamela King at 805/781-7210 no later than C. ROLE OF STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES The PSR must satisfy all requirements of the California Department of Transportations"s Guidelines for the Preparation of Project Study Reports (September. 1991 as amended) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) . D. EXISTING INFORMATION The following reports and studies are available to assist the Consultant with the preparation of the PSR: 1. Transportation Model (MINUTP, 1991) : As part of preparing the City's new Circulation Element, a traffic model was developed to forecast traffic conditions. The results of this modeling effort led to recommendations for changing both State and local road systems in San Luis Obispo. The traffic model (and documentation) is available for Consultant use. City staff will not provide support for model applications, however. Agency: SLO Public Works Department, Terry Sanville, 805/781-7178 2. Concept Design for Los Osos valley Road Highway Ramps (1992) : As part of the City's Circulation Element studies, concept design was prepared for modifying freeway ramps and local street intersections on the west side of Route 101. (See attached Exhibit 2) . - Agency: SLO Public Works Department, Terry Sanville, 805/781-7178 3. Draft Circulation Element Recommendations for Network Changes (1992) : As a result of the City's traffic modeling studies, and as part of the City's draft Circulation Element, the following street projects within the study area have been recommended (see attached Exhibit B) : (a) Construct a full interchange at Prado Road and Route 101. (b) Extend Prado Road from Route 101 to Madonna Road (4-6 lane arterial) . 2 C'3 S (c) Widen Prado Road between South Higuera and Route 101 (4-6 lane arterial) . (d) Extend Prado Road east of South Higuera Street to connect with Route 227 at Industrial Way (4 lane arterial) . (e) Widen Los Osos Valley Road between Madonna Road and Route 101 (4 lane) . (f) Widen Tank Farm Road between South Higuera and Route 227 (4 lane arterial) . (g) Widen Route 101 to six lanes between Santa Rosa Street and Los Osos Valley Road. Agency: SLO Public Works Department, Terry Sanville, 805/781-7178 4. Final Environmental Impact Report -- 1992 Land Use Element/Circulation Element Updates: This report describes the impacts of the street projects listed in item #3 above. The EIR's technical appendix provides spread sheet information on land use changes within traffic zones and resultant changes (model output) in ADT and level of service (LOS) . Agency: SLO Community Development Department, Glen Matteson, 805/781-7165 S. Private Development Traffic Studies (1993) : Consultants working for sponsors of commercial development west of Route 101 (Central Coast Plaza Expansion) have evaluated the project's traffic impacts. The focus of this analysis was to suggest a phased development strategy for the Prado Road interchange tied to phased development of the commercial center. Agency: SLO Public Works Department, Terry Sanville, 805/781-7178 6. MINUTP modeling Studies of Costco Development (1994) : DKS Associates conducted a MINUTP model evaluation of the development of a 150,000 square foot warehouse retail store on Madonna Road west of Route 101. The study evaluated the impacts of extending a collector street from the warehouse store site to Los Osos Valley Road. Agency: SLO Public Works Department, Terry Sanville, 805/781-7178 3 C'3-+6 7. Phase I Circulation Study, DRS Associates (1988) : DKS Associates assisted the City in preparing its draft Circulation Element. As part of that effort, the Consultant produced a report that evaluated existing transportation conditions throughout the City with special studies of neighborhood traffic management and downtown circulation and parking. Agency: SLO Public Works Department, Terry Sanville, 805/781-7178 8. Aerial photographs on mylar, Scale: 1" = 501 , flown 1981, for all existing City arterial streets within the project study area. Agency: SLO Public Works Department, Wayne Peterson, 805/781-7200 9. Route 101 as-built plans (dated ) : Hard copies are available at Caltrans, District 5. Microfiche may also be available at Caltrans, District 5. Mylars should be filed at Caltrans Headquarters in Sacramento. Agency: Caltrans, District 5, Kathy DiGarzia, 805/549-3459 E. DESIRED ELEMENTS OF THE PROJECT STUDY REPORT Attached Exhibit 1 shows the study area for the Project Study Report. 1. City staff expects as the course of the PSR proceeds that a verification will be requested and necessary of the City's existing computer based traffic model. 2. The City requests that additional detail be provided to the final PSR approval schematic design such that the City can establish right-of-way setback lines for future acquisition and development. 3. That the interchange design will consider both options of a single point diamond interchange considering Prado Road at grade, versus Highway 101 at grade. Other schematic designs may also be considered. However, once again, it is the City's intention to limit right-of-way acquisition of open space areas. 4. The PSR should include an analysis of the feasibility of a phased construction schedule. In other words, is it logical or feasible to incrementally construct the final preferred schematic alignment? 4 C'3-7 5. A complete technical appendix that includes all worksheets., model output, and other data and/or documentation which supports the findings and recommendations of the Project Study Report. 6. The following documents: Administrative draft PSR (10 copies) Draft PSR (3 copies) Final Draft PSR ("camera ready" form) F. GENERAL SERVICES PROVIDED BY CONSULTANT In completing the PSR and related studies, the City wants the Consultant to be responsible for: 1. Inter-agency coordination and consultation with Caltrans, FHWA, and local/regional transportation agencies such as the County of San Luis Obispo and the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments. 2. Liaison with the sponsors of proposed commercial development and property owners affected by area improvements or those required to participate in capital project funding. 3. Obtaining and review all existing transportation plans and background information that is pertinent to the preparation of the PSR. 4. Preparation of mapping materials, consistent with Caltrans standards, necessary to evaluate alternatives and present recommended modifications. S. Preparation of all requests for exceptions to Caltrans or FHWA standards for project elements described within the PSR in a form prescribed by Caltrans. 6. Presentation of report findings and recommendations to the San Luis Obispo City Council and other agencies as needed. G. ANTICIPATED WORK SCHEDULE It is the City's objective to: 1. Have Consultant schedule and conduct a "kick-off" meeting with Consultant, developer, and Caltrans' representatives and appropriate local transportation agency representatives within 14 calendar days of the execution of consultant services agreement. 5 L'3-ff 2. Receive ten (10) copies of a complete administrative draft of the PSR (including all findings and recommendations) within 150 calendar days of the signing of a consultant services agreement. if different, see paragraph H.2 .L. 3. Complete agency review of the administrative draft PSR and transmit comments to Consultant within 45 calendar days of receipt from administrative draft PSR. 4. Receive three (3) copies of a draft of the report from Consultant within 60 calendar days of receipt of agency comments. 5. Complete focused agency review of the draft report and transmit comments to Consultant within 21 calendar days of receipt of draft PSR. 6. Complete final draft and transmit "camera ready" copy of final draft PSR and a computer diskette copy of report in Wordperfect 5. 1 within 14 calendar days of receipt of City final comments. All maps and drawings included within the report shall be prepared using AUTOCAD (Release 12) and a computer diskette copy shall be provided. H. THE PROPOSAL 1. Format and requirements: Although there is no maximum proposal length, proposals should be kept to the minimum length necessary to address the requirements of the RFP. Proposals shall be 8" x 11" with pages numbered sequentially. Padding the proposal with "boiler plate" material is strongly discouraged. 2. Proposal contents: a. Firm identification: 1. Firm name and address. 2. Name and telephone number of contact person. 3. A list of the firm's principals with experience, background, academic training and registration. b. Provide the following information for each sub- consultant: 1. Name, address and telephone number. 2 . Contemplated role of the firm in the project. C. Location of office where this work would be performed. 6 d. List by personnel for all firms. Indicate experience, background, academic training and registration. Describe anticipated role in the project, and how the staff would be organized. e. Description of similar projects that the firm, its personnel, subcontractors and associates have performed previously. For each project listed include location, description of work, client and construction cost. List at least three projects undertaken by the firm, the original budget (in working days and cost, and the final budget respectively) . Indicate reasons for under/over runs in either. Provide contacts for reference. f. Description of experience with Caltrans in coordinating and preparing similar projects including the phasing of projects and the firm's experience in attaining Caltrans approvals. g. Experience in managing an interdisciplinary team of professionals and sub-consultants. h. Knowledge of State and Federal environmental and project development rules and procedures. i. Project Understanding: Describe the project background and process as relating to requirements for consultant qualifications. j . Work Program: Based on your understanding of the project, list all required tasks to complete the work. k. Work Budget: Provide a budget breakdown to demonstrate your understanding of the project needs. This budget will not be binding; the final agreement will be the result of a precise scope of work and a negotiated compensation amount. The breakdown should include itemized person-hours, rates and costs for all required work tasks, as proposed. 1. Project Schedule: Provide schedule for all work tasks. M. Provide a statement of what especially qualifies your firm to perform this work. n. Signature: Proposal shall be signed by an authorized corporate office whose signature is binding upon the firm. o. Valid Period: Include a statement that proposal will remain valid for 60 days. 7 �3 io P. Conflict of Interest: Proposal shall include a statement that no conflicts of interest exist in the provision of these services. q. (Optional) : Information, experience, personnel, timing availability of manpower to perform Design Services. r. Appendix: Include supplemental information, if any, such as firm brochure, fees for additional services, etc. , at the end of the proposal. I. THE SELECTION PROCESS The City will establish a screening committee to review all proposals received and to rank the proposals. The City may decide to interview consultants with the most competitive proposals. Key criteria to be used by the City in selecting a consultant or consultant team include the following: 1. Demonstrated experience in preparing PSR's for Caltrans, traffic and transportation analysis, cost estimating of highway projects, and financial planning for project construction. 2. Consultant's understanding of the City of San Luis Obispo's desires and general approach to the project as demonstrated in the Project Understanding and Work Program. 3. Proposal requirements established in this RFP are included in the Proposal. 4. Qualifications of Consultant's staff being assigned to this project. S. Demonstrated ability of the Consultant to perform quality work, control costs, and meet time schedules. 6. Demonstrated knowledge of highway and traffic signal design. 7. Ability to work effectively with City, regional and Caltrans transportation staff. The top ranked firm will be invited to refine its proposal and negotiate a consultant services agreement with the City. J. FOR MORE INFORMATION . . . Contact Michael McCluskey, Director of Public Works, 805/781-7210. pradorlp/mm2 8 aEMM L_Zzia ®® CITY OF SANLUIS OBISP I� ��` I, O FREEWAY INTERCHANGE PROJECT STUDY REPORT z �► ��' � 0000.., � � �� 019 V - \4 outh re 9 c I ' 1 r r e = i L d ♦ / mC _lair.- n. W u+os � /7 . �/ v .�' �I� ODS �r . �'�~,,5, e i f \ •�• . ;��„ �- a Aa ew I i CI}.4�ITi ' r + i M n' Tank Farm Road '• General Study \� Area r- 1` e3 /� Boyle Engineering Corp. Alpha Engineering Group Penfield and Smith 973 Higuera Street 3841 N. Freeway Blvd. PO Box 98 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Suite 280 Santa Barbara, CA 93102 Sacramento, CA 958341929 id Evans & Assoc DKS Associates Moore Iacofano Goltsman Inc. .,t10 Iowa Ave., Ste. 230 1956 Weber St., Ste. 300 1802 Fath Street Riverside, CA 92507-3402 Oakland, CA 94612 Berkeley, CA 94710 TJKM Transportation Frederic R. Harris, Inc. Barton-Aschman Associates Consultants 222 W. Sixth St., Ste. 950 75 N. Fair Oaks Avenue 4637 Chabot Dr., Ste. 214 San Pedro, CA 90731 PO Box 91090 Pleasanton, CA 94566 Pasadena, CA 91109 JHK & Associates Bissel & Karn CH2M Hill PO Box 193727 5890 Stoneridge Drive 2107 N. First Street San Francisco, CA 94119 Pleasanton, CA 94588 Suite 210 San Jose, CA 95131 Wiildan Associates Nolte & Associates McGlassen & Associates 374 Poll St., Ste 101 60 S. Market St., Ste. 300 4630 W. Jacquelyn, Ste. 108 Ventura, CA 93001-22613 San Jose, CA 95113 Fresno, CA 93772 Siegfried Engineering ASL Consulting Engrs. Engeo Incorporated 45 Coronado Avenue 4880 Santa Rosa Road 2401 Crow Canyon Road :kton, CA 952042396 Suite 170 Suite 200 Camarillo, CA 93012 San Ramon, CA 94583-1545 Kittelson & Associates Hawkins/Mark-Tell Sorensen Engineering 1455 Response Road PO Box 619008 24 Eagle Hill Suite 120 Roseville, CA 95678-9866 Kensington, CA 94707 Sacramento, CA 95815 Mark Thomas & Co. Inc. Par Environmental Services Justin F. Farmer 90 Archer Street PO Box 160756 223 E. Imperial Highway,Ste.155 San Jose, CA 95112 Sacramento, CA 95816-0756 Fullerton, CA 92635 RRM Design Group EDA Korve Engineering 3026 S. Higuera Street 1320 Nipomo Street 201 S. Lake Ave., Ste. 706 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Pasadena, CA 91101 psrllst/mm2 W-7-TING AGENDA C!3 ITEM # FEND } 1994 MEMORANDUM sAN LUES G3;SPO,c February 14, 1993 To: John Dunn From: Mike McCluske ' subject: Agenda Item -- RFP for Prado Rd. Interchange Attached is a revised RFP which incorporates Caltrans comments which were received last thursday. The changes fall into approximately three categories: 1. The scope was expanded to include a section to deal with how the project is to be financed. 2 . Language was added to emphasize a traffic study, the environmental concerns and the need for a design exception to the one mile spacing of interchanges rule. 3 . Language was added to tone down the preference for a single point diamond interchange and encourage the consultant to study a full diamond and other geometrics. Also added to the RFP were some standard city language on insurance and project cost estimates and how they will be used in the evaluation process. COUNCIL ❑ CDD DIR R�ICAO ❑ FIN DIR D46CAO ❑ FIRE CHIEF 6105ATTORNEY !Q PYd DIR B`CLERK10MG ❑ POLICE CHF �. ❑ MGNT TEAM ❑ REC DIR ;E3,9 READ FILE U UTIL DIR i /r/LE 0 PERS 0I9 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS PRADO ROAD/LOS OSOS ROAD INTERCHANGE PROJECT STUDY REPORT (SPECIFICATION NO. 94-08A) A. INTRODUCTION The City of San Luis Obispo is requesting proposals to prepare a Project Study Report (PSR) for a proposed Prado Road interchange at its existing intersection with Highway 101. Prado Road currently terminates at its westerly point with Highway 101. The project is a full freeway interchange to extend Prado Road westerly towards the area known as the Central Coast Plaza and eventually to Madonna Road. The San Luis Obispo City Council intends to preserve as much open space as possible. To achieve this objective, the City prefers construction of a "single point diamond interchange" because the least additional right-of-way is required. The .Consultant shall review other geometric interchange designs, but should remember that the City's emphasis is open space preservation without degrading acceptable service levels. The City has no preference for either a Prado Road overpass or a Highway 101 overpass of Prado Road, however, Caltrans has indicated a Highway 101 overpass may be infeasible due to earthwork considerations. Because the spacing of the proposed freeway interchange of Prado Road and Highway 101 is less than existing FHWA standards, the City and Caltrans readily acknowledge that a design exception will have to be approved by the California Department of Transportation to allow the interchange. Caltrans District 5 and FHWA, have indicated that the exception could be granted if auxiliary lanes were provided on both sides of the freeway from the existing Madonna Road interchange to the existing Los Osos Valley Road interchange. It will be incumbent upon the proposer to demonstrate capabilities to achieve approval of the required exception. B. SUBMITTAL DEADLINE AND PRE-SUBMITTAL CONFERENCE Four (4) copies of Consultant proposals must be received by the City Clerk's Office no later than Proposals must be delivered or mailed to: City of San Luis Obispo City Clerk's Office 990 Palm Street/P.O. Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100 1 The City will hold a pre-submittal conference in San Luis Obispo on beginning at 1: 00 p.m. in the Public Works Conference Room, 955 Morro Street, San Luis Obispo, CA. At this conference prospective consultants may view existing materials, ask questions, and review in the field the State and local street network within the project study area. Consultants wishing to attend the pre-submittal conference should call Pamela King at 805/781-7210 no later than C. ROLE OF STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES The PSR must satisfy all requirements of the California Department of Transportations"s Guidelines for the Preparation of Project Study Reports (September, 1991 as amended) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) . D. EXISTING INFORMATION The following reports and studies are available to assist the Consultant with the preparation of the PSR: 1. Transportation Model (MINUTP, 1991) : As part of preparing the City's new Circulation Element, a traffic model was developed to forecast traffic conditions. The results led to recommendations for changing both State and local road systems in San Luis Obispo. The traffic model (with documentation) is available for Consultant use. City staff will not provide support for model applications, however. Agency: SLO Public Works Department, Terry Sanville, 805/781-7178 2. Concept Design for Los Osos Valley Road Highway Ramps (1992) : As part of the City's Circulation Element studies, concept design was prepared for modifying freeway ramps and local street intersections on the west side of Route 101. (See attached Exhibit 2) . Agency: SLO Public Works Department, Terry Sanville, 805/781-7178 3. Draft Circulation Element Recommendations for Network Changes (1992) : As a result of the City's traffic modeling studies, and as part of the City's draft Circulation Element, the following street projects within the study area have been recommended (see attached Exhibit B) : (a) Construct a full interchange at Prado Road and Route 101. (b) Extend Prado Road from Route 101 to Madonna Road (4-6 lane arterial) . 2 (c) Widen Prado Road between South Higuera and Route 101 (4-6 lane arterial) . (d) Extend Prado Road east of South Higuera Street to connect with Route 227 at Industrial Way (4 lane arterial) . (e) Widen Los Osos Valley Road between Madonna Road and Route 101 (4 lane) . (f) Widen Tank Farm Road between South Higuera and Route 227 (4 lane arterial) . (g) Widen Route 101 to six lanes between Santa Rosa Street and Los Osos Valley Road. Agency: SLO Public Works Department, Terry Sanville, 805/781-7178 4. Final Environmental Impact . Report -- 1992 Land Use Element/Circulation Element Updates: This report describes the impacts of the street projects listed in item #3 above. The EIR's technical appendix provides spread sheet information on land use changes within traffic zones and resultant changes (model output) in ADT and level of service (LOS) . Agency: SLO Community Development Department, Glen Matteson, 805/781-7165 5. Private Development Traffic Studies (1993) : Consultants working for sponsors of commercial development west of Route 101 (Central Coast Plaza Expansion) have evaluated the project's traffic impacts. The focus of this analysis was to suggest a phased development strategy for the Prado Road interchange tied to phased development of the commercial center. Agency: SLO Public Works Department, Terry Sanville, 805/781-7178 6. MINUTP modeling Studies of Costco Development (1994) : DKS Associates conducted a MINUTP model evaluation of the development of a 150, 000 square foot warehouse retail store on Madonna Road west of Route 101. The study evaluated the impacts of extending a collector street from the warehouse store site to Los Osos Valley Road. Agency: SLO Public Works Department, Terry Sanville, 805/781-7178 3 7. Phase I Circulation Study, DRS Associates (1988) : DKS Associates assisted the City in preparing its draft Circulation Element. As part of that effort, the Consultant produced a report that evaluated existing transportation conditions throughout the City with special studies of neighborhood traffic management and downtown circulation and parking. Agency: SLO Public Works Department, Terry Sanville, 805/781-7178 8. Aerial photographs on mylar, Scale: 1" = 501 , flown 1981, for all existing City arterial streets within the project study area. Agency: SLO Public Works Department, Wayne Peterson, 805/781-7200 9. Route 101 as-built plans (dated ) : Hard copies are available at Caltrans, District 5. Microfiche may also be available at Caltrans, District 5. Mylars should be filed at Caltrans Headquarters in Sacramento. Agency: Caltrans, District 5, Margaret Carrio, 805/549-3241 10. Caltrans Conceptual Interchange Designs (1990) . Previous conceptual designs using a full interchange and partial cloverleaf. Agency: SLO Public Works Department, Terry Sanville, 805/781-7178 E. DESIRED ELEMENTS OF THE PROJECT STUDY REPORT Attached Exhibit 1 shows the study area for the Project Study Report. 1. City staff expects as the course of the PSR proceeds that a verification will be requested and necessary of the City's existing computer based traffic model. 2. Although identified in the PSR guidelines, the City wishes to place special emphasis on the need for a traffic study of the Highway 101 corridor within the study area, based upon full implementation of the City's General Plan Land Use Element. 3. The City requests that additional detail be provided to the final PSR approval schematic design such that the City can establish right-of-way setback lines for future acquisition and development and such that Caltrans staff can make accurate right-of-way cost estimates. 4 4. The City desires that the interchange design consider both options of a single point diamond interchange considering Prado Road at grade, versus Highway 101 at grade. A full standard diamond and other schematic designs should also be considered. However, once again, it is the City's intention to limit right-of-way acquisition of open space areas without degradation of acceptable service levels. Should the results of the initial environmental inventory indicate highly sensitive areas, an "avoidance" alternative should also be considered. 5. The PSR should include an analysis of the feasibility of a phased construction schedule. In other words, is it logical or feasible to incrementally construct the final preferred schematic alignment? 6. A complete technical appendix that includes all worksheets, model output, and other data and/or documentation which supports the findings and recommendations of the Project Study Report. 7. The PSR shall include a financing section detailing the various resources which will be used to construct the ultimately selected interchange. S. The following documents: Administrative draft PSR (10 copies) Draft PSR (3 copies) Final Draft PSR ("camera ready" form) F. GENERAL SERVICES PROVIDED BY CONSULTANT In completing the PSR and related studies, the City wants the Consultant to be responsible for: 1. Inter-agency coordination and consultation with Caltrans, FHWA, and local/regional transportation agencies such as the County of San Luis Obispo and the San Luis. Obispo Council of Governments. 2. Liaison with the sponsors of proposed commercial development and property owners affected by area improvements or those required to participate in capital project funding. 3. Obtaining and review all existing transportation and land use plans and background information that is pertinent to the preparation of the PSR. 4. Preparation of mapping materials, consistent with Caltrans standards, necessary to evaluate alternatives and present recommended modifications. 5 S. Preparation of all requests for exceptions to Caltrans or FHWA standards for project elements described within the PSR in a form prescribed by Caltrans. 6. Presentation of report findings and recommendations to the San Luis Obispo City Council and other agencies as needed. G. ANTICIPATED WORK SCHEDULE It is the City's objective to: 1. Have Consultant schedule and conduct a "kick-off" meeting with Consultant, developer, and Caltrans' representatives and appropriate local transportation agency representatives within 14 calendar days of the execution of consultant services agreement. 2. Receive ten (10) copies of a complete administrative draft of the PSR (including all findings and recommendations) within 150 calendar days of the signing of a consultant services agreement. If different, see paragraph H. 2 .L. 3. Complete agency review of the administrative draft PSR and transmit comments to Consultant within 45 calendar days of receipt from administrative draft PSR. 4. Receive three (3) copies of a draft of the report from Consultant within 60 calendar days of receipt of agency comments. 5. Complete focused agency review of the draft report and transmit comments to Consultant within 21 calendar days of receipt of draft PSR. 6. Complete final draft and transmit "camera ready" copy of final draft PSR and a computer diskette copy of report in Wordperfect 5. 1 within 14 calendar days of receipt of City final comments. All maps and drawings included within the report shall be prepared using AUTOCAD (Release 12) and a computer diskette copy shall be provided. H. THE PROPOSAL 1. Format and requirements: Although there is no maximum proposal length, proposals should be kept .to the minimum length necessary to address the requirements of the RFP. Proposals shall be 8" x 11" with pages numbered sequentially. Padding the proposal with "boilerplate" material is strongly discouraged. 6 2. Proposal contents: a. Firm identification: 1. Firm name and address. 2. Name and telephone number of contact person. 3. A list of the firm's principals with experience, background, academic training and registration. b. Information for each sub-consultant: 1. Name, address and telephone number. 2. Contemplated role of the firm in the project. C. Location of office where this work would be performed. .d. List of personnel for all firms. Indicate experience, background, academic training and registration. Describe anticipated role in the project, and how the staff would be organized. e. Description of similar projects that the firm, its personnel, subcontractors and associates have performed previously. For each project listed include location, description of work, client and construction cost. List at least three projects undertaken by the firm, the original budget (in working days and cost, and the final budget respectively) . Indicate reasons for under/over runs in either. Provide contacts for reference. f. Description of experience with Caltrans in coordinating and preparing similar projects including the phasing of projects and the firm's experience in attaining Caltrans approvals. g. Experience in managing an multi-disciplinary team of professionals and sub-consultants. h. Knowledge of .State and Federal environmental and project development rules and procedures. i. Project Understanding: Describe the project background and process as relating to requirements for consultant qualifications. j . Work Program: Based on your understanding of the project, list all required tasks to complete the work. 7 k. Work Budget: Provide a budget breakdown to demonstrate your understanding of the project needs. This budget will not be binding; the final agreement will be the result of a precise scope of work and a negotiated compensation amount. The breakdown should include itemized person-hours, rates and costs for all required work tasks, as proposed. It is assumed that these cost estimates are all inclusive (personnel, materials, equipment, travel, incidental costs, etc. ) The City will not use cost estimates as a selection criteria for hiring a consultant. However, for purposes of ascertaining knowledge of the project, the City will use this information in judging the Consultant's ability to estimate workload and overall knowledge of the requirements of the project. 1. Project Schedule: Provide schedule for all work tasks. M. Insurance: . Firms filing proposals for this project must provide documentation that they comply with the City's insurance requirements as specified on Exhibit 2 . n. Provide a statement of what especially qualifies your firm to perform this work. o. Signature: Proposal shall be signed by an authorized corporate office whose signature is binding upon the firm. p. Valid Period: Include a statement that proposal will remain valid for 60 days. q. Conflict of Interest: Proposal shall include a statement that no conflicts of interest exist in the provision of these services. r. (Optional) : Information, experience, personnel, timing availability of staff to perform Design Services. S. Appendix: Include supplemental information; if any, such as firm brochure, fees for additional services, etc. , at the end of the proposal. I. THE SELECTION PROCESS The City will establish a screening committee to review all proposals received and to rank the proposals. The City will interview the top three or four consultants with the most competitive proposals. A representative of Caltrans, District 5, will participate during the interview. Key criteria to be used by the City in selecting a consultant or consultant team include the following: 8 1. Demonstrated experience in preparing PSR's for Caltrans, traffic and transportation analysis, cost estimating of highwayprojects, and financial planning for project construction. 2. Consultant's understanding of the City of San Luis Obispo's desires and general approach to the project as demonstrated in the Project Understanding and Work Program. 3. Proposal requirements established in this RFP are included in the Proposal. 4. Qualifications of Consultant's staff being assigned to this project. S. Demonstrated ability of the Consultant to perform quality work, control costs, and meet time schedules. 6. Demonstrated knowledge of highway and traffic signal design. 7. Ability to work effectively with City, regional and Caltrans transportation staff. The top ranked firm will be invited to refine its proposal and negotiate a consultant services agreement with the City. J. FOR MORE INFORMATION . . . Contact Michael McCluskey, Director of Public Works, 805/781-7210. pradorfp/mm2 9 INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS: Consultant Services The Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, employees, or subcontractors. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: 1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). 2. Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87)covering Automobile Liability,code 1 (any auto). 3. Workers' Compens#tion insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. 4. Errors and Omissions Liability insurance as appropriate to the consultant's profession. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits no less than: 1. General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. 2. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. 4. Errors and Omissions Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence. Deductibles and Self-insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects 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. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 1. The City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, official, employees, agents or volunteers. 2. For any claims related to this project, the Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. 3. Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers. 4. The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. 5. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, cancelled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M.Best's rating of no less than A:VII. Verification of Coverae. Contractor shall furnish the City with a certificate of insurance showing maintenance of the required insurance coverage. Original endorsements effecting general liability and automobile liability coverage required by this clause must also be provided. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences.