mid-coast corridor transit project statement of … · 2007. 3. 15. · statement of work a....

Contract Number: 5000810 Exhibit A

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT STATEMENT OF WORK

A. INTRODUCTION

SANDAG is seeking a qualified Consultant to prepare a Draft and Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIS/SEIR) on the Mid-Coast Corridor from Old Town to University City. The environmental documents shall be prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). SANDAG shall serve as the lead agency for purposes of CEQA, and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) shall serve as the lead agency for purposes of NEPA. The SEIS/SEIR would build on the Alternatives Analysis and DEIS/DEIR completed in 1995 and the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Balboa Extension completed in 2001. The Consultant shall provide engineering services in support of the SEIS/SIER.

Subsequent to successful completion of the environmental document, SANDAG anticipates receiving FTA approval to enter the Preliminary Engineering phase of the Project. The Consultant would assist SANDAG with preparation of the documentation and associated efforts required to gain FTA approval to enter Preliminary Engineering. The Consultant shall perform Preliminary Engineering on the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) and assist SANDAG in gaining FTA approval to enter Final Design. The Consultant also shall assist SANDAG with the annual preparation of the federal New Starts application for Section 5309 funding in accordance with FTA’s policies and procedures.

In November 2004, San Diego County voters approved Proposition A extending the TransNet sales tax for transportation through 2048. SANDAG subsequently established the TransNet Early Action Program, which includes selected priority transportation infrastructure improvement projects slated for early implementation. On January 28, 2005, the SANDAG Board approved inclusion of the Mid-Coast Light Rail Transit (LRT) Project in the TransNet Early Action Program as a “Tier 1 Project.” As a “Tier 1 Project,” the Mid-Coast LRT Project is one of three projects, and the only transit project to receive the highest priority for implementation. The selected Consultant shall assist SANDAG in developing methods and strategies to expedite implementation of the Project as well as possess the knowledge, skills, and experience necessary to achieve this goal.

As the Mid-Coast LRT Project Locally Preferred Alternative for planning purposes is further developed and defined through the preparation of the SEIS/SEIR and the Preliminary Engineering phase, the selected Consultant shall continually identify opportunities to improve upon the cost effectiveness of the project as well as providing designs that will gain community acceptance and support. Implementation of the Mid-Coast LRT Project is contingent upon receipt of FTA Section 5309 New Starts funds and, as such, will need to meet FTA criteria for cost effectiveness. Further, community acceptance and support of this Project are critical to its success. The selected consultant shall possess the ability to continually focus on cost-effective solutions as well as designing the project to fit well into the various communities it serves.


B. PROJECT BACKGROUND

The Mid-Coast Corridor lies midway along the coastal strip, north of downtown San Diego. The Corridor consists of land bounded by the Pacific Ocean on the west, Del Mar and Carmel Valley to the north, Kearny and Sorrento Mesas to the east, and Old Town/Mission Valley on the south (Figure A).

In 1991, the Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) began planning studies for the Mid-Coast Corridor in accordance with state and federal environmental processes. In 1995, MTDB adopted a Locally Preferred Alternative for Planning Purposes (LPA) for the Mid-Coast Corridor that included an 11-mile LRT project. The Mid-Coast LRT would extend the existing San Diego Trolley from the Old Town Station to University City. The Alternatives Analysis/Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Draft Environmental Impact Report (AA/DEIS/DEIR) was completed in February 1995 and the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) was completed in December 1995. Also in 1995, MTDB segmented the light rail project into a two-phased project. The first phase extended from Old Town to Balboa Avenue (Balboa Extension) and the second phase from Balboa Avenue to University City (University City Extension). PE and a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) were completed on the Balboa project in 2001. The University City project was included in the 1995 Draft EIS.

The following milestone environmental documents have been prepared:

• Mid-Coast Corridor Alternatives Analysis/Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Draft Environmental Impact Report, February 1995

• Final Environmental Impact Report for the Mid-Coast Corridor, December 1995

• Mid-Coast Corridor Locally Preferred Alternative Report, November 1995

• Mid-Coast Corridor Project Balboa Extension and Nobel Drive Coaster Station – Final Environmental Impact Statement Volumes 1 and 2, June 2001.

The above documents and other reference materials for this project can be accessed at ftp://ftpx.sandag.org under the Public Directory called “pub” in the “Mid-Coast” folder.

In July 2003, all MTDB transit planning and development activities transferred to the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) as a result of state legislation. On December 19, 2003, SANDAG approved an update to the LPA alignment for the Mid-Coast LRT Project in the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) and North University City area. This alignment reflected the renewed desire by both the University City community and UCSD to better serve the UCSD campus and University Towne Centre (UTC). The revised alignment would directly serve the UCSD campus on both the west and east sides of Interstate 5, and would integrate the LRT with other existing and planned transit services at UTC, located in the heart of University City where a major transit center exists today. The SANDAG Board of Directors approved the UCSD West LRT alignment with Variation A along Regents Road/Executive Drive and Variation B along Genesee Avenue through the University City area that directly serves UCSD and UTC as the updated LPA for planning purposes. In February 2003, after extensive consideration of non-rail alternatives, the MTD Board reaffirmed its strategy to pursue the Mid-Coast LRT Project. The Mid-Coast LRT is included in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), MOBILITY 2030, under both the Revenue Constrained Plan and Reasonably Expected Revenue scenarios.

2

ftp://ftpx.sandag.org/


The Mid-Coast LRT Project was included in the re-authorization of TransNet (Proposition A), which was passed by the San Diego County voters in November 2004. On April 15, 2005, the SANDAG Transportation Committee approved combining the Balboa and University City phases into a single project from Old Town to University City for the purposes of completing the CEQA/NEPA and FTA New Starts Processes. A Notice of Intent (NOI) and Scoping is not required under the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) as the FTA has confirmed that these requirements were met as part of the 1995 AA/DEIS/DEIR. A Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Scoping will be required under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The Locally Preferred Alternative for Planning Purposes (LPA) for the Mid-Coast Project (Figure A) would extend the existing light rail system from the Old Town Transit Center to University City. The Project would begin south of the San Diego River and east of the San Diego Northern Railway (SDNR) track and run within the SDNR right-of-way (R/W), owned by MTDB (now known as the Metropolitan Transit System, or MTS) to Gilman Drive. The SDNR tracks are maintained by the North County Transit District (NCTD) and used by several operators, including Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF), Amtrak, and the Coaster Commuter Rail.

The Project would begin at the point where the Green Line curves away from the SDNR R/W and would continue north on a new bridge over the San Diego River and Friars Road. A study of the San Diego River crossing was included in the Mission Valley West LRT Environmental Impact Report (EIR), November 1991, by MTDB, but not included in the 404 and 1601 Permits for the Mission Valley West LRT Project. The segment of the SDNR from Taylor Street to Tecolote Road is a single track (Figure B-2, No. 19). While double-tracking the SDNR is not a requirement of the Mid-Coast Project, the Mid-Coast Project will have to be planned in a way that allows for construction of a second track for the SDNR. A few years ago, NCTD completed the False Bay Siding Project, adding a second track from Tecolote Road to Balboa Avenue. As it continues north, the alignment would cross under the Tecolote Road Bridge and run between the SDNR tracks and Morena Boulevard. The alignment would cross under the Clairemont Drive bridge and then over Balboa Avenue on a new bridge. Three stations with parking are proposed in this section of the alignment at Tecolote Road, Clairemont Drive, and Balboa Avenue.

From Balboa Avenue to State Route 52 (SR-52), the SDNR again is single track. North of Jutland Avenue, the alignment would cross Rose Creek on a new bridge, then rise to a structure over the SDNR near the terminus of Santa Fe Street along the west side of the railway. The alignment would cross under SR 52 to continue north to Gilman Drive/La Jolla Colony Drive. The LPA alignment would cross La Jolla Colony Drive at-grade and join the east side of the Interstate 5 (I-5) right-of-way, climbing to the north at the approximate grade of the freeway. As it approaches the Nobel Drive interchange, the alignment would pass under the off-ramp and under the Nobel Drive Bridge to the University Center Lane Station, which includes a parking structure and bus bays (Figure B-1, No. 12). The alignment then would rise to cross over the I-5 freeway and La Jolla Village Drive to the west side of I-5 at the northeast corner of the Veterans Administration (VA) Medical Center property.

The alignment then would cross under Gilman Drive in a cut-and-cover tunnel. It would emerge from the tunnel and continue along the west side of Pepper Canyon to a below-grade but open air station serving the University of California at San Diego West Campus, south of Voigt Drive (Figure B-1, No. 11). The LPA then would continue north in a cut-and-cover tunnel, and turn east along the south side of Voigt Drive. The alignment would continue easterly and run at-grade on the south side of Voigt Drive,

3


crossing over I-5 parallel to the Voigt Drive Bridge. The LPA alignment would continue along the south side of Voigt Drive to a station without parking at either Scripps Hospital (Figure B-1, No. 1) or Campus Point (Figure B-1, No. 2). The LPA adopted in 2003 included two alignment variations from Voigt Drive to UTC, one along Regents Road and Executive Drive (Figure B-1, No. 3) and another along Genesee Avenue (Figure B-1, No. 4) to the terminus at the southeast corner of La Jolla Village Drive and Genesee Avenue.

D. WORK DESCRIPTION

The scope of work includes, but is not limited to, the following:

1. ADMINISTRATION AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT

1.1 Task Order Development

For the first item of work, the Consultant shall prepare a draft task order including a critical path method (CPM) schedule, a detailed scope of work, and a fee estimate. The Consultant shall organize tasks in a logical work breakdown structure (WBS). Tasks shall be discrete items of work that are stated in terms of deliverables or other measurable results. Tasks shall have reasonable durations, not to exceed four weeks, with backup where appropriate. Review periods shall be included in the schedule. For each task, resources (approved staff from the Consultant Team, SANDAG staff, or outside agency staff) and their level of effort (from 1 to 100%) shall be identified. Resource utilization charts shall be provided to demonstrate that the proposed schedule does not result in the over-utilization of resources. The CPM schedule shall display the float, early start, early finish, late start and late finish dates, and predecessors and successors for each task. Schedules shall be consistent with the schedule format that has been developed by SANDAG so that they can be rolled up into the same summary schedule as used for all other TransNet Early Action Projects.

The Consultant shall write a detailed scope of work that directly follows the work breakdown structure from the CPM schedule. Any assumptions made while estimating the cost of each task shall be spelled out in clearly the scope of work. The fee estimate also shall directly follow the work breakdown structure (WBS), with sub-totals at each WBS level. The Consultant shall allow SANDAG one month to process a Task Order once agreement on the Task Order has been reached with the SANDAG Project Manager. The format of task orders shall be subject to approval by SANDAG.

1.2 Contract/Project Monitoring, Reporting, and Scheduling

SANDAG will require the Consultant to follow the CPM Schedule, Scope, and Budget contained in each approved Task Order. Upon receipt of a signed Task Order from SANDAG, the Consultant shall baseline the CPM schedule. Each month the Consultant shall prepare an invoice including staff hours and direct expenses.

Accompanying each invoice shall be an updated schedule for each open task order and a Monthly Progress Report. The format for schedules and progress reports shall be subject to approval by SANDAG. The invoice format shall be provided by SANDAG. For all tasks, either the actual start date or the currently forecasted start date shall be identified. Similarly, the actual finish date or currently forecasted finish date shall be identified for each task. All tasks with an actual start date and without an actual finish date should provide an estimate of the level of completion (percent complete) with a written

4


justification contained within the Monthly Progress Report. Each monthly schedule update shall be accompanied by an updated resource utilization chart to be sure that inevitable changes to the project schedule do not result in the unreasonable stacking of resources.

The Monthly Progress Report would include an explanation for tasks that have slipped beyond the baseline schedule, and a recovery plan would be submitted for tasks on the critical path that have slipped more than four weeks beyond the baseline schedule. Explanations and recovery plans would state whether or not the Consultant believes the delay to be the result of changes to the scope of work or assumptions contained within the scope of work. If so, the invoice would be accompanied by proposed language for a task order amendment or a new task order that includes a scope of work that justifies the amendment, the associated costs, and a revised schedule. The task order schedule would be re-baselined upon the approval of each task order amendment.

Each monthly invoice will include estimated earned values for each task in a column directly adjacent to the invoiced amounts for each task. Earned values will be calculated by taking the estimated/budgeted amount of each task and multiplying by the percent complete provided in the project schedule. The Consultant should explain in the Monthly Progress Report situations where earned values have fallen behind invoiced amounts.

1.3 Meetings and Minutes

The Consultant shall attend biweekly meetings with SANDAG to report and document project status, discuss and identify any unforeseen issues, and recommend action plans to keep the project on schedule and within budget. The Consultant also will attend meetings with other agencies and stakeholders in the Mid-Coast Corridor. The Consultant may be asked to prepare agendas, handouts, graphics, presentations, action item lists, and/or minutes for these meetings.

1.4 Project Management Plan

SANDAG will continue to develop a Project Management Plan (PMP) as required by FTA concurrent with the Request to Enter Preliminary Engineering. The Consultant may be asked to provide assistance in developing the Project Management Plan.

1.5 Document Control Plan

One of the chapters of the PMP will discuss the Document Control Plan for the Project. SANDAG is developing an electronic Document Control system with procedures for the development, storage, and retrieval of documents for the Mid-Coast Project. The Consultant shall follow the procedures contained within SANDAG’s Document Control Plan. SANDAG would maintain the Document Control system. The Consultant will be responsible for maintaining their own filing system independent of SANDAG’s Document Control system. If requested by SANDAG’s Contract Manager or the Project Manager, the Consultant shall provide copies of these files.

1.6 Project Manager

The Project Manager must be an experienced professional who has successfully managed the completion of similarly complex LRT projects through the environmental and PE phases. The Project

5


Manager may be called on to make presentations to the SANDAG Board of Directors, Transportation Committee, other agencies, and community groups.

The Consultant Project Manager shall coordinate all matters with the SANDAG Project Manager and, as appropriate, the SANDAG Task Order Manager. In addition, the Consultant Project Manager shall be responsible for all matters related to the Consultant’s personnel and operations including, but not limited to, the following:

• Supervising, reviewing, monitoring, training, and directing the Consultant’s personnel.

• Assigning personnel to complete the required Task Order work as specified.

• Administering personnel actions.

• Maintaining Contract/Task Order files.

• Developing, organizing, facilitating, and attending scheduled coordination meetings, and preparation and distribution of meeting minutes.

• Implementing and maintaining quality control procedures to manage conflicts, ensure product accuracy, and identify critical reviews and milestones.

• Overseeing that all safety measures are in place.

1.7 Submittals

Unless otherwise specified in the Task Order, Consultant Submittals shall conform to the following.

Consultant submittals shall undergo a Quality Control (QC) review prior to submittal to SANDAG. Consultant submittals shall be accompanied by a transmittal summarizing the contents of the submittal, and explaining the action the Consultant expects from SANDAG in response to the submittal. Consultant submittals shall be provided in a standard, uniform, professional format subject to approval by SANDAG. Information regarding author, QC reviewer, version number, and submittal date shall be provided on a cover sheet.

Plans shall be submitted in hardcopy (full size 22”x34” and half-size 11”x17”) and provided electronically in Adobe PDF or CADD format (latest versions of AutoCAD or Microstation). The specific electronic format and number of hardcopies shall be specified in the Task Order. Project Reports, Technical Memorandums, Specifications, and other written documents shall be submitted in hardcopy and provided electronically. Electronic files shall be submitted in Microsoft Word and Adobe PDF format. Photos and graphics shall be submitted in JPEG format. All deliverables shall be in units as specified in the Task Order. It is anticipated that the Mid-Coast Project will be developed using U.S. Customary Units rather than Metric Units. Schedules shall be submitted in the most recent version of Microsoft Project or Primavera P3.

Engineer’s estimates shall be prepared where directed in a Task Order. Estimates shall include backup and calculations for unit cost and lump-sum bid items. Estimates shall be checked prior to submission in accordance with the Consultant’s Quality Plan. Estimates and other calculations shall be submitted in Microsoft Excel format. Estimates shall be based on historical data to the greatest extent possible; the

6


engineer’s judgments of special construction or market conditions, and include contingencies as approved by the Project Manager.

2. ALTERNATIVES – INITIAL EVALUATION

2.1 Research, Review, and Data Collection

The Consultant shall gather data and conduct a data review of all existing information related to the project area including, but not limited to: the previous environmental documents and supporting technical reports, preliminary engineering plans and reports, Mobility 2030, UCSD Long-Range Development Plan and EIR, University Community Plan, UTC Redevelopment Plans, LOSSAN Corridor EIS/EIR and technical studies, High-Speed Rail Planning studies, Coast Rail Trail studies, City of San Diego’s City of Villages, and other relevant master plans, general, and redevelopment plans. The Consultant shall review future roadway and street improvement plans and Caltrans plans for Interstate 5 (I-5).

2.2 Purpose and Need Statement

The Consultant shall prepare, with assistance from SANDAG, an updated Purpose and Need Statement suitable for inclusion in the Draft SEIS/SEIR. The Consultant shall propose the best method to compile the necessary support information for this work. This statement shall clearly define the Mid-Coast Corridor and define the mobility problem that is to be solved by the various alternatives. The analysis shall document transportation infrastructure, demand for service, and carrying capacities of the various modes and options.

The corridor definition and analysis contained in the above documents shall be updated to provide a current definition of the Mid-Coast corridor in terms of boundaries, demographic context, land use patterns, transportation infrastructure, travel patterns, and other factors. The discussion of travel patterns should lead directly to a description of the corridor's transportation carrying capacities and potential infrastructure capacity limitations.

Technical support data that will be necessary for the corridor mobility problem definition shall include, but not be limited to, highway congestion; constrained intersection level of service; transit dependent populations; transit capacity and service; convenience of transit, connectivity; and air quality/non-conformity issues resulting from existing travel patterns.

In addition, the Purpose and Need Statement also shall show how the project supports the “Transit First” principles adopted in the region’s Mobility 2030 Plan of providing a rich network of higher-speed transit, the integration of transit into neighborhoods with easy access to transit, the implementation of transit priority measures that allows transit to bypass traffic congestion, and enhanced transit customer experience.

2.3 Alternatives Update

The Consultant shall review previous environmental and planning studies conducted for the project corridor and update the alternatives. The results of the alternatives development and evaluation process shall be documented in a single comprehensive report. Further alternatives may be identified for study through scoping, community input, or during technical analysis of the alternatives.

7


2.3.1 No Build Alternative

The Consultant shall update the No Build Alternative based on SANDAG’s 2003 RTP.

2.3.2 Transportation System Management (TSM)/Baseline Alternative

The Consultant shall develop a TSM/Baseline Alternative representing the best transit improvements that could be made to the Mid-Coast Corridor without a major capital investment. The Consultant shall test and refine the TSM/Baseline Alternative until it has been confirmed that it represents an improvement to cost effective transit service over the No Build Alternative. The Consultant shall work with SANDAG to present and gain concurrence from FTA on the TSM/Baseline Alternative.

2.3.3 Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative

As with any project, there are physical challenges and opportunities to improve the project’s cost effectiveness. The Consultant shall consider, but is not limited to, the following challenges and opportunities:

San Diego Union-Tribune Freight Spur

Just north of the San Diego River, there is an active freight spur to The San Diego Union Tribune newsprint warehouse on the east side of the right-of-way (Figure B-2, No. 17). Various options to address the conflict between this actively used siding and the LRT tracks have been considered over the years. Subsequent to the Balboa Segment Preliminary Engineering Study, the Union Tribune building was expanded, conflicting with the proposed siding down Lovelock Street. Conceptual designs and cost estimates will be needed for various options so that a comparison and recommendation can be made.

Tecolote and Clairemont Stations

Subsequent to the Balboa Segment Preliminary Engineering Study, the nursery adjacent to the proposed Tecolote Station was completely rebuilt and significantly expanded. This changed condition further constrains the size and access to the proposed park-and-ride lot, and potentially requires the full take of a more valuable business. The Clairemont Drive Station would have parallel parking spaces on the west side of Morena Boulevard, a 4-lane, major street with high speeds. Transfers between buses and LRT are proposed on the Clairemont Drive Bridge, creating design challenges related to minimizing traffic impacts at the freeway on- and off-ramps, compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, and provision of comfortable waiting areas. Both the Tecolote and Clairemont Stations would be in the shadow of a major roadway bridge and would be vertically separated from their primary access. Given the design challenges at the Tecolote and Clairemont Stations, further analysis of an alternative station site at Ashton Street (Figure B-2, No. 16) as a possible replacement to both the Tecolote and Clairemont stations is warranted. Parking would be necessary at this location. The Consultant shall update and prepare conceptual designs, prepare capital and operating cost estimates, and provide model input for ridership estimates so that a comparison and recommendation can be made.

Elvira Curves

Just south of SR-52, there are sharp curves on the SDNR single-track that restrict Coaster and Amtrak speeds to 35 miles per hour (MPH) (Figure B-2, No. 18). Constrained right-of-way with fence encroachments, Rose Creek, major utilities, and SR-52 bridge columns further complicate the goal to provide two LRT tracks and double track the SDNR while improving Coaster and Amtrak speeds. Various

8


alignment options, some potentially outside of the SDNR R/W, will need to be designed and the associated costs estimated. Right-of-way estimates will be needed. Biological, hydraulic, and parkland impacts will have to be considered in the recommendation.

Potential Stations at Jutland and Gilman Drives

It is about five miles from the proposed station at Balboa Avenue to the proposed station at Nobel Drive. Stations previously have been proposed at Jutland and Gilman Drives, but were eliminated due to low predicted ridership as a result of poor access. The Consultant will need to review and possibly update past station concept designs with consideration for potential improvements to station access to the surrounding area, estimate capital and operating costs, provide model input for ridership estimates, and make a recommendation.

Alignment and Station Location at I-5 and Nobel Drive

Since the University Center Lane Station (Figure B-1, No. 12) was proposed in 2003, SANDAG’s Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) widened I-5 from 8 main lanes and 2 High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes to 10 main lanes, 2 HOV lanes, 2 auxiliary lanes, and Direct Access Ramps (DARs) (northbound, southbound, on, and off) at Voigt Drive. The widening of I-5 would require the LPA alignment to be in a tunnel for the full length of the northbound off-ramp from I-5 to Nobel Drive. Given the widening of I-5, it appears to be more cost-effective for the LRT to cross to the west side of I-5 south of Nobel Drive. An elevated station with vertical access to both sides of Nobel Drive without parking might be able to attract more ridership than the currently proposed station site. This alternative station could provide good connections to the proposed Super Loop BRT Project (Figure D) (an important circulator with frequent service throughout the University City area), and good connections to the major shopping centers on both sides of Nobel Drive. The Consultant will review previous work, prepare conceptual designs as needed in order to prepare capital and operating cost estimates, provide model input for ridership estimates, and make a recommendation regarding this potential change to the LPA.

Potential Station at the VA Medical Center

The LPA alignment runs adjacent to the Veterans Administration (VA) Medical Center, but there is no station currently proposed (Figure B-1, No. 13). The Consultant will study a combination of modifications to the hospital and the LRT alignment in order to provide direct LRT service to the VA Medical Center. The difference in capital and operating costs to provide this station, as well as model input, shall be provided, and the impact on the project’s cost effectiveness shall be calculated so that a recommendation can be made regarding a potential station at the VA Medical Center.

UCSD West Station

The UCSD West Station (Figure B-1, No. 11) would generate a high level of ridership and, therefore, should have amenities in line with its relative importance to the San Diego Trolley System. An example would be the San Diego State University Transit Center that opened in 2005. A significant level of coordination with UCSD and good urban design/campus planning will be required to maximize accessibility to the station from the surrounding campus.

Alignment Between UCSD and UTC

There are several issues to consider regarding the LPA alignment between UCSD and University Towne Centre (UTC). he Direct Access Ramps (DARs) at Voigt Drive recently added in the RTP must be grade separated from the LRT, raising the LPA profile by about ten feet, and lowering the Voigt Drive profile by

9


about ten feet. The raised profile over I-5 and the need to potentially grade separate over Campus Point Drive so that emergency vehicles associated with Thorton Hospital are not impacted, could cause this station on the UCSD East Campus to be elevated, significantly increasing the cost. The potential for several at-grade crossings along Voigt Drive is a concern given the California Public Utilities Commission’s (CPUC’s) aversion to new at-grade crossings.

The alignment down the median of Executive Drive would require the street to be widened, which would result in the taking of a significant number of parking spaces from the Lawrence Family Jewish Community Center (LFJCC) (Figure B-1, No. 5), which sits on a City of San Diego Park, invoking Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966. The elevated alignment in the median of Genesee Avenue would require outrigger bridge columns (two columns with a beam on top spanning from the median island to the curb to support the bridge structure) to span over intersections and their associated left turn pockets that would be in conflict with the preferred single column configuration. Partial right-of-way takes would be required from several high-priced properties to accommodate medians that have to be widened to accept bridge columns, and the bridge columns that will need to be placed behind the curbs. Outrigger bridge columns are not aesthetically pleasing, creating a greater challenge to gain community acceptance of an elevated viaduct through this master-planned area of Class A high-rise offices. Constructability and the impacts to the surrounding area during construction are other factors that would need careful consideration.

The terminus of the Mid-Coast LPA is a combined LRT/bus station located at the University Towne Center (Figure B-1, No. 15) which is managed and partially owned by Westfield. Westfield is in the process of gaining City of San Diego approval for a Master Planned Development Permit (MPDP) to redevelop their University Towne Centre (UTC) regional shopping center and add 635,000 square feet of commercial and retail space plus 725 dwelling units. Westfield has agreed to locate the LPA’s LRT Station and bus transit center at SANDAG’s preferred location at the corner of La Jolla Village Drive and Genesee Avenue. Westfield, however, prefers the LRT Station to be oriented in the east/west direction on La Jolla Village Drive, rather than the LPA which was oriented in the north/south direction on Genesee Avenue. There are several issues related to aligning the LPA to travel east/west adjacent to La Jolla Village Drive rather than the current north/south alignment on or adjacent to Genesee. The station at UTC will be highly visible in a very attractive area. The station location is at the center of a major urban node and, if well designed, would attract a high level of ridership. An award-winning station design at UTC in the heart of University City is critical to the acceptance/success of the Project.

The challenges with proposed alignments on Voigt Drive, Regents Road, Executive Drive, and Genesee Avenue identified above and Westfield strongly favoring an alignment on La Jolla Village Drive suggest that other potential alignments between UCSD and UTC could be considered. An alignment that serves UTC before UCSD by staying in the SDNR R/W to Genesee Avenue (as included as an alternative in the 1995 EIR) (Figure C-2), with the LRT in a tunnel under Genesee until reaching the UCSD campus, would be one of several possibilities. The Independent Transit Planning Review (ITPR) suggested that the LRT be stopped short to operate as a line haul service, with circulation provided by the Super Loop Project (Figure D). The opinion expressed in the ITPR was that costs saved by not extending the LRT through University City could potentially be spent improving the capacity and speed of the Super Loop. The point of connection between the LRT and Super Loop could be La Jolla Village Square (Nobel Drive), University Towne Centre (UTC), or UCSD. The alignment options between UCSD and UTC will need to be identified and designed to a conceptual level to enable cost estimates to be produced. The alignment options then could be screened on the basis of cost-effectiveness and potential impacts, resulting in a final recommendation.

10


Operating Plan

The Consultant shall assist SANDAG as needed to determine the optimum operating plan for the San Diego Trolley System when the Mid-Coast segment is added. The optimum plan will maximize cost effectiveness based on ridership forecasts and operating cost estimates balanced against operational considerations as described by the operator, San Diego Trolley, Inc. Some operating plans could require capital improvements in addition to those associated with the actual Mid-Coast alignment. The Consultant shall estimate the costs of any needed capital improvements. SANDAG will coordinate working sessions between the Consultant and the Operator for input and potential acceptance from the Operator.

Other Alternatives

The Consultant may be requested to consider alternatives on tracks separate from the SDNR making use of Non-FRA-Compliant Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) Vehicles as an option to potentially improve cost effectiveness, similar to the technology used on the Sprinter Project in the San Diego Region from Oceanside to Escondido. Differences in capital costs and operating costs would need to be estimated. Finally, the Consultant may be required to investigate new alternatives or provide other cost-effective options for consideration.

2.3.4 Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative

The Consultant shall develop and test Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternatives for the Mid-Coast Corridor in an iterative process designed to arrive at the most cost-effective alternative for inclusion in the CEQA/NEPA environmental documents. Operating cost, capital cost, and ridership estimates for detailed BRT proposals will need to be included in the Consultant’s evaluations and recommendations. The Consultant should calculate the required frequency of service to carry the forecast ridership for the Mid-Coast Corridor given the different carrying capacities of the various modes (i.e., BRT, LRT, Commuter Rail). The Consultant shall consider a range of route, guideway, and enhancements to achieve the travel time savings and improved traveler experience that would be required for the BRT alternative to truly perform on par with an LRT alternative. The Consultant shall consider the market and current origin-destination patterns within the Mid-Coast Corridor to evaluate potential BRT “branches.”

Southern Terminus Options

The Consultant shall evaluate whether the southern terminus should be at the Old Town Transit Center or Downtown San Diego (i.e., weigh the loss of ridership due to the transfer at Old Town against the capital and operating costs to provide an attractive service between Downtown and Old Town). If it is determined that service should be provided to Downtown, the Consultant shall evaluate different alignment options (i.e.; Pacific Highway, Interstate 5, or others). The Consultant shall determine if the most cost-effective running way would be exclusive lanes (curb or median) or shared lanes with queue jumpers and/or signal pre-emption (i.e., would the investment in the exclusive lanes generate enough ridership to warrant the cost). Pacific Highway is not a particularly attractive corridor. Given that Pacific Highway is wholly within the City of San Diego’s North Bay Redevelopment Project Area, consideration should be given to the possibility of improvements to Pacific Highway and the adjacent land uses in order to create an attractive corridor for BRT.

Middle Segment Options

The Consultant shall evaluate routing options for the middle segment between Old Town and Balboa Avenue/Gilman Drive (i.e., Morena Boulevard, Interstate 5, the SDNR right-of-way, or others). Details on

11


the running way, stations, and transitions from segments to the south and north shall be developed and estimated. For the SDNR option, adequate separation and protection for the safety of BRT and railroad users shall be taken into account.

North End Options

The Consultant shall evaluate routing options for the north end, including Gilman Drive, Nobel Drive, and Voigt Drive. In the future, Voigt Drive will have direct-access-ramps (DARs) from the I-5 median lanes. Additional routing options include branches to various destinations at the north end of the Mid-Coast Corridor, including UCSD, University City, and Sorrento Valley, or following the Super Loop route (Figure D) to distribute trips and increase Super Loop headways.

2.3.5 Commuter Rail Shuttle Alternative

The Consultant shall develop and test various alternatives that make use of the existing SDNR tracks in the Mid-Coast Corridor using FRA-Compliant vehicles. This overlay service would have to co-exist with intercity service to Los Angeles operated by Amtrak, Coaster commuter rail service to Oceanside operated by NCTD, and freight service operated by BNSF. Given the service frequencies as forecast by the Operators, the Consultant would have to identify the required improvements to the SDNR infrastructure in order to accommodate the proposed Mid-Coast service with no degradation to the existing services and develop capital costs, operating costs, and ridership estimates based on various service plans. The Consultant would have to determine the best location for the southern terminus (i.e., Old Town, Downtown, or Convention Center/Petco Park). In the middle segment, the Consultant would have to determine whether this “commuter shuttle” service should stop at all of the same stops as proposed in the LRT alternative. Various options for the northern terminus should be explored, such as Gilman Drive or Nobel Drive on the SDNR right-of-way, Nobel Drive or UCSD on the I-5 right-of-way, or to UTC via a short tunnel under Genesee Avenue. A longer tunnel all the way to the Sorrento Valley Coaster Station has been proposed previously as a way to improve travel times on the Coaster and provide direct service to University City but is outside the scope of the Mid-Coast Project. The Consultant also would have to recommend scheduling and fare structure for the “commuter shuttle” service in a way that complements and does not degrade the existing Coaster commuter rail service (i.e., potential overcrowding on the south end of the Coaster runs if shuttle-riders make use of Coaster trains).

2.4 Evaluation and Comparison of Alternatives

The Consultant shall develop a reasonable and logical methodology for comparing the various alternatives that have been developed to ensure that the most promising, most cost-effective alternatives are carried forward, and good justification is provided for eliminating alternatives from further consideration. The Consultant shall present the advantages, disadvantages, and potential impacts of each variation. Concerns and comments of the public groups and advisory committees shall be conveyed. The reasons for all recommendations shall be documented in an evaluation summary.

It is anticipated that the SANDAG Board would approve the alternatives recommended to be carried forward through the Environmental Report prior to the Public Scoping meeting. The Consultant team shall prepare the technical analysis that provides the basis of the preferred alignment recommendations. The Consultant shall prepare a Comparative Evaluation Report in support of the Board action and shall include, at a minimum, the following sections:

12


2.4.1 Conceptual Engineering, Urban Design, and Cost Estimates

Conceptual Engineering

The Consultant shall provide conceptual engineering for each alternative to a level of detail as required to optimize and evaluate each, and provide a basis for cost estimating so that valid comparisons can be made. Conceptual Engineering has been completed for the previously adopted 1995 LPA and the updated 2003 LPA. Alternative descriptions shall include plans, profiles, typical cross-sections, typical station plans, cost estimates (capital and operating), system connectivity, and phasing options.

Mapping

SANDAG’s General Engineering Consultant prepared topographic mapping in CADD format that should be adequate for the Consultant to develop conceptual designs for each alternative. The mapping is based on 2001 topographic mapping from Caltrans along I-5, which includes much of the SDNR, translated into U.S. Customary Units. In areas not covered by the Caltrans mapping, the mapping was supplemented by SANGIS mapping. The Consultant also can use controlled aerial photography obtained through SANGIS or can pursue other aerial photo sources if desired.

Urban Design

The Consultant’s team shall include persons with urban design expertise, who shall ensure that urban design considerations are incorporated into the alternatives evaluation process. The urban design component shall be planned and coordinated in conjunction with the overall public outreach effort to identify key components of the transit alternatives constrained by current transit mode into the existing street and the community.

Station Design

The design of the stations should consider the potential for future transit-oriented redevelopment of the surrounding station area and community. The station design should anticipate that transit-oriented community development reduces parking demand. The station design also should provide or preserve opportunities for non-motorized access from future transit-oriented development. The federal requirement of transit enhancements shall be considered including the Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED). The Consultant shall consider the Smart Growth areas as identified by SANDAG and stated in the Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP).

Cost Estimates

The Consultant shall prepare new capital and operating cost estimates for each transit alternative. The Consultant shall perform a price analysis to support the unit costs developed for the cost estimate. The Consultant shall provide quantity estimates to support the cost estimates for review by SANDAG staff. The Consultant shall prepare cost estimates in accordance with the latest FTA Standard Cost Category (SCC) Estimate format. The Consultant shall prepare operating cost estimates for each alternative to be evaluated based on recent operating cost data from comparable transit operators. Where right-of-way impacts differ between two alternatives being compared, right-of-way estimates shall be performed to the appropriate level of detail for the comparison. Similarly, where the level of risk differs between two alternatives being compared, the cost shall include higher contingencies directly associated with the degree of risk.

13


2.4.2 Ridership Estimates & Performance Measures

The Consultant shall provide a report which includes detailed model input in a format subject to approval by SANDAG for each of the alternatives to be modeled. SANDAG will be responsible for maintaining the transportation forecasting model, coding the networks, and conducting the model runs. The Consultant shall analyze the results and present ridership forecasts for each alternative. In addition, cost-effectiveness and other performance measures shall be presented in a format that can be clearly understood by decision-makers. These performance measures and evaluation factors should correspond to current FTA and other guidelines. The Consultant shall work with SANDAG and the FTA Planning staff to ensure compliance with FTA standards and guidelines.

2.4.3 Environmental Feasibility Analysis

The Consultant shall include a conceptual environmental analysis of each alternative. The Consultant shall summarize previous environmental issues for alternatives that have been previously included in environmental studies. New analysis shall be prepared for new alternatives or variations which have not been previously evaluated. Significant environmental issues shall be summarized at a sufficient level of detail to allow appropriate decision-making among major modal and alignment variations.

2.4.4 Comparative Evaluation & Summary

In coordination with SANDAG staff and other technical reviewers, the Consultant shall develop a methodology to lead the process of comparing and evaluating the different scenarios. This analysis shall be used as a basis for comparing the alternatives and recommending a new LPA or confirming the old LPA for planning purposes for the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project.

The Consultant shall prepare an overall comparative summary of the alternatives in a clear, understandable format that will assist the FTA, SANDAG Board, and the general public in understanding the significance of the issues that will drive the LPA for planning purposes decision. The summary shall utilize graphics, charts, and other illustrative materials to clearly present the choices at hand.

3. AGENCY AND COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION

SANDAG will lead the agency and community participation effort with assistance and support from the Consultant and a Public Outreach Consultant, who will be working under a separate contract with SANDAG. SANDAG will coordinate the efforts of the Consultant and Public Outreach Consultant.

3.1 Community Participation

The Consultant shall provide assistance and project materials, and participate in public involvement as needed. The Consultant shall assist by providing project graphic materials, as needed, for presentations of technical issues, including handout sheets, PowerPoint, and presentation boards. The Consultant shall assist as needed to provide project information to support newsletters, fact sheets, meeting notices and invitations, display ads, and press releases. The Consultant shall work with SANDAG to organize and conduct community meetings, which shall be held within the boundaries of the project area.

The Consultant shall be responsible for attending and assisting with the preparation of materials for project status meetings, project briefings, meetings with stakeholders, and Project Development Team

14


(PDT) (agency) meetings. The Consultant shall be available to assist with preparation for formal SANDAG Committee and Board meetings, City of San Diego meetings, and Caltrans meetings. It is anticipated that meetings with various elected officials and staff, community and neighborhood organizations, business organizations, property owners, and other stakeholders and interested parties will be held.

The responsibility for final layout, graphic presentations, printing, and postage of the written outreach materials shall be as identified in the task order. The format for graphic presentation of materials may include charts, tables, aerial photo images, montages, and/or renderings that clearly convey the character of the project alternatives. The presentation graphics are expected to include, but not be limited to, maps and other illustrations describing the analysis relating to major community issues.

The public meetings shall be held during hours that provide the greatest accessibility of attendance for community residents and stakeholders. The intent of the meetings shall be to review the purpose and need for the Project, present study alternatives and evaluation results, and solicit community input regarding the alternatives and evaluation.

The Consultant shall submit all task deliverables intended for public information to SANDAG for review and approval prior to release of any verbal or written presentation material to outside agencies and the general public. SANDAG shall direct and approve all contacts with elected officials, staff, and the media.

3.2 Public Agency Coordination

The Consultant shall assist SANDAG staff in organizing and conducting the Project Development Team (PDT) meetings for agency staff at SANDAG. The Consultant shall prepare an informational briefing package for the meetings. The Consultant shall be responsible for providing minutes of inter-agency and PDT meetings, documenting issues discussed, and providing follow-up on action items.

The purpose of the meetings shall be to review alternatives, solicit input, and discuss issues. Ongoing review shall be maintained with key agencies (PDT meetings) throughout the study based on issues and concerns identified in the Project Scoping meeting.

3.3 Notice of Preparation

The Consultant shall prepare, with assistance from SANDAG, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) in accordance with CEQA requirements. The Consultant shall develop a Project Definition in written and graphic form for inclusion in the NOP.

The Consultant shall assist SANDAG with submitting the NOP to the State Clearinghouse. SANDAG will be responsible for any other appropriate notices and communications in order to initiate the environmental planning process.

3.4 Project Scoping

The Consultant shall work closely with SANDAG and the Public Outreach Consultant to ascertain emerging issues during the environmental process, and prepare the public for release of the Draft SEIS/SEIR. A Project Scoping meeting will be held as soon as the alternatives recommended for analysis in the Environmental Reports have been identified and confirmed by key stakeholders and the SANDAG Board.

15


4. DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/SUPPLEMENTAL

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (DRAFT SEIS/SEIR)

The Consultant shall complete the Draft SEIS/SEIR, leading to the Project Public Hearings. The Draft SEIS/SEIR shall satisfy all federal and state requirements, including NEPA and CEQA. Consultant shall be knowledgeable of applicable federal and state statutes, regulations, guidelines, as well as precedent created by relevant case law. The Consultant shall pay particular attention to previously completed environmental studies and utilize all such available materials, where applicable. Specific tasks shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

4.1 Environmental Analysis

The Consultant shall conduct environmental studies to identify potential social, economic, and physical environmental impacts which may be attributed to each of the alternatives. The analysis shall include potential impacts during construction as well as long-term environmental impacts. The analyses shall be performed at a level of detail to allow for informed decision-making.

The Consultant shall be responsible for all data collection activities in support of the environmental impact analyses. SANDAG, Caltrans, FTA, FHWA, MTS, City of San Diego, UCSD, and other public agency staffs are expected to provide applicable materials and data as necessary.

The Consultant shall be responsible for environmental impact studies including, but not limited to, the following:

1) Land Use 2) Transportation 3) Neighborhoods 4) Visual & Aesthetics 5) Air Quality 6) Noise & Vibration 7) Ecosystems/Biological Resources 8) Geological Conditions 9) Water Resources 10) Cultural Resources 11) Parklands and Other Recreational Facilities 12) Hazardous Wastes 13) Economic & Fiscal Impacts 14) Safety & Security 15) Energy 16) Construction Impacts 17) Relationship Between Local Short-Term Use of Resources and Maintenance and Enhancement of

Long-Term Productivity 18) Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources 19) Growth Inducing Impacts 20) Cumulative Impacts 21) Environmental Justice 22) Financial Analysis and Evaluation of Alternatives 23) Electromagnetic Fields (EMF).

16


4.2 Environmental Documentation

The Consultant shall prepare an Administrative Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIS/SEIR) that incorporates by reference all previous environmental studies for this corridor. The Draft SEIS/SEIR shall update previous studies, provide new analysis where necessary, and satisfy issues identified in the advanced planning studies and Public Outreach efforts. New analysis will be necessary for most of the environmental categories beyond what has been included in previous studies.

Each category of technical analysis shall include tables, charts, maps, and other graphics to summarize and present the information in layman’s terms. The text in the technical analyses shall include a discussion of the methodologies used to identify salient environmental issues, an analysis of environmental impacts based on reasonable assumptions, and a list of reasonable mitigation measures to address the relevant environmental impacts. The Consultant shall summarize the findings of the environmental studies and shall construct a matrix that outlines both the positive and adverse environmental impacts for each alternative.

4.3 FTA Review

The Administrative Draft document shall be forwarded by SANDAG to FTA offices in San Francisco and Washington, D.C., for review and comment. The Consultant shall revise the draft document in response to comments received.

4.4 Public Comment Period

Following approval by the FTA, the Draft SEIS/SEIR shall be circulated for public comment by SANDAG. The Consultant shall provide an electronic file on CD (compact disk) of the document formatted for distribution to SANDAG, who shall be responsible for duplicating and printing copies for circulation. The formatting will include links within the document to the Table of Contents. The Consultant shall prepare an Executive Summary of the full document and shall prepare summary information in multiple media formats as necessary. The Consultant shall be available to attend and participate in public workshops that will be held as a part of the Project Public Hearings.

4.5 Locally Preferred Alternative Recommendation Report

SANDAG staff shall prepare a Locally Preferred Alternative Recommendation Report for action by the SANDAG Board. The Consultant shall assist with the preparation of supporting materials and documentation of findings.

5. FINAL SEIS/SEIR

5.1 Final SEIS/SEIR

The Consultant shall prepare the Final SEIS/SEIR, which will include the Draft SEIS/SEIR document in its entirety in a revised format to reflect responses to comments and changes to the draft. The Final SEIS/SEIR also shall include the required Comments/Response to Comments section that summarizes and responds to all comments received during the Public Comment Period for the Project.

17


5.2 Draft Findings and Mitigation Monitoring Program

The Consultant shall prepare Draft Findings, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring Program per CEQA Guidelines.

6. NEW STARTS APPLICATION

The Consultant shall assist SANDAG in the preparation of the New Starts Application to FTA for federal funding. The first New Starts Submittal will be made concurrent with the Request to Enter Preliminary Engineering, and New Starts Submittals will be made annually thereafter. The Consultant shall provide technical services to provide information on mobility improvements, environmental benefits, operating efficiencies, and cost-effectiveness. Work shall be completed in accordance with the deadlines set by FTA and guidelines issued each year. Task orders will be issued annually for this work.

Application Requirements/Format

The Consultant shall review FTA’s guidance on the New Starts requirements, including the reporting instructions, reporting templates, and frequently asked questions. The Consultant shall determine the reporting requirements and identify any potential issues.

Development/Coordination

The Consultant shall develop the information needed for the submittal. The Consultant shall coordinate with SANDAG, FTA, and others as appropriate. The Consultant shall use recently completed information for the Draft SEIS/SEIR work to maintain consistency.

Modeling

The Consultant shall coordinate with SANDAG to develop modeling information needed for the submittal. The Consultant shall work with SANDAG staff to develop models for new ridership forecast and new benefit indicators. This work will include providing information on network assumptions and assisting in the development of output in an appropriate format for the New Starts submittal. The Consultant shall work with SANDAG and FTA to use the benefit calculation software provided by FTA. The Consultant shall have experience with the FTA Transportation System User Benefit (TSUB) software.

Responsibilities

As directed by the SANDAG Project Manager, the Consultant shall complete individual New Starts Templates 1, 3 though 10, and 12. SANDAG will prepare Template 2 – Certification, Template 11 – Land Use, and Template 13 – Finance Worksheet, with assistance from the Consultant as required.

7. BEFORE-AND-AFTER STUDY

The Consultant shall develop a plan for the collection and analysis of information to identify the impacts of the LPA and the accuracy of the forecasts for the purpose of fulfilling FTA’s requirement for a Before-and-After Study. The purpose of this study is to determine benefits once the project is implemented and in operation, and the degree to which forecasts prepared as part of project planning and development are realized and the reasons why.

The Before-and-After Study Plan shall identify data collection and analysis activities during final design. This Before-and-After Study Plan should cover the collection of information on project scope, transit

18


service levels, capital costs, O&M costs, ridership patterns, and its associated transit services. The Plan shall address how the data measuring the project effects will be collected and how the subsequent analysis of travel patterns and costs "before" and "after" implementation and operation of the Project will be undertaken. From the FTA guidelines:

“the Before-and-After Study Plan should provide a framework which permits the project sponsor to:

• collect information on existing and future transit services and travel characteristics in a manner which ensures comparability;

• perform the analysis of before and after data to discern the effects of the Project on the sponsor’s costs, overall transit services, and ridership;

• assess the consistency between predicted project characteristics and performance and its actual characteristics and performance; and

• identify the reasons for any disparity (should any exist) between predicted and actual outcomes.”

After receiving approval from FTA on the Before-and-After Plan, the Consultant shall assist SANDAG in preparing the “Before Report.”

8. PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING

The Consultant shall perform PE work on Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) chosen by the SANDAG Board of Directors when the SEIR is certified. The Consultant shall continue to refine the design of the LPA. The refinements respond to public comments received during the environmental review and incorporate measures to mitigate any adverse environmental and community impacts of the proposed Project. The PE will have to be performed to a level of detail to allow the development of more precise estimates of cost and, together with FTA, complete the environmental process and issue the final environmental document. During PE, the Consultant shall address certain activities that require long lead times to resolve. The PE portion of the total design effort must permit the Project to move rapidly through Final Design with a minimum of design changes, disruptions, or delays. The goal of PE is to complete the design to a point where there is consensus among stakeholders in the scope of the Project, so that the scope can be “frozen” and not changed during Final Design. The stakeholders include, but are not limited to: San Diego Trolley, Inc. (SDTI), North County Transit District (NCTD), Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad, Amtrak, Los Angeles-San Diego Rail Corridor Agency (LOSSAN), the California High-Speed Rail Authority, the Metropolitan Transit System (MTS), San Diego Transit Corporation (SDTC), Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), Caltrans, City of San Diego, University of California at San Diego (UCSD), University Towne Centre (UTC), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), and California Coastal Commission, business owners, property owners, residents, community groups, environmental groups, the San Diego County Bicycle Coalition (SDCBC), etc.

SANDAG is investigating project delivery methods other than the traditional Design-Bid-Build for all or part of the Project, including Design-Build and CM-at-Risk. SANDAG will decide on a project delivery method during PE. If Design-Build is chosen, the PE performed under this contract will be the basis for the Design-Build contract. In order to adequately define the minimum Project requirements under a Design-Build scenario, it may be necessary for the PE on certain aspects of the Project to be developed

19


to a higher level than others. Regardless of the delivery method, the PE will have to be sufficient for FTA approval to enter Final Design. If Design-Build is chosen, the PE also shall be sufficient to enter into a Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA) with the FTA, meaning no outstanding issues that would have a material effect on the estimated costs of the Project or the local financial commitment to complete the Project. PE shall be carried out to a level appropriate to the complexity of the Project and the cost estimate will have to incorporate contingencies commensurate with the remaining risks in particularly difficult activities, such as tunneling and real estate acquisition. If Design-Build is chosen, all right-of-way requirements and utility relocations shall be identified during PE so that these issues can be resolved prior to awarding the Design-Build contract. Lastly, if Design-Build is chosen, the Consultant shall assist in preparing the procurement documents. If Design-Bid-Build or CM-at-Risk is chosen, Final Design would be performed under a separate consultant contract.

The PE plans shall be submitted to SANDAG and the appropriate stakeholders for reviews prior to the PE being finalized. The Consultant shall respond to all written comments and reflect in the final version of the PE plans the resolution of each comment. Prior to the submission of plans, the Consultant shall complete a quality review. The Consultant shall have a qualified individual or individuals, not directly involved in the design or drafting of the plans, verify correctness and accuracy. For re-submittals, the Consultant reviewer shall initial each comment as a verification that each comment has been taken care of. Re-submittals to SANDAG or other agencies shall include the new plans and the comments (either on the plans or summarized in a comment log with responses and actions noted), initialed by the Consultant reviewer. The PE will be reviewed for compatibility with the existing system from the perspective of minimizing operating and maintenance costs, minimizing impacts to the environment and community, constructability (the consideration of construction methods and being sure that what is proposed can be built using common construction methods, especially considering need to maintain rail, freeway, and street highway traffic and provide a safe working environment for contractors), compliance with local, state, and federal design requirements (for example, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)), cost-effectiveness, consistency with design criteria, and conformance to the mitigation measures identified in the Environmental Reports. PE does not result in final, stamped construction drawings. All plans shall be produced using CADD and Digital Terrain Modeling, and be transmitted to SANDAG upon request and at the completion of PE in the current AutoCAD or Microstation version at the time of delivery. Plans shall be prepared and formatted per the Caltrans Drafting and Plans Manual and the Caltrans CADD Users Manual.

SANDAG currently uses MTDB’s implementation and design criteria documents. The PE on the LRT Alternative shall conform to the requirements of the MTDB LRT Design Criteria, latest edition, and all applicable federal, state, and local standards. The Consultant shall identify and request in writing any deviations to the MTDB LRT Design Criteria. For shared sections of track with the Coaster, Amtrak, BNSF, and others, the Consultant shall research the applicable standards and determine any conflicting criteria. The Consultant shall make a recommendation on how to determine the governing criteria. PE for Bus Rapid Transit alternatives shall follow the most current version of the Draft MTS Bus Design Criteria; sections of the LRT Design Criteria for parking, lighting, and other applicable station requirements; and Caltrans and City of San Diego highway and street design manuals and guidelines.

Topographic mapping in 3-D CADD format (AutoCAD or Microstation) will be supplied by SANDAG along with a Digital Terrain Model (DTM). SANDAG intends to have a third party provide all field surveying for the Project. The Consultant would submit survey requests as needed. However, SANDAG may request the Consultant to be responsible for his/her own survey.

20


8.1 Preliminary Basis of Design Report

The Consultant shall develop a Preliminary Basis of Design (BOD) Report for the alternative(s) advancing into PE. This report shall be the basis for developing alignment geometry, structure selection, station design, operational control systems, and cost estimates. The Preliminary BOD Report shall be used as a starting point for PE and basis for comparison between alternatives, and of an alternative’s ability to perform to the project objectives and criteria. It is not anticipated that the PE design would meet every BOD assumption or objective. Where the PE design fails to meet an assumption, objective, or design criteria; the specific deviation, cause, and impact shall be identified and discussed in the Preliminary Engineering Report.

The Preliminary BOD Report shall include a section listing operational assumptions, including: vehicle type(s); vehicle storage and maintenance requirements; maximum operating speed, average operating speed and headways; projected patron loads and passenger through-put capacity; service and spare vehicle requirements; station parking requirements; fare collection and security methods; vehicle location, communication, and tracking requirements; central control and monitoring provisions, security and information systems, station and guideway service, and security access; and other requirements determined by SANDAG or its operators. This list shall be used to ensure that these operational elements are included in the preliminary design plans and cost estimates. The Preliminary BOD Report shall include a section listing major technical design assumptions, including: basic alignment grade and geometry requirements for the design alternative technology and other impacted facilities, including railroad, highway, and street; structure types including bridges, retaining walls, floodways and channels, and tunnels; pavement requirements; guideway widths and clearances; physical mitigations identified in the environmental process; and other requirements determined by SANDAG, its operators, or the Consultant. This list shall be used to guide layout and design of the alternative and the development of cost estimates.

The Preliminary BOD Report shall be brief and cover the major operational and technical assumptions and requirements to develop preliminary designs and compare alternatives. The report shall be generally tabular. The Consultant shall develop an acceptable format for approval by SANDAG.

8.2 Geotechnical Studies

The Consultant shall collect and review previously completed geotechnical reports for the area including, but not limited to, reports prepared by/for the City of San Diego and Caltrans, perform a building foundation inventory, perform soil sampling, borings, conduct laboratory tests, interpret the above data, prepare logs of test borings, summarize the findings in a geotechnical report, and develop a design criteria for structures (tunnels, bridges, retaining walls, boxes, etc.), trackwork, paving, foundations, traction power substation ground mats, and slopes based on the geotechnical/seismic conditions.

The Consultant may be asked to prepare a Geotechnical Baseline Report. The Consultant shall prepare a Geotechnical Work Plan which shall include the proposed sampling methods, number of samples and locations, proposed testing, a schedule, and estimate. The Geotechnical Work Plan shall be submitted to the SANDAG Project Manager for approval. The Consultant shall be responsible for all work required to obtain and comply with all permits necessary to carry out the Geotechnical Work Plan including, but not limited to, Traffic Control Permits, Well Permits, and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP).

21


The Consultant shall perform, or subcontract the actual drilling, digging, and sampling. The Consultant shall be responsible for restoring the boring and test pit locations to a condition equal to or better than existing conditions. The existing conditions shall be photo-documented. If a proposed geotechnical boring or test pit is on private property, the Consultant shall provide information regarding the work to be performed including, but not limited to, scheduled dates, work hours, type of equipment, and access to the locations. Upon receipt of this information, SANDAG would pursue permission from the property owner.

If a proposed geotechnical boring is in an area suspected to contain contaminated soils and/or groundwater, the Consultant shall prepare a Health and Safety Plan. The Consultant shall look for signs of contamination, such as discolored soil or odors, and send samples for testing.

8.3 Hazardous Materials Investigation and Analysis (Phase 1 and Phase 2 Site Assessments)

The Consultant shall provide a supplemental Phase I Site Assessment study for the selected alignment(s). A site reconnaissance shall be performed to observe surface conditions, access limitations, and current activities along the proposed alignment in areas not covered by the previous Phase I Site Assessment (primarily in University City). An inventory of potential contaminant sources on and adjacent to the right-of-way shall be completed based upon visual observations. A record review shall be performed using, but not limited to, historic photographs, fire insurance maps, and business directories to characterize the past activities along the alignment. To supplement information gathered from records review, the Consultant shall meet with regulatory agency staff and other persons having knowledge and usage of past sites and adjacent or surrounding property.

Where recommended by the Phase I Study, the Consultant may be asked to perform Phase II Studies. Other related tasks shall include, but are not limited to, identifying and recommending mitigation measures, seeking site closures from the County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health, acquiring RWQCB permits for the discharge of groundwater and potable water, studying aerially-deposited lead (ADL) along I-5, performing lead paint and asbestos surveys for any buildings to be demolished, and investigating construction air quality impacts to schools, day care centers, and hospitals. If any of these investigations require entry onto private property, the Consultant shall provide detailed information regarding the planned work, and SANDAG will seek permission. Any mitigations identified as part of the above investigations shall be included in the cost estimate.

8.4 Drainage/Hydraulics

The Project crosses the San Diego River and Tecolote Creek and parallels a significant length of Rose Creek, some of which may need to be converted from open channel to an enclosed box culvert; the Consultant would have to analyze and prepare preliminary design. The Consultant shall gather and review previously prepared drainage studies for the project area. The Consultant shall identify potential impacts due to construction and future improvements. The Consultant shall perform analyses and prepare a detailed Hydrology or Drainage Report to ensure that the Project is consistent with all FEMA, Caltrans, and local standards for flood control. The Project shall convey the base flood without causing objectionable backwater or tailwater, increases in flood elevations, damage to surrounding property, excessive flow velocities, excessive scour, impacts to traffic, or flooding of LRT tracks or other facilities. The project scope will be limited to resolving only project-related flood problems. The Hydraulic Report shall be submitted to SANDAG and the City of San Diego and receive a “No Rise Certification.” If the Project results in any change to the FEMA Flood Maps, the Consultant shall prepare and submit a

22


Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR). Required drainage structures (box culverts, storm drains, etc.) shall be shown on the PE plans and included in the cost estimate.

8.5 Trackwork

The Consultant shall prepare plan and profile, typical sections, and alignment data tables for all track between the Old Town Transit Center and the end of the line in University City. The alignment must achieve all minimum horizontal and vertical clearances as required by the CPUC, Caltrans, the City of San Diego, and SDTI, including provision of an unobstructed emergency walkway. The location of the emergency walkway shall be shown on the plans, and critical clearances shall be identified. The Consultant should assume that no exceptions to CPUC Standards will be sought. The track alignment and associated structural layout shall minimize impacts to environmentally-sensitive areas, right-of-way, utilities, and hazardous material sites. Also, the alignment shall minimize the structural and earthwork costs.

The Consultant shall plot cross-sections every 50 feet. Trackwork shall be designed in accordance with the MTDB LRT Design Criteria and the American Railway Engineering and Maintenance Association (AREMA) and CPUC standards referenced thereby, incorporating MTDB Standard Plans where possible. The location of crossovers for the LRT track shall be spaced approximately 1.25 miles and as close as possible to the terminal station. The locations shall be agreed upon by SDTI. Limits of trackwork types (i.e., ties and ballast, on plinth, on slab, embedded) and limits of high-strength rail shall be determined and included in the cost estimate.

There are segments of the existing SDNR tracks that will need to be relocated and reconfigured. The design of the LRT Project will need to allow for future projects to double-track the SDNR, and construction access. To ensure that double-tracking of the SDNR is compatible with the design of the LRT, the Consultant shall prepare a conceptual level design of the second SDNR track and show it on the plans as future work. The SDNR is actively used by NCTD for the Coaster Commuter Rail, Amtrak for intercity service to Los Angeles, and BNSF for freight service. Any modifications to the SDNR must meet NCTD, AREMA, and FRA design standards. Maintenance access will have to be continually provided. There are siding tracks north of the San Diego River and north of Balboa Avenue that will need to be modified.

The Consultant shall prepare a final vibration mitigation report based on the proposed horizontal and vertical track alignment, track type, and actual vibration propagation field measurements at the locations identified as potentially requiring mitigation in the environmental report. If the vibration study requires entry onto private property, the Consultant shall provide detailed information regarding the planned work, and SANDAG will seek the permission. This report shall identify specific vibration mitigation measures and shall be submitted to SANDAG for review and approval. Any vibration mitigation measures identified shall be included in the cost estimate.

8.6 Retaining Walls and Sound Walls

The Consultant shall identify where retaining walls and sound walls are required. The plans shall show horizontal limits, offset, height (on an elevation view), and probable type (i.e., gravity, cantilever, counterfort, mechanically-stabilized earth (MSE), soil nail, and tie-back) of retaining walls. The Consultant shall consider landscaping and aesthetic treatments as mitigation measures for visual impacts. The cost estimate for the walls shall include aesthetic treatments, anti-graffiti protection, and stray current mitigation for walls adjacent to the tracks.

23


The Consultant shall prepare a final noise mitigation report based on the proposed horizontal and vertical track alignment, extent of structures, slopes, retaining walls, and roadway modifications in accordance with FTA and/or FHWA requirements. This report shall identify specific noise mitigation measures and shall be submitted to SANDAG for review and approval. Any sound walls identified in this report shall be shown on the PE plans and included in the cost estimate. If the noise study requires entry onto private property, the Consultant shall provide detailed information regarding the planned work, and SANDAG will seek permission.

8.7 Street Improvements

As required by the Environmental documents, the Consultant shall prepare plan views, profiles, and typical sections per City of San Diego and Caltrans requirements for modifications to local streets, utilities, and state highway facilities. Additional traffic analyses may be required to verify that design solutions would perform as required. The Consultant shall identify and include in the cost estimate all necessary traffic control devices or modifications thereof that will be required, including but not limited to, traffic signals, lights, pavement delineation, signs, and interfaces between traffic signals and the transit improvements necessary to provide priority for transit.

8.8 Bridges

The Consultant shall prepare bridge plans identifying bridge limits, bridge type, bridge depth, minimum vertical clearance, column locations, foundation type and size, and construction feasibility issues for LRT bridges, elevated station platforms, roadway bridges, and pedestrian bridges. Depending on the outcome of the Tecolote, Clairemont, and Ashton Station studies, the Consultant may be required to prepare a structural feasibility and cost study for the modifications to the Clairemont Drive Overcrossing; this overcrossing will be required for the Clairemont LRT Station as shown in the Balboa Preliminary Engineering Plans. The cost estimate shall take into account the bridge type, foundation type and size, construction difficulty, stray current, and grounding of metallic objects on LRT bridges. The Consultant shall prepare materials and conduct the Type Selection meeting with Caltrans.

8.9 Tunnels/Trenches

The Project may include segments of cut-and-cover, bored, and/or mined tunnel (i.e., New Austrian Tunneling Method (NATM)) or depressed trench segments. Tunnels must be designed with careful consideration for geotechnical conditions and to minimize the construction impacts to the existing environment. Adequate space for construction staging shall be identified. The Consultant may need to develop temporary shoring and bridging to minimize traffic impacts and provide access points for construction traffic. The tunnel segments may require fire suppression, ventilation, and communications systems per the applicable codes. If so, the Consultant shall perform sufficient design to identify the configuration of these systems and perform a detailed cost estimate for these items. If these systems are required, the Consultant shall prepare a Safety and Fire Projection Plan consistent with all applicable local, state, and transit industry standards.

8.10 Utilities

SANDAG has collected pertinent record drawings from local agencies and utility companies, and plotted the underground and overhead utilities within the project limits on CADD. These utilities include existing: water, storm drain (pipes and channels), sewer, gas, electric, and communication facilities. If

24


Design-Build is chosen as the delivery method, utility relocation will have to be performed prior to the award of the design-build contract, and the relocations will be based upon the PE effort. The Consultant may be asked to identify and recommend critical utilities whose locations should be precisely located. Upon approval by SANDAG and the utility owners, the Consultant would arrange to have potholing performed. Where feasible, the potholing shall consist of digging a hole to expose the subject utility and getting it surveyed. Vacuum extraction or other methods can be proposed in areas where exposing the utility would cause too great an impact. The Consultant would be responsible for obtaining and complying with Traffic Control Permits, preparing SWPPPs, and restoring the areas where the potholing is performed. If a proposed pothole location is on private property, the Consultant would provide information regarding the potholing work to be performed, such as scheduled dates, work hours, type of equipment, and access to the locations, and SANDAG would pursue permission from the property owner. If a proposed pothole is in an area suspected to contain contaminated soils and/or groundwater, the Consultant would prepare a Health and Safety Plan. As the Consultant is performing the utility potholing, they would look for signs of contamination, such as discolored soil or odors, and send samples for testing.

The Consultant, working with SANDAG and utility owners, shall identify the utility segments requiring relocation. At least one field visit shall be scheduled with each affected utility company to review all conflicts and discuss resolution of the conflicts. Where conflicts are proposed to be resolved by reconfiguring utility networks, capacity studies shall be performed. Corrosion control shall be considered for any metallic utility crossings. Relocated utilities shall provide service equal to the existing installations; upgrades shall not be considered without SANDAG’s approval.

For utility owners who design and construct relocations to their facilities (i.e., natural gas, electric, telephone, fiber-optic, and oil pipelines), the Consultant shall identify conflicts and coordinate with the utility owners. The PE plans shall include the utilities in both their existing and relocated configurations. The cost estimate shall include these third-party relocation costs.

Proposed utility services will be required for the Project (i.e., power for traction power substations, power, water, and communications for stations, water and power for landscaping, power and communications for traffic signals, etc.). The Consultant shall verify that services are located nearby and shall include proposed service points on the PE plans. If services are not available, the Consultant shall reconsider their design or show the necessary utility connections on the PE Plans and include these costs in the cost estimate. The PE utility plans shall demonstrate how maintenance access to manholes, vaults, cabinets, or other key facilities, new or existing, is maintained. In some instances, it may be necessary for the Consultant to design maintenance roads and/or crossings and include them in the cost estimate.

8.11 Right-of-Way

The Consultant shall identify the right-of-way requirements for the Project. These requirements shall include any proposed easements (including construction or slope easements), right-of-way takes, preliminary title reports, or agreements which are necessary to construct the improvements defined in the PE task.

The right-of-way plan sheets shall include the existing and proposed alignment right-of-way and easements overlaid on aerial photos or existing topography showing assessor’s parcel boundaries. A table shall be prepared listing the take and easement areas by parcel. The Consultant may be asked to provide Preliminary Title Reports and, through a certified real estate appraiser, provide estimates for the necessary acquisitions.

25


If Design-Build is chosen as the delivery method, right-of-way acquisitions would be performed based on the right-of-way identified as part of this PE effort. The Consultant shall work with SANDAG and its right-of-way consultant to evaluate the cost impacts of proposed acquisitions of property and easements to determine if less costly alternatives to property acquisitions are feasible.

8.12 Traction Power Load Flow Analysis, Substation Locations, and Overhead Contact System

The Consultant shall prepare a traction power load flow analysis to determine design parameters for the traction power system. including but not limited to, substation locations and cabling sizes. The load flow analysis shall take into account the existing substations at the Old Town and Morena/Linda Vista Stations. Based on the conclusions of the load flow analysis, available or low-cost right-of-way within a hundred feet of the tracks, available 12kV power on a unique San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) circuit, and compatible land use, the Consultant shall recommend traction power substation locations for SANDAG’s approval. The Consultant shall attempt to find substation sites that avoid the potential for electromagnetic interference to adjacent properties. If not possible, the Consultant shall identify and estimate the necessary mitigation. If suitable substation sites cannot be located as assumed in the load flow analysis, the analysis shall be repeated in an iterative process until the sites and analysis are consistent.

If required by the environmental report, the Consultant shall design enclosures and/or landscaping to visually screen the substation sites. If required by the load flow analysis, the Project may include upgrades to the existing substations between Old Town and Downtown and at Morena/Linda Vista. The Consultant shall perform sufficient design to identify other unique issues related to the traction power and overhead contact system (OCS) which should be added to the cost estimate. These unique issues include, but are not limited to, access roads to substation sites, unique feeder cable routings, Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA), disconnects, and sectionalizing the junction between the Green and Blue Lines north of Old Town.

8.13 Signaling/Communications

There are potentially several at-grade road/track crossings on the Project. The Consultant shall prepare plans and exhibits to the level of detail required for the application to the CPUC. The grade crossing application shall include the various railroad protection devices that are needed for at-grade crossings and studies of alternatives to avoid the at-grade crossings. The Consultant would attend meetings as required to pursue the approval of the grade crossing application during PE.

At the south end of the Project, there will be a freight siding crossing the LRT tracks at-grade. The Consultant shall develop the design of the interlocking to the point necessary to get agreements from the operators (NCTD, BNSF, Coaster, Amtrak, and Metrolink), make an application to the CPUC, and coordinate the approval with CPUC and the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA).

The Consultant shall perform sufficient design to identify other unique issues related to the signaling and communications systems which should be added to the cost estimate. These unique issues include, but are not limited to, reverse running; intrusion detection systems for any tunnel segments; fire, high water, or other incident warnings tied to the signaling system; interlocking control circuits for the junction of the Blue and Green Lines north of Old Town; expansion of the radio system, including tunnel segments; SCADA; train location/centralized train control; providing a fiber-optic trunk line; security cameras; and communications compatible with the appropriate police and fire agencies. The Consultant shall submit

26


product information on which the design is based. For bus or rapid bus in a dedicated guideway, the design shall include additional elements required for automatic vehicle location (AVL). These elements shall include, but are not limited to, transmission to an existing central monitoring location, bus to wayside communications for next bus visual and audible announcements at stations.

8.14 Traffic Handling and Construction Staging

Project construction will be in and around severely congested interstate freeways, city streets, and UCSD campus roadways. The Consultant shall prepare a preliminary approach and plan for construction staging and traffic handling to facilitate early identification of construction issues to include in the cost estimate.

8.15 Plan & Profile and Typical Section Drawings

The Consultant shall provide drawings as stated in the task order. Standard format plan and profile sheets with plan view on the top and profile below with match lines shall be prepared for the alternatives. The Consultant shall utilize the topographic mapping provided by SANDAG. All plan and profile drawings shall be produced by computer-aided design drafting (CADD) and be convertible or readable into a drawing file form consistent with the latest version of the AutoCAD or Microstation.

The PE drawings shall be drafted using U.S. Customary Units except for areas within Caltrans right-of-way, where plans shall be in metric with a U.S. Customary Unit conversion.

The Consultant shall submit a layout of the proposed plans and profiles for the Project to the SANDAG Project Manager for approval before proceeding with the preliminary design drafting. For the complete alignment from Old Town to University City, the PE drawings shall include, but not be limited to, the following existing and proposed information:

• Planimetrics – Existing structures, roads, walls, facilities, vegetation, etc.

• Location of existing utilities from record information, and relocated utilities. Plans should state assumed depths or cover where applicable. Also plans should include location of proposed utility connection points for services.

• Retaining walls and sound walls including an elevation view (top and toe of walls).

• Limits of grading, erosion control, and landscaping.

• All drainage structures, including box culverts and storm drains.

• Locations and layouts for substations.

• Typical cross-sections of trackway (LRT only), street roadways, structures.

• Structure conceptual plans including elevations and cross-sections.

• Trackwork and special trackwork (LRT only). Alignment for trackwork shall include curve and spiral data summarized on the plans, and the location of crossovers and pocket tracks. Plans shall identify any non-standard special trackwork. Limits of trackwork types (i.e., ties and ballast, on plinth, on slab,

27


embedded) and limits of high-strength rail shall be shown for estimating purposes. Critical horizontal and vertical clearances shall be called out. Locations of rail lubricators shall be shown.

• Street improvements and traffic signal intersections.

• Traffic electrical plans.

• Include details and sections for any areas that will be particularly challenging or have non-standard elements or construction challenges along with notes stating the Consultant’s assumptions for how it can be handled.

• Right-of-way limits shall be shown. Takes and easements needed to contain all facilities associated with the Project including, but not limited to, assumed footing easements, utility easements, drainage easements, slope easements, and construction easements (i.e., access roads, construction yards, and laydown areas) shall be identified on the plans and provided in tabular format. Where the Project is using public right-of-way (i.e., Caltrans, City of San Diego, UCSD), the property owner shall be identified.

8.16 Station Plans

The Consultant, with the assistance of an architect and an urban design firm, shall prepare station plans for each of the alternatives. The Consultant also shall provide models, three-dimensional renderings of the stations, photo-simulations, and/or catalog cuts and samples for review by SANDAG, MTS, SDTI, and the community at large. Station plans shall include the following:

• Vertical circulation, including stairs, ramps, elevators, and possibly escalators. These elements are to be sized to allow for emergency evacuations as required by codes. For long-term maintenance, the elevators and escalators shall be designed to be protected from the elements.

• Parking, including accessible and van accessible spaces, taxi stands, drop-off, pick-up, including auto circulation within the site and local street access. The drainage design for parking lots will likely have to include permanent best management practices (BMPs) to address the quality of storm runoff from the parking lots.

• Bus bays, bus stops, and bus circulation roadways, for transit buses.

• Interface with the SANDAG Super Loop Project and private shuttle buses.

• Bicycle lockers and racks.

• Features to assure compliance with the latest requirements of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act and state Title 24, such as curb ramps, detectable warning pavers, directional bars, international symbol of accessibility, clear zone for wheelchair lift deployment, accessible signs, etc.

• Station furniture, including structural and architectural design of custom canopies, shelters, windscreens, lights, benches, trash cans, railings, pay phones, newspaper racks, etc.

• All signing for platforms, parking lots, roadway trailblazers, and track wayside.

28


• Other facilities, such as ticket sales booths (portable or permanent), push-cart vendors, operator

booths, operator restrooms (including plumbing and electrical), etc.

• Electrical and communications for lighting, ticket vending machines, ticket validators, smart-card readers, public address system, changeable message signs, payphones, automatic teller machines, closed-circuit television (CCTV) for security cameras, vendors, maintenance equipment, etc., including a communications room to house all of the station equipment.

• Irrigation and planting, including hose bibs for maintenance.

• Architectural features and finishes, including paint specifications and colors.

• Clear lines of sight to all areas for security in accordance with CPTED (Crime Prevention through Environmental Design) principals.

• The Consultant should anticipate there being some form of a public art program for each of the stations in accordance with FTA Circular 9400.1A.

• The Consultant may be asked to consider “smart growth” joint development opportunities at some or all of the station sites. Investigating these joint development opportunities could expand the scope of work to include a larger station footprint with residential and/or commercial designs.

8.17 Preparation of Special Provisions

If Design-Build is chosen as the delivery method, the Consultant shall prepare special provisions/specifications for the design-build contract(s). These special provisions/specifications shall be based on Caltrans Standard Specifications, using Caltrans Standard Special Provisions (SSPs) where possible, the Greenbook Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction for items of work which are not covered in the Caltrans Standard Specifications or as required to meet Local Agency requirements. Also, the Consultant shall use AREMA Specifications for track work and signaling. Special provisions from past MTDB projects may be used as a guide for items unique to Light Rail Transit, but shall be modified as required for a design-build contract. The special provisions shall clearly define work to be included in each bid item, unit of measurement, and unit price. Also, the special provisions shall define performance and quality requirements for the contractors work; the special provisions should identify any restrictions or other special requirements placed on the contractor, including all required federal contract provisions.

The Consultant may be asked to prepare an estimate of the construction schedule, including the number of working days required for each of the construction contracts, along with key milestone dates. This estimate of working days shall be supported by a construction schedule and narrative describing anticipated construction methods, assumptions, and key milestones and interfaces with adjacent contractors. The Consultant also may be asked to provide advice on contract packages, phasing, milestone interfaces, and the like.

Prior to the submission of any contract specification submittals, the Consultant shall complete a quality assurance verification of the specifications. The Consultant shall have a qualified individual or individuals, not directly involved in the preparation of the specifications, verify correctness and accuracy. The reviewer shall verify that measurement and payment provisions are consistent with the description of the

29


work on the plans and the bid list and are consistent with any construction notes or written directions. The reviewer shall verify and initial that previous comments on the specifications have been resolved.

8.18 Cost Estimates

The Consultant shall update existing and prepare new capital and operating cost estimates for each transit option. The Consultant shall perform a price analysis to support the unit costs developed for the cost estimate and shall provide quantity estimates to support the cost estimates, to be reviewed by SANDAG staff. Cost estimates shall be prepared in accordance with the latest FTA Standard Cost Categories for Major Capital Projects format. SANDAG may request the cost estimate in a format suitable for bidding.

The Consultant shall prepare an independent cost estimate of the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) as one of their initial tasks. The Consultant shall use the same cost model to determine the cost difference for all alternatives or variations considered to the LPA. The Consultant shall update the cost estimate as new information is discovered on the LPA. The Consultant shall submit a revised cost estimate each year as required with the New Starts Application to FTA, and when SANDAG submits its request to FTA to Enter Final Design. The Consultant shall determine a reasonable method with justification for the factors to be used to inflate the cost estimate to the year-of-expenditure as required by the FTA.

Prior to the submittal of any cost estimate, the Consultant shall complete a quality assurance verification of the estimate. The Consultant shall have a qualified individual or individuals, not directly involved in the preparation of the estimate, verify correctness and accuracy. The reviewer shall verify the methods of quantity calculation and spot-check quantity calculations; verify that quantity calculations match the information depicted on the plans; verify that quantity and unit cost extensions are correct and accurate; and verify the unit prices were reasonably derived and correctly applied. SANDAG may have an independent third-party review of the cost estimate. The Consultant shall reconcile any differences greater than ten percent on any item resulting from any cost estimate reviews.

8.19 Safety and Security

The Consultant shall prepare a Safety Certification Plan, in accordance with FTA Chapter 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 659, Rail Fixed Guideway Systems, State Safety Oversight; CPUC General Order 164C, Rules and Regulations Governing State Safety Oversight of Rail Fixed Guideway Systems; and the American Public Transportation Association's "Manual for the Development of Rail Transit System Safety Program Plans," to document that safety codes, standards, and criteria have been properly addressed in the design of the Project. The resulting safety certificates and Safety Certification Plan also would be used through the design, construction, testing, and operational-readiness phases of the Project and shall be designed to reduce all incidents that harm passengers and employees, whether these incidents are the result of unintentional occurrences (safety) or intentional acts (security). Also, the Safety Certification Plan should encompass Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED). The Safety Certification Plan shall be subject to the approval of the CPUC. It must be prepared during PE and updated as needed.

The Safety Certification Plan shall include a hazard management process to conduct safety hazard analyses and safety hazard resolution. The document shall include a list of hazard analyses to be performed. Hazard analyses shall be submitted upon request by the CPUC.

30


In accordance with the “Joint Policy Statement on the Shared Use of the Tracks of the General Railroad System by Conventional Railroads and Light Rail Transit Systems" issued in 2000 by the FTA and FRA, the Consultant shall consider cost-effective methods to address the safety concerns involved in adding LRT to a conventional railroad right-of-way. For example, these methods may include, but not be limited to, protecting evacuated passengers and maintenance workers within the right-of-way, discouraging trespassing (especially where pedestrians will be drawn to the right-of-way; i.e., stations), and minimizing the risk of collisions with derailments or shifting loads through measures like minimum separation, intrusion detection, fencing, and concrete barriers. The FRA will review the proposed freight siding crossing the LRT tracks at grade at the south end of the Project.

8.20 Project Risk Analysis and Procurement Planning

As soon as the project scope is well defined and at least six months prior to the request to enter Final Design, a formal Risk Assessment shall be performed on the Project. The Consultant shall be a member of a multi-disciplinary Risk Management Group that will include stakeholders, SANDAG Staff, and the FTA’s Project Management Oversight Consultant (PMOC). Risk Assessment includes identification of risks, evaluation/measurement of risks, analysis of risk treatment alternatives (i.e., avoidance, prevention, mitigation, cost control, and insurance), assignment of risk, and monitoring/evaluating the performance of measures implemented.

Alternative project delivery methods shall be considered within the context of project risk analysis and procurement planning. SANDAG will select the delivery option that minimizes project risks and provides the greatest likelihood of implementation success while minimizing cost overruns and schedule slippages. Risks shall be assigned to the individuals best able to manage them. SANDAG is considering the following options: Design-Bid-Build (D/B/B), Design-Build (D/B), and CM-at-Risk (CMR). The Project could be implemented with a combination of contracting approaches.

8.21 Caltrans Project Initiation Report

Due to the extent of the project encroachment into the Caltrans right-of-way, a Project Initiation Report may be required by Caltrans. The Consultant shall confirm the type of report(s) required and prepare the report(s) in accordance with the latest Caltrans Project Development Procedures Manual. If the Project includes more than $1 million of construction within Caltrans right-of-way (i.e., bus transfer facilities on the Clairemont Drive Overcrossing or the I-5 University City alignment), then the Consultant shall prepare a Project Study Report/Project Report to Caltrans’ standards and requirements.

The focus of the Project Initiation Report will be to demonstrate that the Mid-Coast design alternatives adhere to the Mobility 2030 concept for the I-5 corridor and show that the 10 main lane + 2 HOV lane alternative as identified in Mobility 2030 will be feasible.

8.22 Value Engineering/Peer Review

Value Engineering (VE) shall be conducted at the completion of the Final SEIS. The Consultant shall work with the VE team to provide background information and to assemble exhibits and conduct presentations for any value engineering analysis on the engineering, operational, and architectural/landscaping design features of the LPA. SANDAG will contract separately for the VE team and perform all other arrangements related to this review. The Consultant shall review the VE suggestions and any resulting design modifications will be accomplished through task order.

31


SANDAG may elect to conduct a Peer Review. The Consultant shall work with SANDAG to provide background information and to assemble exhibits and conduct presentation for any peer review on the engineering, operational, and architectural/landscaping design features of the LPA.

8.23 Agency Permits and Approvals

Depending on the project delivery method chosen, the Consultant may be asked to assist in the applications and negotiations to secure the permits and approvals required for the project including, but not limited to, the ACOE Section 404 of the Clean Water Act Permit, CDFG 1601 Streambed Alteration Agreement, RWQCB Section 401 of the Clean Water Act Certification, USFWS Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation, National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 Cultural Resources Review by the State Office of Historic Preservation (SOHP), California Coastal Act Consistency Determination, Coastal Development Permit, Rivers and Harbors Act Permits, Caltrans encroachment permits, and CPUC grade separation applications. The Consultant may be asked to provide design, studies, information, or exhibits for the permit applications.

8.24 Preliminary Engineering Report

The Consultant shall summarize all findings and analyses in the Preliminary Engineering (PE) Report. The PE Report shall include recommendations for design assumptions, deficiencies in known information, changes in design criteria, and additional investigations needed to complete final design. The PE Report shall include recommended criteria for final design, taking into account the analysis completed in PE, including: geotechnical, hazardous or contaminated materials, hydraulics, structural, right-of-way, environmental, operational, constructability, operations, systems, safety/security, cost-effectiveness, community acceptance, or other pertinent data. Assumptions should include, through coordination with SDTI, the proposed operating plan for the San Diego Trolley system after Mid-Coast is completed, including regular service and special event service, and through coordination with San Diego Transit and MTS, the proposed operating plans for feeder bus, rapid bus, or dedicated guideway bus rapid transit operations. The PE Report shall identify all requirements for the final design, including codes, criteria, and design standards that must be met. If the LPA includes tunnel segments, the PE Report shall identify all of the geotechnical, ventilation, passenger circulation, maintenance, and fire/life safety criteria.

8.25 Other

Through the development of the environmental documents and preliminary engineering, other project related tasks could arise. As with the work described above, task orders will be prepared to define the work before it proceeds.

5000810 Statement of Work.doc 3/13/2007

32

MissionBay

NOBEL DR.

MO

RENA

NO

RTH TO

RREY

PINES RD

.

GOVERNOR DR.

UniversityUniversityTowne CentreTowne Centre(Future Transit Center)(Future Transit Center)

UniversityCenterLane

SEAWORLD DR.

HOTEL CIRCLE SOUTH

TURQUOISE ST.

ING

RAH

AM

ST.

TECOLOTE RD.

MILTON ST.

CLAIREMONT D

R.

BALBOA AVE.LA

JO

LLA

SCE

NIC

DR.

LA JO

LLA B

LVD

.

NAUTILUS ST.

SOLEDAD MTN. RD.

CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD.

CARMEL VALLEY RD.

MIRA M

ESA B

LVD.

MIRAMAR RD.

ARDATH RD.

GIL

MA

N D

R.

GENESEE AVE.

REG

ENTS

RD.

CARMEL MT. RD.

EASTGATE MALL

TORREY PINES RD.

TOR

REY

PIN

ES R

D.

GRAND AVE.

MIS

SIO

N B

LVD

.

LINDA VISTA RD.

GEN

ESEE AVE.

JUTLA

ND DR.

San Diego TrolleyBlue Line

CoasterExpress Rail

FRIARS RD.

BAY PARK

CLAIREMONT

UNIVERSITY CITY

SORRENTO VALLEY

LA JOLLA

MISSIONVALLEY

BAY PARK

CLAIREMONT

UNIVERSITY CITY

SORRENTO VALLEY

MISSIONVALLEY

SORRENTO

VALLEY RD.

LA JOLLAMid-Coast Light RailTransit Extension

Alternative 1

Alternative 2

Existing Blue Line Trolley

NN0 1/2 Miles

Existing Transit Station

Future Transit Station

Existing Transit Center

Future Transit Center

Existing Coaster Line

MAP AREASan Diego Region

Figure A

Old TownTransit Center

Balboa

Nobel Drive Nobel Drive Coaster StationCoaster Station

(Tentative)(Tentative)

Sorrento ValleyCoaster Station

Clairemont

Tecolote

UC EastUCWest

Pacific Ocean

Pacific Ocean

Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project

February 2007

Regents RoadRegents Road

Reg

en

ts R

oad

Reg

en

ts R

oad

Voigt Drive

Voigt Drive

Eastgate Mall

Eastgate Mall

La Jolla Village Drive

La Jolla Village Drive

Genesee Avenue

Gilman Drive

Vil

la L

a Jo

lla

Dri

ve

Nobel Drive

Executive Drive

Campus Point DriveCampus Point Drive

Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Locally Preferred Alternative VariationsFig

ure B

-1May 2005

1

4

3

2

567

8

11

10

9

12

13

14

15

10

1

4

3

2

5

6

7

8

11

10

9

12

13

14

15

Scripps Station Location Option

UCSD East StationLocation Option

Regents-Executive Variation

Genesee Variation

Lawrence Family JewishCommunity Center

City Parkland

Eastgate Mall

At-Grade Crossings

Emergency Access toThornton Hospital

Genesee – Rose Canyon Variation

UCSD West

University Center Lane Station

VA Medical Center Station Option

Future Gilman Bridge

Westfield ShoppingtownUniversity Town Center

Mid-Coast North

Existing Blue Line

BalboaBalboaStationStation

TecoloteTecoloteStationStation

Old Town Old Town Transit CenterTransit Center

Clairemont Drive Clairemont Drive StationStation

18

17

16

1916

17

18

19

Ashton Street StationLocation Option San Diego Union Tribune Spur

SDNR Elvira

SDNR Tecolote

Mid-Coast South

May 2005

Figure B-2 Mid-Coast Corridor Transit ProjectLocally Preferred Alternative Variations


May 2005

Figure C-1


May 2005

Figure C-2

FIGURE D Super Loop Routing and Station Locations

mid-coast corridor transit project statement of … · 2007. 3. 15. · statement of work a....

Documents