Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
City of Garden Grove and City of Westminster - 2023-03-21 (3)
fJPR°VE7D 7 - D Uij , 2000 Main Street, oti Huntington Beach,CA _° 92648 City of Huntington Beach File #: 22-824 MEETING DATE: 3/21/2023 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY: Al Zelinka, City Manager VIA: Sean Crumby, Director of Public Works PREPARED BY: William Janusz, Principal Civil Engineer Subject: Approve and authorize execution of a Cooperative Agreement with the Cities of Garden Grove and Westminster for a traffic signal synchronization project along Bolsa Chica Street/ Valley View Street; place project on City of Huntington Beach Fiscal Year 2022/2023 Capital Improvement Program; and authorize budget appropriation of local funds from the Air Quality Management District Fund Statement of Issue: In October 2019, the City of Huntington Beach in conjunction with the City of Westminster and the City of Garden Grove submitted an application to the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) for a Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program project on Valley View Street/ Bolsa Chica Street from Chapman Avenue in Garden Grove to Warner Avenue in the City of Huntington Beach. To clarify the roles and responsibilities of the participating agencies, the City of Huntington Beach, as lead agency, submitted a Cooperative Agreement to the Cities of Westminster and Garden Grove. With the agreement approved by the Cities of Westminster and Garden Grove, approval is required from the City of Huntington Beach. The cooperative agreement also specifies funding commitments from the cities of Westminster and Garden Grove. Council action is required to allocate the City of Huntington Beach's matching funds required for this project. Financial Impact: The total project cost is $2,343,900, with OCTA providing $1,735,949 in grant funds. The City of Huntington Beach has grant matching fund commitment of$155,532. An allocation of$329,496 is requested from the Air Quality Management District (AQMD) fund (Account No. 20190014.82700) for the grant matching funds, construction administration and construction contingency. Because the City is acting as lead agency for this project, the City will bill the cities of Westminster and Garden Grove City of Huntington Beach Page 1 of 4 Printed on 3/16/2023 power LegistarT" File #: 22-824 MEETING DATE: 3/21/2023 for their matching portions. Therefore, an allocation of the grant funds of$1,735,949 and the other cities matching funds of$142,846 (Westminster) and $135,608 (Garden Grove) for a total of $2,014,403 is requested. Recommended Action: A) Approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute "Cooperative Agreement by and between the Cities of Huntington Beach, Garden Grove and Westminster for the Valley View Street/ Bolsa Chica Street Corridor Traffic Signal Synchronization Project"; B) Amend the City of Huntington Beach 2022/2023 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to include the Traffic Signal Synchronization project along Valley View Street/Bolsa Chica Street with a total project budget of$2,343,900; C) Allocate grant funds from the Orange County Transportation Authority of$1,735,949, project matching funds from the City of Garden Grove in the amount of$135,608 and project matching funds from the City of Westminster in the amount of$142,846 to a designated grant account approved by the Finance Department; and, D) Allocate City of Huntington Beach funds in the amount of$329,496 from the Air Quality Management District (AQMD) fund to account no. 20190014.82700. Alternative Action(s): Deny approval of the Cooperative Agreement which would result in the cancellation of the project and the forfeiture of the grant allocation. The project would be placed on hold while the City awaits future OCTA funding opportunities. Analysis: In October 2019, the City of Huntington Beach, in conjunction with the City of Westminster and the City of Garden Grove, submitted an application to OCTA for a Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program project on Valley View Street/ Bolsa Chica Street from Chapman Avenue in Garden Grove to Warner Avenue in Huntington Beach. This project allows for improved traffic flow through signal synchronization along the corridor. On December 16, 2019 the City Council formally approved the submission of this grant application to OCTA, including the commitment to lead the project and to provide the matching funds identified as identified in Resolution 2019-74. In April 2020, OCTA approved funding for this project. This is a joint project with the Cities of Westminster and Garden Grove and Caltrans, and will provide operational and infrastructure improvements at 22 signalized intersections along the corridor. Improvements within the City of Huntington Beach include the installation of fiber optic communication cable and new traffic signal controllers. The City of Huntington Beach will manage the design and implementation efforts. Construction contracts and construction administration will be the responsibility of each participating agency, with the City of Huntington Beach following standard construction advertising, bidding and contract award procedures for work within the City of Huntington Beach. The City of Huntington Beach will manage City of Huntington Beach Page 2 of 4 Printed on 3/16/2023 powere244,LegistarT" File #: 22-824 MEETING DATE: 3/21/2023 all finances on this project, being responsible for administering the grant funds from OCTA, collecting the matching funds from the other agencies, and paying the project expenses. As Caltrans does not participate financially in this type of project, the matching funds for improvements at the Caltrans intersections are divided between the three cities. In October 2022, the City of Huntington Beach requested an escalation to the grant allocation (City Council Resolution No. 2022-65), citing the passage of three years since the initial grant application was submitted and the subsequent price increases for construction materials and labor costs. The request was approved by OCTA in February 2023. The approved project budget is as follows: Total Project Cost: $2,343,900 Work Within the City of Huntington Beach: $ 760,103 City of HB Matching Funds Required (Includes Caltrans locations) $ 155,532 City of Huntington Beach Construction Contingency (15%) $ 114,015 City of HB Contract Administration $ 59,949 Total City of Huntington Beach Appropriation Request $ 329,496 The City of Huntington Beach will also administer the grant funds from OCTA, collecting the matching fund contributions from the Cities of Westminster and Garden Grove, contracting with a consulting engineer to perform the analysis and design the communication improvement plans and to enter into a construction contract for the construction activities within the City of Huntington Beach. The Cities of Westminster and Garden Grove will issue their own construction contracts for work within their cities. The OCTA grant covers approximately 80% of the engineering and construction costs. The funding for this project will be as follows: OCTA Project P Allocation: $1,735,949 'Matching Funds from the City of Garden Grove $ 135,608 Matching Funds from the City of Westminster: $ 142,846 City of Huntington Beach Matching Funds (AQMD fund) $ 155,532 City of Huntington Beach Project Administration: $ 59,949 City of Huntington Beach Project Contingency (15% of construction) $ 114,015 TOTAL PROJECT COST $2,343,900 As stipulated in the Memorandum of Understanding, the individual agencies will be responsible for any project costs within their jurisdictions that exceed the approved project budget. The OCTA project allocation will not be increased. The City of Huntington Beach prepared a Cooperative Agreement for this project which was approved by the City of Garden Grove on August 16, 2022 and the City of Westminster on September 14, 2022. This agreement specifies the responsibilities and funding commitments for City of Huntington Beach Page 3 of 4 Printed on 3/16/2023 powere344 Legistar'"' File #: 22-824 MEETING DATE: 3/21/2023 each agency. Approval of this Cooperative Agreement and the associated addition of this project to the City of Huntington Beach 2022/2023 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) will enable the City of Huntington Beach to initiate the process of issuing Requests for Proposals to engineering firms to perform the analysis and design activities for this project. Upon acceptance of the project plans, the City of Huntington Beach will procure a construction contract utilizing the City's standard advertising, bidding and construction contract award processes. The Cities of Garden Grove and Westminster will procure their own construction contracts for work within their cities. Public Works Commission Action: None required for this action. Upon completion of the project plans and contract documents within the City of Huntington Beach, these items will be brought before the Public Works Commission for approval to advertise for sealed bids. Environmental Status: This project is categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303 (c). Strategic Plan Goal: Infrastructure & Parks Attachment(s): 1. Location Map 2. "Cooperative Agreement by and between the Cities of Huntington Beach, Garden Grove and Westminster for the Valley View Street / Bolsa Chica Street Corridor Traffic Signal Synchronization Project"; 3. Agreement No. C-1-2765, City of Huntington Beach, "M2 CTFP Master Funding Agreement" - Letter Agreement No. 11. 4. Request for Escalation to Project P Prior Allocation, from City of Huntington Beach to OCTA dated October 12, 2022, 5. Committee Transmittal dated February 13, 2023, approving Escalation Request. 6. PowerPoint City of Huntington Beach Page 4 of 4 Printed on 3/16/2023 powere 4Gy Legistar'' I ' CHAPMAN AVE. GARDEN GROVE LAMPSON AVE./ 1 �' LAMPSON AVE. V, J 4 0 N z N >p. NTS 405 ,22, _ I 405 w WESTMINSTER m Q Cl) U 0 U1wa WESTMINSTERI N I BLVD. WESTMINSTER BLVD W w J ' Z SEAL IJJ CO # o BEACH PROJECT / 91 I I BOLSA AVE. CORRIDOR I 405 I0 En I J = Qp z % z 3 w ' EDINGER AVE. C" I HUNTINGTON BEACH o it: Icn HEIL AVE. o V' w 3 Q 0 m m 1 WARNER AVE. 0 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH * PUBLIC WORKS * TRAFFIC ENGINEERING • © ATTACHMENT 6 e PROJECT LOCATION 1 I 347 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITIES OF HUNTINGTON BEACH,GARDEN GROVE AND WESTMINSTER FOR THE VALLEY VIEW STREET/BOLSA CHICA STREET CORRIDOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION PROJECT This Cooperative Agreement("Agreement")is made and entered into this 21sr day of Mgf,14 , 2023,by and between the CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH,the CITY OF GARDEN GROVE and the CITY OF WESTMINSTER. A. The City of Huntington Beach,with cooperation from the Cities of Garden Grove and Westminster,applied for a grant from the Orange County Transportation Authority ("OCTA")Measure M2 Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program("RTSSP"), aimed to coordinate traffic signals across multiple jurisdictions to enhance the countywide traffic flow and reduce congestion. B. The Valley View Street/Bolsa Chica Street Corridor Traffic Signal Synchronization Project was selected by OCTA as one of the RTSSP Projects to be funded in OCTA Fiscal Year 2020-2021. A two-year project delay was received from OCTA,with a revised project funding Fiscal Year of 2022-2023. The project will include timing implementation and improvements at traffic signals along Valley View Street/Bolsa Chica Street,from Chapman Avenue in Garden Grove to Warner Avenue in Huntington Beach,as listed in the Project Application attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by this reference. C. The total budget for the project is $1,871,410. Of this budget, 80%($1,497.120) is funded by the OCTA Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program and 20% ($374,280)is local agencies matching funds. The breakdown is shown in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. D. Huntington Beach, Garden Grove and Westminster agree to provide twenty percent (20%)matching funds for the total project cost. Matching funds can be a combination of cash and in-kind match as defined by the RTSSP grant. E. OCTA and Huntington Beach have entered into a Master Funding Agreement "Cooperative Agreement No. C-1-2765"defining the terms and conditions for approved Measure M2 projects that will be implemented by Huntington Beach. F. Huntington Beach agrees to serve as the lead agency to oversee the design and implementation of the project. G. Huntington Beach, Garden Grove and Westminster desire to enter into this Cooperative Agreement to demonstrate their commitment to implement the project and improve inter- jurisdiction traffic signal synchronization on Valley View Street/Bolsa Chica Street. H. This Cooperative Agreement defines the specific terms,conditions and funding responsibilities between Huntington Beach, Garden Grove and Westminster for the implementation of the project. 1 NOW THEREFORE,it is mutually understood and agreed by and between HUNTINGTON BEACH,GARDEN GROVE AND WESTIMINSTER: SCOPE: This Agreement specifies the roles and responsibilities of the cities as they pertain to the subjects and projects addressed herein. The project is specifically detailed in the Project Application attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by this reference. All of the cities agreed that each will cooperate and coordinate with the other in all activities covered by this Agreement and any other supplemental agreements that may be required to facilitate purposes thereof. II. MUTUAL RESPONSIBLITIES: Huntington Beach,Garden Grove and Westminster mutually agree to: • a. Designate a lead staff to act as the liaison for the project. The liaison and any other project personnel,if necessary,will attend and participate in all related project meetings. b. Participate,cooperate and coordinate with contractors,consultants,vendors and staff in good faith using reasonable efforts to resolve any unforeseen issues and disputes arising out of the project to the extent practicable with respect to the performance of the project. c. Maintain project related traffic signals and telecommunications equipment with high priority during the project,and be responsible for repair of their own signal control systems in each of their respective jurisdictions. d. Provide on-site support for signal control systems,timing plans,detection systems and related equipment during construction,installation and integration,and be available to change or make adjustments to timing plans when necessitated by the project. • e. Document in-kind match or dollar match funding as identified in the project application,and provide verification of such expenditures as part of any review or audit process,which may include payroll records,contracts and purchase orders. f. Monitor and operate the project traffic signals and improvements within its jurisdiction for a period of two(2)years following the completion of the Primary Implementation Phase of the project,as required by the program funding. g. Coordinate the inclusion of other improvements and in-kind services,where necessary,that the owning agency requires for the implementation of the project,but are not included in the project application.The owning agency shall be responsible for the inclusion of such elements within reason and at its own costs. 2 f t h, Unused project funds for improvements from one City can be used by another City (with matching fund responsibility)upon mutual consent of the involved parties. III. RESPONSIBILITIES OF HUNTINGTON BEACH: Huntington Beach agrees to the following responsibilities: a. Huntington Beach shall serve as lead agency for design and traffic signal timing implementation and shall provide oversight by establishing milestones and overseeing the project development to ensure that all standards and requirements set forth by the agreement is adhered to. b. Huntington Beach shall be responsible for completing the project in accordance with the funding guidelines and any and all other OCTA requirements related to these funding programs. Huntington Beach shall maintain coordination with • all participating agencies throughout the duration of the project. c. Huntington Beach shall provide staff,consultants,and contractors deemed necessary and appropriate to manage,administer,coordinate,and oversee engineering design and timing implementation of the project. d. Huntington Beach shall coordinate the work effort of the Project,provide the day-to- day management of the consultant and manage all consultant administration. Huntington Beach shall review the consultant's invoices and pay them accordingly after ensuring that the work has been adequately performed by the consultant. e. Huntington Beach shall provide its share of matching fund as shown in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. The final amount may vary and will be based on the 20%of actual cost of implementing all timing,improvements and maintenance,as identified in the project application. f. Upon issuance of a Notice to Proceed to the Consultant,Huntington Beach can issue invoices to Garden Grove and Westminster for up to 80% of the cash match amount identified in Exhibit A. The remaining case match amount will be invoiced after completion of the Primary Implementation Phase of the project. g. Huntington Beach shall comply with all of the terms and conditions of the Cooperative Agreement with OCTA, including the Project Reporting and Audit Requirements contained therein. IV. RESPONSIBILITIES OF GARDEN GROVE: Garden Grove agrees to the following responsibilities: 3 a. Garden Grove shall provide its share of matching funds as shown in Exhibit A. The final amount may vary and will be based on the 20%of actual cost of the implementing all timing,improvements and maintenance,as identified in the project application. b. Garden Grove shall be responsible for construction contracting, construction administration and construction inspection for all improvements within its jurisdiction. Costs of such inspection services shall be part of the in-kind labor services provided within the matching fund. No additional compensation from the project is provided for providing inspection services. c. Garden Grove shall waive all costs and fees related to any and all permits,if such permits are required to perform any project related work in its jurisdiction. V. RESPONSIBILITIES OF WESTMISTER: Westminster agrees to the following responsibilities: a. Westminster shall provide its share of matching funds as shown in Exhibit A. The final amount may vary and will be based on the 20%of actual cost of implementing all timing,improvements and maintenance,as identified in the project application. b. Westminster shall be responsible for construction contracting,construction administration and construction inspection for all improvements within its jurisdiction. Costs of such inspection services shall be part of the in-kind labor services provided within the matching fund. No additional compensation from the project is provided for providing inspection services. c. Westminster shall waive all costs and fees related to any and all permits,if such permits are required to perform any project related work in its jurisdiction. VI. COMPLETE AGREEMENT a. This Agreement,including any attachments incorporated herein and made applicable by reference,constitutes the complete and exclusive statement of the terms and conditions of this Agreement between HUNTINGTON BEACH,GARDEN GROVE AND WESTMINSTER and it supersedes all prior representations,understandings and communications between the parties. The invalidity in whole or in part of any term or condition of this Agreement shall not affect the validity of other term(s)or condition(s)of this Agreement. The above referenced Recitals are true and correct and are incorporated by reference herein. b. Any modifications of this Agreement shall only be by amendment upon written mutual consent of all cities. All modifications,amendments,changes and revision of this Agreement in whole or in part,and from time to time,shall be binding upon the cities so long as the same shall be in writing and executed by each agency. c. A party's failure to insist on any instance(s)of any other party's performance of any term(s) or condition(s)of this Agreement shall not be construed as a waiver of the non-enforcing party's right to such performance or to future performance of such 4 term(s)or condition(s), and the non-performing party's obligations in respect thereto shall continue in full force and effect. Changes to any portion of this Agreement shall not be binding upon either party except when specifically confirmed in writing by way of a written amendment to this Agreement between the parties and issued in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. VII. INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION a. Each City shall jointly and severally indemnify,defend and hold harmless every other City,it's officers,directors,employees and agents from and against any and all claims for any loss or damages,bodily injuries,damage to,or loss of property caused by the negligent acts,omissions or willful misconduct by the City,its officers, directors,employees,or agents in connection with or arising out of the performance of this Agreement. b. Each City shall maintain adequate levels of insurance,or self-insurance to assure full indemnification of every other City. VIII. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS a. Term of Agreement: This Agreement shall continue in full force and effect until December 31,2026. This Agreement may be extended at the mutual consent of all parties in writing. b. HUNTINGTON BEACH,GARDEN GROVE and WESTIMINSTER hereto affirm that they are authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of said parties and that, by so executing this Agreement,the parties hereto are formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement. c. Severability: If any term,provision,covenant or condition of this Agreement is held to be invalid,void or otherwise unenforceable to any extent,by any court of competent jurisdiction,the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby, and each term,provision,covenant or condition of this Agreement shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. d. Counterparts of Agreement: This Agreement may be executed and delivered in any number of counterparts,each of which,when executed and delivered shall be deemed an original and all of which together shall constitute the same agreement. Facsimile and electronic signatures will he permitted. e. In the event that the project costs exceed the estimates submitted in the Project Application as prepared, all parties agree to meet and determine project revisions to meet the budget,or a revised funding proposal by the Cities that shall be documented and submitted in writing as a revision to the Agreement. f. The parties shall comply with all applicable Federal, State and local laws, statutes, ordinances and regulations of any governmental agency having jurisdiction over the project. 5 g. Force Majeure: Any party shall be excused from performing its obligations under this Agreement during the time and to the extent that it is prevented from performing by any unforeseeable cause beyond its control,including but not limited to,any • incident of fire;flood; acts of God; commandeering of material products,plants or ( facilities by the Federal,State or local government;national fuel shortage;or,a material act or omission by the other party;when satisfactory evidence of such cause is presented to the other parties,and provided further that such non-performance is unforeseeable beyond the control and is not due to the fault or negligence of the party not performing. h. Assignment: Neither this Agreement,nor any of the parties' rights,obligations or duties hereunder may be assigned in whole or in part by any party without the prior written consent of all the other parties in their sole and absolute discretion. Any such attempt at assignment shall be deemed void and of no force and effect. Consent to one assignment shall not be deemed consent to any subsequent assignment,nor the waiver of any rights to,consent to such subsequent assignment. i. Obligations to Comply with Law: Nothing herein shall be deemed nor construed to authorize or require any party to issue bonds,notes or other evidences of indebtedness under the terms, in amounts, or for purposes other than as authorized by local,State or Federal law. • j. Governing Law: The laws of the State of California and applicable local and Federal laws,regulations and guidelines shall govern this Agreement. k. Litigation fees: Should litigation arise out of this Agreement for the performance thereof,the court shall award costs and expenses,including attorney's fees,to the prevailing party. 1. Notices: Any notices,requests or demands made between the parties pursuant to this Agreement are to be directed to: City of Huntington Beach Public Works/Engineering Attn: William Janusz,Principal Civil Engineer 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (714) 374-1628 City of Garden Grove Public Works Department Attn: Dai Vu,City Traffic Engineer 11222 Acacia Parkway Garden Grove,CA 92842 6 t' S (714)741-5189 E d City of Westminster Public Works Department Attn:Adolfo Ozeata,Transportation Manager 8200 Westminster Blvd., Westminster, CA 92683 (714)554-3462 IX. DELEGATED AUTHORITY The actions required to be taken by the Cities in this implementation of this Agreement are deleted to its Mayor, City Manager or equivalent designee. [SIGNATURES ON SUBSEQUENT PAGES] i 7 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the day and year first above written; CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH: cele Mayor ATTEST: /' L {v,(City Clerk l APPROVED , I• FORM: Ci+ Attorney 1µ•U 8 4 DocuSign Envelope ID:03A8DDB8-B426-437F-8E93-3135388D83EB • IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the day and year first above written: CITY OF GARDEN GROVE: ,) DocuSigned by: 8/16/2022 29eee,oCEP.2,46a... Mayor Steve Jones ATTEST: ,—DocuSIgned by: ,vr,sa Pbw►Ual 8/16/2022 v City Clerk • APPROVED AS TO FORM: e—DocuSigned by: i ,444.4 8/16/2022 City Attorney 9 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the day and year first above written: CITY OF WESTMINSTER: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk I iti-ew►hn APPROVE A TO FORM: ity Attorney 10 EXHIBIT A { Valley View Street/Bolsa Chica Street TSSP Project Funds Breakdown AGENCY PROJECT M2 GRANT LOCAL MATCH(20%) FUNDS BY (80%) TOTAL MATCH TYPE AGENCY* MATCH** CASH 1N-KIND HUNTINGTON $654,000.00 $523,200.00 $134,311.58 $131,165.58 $3,146.00 BEACH GARDEN $567,300.00 $453,840.00 $115,654.74 $32,494.74 $83,160.00 GROVE WESTMINSTER $597,600.00 $478,080.00 $122,153.68 $122,153.68 $0.00 CALTRANS $41,700.00 $33,360.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 TOTAL $1,860,600.00 $1,488,480.00 . $372,120.00 $285,814.00 $86,306.00 *Unused project funds from one Agency can be transferred to another agency with mutual consent. "Total match amount may vary;the final match amount will be based on the actual project implementation costs,to be determined at the Primary Implementation Phase of this project. • 11 EXHIBIT B PROJECT APPLICATION 3/19/2020 I { • • ti t i - 12 EXHIBIT B CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 4 Public Works Department rrr Tom Herbel, PE ;.;;' Acting Director of Public Works March 19, 2020 Mr.Alfonso Hemandez Orange County Transportation Authority 600 S. Main Street Orange, CA 92863 Subject: Revised Application for Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program Funds Under the Comprehensive Transportation Funding Program Valley View Street / Bolsa Chica Street from Chapman Avenue to Warner Avenue Dear Mr. Hernandez: The City of Huntington Beach, in conjunction with the Cities of Garden Grove and Westminster, is submitting the enclosed revised application for funding consideration for the Valley View Street / Balsa Chica Street corridor under the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program of the Comprehensive Transportation Funding Program. The application is for operational and infrastructure improvements along Valley View Street/ Bolsa Chico Street from Chapman Avenue to Warner Avenue. Enclosed is a printout of the revised supplemental application. This application has been revised based upon your comments dated March 18, 2020. We appreciate your consideration of our application. If there are any questions, please contact me at (714) 374-1628. Sincerely, � -,— „- William F. Janusz, P.E. Principal Civil Engineer Enclosures C: Dai Vu, City Traffic Engineer, Garden Grove Bill (Hoa) Pham, Civil Engineering Associate,Westminster 2000 Main Street, California 92648* Phone 714-536-5431 • www.huntingtonbeachca.gov FY 2020 Call for Projects Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program Project P Supplemental Application VALLEY VIEW STREET I BOLSA CHICA STREET 10/24/2019-RESUBMITTED 3/19/2020 Project Overview Length of Corridor(mi): 5.35 Number of signals: 22 Total Project Cost: $1,860,600.00 M2 funds requested: $1,488,480.00 Total Match: $372,120.00 Cash Match: $285,814.00 In-kind Match: $86,306.00 Participating agencies: Cities of Garden Grove, Westminster and Huntington Beach and Caftans Applicant Agency: City of Huntington Beach Contact Name: William F. Janusz Contact Number: 714-374-1628 Contact Email: wianuszAsurfcity-hb.orq Project P Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program Application Checklist • Project P Application Checklist Page RTSSP Online Application—submitted through OCFundlracker 1. Vehicle Miles Traveled. 2. Benefic Cost Ratio 3. Project Characteristics 4. Transportation Significance Online 5. Maintenance of Effort 6. Project Scale 7. Number of Jurisdictions B. Current Project Readiness 9. Funding Over-Match 10. Cabinet photos,equipment specifications,as-built drawings,cabinet drawings,etc.(if Flashdrive Section 1:Key Technical information a. Project Corridor Limits 1 b. Designation of the corridor to synchronize:Signal Synchronization Network corridor or 1 Master Plan of Arterial Highways corridor c. Project start date and end date,including any commitment to operate signal 1 synchronization beyond the three year grant period • d. Signalized intersections that are part of the project 1 e. Traffic Forum members 1 Section 2:Lead agency 2 Section 3:Resolutions of support from the project's Traffic Forum members 3 Section 4:Preliminary plans for the proposed project by task(detail below) The plans shall include details about both phases of the project Primary Implementation(PI)and the Ongoing Maintenance and Operations(0&M).The plan should be organized using the following setup. Primary Implementation shall include details about the following: Task 1: Project Administration(required) Pg.8-11 Task 2: Data Collection(required) Task 3: Field Review and Plans Specifications and Estimates(required) Task 4: Corridor"Before"Study(required) Task 5: Signal Timing Optimization and Implementation(required) Task 6: Corridor"After"Study(required) Task 7: Sychronization System Construction(required) Task 8: Project Report(required) Task 9: On-going Operations and Maintenance(required) Ongoing Maintenance and Operations(O&M)will begin after the Primary Implementation of the project Pg 11 is completed. It shall include details about the following: a. Monitoring and improving optimized signal timing(required) b. Communications and detection support(optional) c. O&M Final Memorandum(required) Section 5:Funding NeedslCosts for Proposed Project by Task Pg. 12 a Table I: Summary of Improvements Pg. 13 b. Table II: Detailed Improvement Breakdown Pg. 14-16 Section 6:Project schedule for the 3 year grant period by task Pg. 17 Section 7:Matching funds Pg. 18 • Section 8:Environmental clearances and other permits Pg. 19 Section 9:Calculations used to develop selection criteria inputs Pg. 19-20 Section 10:Any additional information deemed relevant by the applicant Pg.21-22 Appendices Pg.23 SECTION 1:KEY TECHNICAL INFORMATION a. The proposed project will synchronize Valley View Street I Boise Chica Street from Chapman Avenue to Warner Avenue. The project includes(22)signals over approximately(5)miles. Figure 1 shows a map of the project area. Boma Chico Road/Valley View Street Cunidor • 0'R094 GROVE w..mw no isi .. 1VESR:'.P15TER Y< . b nc �B �T r1 �a 4 � 1 _ >;, _ - t F '-J' ,� ;Yi try .1 �r u. • ' • L08ALAF�RD9 — . i to • Figure 1:Signalized intersection and proposed project limits. b. Designation of the corridor to synchronize: 0 Master Plan of Arterial Highways Corridor Q Signal Synchronization Network Corridor c. Project Start Date: 7/1/2020 Project End Date: 6/30/2023 All agencies commit to operate signal sychronization BEYOND the three year grant period for. Q Zero Years 0 One Year ❑Two Years 0 Three Years ❑Other d. Signalized intersections that are part of the project: City of Garden Grove : • 11,Boise Chica Street @ Westminster Blvd" 1.Valley View Street @ Chapman Avenue 12.Boise Chica Street St James Park: : 2.Valley View Street @ Cinema Main Driveway 13.Balsa Chico Street @ Churchill Avenue 3.Valley View Street @ BelgraveAvenue: 14.Balsa Chico Street @ Rancho Road : _ 4.•Valley View Street @ Lampson Avenue 5.Valley View Street @ Cerulean Avenue City of Huntington Beach , . 15.Boise Chico Street @ Boise Avenue ... CALTRANS • . '16.Boise Chica Street @ Argosy Avenue 6.Valley View Street @ Tiffany Avenue 17.Boise Chico Street @ McFadden Avenue 7.Valley View Street @ WB SR 22 Ramps 18.Boise Chico Street @ Robinwood Drive 8.Valley View Street @ Garden Grove Boulevard 19.Boise Chico Street @ Edinger Avenue 20.Boise Chico Street @ Heil Avenue City of Westminster 21.Boise Chico Street @ Pearce Drive - 9.Boise Chico Street @ Old Boise Chica Road . 22.Boise Chico Street @ Warner Avenue " 10.Balsa Chico Street @ Duncannon Avenue • e. Traffic Forum members: Garden Grove,CALTRANS,Westminster and Huntington Beach 1 SECTION 2:LEAD AGENCY OX City of Huntington Beach 'will be the lead agency County of Orange will be the lead agency Please note OCTA will not be leading projects for this Call for Projects. Explain why this project is regionally significant: Bolsa Chica Street/Valley View Street is a major north-south arterial in western Orange County. The segment encompassing this proposed project provides a primary access route between Interstate 405 and State Route 22 with the beach communities to the south and the cities of Garden Grove, Cypress and Buena Park to the north. Average daily traffic volumes near the freeways exceed 50,000 vehicles per day. 2 SECTION 3:RESOLUTIONS OF SUPPORT Attached are resolutions of support from the Cities of Huntington Beach,Garden Grove and Westminster which were approved by their City Councils on December 16,2019,November 26,2019 and January 15, 2020 respectively: A letter of support is included for Caltrans,who will not be a part of any cooperative agreement. • 3 • RESOLUTION NO:2019-74 A RESOLUTION.OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TH CITY OF HUNTINGTONBEACH APPROVING THE SUBMITTAL OF AN IMPROVEMENTPROJECT TO THE ORANGE COUNTY : TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY FOR FUNDING UNDER. THE COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION FUNDING PROGRAM . WHEREAS,the Orange County Transportation Authority intends tb lillacate fund$for • ti ° transportation improvetrients within the incorporated cities and the County;and The Measure M2 Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program targets over 2,000 • • signalized intersections across.Orarige County to maintain traffic signal synchronization, improve traffic flow,and reduce congestion across jurisdictions;and The City of Huntington Beach has been declared by the Orange County Transportation Authority to meet the eligibility requirements to receive revenues as part of Measure M2;and • The City.of Huntington Beach must include all projects funded by Net ftevenaes in the seven-year Capital Improvement Program as part Of the Renewed Measure•M-Ordinance eligibility requirement;and i • • The City of Huntington Beach authorizes a formal amendment to the seven-year Capital Improvement Program to add projects approved for funding'upon approval f om the Orange County Transportation Authority Board of Directors;and The City of Huntington Beach has currently adopted a Local Signal Synchronization Plan • •consistent with the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan as a key coniponept of local agencies'efforts to synchronize traffic signals across local agencies`boundaries;and' • The City.Council of the City of Huntington Beach desires to impletnent the multi • - jurisdictional signal synchronization listed.hercin;arid The City's Circulation Element is consistent with the County of Orange Master Plan of • Arterial Highways;and The City of Huntington Beach will provide matching fund*for the project as required by the Orange County Comprehensive Transportation Program Procedures Manual;and The City of Huntington Beach will riot use Renewed Measure M funds to supplant Developer Fees mother committnents, 19-13103/216317 1 Resolution No.2019-74 NOW,THEREFORE,the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby .resolve as follows' , 1 } The City Council of the City of.Hitntington.Beaeli hereby requests the Orange County. , i Transportation Authority to allocate funds in the amounts:specifiid in the City's-application for • the Comprehensive Transportation Funding"Program. Said funds shall bematcheiFby funds ` from the City as tegriired arid shall be.nsed as supplemental funding to aid the City signal. ' - synchronization along the following streets: • Boise Chica Street PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of triu}tingtoa Beaoh at a regular meeting thereof held on the . 16 th day.of. December. ,.2019. '41 . Ma r . ' REYIE D" AROVt...._... APPROVED ity Manager • rty ttomey MN ATED AND APPROVED" - t_____,42, , 0 • Direct of a, is Works f • 19-81031216317 2 _ } • t I Res.No.2018 74 • i • STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE ) et: - . CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) i • I, ROBIN ESTANISLAU,the duly el'ected;,qu�lifief City Clerkaf the City of Huntington Beach,and ex oflicio Clerk of the City Council of said City,do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City.Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven;that the foregoing resolution Was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council • at a.Regular meeting thereof held on December 16,2019 by the following vote: • AYES: Brenden;Carr, Semeta, Peterson, Delgleize, Hardy • NOES: None ABSENT: Posey RECUSE: None . 4 ) . • City.Cnd ew-ofticio Clerk of the • City Council Of the City Of Huntington Beach, California •• GARDEN GROVE CITY COUNCIL • RESOLUTION NO. 9595-19 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GARDEN GROVE APPROVING THE SUBMITTAL OF VALLEY VIEW STREET/BOLSA CHICA STREET TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT TO THE ORANGE • COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY FOR FUNDING UNDER THE COMPETITIVE j = MEASURE M2 REGIONAL TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION PROGRAM . WHEREAS, the City of Garden Grove desires to implement transportation improvements listed below; WHEREAS,the Measure M2 Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program targets over 2000 signalized intersections across Orange County to maintain traffic signal synchronization,improve traffic flow, and reduce congestion across • jurisdictions; • • WHEREAS, the City of Garden Grove has been declared by the Orange County Transportation Authority to meet the eligibility requirements to receive • revenues as part of Measure M2; WHEREAS,the City must include all projects funded by Net Revenues in the seven-year Capital Improvements Program as part of the Renewed Measure M • Ordinance eligibility requirement; WHEREAS, the City authorizes a formal amendment to the seven-year Capital Improvement program to add projects approved for funding upon approval from the Orange County Transportation Authority; WHEREAS, the City of Garden Grove has a currently adopted a Local Signal Synchronization Plan consistent with the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan as a key component of local agencies'efforts to synchronizing traffic signals across local agencies'boundaries; WHEREAS, the City of Garden Grove will provide matching funds for each • • project as required by the Orange County Comprehensive Transportation Funding • Programs Procedures Manual; WHEREAS, the City of Garden Grove will not use Measure M funds to supplant Developer Fees or other commitments; and WHEREAS, the City of Garden Grove desires to implement multi jurisdictional signal synchronization listed below. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED,that the City Council of the City of Garden Grove does hereby request the Orange County Transportation Authority allocate funds in the amounts specified in the City's application to said City from the • Garden Grove City Council Resolution No. 9595-19 Page 2 t Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program. Said funds, if approved, shall be _ matched by funds from said City as required, and shall be used as supplemental funding to aid the City if signal synchronization along the following street: i 1. Valley View Street/Bolsa Chica Street ' Adopted this 26th day of November 2019. • ATTEST: /s/STEVEN R.JONES MAYOR • /s/TERESA POMEROY.CMC CITY CLERK • STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) • COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS: CITY OF GARDEN GROVE ) • • • I,TERESA POMEROY,City Clerk of the City of Garden Grove,do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Garden Grove, California, at a meeting held on November 26, 2019, by the • following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: (7) BRIETIGAM, O'NEILL, NGUYEN T., BUI • KLOPFENSTEIN, NGUYEN K., JONES NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: (0) NONE ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: (0) NONE /sl TERESA POMEROY. CMC • • CITY CLERK •RESOLUTION NO.4977 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WESTMINSTER APPROVING THE SUBMITTAL OF VALLEY VIEW STREET/BOLSA CHICA STREET TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT TO THE ORANGE COUNTY • TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY FOR FUNDING UNDER z THE COMPETITIVE MEASURE M2 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION • PROGRAM • • WHEREAS, the City of Westminster desires to Implement transportation improvements listed below;and WHEREAS, the Measure M2 Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program • targets over 2000 signalized intersections across Orange County to maintain traffic signal synchronization, improve traffic flow, and reduce congestion across jurisdictions;and WHEREAS, the City of Westminster has been declared by the Orange County Transportation Authority to meet the eligibility requirements to receive revenues as part of Measure M2; and WHEREAS,the City must include all projects funded by Net Revenues in the seven- year Capital Improvements Program as part of the Renewed Measure M Ordinance eligibility requirement; and WHEREAS, the City authorizes a formal amendment to the seven-year Capital ' Improvement program to add projects approved for funding upon approval from the Orange County Transportation Authority; and WHEREAS, the City of Westminster has a currently adopted a Local Signal Synchronization Plan consistent with the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan as a key component of local agencies'efforts to synchronizing traffic signals across local agencies' boundaries; and • WHEREAS,the City of Westminster will provide matching funds for each project as required by the Orange County Comprehensive Transportation Funding Programs Procedures Manual;and • WHEREAS, the City of Westminster will not use Measure M funds to.supplant Developer Fees or other commitments;and WHEREAS,the City of Westminster desires to implement multi jurisdictional signal synchronization listed below. • 4977-1 • NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED THAT,the Mayor of City Council of the City • of Westminster hereby requests the Orange County Transportation Authority allocate funds in the amounts specified in the City's application to said City from the Regional Transportation Signal Synchronization Program.Said funds,if approved,shall be matched by funds from said City as required, and shall be used•to supplement funding to aid the r implementation of signal synchronization along the following street: _ • • 1. Valley View Street/Bolsa Chica Street • • • PASSED,'APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 151h day of January 2020, by the following vote: • AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: TA, HO,CONTRERAS, DO, NGUYEN NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE • C. • TRI TA, MAYOR • ATTEST: 01..L • • 1 ' CHRISTINE CORDON,CITY CLERK I : AP- - ' AS TO FORM: • RIC ARD D.J. ES,CITY ATTORNEY • STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE )ss. CITY OF WESTMINSTER ) I,CHRISTINE CORDON, hereby certify that I am the duly appointed City Clerk of the City of Westminster and that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted at a regular ' meeting of the City Council of the City of Westminster held on the 15u'day of January 2020. alj6 Christine Cordon, City Clerk • • 4977-2 • • 6 it STATEOFCAt FnaNL.a.-ciUFoaNnaSTAATROXSTOarariorAGENCY cdaM Woman.Cave n/. DEPARTMENT�, OF TRANSPORTATION -- . F ECl 2 C�iC� t i3t t 1756 E>ST1T"STREET,SUITE I00 s•�,, f . ss.A,YTr1 ANA,Ci�•92705 Seddw drcn4g16G PRONE(65 528.60b0 K�tp raga willed • - FA?C(657) S-65.to- , TIT 7ir w w.a«.c tan- December 19,2019 , • Willi m F.Janusz,P.E.,PTOE • Prin9lpal Civil Engineer • • City of Huntington Beach 2000,Main Street, P.O.Box 190 • j Huntington Beach, CA 92648 . Subject: Letter of Support for the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Application—Valley • - 4 VieW Street(Bolsa Chica Street Corridor Dear Mr.Janusz The 1Orange County Transportation Authority recently issued the 2020 Comprehensive Transportation Funding Program Call fdr Projects for Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Progr m to coordinate traffic signals across jurisdictional boundaries in the County. . • The State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is in support of the City of . Huntington Beach's submittal of the CTFP application to OCTA for signal synchronization on Valley View IStreetli3olsa Chica Street between the intersection of Chapman avenue in Garden Grove.to t Warner Avenue in Huntington Beach with three Caltrans traffic signals in between—Valley.VieW Street and Tiffany Avenue,Valley View Street at the WB SR-22 Ramps,and Boise Chica Street and Garden Grove Boulevard(EB SR-22 Ramps). If yock have any-questions-or require additional information,please contact Mr. Denny Ngo at(949) 936-3512 or by email at Denny.NooCa�dot.ca.aov, .• Sincerely, • Shivi derjit Sin .MS, MP Brang m Chief,Electrical ystes ITS, eW Technology,TMS Support&Traffic Signals . Divisi nn of Traffic Operations and Maintenance TMC;District 12,Caltrans, SECTION 4:PRELIMINARY PLANS FOR THE PROJECT Primary Implementation(PI) The Primary Implementation phase will last approximately one year and include the following elements: Task 1: Project Administration The City of Huntington Beach will lead and administer the project on a daily basis using a consulting engineering firm(hereafter referred to as PROJECT CONSULTANT)to optimize signal synchronization timing along the Valley View Street Balsa Chica Street corridor. Other participants in the project are the Cities of Garden Grove and Westminster along with Caltrans(the project team). The City of Huntington Beach staff shall perform normal day to day project administration duties. Local agency staff will perform local project administration duties.Project budget shall include time and funding for agency outreach,development and execution of cooperative agreements and administering bath in-kind and cash matches. As Caltrans is not a financial participant in this project, work at the three Caltrans intersections will be limited to coordination timing efforts. At the conclusion of the timing efforts, these timings will be provided to Caltrans who will decide whether or not to implement the timing. No cooperative agreements will be executed between Ca/trans and the local agencies. PROJECT CONSULTANT selection will conform with the City of Huntington Beach's procedures for consulant selection for professional services contracts. This includes publishing a Request for Proposals(RFP)on the City's website,ranking the proposals utilizing City staff and representatives from Westminster and Garden Grove, conducting interviews, negotiating with the top ranked firm and finally recommending one firm for contract award to the Huntington Beach City Council. • The engineering design consultant(DESIGN CONSULTANT)for the design of improvements will be under a separate contract from the engineering firm undertaking the coordination anyalsis(PROJECT CONSULTANT). Each agency will contract seperately with an engineering consultant for the design of improvements and seperately contract with a construction contractor to construct the improvements. Task 2: Data Collection The PROJECT CONSULTANT will collect data necessary to thoroughly understand existing traffic conditions in the study area and be able to develop optimal time-of-day traffic signal coordination plans,if applicable. This includes 24-hour counts along the corridor in the AM, Midday and PM periods along with midday on a weekend. Travel time analyses will also be performed for both the before and after project condition. Task 3: Field Review and Plans Specifications,and Estimates Each agency will contract seperately with a DESIGN CONSULTANT to design the improvements for this project within their jurisdiction. This includes fiber optic communications, installation of CCTV cameras, changeout of some of the existing controllers and other controller modifications. Each city's DESIGN CONSULTANT will review the geometric layout, existing traffic signal equipment, and signal synchronization related infrastructure to identify any deficiencies for each intersection and within the city. • Improvement plans and specifications will be prepared seperately for each city and each City will be responsible for procuring a construction contractor. With permission of the local AGENCIES, the DESIGN CONSULTANTS shall inspect the interior of each traffic control cabinet, inspect the telemetry systems and determine their respective condition and make recommendations for • equipment upgrades. The following is a summary of the proposed improvements. See Attachment B for more details and cost estimates. City of Huntington Beach-The City of Huntington Beach will be installing approximately one and one- half mile of fiber optic cable in existing conduit from Rancho Road to Edinger Avenue. This will replace the existing twisted pair copper interconnect cable. The existing 170 controllers will be changed out to 2070 ATC controllers.The fiber optic cable will connect to a fiber optic hub which will be constructed at the intersection of Balsa Chica Street and Edinger Avenue under the Edinger Avenue TSSP project which is being administered by OCTA(fiber optic cable will be installed from Edinger Avenue to Warner Avenue as part of the Edinger Avenue TSSP project). New CCTV cameras will be installed at four locations within the city(the budget includes three additional licenses for the City's Aviglion video software). Although the existing conduit is currently serviceable for the twisted pair cable, an allowance is included in the budget for pull box replacement and conduit installation should the existing conduit and pullboxes be found to be unable to accomodate the fiber optic cable. City of Garden Grove-Work in the City of Garden Grove consists primarily of replacing the existing controlllers and cabinets along with rewiring the intersections. There is also the installation of APS pedestrian push buttons and CCTV cameras at some locations. The traffic signals on Valley View Street in Garden Grove have old individual signal wires in old conduits. The conduits are currently full and cannot accomodate any additional wiring for additional equipment such as video detection cameras. To increase available capacity, it is proposed to replace the individual traffic signal conductors with traffic signal conductor cable. The new conductor cable will provide the capacity to accomodate the additional equipment proposed for this intersection. Similiar rewiring was included in the Brookhurst Street TSSP project. The City is also proposing the replacement of existing pull boxes as part of the rewiring effort. Considering the age and condition of the pull boxes, they will likely not be servicible after the rewiring activity. Upgrades will also be made to the City's Traffic Management center including the addition of Layer Ai switches, uninterruptible power supply and video management software. City of Westminster-Work within the City of Westminster will consist primarily of rewiring intersections along with the installation of CCTV Cameras, video detection systems,battery back-up systems and ethernet switches. The need for rewiring the intersections is malted to the age and reliability of the existing conductors. Task 4: Corridor"Before"Study The PROJECT CONSULTANT will conduct"before"floating car travel runs prior to timing implementation. The PROJECT CONSULTANT will conduct a 'Before'field study report representative of the times and days for which synchronization plans will be developed. The report shall identify Measures of Effectiveness(MOE)to evaluate the effects of the synchronization plans. MOE's will likely include traffic flow,travel time,average speed,number of stops per mile, number of intersections traversed on green vs. stopped by red(Greens per Red)(note:Average Speed, Stops per Mile, and Greens per Red are the new OCTA MOE, Corridor Synchronization Performance Index (CSPI)),fuel consumption reduction,pollution reduction, and other pertinent items. 9 Task 5:Signal Timing Optimization and Implementation Synchronization will be inter jurisdictional in nature.All existing traffic patterns,flows, and conditions will be taken into account Synchronized timing will be developed for the AM Peak, PM Peak, Mid-day Peak and Weekend Peak. Special generators such as schools and businesses along with cross street traffic will be considered as part of the project. Timing plans will be developed that assist traffic in getting to its destination without regard to physical or jurisdictional boundaries. Implementation will• include the system integration(including graphics)with the Huntington Beach Transparity system. s Task 6: Corridor"After"Study • The PROJECT CONSULTANT will conduct"after'floating car travel runs after timing implementation. The Consultant will conduct an`After'field study representative of the times and days for which synchronization plans will be developed. The'After'study must be conducted in the same manner • and contain the same MOE's as the'Before'study in order to evaluate the improvements of the synchronization plans. MOE's should be compiled for the optimized corridor using the floating car method. • Task 7: Synchronization System Construction Each agency will issue separate construction contracts for work within their jurisdiction. The City of Huntington Beach will utilize the DESIGN CONSULTANT prepared plans and specifications to advertise the project for sealed contractor bids utilizing the City of Huntington Beach's adopted procedures for bidding public works construction projects. The Cites of Westminster and Garden Grove will issue construction contracts in compliance with their individual city's practices and policies. The DESIGN CONSULTANTS'contracts will include construction support and communications implementation. The DESIGN CONSULTANTS and construction contractors will be overseen by the individual agency staff Construction inspection will be the responsibility of each individual agency. All installations and upgrades will be per the owning agencies'standards. Details of equipment upgrades are tabulated in Tables I and II. The cooperative agreements between the cities will include language to ensure conformance with the schedule set by OCTA. Task 8: Primary Implementation Project Report The PROJECT CONSULTANT will develop a before and after study for the project.This report will be completed after the Primary Implementation is completed and will include the following: •Introduction/project description:a summary of the project including the purpose, background, and objectives of the project. •Data collection:a summary of the data collected as part of the effort including the traffic counts, phasing,lane configurations, etc. •Traffic signal systems improvements:a summary of the implemented traffic signal systems improvements by city. •Signal timing optimization:a summary of the development and implementation of updated signal timing including the models,selected cycle lengths,intersection groupings,etc. 10 •Results:the study will contain directional morning,mid-day,evening,and weekend peak periods using travel times,average speeds,green lights to red lights,stops per mile,and the derived corridor synchronization performance index(CSPI)metric.This information shall be collected both before and after any signal timing changes have been made.Additional details based on the Final Report Template will also be included. •Benefits to cost analysis:project benefits resulting from signal synchronization will be evaluated • based on the before and after study results.Savings will be calculated for travel time,fuel consumptions,vehicle maintenance,Greenhouse Gas(GHG)reduction,and a final benefit cost ratio. •Future signal corridor improvements:recommendations for system and equipment enhancements to improve traffic flow and signal synchronization will be provided. •Conclusion:a summary of the before and after study and its findings. Task 9: On-going Maintenance&Operations The PROJECT CONSULTANT will provide on-call•signal timing support services for a period of two • years or 24 months following the completion of the primary implementation tasks(Tasks 5 through 8), • to address any future adjustments that may be needed during this period. Depending on the nature of • the adjustment the PROJECT CONSULTANT may accomplish the fine-tuning adjustments remotely from the office through the traffic management systems. During this 24-month period the PROJECT • CONSULTANT will be prepared to review any project intersection requested within(24)hours of written notice,including observing and fine-tuning the signal timing. The PROJECT CONSULTANT • will also assist with resolving detection issues along the corridor. The PROJECT CONSULTANT will drive the length of the project arterial during all designated corridor synchronization timing plan hours of operation on a monthly basis in order to verify that the synchronization timing is working as designed,and complete any necessary adjustments. Monthly driving times will consist of a full 12-hour weekday and a 4-hour Saturday. All drives shall be documented. A copy,limited to jurisdictional boundaries,shall also be sent to each agency. At the end of the 2-year O&M phase,the PROJECT CONSULTANT shall prepare a memorandum to summarize the O&M phase. It should,at the minimum,include when travel runs were conducted, issues and solutions throughout the phase,and recommendations for future improvements. 11 SECTION 5:FUNDING NEEDS/COSTS FOR PROPOSED PROJECT BY TASK Primary implementation The Primary Implementation will last one year and include the following elements(See Table I and Table II). INSTRUCTIONS:Be sure to carefully review improvements that may need engineering design or develoment of specifications prior to construction. For example,the interconnect conduit installation,new service locations, or cabinet foundations. Include this cost in your estimate. Costs associated with Caltrans fees, SCE fees,and/or special inspection requirements should also be included. Even though Caltrans is not a participant,costs associated with Tasks 2,4,5,and 6 shall also be included for Caltrans intersections. t _ Project Tasks Cost/Int Total Cost Match Cash In-Kind Task 1:Project Administration(a) I $2,340.91 $ 51,500.00 $ 7,154 $ 3,146 Task 2:Data Collection $ 850.00 $ 18,700.00 $ 3,740 $ - Task 3:Field Review and Plans Specifications,and Estimate: $ - $ 137,300.00 $ 27,460 $ - Task 4:Corridor"Before"Study $ 500.00 $ 11,000.00 $ 2,200 $ - Task 5:Signal Timing Optimization and Implementation $4,650.00 $ 102,300.00 $ 20,460 $ - • Task 6:Corridor"After»Study $ 500.00 $ 11,000.00 $ 2,200 $ - Task 7:Synchronization System Construction(See Table II) - $1,465,000.00 $209,840 $ 83,160 Task 8: Primary Implementation Project Report $ 500.00 $ 11,000.00 $ 2,200 $ - Task 9:Ongoing Operations&Maintenance(See Task 9 Det $2,400.00 $ 52,800.00 $ 10,560 $ - Total Project Cost: $ 1,860,600.00 $285,814 $ 86,306 (a)Project Administration is$2,000 per local agency Intersection and$4,500 per Caltrans intersection. Ongoing Operations&Maintenance Ongoing Operations and Maintenance will last two years and include the following elements.(See Task 9 Details): Task 9 Details: Unit Price/ #of Task Description of Work Intersection signals Cost Project Administration Day to day administrative duties during O&M = '.z, included Monitoring and Drive monthly and improve timing parameters improving optimized along 22 signals for 24 months after signal $1,680.00 22 $36,960 signal timing timing and implemented along Valley View! Bolsa Chica from Chapman to Warner Monitor, maintain,and repair communication Communications and and detection along for 22 signals for 24 months detection support after signal timing is implemented along Valley $720.00 22 $15,840 View/Bolsa Chica from Chapman to Warner(@ $30/signal/month) A memorandum to summarize the O&M phase, '..: ;.:. • including details on when travel runs were • i4. OMM Memorandum conducted;issues and solutions throughout the included phase;and recommendations for future improvements. Proposed Onging Operations&Maintenance: $52,800 Total Project Cost (Including PI and O&M for a total of 3 years): Total Total M2 Request: $1,488,480.00 Total Agency Match: $372, 120.00 Total Project Cost: $1,860,600.00 12 .: r g5...,tvsdfvr,.77,iiK*.f• :'it ! ▪ MD �, � XXXXXX i of •:v ymC^YIMO t.p+ : • ;� « _t x.: L .t: .` KXXX .2,.b...',":,;:.."-Fir. 1qJ p41w�d4a�4iik E :_.; grrpM▪q� XX XX,KX XKX XXX r 1(1R i wq!yNyO ...ay x x x x 7m�� NriW+pW X X X X X • n • L . '; _ . • xxxxx xxxxx .}._..i.�. gdPA?�� Y r_ - F;• - Lie' �- a :f+ 'JJLLyj- !,.e" X xX XXXXKXX x KX X NM1 NNI.i�LL 111pY • • t yip y@p00•1,!'°tP�}p"""A! • } a ,v )1 T f- rn (wa�!gpmtll • La xxxxx npoonwp:. _ • • s5: Sf xxXX XXxXX XXX K XT a xxxxx �PI�7Y�ppWWd 4 41.....y pw«y u�ny4a!�py xxxxx , z sdo 7. , • W* A (p�a{.Q oapA K X X X X X X a" - :v` s:.zF.+=.TgTJ;fy44:: � �,r• M s G ? >S60CY w¢ >.s.: su°oY�4b1�W4 rY V. Q r-a Q y OO(ozo UI a-ai 4_pp sr" ,I a a,. ..a.▪ .7: x ,zzry 2y5‹Qw y1p , Fa.!-, �Rt.? Y'J�e • f QglqQ�s)ZWWQ gW OQ f)p66p3 W7 ai a Y"+ 2 .� `'•- "�"� i x fU'S�74p0p�� m LL• Q62 Qix VZ > .�. :,.�{t- k.Y '�y� ` S Zu"'iu�iQ � wSK 66 00w `- s- �uvm ac�iiGCCG777777 00 3m� m4< zWxa3 O gyp xxxrx sx xx r6� 11 le TY.r.�' H k04V•v e;▪'- V i 1iu w is tiX�?w�7�a ..,.p° s�, ;. O�O G.OC�G�� mmmmmm mZZm ,d r�z, y.=5 ? Zzz z 2!i'T1 Ts 2 a a Is a d d~d Oil i '*-i z'• • iiiV W W f2 f Z Z i i -.xr a c, w A o��ao� '-r� I. Fi xz :tip -1>:: c {q�qq[ �a'7°�wwplwW > » II. ,. -••'S s,_4.yr �. :,f-. U' U'L' .UU3 33Sri zSSS J h•:. .t. tt a G '! 2'C.r� 6• �t� ;.} rN!7 faRm nm Otd N^I�h.„....NNN %� i --�—PzPz pzp --,--_ — t�y V RI C I I e e l I S I t I g P e I e e e E e e t g m o 1 om 22 Z g N 3�g i w w a tb t U 0000000000 0 000000000000000<< < 1I< F mg .6 SrS.E.E 5.5f o�c c c c c c c c e c c c e c c rc a cc � c t E p l b-E E s E E o S cd E r e o rS o S a I r S E e e E M 1- i-(-h i-F h g D g&e g g E &g i • 4 Pempp-e zvvvEEEtE P.sE9 L�E.m-" JJ.JJ we 0 Y Y 8 �" " r m g n c�c��nc��ac�c�c�oc�c�c�c�c�c�ncac�c�000gac`�agagg`6 `5`6g63333; 3;r333 33 • • • • . 8S . 8888888888888888888888888 888888d8o8g8888 r S8 g ggggg8 8gggggggg lgggggg gggggggggg$gg§g Y' O O T N O O O O N T O N�?6 O N t O o�e O N T O O m NV �D T VT A,4 mw'O N NO.� { 'f N O"T N v""+�}PIN .= N N {V`fV N f N N' T"�7 ti N m M C, N K M oo ,goo0SBQo$888mo, 88000000gggyo�o $gog0egggoo88$gg S o g g a o S 0 0 0 e o 0 o a 0 0 0,0,0 g 0 c.0 0 0 0 oe p o e e o 0 g e o e o g o e g Q O O 8 O 0 o 0 0 o 0 0 o O O O mw N4 N'�O f0N Oeb,N OO b NOO f 0.O NOO.! b 1T'.'i Nm'N`ONN160�On .'..' N r N N.-N N N N .- N N�+ N ♦ N N .1 F 1 p p p p p pp p p p p p p p p p p b q SOS � SSS88 OOO 0S8 88888 SSS88 888 SO$gg$gSSB$8 •. NV V M N N N 44 VV"V N 4 M N N N N N N N b*NN N * 88 ' 888888588$888880088888888 M N N N 888888888888828 • . .e. .ilN N.-avi* •.4ttw"NT07•-0iriV tiOw'NNV w *r .z.f wNrywO��'i.=NT .- w N w N w N w N .- N O 1 NN.}NN, NMN»NNNNNNNNNNNNHNN r • • 7 n J J n n w J W r J W_i J J W J J J W J g 6 J W J w y W w J W 6 J W.WW J J w J J W 2 U U e n 8 w w c ° w g n a„A a0zn A a E E il _ _ / _ 3 mv x nmm _ ` g m $ ° s � r 0 e x y N al 8 a 2 1 n aE 51 c E 7g u E '2Sn E u 4 e $ rFl � rrntmg W iIIiiiiuIri U U"w 8 o c�< S d C S d 8 U a w t 8 u<w N U m w N e m w 5 N c`�S W .� g& 0.-.RE 5 _I.a'SeS.-.e£ S£S25eSSM .e.CssSS.g21111eeR W A 54 44A. a .00k4g 4 ZM c440,4b g.04.e .54.0.0.e.[.e .e.6 c40.E 44 > n0 2.c ctUc cUm-mu..- ccUc csr sscscsccc .c sc O M or S erE ". rE " e§gA " n A4it 8B§!3RQ14 " erit "ii g. m 1-- u LL m w LL w mZ wmw w www cZmiL mZ2E LL LLLL L.- LL LLLL K LL LL w21. I I ev< 08 s S F- 2 � o a m i U c ell U1-1-1-1- N E$ c EiO y g 1 i N A a ! U 2 1 m ~ 0h v ?i 4co O j ry o 0 a• IJ!__J_:0 .*g o.�.mI0°I N ll fl�m A P�m Ol N N N N NIN[mV fb`.N�'N 1•!PI I•Nl IN9 V am+f eb9 MAf tmtlllm7 r r'f'Nf'Nf 4 �' 4 v'e 5 55 5 5i5 5 55 5 ;_ -a5 Ss aU 5 5 5p5 -5 .5 G 1qj S O Y 4 .. ry O tl Y ' • Y w Ym is "Y• n i v y N C O�Y{ Y Y O Y o Y O O IYO L�C rr i�r C_ [ C C C mOO @ Ili m m m@ @ IDm @ m COm m @IDg gm@ m CO mm m CO 4€gt .g.g. E EgE�F. gg .ET Es. a al § AgA g � 5 8 oc cgcc 2 2ggg, es § 5a 5 s 00gg gga8�° 0 b era§ gaga § a 4g 8 5 333 3 3 33 33 3 t'ec e c c e ec acre c c ec c c zx i ix z xzz z rz x xxx z xzxz 12 22 x x . . . . . . . 1 . . . . .' 1 1 1 . . . . . 1 . . 1 1 NN NN pb bM qNN pM....... . ..... pM pM pM`43 pNM N N M 44 4,N N 4 NpN M NN M N pNp 43 Np pN.0 M 8h 4, NN N p44 4. 888888888888888 8 888 8 88 8 888 8 88 8 888 8 8888 8 88 8 8 ggg�oIgg$gIgggg g ggg g gg g gg$, 0 gg g 8g8 0 ggggg ggg 8 CV-mer.�N N .1j N N .1i+=N N 4 w N N .1J 2ti N e.i ell Nei�-N N 4i 01 N •- N 't •'i N i. M pN QQM.p4 N NN N NeTN 41 NN N 01,1445 N oN eeNN N 4T N e4 4r N N 444434444444444, o O g Og O QS a 4444 00 S 0 0 0 Q0 0000 0 O 00 O Q ' goSoO$Soo88$000 0 050 q aS g 000 00 0 8 o0o g s000 a g eg g 0 r41014 019 Ni MMe ri a 4eio en h 4 N r rb 4 co si a .na ed . 0* l 'O'v o o ryry O 4 . r N N r S. N S.r N r N r r r' r r 04 r r j 00T N NNN N N N N NNN N N N N NNN N N NN N N N NN N 41 888888888888888 8 888 8 88 8 888 8 88 8 888 8 8888 8 8 88 8 8 gggg ggggiggggg g gig' g g" g rg g ''g g "gg g `Ig ' g g "'$ g 4' N N N`O R1'�N N h 0v.4 N N h Cr N N N.10"O' 4 .- P. 4 4 .- f 4 O 4 .Y.- N N Pi r OS la, SS la NNNN4NN N NN N 43NN NM N N NNN N N N 43 NNN N 1 4,NN N N N N N b 888888888888888 8 888 8 88 8 888 8 88 8 8888 8888 8 8 88 8 8 • goggggggggggggg g ggg g gg g g g g g 8g g g g g g ggbg g g gg g g aN..:NN.=14..:NNr24,•N4 .. 1'1 NN N to.: N 24001 N FN 4 001N N ^1w US 0 b 4 wt'4ti r. c N NN N NM N MN 44 N M N N N 41N N N.N NN N N NN N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r .- r .- r r r 8 r TO0, r m - f 0 r.- r 8,f 8 �- .- 0 r a cv 196961565665696 6 966 6 91Li 6 6 6 e3 56 6 5669 J6W5 6 J 616 u. Z. d � I 8 t s 2cn g y N °) a c __ c a c Y is U 8 8 .9 g 5 a a pp z • 013 o ei o __ E c p m CC 33 O 7 b 7 f C N tl C q C q 2 5 " 0 W W W W 5 M a i Y? N 2 g l i Og 8 O a a ae a a ua o a¢ W E'a N a f Ls FtQ 22 z f o _ q m m 3 o CO LB IT1St c m_ < e a Yf 4ci c F• . > .. E >r E >xLL E >x 4U) .� o o S a,N 99 ° c-' N T7.r a ry 1�1.a. ro o N o a 5 * L 7 O C CN E 8— a lr a 3 7 N 8 5 5 . 7 C 0 0 a E N o o Y .? J5 5 2 E .r a s >-E a E 2 z N S b y —.1 = x4tl' 1 cY 8 m$ i $t f p`e= g n ;• o y�18 ��e( : I � I8I 1812 agg •.'• Ell i 8g2 : 0. 60E- m of-t; 31-m a YIU-0-g, `2 o u H u- tl N '� a L a N5 00 u.0 o z eo115 $o S>N0 a r Mrgt3.6 3 at.5 o s L NIYm if ,3SNUmwSNV�W>NUm co > 1QiUu.t2 I alv�l2Q$ bh trN - 81195111131311 M tl N N N 11 4 N d M M tl i31 M N •M Y+ N O N TI R N 4 M II U _ EEEErcrc £See a s� fcfi fc EFS sE £ £ ES££ .E.EE .E.5Y5.£ 5 .R .e.l tl •.6.Q-e.e.6.LLd b d.LLe d.4 d .a.Le b.tl� .3 .e . .....Ld.Le .d 41 a.D.4 41.11 41.s . os z.4. rtl .6 00 Z 5 5-c q!A M i r .C1 5 M M .e a i I�a w V o ._5 § Y M N.U q y .Li p 4 4 W V O_o w a a V 0.. N y - m liggEgaiulagg E iFHHh g gg § EQ § a E > ; _ > ;gQgg E c U.U.u.U.LL U.II-12.U.U.U.U.U.U. U. U.U.U.IL Ora U. U. U.U.II.12 O L.U. U. U.U.22rXe-oici,X.LL U.U. IL u.O LL u. u. U. C Y as Y a 3 C o € E o E • a a y .Ca. Cr m Lb K O h 20 01 N 17IY b,IO1A ml0)TO N 01♦ N Wlh N O N e.�f 30 f0 A 20 01 O N 1.1 41 4)10 AI m Im .f f e O a.O Y1 n.i111 N W.n 2 43 2 10 l0 10 101 tD I0 (A A h A A A h A h A t0 2 r0 2 CD 10 a0 1pI m Sam= 55 5 555 1 t€5 5 55 . 22 o $ n a o r o 32 mm 0 m 0 0 0 mmm ea CC 000 QCo Cc C5 O o C. 5.5g O O Cp C 1 C C G 'J gcg c S E SG xx z xxx z Sxz z xx • N N 4$N OK pN K 44., pK 444$ MMN , gg gSg O Sg$ O gSSB$g $g g egg g off g o$ s .=rj ni .. .- .-0;. or w V gn n OM1 N (I) 04 N K N N N N K N pK N K K M • 00 0 000 0 000 C. OOo O g pi. pp p C O O O O S O 8 O 8 c 0 0 O g g g 0p g g 3 $ 8 g 8 R 8 Q6 0 0 O ..... W O0. 0 a .r e;4.u m O'q ' O.Y n 0 w O. s Ip' • 7. • 4 • ✓ N V! . , 4.4 to,N . pp a 888 $ 888 O 88OONQ §§ 8 "§§ a § § § Q4$ • •O Ol N w 10"q 10 10 .O O q u `I. • N K N K V.K K K 4$N y N N C 0 W • g 8 $g0 8gg g go' • N N ti a m N.V K N N N zee 30.• K N K KNK N K y N M N y . 62 CO p N O 6 Q QQ to 1J 5 66 `5 5 W W 5 I,aa • E o F c c W C s 2 nn C Y... Q iv.-. it. O w w S a °s w o 8 a 3 E a• e . • aO Wi W zSs' S • o 11 66 11 y££.5 6 E56£ n6£ .dd UF`�'tl.od 04004144 w Ag w.4 w .Iif .itaiw • E § t$e g g E E E E E S E E IL ILLL 40 IL LLLL IL IL U.IL1L O U.CL. 7 C . Cry ! a Y g 1 p E W Irr O i mw Si amIwl a main a � o SECTION 6:PROJECT SCHEDULE BY TASK Project start date: July 1,2020 Project end date:June 30, 2023 Primary Implementation Task Starting Date Ending Date Task 1: Project Administration July 1, 2020 June 30, 2021 Task 2:Data Collection July 1, 2020 December 31,2020 Task 3:Field Review and Plans Specifications,and Estimates July 1, 2020 January 31, 2021 Task 4:Corridor"Before"Study January 12, 2021 January 19, 2021 Task 5:Signal Timing Optimization and Implementation August 1, 2020 May 18, 2021 Task 6:Corridor"After"Study May 5, 2021 May 18, 2021 • Task 7:Synchronization System Construction July 1,2020 May 31, 2021 Task 8: Primary Implementation Project Report July 1, 2020 June 9, 2021 Task 9:Ongoing Operations&Maintenance July 1, 2021 June 30, 2023 Ongoing Monitoring and Maintenance Task Starting Date Ending Date a. Monitoring and improving optimized signal timing July 1,2021 June 30, 2023 b. Communications and detection support July 1, 2021 June 30, 2023 c. OMM Memo July 1, 2021 June 30, 2023 17 SECTION 7:DETAILED LOCAL MATCH COMMITMENT Input Only f PART 1:AGNCY TOTAL MATCH SUMMARY f.T17 : ' Agency IN-KIND TOTAL MATCH PI 0MM PI OMM P1 OMM • ' $27 90000 ' $2 400.00 • '•$83,160 00 • $0.60 , $111060 00 .. `$2400 = Ciiy of Garden Grove r -'$3030Q00 ' y ;t83,16000+ r. r$113,46000 t 56900.00 $1 440.00 40 00 1 80 00 56 90000 I , 51440 00 CALTRANS F $8 340.00 r + f , '' r Fs}s� .,7 .�.{ffft .._1._: 3 z �`v ``4,� ,.1'�Q1 _44 i_,•, $118,640.00 *. I $2,880.00. 50-� l 50.00 ..$1fe64000 Atijz o.o0 Cdy of WBSI,TxnstBr ,�. _ �ti $119,520:00 = $0.00 *':$119'320.00 1 i t S123 814.00 I 53 84000 83148.00 I woo 'S125860 00R (. ��,f3 840 00 ; + City of Huntington Beach t:$127,654.00 :;. 53,146.00 . i f130800.00 '`3275251.0o l 51056000 $8830Q 00 I $o oo �' $364 56d:00 I ; :$10 66000 TOTAL MATCH . . $285 814.00 . ' -.$86306.(i0 .$372,120 00 • } PART 2;MATCH BREAKDOWN(CASH vs!N-KIND SERVICES) A. Cash Match Agency Amount Funding Source ContributionofCash City of Garden Grove'`;', Local Funds -';'130,300 :.•. TOeECovEREOeYLOCAL r' CALTRANS . nct uryEs 4,8 340:00..: City of Westminster?' Local Funds ';a. i118,520 0( • ;Ciyof;HuntingtonBeach; Local Funds '.517,854:00::;,`': TOTAL CASH MATCH: :'.1265,E14,00-': B. In-Kirtd Services L Specific improvements(list items and Cost): Agency Description Expenditure City of Garden Grove Traffic Signal Contirflercablne(s(4t$20,79O say .:,,SB3;_760.00 CALTRANS ' ' N/A ::;r$0.00;i'`_:';': •City of Westminster NIA .._: 004:'..'';;:;-: City of Huntington Beach NIA `$0.00.P,'.; '.., Total Seta icImprovements(I): ''`.03,160.00- ii. Staffing Commitment: Agency Staff Position Type of Service to Project No,of Hours Fully Burdened Tatar Rate oily of Garden Grove Total for City of Garden Grove:';:;;`.:.30.00__-;,':_ CALTRANS I - ' I 0 . , I ` $000 L, . Total for City of CAL TRANS ,:=:,;; >30.00:::;``>'. City of Westminster I I I 0 * I " ', 60o0 _ Total for City of Westminster = : `:50.00 ':=:- City of Huntington Beach I Prindpai Civil Engineer Project Administration :. I 25 l : $125.85 S3146.25 Total for City of Huntington Beach::,,.i,;53,146.25 :; Total Staffing Commitment(I1):1 d'.:;:$3,146.251 y'"` TOTAL IN-KIND MATCH'1.II) '_•: .586,306.25..:' `Total amount Is the required participation by the identified agency.The number of hours and hourly rate will be based on each agency's actual My burdened biting rates, which must czectively equal the same value of the assigned'Total'dollars, Each agency will be responsible for keeping detailed records ol•hours worked and description of work An accounting record of personnel hours al fully burdened rate is expected to be included with the final submittal.Records wll be subject to auditing. 18 SECTION 8:ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE AND OTHER PERMITS Environmental clearance and other permits(if needed)will be obtained for this project. SECTION 9:SELECTION CRITERIA CALCULATIONS Vehicle Miles Traveled(VMT): Segment ADTs Distance VMT • • Chapman Ave to Cinema Main Driveway :48,330 ° 0.13 `'` 6,481 Cinema Main Driveway to Belgrave Ave 48,330 0.08 I :`3,881 Belgrave Ave to Lampson Ave 53,440 0.25 13,320 Lampson Ave to Cerulean Ave I 47,311 I 0.21 10,036. Cerulean Ave to Tiffany Ave 49,986 0.25 12,553 Tiffany Ave to SR 22 WB Ramps 54,000 0.07 3,723 ' Garden Grove FWY Exit to Garden Grove Blvd I 54,000 0.22 I 12,048 Garden Grove Blvd to Old Balsa Chica Rd 44,000 0.32 I 14,217 Old Boise Chica Rd to Duncannon Ave 42,659 0.23 9,905 Duncannon Ave to Westminster Blvd I 42,659 0.53 22,493 Westminster Blvd to St James Park 45,410 0.21 ' 9,374 St James Park to Churchill Ave 45,410.: 0.27 •12,453 Churchill Ave to Rancho Rd 45,410 0.16 7,087 • Rancho Rd to Balsa Ave 45,163 0.41 18,527 Balsa Ave to Argosy Ave 37,935 0.23 8,650 Argosy Ave to McFadden Ave I 37,935 0.27 10,389 McFadden Ave to Robinwood Ave I 33,262 0.35 11,742 Robinwood Ave to Edinger Ave 33,262 0.15 4,96.4 Edinger Ave to Heil Ave I 28,785 0.50 I 14,393 Heil Ave to Pearce Dr I 21,804 I 0.25 I 5,468 Pearce Dr to Warner Ave I21,804 0.25 5,468 Total Project VMT: 5.35 217,171 Source:2019 City of Huntington Beach, City of Garden Grove and City of WestminsterADT Counts 19 Calculations and Estimated Points Criteria(Max Points) Estimated Points • 1. Vehicle Miles Traveled(VMT)(20 points) VMT=217,171 (See VMT Table) 2. Cost Benefit Ratio: (15 points) 8 Calculation for Total Project Cost/VMT=$1,860,600/217,171 =8.6 3. Project Characteristics: (10 points) New or upgraded detection(1); Intersection/field modernization(2);new or 8 upgraded communication systems(2); Bicycle/Ped detection(2);TMC/TOC and motorist information LZ 4. Transportation Significance(10 points) 5 Signal Synchronization Network . 5. Maintenance of Effort (5 points) . 0 . 0 years beyond 3 year grant period 6: Project Scale: (10 points) a. Number of signals= 22 -2 b. Number of signals being synchronized/Total number of corridor signals=22/46=47.8% 7. Number of Jurisdictions: (20 points) 16 4 Jurisdictions 8. Current Project Readiness(5 points) • Project start date: July 1, 2020 9. Funding Match: (5 points) 0 .. $374,280/$1,871,400 =20%=20% Total Points 59 20 SECTION 10:DETAILED BREAKDOWN OF COSTS BY AGENCIES City of Garden Grove Number of Signals: 5 • Project Tasks (Garden Grove) Total Cost Match Cash I In-Kind Task 1:Project Administration $ 10,000 $ 2,000 I $ - Task 2:Data Collection $ 4,250 $ 850 I $ - Task 3:Field Review and Plans Specifications,and Estimates $ 37,800 $ 7,560 I $ - Task 4:Corridor"Before"Study $ 2,500 $ 500 $ - Task 5:Signal Timing Optimization and Implementation $ 23,250 $ 4,650 $ - Task 6:Corridor"After"Study $ 2,500 $ 500 I $ - Task 7:Synchronization System Construction(See Table ll) $ 472,500 $ 11,340 1 $ 83,160 Task 8: Primary Implementation Project Report $ 2,500 $ 500 $ - Task 9:Ongoing Operations&Maintenance(See Task 9 Details) $ 12,000 $ 2,400 I $ - Total Project Cost: $ 567,300 $ 30,300 I $ 83,160 Caltrans . Number of Signals: 3 Project Tasks (Caltrans) Total Cost Match Cash I In-Kind Task 1: Project Administration $ 13,500 $ 2,700 I $ - Task 2: Data Collection $ 2,550 $ 510 I $ - Task 3: Field Review and Plans Specifications,and Estimates $ - $ - I $ - Task 4:Corridor"Before"Study $ 1,500 $ 300{ $ - Task 5:Signal Timing Optimization and Implementation $ 13,950 $ 2,790 $ - _ Task 6:Corridor"After"Study $ 1,500 $ 300 I $ - Task 7:Synchronization System Construction(See Table II) $ - $ - $ - Task 8:Primary Implementation Project Report $ 1,500 $ 300 $ - Task 9:Ongoing Operations&Maintenance(See Task 9 Details) $ 7,200 $ 1,440 $ - Total Project Cost $ 41,700 $ 8,340 I $ - City of Westminster Number of Signals: 6 Project Tasks (Westminster) Total Cost Match Cash In-Kind Task 1:Project Administration $ 12,000 $ 2,400 $ - Task 2:Data Collection $ 5,100 $ 1,020 $ - Task 3:Field Review and Plans Specifications,and Estimates $ 39,200 $ 7,840 $ - Task 4:Corridor"Before"Study $ 3,000 $ 600 $ - Task 5:Signal Timing Optimization and Implementation $ 27,900 $ 5,580 $ - Task 6:Corridor"After"Study $ 3,000 $ 600 $ - Task 7:Synchronization System Construction(See Table II) $ 490,000 $ 98,000 $ - Task 8:Primary Implementation Project Report $ 3,000 $ 600 $ - Task 9:Ongoing Operations&Maintenance(See Task 9 Details) $ 14,400 $ 2,880 $ - Total Project Cost: $ 597,600 $ 119,520 $ - 21 City of Huntington Beach Number of Signals: 8 Project Tasks (Huntington Beach) I Total Cost Match Cash In-Kind Task 1: Project Administration I $ 16,000 $ 54 $ 3,146 Task 2: Data Collection $ 6,800 $ 1,360 $ - Task 3:Field Review and Plans Specifications,and Estimates $ 60,300 $ 12,060 $ - Task 4:Corridor"Before"Study $ 4,000 $ 800 $ - Task 5:Signal Timing Optimization and Implementation $ 37,200 $ 7,440 $ - Task 6:Corridor"After"Study I $ 4,000 $ 800 $ - Task 7:Synchronization System Construction(See Table ll) $ 502,500 $ 100,500 $ - • Task 8:Primary Implementation Project Report $ 4,000 $ 800 $ - Task 9:Ongoing Operations&Maintenance(See Task 9 Details) $ 19,200 $ 3,840 $ - Total Project Cost: $ 664,000 $ 127,654 $ 3,146 Grand Total Project Cost $ 1,860,600 I $ 285,814 I $ 86,306 Total Match $ 372,120 M2 Grant Total $ 1,488,480 1 Project Summary X All guidelines were met for this project • Not all qualifications were met An explanation of why the guidelines were not met for this project is provided below. LIST OF CONTACTS Agency Phone Email Street Address City of Garden Grove City of Garden Grove Dai Vu, P.E. (714)741-5189 daiv(6 ggcitv.orq 11222 Acacia Parkway City Traffic Engineer Garden Grove,CA 92840 CALTRANS Caltrans Denny Ngo (949)936-3512 Dennv.Nnotc dotca.gov 1750 E.4th Street,Suite 100 Transportation Engineer Santa Ana,CA 92705 City of Westminster City of Westminster Bill(Hoa)Pham (714)548-3457 bphamt westminster-casiov 8200 Westminster Boulevard Civil Engineering Associate Westminster,CA 92683 • City of Huntington Beach City of Huntington Beach William F. Janusz,P.E. (714)374-1628 Wianuszfdsurfcity-hb.oro 2000 Main St, P.O.Box 190 Principal Civil Engineer Huntington Beach,CA 92648 22 i - BUDGET SPREADSHEET : • , • . f a • h� 0 10. mp m A O m m - yovm ON Norr.NNN1 a C 0 0 0 0 0 by j�NNN NN • O O o 0 m 2 Y Y m m q 0 0.04 4.,N Pi C a ~ i w a =' C. tl O O o O 0 0 m 0 i r $ OQm'fh NO.n 0 Z O,Y m O m ,y H 0 O N N O N N a N N M H N N N N 0 c z : -• o C Qp„Q z ` O m N M N 0 Q n r.,ie4�i N WO v a N N N N N O o 0 o O . OB4ON0 U N^'f m� N N N N N O as a m C,-o cos-17 • m N N N o • E. " N t r-' 0 o�v mm 'o2o � m a m _ $ oY$ mg rm� y c - mor0 00 '0 a CR oo�o? as p�.m N _ Y N M N N N III N N mN M N N H�m U C H M N 42 N4 HNMNK Z mp O O o Y I ..' :iv li . O v. '� OOmhm n �e V. 00v N'0Y��M� m m N i vVa7roq a.2 2 rNItV-1o7 a 6 N •� U H NNNMNNNhNM N NN UN�N N T N N M N N a M N N H a .. J i . -' :. J .'. o 000 o 0 m0 00oo ao i5 •0 000 e-m 8 K 'I" N.1m'c�im 2 0 fO�Ogv�o_m 1m0 h N m POafo' 2a. a 0 o w^mA _ (mpY .rYN„p co_ 0lV ^gyp CO ON m N vmmo NMNN H N o,N.,MM M m N/A9 G.N•.oi ri n • 22 N N W N N N N N N N j: N N r N N N N O N N M r p•O oo OONm = O Oo OOOO O M aO T.....8 O m C 0000 m is !l„ O E N .0 ..mg2 ma . Nm ER T.AONp Q ^41p N am U NO � I. v O Op 1,ry,VN y•4 N'o t ^hN41 NqNN N YNr NN N NNN - N - NN N N ,` C �4 O O O YI N O N ro O S O t O O O O b rt b O , W A mommNQ• » ~ ti0m ^ a Eh N IL .0 NNnr to " a N NNN NNNNN HN � � Q< N 44 NN UN m z �Ud N NZ N N N ato ' } a 3 1 .. _Q F .0 .' c<D • W 5 r . °4E S O = o4 y, 8 y H::. a o r v W :.' Hi S W W `fA 15g2 w m` c 1 � OWlig �w rc ti •': Qazo ;` 3QZD , p zr�r.: = s iftl °ac o'o OE g ms" al• Ep M 6t.t°-ri w gyp C51 N .q c. 0 4 < 2;; S c7 o b ma o . 2 o1- 03• Cp I-ado m CYt� ON�3 • 4J ` -N., 2 V 4 Q.c E '' �N PJ 41 lJ 0 • a a E 052 t as 5 li3iisitsr8,7�3 3 aM ;g 3 gg 11.288:»85i a gg., 4RA a MAMMA 7E'M'111 s5gpai - I~ I F W g iri« � siI a s _ ggz li lit$ gt gV 88M 2222222 t 2 S zi $lxsxxx a x ,»x».z„ 2, ..� I g MK1 5 gflir`a,R9 a R g. rr '! H = Ipl! s—ptaiiii k Ft 87: Wil E. o3 .. §1§1 48 $ fg i e 11 A : - » » IL LL 'ig i s.... L i oil 1..„0.11.iihai f 5 II i o $ 1 sa■a■ ■ § d {\a;ag;_## } Ita&k/ga&& 2 ` as„#& Z \ { /■■aa : ) | 33332222 ■! i1- .7: a#,@ |p, �| /}\ I !|% ° it» ®® |! Zi"i-3s i ( '$ )2£-J ■■2 ii\ . \\ , 1\ ..82rsztrigit-, 1 ! p.§k \ , ■sass \ s a» / ' ./ i .-: f.0.0. ± A |#g§ ` |§■;■■k k 2 ■$ • - ■■■; 1 ca# % ; ;■ F a } \ \ : \ . \ Il##■ H rsa E. § utI i n $ k; A . !! ■§■seas/ . k r \ :! f ■!# / /, s ris `§ z . i KK2 . f -I , a sass# # i $■ ;;; { 11 �1;■ § a - 9i ■ : • a■5-. , i > af : ( \ - / } I . .; ,. LIFJ'I'I'1lli k \ § . .■|\ . § I'l 11 ] ` ` �Qfj M M N N M r N N N ! 1: M$ »" MaAmKnxa J_— 1 sot » &ggx P0001 d� r�' Eli] 1i 1 ;' Juu CA NN.�RManqq gp .?rt » 4. l At 226 ¢P m O w O.OpO§1i p i' N M a,F G 1 fgASS.,o'O;E O M bA 1 `R l i N M Y�M N q Q d a t Q + t. 0 2.. °� Q URXR i 3 X6 e515a. M4 3 I likligi . 2 5535.E1 ii $ a LI i , . . i ..---- ..1 6- IIIH. :: 1 ~ ..1 1. '1` _ s gad 3 3 u r pwti 2MN28NN a 1 igg axSagg»„2 m E21.-.13MliS$ - Q Q g o" 8 'SR$ S$8S 8 w gg 1311 R3»»ggxsil ig fl88 `,ill Will2§2§ al la il i p C p 8 S:$:8 8 8 O - 11 ay Q SQ2�2Sg. . 751 :a q F annd 00000w Q » .q� + +2...w NMwv MGM N -a E. SQY' fi5 O ow... ia tE <+ww ."i am itx 5 � � »$ 8 $ a =`as n a,_ , : ig $a J a w ~w v Oi e g §§§:§§g$ E R§§M§ § . gg s: »»„ 1 a«wiyBSg.. w sF a 3n r I ES v VI g; R S4 ; i gliarft 5 _ §gseg4 « x pR c� vT $ ww�.$. Zi « 8 .a u u w r�i MUMF Ui ji - . I ' , my l 1 11 III E ---- xz Zz.Fr w - -;: y x ii 3 i .4 r i rA i b it 1 i - rK ».""#xxxz1.»�NNWI. .y d 01 N w N S. N N N N e a ilM u o,ry, z' p q q omO N tpii2t�Ym -SgA0 m[A'1l OD V i R r Il��l�8'toSl N n 2'ADID m O�*'IT N •• 8 0 Pry N0000 N oo No V oo0 00o o.a dddd000dooadodddodddood.o 1 S • 3 O • V V V o..V V V V V V V W W w w.N N N r . , • c V L4�sZZ zrtndJapp V,R.1, cea N W=S W g 6 al= q n K'U w . ga10 °WSadilinszFC,a ..�o$ KWaz* • g w wwwwww r.' t- rF-1t-t%t�. }r z �w<�i1wNvrww{owwww� 6 uEi�lf W E4 54V454 V <t<.7 U 5 st_ilyssss} 00ouuuvuu``uout, % gf.17!1 m om m ggag i@6'! 4 • I V J t i• RI Wt 3 { - - W 61 I u4i u�i 4 Org }g.t.. "tKKirKW¢L222mZ ZZg = rrrr aF 1111 o liiIIIih =e a 0 0 wZ „,V Ncrc C— PI V w NAE PNMN 0 V Corridor. VALLEY VIEW ST Agency GARDEN GROVE Category Description I Unit I Quantity 1.Unit Cost 1 Amount 1 Sub-total Intersection Total Intersection: CHAPMAN AVE • Intersection/FieldController EA 1 $ 6,000.00 i 6,000.00I • System Upgrade Rewire Intersection(Replace Pulnoxes) LS 1 $22,000.00 $22,000.00 348,000 I CCTV EA 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 APS PPB LS 1 $10,000.00 310,000.00 i $48,000 Communication S Upgrade I $ - I SO I i - I 5 - I . $ - I ' Detection Upgrade $ - I 30 I I $ - I Intersection: CINEMA MAIN DWY Instal City Furnished Cabinet,Foundation and LS 1 $24,000.00 $24,000.00 • Intersection/Field Field Service System Upgrade Controller EA 1 S 8,000.00 $ 8,000.00 582,000 Rewire Intersection(including Pulboxes) LS 1 1 $22,000.00 it 22,000.00 I APS PPB LS 1 $10.000.00 $10,000.00 1 i $62,000 Communication I $ - i Upgrade 1 $ - I I S - $ - Detection Upgrade $ - 1 SO I $ - I Intersection: BELORAVE AVE Install City Furnished Cabinet,Foundation and LS I 1 S 24,000.00 $24.000.00 • Intersection/FieldService System Upgrade Controller FA I 1 1 S 6,000.00 $ 8,000.00 $62,000 Rewire Intersection(including Pulboxes) LS 1 $22,000.00 $22,000.00 1 APS PPB LS 1 S 10,000.00 $10,000.00 S• - 462,000 Comunication $mm • Upgrade ' $ - I $0 I 5 Detection Upgrade I $i - $0 • Intersection: - 'LAMPSONAVE I 1 S Install City Furnished Cabinet and Foundation 1 LS 1 S 20,000.00 5 20,000.00 1 Intersection/Field Controller EA 1 S 6,000.00 $ 6,000.00I System Upgrade Rewire Intersection(including Pulboxes) LS 1 $22,000.00 S 22,000.00 I S68,000 CCTV FA I $10,000.00 $10,000.00 1 APS PPB LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 Ethernet Switch EA 1 $ 4,000.00 S 4,000.00 $72,000 Communication S - Upgrade S - S4,000 L $ - S I $ - Detection Upgrade S - I so $ - I Intersection_ CERULEAN AVE Install C8y Furnished Cabinet and Foundation LS 1 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 1 ntersectionlField Controller EA 1 $ 6,000.00 S 8,000.00 System Upgrade Rewire Intersection(including Putlboxes) IS 1 5 22,000.00 $22,000.00 $68,000 CCTV FA 1 S 10,000.00 S 10,000.00 APS PPB FA 1 I $10,000.00 $10,000.00 _ Et emset Switch EA 1 1 $ 4,000.00 $ 4,000.00 Communication S - • $72,000 Upgrade $ - S4 5 - S - $ - 1 Detection Upgrade $ - I SO I s 1 Intersection: TMC Intersection/Field ups 1 LS 1 1 I $15,000.00 1 $16,000.00 $27 000 System Upgrade Video Management Software I LS I 1 I $12,000.00 I $12,000.00 Communication Layer In Switches LS 1 i 35,000.00 $35,000.00 $62,000 Upgrade LS i - S35,o00 Detection Upgrade LS i $0 s - Total $378,000 • Condor. VALLEY VIEW ST Agency:CALTRANS Category Description I Unit I Quantity I Unit Cost I Amount ISub-total Intersection Total Intersection:SR 22 WB RAMPS SO Intersection/Field SO SO System Upgrade SO SO So Communication $O $o Upgrade EO SO $o _ so so Detection Upgrade SO so so Intersection: GARDEN GROVE BLVD SO Intersection/Field $o System Upgrade SO SO so $o Communication $O SO Upgrade SO SO SO so so Detection Upgrade SO SO SO Intersection: TIFFANY AVE SO Inlersectian/Field s0 SO System Upgrade SO so $O Communication SO SO Upgrade SO SO SO So SO Detection Upgrade $o $0 so Total SO Corridor. BOLSA CHICA ST Agency:WESTMINSTER Category I Description I Unit I Quantity I Unit Cost I Amount 1 Sub-total Intersection Total Intersection:OLD BOLSA CHICA RD 2070 ATC Controller I EA 1 $ 6,000.00 $ 6,000.00 Intersection/Field CCTV CAMERA LS 1 $ 12,000.00 $12,000.00 531,000 • • System Upgrade )Battery Back-up System EA I 1 $ 10,000.00 $10,000.00 IEthemetSwich I FA I 1 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 Communlg0esn $ - $56,000 Upgrade • ( $ - SO I $ - Video Detection-Ibis Vantage EdgeConnect I LS 1 $ 25,000.00 $25,000,00 Detection Upgrade $ - $25,000 $ - Intersection • : DUNCANNON AVE • 2070 ATC Controller EA 1 $ 6,000.00 S 6,000.00 I - CCTV CAMERA LS 1 $ 12.000.00 $12,000.00 I kdersection/Field Battery Back-up System EA 1 $ 10.000.00- $10,000.00 1553,000 System Upgrade Ethernet Switch EA 1 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 Rewire Intersection(Existing conduit at capacity& LS i $ 22,000.00 $22 000.00 can't handle additional cable(s)) 576,000 Communication - ._ S - • Upgrade $ - $0 5 - I Video Detection-Hens Vantage EdgeConnect LS 1 $ 25,000.00 $25,000.00 I Detection Upgrade S - I $25,000 $ - I !intersection: WESTMINSTER BLVD 2070 ATC Controller EA I 1 $ 6,000.00 $6,000 Intersection/Field tiem/Field• CCTV CAMERA LS 1 5 12,000.00 312,000 System Upgrade Install New Conduit(Intersection Crossings) LS 1 $ 30,000.00 $30,000 565,000 • EthernetSwtch EA I 1 $ 3,000.00 $3,000 I Hub Ethernet Switch EA I 1 $ 14,000.00 $14,000 I $90,000 Communication - Upgrade $0 Video Detection-Heels Vantage EdgeConnect LS I 1 $ 25,000.00 325,000 Detection Upgrade I f $25,000 lintershctioh: STJAMES PARK 2070 ATC Controller EA I 1 $ 6,000.00 $6,000 I IntarseclioNFfeld CCTV CAMERA IS 1 $ 12,000.00 312,000 System Upgrade Battery Back-up System EA 1 $ 10,000.00 $10,000 I $31,000 Ethernet Switch EA 1 $ 3,000.00 $3,000 I $56,000 • Communication so Upgrade - 'Vldeo Detection-Heels Vantage EdgeConnect LS I 1 $ 25,000.00 325,000 I Detection Upgrade J I 1525,000 I I f Intersection: CHURCHILL AVE 2070 ATC Controller EA 1 $ 6,000.00 $6,000 I Inlersectionlfield CCTV CAMERA LS 1 $ 12,000.00 $12,000 System Upgrade Battery Back-up System EA 1 $ 10.000.00 310,000 531,000 Ethernet Switch EA 1 3 3,000.00 53,000 $56,000 Communication Upgrade - SO Video Detection-tteris Vantage EdgeConnect LS I 1 $25,000.00 $25,000 Detection Upgrade $25,000 • I I Intersection: RANCHO RD 2070 ATC Controller EA I 1 $ 6,000.00 $6,000 I Intersection/FieldCCTV CAMERA • LS 1 S 12,000.00 $12,000 I System Upgrade Battery Back-up System EA 1 S 10,000.00 $10,000 $31,000 Ethernet Switch EA 1 $ 3,000.00 53,000 $56,000 Communication Upgrade S0 Video Detection-Iteris Vantage EdgeConned LS 1 $25,000.00 $25,000 Detection Upgrade I i $25,000 Total $392,000 Corridor:BOLSA CHICA ST Agencv:HUNTINGTON BEACH Category I Description I Unit I Quantity I Unit Cost I Amount I Sub-total intersection Total Intersection:BOLSA AVE 2070 ATC Controller EA 1 S 8,000.00 S 8,000.00 Intersection/Field CCTV CAMERA(including license) EA 1 S 12,000.00 S 12,000.00 S20,000 System Upgrade ; - S - Fiber Distribtuion Unit,Splice Enclosure,and SMFO-6 Drop CA1 S 10,000.00 S t0,00D,00 . • Pull 100'98 SMFO cable in puilbox at;acant to LS 1 $ 1,000.00 5 1,000.00 590,500 • Communication RandwControllerCabinet $70,500 Upgrade instal 96 SMFO cable(Rancho to Boise) IF 2650 $ 10,00 $26,500.00 JPufboxes(68E)(Rancho to Balsa) EA 1 $ 4,000.00 $ 4,000.00 • • IPuWtroxes(66)(Rancho to Bofsal FA 8 $ 3,000.00 $18,000,00 Replace 2"Conduit(Rancho to Balsa) LF 200 $ 55.00 S 11,000.00 3 - Detection Upgrade S - _ SO I $ - _ Intersection: [ARGOSY AVE 2070 ATC Controller FA 1 S 8,000.00 i 8,000.00 Intersection✓Fieid I $ - $8,000 . System Upgrade I $ - I 5 - 'Fiber Distribtulon Unit,Splice Enclosure,and SMFO-6 LS 1 ;10,000.00 S 10,000.00 Drop Cable+splicing - $61,000 1 Communication Instal 96 SMFO cable(Balsa to Argosy) LF 1600 $ 10.00 S 16,000.00 $53,000 Upgrade JPulboxes(66E)(Boise to Argosy) EA 1 S 4,000.00 S 4,000.00 • Pullboxes(06)(Boisa to Argosy) FA 4 $ 3,000.00 S 12,000.00 , Replace 7'Conduit(Balsa to Argosy) IF 200 $ 55.00 S 11,000.00 I $ - • Detection Upgrade J $ - SO I $ - Intersection: JMCFADDEN AVE 12070 ATC Controller I EA 1 1 $ a,000.0015 8,000.00 Intersection/Field CCTV CAMERA(including license) I EA I 1 3 12,000.00 I$12,000.00 $20.000 System Upgrade J $ S - Fiber Distrbtuion Unit,Splice Enclosure,and SMFO-6 LS 1 S 10,000.00 $10,000.00 • Drop Cable+splicing $76,000 • Communication 'Install 96 SMFO cable(Argosy to McFadden) LF 1900 S 10.00 S 19,000.00 $56,000 Upgrade JPuliboxes(USE)(Argosy to McFadden) EA I 1 3 4,000.00 S 4,000.00 JPullboxes(06)(Argosy to McFadden) EA I 4 i 3,000.00 $12,000.00 [Replace 2'Conduit(Argosy to McFadden) LF I 200 $ 55.00 $11,000.00 I S • Detection Upgrade I S - So I Is - _ Intersection: IROSINWOOD DR 12070 ATC Controller EA 1 S 8,000.00 S 8,000.00 Intersection/Field ( $ - $8,000 System Upgrade if I I$ - I Is - Fiber Distrbtubn Unit,Splice Enclosure,and SMFO-6 LS 1 S 10,000.00 $10,000.00 Drop Cable+splicing $70,000 Communication Install 96 SMFO cable(McFadden to Robinwood) LF 2200 S 10.00 3 22,000.00 562,000 Upgrade Pullboxes(66E)(McFadden to Robinwood) FA I 1 $ 4,000.00 S 4,000,00 Pullboxes 016)(McFadden to Robinwood) I EA 5 $ 3,000.00 $15,000.00 [Replace 2'Conduit(McFadden to Robinwood) IF 200 3 55.00 S 11,000.00 I S - Detection Upgrade J $ - $0 I I $ - Intersection: IEDINGER AVE 2070 ATC Controller I EA ' 1 $ 8,000.00 S 8,000.00 Intersection/Fleld CCTV CAMERA(inducing license) i FA 1 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 $20,000 System Upgrade I $ - I $ - tnstal 98 SMFO cable Into Hub Cabinet(Hub installed LS 1 S 1,000.00 3 1,000.00 Edinger with Eger TSSP Project) $46,500 Install 96 SMFO cable(Robinwood to Edinger) I LF 1000 $ 10.00 S 10,000.00 $26,500 JPulboxes 08E)(Robinwood to Edinger) I EA 1 $ 4,000,00 S 4,000.00 Pulboxes(#8)(Robinwood to Edinger) FA 2 $ 3,000.00 $ 8,000.00 Replace 2 Conduit(Robinwood to Edinger) IF 100 S 55.00 S 5,500.00 I I I $ - Detection Upgrade I I 13 SO Intersection: HEIL AVE • 2070 ATC Controller EA 1 3 8,000.00 5 8,000.00 Intersection/Plaid CCTV CAMERA(ickrdln0 license) EA 1 $12,000.00 3 12,000.00 520,000 System Upgrade $ • $ 3 - Communication 3 $20,000 Upgrade $ SO $ - S - Detection Upgrade 3 - SO $ - , Intersection: PEARCE DR 2070ATC Controller EA 1 $ 8,000.00 $ 8,000.00 Intersection/Reid $ - • System Upgrade 3 - $8,000 $ Fiber Dislribluion Unit,Splice Enclosure,and SMFO 8 L3 1 310 000 00 $10,000.00 • Drop Cable+splicing Communication Upgrade S - $10.000 $18,000 $ $ - $ - $ - Detection Upgrade 3 - 50 $ - Intersection: WARNER AVE 2070 ATC Controller CA 1 $ 8,000.00 $ 8,000.00 J IntersectiorVFeld CCTV CAMERA EA 1 312,000.00 $12,000.00 520,000 . System Upgrade $ - $ - S - Communication $ - $20,000 Upgrade $ s0 $ $ - 3 - Detection Upgrade $ - SO S - Total 3402,000 �00��NT I N G T =00 -� �fiPOnar••. City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street ♦ Huntington Beach, CA 92648 i - `=1� (714) 536-5227 • www.huntingtonbeachca.gov 0. ''' �`` •0 Office of the City Clerk �UNT� �� Robin Estanislau, City Clerk March 13, 2023 City of Garden Grove Public Works Department Attention: Dai Vu, City Traffic Engineer 11222 Acacia Parkway Garden Grove, CA 92842 Dear Mr. Vu: Enclosed is an executed copy of the Cooperative Agreement by and between the Cities of Huntington Beach, Garden Grove and Westminster for the Valley View Street/Bolsa Chica Street Corridor Traffic Signal Synchronization Project, approved by City Council on March 21, 2023. Sincerely, q‘W-4,74,14A4) Robin Estanislau, CMC City Clerk RE:ds Enclosure Sister City: Anjo, Japan /#�NTINGT 1, '0��'-;�:�.fiPoerFc°�� City of Huntington Beach '� F ..':9 I 2000 Main Street ♦ Huntington Beach, CA 92648 % (714) 536-5227 • www.huntingtonbeachca.gov Nikv _ `N`6l ../).1111 ..... 0' %NTY CP �� Office of the City Clerk Robin Estanislau, City Clerk March 13, 2023 City of Westminster Public Works Department Attention: Adolfo Ozeata, Transportation Manager 8200 Westminster Blvd. Westminster, CA 92683 Dear Mr. Ozeata: Enclosed is an executed copy of the Cooperative Agreement by and between the Cities of Huntington Beach, Garden Grove and Westminster for the Valley View Street/Bolsa Chica Street Corridor Traffic Signal Synchronization Project, approved by City Council on March 21, 2023. Sincerely, q6/64'714,4A4) Robin Estanislau, CMC City Clerk RE:ds Enclosure Sister City: Anjo, Japan PR OCTA AFFILIATED AGENCIES November 16, 2020 Orange County Transit District Local Transportation Mr. Tom Herbel Authority City of Huntington Beach—Department of Public Works Service Authority for 2000 Main Street Freeway Emergencies Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Consolidated Transporation Service Agency Subject: Agreement No. C-1-2765, City of Huntington Beach, "M2 CTFP Master Congestion Management Funding Agreement"—Letter Agreement No. 11 Agency Dear Mr. Herbel: This Letter Agreement serves as the Orange County Transportation Authority's (OCTA) approval to amend Agreement No. C-1-2765, Attachment A-10 "Projects List." OCTA is deleting Attachment A-10, in its entirety,as identified in Article 4"Responsibilities of Agency," paragraph A, and in lieu thereof is inserting the revised "Project List," attached hereto as Attachment A-11, which is incorporated and made a part of the Agreement. All provisions set forth in Master Funding Agreement No. C-1-2765 apply. The following additional provisions apply to OCTA's Board of Directors approved Project P project(s): 1. In-kind or soft match shall be itemized by Lead Agency and or participating cities. 2. The Lead Agency agrees to ensure that technical representatives from the project's Traffic Forum meet and participate regularly during the entirety of the project. 3. The Lead Agency agrees to manage the project for all participating agencies. 4. The Lead Agency agrees to develop and execute an agreement with the participating agencies outlining the roles and responsibilities, flow-down contractual elements, and project match share for completion of the project consistent with the Measure M Comprehensive Transportation Funding Guidelines and referenced documents, the project application, and this letter. 5. The Lead Agency agrees to provide updated timing plans, traffic counts, and other appropriate data to OCTA in formats consistent with the ROADS database at the completion of the Primary Implementation phase of the project. 6. The Lead Agency agrees to cooperate with OCTA and coordinate outreach efforts for the Primary Implementation phase project. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Alfonso Hernandez at(714)560-5363. Please execute this Letter Agreement and return the signed original to the attention of: Luis Martinez,Associate Contract Administrator, Procurement Contracts Administration and Materials Management Department 600 South Main Street, 4th Floor Orange, CA 92868 Phone: (714) 560-5767, Email: Imartinez1 tc�octa.net Orange County Transportation Authority 550 South Main Street/P.O.Box 14184/Orange/California 92863-1584/(714)560-OCTA(6282) 402 Agreement No.C-1-2765,City of Huntington Beach Master Funding Agreement-Letter Agreement No.11 Page 2 Upon full execution of the Letter Agreement,the effective date will be August 1 2020. t Accepted and Agreed /40, 97.6f-%&/,14,7 Kia Mortazavi : - - .-I 5e,44 i Wifl yY Executive Director, Planning Director of Public Work Orange County Transportation Authority City of Huntington Beach ¶: V.44 Pia Veesapen Interim Director, Contracts Administration & Materials Management Orange County Transportation Authority 11/36 /2.6 Date 403 AGREEMENT NO. C-1-2765 ATTACHMENT A-11 LETTER AGREEMENT NO. 11 M2 CTFP MASTER FUNDING AGREEMENT City of Huntington Beach - Project List Programmed Letter Project Description CTFP Amount Fiscal Year Board Date Agreement No. Project 0"Regional Capacity Program" Beach Boulevard (State Route 39)and Warner Avenue Widening(Engineering) $ 105,225 2011-12 6/27/2011 Brookhurst Street/Adams Avenue Widening (Engineering) $ 274,508 2012-13 6/27/2011 Beach Boulevard(State Route 39)4th Northbound Thru Lane(Engineering) $ 130,575 2012-13 4/23/2012 2 Beach Boulevard(State Route 39)4th Northbound Thru Lane(Construction) $ 136,331 2013-14 4/23/2012 2 Atlanta Avenue Widening $ 1,200,000 2015-16 4/13/2015 8 Cumulative Program Total $ 1,846,639 Project X"Environmental Clean Up" McFadden/Edwards and Heil/Algonquin Catch Basin Project $ 33,000 2011-12 8/8/2011 1 First Street Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Project $ 63,000 2012-13 8/13/2012 3 Northwest Catch Basin Retrofit Project-Phase I $ 199,588 2013-14 9/23/2013 5 Adams Ave. and Bushard St.Bioswale Project $ 635,955 2014-15 4/14/2014 6 Huntington Beach Catch Basin Retrofit Project $ 193,827 2014-15 9/22/2014 7 Huntington Harbour Marina Trash Skimmers(MTS) Trash Removal Project $ 73,118 2016-17 9/12/2016 9 Huntington Beach Trash Removal Project-Phase I $ 432,160 2018-19 9/10/2018 10 Cumulative Program Total $ 1,630,648 Project P"Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program" Bolsa Chica Street RTSSP(Chapman Ave to $ 1,488,480 2020-21 5/11/2020 11 Warner Ave) Cumulative Program Total $ 1,488,480 Total(All Projects) $ 4,965,767 Page 19 of 24 404 ,,,,,j,-__ CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Public Works Department Sean Crumby, PE c .<Ui Director of Public Works October 12, 2022 Ms. Charvalen Alacar Senior Transportation Funding Analyst Orange County Transportation Authority 600 S,Main Street Orange, CA 92863 Dear Ms. Alacar: Subject: Request for Escalation to Project P Prior Allocation Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program Bolsa Chica Street/Valley View Street Corridor Project In April 2020, the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) approved funding for the Bolsa Chica Street/Valley View Street Corridor Project under the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program. In June 2021, a delay request was approved by OCTA which specifies that the commencement of the project will be in fiscal year 2022/2023. The initial application was submitted in October 2019. With the passage of time construction costs have escalated and the City is requesting additional grant funding consistent with the Engineering News Record(ENR) Construction Cost Index(CCI). As provided by OCTA, the CCI escalation factors are as follows: Fiscal Year 2020/2021 5.9% Fiscal Year 2021/2022 8.2% Fiscal Year 2022/2023 5.7%. The construction cost, as presented in the grant application dated March 19, 2020, is $1,465,000. The CCI was applied to the original construction cost as follows: Original Construction Cost Estimate $1,465,000.00 Fiscal Year 2020/2021 Escalation(5.9%) $ 86,435.00 $1,551,435.00 Fiscal Year 2021/2022 Escalation(8.2%) $ 127,217.67 $1,678,652.67 Fiscal Year 2022/2023 Escalation(5.7%) $ 95,683.20 Revised Construction Cost Estimate $1,774,335.87 405 2000 Main Street, California 92648• Phone 714-536-5431 • www.huntingtonbeachca.gov Ms.Charvalen Alacar Orange County Transportation Authority October 12,2022 Page 2 This increase in the construction cost is $309,335.87, bringing the total project cost to $2,169,935.87, with a total M2 request of $1,735,949. The revised project cost breakdown, originally submitted in Section 5 of the grant application, is included as an attachment. A draft City Council resolution supporting this request is also attached. It is anticipated that this resolution will be brought before the Huntington Beach City Council at their November 1, 2022 meeting. Your consideration of our Request for Escalation is appreciated. If you have any questions,please contact William Janusz,Principal Civil Engineer, at(714) 374-1628. Sincerely, Sean Crumby, PE Director of Public Works Attachments: Project Cost Breakdown(revised from Section 5 of the original grant application) Draft Huntington Beach City Council Resolution Copy: Dai Vu, City Traffic Engineer, City of Garden Grove Bill (Hoa) Pham, Civil Engineering Associate, City of Westminster 406 SECTION 5: FUNDING NEEDS/COSTS FOR PROPOSED PROJECT BY TASK WITH 21.12% CONSTRUCTION COST ESCALATION (FY 20/21-5.9%, FY 21/22-8.2%, FY 22/23-5.7%) Primary Implementation The Primary Implementation will last one year and include the following elements (See Table I and Table II). INSTRUCTIONS: Be sure to carefully review improvements that may need engineering design or develoment of specifications prior to construction. For example, the interconnect conduit installation, new service locations, or cabinet foundations. Include this cost in your estimate. Costs associated with Caltrans fees, SCE fees, and/or special inspection requirements should also be included. Even though Ca/trans is not a participant, costs associated with Tasks 2, 4, 5, and 6 shall also be included for Caltrans intersections. Project Tasks Cost I Int Total Cost Match - Cash In-Kind Task 1: Project Administration (a) $2,340.91 $ 51,500.00 $ 7,154 $ 3,146 Task 2: Data Collection $ 850.00 $ 18,700.00 $ 3,740 $ - Task 3: Field Review and Plans Specifications, and Estimate; $ - $ 137,300.00 $ 27,460 $ - Task 4: Corridor"Before"Study $ 500.00 $ 11,000.00 $ 2,200 $ - Task 5: Signal Timing Optimization and Implementation $4,650.00 $ 102,300.00 $ 20,460 $ - Task 6: Corridor"After" Study $ 500.00 $ 11,000.00 $ 2,200 $ - Task 7: Synchronization System Construction (See Table II) - $ 1,774,335.87 $271,707 $ 83,160 Task 8: Primary Implementation Project Report $ 500.00 $ 11,000.00 $ 2,200 $ - Task 9: Ongoing Operations & Maintenance (See Task 9 Det $2,400.00 $ 52,800.00 $ 10,560 $ - Total Project Cost: $ 2,169,935.87 $ 347,681 $ 86,306 (a) Project Administration is$2,000 per local agency intersection and $4,500 per Caltrans intersection. Ongoing Operations& Maintenance Ongoing Operations and Maintenance will last two years and include the following elements. (See Task 9 Details): Task 9 Details: Unit Price/ #of Task Description of Work Intersection signals Cost Project Administration Day to day administrative duties during O&M included Monitoring and Drive monthly and improve timing parameters improving optimized along 22 signals for 24 months after signal $1,680.00 22 $36,960 signal timing timing and implemented along Valley View/ Balsa Chica from Chapman to Warner Monitor, maintain, and repair communication Communications and and detection along for 22 signals for 24 months detection support after signal timing is implemented along Valley $720.00 22 $15,840 View/Balsa Chica from Chapman to Warner(@ $30/signal/month) A memorandum to summarize the O&M phase, including details on when travel runs were OMM Memorandum conducted; issues and solutions throughout the included phase; and recommendations for future improvements. Proposed Onging Operations&Maintenance: $52,800 Total Project Cost (Including PI and O&M for a total of 3 years): Total Total M2 Request: $1, 735,948.70 Total Agency Match: $433,987. 17 Total Project Cost: $2,169,935.87 407 12 RESOLUTION NO. 2022-65 ► A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGT•dik EH AUTHORIZING A REQUEST FOR ESCALATION TO PROJECT P PRIOR A IT ATION FROM THE ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (OCTA) OR THE BOLSA CHICA STREET/VALLEY VIEW STREET CORRIDOR PROJECT—PROJECT P REGIONAL TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION PROGRAM—COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION FUNDING PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) conducted a Call for Projects under the Measure M2 Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program; and WHEREAS, the City of Huntington Beach applied for and received an allocation from OCTA to fund the Bolsa Chica Street/Valley View Street Corridor Project; and WHEREAS, the City of Huntington Beach originally established Fiscal Year 2020/2021 as the program year to commence the design phase for the Bolsa Chica Street/Valley View Street Corridor Project;and WHEREAS, the City of Huntington Beach requested and subsequently received a delay in the project implementation to Fiscal Year 2022/2023 as the program year to commence the design phase for the Bolsa Chica Street/Valley View Street Corridor Project; and WHEREAS, construction cost have experienced increases since the originally programmed project implementation date; and WHEREAS, the OCTA Comprehensive Transportation Funding Program (CTFP) Guidelines requires agencies to request authorization from their governing boards if an escalation in grant funding is requested. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Huntington Beach, does hereby resolve as follows: 1. That the Director of Public Works is hereby authorized to request an escalation adjustment to the original grant allocation for construction activities from OCTA for the Bolsa Chica Street/Valley View Street Corridor, Project P Traffic Signal Synchronization Program. 2. The City of Huntington Beach will continue to provide matching funds at the rate specified in the project's application to the Orange County Transportation Authority. 408 RESOLUTION NO. 2022-65 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach itt regular meeting thereof held on the day of , 2022, Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: REVIEWED AND APPROVED: City Attorney Atv INITIATED AND APPROVED: City Manager Director of Public Works 2 409 OCTA COMMITTEE TRANSMITTAL February 13, 2023 To: Members of the Board of Directors \t\\lay" , From: Andrea West, Interim Clerk of the Bo '�l ' Uv Subject: Escalation Rate Adjustments Recommendations for Prior Regional Capacity Program and Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program Allocations Regional Transportation Planning Committee Meeting of February 6, 2022 Present: Directors Do, Chaffee, Dumitru, Federico, Foley, and Harper Absent: Director Khan Committee Vote This item was passed by the Members present. Committee Recommendations A. Approve one-time construction escalation adjustments to four previously approved (2020, 2021) Regional Capacity Program projects in the amount of $2,751,877, increasing the overall Measure M2 award from $13,905,846 to $16,657,723. B. Approve one-time construction escalation adjustments to four previously approved (2020, 2021) Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program projects in the amount of$1,599,615, increasing the overall Measure M2 award from $9,377,300 to $10,976,915. C. Approve a one-time right-of-way escalation adjustment to one previously approved 2018 Regional Capacity Program project in the amount of $1,410,134, increasing the overall Measure M2 award from $7,494,000 to $8,904,134. D. Approve a modification to the Temporary Policy to apply escalation to Project 0 Regional Capacity Program and Project P Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program prior allocation related to right-of-way requirements. Orange County Transportation Authority 550 South Main Street/P.O.Box 14184/Orange/California 92863-1584/(714)560-OCTA(6282) 410 1111 OCTA February 6, 2023 To: Regional Transportation Planning Committee From: Darrell E. Johnson, Chief Executive Officer Subject: Escalation Rate Adjustment Recommendations for Prior Regional Capacity Program and Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program Allocations Overview The Orange County Transportation Authority's Regional Capacity Program and Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program allocate Measure M2 streets and roads funds for roadway and signal improvement projects through a competitive process. Due to recent extraordinary inflationary pressures, the Board of Directors authorized staff to accept escalation adjustment requests from local jurisdictions for existing project commitments that meet certain criteria. Staff has evaluated these requests, and a list of eligible projects with recommended one-time escalation adjustments is presented for Board of Directors' review and approval. Recommendations A. Approve one-time construction escalation adjustments to four previously approved (2020, 2021) Regional Capacity Program projects in the amount of $2,751,877, increasing the overall Measure M2 award from $13,905,846 to $16,657,723. B. Approve one-time construction escalation adjustments to four previously approved (2020, 2021) Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program projects in the amount of$1,599,615, increasing the overall Measure M2 award from $9,377,300 to $10,976,915. C. Approve a one-time right-of-way escalation adjustment to one previously approved 2018 Regional Capacity Program project in the amount of $1,410,134, increasing the overall Measure M2 award from $7,494,000 to $8,904,134. Orange County Transportation Authority 411 550 South Main Street/P.O. Box 14184/Orange/California 92863-1584/(714)560-OCTA(6282) Escalation Rate Adjustment Recommendations for Prior Page 2 Regional Capacity Program and Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program Allocations D. Approve a modification to the Temporary Policy to apply escalation to Project 0 Regional Capacity Program and Project P Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program prior allocation related to right-of-way requirements. Background Measure M2 (M2) includes two competitive streets and roads programs known as the Regional Capacity Program (RCP) and the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program (RTSSP). These programs target projects that improve mobility by considering factors such as degree of congestion relief, cost-effectiveness, and project readiness and allocate M2 funds on a competitive basis through the Comprehensive Transportation Funding Programs (CTFP). Both programs are included in the CTFP, which serves as the mechanism through which Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA)staff administers the RCP and RTSSP, as well as other M2 competitive transit and environmental cleanup programs. The CTFP allocates funds for the RCP and RTSSP through an annual call for projects (call) based on a common set of guidelines and scoring criteria. The CTFP guidelines are developed in collaboration with the OCTA Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), which includes representatives from all of Orange County's 35 local jurisdictions, and are ultimately approved by the OCTA Board of Directors (Board). In adherence to the CTFP guidelines, OCTA staff and the TAC review, evaluate, score, and recommend funding allocations to the Board. Once awarded funding by the Board, a project cannot receive additional allocations of M2 funds due to the competitive nature of these programs and as prescribed in the CTFP guidelines. As such, M2 funding that is allocated through CTFP calls requires that local jurisdictions commit to covering any project cost overruns that may occur after a project is allocated. At the May 2022 TAC meeting, the committee requested that OCTA consider ways to help local jurisdictions accommodate considerable cost increases for projects entering right-of-way (ROW) and construction phases. The issue involves projects which had been allocated RCP and RTSSP funding in recent years and have not started due to the coronavirus pandemic or other factors. Local jurisdictions indicated that they are experiencing extraordinary cost increases in projects due to increases in the cost of materials and labor due to shortages, supply chain issues, and extraordinary inflation. 412 Escalation Rate Adjustment Recommendations for Prior Page 3 Regional Capacity Program and Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program Allocations As background, the CTFP guidelines provide that at time of Board award, OCTA applies an escalation factor to RCP grants for ROW and construction phases after a project is selected for an allocation. The escalation for years two and three of the call funding cycle is applied based on the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (ENR CCI) 20-city average rate that is available when the Board awards the grants. Prior to the pandemic, typical changes to the ENR CCI rates result in escalation factors around two to three percent annually. Following the pandemic, based on the published ENR CCI rate combined with M2 economic forecasts, an aggregate or cumulative escalation of 21 percent is the approximate rate of escalation through fiscal year 2023. On August 8, 2022, the Board authorized temporary policy changes to address project challenges. The temporary policies, described in Attachment A and Attachment B, provided two options for local jurisdictions: 1. To participate in a flexible reapplication process in the current 2023 CTFP call. 2. Request an escalation adjustment to existing RCP and RTSSP allocations. Both one-time options are limited to existing RCP and RTSSP allocations previously programmed through the 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 calls that satisfy a list of eligibility criteria. OCTA committed to return to the Board for consideration of the escalation to existing allocations based on requests from local jurisdictions. Discussion OCTA received nine escalation adjustment requests comprised of five RCP projects and four RTSSP projects as further detailed in Attachment C. Staff reviewed all request packages to ensure completion, accuracy, and compliance with Board-approved temporary policy requirements. The eligibility criteria reviewed included confirmation that construction phases were not under a contract, verification of council approval to also increase the required local match, and review of the acquisition status of all parcels included in ROW phases. During the review process, staff worked with local jurisdictions to calculate escalation rate adjustments for project allocations and the proportionate local funding commitment. Based upon these reviews, staff recommends an escalation adjustment to the construction phases of four RCP projects, totaling $2,751,877 in additional M2 funds. The M2 RCP funding adjustments support arterial capacity benefits for two City of Santa Ana projects and two City of Yorba Linda projects, which are expected to require an additional total local match commitment of$754,007. 413 Escalation Rate Adjustment Recommendations for Prior Page 4 Regional Capacity Program and Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program Allocations With respect to the four RTSSP requests, staff recommends an escalation adjustment to the primary implementation phases of all four projects, totaling $1,599,615 in additional M2 funds. The M2 RTSSP funding adjustment supports one project programmed through the 2020 call and led by the City of Huntington Beach and three projects programmed through the 2021 call, with implementation efforts being led by OCTA staff at the request of lead applicant agencies from the cities of Irvine, Lake Forest, and Santa Ana. Among the partnering agencies for each corridor, the M2 escalation adjustment would result in an additional local match commitment of$685,317 towards construction. Lastly, an escalation adjustment to the ROW phase of one RCP request submitted by the City of Santa Ana (City) for Warner Avenue arterial improvements, between Oak Street and Standard Avenue, is recommended, totaling $1,410,134 in increased M2 funding and $470,045 in additional local match funding. In order to implement this recommendation, the Board is requested to also authorize an update to the temporary policy specifying that requests to adjust allocations for escalation must be submitted before a purchase agreement has been fully executed for property as part of the ROW phase instead of before an initial offer has been made. The City believed that not awarding a construction contract would satisfy the requirement of this segment of Warner Avenue arterial improvements for both the ROW and construction allocations. The ROW phase was included in the policy at the City's request and is the only agency that would qualify for ROW escalation, under the modified policy. Approval of the proposed modification to the escalation policy, as red-lined in Attachment D, is recommended in light of the unique circumstance. The overall escalation adjustment recommendation of$5,761,626, as detailed in Attachment E, is within the estimated impact of $5 million to $9 million reported to the Board in August 2022. It should be noted that of the nine recommended adjustments requests, three projects recommended for$2.4 million in escalation adjustments may be alternatively funded through the 2023 call. Next Steps With Board approval of these recommendations, staff will initiate the execution of amended letter agreements between OCTA and the appropriate local jurisdictions. Once these agreements are executed, local jurisdictions are authorized to proceed and seek M2 reimbursement for their respective eligible project costs. 414 Escalation Rate Adjustment Recommendations for Prior Page 5 Regional Capacity Program and Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program Allocations Summary Escalation adjustment recommendations that will provide an additional $5.76 million in M2 funding from the RCP and RTSSP programs to nine projects, increasing the overall M2 award from $30.78 million to $36.54 million, are presented for Board approval. Attachments A. Temporary Policy for Flexible Cancellation of Project Allocations to Reapply and Pre-Award Authority B. Temporary Policy to Apply Escalation to Project 0 Regional Capacity Program and Project P Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program Prior Allocation C. Escalation Rate Adjustment Request Recommendations D. Temporary Policy to Apply Escalation to Project 0 Regional Capacity Program and Project P Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program Prior Allocation — Proposed Revisions E. CTFP Temporary Policy for Inflation — Escalated Funding Allocation Recommendations Prepared By: Approved By: ,t/z4f),,,(4 Charvalen Alacar Kia Mortazavi Section Manager, Local Programs Executive Director, Planning (714) 560-5401 (714) 560-5741 415 ATTACHMENT A Temporary Policy for Flexible Cancellation of Project Allocations to Reapply and Pre-Award Authority Issue: Considering the extraordinary inflationary impacts currently being experienced, local jurisdictions have requested that the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) consider the flexibility for local jurisdictions to apply for Comprehensive Transportation Funding Programs (CTFP) funds in the upcoming 2023 call for projects (call) for the same project that was approved in a prior grant cycle. This would allow the local jurisdictions to cancel the prior grant if successful in the new grant cycle or retain the prior grant if not successful in the new grant cycle. Further, local jurisdictions requested that OCTA consider pre-award authority. Background: Currently, if a local jurisdiction wishes to cancel a project phase that has been allocated funds through a CTFP call for Project 0 Regional Capacity Program (RCP) and Project P Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program (RTSSP), and reapply for that phase in a future call, then the agency would typically cancel that project before applications are due in October. This would typically take place as part of the preceding September semi-annual review. Board-Approved Request: Under this request, OCTA will accept project applications from local jurisdictions that were previously approved in a prior call. The following conditions would apply: • As part of the new application, the local jurisdiction must agree to a condition that if the project has an existing allocation and submits a new application for funding that is approved by the Board of Directors (Board), the original allocation will be cancelled in its entirety. • OCTA would require that the funds made available from the cancelled project phase will roll into the 2023 call. • The application for 2023 call must be a complete application for the full funding request under the terms of the 2023 call guidelines. • The scope in the application must be generally the same as the original project. In most cases, any expansion of project limits from the original application is not acceptable. • A project is only eligible to be considered under a new application if the contract has not been awarded for construction phase for RCP projects, a notice to proceed issued for RTSSP projects, or offer letters issued for right-of-way phase. Work cannot have started for the phase that is submitted for consideration of funding in the 2023 call. • OCTA will allow pre-award authority for projects approved by the Board (typically May) and before the start of the next fiscal year (July). OCTA will not reimburse costs or count toward match secondary contract or internal staff costs that occur prior to Board approval. 1 416 Temporary Policy for Flexible Cancellation of Project Allocations to Reapply and Pre-Award Authority • The estimated timeline would be: o August/September 2022— OCTA issues call, subject to Board approval. o October 2022 — Applications due, must include the condition statement, must also request pre-award authority (and advancement to award contract) prior to July 1, 2023. o February 2023— Request to cancel project is submitted as part of the March semi-annual review. o March 2023 — Technical Steering Committee and Technical Advisory Committee meetings with allocation recommendations, funding target would be increased to incorporate funds from existing projects that will be cancelled. o May 2023 — Planned Board action to approve 2023 call allocations. If pre-award authority and advancement are requested, jurisdiction may award a contract immediately following Board approval. o May/June 2023 — Staff sends notification to allocated applicants who reapplied for projects through this process that the original project allocation has been cancelled. • If agreed to, changes will be recommended for the project application form to include the condition statement to cancel existing allocation and a check box for requesting pre-award authority. 2 417 ATTACHMENT B Temporary Policy to Apply Escalation to Project 0 Regional Capacity Program and Project P Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program Prior Allocation Issue: Considering the extraordinary inflationary impacts currently being experienced, local jurisdictions have requested that the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) consider adjusting Measure M2 (M2) Project 0 Regional Capacity Program (RCP) and Project P Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program (RTSSP) project allocations for inflation based on the actual Engineering News Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index (CCI) as these projects approach the start of right-of-way (ROW) and construction phase work. Background: Escalation is normally applied using the ENR CCI based on the 20-city average at funding allocation to RCP projects that are allocated funds for ROW and construction phase and are programmed in years two and three, consistent with precept 12 and the project cost escalation as described on page 2-4 of Chapter 2 — Project Programming in the Comprehensive Transportation Funding Programs (CTFP) guidelines. This practice of applying escalation at allocation will not change. Board-Approved Request: OCTA will apply an updated ENR CCI based on the actual 20-city average rate to the original RCP or RTSSP funding allocation from the 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 calls for projects (call) for implementation, ROW, and construction, for fiscal years (FY)2020-21, 2021-22 and an estimate for FY 2022-23 as applicable, subject to the following requirements: • The request to adjust the allocation for escalation must be made by the local jurisdiction before an initial offer(s) has been made for property for ROW phase or before the local jurisdiction has awarded the construction contract for the RCP or issued a purchase order for RTSSP implementation. This request is expected to be presented to the Board of Directors (Board) in December 2022, in concert with the September 2022 semi-annual review. • Requests for escalation must be submitted no later than October 14, 2022, with resolutions due no later than November 9, 2022. • An escalation request can only be made for projects that were allocated RCP and RTSSP funds for implementation, ROW, or construction through the 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 CTFP calls. • The request must include a resolution from the city council or Board of Supervisors that the jurisdiction is: o Authorized to request OCTA to apply an escalation adjustment to the original allocation, o Has justification due to local jurisdiction-specific reasons, o Committing to meeting its original match rate and identifies the additional jurisdictional funding that will be added to the project to ensure the match requirement is met, o Notes the original allocation amount and year funds are programmed for ROW and construction, and o For ROW, identifies how much of the M2 funding has been committed based on offer letters and how much remains to be escalated. 1 418 Temporary Policy to Apply Escalation to Project 0 Regional Capacity Program and Project P Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program Prior Allocation • OCTA will provide the escalation rate that will be applied for the FY noted above and will be based on the ENR CCI 20-city average as of June for FY 2020-21 and FY 2021-22, and as of September for FY 2021-22 and FY 2022-23. • OCTA will provide local jurisdictions with a document that identifies the escalation rate that was applied for each call cycle by programming year. • In order to calculate the escalation rate for project allocations that were already escalated for FY 2020-21, FY 2021-22, and FY 2022-23, OCTA will strip out the escalation for those allocations for those years and then apply the adjusted escalation rate. • For a ROW phase that is underway, the local jurisdiction must provide how much of the grant funding remains based on parcels for which the local jurisdiction has not already issued an offer letter. • The match rate will not change, and eligible project costs will be reimbursed consistent with CTFP guidelines and the original match rate. This would require the local jurisdiction to increase local funding at a minimum, proportionate to the updated allocation amount. • The escalation adjustment will be considered for approval by the Board either as part of the semi-annual review process or concurrent with the September 2022 semi-annual review. • Once the request for an escalation adjustment has been acknowledged as received by OCTA through an OCTA acknowledgement letter, the local jurisdiction could proceed to contract award or offer letter, or issuance of purchase order, under its own risk that the requested allocation adjustment may not be approved by the Board and the local jurisdiction would be responsible for the cost. • The initial payment cannot be made to the local jurisdiction until the Board approves the escalation adjustment to the allocation. • For a ROW phase that has already received an initial payment, the additional funding provided through escalation will be provided in the final payment, if applicable. • The local jurisdiction can only request an escalation adjustment once per project phase and allocation. • Escalation adjustments will only be considered if there is sufficient Project 0 or Project P funding to support the adjustment. It should be noted that the escalation adjustments will reduce the amount of funding that is available for future calls. 2 419 C) H Z W 0 N 2 v Ico C) co rn CD r as Lo co CO N- CO CD 4 � , M N r ti 07 C C L N- N. CCU CA O Tr CO C O C') O Cr) O `. Cf) 6 o .0 16 r N- COO d' al 5 CCI r Cn w R Efl d3 Ef3 en 0 0 tit to C) co O N .... 00 ,-- co r CO a.+ "C3 N r 1 O> O r CU Q ti � dr ti V M M Cr N N \ y y',, (Si r r C pe M tei d N (NiN •• E C2 •0 Q E u. 0 6R1 fA EA ER i V ' Et N N . N N . v L. co — N '' N r Q) 0 } Ca ~ i0 ' N LL a. '� t C .a a CD r � ' E — ONC C CI NC ) Np. C) r• ai G G) Cy >. ui N EN c 4-, a> E = 00 a z -a 0 O } N O a 'Oo o `er p[ �, m Q >. N 'C • CO 0 0 cr)I tt °oo. m c Q +0+ LL 7 r N Q- T N z o0 a et � o cC o o - N v LT.iCD 00 Qa, w m r LL e L c0 t U ` m p D m � N c o -C C3 o a ca ° >- 0. N o � ▪ LL o 0 co W 0 3 o Q E _ N N •I N 0.. • p c: U X O N e- `-I •O N p 0, '0 N M C N [ -0 NO 0 t C 1" 7 d Niy, C O v Q a oU o N a a) C d 'C C I E Q 13 ai U z 0 R Q z � � §. m a) .� 0 0 a ▪it C C j �,o co _co �o �_ ..c a 6 'a) `o N w , U c4 V 0 ` 0 0 p I 0 - 0 T. o u U m C O WN W aa , aU o � , a � N � Q aa 8w � 2 ATTACHMENT D Temporary Policy to Apply Escalation to Project 0 Regional Capacity Program and Project P Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program Prior Allocation — Proposed Revisions Issue: Considering the unusual inflationary impacts currently being experienced, jurisdictions have requested that the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) consider adjusting Project 0 Regional Capacity Program (RCP) and Project P Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program (RTSSP) project allocations for inflation based on the actual Engineering News Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index (CCI) as these projects approach the start of right-of-way (ROW) and construction phase work. Background: Escalation is normally applied based on the ENR CCI based on the 20 city average at funding allocation to RCP projects that are allocated funds for ROW and construction phase and are programmed in years two and three, consistent with precept 12 and the project cost escalation as described on page 2-4 of Chapter 2—Project Programming in the Comprehensive Transportation Funding Programs (CTFP) guidelines. This practice of applying escalation at allocation will not change. Board-Approved Proposal: OCTA staff will apply an updated ENR CCI based on the actual 20 city average rate to the original Measure M2 (M2) RCP or RTSSP funding allocation from the 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 calls for projects (calls) for implementation, ROW, and construction, for fiscal years (FY) 2021, 2022 and an estimate for FY 2023 as applicable, subject to the following requirements: • The request to adjust the allocation for escalation must be made by the jurisdiction before an initial offcr(s) has bcen made a purchase agreement has been fully executed for property for ROW phase or before the jurisdiction has awarded the construction contract for the RCP or issued a purchase order for RTSSP implementation. This request is expected to be presented to the Board of Directors (Board) in December 2022, in concert with the September 2022 semi- annual review. • Requests for escalation must be submitted no later than October 14, 2022, with resolutions due no later than November 9, 2022. • An escalation request can only be made for projects that were allocated RCP and RTSSP funds for implementation, ROW or construction through the 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 CTFP calls. • The request must include a resolution from the city council or Board of Supervisors that the jurisdiction is: o Authorized to request OCTA to apply an escalation adjustment to the original allocation, o Has justification due to jurisdiction-specific reasons, o Committing to meeting its original match rate and identifies the additional jurisdictional funding that will be added to the project to ensure the match requirement is met, o Notes the original allocation amount and year funds are programmed for ROW and construction, and 1 421 Temporary Policy to Apply Escalation to Project 0 Regional Capacity Program and Project P Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program Prior Allocation — Proposed Revisions o For ROW, identifies how much of the M2 funding has been committed based on offer letters and how much remains to be escalated. • OCTA will provide the escalation rate that will be applied for the FY noted above and will be based on the ENR CCI 20 city average as of June for FY 2021 and FY 2022, and as of September for FY 2022 and FY 2023. • OCTA will provide agencies with a document that identifies the escalation rate that was applied for each call cycle by programming year. • In order to calculate the escalation rate for project allocations that were already escalated for FY 2021, FY 2022, and FY 2023, OCTA will strip out the escalation for those allocations for those years and then apply the adjusted escalation rate. • For ROW phase that is underway, the jurisdiction must provide how much of the grant funding remains based on parcels for which the jurisdiction has not already issued an offer letter executed a purchase agreement. • The match rate will not change, and eligible project costs will be reimbursed consistent with CTFP guidelines and the original match rate. This would require the jurisdiction to increase local funding at a minimum, proportionate to the updated allocation amount. • The escalation adjustment will be considered for approval by the Board either as part of the semi-annual review process or concurrent with the September 2022 semi-annual review. • Once the request for an escalation adjustment has been acknowledged as received by OCTA through an OCTA acknowledgement letter, the jurisdiction could proceed to contract award or offer letter or issuance of purchase order under its own risk that the requested allocation adjustment may not be approved by the OCTA Board and the jurisdiction would be responsible for the cost. • The initial payment cannot be made to the jurisdiction until the Board approves the escalation adjustment to the allocation. • For ROW phase that has already received an initial payment, the additional funding provided through escalation will be provided in the final payment, if applicable. • The jurisdiction can only request an escalation adjustment once per project phase and allocation. • Escalation adjustments will only be considered if there is sufficient Project 0 or Project P funding to support the adjustment. It should be noted that the escalation adjustments will reduce the amount of funding that is available for future calls. 2 422 C C C a) O : 0 .O N o . 2 o 0 0 o e N O N o 0 0 o e t`2a O N o o e N L N a) y L u0i r (0 O r m L y m O) 21 y W U W N N N > (� W > () w > Q Q r Q -0 o) o n_ o § 'a-9.. n m N Z 3 3 3 m a Q W 0 o 0 W V 0 N 0 o O O CD 0 O o r n 1- 2 n O N N- d CO (O CO 0 Of a) n = N m v U) r O h N m O O O CO N m W 0 @ m ao N O H > @ d) O O O P > O O M N N a) 0 0 N CO N (O N V T N W 0) U) o U LY W o 0) Cp CC W N M O CC W W co CD O N L e- N L_ N _c CI Q3 Cl.Iln » u► E9 w 3 to E9 v> v) 49 3 E9 w w Q C C ODD M rco N N t Ta com0 C•O) O C = CO O O COa0 U CO) N O 0 N CO M CO 0 0 t0 N 47, C'+) U> .2 0) N CO a) -.0 O O - m !o a) co n O LO io V r 10 N a) is CO a m U) M n Co N •V M U) m) N N U N U < U N O N W N W N W O co 2 69 Ea Ca 49 w 2 69 v) E9 E9 49 a CA 49 CA c N E o M CO U) N CO O O M N 0 0 0 CD a m e N- 0 0 Co V' m e V m rn 0 �a C 0 a ` o 0 c o U) N Co V Ca C 0 N M O r M C O O O � N 'a' CO 0) CO N h 'a' V Z r. o Ira r o u) N- a m V N n is W 0) N o,a o N U) CO V a) U V a0 CA C") O V a n c o O o M N C � co O o v- N N o) ai O 0 F. n o 5 E ¢ Q ¢ Ca VI C9 C9 C9 to •N C9 69 C9 Cfl 49 69 C9 w 'v o 8) C w a` W m CO a To a .coR o J<OO 1+ m O O CC a a a a o R o o 0 a I-C a O UUc.) ZVS a Ta 0 0 0 y 2- 0 0 C .0 •0 - N ce Y O W w UJ W a E -° co co ai o) C 0 a W a g 0 y C c) U U U U 0 C CO co co co - L, c U U (7 Y m C a) W Q Q Q Q >Z Li- a. a. a. a. Co L.L. Q a C L-. E a (o a E 0 a `- O0 Z, Of c E Co T Q 0 > .` E Co o'as 2 a 0 a d M N $ N a a O N- o= co a c0 co c C o •c 3 a) y N .0 U m it U c a ? F- i- 0) _ y TS a m 0 o E o o c m c N a m u m Cu c U •> c O u E > 0 O co p Q L a mm CO 03 co ° a c c E -oo w > o m C `m CO C C y� C Li a) aC) a ao 00 0 > a Ta 0 1.g? in 0 > >, Y U R 0 CO C i. 0 0 a d •- i- O a N_ F O U O a 1- CO `aa w Co U > L C , > > >` V .2...) co_0 Q N 0 >� C 2 y N @ V 'n' Gl m O > Co .0 O > >i („3 O C/) • 6. U Li Q V) v a` Q Y a a Y g 0 M V : Co C c Co Ly a) U) w 73 C a.) a) CO CO (% CO a l6 V 0 O..- 0 co y V 0 co t c E C1 O U) . N D a — 01a d a)E w C co @ y 0 c w 0 N O. a' r r N tT CT U m re O a) a) cp c C C > .0 C to LA E >:- a) c E : E a N U Cn Co C CC > 3 Co co O U E F co C > a = Q o. a 0 Fy- d H m - E o 0 EN a G) E E CC a) Co C) > 0 c a) U > m 'a C a d N ill 0 Q - CO Y to N > C N O. L 3 0) L a N < O C to' C)) U N a) U t6 U o N I- o o .caO. > 0 d ccs o m E o a N V D W 2 - N O Co -O O m m m 3 m a a c): o 0 E 0 C U w N J .co O LL 0 N a w N N N O E of Co Co m y U w ._ O) Co Co -0 -0 C C6 `>) a`Co N a C O C C C_ C_ O N C C 15 O O c m Co c a c c a) o a c Co 0 LL a' 0� E a' o m N C C N C c , C N C O- W $ o 0) Co 0 - 0 0 O 0 Co Co C) a) To 0 C ¢ CO C/) >- >- Q I Z -J U) Q m CO N c O o 0 0 a N E oTo m 'O c N O p N -co W 0 -co co O N 0) m --. O a N C E O O O O Q C a 0 L m a) Cp (A (A (A 0 O O O O a) O I� co N C-0 M <h M th d M 'T Y l' L M U 0- O W F E W UJ w w E Li a a a E Lu 0 d— o d acii Z Q Q Q ',. Q z CO CO CO CO z Q o Cr N m �_ " o m < < 0 0 la a 0 0 L O N 0 O) 0 H I- z z 0 I F H < i) < c c H m U o d E f a) v) 0 Z Z J J o) co 0 0 U a) Z c U of m 9 a ,. .) c g 'o to co > >7 'o x 9 9 9 o n u ° `� C o = o ° a' m m a N N N : N a N N N N d N a s V E Q m U U a o O r a Coo c a , a s O O o J LY a .c a E. 0 o 0 IW- , N 0 COp Z ,- N M V Z .- N CO V Z 0 ,L 0 0 0 0 0 f 0 F >II a) . .1-. ._.• ..... (U) -,, ,.• (::). 0111.11. mINNII C m a, 41 W 0 <, • t CU C en , L. a) imil G) 0 • CO ce vbsx) CO CU i #CU 4-0 C N 11„..,% 0,,,) cy) •— •— 00) .C • o- , = = C s 0 - r..,`-:i- cNi :r•s" , (Nlig iii Eimzi (1.) liti U) lill C I 0 iii cliii co >41 Li) s min Sow Ca > 11 co (111) 41,,,,dror4,40.6., .0,1P• .40., of,' ti1/4tIA ti,14/ a "Lrvai, os,...1114.1,_ WO 111161k . ,e- - ... ao sg , --.- .,-.4 1.... ip r.... .* ( . gik II VW'. :Til , • .,,, : , —. .....- 1 . .....D S ) Nrit, ,4?". Nilli r.,,fig .*.4 406 NO or 14 /3 Olikifill .. jele. '1":11.till' Airilirilr 41iiir'' i�tH+b J �, :�, . L , ,d's v h 1 _. a) cik Z o ¢; =S Fes- % v N o\ I :�_'' cn O z .v ff ;„ wed , Z • �♦ 0C ' �.'••.4......••• V IF .E74= ` � /3 Ow ,# C --,..�..� e CV C\I = O co cn CU Z CU O O EL 'oa c c0 L W tea) = Ucc) v0 w CD Lig r/5" '— 0 0) „,s7-• cn W co � oo = � a) co 0 )._. — O 22 loom c — _ m '> C co U '§ 4= cmc U +� ± 2 C `~c CO . I O D O . _0C O 73OO ~COa) U 2 o° cm ci o al a- czD � f— o < O 1- cam . . . I— . alp��P.............. ,� • ............. '' yam. f v11. .�c a ; co Z:gik,t �' Fes- k v �m r tc� �� ••.,, I �.'t •'c�, 0, CI C a) > c 73 o = Z 0 73 CD CO Z s_ U) o 0 .:E1 v o13 Z °) O Q U O C.) u a) a) 'o i'"' � Q O. . 4 to .� V a � a) Cl) u5 E . W - r U s- C U .O Q 0) a) c }' Q Q E N o- S '5 a) CD ca U "- C > a) +-� p CO C U N .a) W v °) cna�iNo � � Q O • O L N 0 0o -0'0 0 Laj c *(7 U) N _C CD O a) C = N E 2> E .E- 2 "c" O Q >O p t o Q > U Q Q f . . . et blNb i •• J $ L�O - t • ..••.* \ t, V :4�O p i 9 �\' Q.,v .Q V; n cr •• co Lf) 0) N- ----...,.....- co x- 0) L000d' U) z 0)I C) V) � N M to ff- Ef CO a) O I i c c o O M 1Y - 0� 0n 0 cc) O C.) � Mo -oU .c 11 N N N- = p E LL ._ Q W = .c L C.) v can O Q w 0 0 Ilie w UO li z U U U I- N a) N 0 . m ca m z V) O O 0 O z 2 20) U I— I () c 4 E' O z O(..) III 0 F... >— O O O Q a- 0 UUUUI--- QQfl Q O UO O 1- 0 F-- � rt 6 ,, " � . co Y 1' 1j - �': �S { . t t ,r ,gym T-ill. e � !+ i ,'J.1+^ 1�t r '4` � 9l Vie t 1 1' , t'1 '�Y"" -; •,: .. Y + ) Die ? p 1i .'p ♦J 4» 3 y, y };' p, r t S 11 f; R � 44),„..,.. ...,Tt, ,-. , , ...7.--. ._.„. „_„,-,:, „,,,,,f w„,,,,,f 4,,,_, /, ,,,,,.. --'.-,_,. ,,-,..!,_,- ., .t, lk,(C. ..- I,M ry .c .,+ . �o- ^ ' d 41 "-• ...t---- j 14'4,'"?'11,k:t ..'' i Lp .Y1 '.Y a& sty, - .,, 1--�+ to C... 0 C 0 ._ mIlmil U) a)