November 17, 2005

(For Board: December 16, 2005)

REPORT OF THE BUILDING AND OPERATING COMMITTEE

 

Honorable Board of Directors

Golden Gate Bridge, Highway

  and Transportation District

Honorable Members:

A meeting of the Building and Operating Committee was held in the Board Room, Administration Building, Toll Plaza, San Francisco, California, on Thursday, November 17, 2005, at 10:00 a.m., Chair Eddie presiding.

 

Committee Members Present (5): Chair Eddie; Vice Chair Reilly; Directors Hernández and Martini; President Middlebrook (Ex Officio)

Committee Members Absent (4): Directors Ammiano, Boro, Moylan and Stroeh

Other Directors Present (4): Directors Cochran, Newhouse Segal, Pahre and Shahum

 

Staff Present: General Manager Celia G. Kupersmith; District Engineer Denis J. Mulligan; Auditor-Controller Joseph M. Wire; Secretary of the District Janet S. Tarantino; Attorney David J. Miller; Deputy General Manager/Bridge Division Kary H. Witt; Deputy General Manager/Bus Division Susan C. Chiaroni; Deputy General Manager/Ferry Division James P. Swindler; Planning Director Alan R. Zahradnik; Public Affairs Director Mary C. Currie; Executive Assistant to the General Manager Amorette Ko; Assistant Clerk of the Board Patsy Whala

 

Visitors Present: None

1.
Authorize Execution of an Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with HDR Engineering, Inc., Relative to RFP No. 2004-B-6, Consultant to Design and Prepare Bid Documents for the Golden Gate Bridge Seismic Retrofit Project (Phase IIIA), North Anchorage Housing and North Pylon             
     
 

In a memorandum to Committee, Deputy District Engineer Ewa Bauer, District Engineer Denis Mulligan and General Manager Celia Kupersmith provided a report relative to Contract No. 2004-B-6, Consultant to Design and Prepare Bid Documents for the Golden Gate Bridge Seismic Retrofit Project (Phase IIIA), North Anchorage Housing/North Pylon, with staff’s recommendation to authorize an amendment to the Professional Services Agreement (Agreement) with HDR Engineering, Inc., (HDR).  Through this amendment, HDR will provide support in responding to technical reviews by the State of California, Department of Transportation, (Caltrans) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and to finalize project documents required to advertise for construction bids relative to Contract No. 2006-B-1, Golden Gate Bridge Seismic Retrofit (Phase IIIA), North Anchorage Housing/North Pylon.    

The report stated that the Board of Directors, by Resolution No. 2004-066 at its meeting of June 25, 2004, authorized execution of an Agreement with HDR to design and prepare bid documents for the North Anchorage Housing and North Pylon in Phase IIIA of the Golden Gate Bridge Seismic Retrofit Project.  Since the project has been programmed to receive federal grants, Caltrans and FHWA oversight is required.  In September 2005, federal Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation (HBRR) funds were obligated for the Phase IIIA project. As a result, the District must satisfy conditions listed in the HBRR funding obligation finance letter, requiring bid documents to undergo an additional level of review and satisfactory resolution of issues in order to obtain approval to advertise the project for construction bids.

The report also stated that HDR has been responding to comments on the project design plans and technical specifications from various Caltrans’ functional units, such as Earthquake Engineering, Geotechnical, Specifications, etc., as well as participating in meetings with Caltrans personnel.  The project reviews by Caltrans have expanded beyond the anticipated process review indicated in FHWA and Caltrans procedures. HDR’s involvement in these processes have exceeded the Seismic Phase III Design project budget and schedule and have partially depleted amounts assigned for the preparation of bid documents.  The additional cost for services relative to completing the Caltrans’ review/audit process and finalizing the bid documents for advertising have been estimated to be $258,000.  HDR will be compensated based upon actual time expended and expenses incurred, plus a fixed fee not to exceed the authorized amount. 

The report further stated that the Seismic Phase III Design project budget to date amounts to $2,875,000, which consists of $2,802,262 for consultant fees and $72,738 for contract contingency fund.  The proposed amendment would increase the amount of the Agreement to a total cost of $3,133,000, and will maintain the contract contingency fund at an unchanged level.  Sufficient federal grant funds are available to finance the proposed amendment, which Amendment is subject to FHWA approval.  All other project approvals, such as value engineering study, environmental reevaluation, utility relocation agreements and regulatory permits have been obtained by the District.  A copy of the staff report is available in the Office of the District Secretary and on the District’s web site.

At the meeting, Denis Mulligan summarized the staff report, stating that during the process of drafting the project schedule and budget, District staff did not budget for a full oversight process with Caltrans and FHWA. In the course of the project, FHWA determined that the project would need a full oversight process because of the amount of the federal grant and the fact that the Bridge is on the national highway system.  Mr. Mulligan stated that the full oversight process is more costly because it requires a very comprehensive and detailed review process, and a response to all comments.  Finally, he noted that the proposed amendment will increase the total consultant fees to approximately $3 million, which is well below the standard 10% design fee of projected construction costs of $40 million.

Staff recommended and the Committee concurred by motion made and seconded by Directors HERNÁNDEZ/MARTINI to forward the following recommendation to the Board of Directors for its consideration:

RECOMMENDATION

The Building and Operating Committee recommends that the Board of Directors authorize execution of an amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with HDR Engineering, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $258,000, relative to RFP No. 2004-B-6, Consultant to Design and Prepare Bid Documents for the Golden Gate Bridge Seismic Retrofit Project (Phase IIIA), North Anchorage Housing and North Pylon, to provide support in responding to technical reviews by the State of California, Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and to finalize project documents required to advertise for construction bids relative to Contract No. 2006-B-1, Golden Gate Bridge Seismic Retrofit Phase IIIA, North Anchorage Housing/North Pylon; subject to concurrence by the FHWA and with the understanding that requisite federal grant funds are available in the FY 05/06 Bridge Division Capital Budget.

Action by the Board - Resolution

NON-CONSENT CALENDAR

     
 

AYES (5):      Chair Eddie, Vice Chair Reilly; Directors Hernández and Martini; President Middlebrook

NOES (0):      None

ABSENT (4): Directors Ammiano, Boro, Moylan and Stroeh

     
  [Note:  The above recommendation was forwarded to the Board of Directors meeting of November 18, 2005, for action.]
     
2. Approve Appointments to the Golden Gate Bridge Seismic Instrumentation Advisory Panel
     
 

In a memorandum to Committee, Deputy District Engineer Ewa Bauer, District Engineer Denis Mulligan and General Manager Celia Kupersmith reported on staff’s recommendation to approve the appointment of Dr. Gregory L. Fenves, Professor of Civil Engineering, University of California, to serve as chairperson and Dr. Douglas S. Dreger, Professor of Civil Engineering, University of California, to serve as a member on the District’s Seismic Instrumentation Advisory Panel (Advisory Panel), filling vacancies due to the passing of the former chair and member, Dr. Bolt.  The Advisory Panel members serve at no fee, but will be reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses. 

As background, in 1990, the Governor’s Board of Inquiry on the Loma Prieta Earthquake (Governor’s Board of Inquiry) stressed the importance of installing seismic instrumentation on the Golden Gate Bridge.  The Bay Conservation and Development Commission reinforced this importance during its hearings on the seismic analysis of the Bridge.  With the help and recommendation of Dr. George W. Housner, Chairman of the Governor’s Board of Inquiry, the Board of Directors, by Resolution No. 92-26 at its meeting of February 14, 1992, approved the formation of an Advisory Panel, composed of eminently renowned experts in the field, to plan and design the seismic instrumentation system.  The Advisory Panel established a two-phase scope of work to comply with the recommendation from the Governor’s Board of Inquiry.  As a result of Advisory Panel member attrition, the Board of Directors, by Resolution No. 99-218 at its meeting of October 8, 1999, appointed Dr. Bruce Bolt to serve as the chairperson and Dr. Gregory Fenves and Dr. Wen Tseng to serve as Advisory Panel members.  Due to the recent passing of Dr. Bolt, it is necessary to appoint a new Advisory Panel member and select a new chairperson.  After consultation with the existing Advisory Panel members, the District Engineer recommends that Dr. Fenves be chosen to serve as chairperson and that Dr. Douglas Dreger be appointed to serve as an Advisory Panel member.

In addition, the report stated that the Advisory Panel approved the design of the Phase I Seismic Instrumentation System (Phase I System), which involved the installation of basic seismic sensors and recording stations to obtain information in an earthquake about the ground motion and structural response of the Bridge.  The Phase I System was installed on the Bridge in 1995, by the State of California, Division of Mines and Geology – Strong Motion Instrumentation Program (SMIP), and has effectively collected data from several earthquakes.  The Advisory Panel also approved the Phase II Seismic Instrumentation System (Phase II System) for the North Viaduct and the North Anchorage Housing system, which was installed in 2003 after completion of the District’s Seismic Retrofit Project Phase I.  The Phase II System involved the installation of additional sensors and recording stations to obtain detailed information in an earthquake on ground motion, structural response of the retrofitted Bridge, over-stresses of structural elements and verification of the computer model prepared for the seismic retrofit design.  The Phase II System designed for the South Viaduct, Arch, South Pylons and South Anchorage Housing will be installed in conjunction with the Seismic Retrofit Project Phase II.  Additional wireless seismic sensor devices are being developed and tested by University of California and are scheduled to be installed on the Bridge in Year 2006.

The report further stated that the District has converted the computer analytical models of the Suspension Bridge and South Approach Structures into an ADINA program based on seismic retrofit designers’ computer models.  In accordance with the District’s Earthquake Response Plan, this program will be used to analyze earthquake data subsequent to a strong earthquake corresponding to Level 3 or higher response level. Conversion of computer programs for the North Approach and North Anchorage Housing is scheduled for Year 2006.

Lastly, the report stated that there remains a substantial amount of work for the Seismic Instrumentation Program and in order to set up a first-class seismic instrumentation system, the Advisory Panel should remain complete to provide expert advice and approval to monitor Bridge behavior and to provide valuable information to safeguard the safety of the Bridge. The reimbursable expenses are estimated to be less than $1,000 annually, which are included in the FY 05/06 District Division Operating Budget.  A copy of the staff report is available in the Office of the District Secretary and on the District’s web site.

At the meeting, Denis Mulligan summarized the staff report, stating that after the Loma Prieta earthquake in 1989, California Governor George Deukmejian appointed a Board of Inquiry which determined that large structures, including the Golden Gate Bridge, should establish advisory panels to install seismic instrumentation systems.  He stated that there has been a recent vacancy on the District’s Advisory Panel due to the loss of Chairperson Dr. Bruce Bolt, the leading seismologist in the world.  He stated that with the recommended appointees to the Advisory Panel, the District will have the necessary complement of expertise to continue the work of approving the design of future seismic instrumentation systems.  The District envisions a total of approximately 100 instruments on the Bridge to measure accelerations and displacements in seismic events or other significant events.  Mr. Mulligan also stated that the Advisory Panel meets once a year to review the existing seismic instrumentation systems, review current technology and implement changes, as appropriate.

Staff recommended and the Committee concurred by motion made and seconded by Directors MARTINI/REILLY to forward the following recommendation to the Board of Directors for its consideration:

RECOMMENDATION

The Building and Operating Committee recommends that the Board of Directors approve the following appointments to the Golden Gate Bridge Seismic Instrumentation Advisory Panel (Advisory Panel):

     
  a.
Dr. Gregory L. Fenves, Professor of Civil Engineering, University of California, and a current member of the Advisory Panel, to serve as Chairperson, filling the position due to the passing of Dr. Bruce Bolt; and,
  b.
Dr. Douglas S. Dreger, Professor of Civil Engineering, University of California, to serve as a Panel Member, filling the vacancy on the Advisory Panel due to the passing of Dr. Bruce Bolt;
     
 

with the understanding that the full complement of the Advisory Panel is comprised of members Dr. Ray W. Clough; Charles Seim, P.E.; and, Dr. Wen Tseng; and, with the further understanding that Advisory Panel members will receive no stipend for attendance at meetings, but will be reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses.

Action by the Board - Resolution

NON-CONSENT CALENDAR

     
 

AYES (5):      Chair Eddie, Vice Chair Reilly; Directors Hernández and Martini; President Middlebrook

NOES (0):      None

ABSENT (4): Directors Ammiano, Boro, Moylan and Stroeh

     
  [Note:  The above recommendation was forwarded to the Board of Directors meeting of November 18, 2005, for action.]
     
3. Status Report from District Appointees on Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) Board
     
 

The Committee was provided with copies of the Agenda for the November 16, 2005, meeting and the Minutes of the October 19, 2005, meeting of the Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit District (SMART).   Copies of these items are available in the Office of the District Secretary, as well as on the District’s web site.

             

             

At the meeting, Director Pahre, one of the District’s representatives to SMART, provided updates on the following topics, which were discussed at the November 16, 2005 meeting of the SMART Board of Directors:

             
     
  1.
She stated that the SMART Board is reviewing a draft Request for Proposal (RFP) for the development of Santa Rosa Railroad Square property and that it is anticipated that the RFP will be presented to the Santa Rosa City Council in December 2005, with final approval from the SMART Board in January 2006.
  2.
She stated that the 700-page SMART Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is in the publication process, and will be available on compact disk and eventually posted on the County of Sonoma web site.  She also stated that the public comment period will end on Tuesday, January 24, 2006, and that public hearings have been scheduled in Sonoma County on Tuesday, January 17, 2006, and in Marin County on Monday, January 23, 2006.
     
 

Discussion ensued, including the following:

  • Director Martini made the following inquiries:
    • He inquired as to what discussion has taken place regarding the SMART Board’s readiness to place an item on the ballot measure for the November 2006 election cycle.  In response, Director Pahre stated that the SMART Board has not recently addressed the issue, but that she assumes that the original timeline is in order for the November 2006 ballot.
    • He inquired if the SMART Board is planning to propose a half cent or a quarter cent increase in sales tax.  In response, Chair Eddie stated that the proposal calls for a quarter cent increase which would bring the sales tax in select cities in Sonoma County to 8%.
  •  
  • Director Pahre stated that the SMART Board of Directors is encouraging the public to send comments regarding the adequacy of the EIR via e-mail, letters or through the SMART District’s web site.  She also stated that SMART extended the time that any one individual could speak on the adequacy of the EIR at the Public Hearings to emphasize the commitment to obtaining all public comments before formal responses are prepared.

Action by the Board - None Required

     
4. Status Report on Engineering Projects
     
 

In a memorandum to Committee, Deputy District Engineer Ewa Z. Bauer, District Engineer Denis Mulligan and General Manager Celia Kupersmith reported on current engineering projects.  A copy of the report is available in the Office of the District Secretary and on the District’s web site.

Action by the Board - None Required

     
5. Public Comment
     
  There was no public comment.
     
6.

Adjournment

     
  All business having been concluded, the meeting was declared adjourned at 10:50 a.m.
     

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ James C. Eddie, Chair

Building and Operating Committee