May 5, 2006
(For Board: May 12, 2006)

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 was held in the Supervisors Chambers, County of Mendocino Administration Building, Ukiah, California, on Friday, May 5, 2006, at 10:00 a.m., Chair Eddie presiding.

Committee Members Present (5): Chair Eddie; Directors Boro, Martini, Moylan; President Middlebrook (Ex Officio)

Committee Members Absent (4): Vice Chair Reilly; Directors Ammiano, Hernández and Stroeh

Other Directors Present (2): Directors Cochran and Newhouse Segal

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 Madeline Chun; Deputy General Manager/Ferry Division James P. Swindler; Deputy General Manager/Administration and Development Teri W. Mantony; Assistant Clerk of the Board Karen B. Engbretson

Visitors Present: Michael Delbar, Mendocino County Supervisor; Kendall Smith, Mendocino County Supervisor; Hal Wagenet, Mendocino County Supervisor; Marilyn Butcher, Former Mendocino County Supervisor; Howard Dashiell, Director, Mendocino County Department of Transportation; John McCowen, Ukiah City Council; Glenna Blake, Willits Chamber of Commerce

     
1. Update on the Seismic Retrofit Project
     
 
District Engineer Denis Mulligan provided a slide show to the Committee depicting several detailed photographs of the on-going Golden Gate Bridge Seismic Retrofit project (Seismic Retrofit project), the completion of which will ensure the structural integrity of Golden Gate Bridge and preserve it as an integral part of the nation’s transportation infrastructure. Mr. Mulligan described the following phases of the District’s Seismic Retrofit project:
 
  • Phase I, North Approach Viaduct (completed in April 2002); and,
  • Phase II, South Approach Structures.
     
 
Mr. Mulligan provided technical information on how the following structural elements of the Golden Gate Bridge have been or will be retrofitted as part of the Seismic Retrofit project:
 
  • North Approach viaduct trusses and towers;
  • Fort Point Arch;
  • South Pylons;
  • South Anchorage Housing walls and foundation;
  • South Viaduct bracing members and towers;
  • North Anchorage Housing roadway deck;
  • North Pylons;
  • Suspension Span, towers and cable saddles; and,
  • Roadway expansion joints.
     
 
He noted that when the viaduct towers of the north and south approaches were replaced, the Bridge roadway was jacked up one-quarter inch each time.  He described the different access and containment systems that are used on the Bridge structure to undertake the Seismic Retrofit project work, noting that three temporary work platforms at various levels have been placed under the entire length of Fort Point Arch.
     
 
  • Director Martini inquired regarding the status of Phase III of the Seismic Retrofit project.  In response, Mr. Mulligan briefly described the work to be undertaken as part of Phases IIIA (North Anchorage and Pylon N1) and IIIB (Suspension Span, Main Towers, South Tower Pier and Fender) of the Seismic Retrofit project, noting that the original design for the North Anchorage Housing was set aside and redesigned after the events of September 11, 2001.
     
 
  • Director Moylan made the following inquiries:
    • He inquired as to the anticipated completion date for the entire Seismic Retrofit project.  In response, Mr. Mulligan stated that, taking into account the on-going research into protecting the Bridge from other non-seismic threats, the final phases of the project would be completed in the next five to six years.
    • He inquired regarding funding for the Seismic Retrofit project.  In response, Mr. Mulligan stated that all funding is now in place for all three phases of the project.  Celia Kupersmith provided additional details regarding the Seismic Retrofit project funding, noting that as recently as five years ago, the District did not have all the funding in place to complete all three phases of the project.  She stated that the Seismic Retrofit project was one of the largest appropriations in the latest federal transportation funding bill recently passed by Congress.  She further stated that the State of California, Department of Transportation has provided $200 million in state-controlled federal funding for the project.
     
 
  • Director Newhouse Segal inquired as to the total cost of project.  In response, Mr. Mulligan stated that the current cost of the project is estimated at $405 million.
     
 
  • Director Boro made the following comments:
    • He stated that he had an opportunity to tour the Seismic Retrofit project construction site with Mr. Mulligan, and encouraged other Board members to take the tour.  He also stated that he was impressed with how the project has overcome the many hurdles associated with performing heavy construction in an environmentally and historically sensitive National Park setting.
    • He remarked that, to put the Seismic Retrofit project costs in perspective, the original construction of the Bridge in 1937 cost $35 million, the Seismic Retrofit project will cost $405 million and the total replacement cost for the Bridge would be over $2.5 billion.
     
 
  • Chair Eddie commented that the Seismic Retrofit project also provides an opportunity to rehabilitate portions of the 70-year-old Bridge structure.  He stated that the Seismic Retrofit project will hopefully strengthen the Bridge for another 70 years.
     
  Chair Eddie invited questions from the visitors in attendance at the meeting, including the following:
     
 
  • Ed Segal inquired as to whether any of the new materials being used in the Seismic Retrofit project had been tested on other structures in an earthquake event.  In response, Mr. Mulligan stated that various seismic retrofit components on the Bridge, such as the seismic isolator bearings, were subjected to rigorous laboratory testing.  In addition, he described the seismic instrumentation in place on the Bridge structure, which will record in detail the effect of an earthquake event on the components of the Bridge.  He further stated that these seismic retrofit components have not been subjected to an actual earthquake on an actual large bridge structure.
     
 
  • Marilyn Butcher, former member of the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors, described her experience on 50th Anniversary Bridge Walk in 1987, in which the Bridge deck was temporarily flattened from the weight of so many people.  In response, Mr. Mulligan noted that the Bridge structure was designed with enough flexibility to move down ten feet, to move up six feet and to also move side to side up to 27 feet.  He further noted that when the Bridge deck flattened during the 50th Anniversary festivities, there was still some reserve capacity remaining in the Bridge and there was no damage to the Bridge structure.
     
 
  • John McCowen, member of the Ukiah City Council, inquired as to whether or not  environmental considerations have added to the cost of the Seismic Retrofit project.  In response, Mr. Mulligan stated that the costs associated with environmental mitigation for the entire Seismic Retrofit project have not been calculated separately.  He further noted that there were costs associated with the circumstances of staging and undertaking a major construction project in a National park setting, including shuttling workers to and from the construction site, as well as the delivery of construction equipment and materials.
     
 

In conclusion, Chair Eddie introduced the members of the Board of Directors and the District staff that were present at the meeting.

Action by the Board – None Required

     
2.
Authorize Execution of an Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Elliott Bay Design Group Relative to RFP No. 2005-FT-6, Consultant to Provide Technical Specifications, Drawings and Contract Support for Spaulding Vessel Refurbishment, for Engineering Services
     
 

In a memorandum to Committee, Deputy General Manager/Ferry Division James P. Swindler and General Manager Celia Kupersmith reported on staff’s recommendation to amend the Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Elliott Bay Design Group, to make modifications to the drawings and technical specifications for Spaulding ferry vessel refurbishment.  The report stated that the Board of Directors, by Resolution No. 2005-011 at its meeting of February 25, 2005, authorized execution of a PSA with Elliott Bay Design Group relative to Contract No. 2005-FT-6, Consultant to Provide Technical Specifications, Drawings and Contract Support for Spaulding Vessel Refurbishment.  The report also stated that following an inspection of the Spaulding ferry vessel, certain structural elements and systems were found to be different than had been anticipated based on available reference drawings of the vessel, and it was necessary for Elliott Bay Design Group to incur extra work to make additional changes to the design and drawings.  Because of these unforeseen conditions, this extra work was not anticipated or provided for in Elliott Bay Design Group’s cost estimate. District staff has determined that an amendment in the amount of $55,000 is fair and reasonable for this extra work, which will include the design modifications noted above, as well as any extra design work that may be necessary following U.S. Coast Guard review of the completed technical specifications and drawings for the Spaulding vessel refurbishment.  A copy of the staff report is available in the Office of the District Secretary, as well as on the District’s web site.

At the meeting, James Swindler summarized the staff report and stated that it is not unreasonable for a design consultant to find it necessary to change the scope of work due to unforeseen conditions. 

Discussion ensued, including the following:
     
 
  • Director Boro inquired as to the District’s long-term plans regarding refurbishment of the three Spaulding vessels in the District’s fleet.  In response, Ms. Kupersmith described the current ferry service plan, which utilizes two high-speed ferry vessels operating from the Larkspur Ferry Terminal and utilizes one Spaulding vessel for Sausalito ferry service and another Spaulding vessel for special event ferry service to Giants baseball games at AT&T Park.  She stated that staff will be presenting a proposal at a future meeting of the Committee regarding the District’s long-term plans for its ferry fleet, which would likely include a proposal to purchase a third high-speed ferry vessel.
     
 
  • President Middlebrook inquired regarding the status of staff’s efforts to purchase a used high-speed ferry from a Washington State ferry provider.  In response, Mr. Swindler stated that upon further investigation, staff determined that the vessel from Washington State had too small a capacity to be feasible for Golden Gate Ferry commute service.
     
 
Staff recommended and the Committee concurred by motion made and seconded by Directors MOYLAN/MIDDLEBROOK 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 Elliott Bay Design Group, Seattle, WA, relative to RFP No. 2005-FT-6, Consultant to Provide Technical Specifications, Drawings and Contract Support for Spaulding Vessel Refurbishment, to make modifications to the drawings and technical specifications for the refurbishment of the Spaulding class vessels, in the amount of $55,000; with the understanding that requisite funds are available in the FY 05/06 Ferry Division Capital Budget, to be funded with 80% federal and 20% District funds.

Action by the Board – Resolution
NON-CONSENT CALENDAR

     
  AYES (5):      Chair Eddie; Directors Boro, Martini, Moylan; President Middlebrook (Ex Officio)
NOES (0):     None
ABSENT (4): Vice Chair Reilly; Directors Ammiano, Hernández and Stroeh
     
3.
Approve Actions Relative to the Award of Contract No. 2007-FT-1, Larkspur Ferry Terminal Channel Maintenance Dredging, to Dutra Dredging Company
     
 

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 award Contract No. 2007-FT-1, Larkspur Ferry Terminal Channel Maintenance Dredging, to Dutra Dredging Company. The report stated that the Larkspur Ferry Terminal navigational channel and turning basin require periodic maintenance dredging to remove sediments that accumulate in the waterway from natural sedimentation processes associated with runoff from the adjacent Corte Madera Creek and sea currents of the San Francisco Bay. The channel and turning basin were last dredged in 2002.

The report also stated that Contract No. 2007-FT-1, Larkspur Ferry Terminal Channel Maintenance Dredging is a project to perform maintenance dredging of the navigational channel and turning basin. This contract was advertised for construction bids on March 21, 2006, and the bid documents were also posted in electronic format on the District’s website, where the documents could be viewed and downloaded for printing by interested bidders. On April 18, 2006, one bid was received, opened and publicly read. The sole bidder is Dutra Dredging Company, with a bid price of $3,101,500, which is significantly lower than the Engineer’s cost estimate of $4,257,000. The report stated that the Engineer’s estimate was based on discussions with dredge contractors during the design phase on the cost of prior maintenance dredging of the channel and on current market conditions. The market conditions that were considered included the availability of some dredging equipment given the number of large dredging contracts being simultaneously let in the San Francisco Bay.

The report further stated that staff, the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program Administrator and Attorney have reviewed the sole bid and found the bid of Dutra Dredging Company to be responsive and the bidder responsible, and recommend award of the Contract to the sole bidder. A contingency fund of fifteen percent (15%) of the bid amount for $465,225 is considered appropriate for this project due to potential unknowns. The total budget to complete all components of this project is estimated at $4,600,000. This 80% grant-funded project was included in the FY 05/06 Ferry Division Capital Budget in the amount of $5,550,000; and, therefore, a capital budget decrease in the amount of $950,000 will be necessary. A copy of the staff report is available in the Office of the District Secretary, as well as on the District’s web site.

At the meeting, Denis Mulligan summarized the staff report, stating that staff was pleased that the sole bid came in almost $1 million below the Engineer’s estimate.

Staff recommended and the Committee concurred by motion made and seconded by Directors MARTINI/MOYLAN 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 actions relative to Contract No. 2007-FT-1, Larkspur Ferry Terminal Channel Maintenance Dredging:
  a.
Authorize award of contract to Dutra Dredging Company, San Rafael, CA, in the amount of $3,101,500;
  b.
Authorize a contingency fund in the amount of $465,225, equal to 15% of the contract award; and,
  c.
Authorize a budget decrease in the FY 05/06 Ferry Division Capital Budget in the amount of $950,000, subject to the concurrence of the Finance-Auditing Committee at its meeting of May 11, 2006;
 

with the understanding that requisite funds are available in the FY 05/06 Ferry Division Capital Budget.

Action by the Board – Resolution
NON-CONSENT CALENDAR

     
  AYES (5):      Chair Eddie; Directors Boro, Martini, Moylan; President Middlebrook (Ex Officio)
NOES (0):     None
ABSENT (4): Vice Chair Reilly; Directors Ammiano, Hernández and Stroeh
     
4.
Ratify the Actions of the General Manager Relative to the Issuance of Change Orders to Contract No. 2006-FT-3, Dry-Docking of the M.V. Mendocino for Routine U.S. Coast Guard Inspection, Hull Maintenance and Repairs, with BAE Systems San Francisco Ship Repair, Inc., and Contract No. 2006-FT-6, Dry-Docking of the M.V. Del Norte for Routine U.S. Coast Guard Inspection, Hull Maintenance and Repairs, with Bay Ship & Yacht Co., for Additional Work Performed on the Vessels
     
 

In a memorandum to Committee, Deputy General Manager/Ferry Division James P. Swindler and General Manager Celia Kupersmith reported on staff’s recommendation to ratify the actions of the General Manager relative to the issuance of change orders for additional work performed on the dry-docked ferry vessels, the M.V. Mendocino and the M.V. Del Norte.  The report stated that every two years, each of the District’s vessels is required to be dry-docked for inspection and recertification by the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG).  When the District issues contracts for shipyard dry-dockings, it is not unusual that, upon inspection of the vessel after it is out of the water and in the dry dock, additional work items may be identified. 

On September 6, 2005, bids were opened and publicly read for Contract No. 2006-FT-3, Dry-Docking of the M.V. Mendocino for Routine U.S. Coast Guard Inspection, Hull Maintenance and Repairs, and this contract was subsequently awarded to the low bidder, BAE Systems San Francisco Ship Repair (formerly San Francisco Dry Dock) under the General Manager’s authority, in the amount of $84,552.00. The report also stated that when the M.V. Mendocino was removed from the water, an inspection revealed excessive corrosion of certain waterjet components, necessitating removal and replacement of the parts prior to returning to service.  BAE Systems San Francisco Ship Repair has provided the District with a cost estimate in the amount of $40,578 for this additional work, and staff determined that this amount was fair and reasonable.  The General Manager subsequently authorized change orders to Contract No. 2006-FT-3 in the total amount of $40,578 in accordance with the District’s procurement policy.

On February 21, 2006, bids were opened and publicly read for Contract No. 2006-FT-6, Dry-Docking of the M.V. Del Norte for Routine U.S. Coast Guard Inspection, Hull Maintenance and Repairs, and this contract was subsequently awarded to the low bidder, Bay Ship & Yacht Co., under the General Manager’s authority, in the amount of $99,879.14. The report also stated that during the USCG’s inspection of the vessel M.V. Del Norte, the USCG noted that certain components of the bilge, ballast and firemain piping were worn out and required corrective work to be completed prior to the vessel returning to service.  This extra work required the vessel to remain in the shipyard for two additional days.  Bay Ship & Yacht Co. provided the District with a cost estimate in the amount of $23,068.05 for this additional work, and staff determined that this amount was fair and reasonable.  The General Manager subsequently authorized change orders to Contract No. 2006-FT-6 in the total amount of $23,068.05 in accordance with the District’s procurement policy.  A copy of the staff report is available in the Office of the District Secretary, as well as on the District’s web site.

At the meeting, Celia Kupersmith summarized the staff report, noting that according to the District’s practice for dry-dock contracts, where the precise scope of work is not known until the vessels are in the dry dock, the General Manager is given authority to authorize change orders of this type, and then to seek ratification by the Board of Directors.

Staff recommended and the Committee concurred by motion made and seconded by Directors BORO/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 ratify the actions of the General Manager relative to the issuance of change orders for additional work performed on the dry-docked ferry vessels as follows:
  a.
Approve change orders to Contract No. 2006-FT-3, Dry-Docking of the M.V. Mendocino for Routine U.S. Coast Guard Inspection, Hull Maintenance and Repairs, with BAE Systems San Francisco Ship Repair, Inc., (formerly San Francisco Dry Dock), in the amount of $40,578, for additional work to the vessel’s water jets and other miscellaneous items; and,
  b.
Approve change orders to Contract No. 2006-FT-6, Dry-Docking of the M.V. Del Norte for Routine U.S. Coast Guard Inspection, Hull Maintenance and Repairs, with Bay Ship & Yacht Co., in the amount of $23,068.05, for additional work to the vessel’s bilge/ballast/firemain piping and other miscellaneous work items;
 

with the understanding that the requisite funds are available in the FY 05/06 Ferry Division Operating Budget.

Action by the Board – Resolution
NON-CONSENT CALENDAR

     
  AYES (5):      Chair Eddie; Directors Boro, Martini, Moylan; President Middlebrook (Ex Officio)
NOES (0):     None
ABSENT (4): Vice Chair Reilly; Directors Ammiano, Hernández and Stroeh
     
5.
Status Report from District Appointees on Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) Board
     
 

The Committee was provided with copies of the agenda for the April 19, 2006 meeting and the minutes for the March 15, 2006 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 Boro, one of the members of the SMART Board of Directors (SMART Board), provided updates on the following topics:

 
  • He stated that on May 1, 2006, a meeting of the SMART Ad Hoc Selection Committee was held regarding the selection of a developer for SMART’s property at Santa Rosa Railroad Square.  Director Boro noted that the meeting was attended by members of the Santa Rosa community, who appeared to be quite receptive to the development proposals presented by the three potential development teams.  He noted that each of the development proposals included mixed-use residential, commercial and retail elements.
  • He stated that at its April 19, 2006 meeting, the SMART Board approved the November 2006 ballot measure for the one-quarter sales tax and that SMART staff is currently settling the funding issues associated with the ballot measure.
     
  Director Martini, who attended the May 1st meeting of the SMART Ad Hoc Selection Committee as a member of the Santa Rosa City Council, made the following comments regarding that meeting:
 
  • He stated that the development proposals all showed a commendable balance of community interests.
  • He provided a timeline for the SMART Ad Hoc Selection Committee, noting that the next meeting will be held on May 12, 2006, at which SMART staff will analyze the fiscal impacts of the three development proposals.  He stated that at a third meeting on May 24, 2006, a decision will be made as to the selection of the Santa Rosa Railroad Square developer, and a recommendation will be forwarded to SMART’s Real Estate Subcommittee and then to the full SMART Board for action.
  • He stated that in his opinion, while all three development proposals suitably respond to community needs, they do not necessary respond to marketplace needs.  He further noted that there are still some funding gaps to be resolved, and that perhaps some form of public/private investment may be needed.
     
 
Chair Eddie, one of the District’s representatives on the SMART Board, provided additional background regarding the historic property at Santa Rosa Railroad Square:
 
  • He noted that SMART devised the selection of the developer as a public process, allowing the community to be involved in the evaluation of the merits of the three short-listed proposals.
  • He stated that the cost to develop Santa Rosa Railroad Square is estimated at $100 million, and will be a high-density, urban development.
     
 

Further, Celia Kupersmith announced the closing of the real estate transaction that transferred the District-owned portion of the former Northwestern Pacific Railroad (NWP) right-of-way to SMART, and noted that now SMART is the full owner and operator of the NWP right-of-way in Marin and Sonoma counties.

Action by the Board – None Required

     
6. 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

     
7. Public Comment
     
 
The following audience members were introduced to the Committee: Michael Delbar, Mendocino County Supervisor; Kendall Smith, Mendocino County Supervisor; Hal Wagenet, Mendocino County Supervisor; Marilyn Butcher, Former Mendocino County Supervisor; Howard Dashiell, Director, Mendocino County Department of Transportation; and, John McCowen, Ukiah City Council Member.
     
8. Concluding Remarks
     
 
Chair Eddie remarked on the importance of recognizing the contribution of the member counties of the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District, noting that Mendocino County was instrumental in backing the $35 million in bonds that were issued to finance the construction of the Golden Gate Bridge.
     
9. Adjournment
     
 
All business having been concluded, the meeting was declared adjourned at 11:10 a.m.
     

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ James C. Eddie, Chair