• Phase I, North Approach Viaduct (completed in April 2002); and,
• Phase II, South Approach Structures.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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

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. 

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:

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.

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 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.

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

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