Approve Actions Relative to the Award of Contract No. 2007-BT-4, Santa Rosa Bus Facility Diesel Tanks Replacement, to American Construction & Environmental Services, Inc.

In a report to Committee, Deputy District Engineer Ewa Bauer, District Engineer Denis Mulligan and General Manager Celia Kupersmith provided staff’s recommendation to approve actions relative to the award of Contract No. 2007-BT-4, Santa Rosa Bus Facility Diesel Tanks Replacement, to American Construction & Environmental Services, Inc.

The report stated that the current diesel storage system at the Santa Rosa Bus Facility consists of two double-walled underground storage tanks that were installed in 1998. After developing a long-term course of action regarding these diesel storage tanks, it was determined that the underground tanks should be replaced with above-ground tanks. Contract No. 2007-BT- provides for the removal of two existing underground diesel storage tanks and installation of two new aboveground concrete-encased, double-walled steel diesel storage tanks adjacent to the existing fueling building with all the necessary monitoring devices that comply with the applicable environmental regulations. A new structural steel shelter will be constructed to mitigate the visual impact of the new aboveground tanks and to protect the fueling system from the elements.

The report also stated that staff prepared the plans and specifications for Contract No. 2007-BT-4 and advertised for bids on April 17, 2007. On May 15, 2007, three bids were received and publicly read. The report further stated that staff and the Attorney evaluated the bids and concluded that the apparent responsive, responsible low bidder is American Construction and Environmental Services, Inc., with a bid price of $664,333. In addition, the DBE Program Administrator determined that American Construction and Environmental Services, Inc., complied with the DBE requirements applicable to this contract, although no specific DBE goal was established, and no DBE participation is anticipated during the performance of the project.

It is recommended that Contract No. 2007-BT-4 be awarded to American Construction and Environmental Services, Inc., and that a contingency fund be authorized in the amount of $66,430, equal to 10% of the contract amount. In addition, award of this contract will require a budget transfer in the amount of $77,000 from the FY 06/07 District Division Operating Budget to the FY 06/07 Bus Transit Division Capital Budget. This project is 41% Federal Transit Administration grant funded and 59% District funded. A copy of the report is available from the Office of the District Secretary and on the District’s web site.

At the meeting, Mr. Mulligan summarized the staff report, stating that one year ago, a leak was detected in one of the two underground storage tanks at the Santa Rosa Bus Facility. He stated that due to the double-walled structure of the tank, there was no contamination into the surrounding environment. He stated that the tank was purged and cleaned, regulatory agencies were notified and the Engineering staff developed a design for a replacement above-ground facility. He noted that all three bids received for Contract No. 2007-BT-4 had the same minor irregularity, in that none of the steel fabricators listed as suppliers in the bids had certification from the American Institute of Steel Construction. He stated that staff recommends waiving that minor irregularity.

Discussion ensued, including the following:

• Director Reilly inquired regarding the practical differences between underground and above-ground storage tanks. In response, Mr. Mulligan stated that it is more economical to manage above-ground storage tanks, and that above-ground storage tanks are more prevalent outside metropolitan areas,

Staff recommended and the Committee concurred by motion made and seconded by Directors STROEH/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 approve the following actions relative to the award of Contract No. 2007-BT-4, Santa Rosa Bus Facility Diesel Tanks Replacement:

Authorize a budget transfer in the amount of $77,000 from the FY 06/07 District Division Operating Budget to the FY 06/07 Bus Transit Division Capital Budget, subject to the concurrence of the Finance-Auditing Committee at its meeting of May 24, 2007.

Action by the Board – Resolution
NON-CONSENT CALENDAR

Approve Actions Relative to the Award of Contract No. 2007-FT-13, Larkspur Ferry Terminal Storage and Inspection Station, to Bay Area Structural, Inc.

In a report to Committee, Deputy District Engineer Ewa Bauer, District Engineer Denis Mulligan and General Manager Celia Kupersmith provided staff’s recommendation to approve actions relative to the award of Contract No. 2007-FT-13, Larkspur Ferry Terminal Storage and Inspection Station, to Bay Area Structural, Inc.

The report stated that in January 2006, the District was awarded a grant through the Transit Security Grant Program of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. This grant allows the District to construct a single delivery, storage and inspection station for ferry supplies, outside of the physical security perimeter and away from ferry passengers and vessels, at the Larkspur Ferry Terminal. This project is in response to recommendations in a security vulnerability assessment, and will ensure compliance with 33 CFR 104, et seq., by providing facilities to deliver and inspect vessel supplies, as well as all vendor-supplied concession goods, before they are placed onboard the ferry vessels. The report also stated that this single delivery, storage and inspection station will be located in Larkspur, away from the congested regional transportation hub at the San Francisco Ferry Terminal. This separate facility will allow Ferry Transit Division staff to focus on screening incoming passengers at Larkspur and will separate delivery personnel from passengers and vessels. The District has applied for a permit from the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) for this project.

The report also stated that staff prepared plans and specifications for Contract No. 2007-FT-13, and advertised for bids on April 17, 2007. On May 15, 2007, three bids were received and publicly read. The report further stated that staff and the Attorney evaluated the bids and concluded that the apparent responsive, responsible low bidder is Bay Area Structural, Inc., with a bid price of $255,200. In addition, the DBE Program Administrator determined that Bay Area Structural, Inc., complied with the DBE requirements applicable to this contract, although no specific DBE goal was established. Bay Area Structural, Inc., is a DBE and 68.7% DBE participation is anticipated during the performance of the contract.

It is recommended that Contract No. 2007-BT-4 be awarded to Bay Area Structural, Inc., pending issuance of the BCDC permit, and that a contingency fund be authorized in the amount of $25,520, equal to 10% of the contract amount. In addition, award of this contract will require a budget increase in the amount of $120,000 in the FY 06/07 Ferry Transit Division Capital Budget, to be funded with Federal Transit Administration grant funds in the amount of $96,000 and with District Reserves in the amount of $24,000. This project is 85% Transportation Security Administration grant funded and 15% District funded. A copy of the report is available from the Office of the District Secretary and on the District’s web site.

At the meeting, Denis Mulligan summarized the staff report, and outlined the new U.S. Coast Guard regulations pertaining to security protocols for ferry facilities, requiring that consumables used by the ferry concessionaires should not be stored in the same area in which paid passengers wait to board the vessels. Mr. Mulligan stated that in accordance with those regulations, Contract No. 2007-FT-13 will construct a new 20-foot by 40-foot metal structure outside the paid passenger waiting area at the Larkspur Ferry Terminal. He further stated that it is recommended that the General Manager be authorized to award Contract No. 2007-FT-13 as soon as the BCDC permit is issued, in order to keep the project moving forward in a timely manner before the expiration of the applicable federal grant funds.

Staff recommended and the Committee concurred by motion made and seconded by Directors STROEH/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 approve the following actions relative to the award of Contract No. 2007-FT-13, Larkspur Ferry Terminal Storage and Inspection Station:

Approve Actions Relative to Contract No. 99-B-5, Golden Gate Bridge Seismic Retrofit (Phase II), South Approach Structures, for Construction Management and Inspection Support Services

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 actions relative to Contract No. 99-B-5, Golden Gate Bridge Seismic Retrofit (Phase II), South Approach Structures, for construction management and inspection support services and for necessary budget increases to administer an increase in scope and time of project.

The report stated that Phase II of the Seismic Retrofit project is approaching completion, with the contractor in the process of completing all remaining change order work, finish work and site cleanup. Once the contractor has completed this work, under a proposed addendum to the Ninth Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with HNTB Corporation, Inc., and its subconsultants, an integrated team of District staff and consultants must undertake final field inspections and verification of materials reports and as-built plans. The report further stated that the total cost of the additional construction management and inspection services attributable to the extended scope of work and time is estimated to be $510,000. It is recommended that an addendum to the Ninth Amendment be authorized, and that a consultant contract contingency in the amount of $50,000 also be authorized.

The report also stated that in order to fully fund the addendum to the Ninth Amendment, a budget increase is necessary in the amount of $560,000 in the Bridge Division Capital Budget for the Golden Gate Bridge Seismic Retrofit Phase II Project, to be funded with federal grant funds programmed for the Seismic Retrofit Project. A copy of the staff report is available in the Office of the District Secretary and on the District’s web site.

Staff recommended and the Committee concurred by motion made and seconded by Directors MIDDLEBROOK/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 actions relative to Contract No. 99-B-5, Golden Gate Bridge Seismic Retrofit (Phase II), South Approach Structures:

Authorize a budget increase in the Bridge Division Capital Budget for the Golden Gate Bridge Seismic Retrofit Phase II Project, in the amount of $560,000, to be funded with the federal grant funds programmed for the Seismic Retrofit Project, subject to the concurrence of the Finance-Auditing Committee at its meeting of May 24, 2007.

Action by the Board – Resolution
NON-CONSENT CALENDAR

Approve Appointment 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. Edward L. Wilson, Professor Emeritus of Structural Engineering, University of California at Berkeley, to serve as a member on the District’s Seismic Instrumentation Advisory Panel (Advisory Panel), filling a vacancy due to the retirement of Dr. Ray W. Clough.

The report provided background information regarding the formation of the Advisory Panel, which is composed of eminently renowned experts in the field of seismic instrumentation. The Advisory Panel established a two-phase scope of work to comply with recommendations from the Governor’s Board of Inquiry on the Loma Prieta Earthquake. The Advisory Panel designed the Phase I basic seismic instrumentation system, which was installed in 1995 by the State of California, Division of Mines and Geology – Strong Motion Instrumentation Program. The Advisory Panel also approved the staff-designed Phase II seismic instrumentation system, which will obtain detailed information on the structural response of the retrofitted Golden Gate Bridge during an earthquake. In addition, the Advisory Panel recommended installing a wind monitoring system on the Golden Gate Bridge to monitor the response of the Bridge structure during wind storms and to assist Bridge inspection subsequent to wind storms.

The report further stated that there remains a substantial amount of work to be done for the Seismic Instrumentation Program, and that it is recommended that the Advisory Panel remain in place to provide expert advice for the seismic instrumentation system in order to safeguard the safety of the Bridge. Since the members do not receive a stipend, the only costs associated with this Advisory Panel are reimbursable expenses which are estimated to be less than $1,000 annually, and these costs has been 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.

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 appointment of Dr. Edward L. Wilson, Professor Emeritus of Structural Engineering, University of California at Berkeley, to serve as a member on the District’s Seismic Instrumentation Advisory Panel, filling a vacancy due to the retirement of Dr. Ray W. Clough; with the understanding that panel members will serve at no fee, but will be reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses.

Action by the Board – Resolution
NON-CONSENT CALENDAR

AYES (10): Directors Cochran, Eddie, Grosboll, Martini, McGlashan, Middlebrook, Pahre, Reilly and Stroeh; President Moylan
NOES (0): None

Status Report from District Appointees on Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) Board

The Committee was provided with a copy of the agenda for the May 16, 2007, meeting and the minutes of the April 18, 2007, 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, Chair Eddie, one of the District’s representatives on the SMART Board of Directors (SMART Board), reported on the following topics discussed at the May 16, 2007 meeting of the SMART Board:

1. He reported that the SMART Board has selected a group of consultants to undertake the preparation of a Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS/FEIS) that will satisfy federal environmental clearance requirements. The DEIS/FEIS will draw upon information developed for SMART’s 2006 Environmental Impact Report that was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. He also stated the team of consultants working on the DEIS/FEIS will be led by Project Manager Vicki Hill, with whom SMART has worked with in the past.    
2. He provided an update regarding the Santa Rosa Railroad Square project. He stated that there have been significant changes made to the development proposal from New Railroad Square, LLC, led by Creative Housing Associates. He also stated that despite considerable support for the project from the Santa Rosa community and the SMART Board as a transit village concept, the local housing boom has necessitated a reduction in the amount of residential housing units to be included in the project. He noted that the SMART Board also discussed the changes being made to the parking requirements for the project.     
3. He stated that the North Coast Railroad Authority, which operates freight service on a portion of the SMART railroad right-of-way, is in the process of rebuilding parts of the railroad tracks in order to resume freight service in 2008.    
4. He stated that the SMART is continuing discussions about which of the three election dates in 2008 would be best to schedule the ballot measure for the one-quarter sales tax to fund SMART’s passenger rail service in Sonoma and Marin County.

Action by the Board – None Required

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

Status Report on the Golden Gate Bridge Suicide Deterrent Study

Denis Mulligan provided a presentation on the results of the Phase I Wind Studies Report (Wind Study), the first phase of the Environmental Studies and Preliminary Design for a Suicide Deterrent System on the Golden Gate Bridge (Suicide Deterrent System Study). He announced the launch of a new web site dedicated to the Suicide Deterrent System Study, located at www.ggbsuicidebarrier.org. He noted that the Board of Directors, by Resolution No. 2006-077 at its meeting of September 22, 2006, authorized a two-phase approach for the Suicide Deterrent System Study: Phase I – Wind Tunnel Testing of Generic Concepts; and, Phase II – Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Studies.

Mr. Mulligan presented two charts depicting the timeline, milestones and formal environmental process for the Suicide Deterrent System Study, noting that the draft Environmental Impact Report is scheduled for release in the fall of 2007, for public comment and agency review. He stated that the formal environmental review process will draw upon the results of the wind tunnel testing and will analyze a “no-build” and several “build” alternatives, based on anticipated environmental impacts, as well as on the criteria previously adopted by the Board of Directors.

Mr. Mulligan proceeded with presenting the results of the Wind Study. As background, he displayed historic photographs of Tacoma Narrows Bridge, also known as “Galloping Gertie,” which collapsed in 1940 during a modest wind storm. He noted that long-span suspension bridges, including the Golden Gate Bridge, are particularly prone to “incipient flutter,” a term used to describe how flexible structures respond dynamically and potentially dramatically to wind. He further noted that changes in the aerodynamic form of the Bridge, such as changes in the railings, determine how the Bridge will respond to wind. He stated that the section of the Bridge between the two towers is most sensitive to wind.

Mr. Mulligan stated that the following three basic concepts of a Suicide Deterrent System were analyzed during the Wind Study: 1) Adding on to the existing railing; 2) Replacing the existing railing; and, 3) Installing nets that extend out horizontally. He stated that parametric studies were undertaken to see how each of these three basic concepts responded to different variables, including the height, the solid ratio and the use of wind devices. He explained that the existing Bridge railings have a solid ratio of 60%, which presents a challenge from a wind perspective. He noted that the Seismic Retrofit Program, which also includes enhancing the wind stability of the Bridge, contemplates replacing the existing railing on the west sidewalk of the Bridge between the two towers, with a replicated railing composed of aerodynamically efficient vertical steel plates. Mr. Mulligan further described the various types of wind devices, including winglets and fairings.

Mr. Mulligan stated that the wind criteria used for the Wind Study was based on a wind event that would occur once every 10,000 years, due to the severe consequences of exceeding the wind tolerance of the Bridge. Based on meteorological data for the Golden Gate strait, the 10,000-year-wind was defined as a 100 mile-per-hour wind from the west, or a 66 mile-per-hour wind from the east.

Mr. Mulligan reported on the findings from the Wind Study, which determined the following regarding the proposed design concepts for a Suicide Deterrent System:

• Various railing heights would be acceptable, ranging from 8-feet to 14-feet tall;   
• A Suicide Deterrent System could only be 12% to 24% solid;  
• Wind devices, either visible or hidden from view, would be necessary for all concepts;   
• A workable net option would require the use of the replicated railing proposed for the Seismic Retrofit project;   
• Any options that contemplate keeping the existing railing would require visible winglets on top of the railing attachment; and,    
• The addition of a moveable median barrier would not create wind instability.

Mr. Mulligan continued with the presentation, describing in detail each of the various proposed Suicide Deterrent System design concepts, with slides depicting architectural renderings of how the various concepts would look like as installed on the Bridge.

In conclusion, Mr. Mulligan stated that all of the proposed design concepts that passed the wind tests will be used to develop alternatives that will be thoroughly analyzed during the formal environmental review process.

Public Comment

John Vidaurri expressed gratitude to the District for proceeding with the studies, and urged the District to start locating funding sources for the construction of a Suicide Deterrent System on the Golden Gate Bridge.

Mel Blaustein, M.D. expressed his appreciation to District staff for the presentation of the proposed Suicide Deterrent System concepts.

Eve Meyer expressed her satisfaction that after many years of debate, the Wind Study has determined that a physical suicide deterrent system could safely be installed on the Bridge.

Discussion ensued, including the following:

• Director Martini inquired as to whether the Wind Study tested the 10,000-year wind on the existing Bridge structure. In response, Mr. Mulligan answered in the affirmative, noting that as part of the Seismic Retrofit of the main span, the existing railing, with rails spaced 4.5 inches apart, will be replaced with a replicated railing with vertical steel plates spaced 6.0 inches apart.

• Director Grosboll made the following comments and inquiries:    
  • He inquired as to which options were excluded as a result of the Wind Study. In response, Mr. Mulligan stated that the Wind Study defined the parameters of which options would work on the Golden Gate Bridge, precluding any of those options that would not work, such as any add-on railing options that are more than 12% solid, or any new railing options that are more than 23% solid.    
  • He inquired as whether any of the options would accommodate small view areas through which visitors to the Bridge could take photographs. In response, Mr. Mulligan stated that there would be sufficient flexibility in the design options to provide openings for taking photographs.     
  • He inquired regarding the comparative costs of the various design concepts. In response, Mr. Mulligan stated that such costs could not be determined until Phase II of the Suicide Deterrent System Study, at which time the amount of steel and other materials to be used for each of the design concepts could be compared. He noted that the estimated project costs for a Suicide Deterrent System range from $15 million to $25 million.   
  • He requested that staff present a report on the costs for the various options for a Suicide Deterrent System at a future meeting of the Board of Directors. In response, Ms. Kupersmith clarified, for the record, that the Board of Directors has not yet taken action to proceed with the construction of a Suicide Deterrent System and, therefore, could not yet provide specific costs for such a project. She further stated that at a future meeting of the Board of Directors, staff could provide a report on what kind of other projects are in the District’s Ten-Year Capital Program for which the District will be seeking funding, and how seeking funding for those other projects would be affected by the decision to build a Suicide Deterrent System. She noted that it would not be appropriate to seek funding for a Suicide Deterrent System project until after the Board takes such an action.

• Director Middlebrook inquired regarding the need for the replicated railing if the net option is considered. In response, Mr. Mulligan stated that the District has plans to replace the existing railing on the west sidewalk between the two towers with the replicated railing as part of the Seismic Retrofit, and that the use of the net option would require the installation of the replicated railing on both the west and east sidewalks between the two towers.

• Director Stroeh made the following comments and inquiries:   

  • He inquired regarding the feasibility of a net option. In response, Mr. Mulligan stated that the Wind Study only studied how wind would affect the various net options, but that there are many other issues associated with the net options that would be analyzed during the formal environmental process.    
  • He emphasized the fact that the existing railing will be replaced on the west sidewalk with the replicated railing during the Seismic Retrofit project.
• Director Pahre made the following comments and inquiries:    

  • She commented that the presentation was extraordinarily complete, and thanked Mr. Mulligan for providing this important information to the Committee.     
  • She inquired as to whether the change to the replicated railing on the west sidewalk would visually appear the same as the existing railing on the east sidewalk. In response, Mr. Mulligan stated that most people driving across the Bridge would not notice the difference in the railing. He further stated that the District has received environmental clearance from agencies such as the State Historic Preservation Office and the Federal Advisory Council on Historic Preservation with respect to the replicated railing on the west sidewalk.     
  • She requested that when staff prepares the Suicide Deterrent System status report at a future meeting of the Board of Directors, that such report include information regarding the commitment from the Psychiatric Foundation of Northern California to help the District raise funds for the construction of a Suicide Deterrent System.

• Director Reilly inquired as to which of the proposed Suicide Deterrent System design concepts the District Engineer preferred. In response, Mr. Mulligan stated that if the Board decided to implement the project, from a maintenance standpoint, any of the options that include wind devices below deck would be preferable, to allow for easier access for maintenance workers on the Golden Gate Bridge

• Director Hernandez inquired as to which of the proposed Suicide Deterrent System design concepts the District Engineer would have the least impact on the safety of maintenance workers. In response, Mr. Mulligan stated that it would be premature at this juncture to consider the specific impacts of the proposed Suicide Deterrent System design concepts.
  

Public Comment

There was no public comment.

Adjournment

All business having been concluded, the meeting was declared adjourned at 10:58 a.m.