Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
13 - CC-11 - Local Road Safety Plan Project - 4/20/2021
1 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: APRIL 20, 2021 ITEM NUMBER: CC-11 SUBJECT: LOCAL ROAD SAFETY PLAN PROJECT DATE: MARCH 23, 2021 FROM: PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT/TRANSPORTATION SERVICES DIVISION PRESENTATION BY: RAJA SETHURAMAN, PUBLIC SERVICES DIRECTOR FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: JENNIFER ROSALES, TRANSPORTATION SERVICES MANAGER, (714) 754-5343 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Award a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. for professional engineering services for the development of a Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) in the amount of $94,328.18 (Attachment 1), in substantially the form as attached and in such final form as approved by the City Attorney, and authorize the City Manager and the City Clerk to execute the agreement and future amendments to the agreement; 2. Accept and appropriate an additional grant funding received from Caltrans in the amount of $15,000. BACKGROUND: The LRSP will develop a framework to systematically identify and analyze roadway safety concerns and recommend potential safety improvements in the City. The City of Costa Mesa has received a State grant from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to complete the LRSP. The LRSP will identify opportunities to improve and enhance roadway safety within the City focusing on engineering, enforcement, education, encouragement, and emergency services. The LRSP will identify emphasis areas including pedestrian and bicycle safety and countermeasures through public outreach and diverse stakeholder collaboration. The LRSP scope of work includes a robust public involvement component and will be developed through collaboration with residents, businesses, schools, community groups as well as a wide range of stakeholders. The development of the LRSP includes review of historical traffic collision data citywide, review of key vehicle and active transportation corridors, identify and analyze roadway safety concerns for all modes of travel, and 2 recommend potential safety improvements and policies. In addition, the scope of work includes the development of Vision Zero policies for the City of Costa Mesa. The LRSP will be prepared as a living document that can be updated to reflect the changing needs and priorities of the City. Starting in April 2022, Cities will be required to have an LRSP to apply for future Federal Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) funding for traffic safety improvements along local roads. ANALYSIS: On February 1, 2021, the City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for professional engineering services for the development of a Local Road Safety Plan. Three (3) proposals were received to provide the professional engineering services. Proposals were reviewed for compliance with the City’s RFP, and consultants were evaluated based on project understanding, depth of experience, technical expertise, and associated evaluation criteria. After a thorough evaluation of the proposals, staff finds Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. to be well qualified to perform the requested services for the development of the City’s Local Road Safety Plan. The proposal submitted by Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. represents a thorough understanding of the project, complies with City requirements, and documents Kimley-Horn’s technical ability and experience with similar projects. The fees proposed by Kimley-Horn were determined to be competitive and commensurate with the requested services. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: One alternative would be to not approve the proposed Professional Services Agreement and conduct the project using in-house resources. However, the technical expertise and volume of work associated with the project exceeds staff’s available resources and time. This will also require the City to return the grant funding to Caltrans and render City ineligible for future HSIP grants. FISCAL REVIEW: The Local Road Safety Plan Project is state-funded through Caltrans Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) funds and local City match funds. The approved FY 20-21 budget includes the LRSP project in the amount of $80,000 consisting of $72,000 in Caltrans grant funds and $8,000 required local City match. In March 2021, Caltrans allocated additional grant funds to the City for the LRSP project in the amount of $15,000 requiring an additional City match of $1,667 from Capital Improvement Program (CIP) funds. This $1,667 will come from projects with remaining balances. With the additional Caltrans grant and match funds, the total available project amount up to $96,667, consisting of $87,000 in Caltrans grant funds and $9,667 local City match. LEGAL REVIEW: The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed and approved this report as to form and prepared the proposed Professional Services Agreement. 3 CITY COUNCIL GOALS & PRIORITIES: This item supports the following City Council Goals: 3. Strengthen public safety and keep community safe. CONCLUSION: Staff recommends that the City Council 1. Award a PSA to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. for professional engineering services for the development of a Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) in the amount of $94,328.18 (Attachment 1), in substantially the form as attached and in such final form as approved by the City Attorney, and authorize the City Manager and the City Clerk to execute the agreement and future amendments to the agreement; 2. Accept and appropriate an additional grant funding received from Caltrans in the amount of $15,000. JENNIFER ROSALES RAJA SETHURAMAN Transportation Services Manager Public Services Director CAROL MOLINA KIMBERLY HALL BARLOW Finance Director City Attorney ATTACHMENT: 1. Proposed Professional Services Agreement 1 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Rev. 11-2020 CITY OF COSTA MESA PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. THIS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into this 20th day of April, 2021 (“Effective Date”), by and between the CITY OF COSTA MESA, a municipal corporation (“City”), and KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC., a North Carolina corporation (“Consultant”). W I T N E S S E T H : A. WHEREAS, City proposes to utilize the services of Consultant as an independent contractor to provide services in connection with the development of the City’s Local Road Safety Plan Project, as more fully described herein; and B. WHEREAS, Consultant represents that it has that degree of specialized expertise contemplated within California Government Code section 37103, and holds all necessary licenses to practice and perform the services herein contemplated; and C. WHEREAS, City and Consultant desire to contract for the specific services described in Exhibit “A” and desire to set forth their rights, duties and liabilities in connection with the services to be performed; and D. WHEREAS, no official or employee of City has a financial interest, within the provisions of sections 1090-1092 of the California Government Code, in the subject matter of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions contained herein, the parties hereby agree as follows: 1.0. SERVICES PROVIDED BY CONSULTANT 1.1. Scope of Services. Consultant shall provide the professional services described in the City’s Request for Proposals, attached hereto as Exhibit “A,” and Consultant’s Proposal, attached hereto as Exhibit “B,” both incorporated herein. 1.2. Professional Practices. All professional services to be provided by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement shall be provided by personnel experienced in their respective fields and in a manner consistent with the standards of care, diligence and skill ordinarily exercised by professional consultants in similar fields and circumstances in accordance with sound professional practices. 1.3. Performance to Satisfaction of City. Consultant agrees to perform all the work to the complete satisfaction of the City. Evaluations of the work will be done by the City Manager or his or her designee. If the quality of work is not satisfactory, City in its discretion has the right to: (a) Meet with Consultant to review the quality of the work and resolve the matters of concern; ATTACHMENT 1 2 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Rev. 11-2020 (b) Require Consultant to repeat the work at no additional fee until it is satisfactory; and/or (c) Terminate the Agreement as hereinafter set forth. 1.4. Warranty. Consultant shall exercise the professional standard of care to perform the services required by this Agreement in compliance with all applicable Federal and California employment laws, including, but not limited to, those laws related to minimum hours and wages; occupational health and safety; fair employment and employment practices; workers’ compensation insurance and safety in employment; and all other Federal, State and local laws and ordinances applicable to the services required under this Agreement. Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless City from and against all claims, demands, payments, suits, actions, proceedings, and judgments of every nature and description including attorneys’ fees and costs, presented, brought, or recovered against City for, or on account of any liability under any of the above-mentioned laws, which may be incurred by reason of Consultant’s performance under this Agreement. 1.5. Non-Discrimination. In performing this Agreement, Consultant shall not engage in, nor permit its agents to engage in, discrimination in employment of persons because of their race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or military or veteran status, except as permitted pursuant to section 12940 of the Government Code. 1.6. Non-Exclusive Agreement. Consultant acknowledges that City may enter into agreements with other consultants for services similar to the services that are subject to this Agreement or may have its own employees perform services similar to those services contemplated by this Agreement. 1.7. Delegation and Assignment. This is a personal service contract, and the duties set forth herein shall not be delegated or assigned to any person or entity without the prior written consent of City. Consultant may engage a subcontractor(s) as permitted by law and may employ other personnel to perform services contemplated by this Agreement at Consultant’s sole cost and expense. 1.8. Confidentiality. Employees of Consultant in the course of their duties may have access to financial, accounting, statistical, and personnel data of private individuals and employees of City. Consultant covenants that all data, documents, discussion, or other information developed or received by Consultant or provided for performance of this Agreement are deemed confidential and shall not be disclosed by Consultant without written authorization by City. City shall grant such authorization if disclosure is required by law. All City data shall be returned to City upon the termination of this Agreement. Consultant’s covenant under this Section shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 2.0. COMPENSATION AND BILLING 2.1. Compensation. Consultant shall be paid in accordance with the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit “C,” attached hereto and made a part of this Agreement by this reference (the “Fee Schedule”). Consultant’s total compensation shall not exceed Ninety-Four Thousand Three Hundred Twenty-Eight Dollars and Eighteen Cents ($94,328.18). 3 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Rev. 11-2020 2.2. Additional Services. Consultant shall not receive compensation for any services provided outside the scope of services specified in the Consultant’s Proposal unless the City Manager or designee, prior to Consultant performing the additional services, approves such additional services in writing. It is specifically understood that oral requests and/or approvals of such additional services or additional compensation shall be barred and are unenforceable. 2.3. Method of Billing. Consultant may submit invoices to the City for approval on a progress basis, but no more often than two times a month. Said invoice shall be based on the total of all Consultant’s services which have been completed to City’s sole satisfaction. City shall pay Consultant’s invoice within forty-five (45) days from the date City receives said invoice. Each invoice shall describe in detail, the services performed, the date of performance, and the associated time for completion. Any additional services approved and performed pursuant to this Agreement shall be designated as “Additional Services” and shall identify the number of the authorized change order, where applicable, on all invoices. 2.4. Records and Audits. Records of Consultant’s services relating to this Agreement shall be maintained in accordance with generally recognized accounting principles and shall be made available to City or its Project Manager for inspection and/or audit at mutually convenient times from the Effective Date until three (3) years after termination of this Agreement. 3.0. TIME OF PERFORMANCE 3.1. Commencement and Completion of Work. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the parties, the professional services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall commence within five (5) days from the Effective Date of this Agreement. Said services shall be performed in strict compliance with the Project Schedule approved by City as set forth in Exhibit B. The Project Schedule may be amended by mutual agreement of the parties. Failure to commence work in a timely manner and/or diligently pursue work to completion may be grounds for termination of this Agreement. 3.2. Excusable Delays. Neither party shall be responsible for delays or lack of performance resulting from acts beyond the reasonable control of the party or parties. Such acts shall include, but not be limited to, acts of God, fire, strikes, pandemics, material shortages, compliance with laws or regulations, riots, acts of war, or any other conditions beyond the reasonable control of a party (each, a “Force Majeure Event”). If a party experiences a Force Majeure Event, the party shall, within five (5) days of the occurrence of the Force Majeure Event, give written notice to the other party stating the nature of the Force Majeure Event, its anticipated duration and any action being taken to avoid or minimize its effect. Any suspension of performance shall be of no greater scope and of no longer duration than is reasonably required and the party experiencing the Force Majeure Event shall use best efforts without being obligated to incur any material expenditure to remedy its inability to perform; provided, however, if the suspension of performance continues for sixty (60) days after the date of the occurrence and such failure to perform would constitute a material breach of this Agreement in the absence of such Force Majeure Event, the parties shall meet and discuss in good faith any amendments to this Agreement to permit the other party to exercise its rights under this Agreement. If the parties are not able to agree on such amendments within thirty (30) days and if suspension of performance continues, such other party may terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the party experiencing the Force Majeure Event, in which case neither party shall have any liability to the other except for those rights and liabilities that accrued prior to the date of termination. 4 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Rev. 11-2020 4.0. TERM AND TERMINATION 4.1. Term. This Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and continue for a period of two (2) years, ending on April 19, 2023, unless previously terminated as provided herein or as otherwise agreed to in writing by the parties. 4.2. Notice of Termination. The City reserves and has the right and privilege of canceling, suspending or abandoning the execution of all or any part of the work contemplated by this Agreement, with or without cause, at any time, by providing written notice to Consultant. The termination of this Agreement shall be deemed effective upon receipt of the notice of termination. In the event of such termination, Consultant shall immediately stop rendering services under this Agreement unless directed otherwise by the City. 4.3. Compensation. In the event of termination, City shall pay Consultant for reasonable costs incurred and professional services satisfactorily performed up to and including the date of City’s written notice of termination. Compensation for work in progress shall be prorated based on the percentage of work completed as of the effective date of termination in accordance with the fees set forth herein. In ascertaining the professional services actually rendered hereunder up to the effective date of termination of this Agreement, consideration shall be given to both completed work and work in progress, to complete and incomplete drawings, and to other documents pertaining to the services contemplated herein whether delivered to the City or in the possession of the Consultant. 4.4. Documents. In the event of termination of this Agreement, all documents prepared by Consultant in its performance of this Agreement including, but not limited to, finished or unfinished design, development and construction documents, data studies, drawings, maps and reports, shall be delivered to the City within ten (10) days of delivery of termination notice to Consultant, at no cost to City. Any use of uncompleted documents without specific written authorization from Consultant shall be at City’s sole risk and without liability or legal expense to Consultant. 5.0. INSURANCE 5.1. Minimum Scope and Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall obtain, maintain, and keep in full force and effect during the life of this Agreement all of the following minimum scope of insurance coverages with an insurance company admitted to do business in California, rated “A,” Class X, or better in the most recent Best’s Key Insurance Rating Guide, and approved by City: (a) Commercial general liability, including premises-operations, products/completed operations, broad form property damage, blanket contractual liability, independent contractors, personal injury or bodily injury with a policy limit of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00), combined single limits, per occurrence. If such insurance contains a general aggregate limit, it shall apply separately to this Agreement or shall be twice the required occurrence limit. (b) Business automobile liability for owned vehicles, hired, and non-owned vehicles, with a policy limit of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00), combined single limits, per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage. 5 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Rev. 11-2020 (c) Workers’ compensation insurance as required by the State of California. Consultant agrees to waive, and to obtain endorsements from its workers’ compensation insurer waiving subrogation rights under its workers’ compensation insurance policy against the City, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers arising from work performed by Consultant for the City and to require each of its subcontractors, if any, to do likewise under their workers’ compensation insurance policies. (d) Professional errors and omissions (“E&O”) liability insurance with policy limits of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00), combined single limits, per occurrence and aggregate. If the policy is written as a “claims made” policy, the retro date shall be prior to the start of the contract work. Consultant shall obtain and maintain, said E&O liability insurance during the life of this Agreement and for three years after completion of the work hereunder. 5.2. Endorsements. The commercial general liability insurance policy and business automobile liability policy shall contain or be endorsed to contain the following provisions: (a) Additional insureds: “The City of Costa Mesa and its elected and appointed boards, officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers are additional insureds with respect to: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant pursuant to its contract with the City; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant; automobiles owned, leased, hired, or borrowed by the Consultant.” (b) Notice: “Said policy shall not terminate, be suspended, or voided, nor shall it be cancelled, nor the coverage or limits reduced, until thirty (30) days after written notice is given to City.” (c) Other insurance: “The Consultant’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City of Costa Mesa, its officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers. Any other insurance maintained by the City of Costa Mesa shall be excess and not contributing with the insurance provided by this policy.” (d) Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City of Costa Mesa, its officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers. (e) The Consultant’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer’s liability. 5.3. Deductible or Self Insured Retention. If any of such policies provide for a deductible or self-insured retention to provide such coverage, the amount of such deductible or self-insured retention shall be approved in advance by City. No policy of insurance issued as to which the City is an additional insured shall contain a provision which requires that no insured except the named insured can satisfy any such deductible or self-insured retention. 6 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Rev. 11-2020 5.4. Certificates of Insurance. Consultant shall provide to City certificates of insurance showing the insurance coverages and required endorsements described above, in a form and content approved by City, prior to performing any services under this Agreement. 5.5. Non-Limiting. Nothing in this Section shall be construed as limiting in any way, the indemnification provision contained in this Agreement, or the extent to which Consultant may be held responsible for payments of damages to persons or property. 6.0. GENERAL PROVISIONS 6.1. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to any matter referenced herein and supersedes any and all other prior writings and oral negotiations. This Agreement may be modified only in writing, and signed by the parties in interest at the time of such modification. The terms of this Agreement shall prevail over any inconsistent provision in any other contract document appurtenant hereto, including exhibits to this Agreement. 6.2. Representatives. The City Manager or his or her designee shall be the representative of City for purposes of this Agreement and may issue all consents, approvals, directives and agreements on behalf of the City, called for by this Agreement, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement. Consultant shall designate a representative for purposes of this Agreement who shall be authorized to issue all consents, approvals, directives and agreements on behalf of Consultant called for by this Agreement, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement. 6.3. Project Managers. City shall designate a Project Manager to work directly with Consultant in the performance of this Agreement. Consultant shall designate a Project Manager who shall represent it and be its agent in all consultations with City during the term of this Agreement. Consultant or its Project Manager shall attend and assist in all coordination meetings called by City. 6.4. Notices. Any notices, documents, correspondence or other communications concerning this Agreement or the work hereunder may be provided by personal delivery or mail and shall be addressed as set forth below. Such communication shall be deemed served or delivered: (a) at the time of delivery if such communication is sent by personal delivery, and (b) 48 hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail as reflected by the official U.S. postmark if such communication is sent through regular United States mail. IF TO CONSULTANT: IF TO CITY: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 1100 Town and Country Rd. Suite 700 Orange, CA 92868 City of Costa Mesa 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Tel: (619) 744-0161 Tel: (714) 754-5180 Attn: Mychal Loomis Attn: Jennifer Rosales 7 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Rev. 11-2020 Courtesy copy to: City of Costa Mesa 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Attn: Finance Dept. | Purchasing 6.5. Drug-Free Workplace Policy. Consultant shall provide a drug-free workplace by complying with all provisions set forth in City’s Council Policy 100-5, attached hereto as Exhibit “D” and incorporated herein by reference. Consultant’s failure to conform to the requirements set forth in Council Policy 100-5 shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement and shall be cause for immediate termination of this Agreement by City. 6.6. Attorneys’ Fees. In the event that litigation is brought by any party in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the opposing party all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred by the prevailing party in the exercise of any of its rights or remedies hereunder or the enforcement of any of the terms, conditions, or provisions hereof. 6.7. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of California without giving effect to that body of laws pertaining to conflict of laws. In the event of any legal action to enforce or interpret this Agreement, the parties hereto agree that the sole and exclusive venue shall be a court of competent jurisdiction located in Orange County, California. 6.8. Assignment. Consultant shall not voluntarily or by operation of law assign, transfer, sublet or encumber all or any part of Consultant’s interest in this Agreement without City’s prior written consent. Any attempted assignment, transfer, subletting or encumbrance shall be void and shall constitute a breach of this Agreement and cause for termination of this Agreement. Regardless of City’s consent, no subletting or assignment shall release Consultant of Consultant’s obligation to perform all other obligations to be performed by Consultant hereunder for the term of this Agreement. 6.9. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. Consultant agrees to defend, with counsel of City’s choosing, indemnify, hold free and harmless the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees from and against any and all claims, actions, suits or other legal proceedings brought against the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees to the extent arising out of the performance of the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, of the work undertaken pursuant to this Agreement. The defense obligation provided for hereunder shall apply without any advance showing of negligence or wrongdoing by the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, but shall be required whenever any claim, action, complaint, or suit asserts as its basis the negligence, errors, omissions or misconduct of the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, and/or whenever any claim, action, complaint or suit asserts liability against the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees based upon the work performed by the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors under this Agreement, whether or not the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors are specifically named or otherwise asserted to be liable. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Consultant shall not be liable for the defense or indemnification of the City for claims, actions, complaints or suits arising out of the sole active negligence or willful misconduct of the City. This provision shall supersede and replace all other indemnity provisions 8 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Rev. 11-2020 contained either in the City’s specifications or Consultant’s Proposal, which shall be of no force and effect. 6.10. Independent Contractor. Consultant is and shall be acting at all times as an independent contractor and not as an employee of City. Consultant shall have no power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability on behalf of City or otherwise act on behalf of City as an agent. Neither City nor any of its agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant’s employees, except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not, at any time, or in any manner, represent that it or any of its agents or employees are in any manner agents or employees of City. Consultant shall secure, at its sole expense, and be responsible for any and all payment of Income Tax, Social Security, State Disability Insurance Compensation, Unemployment Compensation, and other payroll deductions for Consultant and its officers, agents, and employees, and all business licenses, if any are required, in connection with the services to be performed hereunder. Consultant shall indemnify and hold City harmless from any and all taxes, assessments, penalties, and interest asserted against City by reason of the independent contractor relationship created by this Agreement. Consultant further agrees to indemnify and hold City harmless from any failure of Consultant to comply with the applicable worker’s compensation laws. City shall have the right to offset against the amount of any fees due to Consultant under this Agreement any amount due to City from Consultant as a result of Consultant’s failure to promptly pay to City any reimbursement or indemnification arising under this paragraph. 6.11. PERS Eligibility Indemnification. In the event that Consultant or any employee, agent, or subcontractor of Consultant providing services under this Agreement claims or is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) to be eligible for enrollment in PERS as an employee of the City, Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City for the payment of any employee and/or employer contributions for PERS benefits on behalf of Consultant or its employees, agents, or subcontractors, as well as for the payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions, which would otherwise be the responsibility of City. Notwithstanding any other agency, state or federal policy, rule, regulation, law or ordinance to the contrary, Consultant and any of its employees, agents, and subcontractors providing service under this Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled to, and hereby agree to waive any claims to, any compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by City, including but not limited to eligibility to enroll in PERS as an employee of City and entitlement to any contribution to be paid by City for employer contribution and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits. 6.12. Cooperation. In the event any claim or action is brought against City relating to Consultant’s performance or services rendered under this Agreement, Consultant shall render any reasonable assistance and cooperation which City might require. 6.13. Ownership of Documents. All findings, reports, documents, information and data including, but not limited to, computer tapes or discs, files and tapes furnished or prepared by Consultant or any of its subcontractors in the course of performance of this Agreement, shall be and remain the sole property of City. Consultant agrees that any such documents or information shall not be made available to any individual or organization without the prior consent of City. Any use of such documents for other projects not contemplated by this Agreement, and any use of incomplete documents, shall be at the sole risk of City and without liability or legal exposure to Consultant. City shall indemnify and hold harmless Consultant from all claims, damages, losses, 9 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Rev. 11-2020 and expenses, including attorneys’ fees, arising out of or resulting from City’s use of such documents for other projects not contemplated by this Agreement or use of incomplete documents furnished by Consultant. Consultant shall deliver to City any findings, reports, documents, information, data, in any form, including but not limited to, computer tapes, discs, files audio tapes or any other Project related items as requested by City or its authorized representative, at no additional cost to the City. 6.14. Public Records Act Disclosure. Consultant has been advised and is aware that this Agreement and all reports, documents, information and data, including, but not limited to, computer tapes, discs or files furnished or prepared by Consultant, or any of its subcontractors, pursuant to this Agreement and provided to City may be subject to public disclosure as required by the California Public Records Act (California Government Code section 6250 et seq.). Exceptions to public disclosure may be those documents or information that qualify as trade secrets, as that term is defined in the California Government Code section 6254.7, and of which Consultant informs City of such trade secret. The City will endeavor to maintain as confidential all information obtained by it that is designated as a trade secret. The City shall not, in any way, be liable or responsible for the disclosure of any trade secret including, without limitation, those records so marked if disclosure is deemed to be required by law or by order of the Court. 6.15. Conflict of Interest. Consultant and its officers, employees, associates and subconsultants, if any, will comply with all conflict of interest statutes of the State of California applicable to Consultant's services under this agreement, including, but not limited to, the Political Reform Act (Government Code sections 81000, et seq.) and Government Code section 1090. During the term of this Agreement, Consultant and its officers, employees, associates and subconsultants shall not, without the prior written approval of the City Representative, perform work for another person or entity for whom Consultant is not currently performing work that would require Consultant or one of its officers, employees, associates or subconsultants to abstain from a decision under this Agreement pursuant to a conflict of interest statute. 6.16. Responsibility for Errors. Consultant shall be responsible for its work and results under this Agreement. Consultant, when requested, shall furnish clarification and/or explanation as may be required by the City’s representative, regarding any services rendered under this Agreement at no additional cost to City. In the event that an error or omission attributable to Consultant occurs, then Consultant shall, at no cost to City, provide all necessary design drawings, estimates and other Consultant professional services necessary to rectify and correct the matter to the sole satisfaction of City and to participate in any meeting required with regard to the correction. 6.17. Prohibited Employment. Consultant will not employ any regular employee of City while this Agreement is in effect. 6.18. Order of Precedence. In the event of an inconsistency in this Agreement and any of the attached Exhibits, the terms set forth in this Agreement shall prevail. If, and to the extent this Agreement incorporates by reference any provision of any document, such provision shall be deemed a part of this Agreement. Nevertheless, if there is any conflict among the terms and conditions of this Agreement and those of any such provision or provisions so incorporated by reference, this Agreement shall govern over the document referenced. 6.19. Costs. Each party shall bear its own costs and fees incurred in the preparation and negotiation of this Agreement and in the performance of its obligations hereunder except as expressly provided herein. 10 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Rev. 11-2020 6.20. Binding Effect. This Agreement binds and benefits the parties and their respective permitted successors and assigns. 6.21. No Third Party Beneficiary Rights. This Agreement is entered into for the sole benefit of City and Consultant and no other parties are intended to be direct or incidental beneficiaries of this Agreement and no third party shall have any right in, under or to this Agreement. 6.22. Headings. Paragraphs and subparagraph headings contained in this Agreement are included solely for convenience and are not intended to modify, explain or to be a full or accurate description of the content thereof and shall not in any way affect the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement. 6.23. Construction. The parties have participated jointly in the negotiation and drafting of this Agreement and have had an adequate opportunity to review each and every provision of the Agreement and submit the same to counsel or other consultants for review and comment. In the event an ambiguity or question of intent or interpretation arises with respect to this Agreement, this Agreement shall be construed as if drafted jointly by the parties and in accordance with its fair meaning. There shall be no presumption or burden of proof favoring or disfavoring any party by virtue of the authorship of any of the provisions of this Agreement. 6.24. Amendments. Only a writing executed by the parties hereto or their respective successors and assigns may amend this Agreement. 6.25. Waiver. The delay or failure of either party at any time to require performance or compliance by the other of any of its obligations or agreements shall in no way be deemed a waiver of those rights to require such performance or compliance. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the party against whom enforcement of a waiver is sought. The waiver of any right or remedy in respect to any occurrence or event shall not be deemed a waiver of any right or remedy in respect to any other occurrence or event, nor shall any waiver constitute a continuing waiver. 6.26. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable in any circumstance, such determination shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining terms and provisions hereof or of the offending provision in any other circumstance. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the value of this Agreement, based upon the substantial benefit of the bargain for any party, is materially impaired, which determination made by the presiding court or arbitrator of competent jurisdiction shall be binding, then both parties agree to substitute such provision(s) through good faith negotiations. 6.27. Counterparts and Electronic Signatures. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original. All counterparts shall be construed together and shall constitute one agreement. Counterpart written signatures may be transmitted by facsimile, email or other electronic means and have the same legal effect as if they were original signatures. 6.28. Corporate Authority. The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the parties hereto warrant that they are duly authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of said parties and that by doing so the parties hereto are formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement. 11 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Rev. 11-2020 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by and through their respective authorized officers, as of the date first above written. CONSULTANT __________________________________ Date: __________________________ Signature __________________________________ [Name and Title] CITY OF COSTA MESA __________________________________ Date: __________________________ Lori Ann Farrell Harrison City Manager ATTEST: __________________________________ Brenda Green City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________________ Date: __________________________ Kimberly Hall Barlow City Attorney APPROVED AS TO INSURANCE: __________________________________ Date: __________________________ Ruth Wang Risk Management 12 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Rev. 11-2020 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: __________________________________ Date: __________________________ Jennifer Rosales Project Manager DEPARTMENTAL APPROVAL: __________________________________ Date: __________________________ Raja Sethuraman Public Services Director APPROVED AS TO PURCHASING: __________________________________ Date: __________________________ Carol Molina Finance Director EXHIBIT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS 2 SCOPE OF SERVICES A. Task 1 – Project Management The consultant and sub-consultants shall attend a project kick-off meeting with key City staff to initiate the project, review the project scope of work, plan goals, review project schedule and key milestones, and develop a list of documents/data needed to assist in the successful completion of the project. Project progress meetings shall be held twice a month every month for the duration of the contract. The consultant shall be responsible for preparing meeting agendas, minutes, and presentation materials. A Critical Path Method (CPM) network, based on activities to support all project milestones and subtasks shall be prepared. The information will be in the form of a bar chart and will show a deliverables schedule and other relevant data needed for the control of work, for City’s review of the work status and accomplishments occurring each month. Monthly updates shall be furnished to the City’s Project Manager. B. Task 2 – Identify and Engage Safety Partners The consultant shall work with City staff to identify potential stakeholders (Safety Partners) to participate in the development of the LRSP. The LSRP will be developed through collaboration with residents, businesses, schools, community groups as well as a wide range of stakeholders. Safety Partners will meet up to two (2) times during the development of the plan, either in-person or virtually online at the discretion of the City, to: Identify emphasis areas and establish safety goals, objectives, and strategies (review potential countermeasures); and Prioritize plans for implementation, and review and comment on the draft LRSP. Potential stakeholders include but are not limited to: Costa Mesa Bikeway and Walkability Committee Costa Mesa Fire Department Costa Mesa Police Department Newport Mesa Unified School District (NMUSD) California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Costa Mesa Alliance for Better Streets (CMABS) Costa Mesa Chamber of Commerce Orange Coast College (OCC) Vanguard University 3 C. Task 3 – Existing Plans, Programs and Policies The selected consultant will review the City’s related planning documents, policies, plans, programs, and institutional alignment with current safety best practices. The consultant shall produce an inventory of opportunity areas to facilitate improvements in the areas of engineering, enforcement, education, encouragement and emergency services. The City’s existing documents to be reviewed include but are not limited to: Costa Mesa General Plan, City’s Active Transportation Plan, City’s Pedestrian Master Plan (currently in-progress), California Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP), Caltrans Local Roadway Safety Manual, Caltrans Standard Plans, current edition, FHWA Systemic Safety Project Selection Tool. D. Task 4 – Data Collection & Analysis The consultant shall collect collision data for the most recent 5-year period. The consultant will use data collected from the City's collision database, Traffic Information Management System (TIMS), and the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS). The consultant will review and analyze the crashes, crash types, crash severity, roadway conditions, high incident locations, traffic patterns, roadway features, driver characteristics, vehicle factors, and environmental conditions. The analysis will give special attention to high incident locations, midblock crosswalks, DUI, school-related, bicycle, and pedestrian collisions. Data used for the safety data evaluation should also include traffic volumes, number of lanes, and posted speeds. Consultant will conduct a field review to collect any data or roadway characteristics that are missing or unavailable and to gain an understanding of the City’s roadway and Active Transportation network. These include but are not limited to: roadway volume, roadway cross-sections, speed limits, intersection control, bicycle/pedestrian/vehicle conflict zones, suggested routes to school, truck routes, and streetlights. E. Task 5 – Emphasis Areas The consultant will work with the City and the Safety Partners in identifying top emphasis areas and establishing safety goals and strategies (including FHWA approved countermeasures) to improve traffic safety. Emphasis areas describe a transportation safety issue, usually a collision type or mode-specific safety issue that has an opportunity for improvement. The Emphasis areas will include a focus on pedestrian and bicycle safety. Emphasis areas should include a description and a goal, with a metric of success that can be measured over the life of the plan. Consultant will identify the top risk factors and areas of emphasis to guide future evaluation and implementation, including programs and practices. Building on the emphasis areas and the goals established in this task, the Consultant will identify strategies to address these emphasis areas and achieve the project goals. The strategies will address the emphasis areas including pedestrian and bicycle safety. F. Task 6 – Evaluation and Implementation The consultant will assist the City in developing a process to implement and evaluate strategies identified in Task 5. A methodology will also be developed to review, revise, and update the plan, and a lead agency will be identified for each countermeasure. 4 G. Task 7 – Development of Final LRSP Identify Near-Term Strategies – Consultant will identify strategies that may be implemented relatively quickly and/or result in cost savings or cumulative benefits. Develop Vision Zero Policies – Consultant will develop Vision Zero policies for the City of Costa Mesa. Determine Evaluation and Implementation – Consultant will document in final report the plan for emphasis areas and strategy evaluation and implementation. Draft and Final Report – Consultant will develop a draft Local Roadway Safety Plan based on the findings from Tasks 1-6, following Caltrans guidelines for an LRSP. Consultant will meet with City staff to review the draft plan and then develop the final LRSP. Consultant shall submit the Final LRSP to the City six months after receipt of a formal Notice to Proceed (NTP). The consultant will work with City staff to determine the schedule of future plan updates, including the frequency and possible reporting elements. ______________________________________________________________________________ GENERAL PROVISIONS The proposals submitted in response to this RFP will be used as a basis for selecting the Consultant for this project. The Consultant’s proposal will be evaluated and ranked based on qualifications and not based solely on cost. Addenda to this RFP, if required, will be sent to all prospective Consultants that the City of Costa Mesa has specifically e-mailed a copy of the RFP to and will be posted on PlanetBids at: https://www.planetbids.com/portal/portal.cfm?CompanyID=45476. It shall be the Consultant’s responsibility to check the website above to obtain any addenda that may be issued and to confirm receipt on the proposal. If receipt of addenda is not confirmed on the proposal, the proposal will be deemed incomplete and rejected. Any proposals received prior to the deadline for proposals may be withdrawn or modified by written request of the Consultant. To be considered, however, the modified Proposal must be received prior to the date and time proposals are due. Unsigned proposals or proposals signed by an individual not authorized to bind the prospective Consultant will be considered nonresponsive and rejected. This RFP does not commit the City of Costa Mesa to award a contract, to pay any costs incurred in the preparation of a proposal for this request, or to procure or contract for services. The City of Costa Mesa reserves the right to accept or reject any or all proposals received as a part of this 5 request, to negotiate with any qualified Consultant, or to modify or cancel in part or in its entirety this RFP if it is in the best interests of the City of Costa Mesa to do so. Furthermore, a contract award may not be made based solely on price. The prospective Consultant is advised that should this RFP result in recommendation for award of a contract, the contract will not be in force until it is approved and fully executed by the City of Costa Mesa. All products used or developed in execution of any contract resulting from this RFP will remain in the public domain at the completion of the contract. The consultant shall demonstrate familiarity and have experience with providing services for state funded projects, and a clear understanding of the requirements/needs to facilitate the project through Caltrans Local Assistance and Local Assistance Procedures Manual, which can be accessed on: https://dot.ca.gov/programs/local-assistance/guidelines-and-procedures/local- assistance-procedures-manual-lapm. QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC) shall be consistently and thoroughly applied throughout project development. Assigned QA/QC staff shall be technically well qualified to conduct the appropriate level of oversight, and demonstrate a concerted and sustained commitment to provide a high quality product. Concise written records shall be maintained by the Consultant on all activities. Firms considering proposal submittals are requested to have an in-house technical level of expertise to professionally address all aspects of the project. CONTENT OF PROPOSAL The proposal should be no more than 10 pages in length, not including a cover letter, resumes, and cost proposal. It is requested that the following be submitted with your proposal: 1. Project Understanding - provide a brief review of the project and any suggestions you might have to expedite the project or special concerns of which the City should be advised. 2. Work Plan – define the project approach and describe the work tasks you plan to carry out to accomplish this project, and how those will be accomplished. Indicate all key deliverables and products. 3. Schedule – provide a detailed schedule indicating stages of work and time frames. 4. Project Organization and Staffing - describe who will manage and work on this project. Identify the Project Manager who will be the key contact with the City. Provide an organization chart showing all proposed project team members (including sub-consultants) and a staffing plan identifying responsibilities of personnel on this project and experience on other recent similar projects. Provide a brief resume on each individual (two pages max per person). Identify the project manager with a detailed resume, and the individual authorized to negotiate the contract on behalf of the consulting firm. Key team members identified in the proposal and cost proposal shall not change (be different than) in the executed contract. At least one key team member of the proposed project team must have Road Safety Professional Certification from the Transportation Professional Certification Board and at least one key 6 team member of the proposed project team must be a registered Professional Engineer in Traffic from the State of California. 5. Work History – Provide a listing of similar projects that your firm has completed within the last five years. Information should include a description of work, dates, cost, location, and agency/client name along with the agency’s contact person. 6. Professional Services Agreement (PSA) – Provide a brief statement affirming Consultant’s ability to manage and execute a Professional Services Agreement with the City. If a Proposer has any exceptions or conditions to the Agreement, these must be submitted for consideration with the Proposal. Otherwise, the Proposer will be deemed to have accepted the form of Agreement. 7. Conflict of Interest Statement – disclose any financial, business or other relationship with the City of Costa Mesa (including City employees and City Council members) that may have an impact upon the outcome of the contract. The Consultant shall also list current clients who may have a financial interest in the outcome of this contract. 8. Litigation – indicate if the proposing Consultant was involved with any litigation in connection with prior projects. If yes, briefly describe the nature of the litigation and the result. 9. Contract Agreement (additional requirements) – provide a brief statement affirming that the proposal terms shall remain in effect for ninety (90) days following the date proposal submittals are due. 10. Financial Responsibility – provide a brief statement affirming that the consultant’s and subconsultant’s firm have an adequate financial management and accounting system. Please Note: a contract will not be awarded to a consultant without an adequate financial management and accounting system as required by 48 CFR Part 16.301-3, 2 CFR Part 200, and 48 CFR Part 31, as noted in LAPM Ch. 10, at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LocalPrograms/lam/LAPM/ch10.pdf. 11. Checklist of Forms to Accompany Proposal – Proposers shall include with their proposals the following forms which are provided in Exhibit B: Vendor Application Form Company Profile & References Ex Parte Communications Certificate - Proposers and Proposers’ representatives should not communicate with the City Council members about this RFP. In addition, Proposers and Proposers’ representatives should not communicate outside the procedures set forth in this RFP with an officer, employee or agent of the City, including any member of the evaluation panel, with the exception of the RFP Facilitator, regarding this RFP until after Contract Award. Proposers and their representatives are not prohibited, however, from making oral statements or presentations in public to one or more representatives of the City during a public meeting. A "Proposer" or "Proposer's representative" includes all of the Proposer's employees, officers, directors, consultants and agents, any subcontractors or suppliers listed in the Proposer's Proposal, and any individual or entity who has been requested by the Proposer to contact the City on the Proposer's behalf. Proposers shall include 7 the Ex Parte Communications Form with their Proposals certifying that they have not had or directed prohibited communications as described in this section. Disclosure of Government Positions - In order to analyze possible conflicts that might prevent a Proposer from acting on behalf of the City, the City requires that all Proposers disclose in their Proposals any positions that they hold as directors, officers, or employees of any governmental entity. Additional disclosure may be required prior to contract award or during the term of the contract. Each Proposer shall disclose whether any owner or employee of the firm currently hold positions as elected or appointed officials, directors, officers, or employees of a governmental entity or held such positions in the past twelve months using the attached Disclosure of Government Positions Form Disqualifications Questionnaire - Proposers shall complete and submit, under penalty of perjury, a standard form of questionnaire inquiring whether a Proposer, any officer of a proposer, or any employee of a Proposer who has a proprietary interest in the Proposer, has ever been disqualified, removed, or otherwise prevented from proposing on, or completing a federal, state, or local government project because of a violation of law or safety regulation and if so, to explain the circumstances. A Proposal may be rejected on the basis of a Proposer, any officer or employee of such Proposer, having been disqualified, removed, or otherwise prevented from proposing on, or completing a federal, state, or local project because of a violation of law or a safety regulation. Bidder/Applicant/Contractor Campaign Contribution SELECTION CRITERIA The professional services contract will not be awarded based on competitive bidding. The City’s evaluation and selection process will be conducted in accordance with The Brooks Act (40 USC, Section 1104) and Caltrans LAPM, Chapter 10. The consultant shall be selected based on fair and open competitive negotiations, demonstrated competence, and professional qualifications, at a fair and reasonable price. All proposals will be evaluated by a selection committee assembled by the City of Costa Mesa. Proposals will first be screened to ensure responsiveness to the RFP. An incomplete proposal or a Proposal that does not include all the documents required to be submitted by this RFP will be deemed nonresponsive and rejected. At any time during the evaluation process, the City reserves the right to request clarifications or additional information from any or all Proposers regarding their Proposals. The Committee will then rank the proposals. The committee will evaluate each proposal that meets the qualification requirements set forth in this RFP. The Committee may also contact the Proposer’s references. Proposals will be evaluated per the Evaluation Criteria shown below, with the corresponding weights: Evaluation Criteria Weight Project Approach & Methodology 25 Qualifications, Organization, and Key Staff Experience 25 Scope of Services to be Provided 25 Experience and Record of Success on Similar Projects 25 Maximum Points 100 8 A detailed description of each criterion is provided below: 1. Project Approach & Methodology a. Describes familiarity of project and demonstrates understanding of work to be done and project objectives moving forward. b. Identifies the project’s potential issues and responds to them. 2. Qualifications, Organization, and Key Staff Experience a. Relevant experience, specific qualifications, and technical expertise of the firm and sub-consultants to provide services for state funded projects, in general, and for these projects, in particular. b. Proposes adequate and appropriate disciplines of project team. c. Proposed team members, as demonstrated by enclosed resumes, have relevant experience for their role in the project. d. Overall organization of the team is relevant to City of Costa Mesa needs. e. Team is managed by an individual with appropriate experience in similar projects. This person’s time is appropriately committed to this project. f. Team structure provides adequate capability to perform both volume and quality of needed work within project schedule milestones. g. At least one key team member of the proposed project team must have Road Safety Professional Certification from the Transportation Professional Certification Board and at least one key team member of the proposed project team must be a registered Professional Engineer in Traffic from the State of California. h. Proposer has a system or process for managing cost and budget. 3. Scope of Services to be Provided a. Proposed scope of services is appropriate for all phases of the work. b. Scope address all known project needs and appears achievable in the timeframes set forth in the project schedule. c. Deliverables are appropriate to schedule and addresses all items in the scope set forth in the above requirements. 4. Experience and Record of Success on Similar Projects a. Proposer has familiarity and experience with requirements and procedures for state-funded projects. b. Proposer has completed or is currently working on similar types of projects such as Local Road Safety Plans for other agencies, SSAR, Vision Zero plans, or other types of safety or planning documents. Following the initial screening and review of Proposals, the Proposers included in this stage of the evaluation process may be invited to participate in an oral interview. Interviews, if held, are tentatively scheduled for February 23, 2021 and will be conducted virtually, at the discretion of the City. This date is subject to change. The individual(s) from Proposer's organization that will be directly responsible for carrying out the contract, if awarded, should be present at the oral interview. The oral interview may, but is not required to, use a written question/answer format for the purpose of clarifying the intent of any portions off the Proposal. In addition to conducting an oral interview, the City may during this stage of the evaluation process also contact and evaluate the Proposer’s references, contact any Proposer to clarify any response or request revised or additional information, contact any current users of a Proposer’s 9 services, solicit information from any available source concerning any aspect of a Proposal, and seek and review any other information deemed pertinent to the evaluation process. The Committee will notify all proposers according to the evaluation criteria set forth above and negotiations will begin with the highest ranked Proposer. Recommendation for award is contingent upon the successful negotiation of final contract terms. Negotiations shall be confidential and not subject to disclosure to competing Proposers unless an agreement is reached. If contract negotiations cannot be concluded successfully within a time period determined by the City, the City may terminate negotiations and commence negotiations with the next highest scoring Proposer or withdraw the RFP. COST PROPOSAL The professional services contract will not be awarded based on competitive bidding. The consultant shall perform the services stated in the contract for an agreed amount as compensation, including a net fee or profit. In order to assure that the City of Costa Mesa is able to acquire professional services based on the criteria set forth in the Brooks Act and Government Code 4526, the proposal shall include a cost proposal for each service and task of the proposal. It is requested that the fee, including all meetings, reproduction, materials, mailings, and associated project expenses, be itemized under each task. Consultant shall prepare a Lump Sum Fee estimate with progress payments at defined milestones/tasks. NOTE: All originals of plans, field notes, data and calculations, correspondence, reports, electronic files, etc., will be turned over to the City upon completion of design. Ten percent (10%) of the total contract fee will be withheld until the final PS&E, Resident Engineers File, and all project documents are submitted in acceptable form to the City. SCHEDULE The City anticipates a schedule of 6 months to complete the scope of work. CONTRACT AMENDMENTS Contract amendments are required to modify the terms of the original contracts for changes such as extra time, added work, or increased costs and must be done prior to expiration of the original contract. Any change in the scope of work resulting in a contract increase or decrease in fee shall be approved by the City in writing prior to commencement of actual change in work. No fee adjustment will be allowed unless said prior approval is authorized exclusively in writing by the City, without exception. PROTEST PROCEDURES AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION The consultant shall follow the protest procedures and dispute resolution process per the Code of Federal Regulations 2 CFR Part 200.318(k) and 2CFR 172.5(c)(18). 10 INSURANCE & W-9 REQUIREMENTS Upon recommendation of contract award, Consultant and all sub-consultants will be required to submit the following documents with ten (10) days of City notification, unless otherwise specified in the solicitation: Insurance – City requires that licensees, lessees, and vendors have an approved Certificate of Insurance (not a declaration or policy) or proof of legal self-insurance on file with the City for the issuance of a permit or contract. Within ten (10) consecutive calendar days of award of contract, successful Proposer must furnish the City with the Certificates of Insurance proving coverage as specified in the sample contract. W-9 – Current signed form W-9 (Taxpayer Identification Umber & Certification) which includes Proposer’s legal business name. RIGHT TO REJECT ALL PROPOSALS The City of Costa Mesa reserves the right to reject any or all proposals submitted, at any time, and no representation is made hereby that any contract will be awarded pursuant to this request for proposal, or otherwise. All costs incurred in the preparation of the proposal, in the submission of additional information, and/or in any other aspect of a proposal prior to the award of a written contract will be borne by respondent. The City will provide only the staff assistance and documentation specifically referred to herein and will not be responsible for any other cost or obligation of any kind that may be incurred by a respondent. All proposals submitted to the City of Costa Mesa in response to this request for proposals shall become the property of the City. The City of Costa Mesa sample professional services agreement and sample certificate of insurance is enclosed as Exhibit A for reference. The sample professional services agreement will be modified to include updated state requirements including applicable contract language provided in the LAPM Exhibit 10-R (also attached to Exhibit A for reference). The minimum insurance and endorsement requirements are stated within the enclosed documents. If a Proposer has any exceptions or conditions to the Agreement, these must be submitted for consideration with the Proposal. Otherwise, the Proposer will be deemed to have accepted the form of Agreement. The minimum insurance and endorsement requirements are stated within the enclosed documents. Should your firm be interested in submitting a proposal for this project, please email proposals to Jennifer Rosales, jennifer.rosales@costamesaca.gov on or before 5:00 p.m., February 16, 2021. Proposals not received by the indicated time and date will be considered nonresponsive, and will not be accepted. No faxed copies or postmarks will be accepted in lieu of electronic delivery. Tentative Schedule of Events from Issuance of the RFP to Award of Contract: RFP Distributed February 1, 2021 Deadline for Written Questions February 8, 2021 at 5:00 p.m. Responses to Written Questions February 10, 2021 11 Proposals Due February 16, 2021 at 5:00 p.m. Consultant Interviews (if needed) February 23, 2021 Contract Award March 2021 Notice to Proceed March 2021 Estimated Completion Date September 2021 ** All dates are subject to change at the discretion of the City.** If additional information is required, please contact Jennifer Rosales, Transportation Services Manager, at (714) 754-5180, or email at: jennifer.rosales@costamesaca.gov. Sincerely, JENNIFER ROSALES Transportation Services Manager Attachments: 1. Exhibit A – Sample PSA and Certificate of Insurance Forms 2. Exhibit B – Required City Forms c Raja Sethuraman, Public Services Director Ramin Nikoui, Assistant Engineer EXHIBIT B CONSULTANT’S PROPOSAL Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s Local Road Safety Plan Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) 1100 W. Town and Country Road Suite 700 Orange, CA 92868 213.354.9402 City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 i March 24, 2021 Jennifer Rosales, Transportation Services Manager City of Costa Mesa 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Re: Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s Local Road Safety Plan Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) As an industry leader in safety, Kimley-Horn is qualified and committed to providing comprehensive safety consulting services for the City of Costa Mesa’s Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP). As the City proactively prioritizes safety for all road users, our team brings unparalleled technical knowledge of LRSPs and an ideal blend of local and national safety experience. Our proposed project team couples data-driven and community-oriented methods to successfully reduce fatal and serious injury crashes and deliver comprehensive LRSPs. We offer you the following benefits: Scalable Safety Expertise. Kimley-Horn is committed to implementing safety improvements for transportation systems and roadways from every vantage point. We continue to support local agencies, including the cities of Anaheim, Santa Cruz, and Imperial Beach, as well as multiple Departments of Transportation (DOTs) with the development of tailored and future minded LRSPs and Systematic Safety Analysis Report Programs (SSARPs). At the state level, Kimley-Horn is the lead consultant on California Strategic Highway Safety Plans (SHSP) and Safety Performance Measure Targeting, which largely shapes the guidelines and procedures for LRSPs. Members of our team have also advised the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) with defining best practices for LRSP implementation. We Know LRSPs! Our project team is comprised of technical professionals who have collaborated on safety improvements across the state and nationally. Mychal Loomis, P.E., T.E., RSPI, a certified Traffic Engineer in the State of California and Roadway Safety Professional (RSP),will serve as your project manager and first point-of-contact. Mychal’s safety background includes a wide range of projects from LRSPs to the California SHSP. He will be supported by two certified RSPs, Molly O’Brien, P.E., PTOE, RSP2I (Principal-in-Charge and QC/ QA Manager) and Darryl DePencier, AICP, GISP, RSP1 (Data Analysis). Molly has overseen the successful completion of over 100 LRSPs across the country and is currently working on over 50 LRSPs. Darryl led or supported more than 30 LRSPs and SSARPs throughout California. Mychal, Molly, and Darryl have been working together on LRSPs throughout California in addition to the California SHSP and HSIP Implementation Plan. This comprehensive experience will allow our team to efficiently identify the distinct needs of your Safety Partners, community, and safety plan. Access to a National Team and Resources. We have completed LRSPs, SSARPs, Bicycle and/or Pedestrian Safety Action Plans (BSAPs/ PSAPs), SHSPs, Road Safety Audits (RSAs), Roadway Safety Sign Audits (RSSAs), Safety Management Plans (SMPs), data collection and crash analysis, and design of safety countermeasures throughout the country. Through our previous experience and lessons learned, we have acquired the knowledge to develop effective and cost-effective LRSPs. With the Kimley-Horn team, your project is in capable hands. Our team shares the City’s enthusiasm for enhancing its multimodal safety and Vision Zero objectives. Should you have any questions about our proposal or require any additional information, please contact Mychal at 619.744.0161 or mychal.loomis@kimley-horn.com. We confirm receipt of Addendum 1. Sincerely, KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Mychal Loomis, P.E., T.E., RSPI Molly O’Brien, P.E., PTOE., RSP2IProject Manager Principal-in-Charge/QC/QA Manager/Vice President Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 ii Table of Contents 1. Project Understanding ............................................................................................................1 2. Work Plan ..............................................................................................................................3 3. Schedule .................................................................................................................................7 4. Project Organization and Staffing ............................................................................................8 5. Work History ...........................................................................................................................9 6. Professional Services Agreement (PSA) ..................................................................................10 7. Conflict of Interest Statement .................................................................................................11 8. Litigation ................................................................................................................................11 9. Contract Agreement (additional requirements) .......................................................................11 10. Financial Responsibility ........................................................................................................11 11. Checklist of Forms to Accompany Proposal ..........................................................................12 Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) 1City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 1.PROJECT UNDERSTANDING The City is taking a major step towards enhanced roadway safety through the development of a LRSP. This plan will help the City identify factors contributing most to local traffic crashes and better position the City for safety funding from state and federal grant programs. The goal of this LRSP is to develop countermeasures that can be systemically implemented to reduce the risk of crashes on City streets. Kimley-Horn’s approach builds a countermeasure toolbox by using three separate processes: 1.Identify Citywide emphasis areas, such as impaired driving or active transportation, that represent a large proportion of fatalities and serious injuries 2.Identify site specific case studies that are representative of other locations in the City for a more detailed audit and focused countermeasures 3.Review Citywide policies, programs, resources, and practices that may have an impact on traffic safety and identify opportunities to develop safety best practices This study is an important component to addressing the trauma of injury, loss of life, and detrimental economic impact associated with traffic fatalities and injuries in the City of Costa Mesa. According to UC Berkeley’s Traffic Injury Mapping System (TIMS) and Caltrans’ Vehicle Operation Cost Parameters, the City suffered over $360M in economic losses between 2015 and 2019 due to traffic fatalities and injuries at intersections. The Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) recently ranked Costa Mesa 24th of 59 peer cities for traffic injuries after normalizing for population and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT); this puts the City in the more impacted half of peer cities in the state. Crashes occurring at night, involving alcohol, and involving high speed were prevalent. The LRSP will identify the factors associated with the most vehicle crashes particular to the City and will identify matching countermeasures to reduce or eliminate those crashes. The map to the right shows where traffic injuries were most concentrated in Costa Mesa. Figure 1: Serious Injury Crashes and Ten Most Economically Impactful Intersections Source: TIMS 2015-2019 Source: TIMS 2015-2019 When comparing the last ten years against statewide trends for Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) challenge areas, fatal and serious injury crashes in Costa Mesa exhibit similar factors to the state averages in most areas. Lane departure crashes comprise a lower proportion of fatal and serious injury crashes in the City, while both aging and young drivers comprise a slightly larger proportion of fatal and serious injury crashes. Aggressive driving, motorcycles, impaired driving, and pedestrians were also slightly over-represented. No. Intersection Total Fatal Serious Moderate Minor Cost 1 Harbor Boulevard Gisler Avenue 35 0 5 11 19 $14,052,400 2 Newport Boulevard 17th Street 22 1 2 1 18 $8,168,500 3 Victoria Street Thurin Street 13 0 3 3 7 $7,563,200 4 Newport Boulevard 19th Street 31 1 1 9 20 $7,278,700 5 Fairview Road Baker Street 20 1 1 8 10 $6,327,400 6 Harbor Boulevard Adams Avenue 21 1 1 5 14 $6,224,100 7 Fairview Road Adams Avenue 14 1 1 2 10 $5,473,600 8 Sunflower Avenue Bear Street 13 0 2 3 8 $5,454,100 9 Baker Street Randolph Avenue 7 1 1 2 3 $4,907,300 10 Bristol Street Hotel Way 7 0 2 2 3 $4,907,300 Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) 2City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 California SHSP City of Costa Mesa Challenge Area KSI Crashes % Difference Aggressive Driving 33.2% 123 36.9% 3.7% Aging Drivers 65+ 11.9% 34 10.2% -1.7% Bicycles 8.4% 19 5.7% -2.7% Commercial Vehicles 6.4% 17 5.1% -1.3% Distracted Driving 5.2% 20 6.0% 0.9% Impaired Driving 25.8% 94 28.2% 2.4% Intersections 23.6% 68 20.4% -3.2% Lane Departure 43.7% 88 26.4% -17.3% Motorcycles 20.8% 77 23.1% 2.3% Improper Use of Occupant Protection 14.8% 42 12.6% -2.2% Pedestrians 19.1% 72 21.6% 2.5% Work Zones 1.5% 3 0.9% -0.6% Young Drivers (15 through 20) 13.6% 57 17.1% 3.5% Source: California SHSP and Statewide Integrated Traffic Reporting System (SWITRS) (2010-2019) Note: Percentages add up to more than 100%, as there may have been a fatal or serious injury crash which involved multiple challenge areas such as aggressive driving, lane departure, and motorcycle. Countermeasure Toolbox Kimley-Horn uses custom Geographic Information Systems (GIS) based tools to evaluate the roadway system and intersections using Highway Safety Manual (HSM) statistical methods. This allows for independent evaluation of intersections by control type and roadways by function. Our team then applies additional statistics to rate each location for crash severity, crash type patterns, driver behavior factors, and roadway conditions. Our analysis procedures are outlined in the Countermeasure Toolbox exhibit to the right. Through our partnership with Crossroads Software Inc., our team has access to the highest resolution and most recently available crash data. Our custom in-house software can process the Crossroads crash records to provide a ranked order of intersections and roadway segments by crash activity, consistent with the Local Roadway Safety Manual: A Manual for California’s Local Road Owners (Version 1.5, April 2020). We can also produce a statistical evaluation of crash rates for each location relative to citywide norms and highlight locations with unusually high crash severities or crash patterns to help diagnose safety challenges. Kimley-Horn’s approach to LRSP development centers on the creation of a countermeasure toolbox that addresses both infrastructure and driver behavior. A combination of crash history, roadway characteristics, and stakeholder feedback is used to determine which counter- measures are most likely to have a safety benefit relative to cost for the City of Costa Mesa. The toolbox is then used to produce three products as part of the LRSP: 1.Citywide Systemic Infrastructure Projects; Seniors are overrepresented in City fatalities and serious injuries. A citywide upgrade of sign and signal visibility and the addition of advanced warning signage could help seniors navigate the roads more safely. Larger signal lenses, retroreflective backplates, and intersection ahead signs and labels will all enhance safety for seniors and all drivers. Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) 3City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 2.Local Infrastructure Projects; As an example, the intersection of Baker Street and Randolph Avenue is an non-signalized intersection with a slightly negative offset. There is a driveway approximately 200 feet east of the intersection that has also had crashes. At the intersection itself, three injury crashes involved left turns, and a serious injury crash involved a bicycle attempting to cross. Potential countermeasures for this intersection could include low cost elements, such as intersection ahead warning signs and speed feedback signs. Other measures could include traffic calming restrictions on left turns, Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs), green bicycle lane paint or other similar measures to enhance visibility, sight distance, or reduce conflicts. 3. Non-Infrastructure Projects; A critical part of LRSPs involves working with Safety Partners and City staff to identify best practices that address safety beyond roadway engineering. Our team will review local policies, resources, programs, and practices to determine where there are opportunities to enhance the safety environment through enforcement, education, encouragement, and emergency services. Impaired driving in Costa Mesa contributes to proportionally more injuries than in other peer cities. The LRSP might recommend a highly visible enforcement campaign coupled with targeted messaging to help reduce the amount of and harm caused by impaired driving. Options to expedite the project include removal of the Draft Final LRSP and addition of a concurrent review of the Administrative Draft LRSP by City staff and Safety Partners. This could save a month of time for the project. While review times could be shortened, this is not recommended due to the busy nature of City staff and Safety Partners. 2.WORK PLAN The following scope of work outlines how Kimley-Horn will build from the City’s current plans to provide a comprehensive framework for an on- going safety improvement program. We will structure the LRSP to enhance the City’s competitiveness for grant funding, identify and prioritize safety needs, and encourage safer driving practices of its residents. Task 1 – Project Management Task 1.1 Project Management. This task includes general project administration management of project staff, quality control, project accounting, project schedule, and monthly progress reports. This scope of services is anticipated to be completed over a six-month period. Task 1.2 Kick-Off Meeting. Kimley-Horn will coordinate a project kick-off meeting with City staff to discuss the goals of the project and roles of the Kimley-Horn team, the City, and stakeholders. Administrative items, including communication protocol, progress reporting, scheduling and invoicing, will be discussed as well as other relevant project information such as project milestones and what defines success for this project. Kimley-Horn will develop and distribute a summary of the meeting with key action items. Task 1.3 Progress Meetings. Progress meetings will be held twice a month. Task 1 Deliverables: Monthly progress reports and invoices (6) Project kick-off meeting agenda and notes (1) Task 2 – Identify and Engage Safety Partners Critical Path Method (CPM) schedule Progress meeting agendas and notes (11) Task 2.1 LRSP Safety Partners. Kimley -Horn will work with City staff to identify potential stakeholders (Safety Partners) who can participate in the LRSP process and provide input into priority areas that the LRSP should focus on. Safety Partners will cover a variety of interests and knowledge areas, which will aid the development of a balanced and representative plan that addresses roadway safety from each of the five “Es” of safety (engineering, enforcement, education, encouragement, and emergency services). Task 2.2 LRSP Public Engagement. Kimley -Horn will work with City staff to prepare materials for and attend three (3) public meetings. The public meetings would include an overview of the LRSP process and initial crash data findings; and an interactive element to gain public input. The specific public meetings and interactive elements will be scheduled as part of the initial kick-off meetings and determined in coordination with City staff to coordinate the meetings with key timeframes in the LRSP development. Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) 4City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 Task 2 Deliverables: List of Safety Partners with contact information Safety Partner meeting #1 agenda and notes Safety Partner meeting #2 agenda and notes Preparation and attendance for 3 public meetings Task 3 – Existing Plans, Programs, and Policies Kimley-Horn will review the documents noted in the RFP and produce an inventory of opportunity areas to facilitate improvements in the five Es of safety. Kimley-Horn will identify countermeasures, beginning with those listed in the Caltrans’ Local Roadway Safety Manual, the FHWA’s Proven Safety Countermeasures, and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) Countermeasures That Work, 9th Edition, all of which have proven impacts to address safety issues occurring on the City’s roadways. Measures that support safe and efficient active transportation use will also be considered. Task 3 Deliverable: Inventory of opportunity areas to facilitate improvements (draft/final) Task 4 – Data Collection and Analysis Task 4.1 Data Collection. To mitigate the year-over -year fluctuation caused by natural randomness in crash activity, Kimley-Horn will acquire crash data from the past five years from the City’s crash database and other sources, including SWITRS and TIMS. The Kimley-Horn team includes Crossroads Software, which will be used to update the City’s database with the latest available data in the California Highway Patrol (CHP) archive, including all SWITRS data. In doing so, the project team will have direct access to updated geolocated crash records from CHP’s central database and avoid the need for City staff to pull data. Kimley -Horn’s approach is to look at all crash severity levels. This will provide a richer dataset for review and enable the team to determine factors where crash severity levels are high relative to overall crash numbers. Kimley-Horn will obtain available data (if available in GIS format) on roadway functional classification, speed limits, and Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes. If possible, additional ADTs will be accessed from the Travel Demand Model. Approximate volumes for the remainder of the network will be estimated based on roadway functional classification to help estimate crash rates. Task 4.2 Crash Analysis. Kimley-Horn has developed a statistical network screening tool that uses HSM methods to help identify priority locations for additional review. The HSM screening methods are utilized to identify locations with higher than expected crash activity that can be reviewed to identify roadway and intersection characteristics associated with higher risk. These methods can also be used to review a variety of crash characteristics to identify locations where specific types of crashes are over-represented. This helps to diagnose safety factors that are leading to elevated numbers of crashes. The first screening step is to develop critical crash rates for segments and intersections in the City. Average crash rates are developed for intersections based on control type and for roadway segments based on functional classification. A statistical threshold is then established based on daily traffic volumes for each segment and intersection. The difference between the actual and critical crash rate for each location are then used to estimate the relative risk faced by users of a given intersection or segment. This method builds on the High Crash or High Injury Networks, which essentially mirror High Traffic networks, and provides deeper insight into potential low-cost safety measures. Roadways and intersections with lower classifications will also be identified, allowing the LRSP to broach risk factors associated with those roadways. The second screening step focuses on crash type over-representation. Citywide data is used to determine the typical crash type mix for each of the functional classifications and intersection control types. The mixture is then reviewed for each segment and intersection to highlight those with high concentrations of a specific crash factor. Analyzed factors include: •Fatal Crashes •Fatal + Serious Injury Crashes •Broadside Crashes •Rear-End Crashes •Sideswipe Crashes •Head-On Crashes •Single Vehicle Crashes (run off road, fixed object, parked vehicle, other) •Bicycle Crashes •Pedestrian Crashes •Wet/Slippery Road Crashes •Nighttime Crashes •Crashes Involving Alcohol/Drugs •Crashes Involving Driver Inattention •Crashes Involving Speeding/ Aggressive Driving Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) 5City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 The resulting list includes both the number of crashes for each factor, and the probability that any excess is not random. Kimley-Horn will provide an inventory of all roadway segments and intersections with three or more crashes (needed for statistical evaluation), ranked by overall number of crashes per Local Roadway Safety Manual Guidance. Based on the results of the network screening process, Kimley-Horn will then provide the City with a list of 20 locations for potential review. The City will review the list and provide up to ten locations where further evaluation will be conducted during a field review. Task 4.3 Field Review. A field review will be conducted for the ten locations to better understand site-specific conditions (such as bicycle/ pedestrian/vehicle conflict zones, lighting, safe routes to school, etc.) at priority locations and determine which locations may have the greatest potential for a competitive HSIP grant application. Safety Partners will be invited to attend the field review (depending on the current COVID-19 climate and ability to do so in-person). Field visits are most effective when City staff and key Safety Partners participate, particularly representatives from education and law enforcement who provide valuable feedback and observations. This mobile workshop (field review) culminates with a debrief meeting that recaps what was observed and brainstorms potential countermeasures. After the field review is conducted, Kimley-Horn will work with the City to narrow the list down to five locations for specific countermeasure identification. Task 4.4 Project Sheets. Kimley-Horn will prepare project sheets, identifying potential countermeasures for the top five locations, which the City can use in future HSIP grant applications. The project sheets will profile the existing safety performance of each location, including an aerial photo and map, and outline potential countermeasures identified through the field review, high-level planning costs, and potential crash reduction. The sheets will provide the City with a scalable overview of cost-effective safety options at each location, and in doing so, will accommodate for phased implementation of multiple countermeasures or direct implementation of the most cost-effective solutions. Task 4 Deliverables: Tables summarizing the results of the network screening for all intersections and segments Top 20 list Top 10 list Task 5 – Emphasis Areas Field review Top five locations with project sheets containing potential safety countermeasures (draft/final) To guide crash reduction countermeasure strategies, Kimley-Horn will analyze the collision data to identify specific emphasis areas. The emphasis areas within Costa Mesa will be compared to the California SHSP challenge areas, which was prepared by Kimley-Horn. We anticipate that up to five emphasis areas will be considered. The emphasis areas will be structured to meet the needs of the LRSP, provide optimal support for statewide funding priorities, and incorporate priorities and feedback from Safety Partners and City staff. Each emphasis area will be associated with a set of goals and strategies, which will help with prioritization of plan recommendations. Task 5 Deliverable: Emphasis areas, goals, and strategies Task 6 – Evaluation and Implementation Task 6.1 Evaluation and Implementation. Kimley -Horn will work with the City to identify a process you can follow to implement and evaluate strategies identified in Task 5. Like other LRSPs we have worked on, we will develop a methodology for the City to review, revise, and update the LRSP. Lead agencies will be assigned in coordination with the City for emphasis area implementation. Our team is familiar with this process as we have completed past work on LRSPs and SHSPs at the local and state level throughout the country. Task 6.2 Grant Assistance. Kimley-Horn will assist City staff in determining appropriate grants to align the recommended projects with, including ATP, HSIP, and other possible grants. Proposed grant project descriptions and a summary of the project’s alignment with the grant application criteria will be provided by Kimley-Horn. Task 6 Deliverables: Process to implement the LRSPRecommended project grant assistanceLead agencies for emphasis areas identified under Task 5 Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) 6City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 Task 7 – Development of Final LRSP Task 7.1 Administrative Draft LRSP. The results of prior tasks will be incorporated into an Administrative Draft LRSP for City review. The Administrative Draft will include the objectives and goals of the LRSP, an outline of the process for developing the LRSP (including analysis findings, recommended safety countermeasures and their prioritization, potential funding sources, evaluation criteria), and planned future updates. The Plan will also include near-term strategies, a sample Vision Zero policy, and recommendations for evaluation and implementation of the LRSP. Maps, charts, and photos will be included in the Administrative Draft, where applicable. Note, a sample Vision Zero policy will be provided; however, this does not include approval of the policy by the City or partner agencies nor does it include acceptance of the City into the Vision Zero Network. City staff will review and comment on the Administrative Draft Plan, providing one set of consolidated written comments. Task 7.2 Draft Final LRSP. Based upon the comments on the Administrative Draft LRSP, Kimley-Horn will revise and update the LRSP to compile a Draft Final LRSP. City staff and Safety Partners will review and comment on the Draft Final Plan. City staff will provide one set of consolidated written comments on the Draft Final LRSP. Task 7.3 Final LRSP. Based upon the comments on the Draft Final LRSP, Kimley-Horn will revise and update the LRSP to compile a Final LRSP. Task 7 Deliverables: Administrative Draft LRSP (PDF) Address one round of consolidated written comments from City Comment/resolution matrix for Administrative Draft LRSP Draft Final LRSP (PDF) Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 7 3. SCHEDULE The following project schedule reflects the assumed Notice to Proceed of April 2021 and anticipated completion by October 2021. We will use our internal Management Information System (MIS) to track both effort and performance by recording time spent and percent of project completion. In doing so, we can provide the City with regular updates and make proactive adjustments necessary to maintain schedule and stay within budget. Weeks 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Task 1: Project Management 1.1 Project Management 1.2 Kick-Off Meeting 1.3 Progress Meetings Task 2: Identify and Engage Safety Partners List of Safety Partners Safety Partner Meetings (2) Task 3: Existing Plans, Programs and Policies Inventory of Opportunity Areas to Facilitate Improvements (Draft) City Review Inventory of Opportunity Areas to Facilitate Improvements (Final) Task 4: Data Collection and Analysis 4.1 Data Collection 4.2 Crash Analysis Identify Top 20 Locations City Review and Narrow to 10 Locations 4.3 Field Review 10 Locations Narrow to 5 Locations City Review and Confirmation of 5 Locations 4.4 Project Sheets Draft Project Sheets (5) City Review (Concurrent with Draft LRSP Review) Final Project Sheets (5) Task 5: Emphasis Areas Emphasis Areas (5) Goals and Strategies City Review Task 6: Evaluation and Implementation Develop Process to Implement and Evaluate Methodology to Update the LRSP Lead Agency for Emphasis Areas Task 7: Development of Final LRSP 7.1 Administrative Draft LRSP Internal QA/QC Address Comments City Review 7.2 Draft Final LRSP Comment Resolution Matrix Address Comments City/Safety Partner Review 7.3 Final LRSP Comment Resolution Matrix Address Comments Consultant City/Safety Partner Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 8 4. PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING The key staff of our proposed team have regional and national experience completing safety projects, including LRSPs, SSARPs, SHSPs, bicycle and pedestrian safety projects, and grant writing services. This project will be performed primarily out of our Orange, San Diego, and Los Angeles offices by a team that can provide the requested traffic safety services in-house. Our team includes five Roadway Safety Professionals (RSP), a new roadway safety certification that was sponsored by Kimley-Horn. The following organization chart details our team roles: Our proposed project manager, Mychal Loomis, P.E., T.E., RSP1, brings an extensive background in LRSPs and other safety-related projects and will serve as the City’s main contact. As an RSP and CA-registered Traffic Engineer, Mychal will drive the safety planning process and LRSP development. Designated key staff will not change throughout project duration. As a Vice President of the firm, Molly O’Brien, P.E., T.E., RSP2I is authorized to negotiate the contract on behalf of Kimley-Horn. We are committed to providing the City with the responsiveness of a small organization backed by the depth of resources that only a national firm with more RSPs than any other firm can provide. Our staff availability and experience are summarized below: Staff and Availability Previous Experience Mychal Loomis (50%) Molly O’Brien (40%) Darryl DePencier (55%) David Giacomin (55%) Karen Sprattler (25%) Heba Umholt (65%) Devin Ciriaco (70%) Imperial Beach LRSP X X X Santa Cruz LRSP X X X San Joaquin County SSARP X X Lancaster SSARP X X CA SHSP Implementation Plan X X X X X X X CA HSIP Implementation Plan X X X X Roseville LRSP X X X X X X Citrus Heights, LRSP X X X X X Rocklin LRSP X X X X Resumes for our key staff are detailed below. Task 2: Stakeholder Engagement Mychal Loomis, P.E., T.E., RSP1 Darryl DePencier, AICP, GISP, RSP1 Task 3: Existing Plans, Programs, and Policies Darryl DePencier, AICP, GISP, RSP1 Heba Omholt Task 4-6: Data Collection and Analysis (Emphasis Areas, Evaluation, and Implementation) Darryl DePencier, AICP, GISP, RSP1 David Giacomin, P.E., PTOE, RSP1 Karen Sprattler, RSP1 Heba Omholt Devin Ciriaco Jeff Cullen (Crossroads) Task 7: LRSP Development David Giacomin, P.E., PTOE, RSP1 Devin Ciriaco Heba Omholt City of Costa Mesa Jennifer Rosales, P.E., PTOE Project Manager Mychal Loomis, P.E., T.E., RSP1 Principal-in-Charge; QC/QA Manager Molly O’Brien, P.E., PTOE, RSP2I Bold = Focus Area Lead Kimley-Horn maintains of the nation’s certified 2626 Road Safety Professionals (RSPs) 7% of RSP1 in North America (26 out of 379) 15% of RSP2I in North America (6 of 38) 20% of RSP2B in North America (1 out of 5) 1111 RSP 1515 RSP “Kimley-Horn has 50 percent more certified RSPs than the next firm nationwide” Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 IR- Mychal has 14 years of traffic engineering experience and, in his time with Kimley-Horn, has worked on a diverse range of local, regional, and statewide community planning and traffic safety projects. He has spent the past two years helping manage California’s Strategic Highway Safety Plan, performing stakeholder outreach, crash data analyses, and document preparation. His experience also includes development of LRSPs, SSARPs, RSAs, active transportation network evaluations and recommendations, and community-wide mobility studies. Mychal provides responsiveness and holistic viewpoints on mobility, with an emphasis on safety and low-cost solutions that are supported by the community. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE •LRSP, Imperial Beach, CA – Project Manager. As part of this LRSP, Kimley-Horn is conducting a citywide traffic collisions analysis that provides the City of Imperial Beach a detailed understanding of high-risk locations for collisions and identifies countermeasures that will inform safety improvements to the road network. As project manager, Mychal has led the development of focus areas and countermeasures, facilitating stakeholder working group meetings, and overseeing all aspects of the LRSP. The project is in the final stages of completion, with both general and specific solutions developed. The City of Imperial Beach has already been selected for a grant based on outcomes of the LRSP. •SSARP, San Joaquin County, CA – Project Manager. Kimley-Horn prepared an SSARP, including a citywide traffic collision analysis and identification of roadway safety issues, for the San Joaquin County. As Project Manager, Mychal facilitated stakeholder working group meetings and coordinated inter-agency communication on safety improvements. He also identified focus areas and countermeasures while overseeing the general SSARP development. •SSARP, Lancaster, CA – Project Engineer. Kimley-Horn provided program/project management and project oversight throughout the life of five local interchange improvement projects, which were funded with Measure R funding through LA Metro. Our team functioned as an extension of the City of Lancaster and worked closely with Caltrans District 7 and LA Metro to managing the program. As part of this project, Mychal developed a warrant for residential stop sign installation and crosswalk installation. •California SHSP Implementation Plan, Statewide, CA – Deputy Project Manager and Challenge Area Liaison. Kimley-Horn is leading California’s 2020 to 2024 SHSP Implementation Plan, a multi-agency collaborative effort to outline a safe and sustainable transportation system for motorized and nonmotorized users on public roads in the state. Throughout this project, Mychal is leading steering committee and executive leadership meetings and facilitating four challenge area teams. As part of outreach, he has organized several regional outreach events across the state and is responsible for responding to stakeholder inquiries and developing website and communication materials. For example, Mychal was heavily involved in development content for the 2020-2024 SHSP Report. •Olympic Parkway Roadway Safety Assessment, Chula Vista, CA – Project Manager. As part of this RSA, Mychal performed an in- field roadway safety assessment, developed and prioritized countermeasures, and documented the finding and recommendations. Professional Credentials •B.S., Civil Engineering, Oregon State University •Professional Engineer in CA #76101 •Traffic Engineer in CA #2918 •Professional Traffic Operations Engineer #4347 •Road Safety Professional 1 #286 Mychal Loomis, P.E., T.E., PTOE, RSP1 Project Manager; Stakeholder Engagement Lead Other Safety Projects California HSIP Implementation Plan, Statewide, CA - Deputy Project Manager California Strategic Performance Measures Target Setting, Statewide, CA - Project Engineer Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 IIR- Professional Credentials •M.S., Civil Engineering, Iowa State University, Ames •B.S., Civil Engineering, Iowa State University, Ames •Professional Engineer in NV #017702 •Professional Traffic Operations Engineer #2534 •Road Safety Professional 1 #28 •Road Safety Professional 2 Infrastructure #8 Molly has over 17 years of safety, traffic, and transportation planning and design experience, which includes providing transportation safety consulting services to public agencies throughout the country. Her experience includes LRSPs, SSARPs, RSAs, pedestrian/bicycle studies, and complete streets studies. Additionally, she has completed formal training on RSAs and the HSM IHSDM. She is experienced in conducting stakeholder workshops and prioritizing improvements to help maximize resources. Molly will draw on her extensive experience coordinating LRSP projects with collaborators and clients dispersed throughout the country to help oversee the successful completion of your project on schedule and within budget. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE •LRSP, Roseville, CA – Project Manager. Molly is overseeing all aspects of the City of Roseville’s LRSP development and recently completed a technical memorandum summarizing the collision data analysis. She recently presented the results of her team’s data-driven analysis tool, which categorizes collisions by intersection and roadway type. Using this tool helps prioritize locations for field reviews and development of project sheets for specific priority locations to assist with HSIP applications. Molly is also leading the stakeholder coordination groups to obtain feedback from the four E’s of safety. •LRSP, Citrus Heights, CA – Deputy Project Manager. Molly is assisting with and coordinating the documentation of existing collision data analysis and providing QC/QA for project deliverables. Additionally, she is coordinating with the City of Citrus Heights and project team to prioritize priority locations for field reviews and project sheet development based on the results of the team’s data-driven analysis tool, which categorizes collisions by intersection and roadway type. •FHWA, LRSP Implementation, Nationwide, US – Project Manager. Molly conducted interviews with jurisdictions who have completed LRSPs to determine best practices for implementation of LRSPs. Molly helped develop the recommendations and steps for implementation of LRSPs that will serve as the best practices guide for the FHWA for LRSP implementation throughout the country. •California HSIP Implementation Plan, Statewide, CA – Project Manager. Molly oversaw the development of the first-ever California HSIP Implementation Plan. Molly conducted an extensive review of the HSIP funding to provide recommendations to improve the effectiveness of the HSIP by continuing to improve on alignment with the SHSP Challenge Areas and to implement projects that reduce the number of traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. •LRSP, Rocklin, CA – Deputy Project Manager. Molly will be assisting with and coordinating the documentation of existing collision data analysis and providing QC/QA for project deliverables. Additionally, she is coordinating with the City of Rocklin and project team to prioritize priority locations for field reviews and project sheet development based on the results of the team’s data-driven analysis tool, which categorizes collisions by intersection and roadway type. •Iowa DOT, LRSPs, Statewide, IA – Project Manager. Molly has overseen all project aspects, including project management, document review, data collection, crash and roadway data analysis, countermeasure selection, and LRSP development. The project has been divided into four phases to complete LRSPs for 59 counties and seven cities in Iowa. It required extensive GIS database development, mapping of existing infrastructure, and geospatial analysis on over 10,400 miles of paved roads, more than 17,100 intersections, and over 6,000 curves. To date, Molly has led over 75 workshops as part of the project. Molly O’Brien, P.E., PTOE, RSP2I Principal-in-Charge; QC/QA Manager Other Safety Projects California SHSP Implementation Plan, Statewide, CA – Project Engineer KDOT, LRSPs (64 LRSPs), Statewide, KS – Project Manager ALDOT, LRSPs (10 LRSPs), Statewide, AL – Principal-in-Charge and QC/QA Manager SSAR, Mono County, CA – Principal-in-Charge and QC/QA Manager NDOT, RSA Program, Statewide, NV – Facilitator FHWA, Safety Peer to Peer Exchanges, US – Project Manager Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 IIIR- Professional Credentials •M.S., Urban Spatial Analytics, University of Pennsylvania •B.S., Geography, Carleton University, Ottawa •Certificate, Geographic Information Systems, Algonquin College, Ottawa •American Institute of Certified Planners #026552 •Geographic Information Systems Professional #59317 •Road Safety Professional 1 #273 Darryl has been conducting transportation safety for more than 15 years. He has developed tools to root out the spatial relationships between crash events to determine the factors and conditions that increase the probability of vehicle crashes. His experience ranges from establishing safety policy language to network screening, crash site engineering reviews and developing countermeasure toolboxes. Darryl also conducts statistical analyses of crash activity using methods presented in the Highway Safety Manual, the Local Roadway Safety Manual, and customized analyses for unusual locations or conditions. He has worked on studies at the statewide, regional, local, and site-specific levels that include guidance documents, LRSPs, safety thresholds and audits, and local countermeasure recommendations. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE •LRSP, Artesia, CA – Project Manager. Darryl is working with the City of Artesia to use local crash histories to identify locations with higher crash rates, higher crash costs, and crash patterns. By determining citywide trends and patterns, the team will identify the physical roadway characteristics and driver attributes that contribute to the largest number and highest severity crashes, and accordingly, develop a customized countermeasure toolbox. •LRSP, Santa Cruz, CA – Project Manager. Darryl is working with the City of Santa Cruz to develop an LRSP that uses local crash histories to identify citywide trends and patterns. The resulting countermeasure toolbox will emphasize bicycle and pedestrian safety as the City has a high active transportation mode share. •SSARP, Ventura, CA – Project Planner. Darryl developed a GIS tool to implement a more complex statistical review of crash activity. The tool helped to identify several locations within the City of Ventura that exhibited unexpected crash activity relative to other local, similar locations. Darryl used this information to assist with the development of projects that can be implemented to improve traffic safety. •SSARP, Santa Clarita, CA – Project Planner. Darryl oversaw the analytical component of the SSARP, identifying conditions citywide that negatively impacted bicycle and pedestrian safety. He helped the City of Santa Clarita review its policies and programs against best practices for active transportation safety and identified several projects that were eligible and competitive for HSIP funding. •SSARP, Lancaster, CA – Project Manager. Darryl led the analytical tasks for the City of Lancaster’s SSARP. Using custom GIS based tools, he and the team identified crash hot spots, high risk locations, and facilities with unusual crash patterns that could be prioritized for mitigation. Darryl dePencier, AICP, GISP, RSP1 Existing Plans, Programs, and Policies Lead; Data Collection and Analysis Lead Other Safety Projects California SHSP Implementation Plan, Statewide, CA – Project Planner SSARP, Sunnyvale, CA – Project Manager LRSP, Citrus Heights, CA – Project Planner LRSP, Roseville, CA – Project Planner LRSP, Rocklin, CA – Project Planner Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 IVR- Professional Credentials •M.S., Civil Engineering, University of Minnesota •B.S., Civil Engineering, University of Minnesota •Professional Engineer in Nevada #24367 •Professional Traffic Operations Engineer #4609 •Road Safety Professional 1 #270 David is a transportation engineer whose focus on transportation safety has resulted in LRSPs, RSAs, traffic safety analyses, and SHSP project experience across the country. He employs geospatial and statistical analysis to conduct crash and risk factor analyses, drawing upon his knowledge of advanced GIS analysis and mapping, data inventory, and collision data analysis. David has spatially analyzed more than 16,300 miles of roadways, 23,100 intersections, and 3,300 curves for systemic safety improvements as part of LRSPs throughout the country. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE •SSARP, Mono County, CA – Project Manager. Our team identified safety concerns and selected countermeasures to improve safety on Mono County roads while maximizing the limited resources available. David used existing data sources, such as SWITRS and TIMS, to perform a collision and roadway data analysis. Using this analysis in tandem with a geospatial analysis of County roadways, he identified systemic trends in crash history and developed charts and tables to succinctly detail the crash data. •LRSP, Citrus Heights, CA – Project Engineer. Kimley-Horn is currently assisting the City of Citrus Heights develop an LRSP to help identify and prioritize the effective methods of improving traffic safety for all users. The LRSP will address safety through roadway improvements, measures to modify driver behavior, and improved education, enforcement, and emergency response best practices. The LRSP will result in a set of data driven recommendations, coupled with input from key stakeholders representing the Safety E’s – engineering, enforcement, education, and emergency services. •LRSP, Roseville, CA – Project Engineer. Kimley-Horn is currently assisting the City of Roseville on their LRSP. The City experiences a considerable multimodal mix of trips across its transportation network, and David is leading a data-driven analysis to further categorize collisions by intersection and roadway size and type while working directly with local law enforcement to identify critical issues occurring on Roseville’s roadways. Our scope of services includes the preparation of a public outreach plan, as well as the completion of a focused countermeasure evaluation and project sheet development for five specific priority locations to assist with HSIP applications. •California SHSP Implementation Plan, Statewide, CA – Project Engineer. Kimley-Horn is leading California’s 2020 to 2024 SHSP Implementation Plan, a multi-agency collaborative effort to ensure a safe and sustainable transportation system for all motorized and nonmotorized users on all state public roads. David has been involved in this project for approximately two years, conducting several statistical crash analyses and facilitating meetings for both the Pedestrian and Bicycle Challenge Areas. He oversees providing data request deliverables for the 16 challenge areas within the SHSP for California. David is also in charge of preparing data-driven deliverables, such as technical memorandums that provide statistical analysis of fatal and serious injury crashes throughout the state. David Giacomin, P.E., PTOE, RSP1 LRSP Development Lead Other Safety Projects California HSIP Implementation Plan, Statewide, CA – Project Engineer KDOT LRSPs (64 LRSPs), Statewide, KS – Project Manager ALDOT LRSPs (10 LRSPs), Statewide, AL – Principal in Charge and QC/QA Manager NDOT LRSPs (4 LRSPs), Statewide, NE – Project Engineer NDOT RSA Program, Statewide, NV – Facilitator NDOT Wrong Way Driving Study, Statewide, NV - Project Engineer Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 VR- Professional Credentials •M.A., Criminal Justice and Corrections, University of Iowa •B.S., Sociology and Criminal Justice System Studies, North Dakota State University •Road Safety Professional 1 #342 Karen is a nationally recognized behavioral highway safety expert with more than 25 years of experience. Focusing on driver behavior and traffic safety, she has evaluated, developed, and advocated for traffic safety policies, programs, and countermeasures with both government and private sector clients. On this project, Karen will lend her subject matter expertise in the areas of impaired driving, distracted driving, occupant protection, high visibility enforcement, traffic safety technology, teen drivers, driver education, speed, drowsy driving, and other aspects of driver behavior. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE •California SHSP Implementation Plan, Statewide, CA – Project Planner. Karen serves as the team’s behavioral safety expert, providing subject matter expertise, development, and implementation support to California’s federally required SHSP effort in the areas of Drug and Alcohol-Related Driving, Occupant Protection, Speed and Aggressive Driving, Young Drivers, and Distracted Driving. This project began in July 2018 and will run through 2023. •Nevada SHSP Update, Statewide, NV – Project Planner. Kimley-Horn completed Nevada’s 2016 to 2020 SHSP Update on time and under budget. Karen provided subject matter expertise in the areas of Drug and Alcohol-Related Driving, Occupant Protection, Speed and Aggressive Driving, Young Drivers, and Distracted Driving. Our team is continuing to lead implementation support under a new 2018-2020 contract. •Arizona SHSP Update, Statewide, AZ – Project Planner. Karen supported Arizona’s federally required SHSP effort by offering subject matter expertise in the areas of Drug and Alcohol-Related Driving, Occupant Protection, Speed and Aggressive Driving, Young Drivers, and Distracted Driving. Karen provided guidance to Arizona’s traffic safety partners addressing emphasis areas and contributed to the development of a framework for reducing fatalities and serious injuries on Arizona’s roadways. Karen Sprattler, RSP1 Data Collection and Analysis Other Safety Projects and Experience AAA National and the Governors Highway Safety Association, Drug Impaired Driving Policy Forum: Prescription and Over-the-Counter Drugs, Washington, D.C. – Facilitator Governors Highway Safety Association/State Farm® Autonomous Vehicle Safety Expert Panel: Engaging Drivers and Law Enforcement, Washington, D.C. – Facilitator Road to Zero Project, Hennepin County, Minneapolis, MN – Behavioral Safety Expert SSDOT SHSP, Statewide, SD – Behavioral Safety Expert CTDOT SHSP, Statewide, CT – Behavioral Safety Expert Florida SHSP, Statewide, FL – Consultant Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 VIR- Professional Credentials •M.S., Transportation Engineering, New York University •B.S., Environmental Policy, University of California, DavisHeba is an analyst who supports transportation safety projects with data analysis. Using her knowledge of Structured Query Language (SQL), Microsoft PowerBI, and GIS, she has been able to quantitatively and spatially identify safety trends that guide improvements for reducing fatalities and serious injuries on roadways. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE •LRSP, Imperial Beach, CA – Analyst •LRSP, Santa Cruz, CA – Analyst •LRSP, Ventura County, CA – Analyst •LRSP, Roseville, CA – Analyst •LRSP, Citrus Heights, CA – Analyst •LRSP, Rocklin, CA – Analyst Heba has played a key role in the development of LRSPs for the cities and counties identified above. For all listed LRSPS, Heba conducted a literature review of existing plans to identify non-infrastructure safety improvement opportunities in the form of projects, policies, and programs. She also conducted in-depth, geospatial analysis of the City’s collision history that is compliant with the Highway Safety Manual (HSM) methodology. Finally, Heba prepared technical memorandums and reports that document all findings and recommendations. Heba Omholt Existing Plans, Programs, and Policies; Data Collection and Analysis; LRSP Development Other Safety Projects SSARP, San Joaquin County, CA – Analyst Heba conducted a literature review of existing plans to identify non-infrastructure safety improvement opportunities in the form of projects, policies, and programs. She also conducted in- depth, geospatial analysis of the City’s collision history that is compliant with the HSM methodology. Finally, Heba prepared technical memorandums and reports that document all findings and recommendations. California SHSP Implementation Plan, Statewide, CA – Analyst Heba has analyzed state incident report data using SQL to identify trends and provide data-driven guidance to help eliminate fatal and serious injury collisions. She presented data findings in visually appealing and navigable formats – such as creating dashboards in Tableau – to provide private and public agencies with digestible crash data findings. Heba also prepared biweekly presentations to update the executive leadership and steering committee on project status and facilitated discussions for next steps. Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 VIIR- Professional Credentials • Master of City and Regional Planning, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo • B.S., Environmental Science, University of California, Davis Devin serves as one of the lead analysts on studies for SSARs and LRSPs. He brings extensive experience with traffic impact analyses, transportation planning in both the public and private sectors, multimodal corridor feasibility studies, data analytics/visualization, and safety grant applications. Devin is proficient in GIS, database management, SQL, Windows Access, Synchro, HCS, SIDRA, and the Adobe Creative Suite. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE • LRSP, Ventura County, CA – Analyst • LRSP, Simi Valley, CA – Analyst • LRSP, Santa Cruz, CA – Analyst • LRSP, Anaheim, CA – Analyst • LRSP, Artesia, CA – Analyst • LRSP, Roseville, CA – Analyst • LRSP, Citrus Heights, CA – Analyst • LRSP, Rocklin, CA – Analyst Devin has played a key role in the development of LRSPs for the cities and counties identified above. For all listed LRSPs, Devin identified non-infrastructure safety improvement opportunities in the form of projects, policies, and programs. He created collision diagrams for high- collision locations identified in the statistical network screening analysis process and conducted in-depth, geospatial analysis of jurisdiction’s collision history that is compliant with the HSM methodology. Devin also assisted with field assessments at high-collision locations, developed project sheets, prepared and presented at technical workshops for key stakeholders, and prepared technical memorandums and reports that document all findings and recommendations. Devin Ciriaco Data Collection and Analysis; LRSP Development Other Safety Projects California SHSP Implementation Plan, Statewide, CA – Analyst. Kimley-Horn is leading California’s 2020 to 2024 SHSP Implementation Plan, a multi-agency collaborative effort to outline a safe and sustainable transportation system for motorized and nonmotorized users on public roads in the state. As part of this project, Devin analyzed state incident report data using SQL to identify trends and provide data-driven guidance to help eliminate fatal and serious injury collisions. Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 9 5. WORK HISTORY Kimley-Horn has and is working with local and state agencies to advance their safety projects and visions across California (demonstrated by the map to the right). Detailed descriptions of a few of our relevant recent experience, including client references, are provided below. ?Local Road Safety Plan, Imperial Beach, CA The overarching project goal is to provide the City of Imperial Beach with a detailed understanding of high- risk locations for collisions and identify countermeasures that will inform planning for immediate, mid-range, and long-term safety improvements. As part of this LRSP, Kimley-Horn is conducting a citywide traffic collisions analysis that identifies safety issues throughout the City of Imperial Beach’s road network. Based on the finding that Imperial Beach has more vulnerable user crashes (pedestrian, bicycle, motorcycle), we identified infrastructure and non-infrastructure countermeasure recommendations to reduce the likelihood of future crashes. This project also includes public outreach and involvement to gather feedback from residents, and the resulting document will provide guidance on selecting projects that will be detailed for future grant cycles. Dates:Contract Amount: Agency:Agency Contact: March 2020 – Ongoing $82K City of Imperial Beach Eric Minicilli, Public Works Director • 619.628.1369 • eminicilli@ imperialbeachca.gov ?Local Roadway Safety Plan, Santa Cruz, CA Kimley-Horn developed an LRSP that included an evaluation of best safety practices and common safety challenges in the City of Santa Cruz. The final plan included a customized toolbox of countermeasures that addressed the most common local challenges that align with statewide funding priorities. Dates:Contract Amount: Agency:Agency Contact: March 2020 – Ongoing $72K City of Santa Cruz Claire Gallogly, Transportation Planner • 831.420.5107 • cgallogly@ cityofsantacruz.com ?Systematic Safety Analysis Report Program, San Joaquin County, CA Kimley-Horn prepared a SSARP for San Joaquin County, including a citywide traffic collision analysis identifying safety issues throughout its road network. This project involved partnership with Crossroads and detailed crash data analysis to identify the number of collision risk factors and rates, collision types and severity, crash rates and various environmental variables. The SSARP included the development of county emphasis areas, a review of current traffic safety efforts being performed by the county, and recommended strategies for improving traffic safety for specific locations, systemic applications, and non-infrastructure considerations. Dates:Contract Amount: Agency:Agency Contact: May 2020 – November 2020 $20K County of San Joaquin Najee Zarif, Engineering Services Manager • 209.468.3053 • nzarif@sjgov.org “I’ve loved working with Kimley Horn on this project. Darryl DePencier is our project manager, and has done a great job keeping the project moving on time and on budget. The rest of the team has also been great to work with. Their work is high quality, communication clear, and product is immediately usable. They went the extra mile in assisting us with two HSIP applications this cycle based on their draft report, and we would have been unable to take on the extra work of those without their help. I’d highly recommend their team.” -Claire Gallogly, Transportation Planner at the City of Santa Cruz CITY LRSPS, SSARPS, AND RSSAS 11 Sunnyvale SSARP 12 Goleta SSARP 13 Ventura SSARP 14 Santa Clarita SSARP 15 Lancaster SSARP 16 Artesia LRSP 17 Anaheim LRSP 18 Eastvale SSARP 19 La Quinta SSARP 20 Perris LRSP 21 Imperial Beach LRSP 22 Moreno Valley RSA / RSSA 23 Santa Cruz LRSP 24 Palm Desert LRSP 25 Citrus Heights LRSP in other states OVER135 LRSPs 26 Roseville LRSP 27 Rocklin LRSP 28 South San Francisco LRSP 29 Rancho Cordova LRSP COUNTY LRSPS, SSARPS, AND RSSAS 1 Nevada County RSSA 2 Placer County RSSA 3 Marin County RSSA 4 San Joaquin County SSARP 5 Calaveras County RSSA 6 Stanislaus County RSSA 7 Mono County SSARP 8 Monterey County RSSA 9 Ventura County LRSP 10 Imperial County RSSA ¨§¦80 ¨§¦40 ¨§¦15 ¨§¦10 ¨§¦8 ¨§¦5 ¨§¦580 ¨§¦80 ¨§¦280 101 101 99 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1617 18 22 20 19 21 23 24 252627 28 29 STATEWIDE SAFETY PROJECTS »California Strategic Highway Safety Plan »California Strategic Performance Measures Targets »California Highway Safety Improvement Program Implementation Plan Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 10 ?Systematic Safety Analysis Report Program, Goleta, CA Kimley-Horn prepared a SSARP focused on selected major corridors within the City of Goleta. The study was informed by a citywide safety performance to determine crash patterns that stood out and cost-effective countermeasures. The selected crash locations were used to develop template projects that became part of a toolbox for the City’s use to simplify the process of identifying higher risk locations and appropriate treatments. Dates:Contract Amount: Agency:Agency Contact: December 2018 – February 2021 $240K City of Goleta James Winslow, Senior Project Manager • 805.961.7577 • jwinslow@cityofgoleta.org ?California Strategic Highway Safety Plan Implementation Plan, Statewide, CA Kimley-Horn is leading California’s multi-agency collaborative effort, 2020 to 2024 SHSP Implementation Plan. The SHSP outlines a safe and sustainable transportation system for motorized and nonmotorized users on all public roads in the state. Kimley-Horn is assisting with SHSP development, action plans, and compliance with federal requirements. The final SHSP will provide guidance on areas of emphasis, make recommendations for improvement, and note responsible agencies and individuals for each action. Kimley-Horn will support Caltrans with overseeing implementation for the next several years. This project has required extensive coordination with several working groups, including a steering and executive committee. Kimley-Horn has successfully worked with Caltrans staff to keep the project on schedule and on budget, while remaining versatile enough to respond to feedback that occasionally shifts project priorities and objectives. Dates:Contract Amount: Agency:Agency Contact: July 2018 – Ongoing $7.9M Caltrans Rachel Carpenter, Chief Safety Officer • 916.651.1248 • rachel.carpenter@dot.ca.gov ?California Highway Safety Improvements Program Implementation Plan, Statewide, CA Kimley-Horn developed California’s first HSIP Implementation Plan in the summer of 2020. The HSIP Implementation Plan included a review of historical spending of HSIP funds that are provided to the state as they relate to location and project type, size, and selection process. The plan includes recommendations on how to modify future use of HSIP funding to address data-driven needs identified in California. Recommendations included changes to the HSIP grant application, Caltrans monitoring programs, and more opportunities for stakeholder input. The plan was developed in close coordination with Caltrans staff, including input from the Chief Safety Officer and Director. Dates:Contract Amount: Agency: Agency Contact: June 2020 – October 2020 Prepared with SHSP Funds Identified Above Caltrans Dean Samuelson, P.E., T.E., Chief, Office of Traffic Safety Programs • 916.653.3661 • dean.samuelson@dot.ca.gov ?Vision Zero Crash Study and Action Plan, Minneapolis, MN Utilizing 10 years of data to identify trends, contributing factors, and characteristics of more than 40,000 crashes, Kimley-Horn completed a comprehensive analysis of pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle crashes for the City of Minneapolis. The study considered trends over time, identified high crash and crash severity corridors, and drew connections between crashes and street geometry, land use, demographics, transit, and signal characteristics. The City is currently using the results of the studies to guide and prioritize locations for improvements in its Vision Zero Action Plan and its capital improvement program (CIP). Dates:Contract Amount: Agency:Agency Contact: May 2018 – February 2020 $70K City of Minneapolis Ethan Fawley, Vision Zero Program Coordinator, 612.673.5983 • ethan.fawley@minneapolismn.gov 6. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (PSA) Kimley-Horn has reviewed the sample Professional Services Agreement and would like to discuss the following modifications with the City that are congruent with previously negotiated terms. 1.2. Professional Practices. All professional services to be provided by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement shall be provided by per- sonnel experienced in their respective fields and in a manner consistent with the standards of care, diligence and skill ordinarily exercised by professional consultants in similar fields and circumstances in accordance with sound professional practices. Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 11 Consultant also warrants that it is familiar with all laws that may affect its performance of this Agreement and shall advise City of any changes in any laws that may affect Consultant’s performance of this Agreement. 1.4. Warranty. Consultant warrants that it shall exercise the professional standard of care to perform the services required by this Agree- ment in compliance with all applicable Federal and California employment laws, including, but not limited to, those laws related to minimum hours and wages; occupational health and safety; fair employment and employment practices; workers’ compensation insurance and safety in employment; and all other Federal, State and local laws and ordinances applicable to the services required under this Agreement. Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless City from and against all claims, demands, payments, suits, actions, proceedings, and judgments of every nature and description including attorneys’ fees and costs, presented, brought, or recovered against City for, or on account of any liability under any of the above-mentioned laws, which may be incurred by reason of Consultant’s negligent performance under this Agreement. 5.1. Minimum Scope and Limits of Insurance. (d) Professional errors and omissions (“E&O”) liability insurance with policy limits of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00), combined single limits, per occurrence and aggregate. Architects’ and engineers’ coverage shall be endorsed to include contractual liability. If the policy[…]. 6.9. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, hold free and harmless the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees, at Consultant’s sole expense, from and against any and all claims, actions, suits or other legal proceedings brought against the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees to the extent arising out of the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct […] 7. CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT To the best of our knowledge, Kimley-Horn does not have any financial, business, or other relationship with the City of Costa Mesa that may have an impact upon the outcome of the project. Likewise, we do not believe that any of our current clients have a financial interest in the outcome of this contract or projects that may follow. 8. LITIGATION Kimley-Horn and its subsidiaries have provided services in all 50 states and numerous countries. Because of the many and varied projects we have completed, we are subject to various legal proceedings from time to time and in the ordinary course of business. It is not practical to provide a complete list as part of this proposal. None of the pending matters, if decided against Kimley-Horn, would have a material impact on our financial statements or impair in any way our ability to serve our clients. Generally, these matters are covered by insurance, and we consider them to be without merit. If you would like to discuss our legal matters in more detail, please contact Kimley-Horn’s General Counsel, Richard Cook, at 919.677.2058. Civil litigation cases in California in the last five years are as follows: •29Twenty Maintenance Association v. Van Daele Development Corp., et al; Los Angeles County, Superior Court of the State of California; Case No. 19STCV13496; filed 2019; alleged economic loss; settled 2020 •Farhad Abad, individually and for the Estate of Mahin Ashki-Abad; Keemia Abad; and Arianna Abad v. U.S. Foods, Inc., et.al.; Alameda County Superior Court; Case No. RG17856272; filed 2017; traffic accident, wrongful death claim; settled; closed 2019. •Air Wing, LLC v. One Piper Ranch, LLC v. Cross-Complainants: San Diego County Superior Court; Case No. 37-2014-00009315; filed 2016; alleged economic loss; Kimley-Horn dismissed; closed 2017. •Rickey Fraley, Eileen Fraley v Live Nation Worldwide, Inc., et al: San Bernardino County Superior Court; Case No. CIVDS 1707090; filed 2017; wrongful death claim; Kimley-Horn dismissed; closed 2017. •Nancy Graham v. City of Santa Cruz, et al: Santa Cruz County Superior Court; Case No. 16CV02729; filed 2017; bicycle accident, personal injuries; settled; closed 2018. •David S. Lindley, individually and as successor in interest to David W. Lindley, Maureen K. Sennhauser, individually and as successor in the interest to David W. Lindley and The Estate of David W. Lindley v. City of Los Angeles, et al: Los Angeles County Superior Court, Central District; Case No. BC576886; filed 2015; wrongful death claim; settled; closed 2016. •Brenda Sherriffs v. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., et al: Santa Cruz County Superior Court; Case No. 16CV00335; filed 2016; bicycle accident, personal injuries; settled; closed 2019. 9. CONTRACT AGREEMENT (ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS) Kimley-Horn recognizes that the proposal terms will be in effect for 90 days following the date of submittal. 10. FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY Kimley-Horn is privately owned, financially strong, and positioned for continued financial health. In addition to sustaining healthy annual revenues and equity, Kimley-Horn maintains a robust cash flow and has an untapped eight-figure operating line of credit available for short- term cash flow needs. We operate the firm conservatively and have the financial ability to successfully perform the services for your project. Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 11. CHECKLIST OF FORMS TO ACCOMPANY PROPOSAL Vendor Application Form Company Profile & References Ex Parte Communications Certificate Disclosure of Government Positions Disqualifications Questionnaire Bidder/Applicant/Contractor Campaign Contribution 12 Page 27 of 36 VENDOR APPLICATION FORM FOR RFP No. ______ for ______ TYPE OF APPLICANT: F NEW F CURRENT VENDOR Legal Contractual Name of Corporation: ______________________________________ Contact Person for Agreement: ____________________________________________________ Corporate Mailing Address: ________________________________________________ City, State and Zip Code: __________________________________________________ E-Mail Address: _________________________ Phone: ________________________ Fax: ________________________ Contact Person for Proposals: ______________________________________________________ Title: ______________________________ E-Mail Address: ______________________ Business Telephone: _________________________ Business Fax: ________________ Is your business: (check one) F NON PROFIT CORPORATION F FOR PROFIT CORPORATION Is your business: (check one) F CORPORATION F LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP F INDIVIDUAL F SOLE PROPRIETORSHIP F PARTNERSHIP F UNINCORPORATED ASSOCIATION LRSPL-5312(105)Local Road Safety Plan Project Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Orange, CA 92868 1100 W. Town and Country Rd, Ste. 700 N/A Molly M. O'Brien, Vice President 619.744.0161 molly.obrien@kimley-horn.com 775.200.1979 Mychal Loomis, P.E., T.E., RSP1 Project Manager mychal. loomis@kimley-horn.com N/A Page 28 of 36 Names & Titles of Corporate Board Members (Also list Names & Titles of persons with written authorization/resolution to sign contracts) Names Title Phone ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Federal Tax Identification Number: __________________________________________ City of Costa Mesa Business License Number: ________________________________________ (If none, you must obtain a Costa Mesa Business License upon award of contract.) City of Costa Mesa Business License Expiration Date: ________________________________ 56-0885615 John C. Atz, Chairman Steven E. Lefton, CEO, President Tammy L. Flanagan, CFO, Senior Vice President Richard N. Cook, Senior Vice President, Secretary David L. McEntee, Vice President, Treasurer, Assistant Secretary 561.845.0665 703.674.1300 919.677.2000 919.677.2000 919.677.2000 Will obtain upon award Kimley>>> Horn Certificate of Secretary To Whom It May Concern: I am the duly qualified and acting Secretary of Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., a North Carolina Corporation. The following is a true copy of a resolution duly adopted by the Board of Directors of the corporation at the Board meeting held on December 17, 2020 and entered in the minutes of such meeting in the minute book of the corporation. "The Board unanimously approved the contract signing authority of employees as presented." (Copies of the employee lists as presented are enclosed.) The resolution is in conformity with the articles of incorporation and bylaws of the corporation, has never been modified or repealed, and is now in full force and effect. Dated: January 14, 2021 Richard N. Cook, Secretary ( corporate seal) kimley-hom.com 421 Fayetteville Street. St 600. Raleigh. NC 27601 919-677-2000 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. FULL CONTRACT SIGNING AUTHORITY December 17, 2020 Page 1 of 2 ATLANTIC BALTIMORE Falk, Katherine W. Kraft, Jonathan H. HOBOKEN Gibson, Adam T. NEWPORT NEWS Collins, Carroll E. NORTHERN VIRGINIA Byrd, Michael N. Carter, Erica V. Elman, Paul D. Giffin, Geoffrey D. Hall, Lori A. Kauppila, John L. Lefton, Steven E. Martin, Robert J. Musson, David B. Sauro, Thomas J. Stevens, Ross S. Whyte, Richard D. PHILADELPHIA Hughes, Paul W. PRINCETON Diggan, Tony W. RICHMOND Brewer, Brian J. Harmon, Amanda R. Hill, Corey Lickliter, Ashley C. McPeters, Brian A. Musarra, Salvatore J. White, Timothy E. VIRGINIA BEACH Chambers, Jon S. Crum, Katie E. France, William D. Holland, Kimberly R. Jucksch, Rebecca R. Mackey, William F. Marscheider, Edward A. Mertig, Karl E. Miller Edward W. Royal, Jack R. Votava Charles F. WHITE PLAINS Canning, Thomas J. Van Hise, Kevin CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES Blume, Robert D. Fares, Jean B. Kyle, Gregory S Phaneuf, Alyssa S. OAKLAND Akwabi, Kwasi Dankberg, Adam J. ORANGE Adrian, Darren J. Gillis, Brian R. Kerry, Nicole M. Matson, Jason B. Melchor, Jason J. Melvin, M. Pearse Phillips, Chad E. PLEASANTON Dean, Felicia C. Durrenberger, Randal R. Mowery, Michael C. Sowers, Brian E. SACRAMENTO Melvin, Enda Pittalwala, Fareed S. Weir, Matthew D. SAN DIEGO Barlow, Matthew T. Espelet, Leonardo E. Harry, Jennifer L. Kaltsas, Joseph D. Knapton, Michael J. Landaal, Dennis J. McCormick, Matthew B. McWhorter, Samuel L. Podegracz, Anthony J. Ross, Michael S. SAN JOSE Hedayat, Leyla Meyerhofer, Peter N. Venter Frederik J. FLORIDA BOCA-DELRAY Spruce, Michael D. Webber, Jason A. FORT LAUDERDALE Alam, Mudassar M. Capelli, Jill A. Falce, Christopher T. McWilliams, John J. Ratay, Gary R. Robertson, Stewart E. FORT MYERS Wicks, Amy N. JACKSONVILLE Brenny, Martin T. Mecca, Joseph P. Roland, George E. LAKELAND Lewis, Jason A. Wilson, Mark E. MIAMI Baldo, Burt L. Buchler, Aaron E. Campbell, David C. Collier, Julio A. Fernandez, Jorge L. OCALA Bryant, M. Lewis Busche, Richard V. Gartner, Amber L. ORLANDO Chau, Hao T. Jackson, Jay R. Martin, Jonathan A. Mingonet, Milton S. Thigpen, Jonathan D. Wetherell, Ryan S. White, Wayne E. SARASOTA Klepper, B. Kelley Nadeau, Gary J. Pankonin, James R. Schmid, Seth E. ST. PETERSBURG Dodge, Dawn M. TALLAHASSEE Barr, Richard R. Sewell, Jon S. Stephens, Britt L. TAMPA Bulloch, Kelly B. Gilner, Scott W. Lee, Nathan Q. VERO BEACH Dalton, Edward T. Good, Brian A. Peed, Brooks H. Roberson, Kevin M. Thomas, Melibe S. WEST PALM BEACH Atz, John C. Barnes, R. Russell Heggen, Christopher W. Mufleh, Marwan H. Rapp, Bryan T. Schanen, Kevin M. Schwartz, Michael F. Sumislaski, James M. Tercilla, Lindsey A. Walthall, David W. MID-WEST CHICAGO DOWNTOWN Dvorak, Jr., William E. Marnell, Colleen L. Morton, Jr., Arthur J. West, Craig L. CHICAGO SUBURBAN Antony, Dean M. Heinen, Andrew N. Sjogren, Timothy COLUMBUS Muller, Justin M. INDIANAPOLIS Butz, Jr., William A. TWIN CITIES Bishop, Mark C. Coyle, Daniel J. Horn, Jon B. Elegert, Brandon R. Kuhnau, JoNette L. Leverett, Christopher C. Matzek, William D. MOUNTAIN COLORADO SPRINGS Gunderson, Eric J. DENVER Andryscik, Kory J. Colvin, Scott W. Krell, Gabriel M. Phelps, Randall J. Rowe, Curtis D. Salvagio, Robin Sobieski, Dennis Turner, Meaghan M. Valentine, Brian W. Wilhelm, William R. LAS VEGAS Ackeret, Kenneth W. Colety, Michael D. Moles, Richard A. MESA Grandy, Michael L. Margetts, Sterling T. Walnum, Nathan C. PHOENIX Henderson, Benjamin J. Hermann, Michael J. Jupp, Andrew M. Kimm, Kevin J. Kissinger, John C. Leistiko, David J. Mutti, Brent H. Noon, Lisa K. Perillo, Adam C. Purtle, Vicki L. Smalkoski, Brian R. Williams, Laura J. RENO O’Brien, Molly M. SALT LAKE CITY Johnson, Zachary A. SEATTLE Belsick, Jody W. Danielson, Paul B. TUCSON Crowther, Brent C. Rhine, Timothy J. SOUTHEAST ALPHARETTA Fanney, Lawson H. Hamilton, James R. James, Alvin B. Stricklin, David L. Walker, John D. Webb, Floyd C. ATLANTA Newton, Gary T. Rushing, Michael L. ATLANTA MIDTOWN Bosman, Eric S. Fink, Kenneth L. Johnston, Sean P. Montanye, Emmeline F. Ross, Robert A. CHARLESTON Guy, Jonathan R. Hume, Robert M. CHARLOTTE Blakley, Jr., Stephen W. Edwards, Matthew A. Taylor, Benjamin S. COLUMBIA Iser, Christopher M. DURHAM DOWNTOWN Beck, Chadwick W. Lewellyn, Earl R. MEMPHIS Collins, James F. Danley, Drake E. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. FULL CONTRACT SIGNING AUTHORITY December 17, 2020 Page 2 of 2 NASHVILLE Creasman, Brett R. Dufour, Zachary J. McMaster, Ryan L. Rhodes, Christopher D. RALEIGH Adams, Richard C. Balltzglier, Lindsey Barber, Barry L. Cook, Richard N. Deans, Neil T. Keil, Ashley R. Flanagan, Tammy L. Kuzenski, John McEntee, David L. Meador, Emily H. Nuckols, Charles A. Otto, James N. Sutter, Karl V. Venters, Samantha TEXAS AUSTIN NORTH Boecker, Brian C. Van Leeuwen, Andrew AUSTIN SOUTH Mason, Sean R. DALLAS Hall, James R. Harris, Mark E. Hoppers, Kevin P. Nathan, Aaron W. Smith, Eric Z. Sulkowski, Nicholas E. Swindler, Roderick P. Williamson, Sarah T. FORT WORTH Arnold, Scott R. Atkins, John R. Gary, Glenn A. James, Jeffery FRISCO Brignon, Brit A. McCracken, Paul D. HOUSTON Frysinger, Chris V. Guillory, Michael B. Hicks, Rebecca Rader, Aaron K. LAS COLINAS Ante, Louis N. SAN ANTONIO Farnsworth, Jeffrey A. Page 32 of 36 COMPANY PROFILE & REFERENCES Company Legal Name: Company Legal Status (corporation, partnership, sole proprietor etc.): Active licenses issued by the California State Contractor’s License Board: Business Address: Website Address: Telephone Number: Facsimile Number: Email Address: Length of time the firm has been in business: Length of time at current location: Is your firm a sole proprietorship doing business under a different name: ___Yes ___No If yes, please indicate sole proprietor’s name and the name you are doing business under: Federal Taxpayer ID Number: Regular Business Hours: Regular holidays and hours when business is closed: Contact person in reference to this solicitation: Telephone Number: Facsimile Number: Email Address: Contact person for accounts payable: Telephone Number: Facsimile Number: Email Address: Name of Project Manager: Telephone Number: Facsimile Number: Email Address: Corporation California Secretary of State#C1616788 1100 W. Town and Country Rd, Ste. 700, Orange, CA 92868 www.kimley-horn.com 714.939.1030 N/A mychal.loomis@kimley-horn.com 54 years 22 years 56-0885615 Mychal Loomis, P.E., T.E., RSP1 Mychal Loomis, P.E., T.E., RSP1 N/A N/A N/A619.744.0161 619.744.0161 mychal.loomis@kimley-horn.com mychal.loomis@kimley-horn.com Elio Portillo 657.201.8790 elio.portillo@kimley-horn.com 7:30 a.m. - 5:30 p.m., Friday - 7:30 a.m. - 11:30 a.m. Closed on New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independece Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day Page 33 of 36 COMPANY PROFILE & REFERENCES (Continued) Submit the company names, addresses, telephone numbers, email, contact names, and brief contract descriptions of at least three clients, preferably other municipalities for whom comparable projects have been completed or submit letters from your references which include the requested information. Company Name: Contact Name: Contract Amount: Email: Address: Brief Contract Description: Company Name: Telephone Number: Contact Name: Contract Amount: Email: Address: Brief Contract Description: Company Name: Telephone Number: Contact Name: Contract Amount: Email: Address: Brief Contract Description: eminicilli@imperialbeachca.gov City of Imperial Beach City of Santa Cruz Claire Gallogly, Transportation Planner 831.420.5107 $72,000 cgallogly@cityofsantacruz.com Kimley-Horn is developed an LRSP that included an evaluationof best safety practices and common safety challenges in the City of Santa Cruz. Kimley-Horn is conducting a citywide traffic collisions analysis that identifiessafety issues throughout the City of Imperial Beach’s road network. Eric Minicilli, Public Works Director / 619.628.1369 $82,000 County of San Joaquin 209.468.3053 Najee Zarif, Engineering Services Manager $20,000 nzarif@sjgov.org Kimley-Horn prepared an SSARP for San Joaquin County, including a citywide traffic collision analysis identifying safety issues throughout its road network. 825 Imperial Beach Blvd., Imperial Beach, CA 91932 809 Center Street, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 1810 East Hazelton Avenue, Stockton, CA 95205 Page 34 of 36 Company Name: Telephone Number: Contact Name: Contract Amount: Email: Address: Brief Contract Description: Company Name: Telephone Number: Contact Name: Contract Amount: Email: Address: Brief Contract Description: City of Goleta 805.961.7577 James Winslow, Senior Project Manager $240,000 jwinslow@cityofgoleta.org Kimley-Horn prepared a SSARP focused on selected major corridors within the City of Goleta. Rachel Carpenter, Chief Safety Officer 916.651.1248 CALTRANS $7.9M rachel.carpenter@dot.ca.gov Kimley-Horn is leading California’s multi-agency collaborative effort, 2020 to 202 4SHSP Implementation Plan. The SHSP outlines a safe and sustainable transportation system for motorized and nonmotorized users on all public roads in the state. 130 Cremona Drive, Goleta, CA 93117 1120 N Street, Sacramento, CA 95814 Page 29 of 36 EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS CERTIFICATION Please indicate by signing below one of the following two statements. Only sign one statement. I certify that Proposer and Proposer’s representatives have not had any communication with a City Councilmember concerning informal RFP No. _____FOR ________ at any time after November 09, 2020. ________________________________ Date: _______________________ Signature ________________________________ Print OR I certify that Proposer or Proposer’s representatives have communicated after November 09, 2020 with a City Councilmember concerning informal RFP No. _____FOR ________. A copy of all such communications is attached to this form for public distribution. ________________________________ Date: _______________________ Signature ________________________________ Print February 23, 2021 Molly M. O'Brien, Vice President LRSPL-5312(105)Local Road Safety Plan Project Page 31 of 36 DISCLOSURE OF GOVERNMENT POSITIONS Each Proposer shall disclose below whether any owner or employee of Contractor currently hold positions as elected or appointed officials, directors, officers, or employees of a governmental entity or held such positions in the past twelve months. List below or state "None." NONE Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 30 of 36 DISQUALIFICATION QUESTIONNAIRE The Contractor shall complete the following questionnaire: Has the Contractor, any officer of the Contractor, or any employee of the Contractor who has proprietary interest in the Contractor, ever been disqualified, removed, or otherwise prevented from bidding on, or completing a federal, state, or local government project because of a violation of law or safety regulation? Yes _____ No _____ If the answer is yes, explain the circumstances in the following space. Page 35 of 36 BIDDER/APPLICANT/CONTRACTOR CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION DISCLOSURE FORM Proposer/Consultant/Applicant is required to identify any campaign contribution or cumulative contributions greater than $249 to any city council member in the twelve months prior to submitting an application, proposal, statement of qualifications or bid requiring approval by the City Council. Date Name of Donor Company/Business Affiliation Name of Recipient Amount Except as described above, I/we have not made any campaign contribution in the amount of $250 or more to any Costa Mesa City Council Member in the twelve months preceding this Application/Proposal. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Bidder/Applicant/Proposer Date N/A February 23, 2021 Molly M. O'Brien, V.P. The entirety of this proposal, including text and images, is the property of Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., protected under U.S. copyright law. Copyright © 2021 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Mychal Loomis, P.E., T.E., PTOE, RSP1 Contact mychal.loomis@kimley-horn.com 📞✉619.744.0161 1100 W. Town & Country Road, Suite 700, Orange, CA 92868 EXHIBIT C FEE SCHEDULE 1100 W. Town and Country Road Suite 700 Orange, CA 92868 213.354.9402 City of Carson TRED96041.2020City of Costa Mesa TRTS77044.2021 Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s LRSP Project (LRSPL-5312(105)) March 24, 2021 Jennifer Rosales, Transportation Services Manager City of Costa Mesa 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Re: Cost Proposal for the City of Costa Mesa’s Local Road Safety Plan (LRSPL-5312(105)) Per the directions in the City’s RFP, we have provided our cost proposal as this separate attachment. We welcome the opportunity to discuss our cost with the City and are flexible to adjustments and refinements as necessary to better accommodate your needs. We thank you for your consideration. If you have any questions or require any additional information, please contact our project manager, Mychal Loomis, P.E., T.E., RSP, at 619.744.0161 or mychal.loomis@kimley-horn.com. Sincerely, KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Mychal Loomis, P.E., T.E., RSPI Molly O’Brien, P.E., PTOE., RSP2IProject Manager Principal-in-Charge/QC/QA Manager/Vice President *Molly O’Brien, P.E., PTOE, RSP2I, Principal, is fully authorized to submit the proposal, negotiate and contractually bind as well as certify that Kimley-Horn complies with nondiscrimination requirements of the state and federal government. Molly can be reached at 775.200.1979 or at molly.obrien@kimley-horn.com 195.25%Overhead%Name Mychal Loomis Molly O'Brien 194.64%Overhead% w/o FCCM Category/Title Project Manager Principal-in- Charge/QA-QC 10%Fee%Direct Rate $64.46 $67.60 $72.16 $55.08 $37.92 $35.23 Billing Rate $209.31 $219.51 $234.31 $178.85 $123.13 $114.40 Task 1 27 10 5 0 2 12 56 $ 10,637.05 1.1 12 12 24 $ 3,884.49 1.2 4 4 2 10 $ 1,961.53 1.3 11 6 5 22 $ 4,791.03 Task 1 Task 2 30 4 0 24 8 0 66 $ 12,434.86 2.1 2 4 6 $ 911.15 4 4 4 12 $ 2,207.80 2.2 24 24 48 $ 9,315.91 Task 2 Task 3 4 2 8 0 14 0 28 $ 4,874.61 2 4 10 16 $ 2,587.19 2 2 $ 439.01 2 4 4 10 $ 1,848.40 Task 3 Task 4 17 8 9 36 66 0 136 $ 21,988.53 4.1 2 2 6 10 $ 1,565.12 4.2 2 2 5 10 40 59 $ 8,742.99 4.3 10 2 14 26 $ 5,036.05 4.4 5 4 2 10 20 41 $ 6,644.36 Task 4 $ 2,600.00 $ 100.00 $ 2,500.00 Task 5 8 2 8 4 35 0 57 $ 9,013.02 4 4 4 20 32 $ 4,952.54 4 2 4 15 25 $ 4,060.48 Task 5 Task 6 12 2 8 22 28 0 72 $ 12,207.69 6.1 2 4 4 10 $ 2,071.29 4 2 8 14 $ 2,736.69 2 2 6 4 14 $ 2,452.89 6.2 4 2 4 24 34 $ 4,946.82 Task 6 Task 7 15 8 4 22 66 3 118 $ 18,237.59 7.1 8 4 10 40 3 65 $ 9,668.72 6 6 $ 1,317.04 1 4 4 9 $ 1,417.25 7.2 0 $ - 1 3 4 $ 578.71 2 2 4 10 18 $ 2,804.36 7.3 0 $ - 1 3 4 $ 578.71 2 4 6 12 $ 1,872.82 Task 7 $ 100.00 $ 100.00 113 36 42 108 219 15 533 23,652.10$ 7,902.24$ 9,841.17$ 19,316.07$ 26,965.81$ 1,715.95$ $ 89,393.34 $ 2,700.00 $ 2,234.83 $ 94,328.18 Sr. Professional Professional Other Direct Costs Subtotal Methodology to Update the LRSP Lead Agency for Emphasis Areas Emphasis Areas Crash Analysis Field Review (Including Preparation and Summary) Project Sheets (5) (Draft/Final) Data Collection and Analysis Travel/Mileage/Outside Printing Other Direct Costs Subtotal Other Direct Costs Subtotal Other Direct Costs Subtotal Other Direct Costs Subtotal Public Meetings (3) Data Collection Final LRSP Develop Process to Implement and Evaluate Goals and Strategies for Emphasis Areas Address Comments Comment Resolution Matrix Address Comments Address Comments Other Direct Costs Subtotal Grant Assistance TOTAL COST: Project Management Kick-Off Meeting (1) Identify Safety Partners Safety Partner Meetings (2) Inventory of Opportunity Areas to Facilitate Improvemen QA/QC Inventory of Opportunity Areas to Facilitate Improvemen Existing Plans, Programs and Policies Evaluation and Implementation Labor Escalation Development of Final LRSP TOTAL HOURS Subtotal Labor: Administrative Draft LRSP Other Direct Costs Subtotal Subtotal Other Direct Costs Draft Final LRSP Comment Resolution Matrix Travel/Mileage/Outside Printing Internal QA/QC CITY OF COSTA MESA Local Road Safety Plan Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Total Hours Total Cost Project Management Identify and Engage Safety Partners Analyst Project Support Progress Meetings (11) Emphasis Areas Data Collection (Crossroads) EXHIBIT D CITY COUNCIL POLICY 100-5 CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL POLICY BACKGROUND Under the Federal Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988, passed as part of omnibus drug legislation enacted November 18, 1988, contractors and grantees of Federal funds must certify that they will provide drug-free workplaces. At the present time, the City of Costa Mesa, as a sub-grantee of Federal funds under a variety of programs, is required to abide by this Act. The City Council has expressed its support of the national effort to eradicate drug abuse through the creation of a Substance Abuse Committee, institution of a City-wide D.A.R.E. program in all local schools and other activities in support of a drug-free community. This policy is intended to extend that effort to contractors and grantees of the City of Costa Mesa in the elimination of dangerous drugs in the workplace. PURPOSE It is the purpose of this Policy to: 1. Clearly state the City of Costa Mesa’s commitment to a drug-free society. 2. Set forth guidelines to ensure that public, private, and nonprofit organizations receiving funds from the City of Costa Mesa share the commitment to a drug-free workplace. POLICY The City Manager, under direction by the City Council, shall take the necessary steps to see that the following provisions are included in all contracts and agreements entered into by the City of Costa Mesa involving the disbursement of funds. 1. Contractor or Sub-grantee hereby certifies that it will provide a drug-free workplace by: A. Publishing a statement notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in Contractor’s and/or sub-grantee’s workplace, specifically the job site or location included in this contract, and specifying the actions that will be taken against the employees for violation of such prohibition; B. Establishing a Drug-Free Awareness Program to inform employees about: SUBJECT DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE POLICY NUMBER 100-5 EFFECTIVE DATE 8-8-89 PAGE 1 of 3 SUBJECT DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE POLICY NUMBER 100-5 EFFECTIVE DATE 8-8-89 PAGE 2 of 3 1. The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace; 2. Contractor’s and/or sub-grantee’s policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace; 3. Any available drug counseling, rehabilitation and employee assistance programs; and 4. The penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations occurring in the workplace; C. Making it a requirement that each employee to be engaged in the performance of the contract be given a copy of the statement required by subparagraph A; D. Notifying the employee in the statement required by subparagraph 1 A that, as a condition of employment under the contract, the employee will: 1. Abide by the terms of the statement; and 2. Notify the employer of any criminal drug statute conviction for a violation occurring in the workplace no later than five (5) days after such conviction; E. Notifying the City of Costa Mesa within ten (10) days after receiving notice under subparagraph 1 D 2 from an employee or otherwise receiving the actual notice of such conviction; F. Taking one of the following actions within thirty (30) days of receiving notice under subparagraph 1 D 2 with respect to an employee who is so convicted: 1. Taking appropriate personnel action against such an employee, up to and including termination; or 2. Requiring such employee to participate satisfactorily in a drug abuse assistance or rehabilitation program approved for such purposes by a Federal, State, or local health agency, law enforcement, or other appropriate agency; SUBJECT DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE POLICY NUMBER 100-5 EFFECTIVE DATE 8-8-89 PAGE 3 of 3 G. Making a good faith effort to maintain a drug-free workplace through implementation of subparagraphs 1 A through 1 F, inclusive. 2. Contractor and/or sub-grantee shall be deemed to be in violation of this Policy if the City of Costa Mesa determines that: a. Contractor and/or sub-grantee has made a false certification under paragraph 1 above; b. Contractor and/or sub-grantee has violated the certification by failing to carry out the requirements of subparagraphs 1 A through 1 G above; c. Such number of employees of Contractor and/or sub-grantee have been convicted of violations of criminal drug statutes for violations occurring in the workplace as to indicate that the contractor and/or sub-grantee has failed to make a good faith effort to provide a drug-free workplace. 3. Should any contractor and/or sub-grantee be deemed to be in violation of this Policy pursuant to the provisions of 2 A, B, and C, a suspension, termination or debarment proceeding subject to applicable Federal, State, and local laws shall be conducted. Upon issuance of any final decision under this section requiring debarment of a contractor and/or sub-grantee, the contractor and/or sub-grantee shall be ineligible for award of any contract, agreement or grant from the City of Costa Mesa for a period specified in the decision, not to exceed five (5) years. Upon issuance of any final decision recommending against debarment of the contractor and/or sub-grantee, the contractor and/or sub-grantee shall be eligible for compensation as provided by law.