Administration and Projects Committee STAFF REPORT May 1, 2014 Page 2 of 2 Changes from Committee Background The State Route 4 Highway Operational Imp

Transcription

1 Administration and Projects Committee STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: May 1, 2014 Subject State Route 4 Highway Operational Improvements (Project 6006) Authorization to Execute Contract No. 391 with Mark Thomas and Company, Inc. for Project Initiation Document (PID) Development Summary of Issues The State Route 4 Highway Operational Improvements project between State Route 242 and Bailey Road in Concord is in the Project Initiation Document (PID) phase, and a Project Study Report/Project Development Support (PSR/PDS) document will be developed. The document will be used to advance the project to the environmental phase. In December 2013, the Authority approved entering into negotiations with the firm of Mark Thomas and Company for the scope and fee to develop the PSR/PDS for the project and to issue a Notice to Proceed (NTP) in the amount not-to-exceed $100,000 upon satisfactory conclusion of the negotiations. Staff issued the NTP on April 3, Recommendations Staff requests authorization for the Chair to execute Contract No. 391 with Mark Thomas and Company in an amount not-to-exceed $475,000, which includes $20,964 for contingency, for completion of the PID for the State Route 4 Operational Improvements project, allowing the Executive Director to make any non-substantive changes to the language. Financial Implications Options Adequate funds are programmed in the 2013 Measure J Strategic Plan. The Board could elect not to approve this agreement. However, this may delay the project delivery schedule. Attachments A. Mark Thomas & Company Scope proposal, dated April 2, (Distributed to Board members, copies available upon request)

2 Administration and Projects Committee STAFF REPORT May 1, 2014 Page 2 of 2 Changes from Committee Background The State Route 4 Highway Operational Improvements project between State Route 242 and Bailey Road in Concord is in the Project Initiation Document (PID) phase, and a Project Study Report/Project Development Support (PSR/PDS) document will be developed. The document will be used to advance the project to the environmental phase. In December 2013, the Authority approved Mark Thomas and Company as the top ranked consultant to complete the Project Initiation Document (PID) for the State Route 4 Operational Improvements project in Concord. Contract negotiations have been successfully completed and an NTP was issued on April 3, Staff requests authorization for the Chair to execute Contract No. 391 with Mark Thomas and Company in an amount not-to-exceed $475,000, including a contingency of $20,964, to complete the PID for the State Route 4 Operational Improvements project, allowing the Executive Director to make any non-substantive changes to the language. The agreement will terminate 90 days after the PID is executed

3 STATE ROUTE 4 OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT SCOPE OF SERVICE INTRODUCTION The Mark Thomas & Company (MTCo) team will provide professional services for the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) to complete the Project Initiation Document (PID) for the State Route 4 Operational Improvement Project Widening Project (SR4 OIP). The SR4 OIP improvements are derived from a series of operational improvements first identified in the SR4 Corridor System Management Plan (CSMP) prepared by Caltrans in 2009 and further refined as part of an Integrated Corridor Analysis (ICA) in As shown in Scenario 5 of the ICA, the SR4 OIP will likely include the addition of mixed-flow, High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) and auxiliary lane improvements between Port Chicago Highway and San Marco Boulevard on SR4 to address the persistent AM westbound and PM eastbound congestion between the SR242/SR4 interchange in Concord and the San Marcos Boulevard interchange in Bay Point. The work to be performed under this scope will include preparation of a Project Study Report- Project Development Support (PSR-PDS) document that will identify the SR4 OIP s purpose and need and a range of possible project alternatives. The PSR-PDS will allow the SR4 OIP to be adequately scoped in terms of its likely CEQA/NEPA effort, types of environmental technical studies, and range of design alternatives. Should it be possible to do so, the PSR-PDS will identify likely phases and priority construction segments for the SR4 OIP as part of the PSR-PDS and include language in the PID that states that packages of improvements may proceed to Project Approval and Environmental Document (PA&ED) as one or more individual projects. The PSR-PDS should be used as a tool to gain consensus with Caltrans on the likely SR4 OIP packages and construction phases and the scope of future environmental phase documents needed to advance each package as a standalone project. By preparing the PSR-PDS in this manner, the CCTA will have maximum flexibility to efficiently deliver projects as funding becomes available and enable the CCTA the ability to ultimately issue construction contracts of the size and scale likely to attract the most competitive bids. To achieve the objectives of the PSR-PDS described above, the MTCo team will utilize the traffic forecasting and modelling tools being developed and validated as part of the SR4/I-680 project. The MTCo team will use these traffic analysis tools as described in the scope below to perform traffic operations analysis beyond that of typical PSR-PDS documents in order to demonstrate independent utility of project packages. The PSR-PDS document will then describe the necessary environmental document and technical studies required for each independent construction package. PROJECT INITIAITON DOCUMENT (PID) PHASE The MTCo team will prepare a PID consisting of a PSR-PDS for the SR4 OIP from just east of the SR4/SR242 Interchange to the just west of the Bailey Road Interchange, a total length of approximately 5 miles. The PSR-PDS will be based upon Caltrans guidelines and will focus on the major elements of the project within Caltrans right of way

4 TASK 1: MANAGEMENT/MEETINGS 1.1 Management This task will include general project management, including preparation of monthly progress reports, maintaining the project submittal register, and Critical Path Method (CPM) scheduling and updates. MTCo will coordinate and manage subconsultant activities and maintain project files in this phase. 1.2 Meetings MTCo will coordinate a pre-pid meeting with the Project Development Team (PDT); this will include representatives from the design team (CCTA, Caltrans, Contra Costa County, and the City of Concord). The purpose of this meeting will be to discuss the framework for the PSR-PDS (including Purpose and Need, design criteria, etc.), limits of the overall improvements, goals associated with the project, and what will be accomplished with the PID Phase. Additional meetings during the PID Phase will be held on a monthly basis. For purposes of this scope, we have assumed a total of twelve meetings for the PID Phase. Task 1 Deliverables Progress Reports & Schedule Updates 12 Total Meetings (Pre-PID and PDT) - 12 Total TASK 2: MAPPING/DATA GATHERING The MTCo team will identify and assemble existing data useful in analyzing impacts of the project. These information sources include City, County and Caltrans As-built information, adjacent proposed development project planning documents, environmental studies, existing reports, etc. Also as part of this task, MTCo will obtain an encroachment permit rider (under the CCTA master permit) for site surveys and field investigation. 2.1 Project Base Mapping Because the project limits are so large, MTCo is proposing to use available aerial photography as the project base mapping. MTCo will use publically available orthorectified aerial imagery. The aerial mapping will be superimposed on available GIS mapping and include property ownership, street labels, City/County limits, sphere of influence limits, etc. MTCo will include design plan files from the SR4/I-680 project in the base mapping. 2.2 Supplemental Field Topography MTCo will perform minimal supplemental field surveys to identify and locate significant features not adequately shown in available aerial imagery. MTCo will survey visible surface evidence of major underground utilities, structures, and other critical features necessary for the preparation of the PSR-PDS. This scope assumes a total of four days for topographic surveys. As a supplemental service, MTCo can perform mobile scanning of the project limits to produce design level ground models

5 2.3 Utility Mapping This task consists of compiling existing utility mapping and doing verification with utility providers. The intent of this task is to allow for identification of preliminary conflicts for budgeting and scheduling purposes, in support of the PSR-PDS right of way estimates. The following procedure is proposed: Compile mapping on base plans using utility company system mapping, as-built information, and visible and surveyed locations of surface utility facilities. Prepare and send utility coordination cover letter and plans to utilities for their confirmation and/or location of facilities. Revise utility mapping per utility comments and provide copies of project mapping to utility companies stamped "for information only." 2.4 Right of Way Analysis MTCo will develop the existing right of way limits along SR4 OIP corridor. Existing right of way will be based solely on existing GIS parcel data. This scope assumes the GIS information will be sufficient for determining constraints during the PID Phase. As an additional service, MTCo can supplement GIS parcel data with readily available Right of Way Record information if necessary. TASK 3: TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Fehr & Peers (FP) will prepare a transportation analysis for the SR4 OIP that will focus on developing a plan to improve the corridor in stages up to and including the ultimate facility. The PSR-PDS will make use of the traffic forecasting and analysis models being prepared for the SR 4/I-680 Interchange project. It is understood that the limits of the SR4/I-680 FREQ model are being expanded to cover the limits of the SR 4 OIP as part of the SR4/ I-680 project. As part of the OIP this model will be used to evaluate the operational effects of the various project elements defined in the SR 4 ICA. This approach will allow the traffic benefits of individual projects to be determined and whether independent utility can likely be demonstrated. FP will evaluate the set of project components, identify preliminary measures of effectiveness and recommend sets of project improvements that demonstrate operational benefits. During this analysis, FP will document existing transportation conditions, assess transportation safety, prepare transportation forecasts, and analyze transportation operations to support the engineering design of the project. PSR-PDS Guiding Principles Related to Traffic The following is an excerpt from the PSR-PDS guidelines that was used to help establish the work scope: To meet the purpose of the PSR-PDS, the preliminary traffic engineering studies should be limited to an assessment of readily available information and data, and macro-level analysis and evaluation. This effort will produce preliminary traffic engineering findings and estimates to inform and advise the PDT on:

6 o the potential scope of work and features o potential performance benefits and deficiencies o the scope and magnitude of traffic engineering work (traffic forecasting, modeling, analysis and evaluation) to be performed during the Project Approval and Environmental Document phase 3.1 Assemble Data Readily available data (i.e., traffic volumes, speeds, etc.) recently collected for the SR 4/I-680 project will be used for the traffic analysis. No new data will be collected. 3.2 Prepare Travel Demand Volume Forecasts FP will use traffic forecasting information readily available from the SR 4/I-680 project to prepare the design year forecasts for westbound SR 4 in the AM period and eastbound SR 4 in the PM period for the OIP. FP will use a combination of growth factors and manual redistribution of the I-680/SR 4 forecasts to develop design year forecasts for up to six projects in each direction. It is anticipated that the projects will be comprised of individual elements or combinations of elements shown in Scenario 5 of the ICA. As an example, in the eastbound direction, the six projects may be: 1. New eastbound HOV lane east of I-680 only 2. New eastbound mainline and auxiliary lane between SR 242 and Willow Pass Road 3. New eastbound auxiliary lane between Willow Pass Road and San Marco Boulevard 4. New eastbound mainline lane between San Marco Boulevard and Bailey Road 5. A combination of two or three of the above elements 6. All project elements listed above The final list of projects will be determined in consultation with the PDT. Deliverable Technical memorandum summarizing the traffic volume forecasts for each project. 3.3 Existing and Design Year Traffic Operations Analysis For the existing conditions analysis, FP will use the westbound AM and eastbound PM peak period (4-hour) FREQ models being developed for the SR 4/I-680 project to assess the existing corridor from Morello Avenue to Bailey Road in the peak travel direction. The traffic analysis will focus on the peak direction of travel because that is what will drive the identification of effective project elements; analysis of the non-peak direction can be handled during subsequent environmental review phases. The analysis will document the current bottleneck locations, queue lengths, and congestion duration. In addition, the following network measures of effectiveness will be calculated for each peak period: Vehicle-miles and person-miles of travel (VMT and PMT) Single-occupancy vehicle average travel time, speed, and delay High-occupancy vehicle average travel time, speed, and delay Mainline vehicle-hours and person-hours of delay

7 Peak hour segment level of service and density will not be analyzed at this phase of the project because those measures will be of limited value in identifying the operational effectiveness of individual project elements; those MOEs can be reported during subsequent environmental review phases. The existing conditions FREQ models will be modified with the approved traffic forecasts from Task 3.2 to evaluate Design Year No Build conditions and up to 6 projects per direction (the same ones evaluated under Task 3.2). The same measures of effectiveness provided under Existing conditions will be provided for the design year. Deliverable Technical memorandum summarizing the effectiveness of the various project elements analyzed, and making suggestions on the independent utility of the project elements and the phasing of elements that would produce the most effective operational improvements. 3.4 Prepare Traffic Engineering Performance Assessment (TEPA) FP will document the results of the traffic analysis by following the report template for the Traffic Engineering Performance Assessment (Appendix S, Article 5, Section F). As required, FP will also coordinate with Caltrans staff in preparing a scope of work for the traffic engineering studies to be completed in the future environmental review stage of this project. FP will submit an Administrative Draft TEPA to MTCo and CCTA for one round of review and written comments; up to eight hours has been budgeted to respond to written comments and prepare the Draft TEPA for submittal to Caltrans, at which point up to 16 hours has been budgeted to respond to Caltrans comments and prepare the Final TEPA. As part of conducting this analysis and developing the TEPA, FP will participate in up to five in-person project team meetings (PDT, focus meetings, etc.) and five teleconference calls. Deliverable Draft and Final TEPA TASK 4: PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS REPORT (PEAR) Circlepoint will prepare a Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report (PEAR) for SR4 OIP project corridor. The PEAR provides a preliminary analysis of potential environmental constraints that may affect the design, cost, schedule, and delivery of different alternatives, and discusses the scope of future environmental studies likely to be required for each alternative. The information contained in the PEAR serves as the foundation for the environmental team to begin studies for the Project Report and PA&ED phases, facilitating early consultation with Federal and State resource agencies. The PEAR also estimates the scope, schedule, and costs associated with completing environmental compliance for the project alternatives to be carried forward. The project approach is based on the following: Identifying and mapping major environmental resource constraints along the project corridor;

8 Identifying and evaluating key environmental considerations within the corridor; and, Identifying future environmental studies and likely level of environmental document for each standalone project. 4.1 Purpose and Need/Project Alternatives/Meetings Circlepoint will obtain preliminary information about the project purpose and need, project limits and design features, and alternative project concepts from MTCO. Circlepoint will work with project engineers and CCTA to participate in the development of the preliminary project purpose and need/objectives and project description to a level sufficient to support preparation of the PEAR and environmental constraints analysis/selection of priority segments. As part of this task Circlepoint will work with MTCo to create an Environmental Study Limits (ESL) map that would encompass all proposed build alternatives and phases. All data collection and surveys described below would be based on the ESL map. Under this task Circlepoint will attend up to ten meetings with the project engineers, CCTA and the PDT, including a project kick-off meeting, and manage/coordinate internal team activities with subcontractors participating in the environmental studies. Deliverables: Attendance at up to ten meetings Draft and final Purpose and Need Statement Draft and final project description including No Build, Build Alternatives and phases ESL map 4.2 Conduct Windshield Survey Once the ESL has been approved by CCTA and Caltrans, windshield surveys will be conducted to identify the location and nature of resource issues that could be of concern for the project. Scoping level information on the following topics will be gathered during the surveys: land use (including existing and future land uses); parks and recreation facilities; farmlands; community character and cohesion; utilities/emergency services/public facilities, visual/aesthetic character, historic/cultural resources, hydrology and floodplains, water quality and stormwater runoff, geology and soils, biological resources, and possible Section 4(f) properties. 4.3 Prepare Administrative PEAR. Circlepoint will prepare an administrative draft version of the PEAR for review by the CCTA. The PEAR will include the following information: Purpose & Need Project Description Anticipated Environmental Approval Special Environmental Consideration Environmental Commitments Summary Permits and Approvals Risks and Assumptions Technical Summaries

9 Summary Statement for PID Disclaimer Preparer Review Signatures Review and Approval Signatures Attachments including: PEAR Environmental Studies Checklist, Resource Estimates; Schedule; Environmental Commitments Cost Estimate Preparation of the PEAR will include the following activities: 1. Land Use Circlepoint will identify the existing and planned land uses and zoning in the project area and will determine if the build alternatives/project phases are consistent with state, regional, and local plans. While it is anticipated that the build alternatives/project phases will be consistent with existing land use plans, Circlepoint will identify any inconsistencies and/or required mitigation. 2. Growth It is not anticipated that the project would induce growth in the project area, as the project would introduce improvements to an existing freeway to accommodate existing and planned growth in traffic volumes. No new access to adjacent properties is envisioned as part of the build alternatives/project phases. 3. Farmlands/Timberlands There are no farmlands in or within the vicinity of the project area and it is not anticipated that the project would impact agricultural resources. 4. Community Impacts This task will involve review of existing census data to determine the social and economic characteristics of the area. Circlepoint will conduct a windshield survey to determine the types and approximate numbers of structures in the project area that may be affected. 5. Visual/Aesthetics The project area contains a mix of urbanized, suburban and rural aesthetics. The build alternatives/project phases could result in changes to the visual character primarily through the additional of pavement and removal of vegetation to widen portions of the freeway. During the site visit Circlepoint will document the visual character of the corridor along with any scenic resources. 6. Cultural Resources Circlepoint will review previous cultural resource studies for SR242/Clayton Ramps and for SR4/I-680 interchange projects and conduct a search of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) to confirm the presence of known historical sites or structures and known archaeological sites in the project vicinity. During the site visit, Circlepoint staff will photograph any structures in the project area that appear to be older than 45 years of age. 7. Hydrology and Floodplain Circlepoint will review available FEMA and USGS topographic maps and document whether the project would be within a designated FEMA 100-year floodplain. MTCo will provide an evaluation of drainage impacts and/or develop project plans regarding drainage facility design for use in the PEAR. 8. Water Quality and Stormwater Runoff The proposed project could result in an increase in surface water runoff pollutants. The project will be required to comply with the Statewide Construction General Permit (No DWQ, CA S000002, as amended by DWQ). 9. Geology, Soils, Seismic and Topography Circlepoint will review geology studies conducted for the SR 242/Clayton Ramps and SR4/I-680 interchange projects, and the city

10 and county General Plans to identify the general regional geology of the project area and determine if a subsequent geotechnical site characterization would be required. 10. Paleontology Soil types in the project area will be reviewed to determine general sensitivity for the presence of paleontological resources. 11. Hazardous Waste/Materials Geocon will prepare an Initial Site Assessment for this phase of environmental documentation. 12. Air Quality Using information provided by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), the PEAR will document BAAQMD s attainment of national and state ambient air quality standards, and will provide information on pollutant levels recorded at the closest monitoring station. The PEAR will also document any maintenance plans for the BAAQMD and will list any standard mitigations required by the BAAQMD as part of these plans. 13. Noise and Vibration Circlepoint will identify and map the location of any noise- and vibration-sensitive land uses (e.g. residences, community centers, schools, parks) in the project area that may be affected by construction or operation of the build alternatives/project phases. The PEAR will document anticipated technical reports and construction mitigations that would be required to evaluate and protect these noise- and vibration-sensitive land uses. 14. Energy and Climate Change Circlepoint will consider the project consumption of energy during project construction and operations and determine if a subsequent energy technical report would be required. The PEAR will reference the BAAQMD thresholds of significance regarding greenhouse gas emissions as well as Caltrans standard approach, and will briefly discuss how the project is designed to reduce congestion and/or vehicle time delays and will identify the anticipated scope of qualitative or quantitative analyses that will be required for the subsequent environmental document including project-level PM2.5 analysis. 15. Biological Environment Areas adjacent to SR 4 contain habitat for a variety of specialstatus species. In addition, the project area traverses several creeks which may provide habitat for anadramous fish and other aquatic special-status species. As a result, understanding the biological resource issues associated with the build alternatives/project phases will be key in determining the appropriate level of environmental document and resource agency permits that may be required. The PEAR will include a review of threatened and endangered species using the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Endangered Species List website and the California Natural Diversity Database to determine to determine the location of known sightings of threatened and endangered species relative to proposed improvements. In addition, biological studies conducted for the SR242/Clayton Ramps and SR4/I-680 Interchange project will be reviewed. It is anticipated that studies being conducted for the SR4/I-680 interchange Phase 3 revalidation will provide detailed information regarding the biological sensitivities within the western portion of the project corridor. Windshield and pedestrian surveys of the eastern portion of the project corridor will be conducted by a qualified biologist to identify biological sensitivities. The PEAR will recommend the appropriate studies to be conducted in the PA&ED phase as well as any biological or resource agency permits that would be required for the build alternatives/project phases, such as permits from the USFWS, US National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC)

11 16. Cumulative Impacts Circlepoint will consider the cumulative impacts of the project in consideration with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future related projects. The PEAR will identify any subsequent cumulative impact analyses that would be required. The PEAR will be prepared in accordance with Caltrans Guidelines for Preparation of the Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report and will utilize Caltrans standard PEAR template. As part of the PEAR, or as a separate appendix, an environmental constraints matrix will be prepared that summarizes the environmental resources that could influence decisions about priority segments and the end points for these segments. The matrix will provide a tabular presentation of the resource constraints by alternative concepts/segments. Deliverables: Administrative PEAR for review by the CCTA and Caltrans (10 hard copies, electronic files). 4.4 Revise Administrative PEAR and Submit Final PEAR Circlepoint will revise the Administrative Draft PEAR based on comments from CCTA and Caltrans. The scope assumes two revisions (or rounds of review) by Caltrans. Deliverables Revised PEAR (5 hard copies, electronic files) Final PEAR (5 hard copies, electronic files.) TASK 5: ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT AND ANALYSIS 5.1 Constraints Map The MTCo team will prepare a constraints map before starting to develop project alternatives. The constraints map will show the following information: Limits of existing development Limits of proposed development (Concord NWS Reuse and others) Biological and cultural resources (from windshield surveys and record search) Major utility lines (from available GIS, As-builts, Utility Owner Maps) Access control limits Hazardous waste areas (from windshield surveys and record search) BART facilities/right of way The intent of the Constraints Map it to identify any constraints that should be avoided with the proposed roadway alignments or that will have to be mitigated if they cannot be avoided. 5.2 Prepare Preliminary Geometrics MTCo will develop alternatives for the SR4 OIP corridor assuming two widening scenarios, full design standard, and with considered design exceptions. Alternative development will consist of:

12 Layout strip map showing lane configurations, intersection channelization, existing right of way, proposed right of way, required utility relocations and boundary of potential project impact area. The alternatives will include the following information typical cross-sections, horizontal alignment, geometric layout, structure limits, retaining walls, signal locations (or other intersection traffic control), and curve data necessary for concept approval. Vertical alignment will be qualitatively evaluated. Determine right of way needs from conceptual design alternatives by calculating areas of parcels required to accommodate the proposed design, temporary construction easements and utility relocation costs. Deliverable will be a spreadsheet summary and exhibit. Preparation of preliminary cost estimates using Caltrans 6-page format. After completion of alternative development and delivery of the PSR-PDS, MTCo will participate in prioritizing segments by attending a focus meeting to discuss and evaluate locations under consideration. TASK 6: PSR-PDS SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION The MTCo team will prepare supporting documentation required for the PSR-PDS based upon the requirements of the Caltrans Project Development Procedures Manual (PDPM). This includes the following: Quality Management Plan Scoping Document- Project specific Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) plan. Risk Register Memo documentation of the potential risks associated with the project. Storm Water Documentation Memo documentation of the major elements of storm water runoff protection (right of way needs, detention basin locations, etc). Storm Water Data Report Per Appendix S Preparation Guideline for Project Study Report-Project Development Support. Right of Way Conceptual Cost Estimate Checklist of potential right of way acquisitions along with conceptual costs Division of Engineering PSR-PDS Scoping Checklist Transportation Planning Scoping Information Sheet Design Scoping Index Discussion of anticipated alignments and alternatives and identification any anticipated design exceptions. PSR-PDS Surveys Needs Questionnaire Order of Magnitude Capital Cost Estimate Sheets This scope specifically excludes preparation of design exception fact sheets. PSR-PDS documents do not require the preparation or approval of design exceptions. 6.1 Draft PSR-PDS MTCo will prepare a Draft PSR-PDS for circulation to the CCTA, Caltrans and the PDT members. The document will be based on the revised Caltrans guidance on the PSR-PDS process

13 6.2 Final PSR-PDS Following Caltrans and external reviews of the Draft PSR-PDS, MTCo will coordinate with the PDT to address any new significant issues affecting the project's cost, scope or schedule and revise the PID accordingly. TASK 7: PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 7.1 Project Factsheet (updated once) Circlepoint will develop a project fact sheet to provide an overview of the project including project benefits, anticipated schedule, funding and project development process. The fact sheet will be developed early in the PID process and then updated at the end of the PID process to account for clarity on project alternative/project phases, schedule and PA&ED process. The fact sheet is assumed to be full color, 8.5 x 11 and double sided. Deliverables: Two rounds of review by CCTA for each factsheet before finalizing 50 color copies of each factsheet, electronic files provided to CCTA 7.2 Small Group Stakeholder Workshops/Informational Meetings Circlepoint will provide support for three small group, informational meetings to provide an overview of the project to project stakeholders. Tasks for these meetings will include: Meeting Strategy/Logistics: Coordination of meeting venue, format and equipment Notification: Regarding meeting details and agenda will be coordinated through the Stakeholder group(s) may include the Chamber of Commerce, local businesses, and/or environmental interest groups. Circlepoint will work with CCTA staff to determine appropriate stakeholders to meet with. It is anticipated that one presentation to the City of Concord City Council will be provided as part of the public outreach. Deliverables: Presentation: Assistance with development of presentation to address specific issues of interest to stakeholders Meeting Materials: Agenda, copies of factsheet Documentation: brief meeting summaries to capture key comments and action items KEY SCOPE ASSUMPTIONS The budget assumes that the PEAR will evaluate a no build Alternative, two build alternative and up to six project phases. Inclusion of additional alternatives or project phases may require additional budget. No field surveying or soil investigations would be conducted beyond windshield/pedestrian surveys