SUBJECT: Consideration of Proceeding with the Mathilda Avenue Overhead Bridge Rehabilitation Project and Authorization to Amend an Existing Contract for Design and Construction Support Services for the Mathilda Avenue Overhead Bridge Rehabilitation Project (F0405-64)

REPORT IN BRIEF

This project involves widening and modifying the Mathilda Avenue bridge (at Evelyn Avenue and the Caltrain tracks) to address deficiencies which have been identified by Caltrans.  Staff requests that the City Council affirm whether to proceed with the Mathilda Avenue Overhead Bridge Rehabilitation Project.  Should Council desire to proceed with the project, approval is then requested to amend an existing contract with Mark Thomas & Company, Inc., for design and construction support services for the Mathilda Avenue Overhead Bridge Rehabilitation Project (Project # TR-02/03-07).

The project is currently at the 35% phase of design.  The environmental review phase of work has proceeded to the point of preparation of a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration and conclusion of a 30 day public comment period.  One comment letter was received in legal brief format under cover of a practicing environmental attorney.  The letter contained substantial technical comments and requested the preparation of a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR).  Staff and the Office of the City Attorney are recommending preparation and circulation of a full EIR to address the substantial comments received and enable additional community input.  The Council can amend the project work scope to complete an EIR, or can consider termination of the project.  Should the Council desire to continue with this project, staff is recommending approval of a contract amendment to the existing design/environmental contract with Mark Thomas & Company to provide for the preparation of an EIR.

BACKGROUND

The Mathilda Avenue Bridge Overcrossing project is intended to correct deficiencies with the existing bridge as well as improve access into downtown Sunnyvale.  The current bridge does not meet bridge pier clearance standards nor does it meet current deceleration lane, shoulder width, or bridge railing design standards.  Pedestrian facilities do not meet Americans with Disabilities Act standards as well. 

The existing Mathilda Bridge was built in 1965 and underwent seismic retrofits in 1981 and 1993.  According to the latest Caltrans bridge inspection report done in April 2000, the bridge was evaluated with a Sufficiency Rating of 79.7, and was found to be “functionally obsolete.”  The bridge is also on the Federal Highway Administrations Eligible Bridge List (EBL).

The City secured funding for preliminary engineering through the Federally funded Highway Bridge Rehabilitation and Reconstruction (HBRR) Program, and a funding commitment is in place for construction funding. 

The project involves upgrading and/or replacement of obsolete, sub-standard features of the bridge, including gore point improvement, acceleration/deceleration lanes, shoulders, and bridge pier clearance.  It is not a total bridge replacement, but there is some significant reconstruction of on and off ramps, pedestrian facilities, and portions of the main deck.  The project provides significant improvement of vehicle access to Downtown, and access for pedestrians, bicyclists and the disabled over and around the structure.  There is also a significant landscape mitigation and improvement component.

In early 2003, Request for Proposals specifications were prepared by Public Works and mailed to thirty-four Northern California consultants.  Proposals were received from three firms:  Mark Thomas & Company, Inc., of San Jose; Brian Kangas Foulk of San Jose; and Rajappan & Meyer Consulting Engineers, Inc., of San Jose.  All three proposers were invited to make presentations before a review panel that included staff from Purchasing, Public Works and Caltrans.

After reviewing written proposals and attending consultant presentations, the panel felt the Mark Thomas proposal reflected the best understanding of project requirements, indicated the most extensive bridge project experience, and proposed to assemble an outstanding team of sub-consultants for this project.

On July 15, 2003, Council awarded a contract to Mark Thomas & Company, Inc., in an amount not-to-exceed $1,623,260 to perform the necessary environmental and right-of-way analysis, provide design services, prepare construction drawings, develop bid technical specifications, and provide consultation services during project construction.  As this is a federally-funded project, the consultant will also be responsible for compliance with all federal requirements, including Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) requirements.

 
The project currently is at 35% of design and a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared and circulated.

Primary design and environmental issues are as follows:

§         Proposed pedestrian and bicycle access

§         widened, barrier-separated pedestrian crossing on the east side of the structure

§         5’ roadway shoulders for bikes

§         removal of existing walkway on the west side of the structure

§         Changes to Charles Street access 

§         Cul de sac with no access to Evelyn Avenue

§         Replacement of street access with a driveway for the northernmost three homes

§         Impacts to parking

§         Reduction of spaces in the Charles Street lot

§         Removal of parking spaces on southbound Mathilda ramp

§         Location and number of trees to be impacted

§         Removal of one row of trees on the northwest side of the structure, retention of one row – 26 trees to be removed, 68 to remain

§         Removal and replacement of 8 trees on the northeast side of the structure.

§         Landscape mitigation opportunities, including tree replacement and bio swale construction, particularly at the southwest quadrant of the interchange.

§         Potential construction impacts such as pile-driving operations and traffic control.

§         Pre-drilled piles – limited impact

§         Ramp closures – detours required

§         Landscape and other aesthetic treatments

§         Aesthetics consistent with downtown streetscape standards

§         San Andreas Court “woonerf” – shared resident vehicle/pedestrian access

§         Noise

Several community meetings have been held during the project development and design process.  The most recent was held on August 25, 2004 to gather community input to inform the environmental analysis.  Particular issues that were voiced at the meeting included visual impacts, bridge aesthetics, ADA compliance, and noise.  Feedback has been used to inform the environmental analysis.

The environmental review phase of work has proceeded to the point of preparation of a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration and conclusion of a 30 day public comment period.  One comment letter was received in legal brief
format under cover of a practicing environmental attorney.  The letter contained substantial technical comments and requested the preparation of a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR).  Staff and the Office of the City Attorney are recommending preparation and circulation of a full EIR to address the substantial comments received and enable additional community input.  Should the Council desire to continue with this project, staff is recommending approval of a contract amendment to the existing design/environmental contract with Mark Thomas & Company to provide for the preparation of an EIR.

EXISTING POLICY

Land Use and Transportation Element C3, Attain a transportation system that is effective, safe, pleasant and convenient.

Land Use and Transportation Element C3.4, Maintain roadways and traffic control devices in good operating condition.

Land Use and Transportation Element C3.1.4, Study and implement physical and operational improvements to optimize roadway and intersection capacities.

Land Use and Transportation Element N1.5, Support a roadway system that protects internal residential areas from City-wide and regional traffic.

Land Use and Transportation Element C3.5, Support a variety of transportation modes.

DISCUSSION

The City of Sunnyvale prepared a Draft Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration and circulated this document for public review per CEQA. Based upon the comments submitted, staff is recommending an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) be prepared to address comments and minimize delay to the design of the project.  This will require an amendment to the original contract with Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. to expand the scope of work to include the EIR and to provide additional funding.

A Mitigated Negative Declaration was initially established as the appropriate environmental document for the project because the environmental impacts associated with the project are able to be mitigated.  An EIR is required only for those projects where the impacts cannot be mitigated.  An EIR differs from a Mitigated Negative Declaration in that an EIR could include more detailed studies, and an EIR would require a longer period of public review.

The Council can also opt to terminate the project at this time prior to the expenditure of additional funds for an EIR.  The City has nearly completed the Mitigated Negative Declaration process, which presents a logical point for termination of the project if so desired.  The Council could decide for fiscal or environmental reasons not to proceed with the project.  The estimated project cost exceeds the level of approved grant funding; the project is assured only $10 million in federal funds until a “high cost project application” is completed at the end of the design process.  While no project in the State of California has ever been denied a high cost application request, there is a level of risk involved.  The comment letter from the Heritage District Neighborhood Association on the mitigated negative declaration contained substantial comments on potential noise and aesthetic impacts.  Upon initial review it appears that the comments do not raise any fatal flaw issues with the project, but they do represent substantial concern from one element of the community. 

It is unclear what the ramifications of terminating the project would be on grant reimbursement for expenditures previously incurred, and there is the potential that the City could be formally designated a high risk for future federal Highway Bridge Reconstruction and Rehabilitation funding.  The City’s experience with a recent federally funded project that was terminated at the conclusion of an environmental review process was that full reimbursement was achieved, with some minor difficulty.  It is a relative certainty that the Mathilda Bridge would be ineligible for any HBRR funding for a period of ten years should the project be terminated.  The implications on other future federal funding are unknown.  There may also be a potential liability associated with initiating a rehabilitation project and then terminating it, should any event occur involving elements of the bridge that were recognized by the project as being in need of rehabilitation. 

FISCAL IMPACT

Total cost of the amendment requested by this report is $228,500.  This includes $68,500 for additional expenditures and project contingency in the amount of $160,000.  In re-negotiating the project scope and allowable expenditures with Caltrans (the grant administrator for the project), Staff has been able to secure grant reimbursement eligibility for a project contingency.  Caltrans originally did not allow a project contingency as an allowable expense, but has reversed its position given project events.

Funds for design and construction support services are available in Public Works Infrastructure Project 822710 – Mathilda Avenue Railroad Overpass Improvements; 80% of the funds are from the federal HBRR program, and 20% of funds are from the Gas Tax fund and Traffic Mitigation funds.  It is anticipated that construction will begin in March 2007.

The total cost for the design phase of the project would be as follows:

CONCLUSION

This project involves widening and modifying the Mathilda Avenue bridge (at Evelyn Avenue and the Caltrain tracks) to address deficiencies which have been identified by Caltrans. The project involves upgrading and/or replacement of obsolete, sub-standard features of the bridge.  It is not a total bridge replacement, but there is some significant reconstruction of on and off ramps, pedestrian facilities, and portions of the main deck.  The project provides significant improvement of access to Downtown, and access for pedestrians, bicyclists and the disabled over and around the structure.  There is also a significant landscape mitigation and improvement component.

A Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared and circulated for the Mathilda Avenue Overhead Bridge Rehabilitation Project.  Substantial comments were received and submitted in the format of a possible legal challenge.  Staff and the Office of the City Attorney are recommending the preparation of an EIR to address environmental issues raised by the comment letter.
 

The City Council can choose to move forward with the preparation of an EIR, or could choose to conclude the Mitigated Negative Declaration process and terminate the project.  Termination of the project may have future unknown consequences on federal highway rehabilitation funding, and will render the Mathilda Bridge ineligible for HBRR funding for a period of ten years.  There may be liability associated with recognizing a rehabilitation need and then terminating work to repair the deficient facility.

Should the Council choose to proceed with the project, an amendment to the existing design and environmental services contract with Mark Thomas & Company is required.  Staff is also recommending the addition of a project contingency, which was previously disallowed by Caltrans but is now being approved. 

ALTERNATIVES

1.      Direct staff to proceed with the Mathilda Overhead Bridge Rehabilitation Project.

2.      Direct staff to complete the Mitigated Negative Declaration process and terminate the Mathilda Overhead Bridge Rehabilitation Project.

Should the City Council elect to proceed with the Project, the City Council can:

1.     Amend the scope of work of an existing contract with Mark Thomas & Company, in substantially the same format as the attached Draft Amendment, to include the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report; authorize additional expenditures in an amount not to exceed $68,500, making a total contract amount of $1,691,760; and approve a project contingency in the amount not-to-exceed $160,000.

2.     Make modifications to the proposed design and environmental scope of work and budget amounts.

3.     Direct staff to pursue alternative contracting arrangements to complete the environmental review process.

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that Council:

1.      Give direction whether to proceed with the Mathilda Overhead Bridge Rehabilitation Project.

Should the City Council desire to proceed with the Mathilda Overhead Bridge Rehabilitation Project, staff recommends that Council;

1.          Amend the scope of work of an existing contract with Mark Thomas & Company, in substantially the same format as the attached Draft Amendment, to include the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report;

2.          Authorize additional expenditures in an amount not to exceed $68,500, making a total contract amount of $1,691,760; and

3.          Approve a project contingency in the amount not-to-exceed $160,000.

Reviewed by:

Marvin Rose, Director, Public Works

Prepared by Jack Witthaus, Transportation and Traffic Manager

Reviewed by:

Mary J. Bradley

Director, Finance

Approved by:

Amy Chan

City Manager

Attachments

A. Consultant Services Agreement- Exhibit A, Exhibit B, Exhibit C (.pdf)
B. Draft Amendment (.pdf)