My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
AECOM 1 - 2011
Clerk
>
Contracts / Agreements
>
_PENDING FOLDER
>
READY TO DESTROY IN 2021
>
AECOM 1 - 2011
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/4/2017 11:58:03 AM
Creation date
4/6/2011 11:51:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Contracts
Company Name
AECOM
Contract #
A-2011-024
Agency
PUBLIC WORKS
Council Approval Date
1/18/2011
Expiration Date
1/1/2013
Insurance Exp Date
4/1/2014
Destruction Year
2021
Notes
Amended by A-2011-024-01, -02, -03
Document Relationships
AECOM (FORMERLY DMJM HARRIS) 1A - 2011
(Amended By)
Path:
\Contracts / Agreements\_PENDING FOLDER\READY TO DESTROY IN 2021
AECOM (FORMERLY DMJM HARRIS) 1B - 2011
(Amended By)
Path:
\Contracts / Agreements\_PENDING FOLDER\READY TO DESTROY IN 2021
AECOM (FORMERLY DMJM HARRIS) 1C - 2014
(Amended By)
Path:
\Contracts / Agreements\_PENDING FOLDER\READY TO DESTROY IN 2021
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
143
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
AECOM 2 <br />In <br />Project Understandi <br />Key Project Objectives <br />The purpose of this Project Approach is to demonstrate to <br />the City of Santa Ana (City) our team's grasp of the project <br />challenges and key issues, and to demonstrate our ability to <br />achieve the project objectives efficiently, cost effectively, and <br />expediently. Our technical review of the project requirements <br />and the site-specific constraints has enabled us to identify a <br />number of key project objectives: <br />• Maximize the City's "Bang for their Budget" <br />• Effective coordination with Southern California <br />Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) and the Orange County <br />Transportation Authority (OCTA) <br />• Define/maintain a realistic and comprehensive <br />schedule for completion <br />• Define a detailed scope of services sufficient to <br />eliminate contract change orders <br />• Maintain project budget <br />• Identify and study (a minimum of) three (3) alternatives <br />that meet the need and purpose of the project <br />• Maintenance of traffic during construction <br />Maximize the City's "Bang for their Budget" <br />We have visited the project site, have come to a clear <br />understanding of the project challenges and issues, have <br />reviewed the scope of services, and have produced a <br />schedule for the completion of the scope of services. During <br />this time of coming to a thorough understanding of the <br />project, we have arrived at the conclusion the City can get <br />more for the budget they have allotted for this phase of the <br />project. We offer for the City's consideration, to complete <br />this phase and the next phase of the project, the Project <br />Approval/Environmental Document (PA/ED) Phase, for less <br />than the $1.3M stated as the Project Budget on page 15 <br />of the RFP. Therefore, we propose to complete a PSRE, a <br />Project Report, and obtain environmental approval through <br />an approved ED for the project, all for under the budgeted <br />amount listed in the RFP. We can say this because we have <br />solicited a complete scope of services and a fee for obtaining <br />environmental clearance from our subconsultant ICF -Jones <br />and Stokes. The full scope for this is included for the City's <br />reference in the appendix, along with a schedule for this <br />proposed, expanded project definition. Our fee for this <br />expanded project definition is included separately, along with <br />our fee for the services defined in the RFP. <br />This strategy yields benefit to the City for the delivery and <br />completion of the project, since moving expediently into the <br />environmental phase will result in better project readiness. <br />The project becomes a real project sooner. With the <br />environmental phase completed, it can be better positioned <br />for funding, whether funding may ultimately come from OCTA: <br />or from another source, such as Federal stimulus funds, <br />Proposal to Project Study Report Equivalent and Co ;: etual Engineering Plans for <br />Santa.-',-,,, 'outevard Grade Separation Project Y <br />where projects with environmental approval are clearly <br />favored. We understand clearly this project is grouped by <br />OCTA into the next phase of grade separation projects, with <br />the current phase under design, so with this next phase, there <br />may be stiff competition from other projects/cities with OCTA <br />for a potentially limited pool of available funds. Moving Santa <br />Ana Boulevard ahead of the others likely will yield budgetary <br />dividends. <br />We also provide, within AECOM, the ability to seek project <br />funding. On our team is Mr. John Barna, whose expertise <br />is project funding. As a former member of the California <br />Transportation Commission (CTC), Mr. Barna was intimately <br />involved with project funding decisions made by the CTC. <br />We plan on using Mr. Barna to assist our team and the City <br />in the hunt for funding. Additionally, with a project that has <br />achieved environmental clearance at an early time within the <br />project's development, we will have a strong candidate for <br />any funding that can be identified and competed for. AECOM <br />also has advocates that can seek out funding opportunities at <br />the Federal level. <br />Coordination with SCRRA and OCTA <br />It is very critical to the success of this project to effectively <br />coordinate and communicate with both SCRRA and OCTA. <br />As the City well knows, the railroad right of way within the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.