Loading...
269439 � WMITE - CITY CLERK . PINK - FINANGE CITY OF SAINT PAUL Council � . CANARV - DEPARTMENT � BLUE - - MAVOR . File N 0. Resolution Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date WHEREAS, in accordance with the approved Joint Powers Agreement between the City of Saint Paul (City) and the Metropolitan Transit Commission (MTC) , a combined staff of the City and MTC has completed " consultant proposal review and recommended a consultant team to the Downtown People Mover Steering Cominittee; WHEREAS, in accordance with the aforementioned Joint Powers Agreement, the Steering Committee has reviewed and approved the recommended con- sultant team, study management structure and general budgat allocations and; has offered these for City Council and MTC approval; � WHEREAS, in accordance with the a€orementioned Joint Powers Agreement, the M'�C shall be the contractor for all third party con- sultants selected for the project; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Ci.ty Council of the City of Saint Paul concurs with the Steering Committee's recommendations and recommends to the MTC that the consultant contracts be submitted ' . _ to the Ux]�an Mass. Transit Administra�io�- fQr its €inal approval at the ,.�� . � - earliest possible d�te. : , COU[VCILMEN Requested by Department of: . Yeas ' Nays Butler Hozza. [n Favor � Hunt � Levine _ Against BY Roedler S ylvester Tedesco Adopted by Council: Date ,1UL Z,6 197� Form Approved by City Attorney , Certified Passed by Council Secretary BY �'/��--^-- By � Appro ;4lavor: Date ,U�- �'s '� Appro b Mayor for Submis ' unci� BY BY ;$LISNED �UL 3 0 197'' ' � . ' ���� , July 15, 1977 MEMO TO: DPM Steering Committee � ��/�� FROM: John: Jamieson, Project Director - Dick Schnarr, Deputy Project Direct SUBJECT: Consultant Selection Background Recent legislation requires "that all third party contracts for consul- tants be approved by a majority of the Steering Committee. . .". To date, the committee has (1) received the report of the Consultant Recommenda- tion Committee, and (2) interviewed principal representatives pf the ' six major firms recommended previously. On July 5, 1977, the DPM Steering Committee approved the use af the recommended firms and requested that we (1) clarify project management including contractual relationships, (2) define the wozk allocations amount of all participants including the governmental agencies, and (3) prepare contracts for further consideration. Mr. Richard Wolsfeld was designated by the committee to coordinate consultant activities during this negotiations period. . Currer�t Status City and MTC staffs have been working with Mr. Wolsfeld and other recom- mended consultants. We are satisfied with the administration and manage- ment plans as praposed in Mr. Wolsfeld's memo of July 11, 1977. We recommend the administration structure utilizing the concept of a joint venture between the two principal firms (Kaiser Engineers and Bather- Ringrose-Wolsfeld) with all but one other firm as subcontractors. (as indicated in �=he Scope of Work, an independent evaluation of safety and reliability is desired; hence a separate contract in tfiis ar�a. Summarized on the following page are the firms, areas of responsibility and contracts amounts as suggested by Mr. Wolsfeld in his memo dated July 14, 1977. We concur with these amounts. , � . , : : ��.r ����, Q8M Steering Committee Page 2 July 15, 1977 FIRM AREA(S) OF RESPONSIBILITY - CONTRACT AMOUNT Joint Venture : Bather-Rinqrose-Wolsfeld/ Project coordination, community Kaiser Engineezs involvement, transit system • design, urban development, sta- tions, project schedule, and implementation plan -Bather-Ringrose-Wolsfeld $315,000 -Kaiser 340,000 -Joint Venture Contingency 29 156 -Station area contingency 80,000 . $ 764,156 Subcontractors , �BAM Engineers Inc. Guideway design assistance 70,000 ;arton-Aschman Assoc Ridership, air quality, noise assessment, and parking 83,570 ammer, Siler, George Assoc Economic forecasts, socio- economic, and financial planning � 62,000 �E� Community coordination in Summit/ University area 5,000 obert �J. Harmon & �ssoc Benefit/cost and value capture � 50,000 kidmore, Owings & Merrill Design criteria, urban design, and support in station design 83,631 �rn►an Associates Security 7,000 �ltz, King Duvall, Local engineering assistance �derson Assoc.: and yards and shops 40,000 �rgstedt, Wahlberg, Station Area Design subcontractors Bergquist, Rohkohl (Contingency held in Joint Venture) Llerbe ' ------ immel, Green, Abrahamson _nsor/Faricy �fety and Reliability Contractor �ank Smith and Assoc Safety and Reliability 34,643 TOTAL $1,200,000 . .. . . . . . . .,.. .. R , DPM Steering Committee Page 3 July 15. 1977 Motion The DPM Steering Committee recommendS to the MTC and the City of�Sa�epaul establishment of the �oint venture and subcontractors, and a sep contract for evaluation of safety and•reliability to the firms and foX the amounts shown on the precedinq page. lad • � r � R.ANf�1WG;TAAINSPOHiA710N/ENGY�i1JG/� July I I, 1977 MEMORANDUM � TO: John Jamieson, DPM Rroject Director, MTC Richard Schnarr, DPM Deputy Project Director, City of St. Paul FROM: Richard Wolsfeld �V`�`v SUBJECT: Administrative and Management Pian for DPM Project At the July S, 1977, meeting of ihe Steering Committee, t was directed to develop an organization plan for the project that addressed the following points: • Administrative or Contractual Structure for the DPM Pro ject. • Management Plan for the Involvement of the Consulting Firms and Agency Staff. � Management Plan relating the Consulting Firms, Public Agency Staff, Advisory Committees, Steering Committee, City of St. Paul, MTC, and UMTA. Outlined be(ow are my suggestions for each of these items. Administrotive Structure Two major options were anlyzed for the administrative or contractual structure for the project: � For the MTC to execute three contracts with consultants, us follows: - Frank Smith & Associates for safety and reliability. enn�.wNr�.wo�.sFan.,,aa+ns.c�wo�a.r�c. �,o�rnPoC a�►�.,e sarr►i ��s,�► se+as P+ior�a�area,-xioo ' r - Kaiser Engineers for transit system design and related activities. - BRW for urban develo ment• social, economic, and financi6l pla�ne�9� a�d environ� mental. Kaiser Engineers nnd BRW would then execute appropriate sub-contracts to compiete their fndividuol areas of responsi bii i ty. • For the MTC to execute two contracts with consuitants as fol lows: , - Frank Smith & Associates for safety and reliability, ' BRW/kaiser Engineers, A Joint Venture for ati other work. The major advantages of the later structure include: • A single entity would be responsible for the consulta�t activities, this would minimize potential for disagreement over task responsibility and give the client a single entity to deal with for all work. • With a single entity responsible for all tasks, a stronger unit exists than with a diversion of tasks between two firms. • Spokespeop�e for the Joint Venture would carry more authority than if speaking for either BRW or Kaiser. • Greater flexibility to shift dollars and work responsibility among firms exists with the Joint Venture. • The simplier structure wi1! probably resutt in cost savings. Poten#ial disadvantages include: ` • The person representing the Joint Venture might not always be knawledgeable of all activities, where two separate parties might have more comprehensive representation. • If disagreement occurs between the MTC and the Joint Venture over contractual matters, this could split the Joint Venture and result in a three party situation. The suggested administrative structure is the Joint Venture as shown on Figure I. The general area of responsibility for each firm is noted below: FIRM � AREA S) OF RESPONSIBILITY Joint Venture Project Coordination, Community lnvolvement, Transit System Design, Urban Development, Stations, Project Schedule, and Implementation Plan ABAM Esgineers, Inc. Guideway Design Assistance Barton-Aschman Associates Ridership, Air �uality, Noise Assessment, and Parking Hammer, Siler, George Assoc. Economic Forecasts, Socio-Economic, and Financial Planning HELP Community Coordinution in Summit/ : University Area Robert J. Harmon and Assoc. Benef i t/Cost and VaI ve Capture Skidmore, Owings & Merrill Design Criteria, Urban Design, and Support in Station Design Norman Associates � Security Toltz, King, Duvall, Anderson, Local Engineering Assistance and Yards Associates and Shops. � Management Plan for the Participatinq Consultinq Firms and A �ncy Staff The management plan for the involvement of the participating consulting firms and the staffs of the city and MTC is based on the following premises: � This is a large, complex project and the day-to-day manage- ment and meeting responsibility can not be handled by Q � single individual. � • The project must be divided into logical functional units that are directed by people reporting to a project caordinator. • The basic organization unit is the functional element to be completed; therefore consultants and publie agency staff will both work and/or direct the functional elements. • The heads of the functional units must be knowledgeable about the entire project and must inform people under them about the other areas as required for them to complete their work. • Since, it is impossible for all people working on the project ' to fully understand or be able to discuss all elements of the project; public presence must be closely monitored. • Public presentations must be made by the project coordina- tor, deputy coordinator, or the heads of the functional units. • - A single foca) point must be available for interface with the private development sector. Figure 2 outlines the suggested organization of the DPM functions. The Project Coordinator will have responsibility for management, coordination, community involvement support, project schedule, and the implementation plan. � m C� � � � D G� U O � -� A t�n f� 'l7 c] ..."�'* C fD '0 . -+ � 'p '�; ? (S, �• „�� �p N '�O � � '� y pQ j• � � �' = Q V1 � ? O "'� � ' r -�+ y n � '� rn � cn D -� --� Z � � �`1 ro � rr- C� m cn � y' � -, ,-. z � v, � o' � T� --a _ o �+ y' N v C/� c!� � D ° o � D � � � � i � C � -« -.� -« c� a: �'. � c� � D � D � � � � o p ' Z —I � rn D Z� � � c�"i . �v -�+ �v, � rn Z � -� Z � C1 o cu -: �1 � -� � N p p � "' ° a -, -� o � ^ m m l v�i � ('A �• G• ^ U'f Q � � I n � � � � � � —� ' � i � u, y � Z � Z ,,,� � � � ; � ` � � � � rn � � _ � � � � i Z �1 m m � rn � D C r � � � n � o rn � 1 . o o .-, o ; Z ,,, �. o � � � . � o � � m � � � � .� � °n. � y � D � � � cn : � { N � � y , -� --a 1 3 o � � z � c � � �n � � � °-° t z � � � -� f� �" O -+ Z � � � ... , � m � < N C � m O � D � °— n o- ' � =� fD � � � � � � y p' n o 0 o N � o m r � Z r Q o � o � m D Z O m � 0 6 n � � p � cc , � Z 3 � � � D � 3 � � � `� n Management Plan for the DPM Project The suggested management plan for the DPM Project is shown on Figure 3 and revolves around two major groups: � Steering Committee - the purpose of the Steering �ommittee is to provide overall �rection to the project. The committee will approve the DPM wo�k program, approve project consultant contracts, review the progress of the project, and make recommendations to the City of St. Paul, MTC, and the State Legislature. The members of the committee include: - President of St. Paul City Council, Chairman - Mayor of City of St. Paul - Chairman of MTC - Chairman of TDC of MTC - Chairman of Metropolitan Council - Chairman of TAB of Metropalitan Council - Commissioner of Mn/DOT - Member of Minnesota Senate - Member of Minnesota House • Project Coordination Team - the purpose of the Project Coordination Team PCT is to execute the overall direction of the Steering Committee with the advice of the three advisory committees. The PCT will complete four major tasks: - provide coordination and direction to the consultant and public agency staff. - present project results to the Steering Committee. - receive and utilize inp�ut from the three advisory committees. - receive and utilize the input from the safety and reliability consultant. To assist in compteting these tasks, the PCT will hold bi- weekly meetings to discuss the following types of items: _ work task progress during the last two weeks. - scheduled work tasks during the next two weeks. - review of public meetings held. - scheduled meetings and attendance requirements. - casts versus budgets. - main trends in project. - problern areas. . �v m ODO 3 �� O�n � 0� '� �D nNT.Z �c"C rn3Z m rnD- m�� mZ '�.� .� ---- � I n CI � � � -� t � p -� rn � j � Z y �n O 1 ° ..D.� Z �m n c� p , cn C ,� � � 1 � � O O � � � a � N � o � � � .� c� � � g --� D 3 O Z r � � 0 r? _ _ ,3 � p �C7 �L��� L� • . . .. D ZT� = I- cn Z C � j �' �i 7o t-7 c, �v � � � -°±,�. �1 r � - • • � • • � -� 3 � � D "C"� � —._��, ' � o � � m � � c,,,o�,� � � ..�'�'.� —I � � � j �: � y � aw ►`�- -' 3 � m Z m -n �° i� rn, � M � c� � w ZG 1 � � �� �'.�. ~ a K � o _. � ; � c� rn �° n d v � � -v ('� �� p; � ro �-+ ;fl� 0;- C'� � � �a �� R �°. � � ��0 3 ' � (�,i c o � p n p � � r� � z � °c � � 'o 1 Z ' �.�. �..,, � a � � �� v;i ..D.�1 I � w c� o o m � Z Dj :�! � � � � o � O -nC p!j � � o n -�-1 :0 1 � � '-� -� D �° �� 3'v :D "'� cp �N �;:-1 v m < rn O _ � 3 ---- -- __ --� ;n m�, � 'r� _ � 3 Drn � ? � -a n r'- 'C • O �� � ' � --� rn rn . � �nr�u�w�i�nr�sao�rnnoru v�NO��� July 14, 1977 , MEMORANDUM TU: John Jamieson, DPM Project Director MTC Richard Schnarr, DPM Deputy Project pirector, City of St. Paul FROM: Richard Woisfeld ,�1�"� SUBJECT: Contracts At the July 5, 1977, meeting of the Steering Committee, I was directe to re ' the work alfocations �nong the consulting firms and the governmentalugencies and on the basis of the refinements prepare draft contracts for the Steering Committee's consideration at their meeting on July 19, 1977, These tasks have been completed and �e summarized below. Refinements to Work Ailocations The refinements to the work allocations are summarized below. The refinerr�en were made to the allocations as presented in a June 16, 1977, merrio from Cam Andre, MTC, to the MTC Transit Development Committee und the City of St. Paul Transportation and Development Committee. � Manaqement and Coordination - estirr�ates of man-hours were made by BRIN and Kaiser�o manage and coordinate the fifteen firms during the 12 month time period. The relationship to the review work that will be compieted by the consultant to the Metropolitan Councii and the consuitant to UMTA wps also considered. The resuit is an increase in the budget from $30,000 to $45,000 for both firms; BRW is budgeted at $30,000 and Kaiser at $I5,000. • Alternatives - the original work progrcun did not include extensive analysis of transportation or non-transportation alternatives to the DPM. This alternative analysis will require additional dollars in patronage, guideways, systems analysis, economics, and financial plans. $pecifically $I 8,000 was added to Kaiser's budget, $I O,Q00 to BRW's budget, $7,000 to Hammer's budget, and $7,000 to Barton- Aschman's budget. enn�.Rwr�aose.Hro�sFao..�wvrs.cnc�A,r�c ��c�you��s� , ����•� �arF s�isa�-xioo �� • Station and Sk a Simulation - Honeywell requested , 0 io conduct simulations. oliars were not available to fund this task and Task 6.3 has been dropped. • Personal Security - Honeywell had proposed to u�e Norman Associates to complete this task as part af their origina) proposal. Since Honeywell will not be involved in the project, they have requested that a contract be negotiated - directly with Norman Associates. This has been initiated. • Social, Economic, and Financial Planninq - becouse of the scope of fhe refinement of work ailocation in this area, the MTC and city gave policy direction. Their direction was as follows: - R. J. Harmon and Associ ates: 8enef i t/Cost and Val ue" Capture - Hammer, Siler, George: Economic Forecqsts, Socio- Economic, and Financial Ptan This resvlts in clear responsibility and no splitting of tasks. Harmon has been allocated $50,000 for his work and Hammer has been allocated $62,000. • ABAM's Role - further study revealed overlap between Kaiser and ABAM on certain tasks related to the guideway. Elimination of this overlap reduced ABAM's budget io $70,000. • Local Architects - the recommendation is to establish a contingency fund of $80,000 under the Joint Venture to be used for station area schematics as defined through work orders from the Joint Venture to the four local architects. • 5ummar of S ecific Work Task Res onsibilit - Appendix C attached assigns responsibility,. for each work task in the Scope of Work. . ' � ' �� , ��`, Budgets Based on the above described work allocation and djrection the budgets were established as outlined below. • Consu{tants . IRM AMOUNT Joint Venture - BRW $3 I S,000 - Kaiser $340,000 Subcontractors - ABAM 70,000 - Barton-Aschman 83,570 - Hammer, Siler, George 62,000 - HELP 5,000 . - R. J. Harmon 50,000 - SOM 83,631 - Norman Associates 7,000 - TKDA 40,000 - Local Architects (BWBR, Ellerbe, HGA, and W/F) 80,000 SUB-TOTAL $1 ,136,20{ Frank Smith 8� Associates 34,643 TOTAL $I, 170,844 � MTC's Budget - The MTC estimntes a required budget of $120,000 io complete their responsibility in the work program. • Cit of St. Paul's Budget - the city estimates a required budget of �to complete their responsibility in the work program. This includes work assigned to Mn/DOT which can be completed through on existing joint powers agreement. • Mn/DOT's Budget - $10,000 was allocated to Mn/DQT for management and coordination. • Contingency Fund - after ollocation of the budgets to each firm, the MTC, the City of St. Paul, and Mn/DOT; a contingency of $29,156 resulted. Contracts -. The proposed form of the contracts is outlined beio�,y; • AGREEMENT _ this one page outlines the time schedule financia! info�mation, and personnel to represe�t the co�� tractor. Drafts of thes� sheets are att4ched for each proposed oontract with the Joint Venture. � • �►PPENDIX A - contains agreement articles which are common to oll contracts. � APP���X B - contains the services to be completed for the project and is the "Project Description and ScQpe of Work" dated March 23, 1977. • AI'PENDIX C - contains the specific ollocotion of responsi- bility of each firm and public ag�Gy for the work pr�am, ,