Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout15049 ORD - 08/08/1979Jicn:o-o=79;l st ' v AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN ARCHITECTURAL AGREEMENT WITH TOTAL DESIGN FOUR FOR ARCHITECTURAL AND PLANNING WORK TO BE PERFORMED IN CONNECTION WITH IMPROVE- MENTS TO THE TRANSIT MAINTENANCE AND ADMINISTRATION FACILITY, SAID AGREEMENT BEING SUBJECT TO APPROVAL FROM THE URBAN MASS TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATION, A SUBSTAN- TIAL COPY OF WHICH AGREEMENT IS ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF, MARKED EXHIBIT "A"; APPROPRIATING $23,000 OUT OF THE NO. 162 FEDERAL/STATES GRANT FUND, ACTIVITY 4682, CODE 301 (UMTA TECHNICAL STUDIES); AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS: SECTION 1. That the City Manager be authorized to execute an architectural agreement with Total Design Four for architectural and planning work to be performed in connection with improvements to the Transit Mainte- nance and Administration Facility, subject to approval from the Urban Mass Transportation Administration, a substantial copy of which agreement is attached hereto and made a part hereof, marked Exhibit "A". SECTION 2. That there is hereby appropriated the sum of $23,000 out of the No. 162 Federal/States Grant Fund, Activity 4682, Code 301 (UMTA Technical Studies), far the aforesaid architectural and planning' work to be performed by Total Design Four. SECTION 3. The necessity to authorize the aforesaid agreement, subject to approval from the Urban Mass Transportation Administration, and to appropriate the sums necessary to effect the said agreement at the earliest practicable date creates a public emergency and an imperative public necessity requiring the suspension of the Charter rule that no ordinance or resolution shall be passed finally on the date of its intro- duction but that such ordinance or resolution shall be read at three several meetings of the City Council, and the Mayor having declared that such emergency and necessity exist, having requested the suspension of the Charter rule and that this ordinance be passed finally on the date of its 15049 pUG 2,10- introduction and take effect and be in full force and effect fromand b after its passage, IT IS ACCORDINGLY SO ORDAINED, this the day of August, 1979. ATTEST: 7 / '' i y—Secretary APPROVED: 6th DAY OF AUGUST, 1979: J. BRUCE AYCOCK, CITY ATTORNEY MAY THE C Y OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS Al CONTRACT ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES TIIE STATE OF TEXAS X COUNTY OF. NUECES I • The City of Corpus Christi, hereinafter called "City", and Total Design Four, Architects, hereinafter called "Architect", whether one or more, agree as follows: I. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED. The Architect hereby agrees, at his own expense, to prepare a study, develop a program, assess environmental impacts, and prepare preliminary designs for a new Bus -maintenance and Administration Facility for the Corpus Christi,Transit.System, in accordance with the -Request for Proposal dated February, 1979, Appendix "A" attached herewith and made a part of this contract. II. SCOPE OF SERVICES. Architect's services shall include generally the following: All work is to develop a preliminary design and maint- enance plan for centralized maintenance and administration facilities that will meet the short- and long-term needs of the Corpus Christi Transit System. A11 designs and estimate for these facilities must be to a sufficient 1'evel of detail for filing a Section 3 capital grant application with UMTA. In addition, the study must consider environmental impacts of the proposed facilities, and reports and permit applications necessary for environmental approval must be prepared. . The specific services to be provided by the Architect are specified in Appendix "B", "Planning Study Proposal - Bus Maintenance and Administrative Facilities" - Corpus Christi Texas, dated 16 April 1979, and as further clarified in Appendix "C", letter record of conference with City Staff dated 18 July 1979. III. TRANSFER OF INTEREST. The Architect shall not assign or transfer any interest in this contract without prior written consent from the City. IV. ORDERLY RENDERING OF SERVICES. The Architect shall complete all work required by this agreement within four (4) months from date of authorization by the City. V. PAYMENTS TO THE ARCIHITECT. The City agree to pay the Architect for his services a fee of $23,000.00. 1. Upon execution of this agreement a sum of $1,000.00 2. Upon completion of the work and approval of same by the City a sum of $22,000.00. VI_ The City reserves the right to terminate this contract at any time with or without cause. In the event of such termination, the Architect will be paid a sum proportioned to the state of completion of the phase of work in which he is then engaged. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, witness our hand in duplicate, each of which shall be considered an origianl, on the day and year first above written. ATTEST: CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI By City Secretary R. Marvin Townsend APPROVED: DAY OF AUGUST, 1979: J. BRUCE AYCOCK, CITY ATTORNEY By Assistant City Attorney Director of Finance TOTAL DESIGN FOUR By • APPENDIX "A" REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS PLANNING STUDY FOR BUS MAINTENANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES FOR THE CORPUS CHRISTI TRANSIT SYSTEM FEBRUARY, 1979 HILUI:lv1:1) MAR 16 1979 The City of Corpus Christi, Texas, is requesting proposals from qualified consultants to develop a program, assess environmental impacts, and prepare preliminary designs for a new bus maintenance and administration facility for the Corpus Christi Transit System. The following information is to facilitate the timely preparation and submission of a proposal for services for the work described in the study objectives under paragraph VI below. BACKGROUND OF CORPUS CHRISTI TRANSIT SYSTEM The Corpus Christi Transit System is owned by the City of Corpus Christi, and operates as a part of the City's Department of Traffic and Transit. It was acquired by the City in 1967, when the previous (private) owner threatened to cease operations. The transit system has a fleet of 42 General Motors diesel transit buses, used in regular transit service and in intracity charters, and four over -the -road coaches, used for intercity charters. Twenty-eight of the transit buses are 1967 models; the others are 1976 models. Twenty-eight buses are used in peak - hour transit service, on 18 routes. In addition to the full size transit buses, the transit system operates nine vans for specialized services for elderly and handicapped persons_ Two of the vans are equipped with wheelchair lifts. Yearly mileage is approximately 1,200,000 miles in regular transit service, 250,000 miles in local and long distance charter service, and 250,000 miles in specialized van service. Approximately two million passengers are carried yearly. The transit system employ about 85 persons_ The'transit capital improvement program calls for replacing some of the older transit buses with new full size buses. In addition, a number of smaller transit buses and specialized equipment for elderly and handi- capped service will be acquired, so that the fleet will become more diversi- fied. The fleet is not expected to grow substantially in the next few years, but the new transit facility should allow some provision for expansion of operations in the future. The current administration and maintenance facility used by the Corpus Christi Transit System is nearly 40 years old, and is not suitable for main- taining and servicing modern transit -buses. The voters of Corpus Christi, as a part of a bond election in November, 1977, approved a project to build a new transit maintenance and administration facility. It is anticipated that 80 percent of the project cost will be provided by the Urban Nass Transporta- tion Administration-(UNTA) under Section 3 and Section 5 capital grants, and that•the 20 percent local share will be provided by the State of Texas (13 percent) and the'City of Corpus Christi (7 percent). The City staff has conducted a preliminary site analysis for the new transit facility. PROPOSAL METHODOLOGY, SELECTING, EVALUATION, PROCESSING & STUDY OBJECTIVES Y. Proposal Constraints Proposals submitted in response to this Request for Proposal are to conform to the following conditions: A. A contract evolving from this request will be between the City of Corpus Christi and a consultant. Sub -agreements between a proposing contractor and other firms/individuals, for the purpose of executing' work elements described are discouraged. B. Five (5) copies of the proposal are to be received no later than 5:00 p.m., Central Daylight Time, April 17, 1979 , By: The Department of Engineering & Physical Development. James K. Lantos, P.E., Director Engineering & Physical Development City Hall, 302 S. Shoreline Corpus Christi, Texas 78401 (Hand carried proposals may be delivered to City Hall, 302 S. Shoreline, Fourth Floor, Corpus Christi, Texas.) II. Proposal Content No limit is recommended as to the level of detail to be included in the.proposal. However, the proposal must at a minimum include the following_ (a) Name of firm (or firms if joint venture). • (b) Size of firm(s) to include both home and branch offices. (c) Brief history and -primary experience of firm. • (d) Brief description of work completed or underway by firm that relates to the scope of work described in attachment. (e) List agencies for which management, planning, or related work has been performed. - (f) List the professional disciplines needed to develop this study and the proposing-firm(s) ability to provide this expertise. One paragraph summaries of related education and experience of the firm(s) key personnel to be associated with study are to be presented. Also, indicate amount of time to be spent on project by the listed personnel. Using the work program description in "The Study Objectives", present the method proposed to accomplish the required work. (h) A schedule of progress reports,' task development stages, and output reports for review is to depict anticipated project scheduling. (g) III. Consultant Selection Procedures Consultant procurement and selection will be made as follows: (a) Requests for proposals are being sent to all consultants having indicated an interest by letter and to all architectural and engineering firms in the City. Other firms who request an opportunity to submit proposals shall be promptly furnished a copy of the request for proposal. (b) Proposals returned to the City within the specified response time shall be considered by the Department of Engineering and Physical Development and the Department of Traffic and Transit. The two Departments shall use the "evaluation criteria" specified below to determine their recommendation as to the top three candidates prior to selection. - 3 - c / IV. Consultant Evaluation Criteria 1. Specialized experience and technical competence in connection with the type of services required; 2. Past record of performance on contracts, including such factors as control of costs, quality of work, and ability to meet schedules; 3. Capacity to perform the work (including any specialized services) within the time limitations;• 4. Geographic location of the candidate and its familiarity with the area in which the project is located; 5. Proposed method to accomplish the work required; 6. Volume of work'previously awarded to the candidate by the grantee with the object of effecting an equitable distribution of work among qualified firms; 7. Avoidance of personal and organizational conflicts of interest; and 8. Estimated cost.' V. Budget and Time of Performance Limitations A total dollar amount available for this work is $23,000. The project will span no more than 4 months. As indicated in the proposed\schedule, work will commence on authorization and"a final project report will be submitted by 120 days VI. Study Objectives A. Preparation of the Construction Program, including an evaluation of the Administrative portion as well as the operational portion. It should take into consideration parking and access for employee and operational vehicles. B. A preliminary facility design and site plan. -4- C. Cost estimates, including architectural and engineering costs, site preparation, construction, landscaping and equipment. D. An environmental assessment to be included by the City as part of the application for UMTA funding. E. Recommendations_for the construction of the Bus Maintenance and Administration Facility with necessary maps, sketches, and all other pertinent support material. E. Six (6) draft copies of the report for review by the City staff. After approval and acceptance of the final draft, the consultant shall prepare 25 copies for submission to the City. - 5 - .t } TOT -A ta D SIG\ FOR PLANNING ARCHITECTURE CONSULTING DEVELOPfv ENT Donald Greene, AIA William H. Holland, AIA James B. Boggs, AIA J. Carter Howald, AIA Homer C. Innis, PE Robert R. Conolly, AIA Fred C. Kirkham, AIA Dietrich H. Braun, AIA Clarence 0. Upchurch, Jr., AIA L � e Mr. James K. Lontos, P.E., Director Engineering and Physical Development City Hall, 302 South Shoreline Corpus Christi, TX 78401 Corpus Christi Office' 16 April 1979 Subject: Planning Study for Bus Maintenance and Administrative Facilities Dear Mr. Lontos: This letter transmits our proposal for subject consultant services for your Transit System. Joining with us in this effort is the firm of Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, Inc., Dallas, Texas. Our joint proposal .is bound with this letter and five (5) copies are provided, as per your request. We have reviewed the Study Objectives described in your February RFP and our proposal meets your requirements. Although the available budget and time frame are somewhat restrictive, we believe we can complete the assignment within those constraints. Our firms bring to this project an effective blend of experience, capabil- ity and capacity. Our Project Team has the capability to continue beyond the current study through final design and construction management, there- by assuring the City of essential continuity of planning and design. Our two firms have depth of qualified personnel to meet any contingency or increase in scope. We propose that I assume Officer -in -Charge responsibilities for Total Design Four. My resume is included in our submission. Thank you for this opportunity to present our proposal and qualifications. Sincerely, J. Carter Howald, A A Principal JCH/mas Encl osure P.O. DRAWER 3947 101 NORTH SHORELINE SUITE 300 CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS 78404 512-884.8811 P.O. BOX 2085 FIRST NATIONAL BANK TOWER SUITE 612 HARLINGEN. TEXAS 78550- 512-428-4571 TOTAL DESIGN FOUR 101 N. SHORELINE SUITE 300 CORPUS.CHRISTI TEXAS 78401 CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI DUS MAINTENANCE/ADMINISTRATION FACILITIES STUDY PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE OF '!ORK NTP TASK END OF WEEK 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 11 1 _Bus Facilities and_Opera- tion Data Collection 2 Facilities and Operations Program Plan 3 Survey and Identification of Candidate Sites 4 Acquisition Analyses 5 Development and Analysis of Alternatives 6 Establishment of Evalua- tion Criteria 7 Alternatives Evaluation and Selection 8 Draft Preliminary Design, Operations and Management Report 9 Preliminary Design, Opera- tions, and Management _ Report 10 Identification of Environ- mental Requirements 11 Establishment of Environ- mental Baseline Data 12 Preliminary Environmental Evaluation, 13 Draft Environmental Report Preparation (DEIR) • 14 Environmental Permit Support :••vet az- . III Hill -s4,.4, 1131 1111 .,.. 0 11111 ,-; T., -�.- 1111111 - D City Review Input ® Decision on Negative Declaration versus DEIR r n 3. MANAGEMENT PLAN We have selected a Project Tears and developed a management approach for this study that will assure the City of Corpus Christi of smooth progression of all work tasks, production of high quality design, maintenance and management plans, and thorough documentation of all work, including environmental analyses, in support of•grant and permit applications. Total Design Four and Parsons Brinckerhoff have committed experienced sen- ior staff members to conduct this project, and we have outlined specific respon- sibilities and schedules for all participants. Individually, team members bring specialized skills and experience to this project; together, they constitute a multidisciplinary Project Team capable of providing the broad range of services needed for the project's successful completion. Of equal importance is the fact the Project Team has the capability to continue beyond the current study through final design and even construction management. The City can be assured of con- tinuity of planning and design. The TD -Four -PB tears is presented graphically on the following Organization Chart. Beside each name we have indicated the percent of each individual's to- tal time that will be dedicted to this project. The Chart establishes as Pro- ject Manager Clarence Upchurch, AIA. tor. Upchurch and lir. Melvin J. Kohn, Man- ager of PBQ7,D Dallas office, will direct the entire study. Advisory Board: Sidney Graves. Mr. Graves, a Project Manager and Architect in PB s Boston office, also is Deputy Technical Director for Architecture and Urban Design. Specializing in transportation facilities, he has served as Project Manager and Architect for MARTA's Brady Avenue Bus Maintenance Facility in Atlanta, and as Project Architect for several projects, including the conceptual and functional planning of a 3,000 car parking garage and the South Braintree Rapid Transit Station complex in Boston. In addition to providing advice and guidance to the Total Design Four architects, Mr. Graves will also be concerned with site planning. Advisory Board: l lvistprojects. Grava. Dr. Grava is the PBQ&D technical director of 9 projects. He is a professor of Urban Planning at Columbia University and a permanent member of the U.S.A./U.S.S.R. exchange program of technical ex- perts in urban planning and computer use. His articles on transportation issues are widely published in professional periodicals. Advisory Board: Debbie C. Allee. viron�nental services conducted b PL's&D.s. A1She haslee isthe twenty year director for en- s eerience design and management of environmental studies for major capitalxinvestmentnpro1- grams, including highway and rapid transit projects. Advisory Board: Julie H. Hoover: Mrs. Hoover is currently Manager of Planning in PB s New York office. Her experience in public participation and community and social analyses include project work and independent and government spon- sored research. Her most notable efforts were as Project Manager for the - 13 - • National Study of Citizen Participation in FHWA Projects. The results of the study were documented by FHwA in a handbook identifying effective citizen parti- cipation mechanisms: "Involving Citizens in Metropolitan Region Transportation Planning: (FHwA/SES-77/11). An Advisory Board consisting of senior principals from TD -Four and PBQUD . will assure complete coordination, adherence to the highest technical standards and on-time performance of the assignment. Following this section we have included detailed company resumes for the key members of the Project Team shown on the Organization Chart. Highlights from those resumes are presented below. Officer -in -Charge: J. Carter Howald. Mr. Howald, Vice President of Total De- sign Four, supervises the planning divisions of both TD -Four's offices. He has over fifteen years experience in management of planning and architecture teams. Officer -in -Charge: Winfield 0. Salter. Mr. Salter, a Senior Vice President of PBQ&D, is Manager of the firm's Southern Region. He is the technical director of all transit activities conducted by the firm and serves on the governing . board of three joint ventures active in transit system studies and design. Mr. Salter has over twenty-five years of experience in the management of transit system study, design and construction. He was director of studies for mass transportation improvements in the Houston -Galveston and Dallas -Fort Worth regions. Project Manager: Clarence Upchurch. Mr. Upchurch has ten years of experience as a Project Manager in the Corpus Christi area. He coordinates approximately 50% of TD -Four's projects. Deputy Project Manager: Melvin J. Kohn: Mr. Kohn, Assistant Vice President, is presently Manager of the Dallas office of PBQ&D. He has served as Project Man- ager of several transportation planning assignments for the cities of Dallas, Fort Worth and Garland, and the North Central Texas Council of Governments. One such study included Site Analysis and Preliminary Design of a proposed Fort • .Worth Transportation Terminal. Site Acquisition Studies: Michael Gilkerson. Mr. Gilkerson researches data for various TD -Four studies. He is an active member of the Steering Committee for Regional/Urban Design Assistance Teain (RUDAT) - Corpus Christi Study, and a member of the RUDAT Implementation Task Force. He recently completed site work analyses for the Santa Anna and Aransas National Wildlife Refuges. While at Texas Tech, Mr. Gilkerson participated in an urban design study for Crosbyton, Texas. The study consisted of transporatation and traffic analyses. Traffic Studies: C. Michael Walton. Dr. Walton is presently assistant profes- sor of civil engineering at the University of Texas in Austin. He specializes in the planning and administration of transportation and traffic. projects. - 14 - Maintenance Operations and Management: Melvin J. Kohn. Environmental Studies: Alfred J. Angiola. Mr. Angiola is manager of Pa's Ad- vanced Technology Department and supervises projects in the environmental, ener- gy and transportation fields. He has directed the preparation of Environmental Impact Statements and is currently Project Manager of Air/Noise Studies for the Houston NTA Downtown Mobility System Project. Environmental Studies: Edward L. Findley. Mr. Findley is currently evaluating the environmental impacts associated with modifications in the MARTA (Atlanta) system. He has over nine years of experience in the preparation of environmenal assessments for various projects. Architectural Planning: J. Carter Howald. tor. Howald, Chief of the TO -Four planning division, served for two years as Station Planner for NAS, Corpus Christi. He attended the Summer Institute at the Air Force Academy which was sponsored by the Office of Civil Defense. Computer applications and urban plan- ning were the main areas of study. Mr. Howald recently wrote the Environmental Impact Assessments for both the Aransas and Santa Anna'National Wildlife Refuge Headquarter projects during site analysis plans of each project. He also recently completed the initial master plan for a 400 acre subdivision in the Corpus Christi area. Engineering Support: Eugene Urban. Mr. Urban has a strong background in all phases of Civil Engineering. His extensive engineering experience includes a long record of subdivision layouts, utility systems, streets and parking areas. He is a city engineer for several cities in south Texas and is familiar with the unique site requirements of the Corpus Christi area. Engineering Support: Kang Tang. Mr. Tang participated in civil and structural design layout and cost estimates for transit studies in Dallas and Fort Worth. He is assigned to Pa's Dallas office and is a licensed professional engineer in Texas. Engineering Support: Hector Sanchez. Mr. Sanchez is the chief electrical engi- neer responsible for the design and review of auxiliary electrical systems for the MARTA (Atlanta) facilities. Engineering Support: Kermit Feldman. Mr. Feldman is presently engaged in HVAC design for the MARTA project. He has extensive experience in the design of HVAC systems for various types of buildings. • Landscape Architect: J. Phil Berry. Mr. [ferry is the owner -designer of Berry Landscape, a TD -Four consultant. He has held various positions in several parks departments throughout Texas. He served as Assistant Park Superintendent for Corpus Christi for three years. - 15 - d.7 Cost Estimating: Dietrich Braun. Mr. Braun has over twenty years experience in architectural and cost control. He is in charge of TD -Four's new in-house com- puterized masterspec system. Mr_ Braun taught various architectural technology courses at Del Mar College. Cost Estimating: Charles W. Koch. Mr. Koch has extensive experience in civil and transportation engineering. He is currently developing design plans and construction cost estimates for access and parking facilities in the City of Dallas. 1 4 OFFICERS -IN -CHARGE J. Carter Howald (TDF) (10 (PB) (5) 4 ai 'r - z 3 die( o1,,} MANAGEMENT PLFJ ORGA(IIZATIOH CHART CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI PROJECT MANAGER C. Upchurch (50) DEPUTY PROJECT MANAGER M. J. Kohn (10) SITE ACQUISITION STUDIES Michael R. Gilkerson (10) ADVISORY BOARD Sidney Graves (15) Sigurd Grave (5) Debbie Allee (5) Julie Hoover (5) TRAFFIC STUDIES C. Michael Walton (10) .MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS M. J. Kohn (5) ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Alfred Angiola (5) E. L. Findley (5) . (00) Indicates Individual percent of time proposed to be dedicated to..this project. ARCHITECTURE/PLANNING J. Carter Howald (5) Sidney Graves (5) ENGINEERING SUPPORT Civil: Eugene Urban (5) Structural: Rang Tang (5) Electrical: -Hector Sanchez (5) Mechanical: Kermit Feldman (5) LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Phil Barry (5) COST ESTIMATING Dietrich Braun (5) Charles W. Koch (5) ..v% iv -7* { t E ]1 1 .__ €..._..l . 1. INTRODUCTION The primary purpose of this study is to develop a preliminary design and maintenance plan for centralized maintenance and administration facilities that will meet the short- and long-term needs of the Corpus Christi Transit System. A11 designs and estimates for these facilities roust be to a sufficient level of detail for filing a Section 3 capital grant application with UMTA. In addition, the study must consider environmental impacts of the proposed facilities, and reports and permit applications necessary for environmental approval must be prepared. Although the RFP indicated the City staff "has conducted a preliminary site analysis for the new transit facility", we believe the Study must address the rehabilitation, no -build and new site alternatives. Candidate sites must be identified and compared on the basis of such factors as availability, cost, zoning, environmental impact, traffic flow, etc. The Study Methodology, including a Task Flow Chart, is detailed in Section 2 of this proposal. It should be kept in mind, however, that although we identify and schedule discrete tasks requiring specific skills, design of a complex sys- - tem is as much a creative and empirical process as it is an analytical one. We also know the findings of any one task are likely to influence the outcome of several other tasks. Therefore, we expect most tasks to proceed in an iterative manner, as information is received and incorporated into the various stages of the Study. Our sonnelofrTotal dDesigneFour andnParsons is ��Brinckerhoff haven in Section 3.Hbeenydesignated for meet the various requirements of the Study. Brief summaries of experience have been included for the key staff members as well as detailed resumes. Section 4 includes material describing Total Design Four;, Parsons Brincker- hoff and similar or related work performed by the team members. Also included in Section 4 is a Standard Form 254 for each firm which shows their individual sizes. - 1 - 2. STUDY METHODOLOGY The general scope of this Study has as its end product a very necessary and ambitious report in which: (1) an alternative analysis is made for a bus main- tenance and administration facility; (2) alternative sites are reviewed and a recommendation made; (3) a construction program is developed; (4) a preliminary facility design and site plan are prepared; (5) cost estimates are made; and (6) an environmental assessment is prepared. The scope of the study and the limited budget snake it essential in the in- terest of time and cost that all available data developed by others be utilized. In the following methodology we have addressed all the City requirements. A Flow Chart, Fig. 1, and a Preliminary Schedule of Work, Fig. 2, are included at the end of this section. The Flow Chart shows the interrelationships between the various tasks. There is parallel scheduling of several tasks to facilitate completion of the work effort. Tasks are included i•n the work program to ensure that all environmental re- quirements are met by the City in its planning for the centralized bus garage and maintenance facilities. These tasks will be accomplished in parallel with the other work of the study, so that the process of environmental clearance for the project can be completed as quickly and cost-effectively as possible. Because a number of steps and agency reviews are required in this process, the environmental tasks are likely to be on the "critical path" of the study. It is therefore proposed to initiate the needed technical work as early as • possible to allow sufficient time for environmental documentation after a re- commended bus facility alternative has been selected. Both the scheduling and scoping of all the environmental tasks have been conducted with a thorough awareness of the ultimate objective of the environmental work effort: to secure as niany of the necessary environmental permits and approvals for the City, and to complete as many of the environmental requirements as possible within the time -frame of the study. For this reason, we have paid special attention to their sequencing, and have emphasized that all environmental analyses will be conducted only to the level of detail that is appropriate for project approval. The individual tasks that constitute the proposed Work Program for the Bus Maintenance/Garage Facilities Study are described in the following: TASK, 1: BUS FACILITIES AND OPERATIONS DATA COLLECTION Objective: Review and evaluate existing and projected bus operations and main- tenance practices in Corpus Christi and identify existing system characteris- tics, deficiencies, and needs to and in design of the centralized maintenance facilities. - 2 - 11 1 Activities: The study team will interview City staff to acquire an understand- ing of current and projected bus operations and maintenance activities. The in- terviews will focus on characteristics of the transit and rnaintenance operations in the following areas: a. Bus routes and schedules. b. Route mileage. c. Revenue and non -revenue mileages. d. Plans for route and schedule changes. e. Ridership trends by route or corridor. f. Fleet size by type, age, and condition. g. Anticipated fleet -sizes and acquisitions. h. Facility condition, access, and throughput capacity. i. Existing equipment, equipment needs. j. Bus access needs to facilities. k. Current maintenance work flow, by vehicle, type and activity : including detailed labor breakdown. 1. Maintenance frequency and cost history, by vehicle type. m. General facility operations, costs, including energy. n. Labor costs, operations, maintenance, general and administrative. o. Access and parking needs of employees. In addition, all available City planning documents will be consulted to corroborate and supplement the information obtained from the interviews. The review will be conducted to provide a basis for establishing rnaintenance procedures, intermediate and long-range manpower requirements, equipment needs, vehicle storage space, overall space utilization, optimum garage size, parking inventory, etc. Product: A technical memorandum, summarizing all data, review procedures, and concusions. The output of this task will aid development of the Facilities and Operations Program Plan in Task 2, and the Alternatives Development and Analysis in Task 5. TASK. 2: FACILITIES AND OPERATIONS PROGRAM PLAN Objective: To develop and document functional, operational and organizational requirements, and resulting design criteria for the proposed centralized facil- ities bus rnaintenance program. Activities: The study team will review the data collected under Task 1 and, in accordance with practices, formulate operations and facility design criteria for the concept of a centralized maintenance program. This will consider function- al, operational and organizational requirements, considering a range of options including rehabilitation of existing facilities or complete centralization. Facility and operations planning will address physical aspects, including equipment specifications, maintenance procedures, manpower requirements, and 3 space and size requirements. In particular, required relationships between office and maintenance operations will be defined including those applicable in the following areas: a. Bus storage. b. Parts storage. c. Service (cleaning, fueling, brake adjustment). d. Fare collection. e. Shops (unit maintenance, sheet metal, signs, upholstery). f. Body work. g. Painting (body, touch-up, etc.). h. Light duty maintenance (lubrication, oil, tires, etc.). i. Heavy maintenance (transmissions, air conditioning, engines, brakes) j. Administrative offices. k. Employee areas (washrooms, lunchroom lockers, etc.). 1. Conference room. Short- and long-term equipment needs and specifications will also be defined, including provisions for the following: a. :Lifts, hoists. b. 1•Jashing. c. Fueling. d. Shop equipment. e. Cleaning. f. Fare collection. g. Fork lifts. h. Storage bins. i. Diagnostic equipment. j. Service trucks. k. Lubricating equipment. 1. Small tools. m. Tire racks. n. Oil dispensing. o. Safety practices. Organizational alternatives, including the status quo, will be determined for the maintenance facilities. Staffing requirements will be compared with the existing organization of operators to identify impacts and the extent of re- quired changes. An evaluation of fare box revenue collection activities will be undertaken to determine appropriate and practical daily working procedures for processing the revenue at a centralized facility. Key issues to be considered will include general specifications for fare box collection equipment and practical operating procedures for the daily fare collection activities. All these functional, operational and organizational considerations will then be translated into an integrated set of planning, design and implementation - 4 - criteria, and summarized in a preliminary Program Plan for the proposed centra- lized facilities_ Product: A technical memo containing the recommended Program Plan, plus all applicable back-up material. This will serve as a set of normative guidelines for the work of Tasks 3, 5 and 6. TASK 3: SURVEY AND IDENTIFICATION OF CANDIDATE SITES Objective: This task will identify for the alternative review process the po- tential sites studied by the City staff. The attractivness of a particular site will be defined considering the following: a. Suitability for location of the maintenance activities and functions identified in Task 2, Facilities, Operations and Organization Program Plan. This will primarily concern area, configuration, physiography, access, and the availability of necessary utilities for the Facilities. b. Location with regard to major existing and projected bus service corri- dors, to minimize dead -head mileage. .c. Compatibility with the surrounding physical and social environment. Sensitive ecological areas will be avoided, and sites adjacent to or near incompatible land uses (e.g., noise sensitive receptors and resi- dential development) will be eliminated. d. Attitude of local government officials and affected land owners towards proposed acquisition for use as a bus maintenance area. Activities: Early efforts in Task 3 will focus on reducing the number of possi- ble sites studied by the City staff to no more than two. Preliminary data on operating characteristics, surrounding land use, street access, etc., will be used to identify these sites. The existing maintenance facility location will be examined as part of this phase. It should also be noted that while it is possible additional sites will be discovered later in the study, it is antici- pated the final list of feasible sites and the recommended alternative site will be drawn from this initial list. Each of the sites on the initial list of candidates will then be subjected to closer analysis as more detailed information is made available from Tasks 1, 2, 4 and 11. As operational concepts are'refined, the analysis will consider other factors such as: a.. Physical suitability. - size - configuration - physiography - 5 - b. c. d. e. Street access. Physical and social environmental setting and anticipated impacts to this setting. Availability and cost. Government approval requirements and prospects. It will be essential to maintain close communication between the consultant staff and the•City to ensure that unattractive or marginal sites are eliminated from considerations as early as possible, while promising sites are identified for further scrutiny. The identification and preliminary analysis of candidate sites will continue to the extent that the results of other task efforts make it necessary. Product: A summary technical memorandum will be issued, detailing sites in Corpus Christi with potential suitability for location of maintenance facilities. It will include all descriptive data such size, owner, approximate_cost, access, physiographic and ecological etc. The memo will summarize all efforts to date regarding acquisi will discuss major impediments to acquisition, if any. • the list of the proposed as location, description, tion, and TASK 4: ACQUISITION ANALYSES Objective: The anlayses performed in this task will generate information on the problems, costs, and fiscal impacts of site acquisition, of a sufficiently de- tailed nature to assist in the completion of Task 3, Survey and Identification of Candidate Sites, and Task 7, Alternatives Evaluation and Selection. Activities: It is expected that interviews with City officials, "Focal realtors, and other real estate interests will provide information on property market val- ues and all steps necessary for property acquisition. This will include, but not be limited to, permit requirements, zoning variances (if any), and any exec- utive or council approvals. If deemed appropriate by the City, initial contact with the property owner will be made and his selling interest and asking price determined. A preliminary survey of the property's legal status will also be made, to determine the presence of any obvious encumbrances, such as easements, liens, etc. If this preliminary survey indicates the possibility of encumbrances on any property which could delay or prevent its expeditious acquisition or lease, the consultant will, at the direction of the City as an addition to the Scope of Services, commission a title search on the property by a reputable title com- pany. For any site under consideration which is presently developed, order -of -mag- nitude estimates of demolition costs will be made, to be included in construc- tion cost estimates prepared later in this study. Further, property taxes cur- rently payable on each candidate site will be determined, allowing calculation of the potential impact on local tax bases. - 6 - 1 Product: The output of this task will be a technical memorandum, containing the following information for each of the sites identified in Task 3: a. Summary of discussions to date with owner (optional), and relevant town officials. b. Approximate market value of the property, and asking price (optional). c. Acquisition schedule and actions required to obtain the property, in- cluding local government approvals, (e.g., zoning variances). d. Demolition requirements and associated costs. e. Results of the "Title Search" (if commissioned). f. Calculation of impacts on City tax bases. • The information in this memorandum will serve as input to Task 7, Alterna- tives Evaluation and Selection. TASK 5: DEVELOPMENT AND ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES Objectives: The objective of this task is to analyze requirements and develop a workable number of conceptual facility design alternatives for the bus mainte- nance and garage facilities. Activities: Based on the Facilities and Operations Program Plan developed under Task 2 and the alternative sites provided under Task 3, conceptual site utiliza- tion plans will be developed. The schematic concepts will reflect alternative approaches to site utiliza- tion. Functional relationships will be established, and constraints and limita- tions imposed by the sites and/or the surroundings will be identified and in- cluded in the design development. Tentative construction schedules and opportu- nities for phasing will be identified, and order -of -magnitude construction cost estimates will also be prepared. The conceptual facility design alternatives, together with the alternative sites, will be further evaluated during the process of selecting a recommended bus maintenance and garage alternative. Product: The product of this task will be design concepts for two alternative systems for the facilities program. The concepts will include schematic draw- ings, tentative construction schedules and possibilities for phasing, and order - of -magnitude cost estimates. TASK 6: ESTABLISHMENT OF EVALUATION CRITERIA Objectives: To identify specific factors for evaluating the effectiveness of the project alternatives, and to develop a procedure that combines these factors into an evaluation algorithm. -7- Activities: Using the output of Tasks 1 through 5, categories of evaluation criteria will be derived. Examples of these include system performance with respect to the program plan, capital construction costs, acquisition costs, operating or maintenance costs, labor impacts, environmental and community im- pacts, traffic impacts, feedback impacts on bus fleet size and operational char- acteristics, and construction staging. For each category of criteria, specific.measures of effectiveness, both quantitative and qualitative, will be identified. As an example, a quantitative measure of effectiveness under the category of ."system performance" might be aggregate annual dead -head mileage. A qualitative measure of effectiveness under the category of environmental impacts might be the visual or aesthetic appeal of the proposed alternative. A matrix of measures of effectiveness versus alternatives, similar to a Planning Balance Sheet or a Goals Achievement Matrix, will be designed, and procedures will be developed for weighting the various measures and scoring the project alternatives. Product: This task wi1i yield an alternatives evaluation form and procedure to be used in Task 7. TASK 7: ALTERNATIVE EVALUATION AND SELECTIOJI Objective: To evaluate the project alternatives developed in Task 5 and to select the "best" bus maintenance and garage facility alternative. Activities: Key members of the Project Team, using the methodology developed in previous tasks, will individually evaluate the various alternatives by weighting the evaluation factors on the alternatives evaluation form. This will include ranking the qualitative factors and assigning values to the quantifiable fac- tors, for all evaluation categories. The results of the scoring will be dis- cussed and an alternative selected for further development.•, Following selec- tion, a brief technical report outlining the evaluation process and the steps leading to selection of the recommended alternative will be prepared. Product: An Alternatives Evaluation Report and maintenance plan recommendation to be forwarded to the City staff for final review and approval. TASK 8: DRAFT OF PRELIMINARY DESIGN, OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT REPORT Objective: Develop the conceptual plans of the selected alternative to a pre- liminary design level, and provide the City with critical grant application in- formation. Activities: The study team will develop final physical layouts of the selected site which clearly identify the sizes and relationships of all programmed spaces, functions and operations. The layouts will include a site plan showing - 8 - • rough sitework and grading, major utilities, paving, lighting, and landscaping. Building flow plans will show all administrative and support spaces, as well as operational spaces, and will also include major equipment installations.' The plans will be supplemented with preliminary building sections and elevations, which will indicate conceptual structural implications as well as exterior treatment. A report will be prepared describing the intended operation of the selected system alternative, with consideration given to both the overall maintenance program and to the facilities in relationship to revenue operations. Preliminary construction costs will be estimated, based on unit area and building function/construction type factors, and equipment requirements - washers, hoists, cranes, dynamometers, cyclone cleaners, fueling systems, etc. Further, a phased construction schedule to bring critical maintenance activities on line in a timely manner will be recommended. Priorities will be established on the basis of need, site availability and construction time, and the overall financing program. Product:: Six copies of a draft report of the PDOMR study for client review and comments. This will include documentation suitable for attachment and support of the UMTA capital grant application. TASK 9: FINALIZATION OF PRELIMINARY DESIGN, OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT REPORT Objective: To prepare and produce a final PDO&M report for the study. Activities: Following review and approval of the draft report by the City, a final report will be prepared for the study. This document will incorporate any revisions required as a result of the review. Twenty-five copies will be pro- duced and delivered to the City. Product: Final Preliminary Design, Operations and Management Report. TASK 10: IDENTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS Objective: To identify environmental responsibilities at the outset of the study, including information on agency requirements for impact assessments and permits, and to gather information which will ensure technical and procedural compliance with all environmental regulations. Activities: As the initial concepts of the proposed facilities are defined, a meeting will be held with UMTA Regional officials in Fort Worth to determine, or initiate determination of the following: a. Environmental status of the project (e.g., if the project might qualify as an "exempt" action). b. The extent of the information needed for a detemination of project significance, and -9- c. the -appropriate scope of the environmental work if an environmental impact statement is required. Continuing coordination will be maintained throughout the project with UMTA and other agencies as required, and the City will be briefed on environmental tasks and strategies for meeting the requirements. Product: A memorandum will be prepared "summarizing the results of the initial coordination efforts with respect to required level of detail for the environ- mental assessments, probable permit requirements, and the schedule for obtaining environmental approvals before a capital grant application can be approved. TASK 11: ESTABLISHMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE DATA Objective: To develop data on existing conditions to provide sufficient docu- mentation for federal and state determinations of impact significance, to assist in identifying and selecting alternative garage and maintenance facility sites, and to highlight potential problems at the candidate sites which may require mitigation. \ Activities: Site-specific data will be compiled based on field inspections, published information, and interviews, in the following technical areas: a. Air quality, noise, and energy consumption (with respect to the existing bus system/maintenance facilities). b. Socio-economic conditions. c. Land use, cultural, and historic/archaeologic resources. d. Water, ecological, and land resources. _ e. Scenic and visual quality resources_ f. Traffic, transportation, safety, and access conditions. As part of this task, preliminary environmental criteria for use in identi- fying and evaluating the alternative candidate sites will also be developed. Product: A technical memorandum or working paper will be prepared which sum- marized existing conditions in each technical area. This document will comply, if necessary, with the content requirements of an IJNTA Environmental Assessment .Report (EAR). (It should be noted that an EAR is to be completed only if a federal determination of the impact significance is required for the project.) TASK 12: PRELIMINARY ENVIROfNMENTAL EVALUATION Objective: To qualitatively determine and document probable impacts of the pro- posed facilities at the alternative candidate sites for the federal and state determinations of significance, and to develop additional information for the site selection and facility planning tasks. - 10 - Activities: A preliminary assessment will be completed to determine the impacts which might result from implementation of the proposed facilities at each of the candidate sites. A technical memorandum which qualitatively summarizes the im- pacts in each technical area under Task 11 will be submitted to the appropriate review agencies. Coordination with the agencies during this review will aid in expediting a determination of the project's environmental status - i.e., whether an Environmental Impact Statement is required. The output of this task will allow development of final environmental cri- teria for use in selecting the recommended facility alternative. Product: The environmental study team will prepare a memorandum or working pa- per summarizing in a qualitative fashion the results of the environmental impact analysis in each technical area. This memo will conform, if necessary, to the content requirements of an UNTA Environmental Assessment Report. TASK 13: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT PREPARATION Objective: To complete the necessary impact assessments for the recommended bus garage and maintenance facility, and to prepare the documentation required for the environmental review process for the project. (This task will be completed only if the Federal and state review of the project's environmental status de- termines that an EIS is required for the project and is considered beyond the scope of this Study.) Activities: Based on data developed in Tasks 11 and 12, detailed environmental assessments for the recommended alternative will be completed, to the level of detail required for a Draft EIS, including the following: a. Studies to establish operational parameters and traffic data for the bus systems and the recommended garage and maintenance facility. •b. Air quality, noise, and energy impact assessments. c. Final assessments of probable socio-economic, visual quality, land use, cultural, and historic/archaeological resources impacts. • d.' Final assessments of probable water, land, and ecological resources impacts. Continuous coordination will be maintained with the appropriate state and local agencies and with UMTA during the impact assessments and subsequent com- pletion and circulation of the Draft EIS. Product: The environmental study team will prepare an Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIR) for use in preparation of a Draft EIS, which will also meet the requirements for a preliminary Draft EIS under Ui•1TA regulations if necessary. TASK 14: ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS AND PERIIIT SUPPORT Objective:' To provide support to the City of Corpus Christi during preparation of the environmental permits for the recommended facility, and to provide sup- port to the extent that it is possible while final environmental approvals are being obtained. Activities:• Using information compiled for the Environmental Impact Assessment Report, all permit applications will be completed and submitted to the appro- priate agencies. Coordination will be maintained as required to expedite approval of all permits. On behalf of the City, on-going coordination with the agency preparing the Draft EIS for the project will also be provided through the completion date of the basic study. Product: The consultant will prepare' all supporting materials for permit appli- cations and provide assistance through the completion date of the study toward securing an approved Final EIS. - 12 - TABLE OF CONTENTS (Corpus Christi Bus Maintenance) Letter of Transmittal Table of Contents 1. Introduction 2. Study Methodology Task 1: Bus Facilities and Operations Data Collection 2 Task 2: Facilities and Operations Program Plan 3 Task 3: Survey and Identification of Candidate Sites Task 4: Acquisition Analyses 5 Task 5: Development and Analysis of Alternatives 6 Task 6: Establishment of Evaluation Criteria 7 Task q: Alternative Evaluation and Selection 7 Task•8: Draft of Preliminary Design, Operations 8 Page 1. And Management Report $ Task 9: Finalization of Prelirninary Design, Operations And Management Report 9 Task 10: Identification of Environmental Requirements 9 Task 11: Establishment of Environmental Baseline Data 10 Task 12: Preliminary Environmental Evaluation Task 13: Draft Environmental Report Preparation 10 1 Task 14: Environmental Reports and Permit Support 12 12 3. Management Plan Brief Summaries of Key Personnel 13 - 16 4. Relevant Experience LIST OF TABLES AND CHARTS Flow Chart Prelirninary Schedule of Work Organization Chart 18 - 23 17 DESIG\ FOSR PLANNING ARCHITECTURE DEVELOPMENT ANG Donald Greene, AIA William H. Holland, AIA James B. Boggs, AIA J. Carter Howald, AIA Homer C. Innis, PE Robert R. Conolly, AIA Fred C, Kirkham, AIA Dietrich H. Braun, AIA Mr. Jimmy Lontos, City Engineer City of Corpus Christi, P. 0. Box 9277 Corpus Christi, Texas 78408 Re: Bus Maintenance and Administration Facilities 'Planning Study Proposal Corpus Christi Office 18 July 1979 Dear Mr. Lontos: Thank you for allowing Total Design Four and Parsons-Brinckerhoff to clarify portions of our proposal to the City of Corpus Christi for the Bus Maintenance and Administration Facilities Project during our meeting in your office with you and Tom Stewart on 5 July. Mel Kohn of Parsons-Brinckerhoff and Clarence Upchurch and Kim Crosskno from our office join me in our appreciation for your professionalism and cordiality during our conference. Our notes from the meeting reflect the following discussion of our proposal: 1. Referring to our Organization Chart following page 16 of the RFP: a. The City expressed concern about the number of people (19 different ones) we show for such a small job. Most of the specialists would be used only to review interim, draft and final reports. They would not visit Corpus Christi and their involvement might be limited to one or two days. Mel Kohn will now be Principal -in -Charge for PBQ&D instead of Salter since Mr. Kohn has been made an officer of the firm. b. The landscape architect would only review the conceptual drawings and develop noise or other environmental buffers as required. The structural, electrical and mechanical engineers would merely provide input to the conceptual drawings and cost estimates. P.O. DRAWER 3947 101 NORTH SHORELINE SUITE 300 CORPUS CHRISTI. TEXAS 78404 512-884-8811 18 Julyn�1979ntos Page 2 2. The City was concerned about the detail in our proposal and whether or not we could accomplish all the services indicated, a. We pointed out that everything mentioned in the proposal would necessitate being addressed for an UMTA submission but the detail or depth to which we address each item would be shallow. , b. We will rely on existing data and interviews with City staff - no new data will be developed. c. We anticipate the City -developed alternative sites (Tom Stewart said about 15) will be analyzed only, and it is anticipated the number for in-depth review' will be narrowed down early in the review process to perhaps three or four sites. We will make.a brief review of aerial maps, etc., to determine that potential sites have not been omitted (an unlikely occurrence). d. Tasks 13 and 14 were stated to be beyond the scope of this study. We believe it will not be necessary to develop a full EIS if the best site is selected. How- ever, we showed the tasks on our Flow Chart so the City would have a full overview of the assignment. 3. The City asked about our use of 'a "study team" on various tasks. Mel Kohn explained that our use of that phrase merely referred to Total Design Four and Parsons-Brinckerhoff, not to a large number of people on a specific assignment. 4. Route Studies. We indicated that a full-scale route analysis, would not be made, but we would merely solicit comments from City staff. Also, we would probably traverse some routes to get a better knowledge of the operation and the environ- mental considerations. We might also recommend some minor changes to specific routes to accommodate a particular site by minimizing dead head mileage; but no full-scale route analysis would be accomplished TOTAL DESIGN FOUR SUITE 300 la NORTH S1-10RELINE COi P lS CHRISTI.TEXAS 781101 512-884.8811 Mr. Jimmy Lontos 18 July 1979 Page 2 5. Tom Stewart indicated much of the material we listed in Task 1 is available. 6. Site Review. We do not intend to make any title searches unless authorized separately by the City and at additional cost (we state that in Task 4). We assume the City will provide tax data on the sites. This information is submitted to clarify our proposal and assist you in your selection process. We are grateful to you for the opportunity. Sincerely, Carter Howald, AIA rincipal JCH/mas TnrAI rr_c�r_ni Grl D a irrF -yh Y nr)TI-7 J-rvxi IN .1.-YY:4:4 r 1 -.IDI ri TFYAR 7st r1 R12.P.Rd_AR11 Corpus Christi, Texas day of Zd1 , 19 TO THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL Corpus Christi, Texas For the reasons set forth in the emergency clause of the foregoing ordinance, a public emergency and imperative necessity exist for the suspension of the Charter rule or requirement that no ordinance or resolution shall be passed finally on the date it is introduced, and that such ordinance or resolution shall be read at three meetings of the City Council; I, therefore, request that you suspend said Charter rule or requirement and pass this ordinance finally,on the date it is introduced, or at the present meeting of the City Council. Respectfully, THE 'TY OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS The Charter rule was suspended by the following vote: Luther Jones Edward L. Sample Dr. Jack Best David Diaz Jack K. Dumphy Betty N. Turner Cliff Zarsky 09) (1,6/�L) le - lays) (},e'er a -y-3 The above ordinance was passed by the following vote: Luther Jones Edward L. Sample Dr. Jack Best David Diaz Jack K. Dumphy Betty N. Turner Cliff Zarsky (,ci of/E.) 15049 CITY OF CORPUS CFIRISTI; TEXAS CERTIFICATION OF FUNDS (City Charter Article IV Section 21) August 6, 1979 I certify to the City Council that $ 23,000 , the amount required for the contract, agreement, obligation or expenditures contemplated in the above and foregoing ordinance is in the Treasury of the City of Corpus Christi to the credit of: Fund No. and Name No. 162 Federal/States Grant Fund Project No. Project Name Activity 4682, Code 301 UMTAtechnical Studies (Architectural Agreement w/Total Design Four) from which it is proposed to be drawn, and such money is not appropriated for any other purpose. a� ,;4+�!�e�' , 19 77 FIN 2-55 Revised 7/31/69 0.-7q a, ° 3f 4:c " - { t c♦ ILr-.•t. FINANCE Q AUG s FPgRT,yFNT Z28Py79 tSK 1 is Facilities td Operation ita Collection TASK 2 Facilities and Operations Program Plan TASK 11 Establishment of Environmental Baseline Data SK 3 rvey and entification Candidate tes SK 10 entification Environmental quirements TASK 12 Preliminary Environmental Evaluation Negative Declaration/ DEIR Decision TASK 4 Acquisition Analyses TASK 6 Establishment of Evaluation Criteria e TASK 5 Development and Analysis of Alternatives PUBLIC MEETING (If Desired) TASK 7 Alternatives Evaluation • TASK 13 Draft Envi- ronmental Report Pre- paration (DEIR) if Required TOTAL DESIGN FOUR IOIN.SH0RELINE SUITE 300 iCORPUS_CHRISTI TEXAS 78401 CITY REVIEW COMMUNITY REVIEW (If Desired) CITY REVIEW ,TASK 7 TASK 8 Alternatives Draft Prelim - Evaluation Re- — inary Design, port and Main- Operations and tenance Plan Management Recommendation Report TASK 14 - Environmental Permit Support TASK 9 Preliminary Design, Oper- ations; and Management Report f1SK 1 us Facilities .d Operation ata Collection CITY REVIEW TASK -2 - Facilities and Operations Program Plan TASK 5 TOTAL DESIGN FOUR 101 N.SHORELINE SUITE 300 ;CORPUS_CHRISTI TEXAS 78401 Development and Analysis of Alternatives COMMUNITY REVIEW (If Desired) TASK 11 Establishment of Environmental Baseline Data 1SK 3 irvey and' ientification Candidate _tes TASK 4 TASK 12 Preliminary Environmental Evaluation Negative Declaration/ DEIR Decision TASK 13 Draft Envi- ronmental Report Pre- paration (DEIR) if Required TASK 14 Environmental Permit Support CITY REVIEW PUBLIC MEETING (If Desired) TASK 9 Preliminary L Design, Oper- ations; and Management Report TASK 6 Acquisition — Analyses Establishment of Evaluation Criteria TASK 7 TASK 8 Alternatives Draft Prelim- Evaluation Re- .._ inary Design, port and Main- Operations and tenance Plan Management Recommendation Report ISK 10 ientification Environmental !quirements CITY REVIEW FIG. 1