reading assignment

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 1 of 34

CITY OF GLENDALE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

“GLENDALE-BURBANK REGIONAL STREETCAR FEASIBILITY STUDY”

To: All Qualified Firms Date: July 31, 2017 Subject: Request for Proposals for City of Glendale: Glendale – Burbank Regional

Streetcar Feasibility Study DUE DATE: Ten (10) hard copies and five (5) electronic copies on CDs responding to the Re- quest for Proposals are to be submitted to:

Fred Zohrehvand Senior Transportation Planner

City of Glendale 633 E. Broadway, Room 300

Glendale, CA 91206 By 5:00 pm on August 22, 2017. Proposals received after this date and time will not be considered.

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 2 of 34

TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Schedule of Events ................................................................................................................ 6 II. Explanation of the Project .................................................................................................... 6 III. Project Background ............................................................................................................. 6 IV. City of Glendale Background .............................................................................................. 7 V. Project Scope of Work.......................................................................................................... 8 VI. Instructions to Proposer ................................................................................................... 15 VII. DBE Requirements ........................................................................................................... 18 VIII. Evaluation & Selection .................................................................................................... 18 IX. Response to RFP – Formatting & Contents ..................................................................... 19 X. Appendix ............................................................................................................................. 22 Submittal Forms ...................................................................................................................... 23 Attachments ............................................................................................................................ 34

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 3 of 34

NOTICE INVITING PROPOSALS

NOTICE is hereby given that the City of Glendale (“City”) will receive Proposals until the dead- line established below for the following project:

Glendale – Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Proposal Submittal Deadline: Submit before 5:00 p.m. on August 22, 2017

Proposal Submittal Location: 633 E. Broadway, Room 300, Glendale, CA 91206

NO LATE PROPOSALS WILL BE ACCEPTED.

City of Glendale Contact Person for RFP Process: Ms. Arezoo Kamali Planning Assistant Phone: (818) 937-8333 Email: [email protected]

Project Description: For the past several years there have been discussions on the concept of developing a street- car system in Downtown Glendale. Earlier streetcar concepts were discussed or evaluated by the Greater Downtown Strategic Plan (1996) and the Downtown Mobility Study (2007). A streetcar in Glendale has the potential to connect the various shopping, dining, entertain- ment and parking components of the Downtown area, and perhaps neighboring cities and other mass transit services. Streetcar systems also attract tourism, and visitors to Glendale will be able to utilize the streetcar to patronize business throughout the Downtown business district. Finally, we have the ability to establish connectivity among our various transportation modes by linking the streetcar to the Beeline and the Larry Zarian Transportation Center to develop a more effective and comprehensive transit system. The City of Glendale hopes to continue to provide the infrastructure and resources necessary for residents to incorporate transit oriented lifestyles into their daily lives, and become part of healthier communities.

The feasibility study required to move forward with any streetcar concept would include:

• Evaluate different route alignments and technologies for the streetcar; • Analyze Downtown Glendale infrastructure to determine its ability to accommodate a

streetcar system; and if necessary, • Determine the infrastructure improvements needed to construct the system; • Determine what types of vehicles are obtainable and appropriate; • Establish how a streetcar system can be implemented; • Project potential streetcar ridership and revenues; • Predict traffic impacts; • Forecast impacts on Downtown Glendale businesses; and • Determine the overall cost of the project, including:

• The various equipment options • Infrastructure improvements (tracks, street improvements) • Maintenance and Operating Costs

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 4 of 34

Other Proposal Information:

1. Request for Proposal Documents may be obtained in the City of Glendale Community Development Department, Urban Design and Mobility Division, lo- cated at 633 East Broadway, Room 300, Glendale, CA, 91206, or via email or mail at the request of consultants without any cost.

2. Acceptance or Rejection of Proposals. The City reserves the right to reject any and all Proposals, and to waive any informalities, irregularities or technical defects in such proposals and determine the lowest responsible proposer, whichever may be in the best interests of the City. No late proposals will be ac- cepted, nor will any oral, facsimile or electronic proposals be accepted by the City.

3. Mandatory Pre-Proposal Conference. August 9, 2017 2:30pm-4:00pm at 633 E. Broadway, Room 105, Glendale, CA 91206.

4. Race Conscious (RC)/DBE Participation. [NOTE: The following mandatory requirement applies ONLY to the Glendale – Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study contract.

The U.S. Dept. of Transportation Regulations found that 49 CFR Part 26 shall apply to this contract. A disadvantaged business enterprise (“DBE”) contract goal of 10% goal has been established for this project. This goal must be met or good faith efforts to meet this goal must be demonstrated in order for a proposal to be considered responsive. The Consultant or subcontractor shall not discrimi- nate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in the performance of this contract. The consultant shall carry out applicable requirements of 49 CFR, Part 26 in the award and administration of DOT-assisted contracts. Failure by the consultant to carry out these requirements is a material breach of this contract, which may result in the termination of this contract or such other remedy, as re- cipient deems appropriate. To assist consultants in ascertaining RC/DBE availability for specific items of work, the City has determined that RC/DBE could reasonably be expected to compete for subcontracting opportunities on this project, and their likely availability for work on this project is 10% Race Conscious RC/DBE.

It is the proposer’s responsibility to verify that the RC/DBE’s fall into one of

the following groups in order to count towards the RC/DBE contract goal: 1) Black American; 2) Asian-Pacific American; 3) Native American; 4) Wom- en; 5) Hispanic American; 6) Subcontinent Asian Pacific American and any other groups whose members are certified as socially and economically disadvantaged. Proposers are required to submit the Local Agency Pro- posal RC/DBE Commitment, “Exhibit 15-G” and the Good Faith Efforts, “Exhibit 15-H” forms form along with the proposal submittal. If the RC/DBE Commitment forms are not submitted with the proposal, the apparent low proposer, the 2nd low proposer, and the 3rd low proposer must complete and submit the RC/DBE Commitment forms (Exhibits 15-G and 15-H) to the City. Submittal of only the “Local Agency Proposer RC/DBE Commitment” form

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 5 of 34

may not provide sufficient documentation to demonstrate that adequate good faith efforts were made.

For a list of RC/DBE’s certified by the California Unified Certification Pro- gram, go to: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/bep/find_certified.htm

Dated this ______ day of _____________, 2017, City of Glendale, California. Ardashes Kassakhian, City Clerk of the City of Glendale.

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 6 of 34

Definition of Terms The following terms used in the RFP documents shall be construed as follows: “City” shall mean the City of Glendale. “Agreement” shall be considered synonymous with the term “Contract.” “Proposer” shall mean the individual, partnership, corporation or other entity who responds to the RFP. “Consultant” shall mean the individual, partnership, corporation or other entity to which an agreement is awarded. “Days” shall mean the business days recognized by City of Glendale.

I. Schedule of Events Event Date Request for Proposals (RFP) Issued July 31, 2017 Mandatory Pre-Proposal Meeting August 9, 2017 Deadline for Written Questions and Requests August 15, 2017 Responses and Addenda Issued August 15, 2017 Technical and Price Proposals Due August 22, 1017; 5:00pm Interview Firms (TBD based on City review of written proposal) Early September 2017 Proposed Approval of Selected Consultant(s) by City Council Early-Mid September 2017 Notice to Proceed / Service Contract Begins / Kick-Off Meeting Late October 2017 Project Completion Date (8-12) mos. after start of contract) Summer 2018 City of Glendale reserves the right to alter any of the dates shown above by written notice. Submit any inquiries via email to Ms. Arezoo Kamali, Planning Assistant at [email protected]. No phone calls please. II. Explanation of the Project The purpose of this RFP is to:

1) Obtain the services of a well-qualified project team led by a single consultant/firm, or a consultant team with experienced sub-consultants who are experts in their respective fields, to develop a Streetcar Feasibility Study concentrating in the City of Glendale with optional tasks D1 & D2.

III. Project Background

Streetcars have been an integral part of the history of the City of Glendale. Streetcar systems such as the Pacific Electric and Glendale & Montrose Railway Company operated within the boundaries of modern-day Glendale from 1904 to1956. Recently, many cities have installed streetcar systems as part of larger successful redevelopment projects. These cities have observed formerly blighted areas turn

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 7 of 34

prosperous; property values increase and cultural resources enhance in the vicinity of newly installed streetcar systems. This benefit is in addition to the gains in transit services provided by the streetcar system for these cities. It is the City’s goal to develop a streetcar system that can create connectivity linking the various shopping, dining, entertainment, and parking resources of downtown Glendale with the region via the Larry Zarian Transportation Center and the Hollywood Burbank Airport. A successful streetcar system can also attract tourism and visitors to the city increasing commerce for Downtown Glendale businesses.

IV. City of Glendale Background The City of Glendale is located at the eastern end of the San Fernando Valley in Los Angeles Coun- ty, at the southern base of the Verdugo Moun- tains. Glendale is bordered to the northwest by the Tujunga neighborhood of Los Angeles, to the northeast by La Canada Flintridge and the unin- corporated area of La Crescenta, to the west by Burbank, to the east by Pasadena and to the south and southeast by the City of Los Angeles. Glendale is also defined by the 210, 2, 134, and 5 freeways. Glendale is a diverse, multilingual city of 191,719 residents (US Census Bureau 2010). Its business community, from manufacturing to financial ser- vices, employs nearly 100,000 people at more than 6,800 firms (US Census Bureau 2007). The area’s mobility network is well-connected by public transportation, including Metrolink and Amtrak service at the Glendale Transportation Center in South Glendale, by Metro Rapid and Local buses, and by the Glendale Beeline bus service. For purposes of long-range planning, Glendale is divided into four community planning areas, as described below: North Glendale Community Plan The community of North Glendale lies within the Crescenta Valley, which is clearly defined by the San Gabriel and Verdugo Mountains. The Crescenta Valley has a variety of neighbor- hood‐oriented village centers and commercial districts, including the Sparr Heights Business District, Verdugo City and the suburban corridor of Foothill Boulevard. The most intense of these is the “town center” surrounding the vibrant, popular, and highly walkable Montrose Shop- ping Park. The North Glendale Community Plan was adopted by City Council in November 2011; the document is provided in the Appendix.

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 8 of 34

South Glendale Community Plan South Glendale includes Downtown Glendale, which is served by three public parking structures and ten parking lots, and has experienced significant growth in high-density mixed-use commercial and residential buildings since the adoption of the Downtown Specific Plan (2006) and the Downtown Mobility Study (2007). Just south of downtown is the Brand Boulevard of Cars, which contains a regional concentration of auto dealerships, and the Tropico town site, the city’s his- toric industrial base and a burgeoning mixed-use and residential neighborhood around the Larry Zarian Transportation Center. The South Glendale Communi- ty Plan is currently in development and its adoption is anticipated in early 2018. East & West Glendale Community Plan East Glendale includes hillside residential neighbor- hoods and neighborhood-serving commercial areas, and features Glendale Community College; this com- munity abuts the City of Pasadena. West Glendale includes hillside residential neighborhoods, commercial, and industrial districts; it features the Kenneth Village shopping area, the Walt Disney Company’s Grand Central Creative Campus, DreamWorks Animation studios, the Glendale Narrows Riverwalk along the Los Angeles River, and abuts the City of Burbank. Development of community plans for East and West Glendale will begin following the adoption of the South Glendale Community Plan. V. Project Scope of Work Scope of Work – Glendale-Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study In developing the Glendale-Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study, the Consultant shall comply with all applicable local, State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and federal facility design guidelines and requirements. The Scope of Work consists of the following tasks: Task A - PROJECT SETTING

1. Statement of Project Purpose and Function This task will focus on developing a statement of purpose and function for reintroducing streetcar service to the city of Glendale. Specific elements include:  Identification of discussion topics that will help guide the development of the

statement of project purpose  Identification of destinations and planned development and redevelopment sites

potentially served by a streetcar through South and West Glendale and into the neighboring city of Burbank

 Draft a statement of purpose and function for review and adoption (see Task A-4)

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 9 of 34

2. Technology Option Review  Provide descriptions of existing (in service) examples of each type of streetcar

technology available to the City  Assess the relative effectiveness of each option based on peer examples and in

light of the project’s statement of purpose

3. Existing Conditions Review This task will provide the narrative context for the study  Research the historic transit context for the project area  Describe the local and regional project setting, including geography, de-

mographics, and economics  Inventory related local and regional transportation projects and their status  Analyze project consistency with local/state/regional plans, policies, and goals  Prepare the Existing Conditions portion of the project report

4. Selection of Preferred Technology and Alignment Alternatives - Workshop and

Report This task will include organization and conducting a workshop with selected staff and the City Council to develop consensus on the option or options to be carried forward for fur- ther study.  Produce a background briefing document  Facilitate a project workshop focused on developing consensus regarding the

draft Statement of Project Purpose and Function; and on determining alignment alternatives and identifying minimum operating segments for each alternative, and confirming technology option(s) for further study

 Document workshop conclusions and basis of decisions made

5. Concept Evaluation Report, Including Geodata In light of the project purpose, and for the preferred technology and alignment alterna- tives, an evaluation will be conducted of how a streetcar would be introduced into the transportation environment and streetscape. Specific elements include:  Identify and refine design concepts including intersection and lane configurations,

impacts on adjacent properties, access constraints and parking impacts  Review & identify major utility impacts  Identify opportunities to reduce impacts  Identify potential solutions for challenged intersections  Consideration of pedestrian and bicycle access to stations  R-O-W inventory and analysis  GIS data collection/creation, including adequately detailed aerial photography us-

ing existing public & commercial sources wherever possible

6. Vehicles Review Identify and describe the range of vehicle types that are available for use in Glendale. Specific elements include:  Develop a description, including advantages and disadvantages, of the range of

vehicle types available  Identify the ability of various vehicle types to meet applicable government re-

quirements  Provide a summary matrix of vehicle features, costs, and opera-

tions/maintenance requirements  Recommend the most appropriate vehicle type for Glendale streetcar

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 10 of 34

7. Preliminary Cost Estimates

For the alignment alternatives identified in Task A-11, the order-of-magnitude capital and operating cost estimates will be refined. Specific elements include:  Develop an preliminary Operations Plan, including service frequency, run times,

annual hours and fleet requirements  Establish an hourly operating and maintenance (O&M) cost  Provide a preliminary estimate of annual O&M cost for the minimum operating

segment in each alternative  Identify the capital cost components of the minimum operating segment in each

alternative  Apply cost factors from recent projects to develop a preliminary capital cost esti-

mate for each alternative

8. Ridership Analysis Develop an estimate of ridership for each alternative utilizing an “off-line” modeling tech- nique. Specific elements include:  Establish agreed upon “off-line” modeling process  Assemble data regarding existing and future land use and travel demand within

project area  Identify transit demand that can be met by each alternative alignment  Update peer system ridership data  Apply an “off-line” spreadsheet model to produce patronage estimates for each

alternative

9. Preliminary Traffic Analysis  Utilizing the existing traffic data provided by the City, the traffic conditions need to

be evaluated along the corridor with respect to streetcar alternatives  The analysis shall include conclusions on effects of streetcar to traffic conditions,

and the effects of traffic on streetcar operations  The analysis shall also include a conceptual level parking analysis, and recom-

mendations for further engineering design and traffic study  Calculate potential runtime for each alternative

10. Funding Sources Report

Refine the listing of funding sources to support the capital and operating cost require- ments of each alternative’s minimum operating segment. Specific elements include:  Develop a listing of local and state funding sources that could be available to ap-

ply to streetcar project  Provide a current assessment of potential Federal funding sources  Identify potential private sector sources of funding  Assess the likelihood of being able to implement each identified source of fund-

ing and the level of revenues each source could provide.

11. Illustrated Route Concepts and Design Report Refine system and alignment alternatives, including identification of a minimum operat- ing segment for each potential alignment. Specific elements include:  Develop criteria for evaluation of alignment alternatives  Refine the candidate system alignment(s)  Apply evaluation criteria to candidate system alignments and recommend a pre-

ferred alternative for further evaluation.

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 11 of 34

 Identify station and maintenance/operations facility locations for the preferred al- ternative

 Produce illustrations of the preferred alignment, including drawings, cross- sections and sketches

12. MEETINGS, PRESENTATIONS and MANAGEMENT

The Consultant will attend a start-up meeting in tandem with the notice to proceed, at which the City and the Consultant will finalize the scope of work and project schedule. Deliverables:

As requested, the consultant team will attend project related meetings and presenta- tions. Specific elements include:

 Preparation of presentation materials  Attend and when requested make presentations at Transportation & Parking

Commission (TPC), City Council and community meetings  Provide overall project management services including coordination with the City

and with sub consultants.

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 12 of 34

TASK B – PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE ASSESSMENT

1. Impact Assessment Impacts not addressed during conceptual design development will be identified and dealt with. Specific elements include:  Refine the concept design to accommodate changes resulting from the ridership

projections for the preferred alternative  Identify opportunities to reduce impacts  Identify issues requiring resolution during the design phase  Assess the impact and cost implications of outstanding design issues  Identify opportunities to reduce project costs

2. Traffic Analysis

 Prepare existing level-of-service (LOS) calculations for each intersection along the preferred alternative

 Identify locations with delays/queuing issues that might affect operations  Calculate potential runtime of preferred alternative  Calculate “existing + project” intersection LOS reflecting proposed road-

way/signal changes for the preferred alternative. This is a planning level LOS analysis and will not estimate traffic diversion or incorporate detailed signal oper- ations analysis in this task.

 Provide suggestions to improve run time/reduce traffic impacts (e.g. through changing intersection configuration, signal operations, implementing transit signal priority, etc.)

3. Transit Interface Report

Identify the positive and negative impacts a streetcar service would have on existing and planned transit services in Glendale. Specific elements include:  Identify connections to local and regional transit services  Suggest solutions to duplication of services  Recommend service modifications that will strengthen the transit service within

the project area.

4. Active Transportation & First/Last Mile Interface Identify opportunities to improve first last/mile connection in light of existing and planned bicycle and pedestrian facilities to streetcar service in Glendale. Specific elements in- clude:  Identify existing “Pathways” around proposed station locations consistent with the

Metro First Last Mile Strategic Plan methodology, and note potential areas of conflict between a streetcar and non-motorized travel modes

 Recommend improvements to active transportation connectivity and access around proposed station locations

5. Operations Plan

A final Operations Plan for the preferred alternative will be developed. Specific elements include:  Identification of operating speeds, service spans by day and service frequency  Provide calculations of annual vehicle revenue hours, annual revenue vehicle

miles and number of vehicles required

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 13 of 34

 Prepare the Operations Plan portion of the project report

6. Capital Costs Estimate A final capital cost estimate reflecting the preferred alternative will be developed. Specif- ic elements include:  Identify project design elements that have changed since the Task A-7 estimates

were produced  Prepare a revised estimate reflecting changed project elements  Prepare the capital cost portions of the project report

7. Operating & Maintenance Costs Estimate

Prepare a final operating and maintenance cost estimate reflecting the final Operations Plan including:  Identify changed project elements that impact the O&M cost estimates developed

in Task A-7  Prepare a revised estimate reflecting the final Operations Plan (Task B-5)  Prepare the O&M cost portion of the project report.

Task C – IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY

1. Phasing Plan Identify the steps and milestones required to advance from the current feasibility study to project implementation. Specific elements include:  Prepare an outline of the project development process under a Federal (FTA)

funded project and a non-federalized project  Identify target opening dates under each alternate processes  Draft the Phasing Plan portion of the project report

2. Programming Strategies Report

Identify the required local, regional, state and Federal approvals and clearances required for project implementation. Specific elements include:  Identify federal, state, regional and local regulations applicable to a streetcar op-

eration and the steps necessary to address each  Identify the level of environmental review and documentation required  Outline required amendments to regulations, city ordinances or adopted plans  Draft the Programming Strategies portion of the project report

3. Public Outreach Plan

Develop an outline for a public outreach plan for the various phases to project opening. Specific elements include:  Draft a public outreach and education program outline  Identify key participants, including the business community, required for a suc-

cessful public outreach program  Identify local project advocates  Prepare the Public Outreach Plan report section

4. Land Use & Zoning Analysis

 Inventory existing land use and zoning policies, as well as design guidelines, within the project area in light of Metro guidance and best practices relative to transit corridors and Transit-Oriented Development

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 14 of 34

 Provide model language for project area land use, zoning, and design guideline policies to focus new growth within the project area, support streetcar ridership, and help achieve regional GHG/VMT reduction goals

5. Funding Plan Prepare a Funding Plan for the Glendale streetcar system. Specific elements include:  Adjust the budget to the anticipated year of expenditure dollars  Identify the most probable funding sources addressing both the capital and O&M

costs  Identify an estimate of the level of contribution for selected funding sources  Prepare the Funding Plan portion of the project report

Task D: Add Alternatives The City requests that proposers provide the following tasks as optional “add alternatives” to the project scope that the City may pursue if desired:

1. City of Burbank Streetcar Alignment A detailed study of the proposed streetcar system within the City of Burbank, including, but not limited to:

• Alternative alignments connecting from the City of Glendale serving the Down- town Area of the City of Burbank, Media District, Hollywood Burbank Airport, and other points of interest within the City of Burbank.

• This optional task to determine alternative alignments to serve the City of Bur- bank shall be the same Scope of Work that was identified for the City of Glendale portion of the Study: Task A – Project Setting; Task B – Preferred Option As- sessment; and Task C – Implementation Strategy.

2. Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) An evaluation of Personal Rapid Transit as a technology both alternative and in addition to a streetcar system in Glendale.

 Basic information regarding PRT technology, including extant or demonstration systems

 Conceptual costs related to designing, implementing, and operating PRT in Downtown Glendale

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 15 of 34

VI. Instructions to Proposer Compliance with Applicable Guidelines and Regulations Consultants are required to comply with all applicable State of California guidelines and regula- tions regarding the Streetcar Feasibility Study. Late Proposals All proposals, as well as any modifications, received at this office after the hour and date speci- fied will not be considered unless they are sent by certified mail, for which an official, dated post office stamp has been obtained, and it is determined by the City’s Project Manager that the late receipt was due solely to delay in the mail. Disclaimers The City reserves the right to extend the time allotted for the RFP submittal, to interview the Proposer in person, and to request a best and final offer, should the City deem that it is in its best interest to do so. This RFP does not commit the City to award a contract, or to pay any costs incurred in its preparation. The City reserves the right to accept or reject any or all RFPs received as a result of this request, to negotiate with any qualified firm, or to cancel this RFP in part or in its entirety. The City may require the selected firm to participate in negotiations and to submit such technical, price, or other revisions of their proposals as may result from negotia- tions. Any costs incurred by the Proposer in responding to this Request for Proposals shall be the Proposer’s sole expense and will not be reimbursed by the City. Proprietary Information; Public Records Act The City seeks to conduct its business openly. Upon recommendation for award of Contract to the City Council, all Proposal Documents shall become a matter of public record and shall be regarded as public, with the exception of those elements of each Proposal that are identified by the Consultant and plainly marked as “trade secret,” “confidential,” or “proprietary”. Each ele- ment of a Proposal which a Consultant desires not to be considered a public record must be clearly marked as set forth above, and any blanket statement (i.e. regarding entire pages, doc- uments, or other, non-specific designations) shall not be sufficient and shall not bind the City in any way whatsoever. If City receives a request from a third party to make a Proposal available for inspection and copying, the City will notify the Consultant of the request. If a Consultant in- structs the City that the information is not to be released, City will withhold the information, pro- vided, the Consultant expeditiously seeks a protective order to prevent such release. If disclo- sure is required under the California Public Records Act or otherwise by law (despite the Con- sultant’s request for confidentiality), the City shall not in any way be liable or responsible for the disclosure of any such records or part thereof. Consultant shall indemnify, defend (including Consultant providing and paying for legal counsel for the City), and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, employees and representatives from and against any liability, claims, suits, demands, damages, fines, penalties, costs, or ex- penses arising out of or alleging the City’s refusal to publicly disclose one or more records that Consultant identifies as protectable, or asserts is protectable. Agreement Once selected, the successful Proposer must enter into a written Agreement with the CITY with- in fourteen (14) calendar days following Proposer’s receiving the CITY’s Notice of Intent to Award Contract. Before any services can commence, the selected Proposer will be required to execute the Standard Form of Agreement, a sample of which is attached here and alternately referred to as

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 16 of 34

“Professional Services Agreement.” To facilitate the project’s smooth and timely implementation, Proposers responding to this RFP shall review all the terms and conditions of the Standard Form of Agreement including, but not limited to, provisions relating to insurance, indemnity, and termination. The CITY’s policy is that the Standard Form of Agreement be accepted as is. By submitting a Proposal to the CITY in response to this RFP, each Proposer is deemed to have provided its approval to the Standard Form of Agreement, accepting it without qualification. If a Proposer seeks limited modification of the Standard Form of Agreement, then in the Proposal a Proposer must identify the proposed changes. However, changes or qualifications to the Standard Form of Agreement may be weighed in the evaluation of the Proposal and may cause rejection of the proposal as non-responsive, in CITY’s determination. Insurance Requirements Based on the Scope of Work, insurance is required for the following coverages:

• Professional Liability Insurance • Workers’ Compensation Insurance • Commercial General Liability or Business owners Liability Insurance • Business Automobile Liability Insurance

The City’s specific insurance requirements are included in the Appendix to this RFP, as are sample Professional Services Agreements (PSAs) for 1) consultants who are not Architects, Landscape Architects, Professional Engineers, or Professional Land Surveyors and 2) consult- ants who ARE licensed professionals in the aforementioned fields. Requests for Clarification A Proposer with questions may submit to the City a written Request for Clarification by email to Ms. Arezoo Kamali, Planning Assistant at [email protected] for an interpretation or clarification of, or addenda to, this RFP. Any such request must be received by the City no later than the date and time specified in Section I. Schedule of Events in this RFP. The City will re- view and prepare a written response to each request made pursuant to this section. The City's determination will be furnished to all Proposers by the date specified in Section I. Schedule of Events in this RFP. The City reserves the right to modify or issue addenda to this RFP. If the City determines it ap- propriate to revise any portion of this RFP, either at the request of a Proposer or upon the City’s own initiative, the City will issue, and make available to all prospective Proposers, a written ad- dendum setting forth this revision. Proposer shall acknowledge receipt of addenda by written notice thereof returned to the City. Where addenda require changes in the work to be performed under the Agreement, the date for receipt of proposals may be postponed by such number of days as the City deems appropriate to enable Proposers to revise proposals. The City is not bound by any oral interpretations, clarifications, or changes made to this RFP by any City staff member. Any clarification or change to the RFP must be provided in writing pursuant to this sec- tion. Acceptance of Proposals

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 17 of 34

Each proposal shall be submitted with the understanding that it is subject to the evaluation pro- cedure set forth in this RFP, and to negotiation at the option of the City. Upon acceptance in writing by the City of the final offer to furnish any and all of the services described herein, the parties shall promptly execute the final contract documents. The written Agreement shall bind the Proposer to furnish, deliver, maintain, operate or compensate in accordance with conditions of said accepted proposal and this Request for Proposals, as negotiated. The City reserves the right to make the award under this RFP based upon the initial proposals submitted. The City has the right to reject any and all proposals and to waive any informality in any proposal. City Rights The City reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to:  investigate the qualification of any Consultant, require confirmation of information fur-

nished by a Consultant, and require additional evidence of qualifications to perform the Work described in this RFP

 Reject any or all of the Proposals, or any item of the Proposal, without further obligation or reimbursement to the Respondents.

 Modify this RFP  Cancel or withdraw this RFP  Issue a new RFP  Suspend or abandon the Project.  Appoint evaluation committees to review Proposals, and seek the assistance of outside

technical experts in Proposal evaluation  Adjust, increase or decrease a Consultant’s qualification determination based on subse-

quently learned information  Approve or disapprove the use of particular Consultants.  Negotiate fees for scope of work with the Consultant at any time after receipt of the Pro-

posal.  Waive immaterial deficiencies, informalities and minor irregularities in Proposals as the

interests of the City may require.  Terminate negotiations if the City determines termination is in its best interests.  Not issue a notice to proceed after execution of the Contract.

In submitting a Proposal to this RFP, the Consultant is specifically acknowledging these City- held rights. This RFP does not commit the City to enter into a contract, including if the City elects to reject, in its sole discretion, all of the Proposals. The City is not liable for any costs in- curred by a Consultant in preparation and submission of a Proposal or in anticipation of award of a contract. By submitting a Proposal, the Consultant disclaims any right to be paid for such costs. Restrictions on Lobbying and Contacts During the period beginning on the date of the issuance of the RFP and ending on the date of selection of the Proposer, no person (or entity) submitting a proposal in response to this RFP, nor any officer, employee, representative, agent, or consultant representing such a person (or entity) shall contact through any means or engage in any discussion concerning the award of the Contract with any member of the City Council of the City of Glendale or his/her staff. Any such contact shall be grounds for the disqualification of the proposal. During the period begin- ning on the date of the issuance of this RFP and ending on the date of selection of the Propos- er, each person or entity described in the previous paragraph shall limit his or her communica- tion with City staff to the written clarification and amendment process described in this RFP, and interviews or discussions pursuant to evaluation and selection process described in this RFP. At no time may any Proposer have any communication with a member of the City’s evaluation

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 18 of 34

Committee, other than communication initiated by such member during interviews or discus- sions. VII. DBE Requirements

Race Conscious (RC)/DBE Participation. NOTE: The following mandatory requirement applies to the Glendale – Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study. The U.S. Dept. of Transportation Regulations found that 49 CFR Part 26 shall apply to this contract. A disadvan- taged business enterprise (“DBE”) contract goal of 10% goal has been established for this pro- ject. This goal must be met or good faith efforts to meet this goal must be demonstrated in or- der for a proposal to be considered responsive. The Consultant or subcontractor shall not dis- criminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in the performance of this contract. The consultant shall carry out applicable requirements of 49 CFR, Part 26 in the award and ad- ministration of DOT-assisted contracts. Failure by the consultant to carry out these require- ments is a material breach of this contract, which may result in the termination of this contract or such other remedy, as recipient deems appropriate. To assist consultants in ascertaining RC/DBE availability for specific items of work, the City has determined that RC/DBE could reasonably be expected to compete for subcontracting opportunities on this pro- ject, and their likely availability for work on this project is 10% Race Conscious RC/DBE. Consultants are required to complete “Exhibit 10.I NOTICE TO PROPOSERS DBE IN- FORMATION,” “Exhibit 10-01 CONSULTANT PROPOSAL DBE COMMITMENT,” and “Ex- hibit 10-02 CONSULTANT CONTRACT DBE INFORMATION” for this project. It is the proposer’s responsibility to verify that the RC/DBEs fall into one of the following groups in order to count towards the RC/DBE contract goal: 1) Black American; 2) Asian- Pacific American; 3) Native American; 4) Women; 5) Hispanic American; 6) Subcontinent Asian Pacific American and any other groups whose members are certified as socially and economically disadvantaged. Proposers are required to submit the Local Agency Proposal RC/DBE Commitment, “Exhibit 15-G” and the Good Faith Effort, “Exhibit 15-H” forms along with the proposal submittal. If the RC/DBE Commitment forms are not sub- mitted with the proposal, the apparent low proposer, the 2nd low proposer, and the 3rd low proposer must complete and submit the RC/DBE Commitment forms (Exhibits 15-G and 15-H) to the City. Submittal of only the “Local Agency Proposer RC/DBE Commitment” form may not provide sufficient documentation to demonstrate that adequate good faith efforts were made. For a list of RC/DBE’s certified by the California Unified Certification Program, go to: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/bep/find_certified.htm. VIII. Evaluation & Selection Evaluation/Selection Criteria

a. Written Proposal (14 points each, 140 points total) 1) Project Understanding 2) Clarity of Proposal/Organization and Schedule 3) Thoroughness in Addressing Requirements 4) Creativity in Approach 5) Experience of Personnel 6) Technical Ability to Perform 7) Overall Cost of Product 8) Community Outreach/Facilitation 9) Experience with Similar Projects/Communities

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 19 of 34

10) Technical Expertise/Experience of Subconsultants

b. Oral Presentation (10 points each, 60 points total) 1) Presentation 2) Organization 3) Clarity 4) Communication Skills 5) Technical Understanding 6) Responses to Questions

The top five (5) highest-scoring Proposers from the Written Proposal section will be selected for the Oral Presentation. The City reserves the right to reject the proposal of any Proposer who has previously failed to perform properly, or complete on time, contracts of a similar nature, or to reject the proposal of a Proposer who is not in a position to perform such a contract satisfactorily. The City expressly reserves the right to reject the proposal of any Proposer who is in default of the payment of tax- es, Agreements or other monies due to the City of Glendale. IX. Response to RFP – Formatting & Contents Response Formatting and Contents The City expects the Proposer to prepare a comprehensive proposal with recommendations, actions, and procedures to accomplish the scope of work set forth in this RFP. The City shall provide all relevant data in its possession that pertains to this project in support of the Proposer’s services. The City assumes no responsibility whatsoever with respect to the suf- ficiency or accuracy of any information supplied. The Proposer shall be responsible for evalua- tion of all information supplied by the City. The City of Glendale must receive five (5) CDs and ten (10) hard copies of the proposal, as well as Form H, Price and Staffing Proposal, completed in MS Excel. All documents must be submit- ted together by the date and time noted on the RFP title sheet. Proposals should be concise and must be correctly formatted in accordance with this RFP. Each proposal must be divided into Parts I, II, and III as specified below, and must include all of the required contents of each Part, in the sequence specified. Each proposal shall include a ta- ble of contents clearly referencing each Part in the proposal. Part I – BACKGROUND, AFFIRMATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS AND STABILITY 1. Submittal Cover – Form A The proposal shall be signed by an individual authorized to bind the Proposer and shall state that the proposal is a firm offer for a 120-day period.  A corporation must execute the Proposal by its duly authorized officer(s) in accordance

with its corporate bylaws.  A partnership must execute the Proposal by all of its partners. After each signature, each

partner must list a residential address or the Firm’s address, either of which must include the state, zip code, and telephone number.

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 20 of 34

 If the Proposer is a joint venture consisting of a combination of any of the above entities, each entity in the joint venture must sign the Proposal.

 An individual signing a Proposal as an agent of another or others must attach to the Proposal evidence of that person’s legal authority to sign on behalf of another or others.

2. Proposer Contact Information – Form B Provide the indicated contact information for the primary contact person who will be authorized to make representations for the Proposer’s firm. Provide information for the Proposer’s second- ary contact. List all sub-contractors proposed for this project including type of work to be per- formed. Use additional sheets as needed. 3. Statements and Agreements – Forms C-F; Disclosure - Campaign Finance Ordinance This section should include the following certifications, each of which shall be fully executed:

i. Form C – Restrictions on Lobbying and Contacts ii. Form D – Statement of Qualifications iii. Form E – Proposer's Affidavit of Noncollusion iv. Form F – Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Statement v. Form G – Hold Harmless Agreement vi. Disclosure – Campaign Finance Ordinance vii. DBE Requirement Documents

a. Caltrans Exhibit 10-O1 Consultant Proposal DBE Commitment b. Caltrans Exhibit 10-O2 Consultant Contract DBE Information c. Caltrans Exhibit 15-G Local Agency Bidder DBE Commitment d. Caltrans Exhibit 15-H DBE Information – Good Faith Efforts

viii. Debarment and Suspension Certification 4. Information Regarding Debarments, Defaults, Claims, and Related Events Each Proposer, including its Joint Venture members, general partners, and subconsultants (“team members”), shall submit the information set forth below regarding past performance, ac- tivities, and projects. The information shall cover the 5 year period prior to the due date of the proposal.

i. Any instance where the Proposer or a team member defaulted on a public services contract.

ii. Information concerning the bankruptcy or receivership of the Proposer or a team member.

iii. Information concerning all adverse claims, disputes, settlements, or lawsuits be- tween a public agency and the Proposer or a team member (including professional liability/errors and omissions claims) in which the claim, settlement, or judgment ex- ceeds two hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($250,000).

Part II – QUALIFICATIONS & TECHNICAL PROPOSAL Each Proposer shall submit Part II that includes each of the materials set forth below, explaining the qualifications of the Proposer to perform the scope of work and setting forth the Proposer’s management and organizational structure, capability, experience, and proposed programs and plans to ensure successful performance of the scope of work.

a. Project Team

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 21 of 34

i. Proposer must submit an organizational chart identifying the titles of pro- ject team members (and subcontractors if applicable) and reporting rela- tionships within the team. The submittal shall also include a brief descrip- tion for each position identifying which functions they will be responsible to perform in relation to the Agreement including coordination of subcon- tractors. The chart shall indicate a “Project Manager” who will be the City’s central contact person for day-to-day matters. The successful Pro- poser agrees not to change the assigned project staff without prior written consent of the City.

ii. If applicable, the Proposer will submit a description of the proposed sub- contractors and identify which functions they will be responsible to per- form in relation to the scope of work.

b. Experience, Reference, and Performance Record i. Provide contact information for five (5) current agencies for which the

Proposer has provided similar work product. Two of these contracts should be located in Southern California. Provide contact name, title, agency name, address, phone, email, services provided, and annual rev- enue hours. Provide a brief scope of services provided for each contrac- tual relationship. Briefly highlight any unusual findings discovered in the course of implementing the project and achievements gained as a result of the work product.

c. Technical Proposal i. Provide detailed Scope of Work based on tasks specified in this RFP. For

each task, please include the following: assigned staff, estimated time or proportion of staffer’s total project time, assigned staffer’s rate and title, and total proposed cost.

Part III -- PRICE PROPOSAL AND STAFFING PLAN Price Proposal and Staffing Plan - Form H Each Proposer shall submit a price proposal and staffing plan using Form H. A review copy of this form is included within this document, while a submittal copy in MS Excel format is provided electronically as a separate file distributed with this RFP. All figures on Form H must be submit- ted as a completed spreadsheet in MS Excel format on CD and within the printed matter as well. Proposer must submit a staffing plan that includes a comprehensive list of all key staff by name and position proposed for this Agreement. Include contract labor by count, position, and rate only, as applicable.

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 22 of 34

X. Appendix List of Resources For a list of resources, see the Attachments section of this Appendix. The following resources shall be used to inform the development of the project and, as appropriate, summarized or in- corporated into the project. All are available on the City’s FTP site at https://goo.gl/59arFG or are linked to in the Attachments section of this Appendix, unless otherwise noted. Local Plan Regional Plan Report/Study Other

• Glendale Bicycle Transportation Plan (2012)

• Greener Glendale Plan (2012)

• Circulation Ele- ment of the Gen- eral Plan (1998)

• Downtown Specif- ic Plan (2006)

• SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016)

• Metro First Last Mile Strategic Plan (2014)

• Metro Active Transportation Strategic Plan (2014)

• Glendale Down- town Mobility Study (2007)

• Caltrans Local Assistance Pro- cedures Manual DBE forms

• Sample Profes- sional Services Agreements

• City of Glendale Insurance Re- quirements

• Forms B, D, H

• Disclosure Form - Campaign Fi- nance Ordinance

• Campaign Fi- nance Summary – Contracts

• Debarment and Suspension Certi- fication (Page 29 of this RFP)

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 23 of 34

Submittal Forms

MS Word versions of Form B, Form D, the Campaign Finance Disclosure form, and an MS Excel version of Form H are provided electronically on the City’s FTP site:

https://goo.gl/59arFG

All other forms should be printed from this RFP and executed manually.

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 24 of 34

FORM A SUBMITTAL COVER PAGE

RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

CITY OF GLENDALE GLENDALE-BURBANK REGIONAL STREETCAR FEASIBILTY STUDY

Proposer: Firm Name: Street Address: City, State, Zip: I certify that this Proposer is sufficiently informed as to all matters affecting the performance of the work, and the furnishing of labor, supplies, material or equipment called for in this proposal; that the proposal has been checked for errors and omissions, that the facts stated in the pro- posal are current and as intended and are a complete and correct statement of the facts stated therein for performing the work or furnishing the labor, supplies, materials or equipment required by the RFP. This Proposer waives any claim for the return of its proposal on account of errors or omissions claimed to have been made in its proposal or for any other reason. I certify that this response fully complies with the requirements as defined in the RFP, and that I am an authorized representative of the company to bind the firm to this response to the RFP for a 120 day period. __________________________________ ___________________________________ Printed Name of Authorized Representative Signature of Authorized Representative

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 25 of 34

FORM B PROPOSER CONTACT INFORMATION

Proposer Firm Name: Address: City, State, Zip Authorized Signer Name: Authorized Signer Title: Telephone Number: Fax Number: Email Address: Project Manager Name: Project Manager Title: Telephone Number: Fax Number: Email Address: Subcontractors to Proposer Firm Name: Address: City, State, Zip Authorized Representative Name: Authorized Representative Title: Telephone Number: Fax Number: Email Address: Work to be Performed: Firm Name: Address: City, State, Zip: Authorized Representative Name: Authorized Representative Title: Telephone Number: Fax Number: Email Address: Work to be Performed: Attach additional pages as necessary.

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 26 of 34

FORM C RESTRICTIONS ON LOBBYING AND CONTACTS

The Proposer agrees that during the period beginning on the date of the issuance of the RFP and ending on the date of selection of the Proposer, no person (or entity) submitting a proposal in response to this RFP, nor any officer, employee, representative, agent, or consultant repre- senting such a person (or entity) has not and shall not contact through any means or engage in any discussion concerning the award of the Contract with any member of the City Council of the City of Glendale or his or her personal staff. Any such contact shall be grounds for the disquali- fication of the proposal. The Proposer agrees that during the period beginning on the date of the issuance of this RFP and ending on the date of selection of the Proposer, each person or entity described in the pre- vious paragraph has and shall limit his or her communication with City staff to the written clarifi- cation and amendment process described in Section IV, and interviews or discussions pursuant to evaluation and selection process described in Section V. At no time has or shall this Propos- er have any communication with a member of the City’s Evaluation Committee, other than communication initiated by such member during interviews or discussions. ________________________________ _______________ Signature of Authorized Representative Date ____________________________________________ Printed Name and Title of Authorized Representative

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 27 of 34

FORM D STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS

A. If your organization is a corporation or a limited liability company, answer the following: 1. Date of incorporation/organization: 2. State of incorporation/organization: 3. Corporate ID number: 4. Agent for Service of Process: 5. Attach names, addresses and phone numbers of all Corporate Officers. B. If your organization is a partnership, answer the following: 1. Date of organization/formation: 2. Type of partnership (if applicable): 3. Attach name(s), address and telephone number of general partner(s): C. If your organization is individually owned, answer the following: 1. Date of organization: 2. Owner Name: Address: Telephone number: D. Claims and Suits (Check the box if answer is “no”. If the answer to any of the ques- tions below is “yes”, please attach an explanation.)

 1. Has your organization ever been debarred or disqualified from bidding by any state, county or local government agencies? If yes, please explain.  2. Are there any judgments, claims, arbitration proceedings or suits pending or outstanding against your organization or its officers?  3. Has your organization filed any lawsuits or requested arbitration within the last five (5) years?  4. Have you or, if Proposer is a corporation, any principal of the corporation ever been convicted of a felony? If your answer is “Yes”, please explain the details of that conviction and, if so, whether you or said officer have served his or her sentence.  5. Have you or your company ever been charged by any governmental agency for failure to follow safety procedures? If so, please explain.

We/I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated this day of , 20____ Name of Company: By: Title:

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 28 of 34

FORM E PROPOSER'S AFFIDAVIT OF NONCOLLUSION

I, ____________________________________ under penalty of perjury, state as follows: 1. That I am the ________________________ (Title of office if a corporation: "sole owner," "Partner," or other proper title) of __________________________________, (hereinafter called "Proposer") who has submitted to the City of Glendale a Proposal for the GLENDALE- BURBANK REGIONAL STREETCAR FEASIBILTY STUDY; 2. That said Proposal is genuine; that the same is not sham; that all statements of fact therein are true; 3. That said Proposal is not made in the interest or behalf of any person, partnership, com- pany, association, organization, or corporation not named or disclosed; 4. That Proposer did not, directly or indirectly induce, solicit, agree, collude, conspire or contrive with anyone else to submit a false or sham proposal, to refrain from proposing, or with- draw his/her proposal, to raise or fix the proposal price of Proposer or of anyone else, or to raise or fix any overhead profit, or any cost element of Proposer’s price or the price of anyone else; and did not attempt to induce action prejudicial to the interests of the City of Glendale, or of any other Proposer, or anyone else interested in the proposed Agreement; 5. That the Proposer has not in any manner sought by collusion to secure for him- self/herself/itself an advantage over any other Proposer or induce action prejudicial to the inter- ests of the City of Glendale or of any other Proposer, or anyone else interested in the proposed Agreement; 6. That the Proposer did not, directly or indirectly, submit its proposal price or any break- down thereof, or the contents thereof, or divulge information or data relative thereto, to any cor- poration, partnership, company, association, organization, bid depository, or to any member or agent thereof, or to any individual or group of individuals, except to the City of Glendale, or to any person or persons who have partnership or other financial interest with said Proposer in his/her business. We/I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated this day of , 20____ Name of Company: By: Title:

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 29 of 34

FORM F EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION STATEMENT

The Proposer hereafter described will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race/color, national origin, sex, sexual preference, religion, age, or handicapped status in employment or the provisions of services. ________________________________ _______________ Signature of Authorized Representative Date ____________________________________________ Printed Name and Title of Authorized Representative

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 30 of 34

FORM G HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT

Proposer agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City of Glendale against and from any and all damages to property or injuries to or death of any person or persons, including employees or agents of the City, and shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, and employees, from any and all claims, demands, suits, actions, or proceedings of any kind or nature, of or by anyone whomsoever, in any way resulting from or arising out of the negligent or intentional acts, errors, or omissions of the Proposer or any of its officers, agents, or employees. ________________________________ _______________ Signature of Authorized Representative Date ____________________________________________ Printed Name and Title of Authorized Representative

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 31 of 34

TITLE 49, CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS, PART 29 DEBARMENT AND SUSPENSION CERTIFICATION

1) All persons or firms, including subconsultants, must complete this certification and certify, under

penalty of perjury, that, except as noted below, he/she or any person associated therewith in the capacity of owner, partner, director, officer, or manager:

a) Are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or

voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by any federal department or agency;

b) Have not, within the three (3) year period preceding this certification, been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against them for commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public (federal, state, or local) transaction or contract under a public transaction, violation of Federal or state antitrust statutes, or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, or receiving stolen property;

c) Are not presently indicted for or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity (federal, state, or local) with commission of any of the offenses listed in subparagraph (1)(b) of this certification; and

d) Have not, within the three (3) year period preceding this certification, had one or more public transactions (Federal, state, and local) terminated for cause or default.

2) If such persons or firms later become aware of any information contradicting the statements of paragraph (1), they will promptly provide that information to THE City of Glendale.

If there are any exceptions to this certification, insert the exceptions in the following space. Exceptions will not necessarily result in denial of award, but will be considered in determining proposer/bidder responsibility. For any exception noted above, indicate below to whom it applies, initiating agency, and dates of actions. _________________________________ Name of Firm _________________________________ Signature (original signature required) _________________________________ Date

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 32 of 34

FORM H (Sample) PRICE & STAFFING PROPOSAL

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 33 of 34

CAMPAIGN FINANCE DISCLOSURE FORM (Sample)

City of Glendale ___________________ RFP: Glendale –Burbank Regional Streetcar Feasibility Study

Page 34 of 34

Attachments All attachments are available for download online here or where noted: https://goo.gl/59arFG

1. Bicycle Transportation Plan (2012) o Available online at http://www.glendaleca.gov/government/departments/public-

works/engineering/bicycle-master-plan-update 2. Downtown Mobility Study (2007)

o Available online at http://www.glendaleca.gov/government/departments/community- development/planning-division/plans-for-mobility/mobility-study

3. Greener Glendale Plan for Municipal Operations (2011); for Community Activities (2012) o Available online at http://www.glendaleca.gov/government/city-

departments/public-works/greener-glendale 4. Circulation Element of the General Plan (1998)

o Available online at http://www.glendaleca.gov/government/departments/community- development/planning-division/city-wide-plans/circulation-element

5. Downtown Specific Plan (2006) o Available online at

http://www.glendaleca.gov/government/departments/community- development/planning-division/plans-for-downtown-glendale/downtown-specific- plan

6. Downtown Mobility Study (2007) o Available online at

http://www.glendaleca.gov/government/departments/community- development/planning-division/plans-for-mobility/mobility-study

7. SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016) o Available online at http://scagrtpscs.net

8. Metro First Last Mile Strategic Plan & Planning Guidelines (2014) o Available online at https://www.metro.net/projects/sustainability-first-last/

9. Metro Active Transportation Strategic Plan (2014) o Available online at https://www.metro.net/projects/active-transportation-strategic-

plan/ 10. Consultant Insurance Requirements 11. Information Sheet – Campaign Finance Ordinance 12. Sample Professional Services Agreement – Non Architect Non Engineer Non Surveyor 13. Form B. Proposer Contact Information 14. Form D. Statement of Qualifications 15. Form H. Price & Staffing Proposal (MS Excel) 16. Disclosure – Campaign Finance Ordinance – CONTRACTS 17. Sample Professional Services Agreement – Architect Engineer Surveyor 18. Caltrans DBE Forms