FEASIBILITY STUDY OF A NEW COMMUTER RAIL … with existing Metro-North Railroad service to...

Bridgeport Connecticut New Commuter Rail Station Feasibility Study – November 2, 2011

1

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS/QUALIFICATIONS FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO CONDUCT A

FEASIBILITY STUDY OF A NEW COMMUTER RAIL STATION IN BRIDGEPORT, CONNECTICUT

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 General Information Page 2 2.0 Scope of Services Page 4 3.0 Responses Page 8 4.0 Evaluation Criteria Page 9 5.0 Submission of Proposals Page 9 6.0 Selection 0 7.0 General Provisions Page 10 8.0 Contract Provisions Page 12

2

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION 1.1 INTRODUCTION This Request for Proposals/Qualifications (RFP/Q) seeks a professional engineering consultant to

conduct a comprehensive feasibility study of a new commuter rail station on Bridgeport’s East Side. The

goals are to determine whether a new rail station can be constructed in a way that is physically possible,

compatible with existing Metro-North Railroad service to Bridgeport's downtown station, and catalyzes the

redevelopment of the adjacent brownfield properties.

1.2 ISSUING ORGANIZATION

Regional Plan Association, Inc. (RPA), acting on behalf of the New York-Connecticut Sustainable

Communities Consortium (the Consortium), is issuing this RFP. RPA is a not-for-profit, 501 (c) (3)

research and planning organization serving metropolitan New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. RPA

serves as the fiscal agent for the Consortium, a collaboration of the New York Metropolitan Transportation

Council, the South Western Region Metropolitan Planning Organization, the Greater Bridgeport/Valley

Metropolitan Planning Organization, the South Central Regional Council of Governments, the Long Island

Regional Planning Council, the City of New York, the Long Island counties of Nassau and Suffolk, the

lower Hudson Valley cities of Mount Vernon, New Rochelle, White Plains and Yonkers, the Connecticut

Coastal Corridor cities of Norwalk, Stamford, Bridgeport and New Haven, and Regional Plan Association.

The Consortium’s primary purpose is to execute a Regional Plan for Sustainable Development using

funding received from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as

described in the Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for HUD’s Fiscal Year 2010 Sustainable

Communities Regional Planning Grant Program (Docket No. FR-5396-N-03).

Proposers are responsible for monitoring updates and amendments to this RFP at

www.SustainableNYCT.org.

The Greater Bridgeport Regional Council (GBRC), on behalf of the City of Bridgeport, will serve as the

lead agency for the study and will be responsible managing the tasks described in Section 2.0, Scope of

Services.

1.3 INFORMATIION AND INQUIRIES Updates and amendments to this RFP can be found at www.SustainableNYCT.org/requests.

All inquiries regarding this RFP must be submitted in writing and submitted via mail or email to: David Kooris, Vice President for Connecticut Regional Plan Association Two Landmark Square, Suite 108 Stamford, CT 06901 [email protected] Questions will be accepted through November 11, 2011. Questions and responses will be compiled and provided to all Proposers via amendments to this RFP by November 16, 2011. No contact with any other RPA, GBRC or City of Bridgeport personnel other than the authorized contact person is allowed until such times as an award (or awards) has (have) been made.

1.4 RESPONSE DATE RFP Due Date: Responses to this Request for Proposals must be received by December 2, 2011.


3

1.5 AWARD AND REJECTION OF PROPOSALS This RFP does not commit RPA to award a contract, or to procure, or to contract for services or supplies. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this RFP, RPA reserves the right to award this contract to the Vendor(s) that best meet the requirements of the RFP, and not necessarily to the lowest Proposer. RPA reserves the right to accept or reject any or all proposals received as a result of this request; to negotiate with all qualified sources; or to cancel in part or in its entirety this RFP if it is in the interests of RPA to so do. RPA may require the selected Proposer to participate in negotiation and to submit any price, technical, or other revisions, or their proposals as may result from negotiations. 1.6 ADDENDA TO RFP Amendments to this RFP may be necessary before the closing date and will be furnished to all prospective offerers. Failure to acknowledge receipt of amendments in accordance with the instructions contained in the amendment may result in the proposal not being considered. 1.7 PROPRIETARY INFORMATION RPA will not disclose any portion of the proposal except to members of the proposal evaluation team or HUD prior to a contract award. RPA retains the right to disclose the name of the successful Consultant, the amount of contract, and any other information in the technical proposal that is pertinent to the selection of the Consultant. 1.8 PRIMARY PROJECT RESPONSIBILITY Consultants responding to this RFP must clearly explain and identify, in detail, which company will be the lead party. It must be clearly understood that the lead party will enter into a contract with RPA. All other parties will be considered subcontractors or sub-consultants to the lead party. Regardless of which consultant performs the work, the lead party is ultimately responsible for the performance of all contract work. 1.9 AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS The contract award under this RFP is contingent upon the availability of funds to RPA from HUD for this project. RPA shall not advance any funding to Consultant for Consultant’s performance under this agreement; all compensation due to Consultant shall be paid in arrears for services rendered and expenses incurred by Consultant prior to its application to RPA for payment. In the event that the funds are not available, any contract resulting from this RFP will become null and void and of no force and effect. 1.10 AMBIGUITY IN THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) Prior to submitting the proposal, the consultant shall be required to bring to RPA's attention any ambiguity in this RFP. Claims for clarification made less than one week prior to the submission date, as indicated in Section 1.4, or after the date of submission, will not be entertained.

(A) Order of Precedence

In the event that a conflict or ambiguity arises in the interpretation of this RFP, said conflict or

ambiguity shall be resolved in accordance with the following order of precedence, with the first

listed item having a higher precedence than later listed items: (a) provisions required by statute;

(b) federal requirements; (c) state requirements (d) local requirements and (e) this RFP.

(B) Conflicts, Errors and Omissions

(i) Any discrepancies in any of the documents comprising this RFP shall be promptly brought to the attention of RPA by notifying the authorized contact person listed in this RFP. RPA shall, at its discretion, decide the prevailing requirement should there be any discrepancies not expressly provided for in the previous section titled

4

“Order of Precedence”. In any such case, Proposers and potential Proposers will be notified of the discrepancy and the prevailing requirement.

(ii) Omissions from this RFP or the misdescription of anything contained herein which are necessary to carry out the work, or which are customarily performed, shall not relieve the Proposer from being obligated to perform such omitted work or misdescribed work, but they shall be performed as if fully and correctly set forth and described in this RFP without additional compensation.

1.11 HUD TERMS AND CONDITIONS The firm awarded this contract must agree to comply with the terms and conditions specified by HUD for the Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant Program in the attached Cooperative Agreement Provisions (Appendix A). 1.12 OWNERSHIP INFORMATION

The Consortium shall have unlimited rights to use, disclose, or duplicate, for any purpose whatsoever, all information developed, derived, documented or furnished by the consultant under any contract resulting from this RFP. All data collected and other documentation produced as part of the contract will become the exclusive property of the members of the Consortium and may not be copied or removed by the Consultant or any employee of the consultant without written permission of RPA, acting on behalf of the Consortium under procedures specified by the Consortium Steering Committee. All the study material including the equipment purchased under the contract funds for the study must be turned over to the GBRC and RPA at the end of the study. News releases, articles, brochures, prepared speeches and other information releases developed under this contract agreement or any subsequent contract or activity related thereto may not be made without the prior written approval of the GBRC and RPA, acting on behalf of the Consortium under procedures specified by the Consortium Steering Committee.

1.13 EQUAL OPPORTUNITY REQUIREMENTS The firm awarded the contract as a result of being pre-qualified under this RFP, must meet all Municipal, State and Federal affirmative action and equal employment opportunity practices. This will include compliance with E.O. 11246, “Equal Employment Opportunity,” as amended by E.O. 11375, “Amending Executive Order 11246 Relating to Equal Employment Opportunity,” and as supplemented by regulations at 41 CFR part 60, “Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Equal Employment Opportunity, Department of Labor.”

2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES

2.1 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The City of Bridgeport has embarked on efforts to reduce resident’s dependence on motor vehicle travel,

reduce the city’s carbon footprint and promote alternative modes of transportation, including commuter

rail, bus, walking and bicycling. The key guiding plan for these efforts is BGreen 2020: A Sustainability

Plan for Bridgeport, Connecticut. This plan was developed as a multi-disciplinary effort to identify

strategies available locally that can have a positive impact on the environment, climate change, energy

dependency and the national economy. To overcome the challenges facing the city, economic, social and

environmental issues must be faced in a comprehensive and sustainable manner.

A key element of the BGreen 2020 plan is the development of a new rail station to serve as a catalyst for

a transit-oriented development and anchor to the revitalization of the City’s Seaview Avenue corridor. This

feasibility study will enable the City to take the next step, working with the Connecticut Department of

Transportation to establish this second Bridgeport train station. The new rail station would provide access

to mass transit in an underserved area, connect workers to jobs throughout the region, bolster commuter


5

rail usage, and reduce traffic congestion on I-95. It may also serve regional commuters from several

neighboring towns without stations or adequate station parking in their own communities by providing

much needed additional rail commuter parking and by offering convenient public transportation

connections from the neighboring communities to the station.

The station would also anchor mixed-use, transit-oriented real estate development on several adjacent

vacant parcels located within walking distance of the station site and others located nearby. Large,

parcels available for redevelopment exist along a north-south corridor and would be connected to one

another and to the station through the transformation of Seaview Avenue into an urban boulevard and

transitway. The ultimate uses in this district would include affordable, workforce housing critical to the

distressed East End and East Side neighborhoods. The new high-quality transit access would also

support commercial and institutional investment that would create jobs and a path out of poverty for

residents in these neighborhoods. The creation of the Barnum Station will encourage re-investment

throughout the area.

Within the context of ongoing initiatives in this portion of the city, consultants completing this scope will

conduct a comprehensive feasibility study for the new station. The goals are to determine whether a new

rail station can be constructed given the physical parameters of available sites, would be compatible with

existing and projected Metro-North Railroad and Amtrak service along the Northeast Corridor / New

Haven Line and to Bridgeport's downtown station, and would catalyze the redevelopment of the adjacent

brownfield properties. The new station aims to:

• Serve more Connecticut and regional rail customers

• Provide a second rail connection between Bridgeport, Connecticut’s largest city, and the region

• Increase availability of affordable housing in transit-supportive locations;

• Decrease per-capita VMT and transportation-related emissions for the corridor; and

• Increase local resident and other stake-holder participation and decision-making in developing

and implementing a long-range vision for a constellation of transit-oriented neighborhoods by

populations traditionally marginalized in and underserved by public planning processes.

2.2 STUDY OBJECTIVES

• Pursue opportunities to improve transit and promote transit-oriented and supportive development

in Bridgeport, Connecticut’s East Side neighborhood

• Determine feasibility of a commuter rail and intercity rail station located near the intersection of

Crescent Avenue and Waterview Avenue

• Develop alternative build-out scenarios to be considered and the related ridership forecasts for

each scenario

• Determine the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Connecticut Environmental Policy

Act (CEPA) implications for feasible alternatives

2.3 STUDY TASKS

The proposed study would follow a multi-task planning work program and be directed by a study advisory

committee. Representative timelines have been provided for planning purposes; actual schedule will

conform to Consortium approved work program. The proposed work program and study outline consists

of following tasks, identified as Task G in the Consortium Work Program:

6

2.3.1 Public Participation and Outreach

The consultant will develop recommendations for a public participation plan for the duration of the

Barnum Avenue Station Feasibility Study including public information sessions and hearings.

Accommodations for Spanish speaking members of the communities affected will be developed and

provided. Two committees – one technical and one community based including but not limited to

Connecticut Department of Transportation, Metro-North Railroad, Metro-North Commuter Rail Council,

RPA, East Side Neighborhood Revitalization Zone, East End Neighborhood Revitalization Zone, local

community organizations, business representatives, and property owners – will be formed with regularly

scheduled meetings. All public meetings will be held in the vicinity of the project and at a location

convenient and accessible to those most impacted or affected by the project. Use initial meetings to

identify study area boundaries and feasibility measures that will be used throughout study.

Deliverable: Study Area Map and Feasibility Measures Matrix

2.3.2 Existing Conditions / Data Collection

The consultant will review recent plans and ordinances relevant to the Barnum Station area. Conduct site

assessment with support from Greater Bridgeport Regional Council collecting all relevant data related to

the determination of rail station feasibility in the immediate vicinity of the Barnum Avenue station. All

pertinent information including neighborhood demographics and economic factors will be collected.

Activities will include:

• Collect demographic data for the Seaview Avenue corridor;

• Collect traffic volume counts on roadways in vicinity of the rail station, including average daily

volumes and turning movement patterns at key intersections and calculate current traffic

operating levels of service;

• Collect information on existing transit service in the area, including route, bus stops, ridership,

and operating difficulties;

• Map land parcels within the study area and develop an inventory of businesses within the vicinity

of the planned site;

• Identify underutilized parcels and determine potential their adaptive reuse;;

• Geo-code demographic data and spatially analyze;

• Assessing Parking supply and demand

Deliverable: Technical Memorandum 1: Existing Conditions Report

2.3.3 Investigate Station Locations and Conduct Fatal Flaws Analysis

Identify potential station locations within the East Side neighborhood. A conceptual site plan will be

developed for each station location possibility and the feasibility of each will be analyzed including

construction costs and construction factors related to the location along the Northeast Corridor.

Deliverable: Technical Memorandum 2: Initial Alternatives Screening Analysis

2.3.4 Alternative Build-Out, Ridership, and Operations Analysis

Utilizing information collected in the existing conditions analysis, the consultant will develop land use and

intensity build-out alternatives for all parcels within the study area. Several alternatives will be generated

that incorporate differing land use mixes, intensities, and amounts of station area parking for the rail

station.


7

Ridership projections for the new rail station will be developed including impacts to ridership at other main

line stations, including alternatives for the distribution of parking between this and nearby stations. The

work will rely on the use of a state-of the-art ridership model capable of assessing new station impacts on

ridership patterns along the main line as well as affects on operations of Metro-North and Amtrak. In

addition, land use around the station will be reviewed based on a spatial analysis of parcel data. Specific

tasks include:

• Analyze the potential diversion of existing rail commuters from nearby stations to the new Barnum

Station;

• Model travel times including a station-level travel time sensitivity analysis that compares

additional ridership that would result from the reduced travel time that could be achieved by riders

using new station versus ridership decline due to reduction in overall travel times elsewhere on

the line due to additional stop;

• Determine possible parking rates;

• Estimate “Build” scenario traffic volumes and assess traffic operations within the area with and

without the new rail station;

• Analyze traffic congestion mitigation and reduction;

• Assess existing local bus service within the area and identify possible alternatives to enhance

access to each potential site;

• Evaluate options and alternatives for safe and convenient bicycle and pedestrian access to each

potential site; and

• Analyze the relationship between the Barnum Station and the existing downtown station and

determine how they will complement each other with various service options.

• Analyze potential community and displacement impacts

Using a simulation model, rail operations including service to the new Barnum Station will be simulated to

determine whether or not the capacity on the Metro-North and Amtrak can accommodate an additional

station stop and identify any fatal flaws that would prevent adding new service. This simulation will include

impacts on existing commuter rail service (MNRR) as well as high-speed and regional rail service

provided by Amtrak. Specific tasks will include:

• Develop train operating plan and go/no-go analysis; and

• Identify impacts of the new rail station on train operations.

Deliverable: Technical Memorandum 3: Alternatives Analysis

2.3.5 Evaluate Alternatives

The transportation, environmental, economic and neighborhood impacts for each identified potential site

will be evaluated, leading to a recommended alternative. Specific tasks will include:

• Evaluate land use, economic development, and environmental impacts;

• Assess transportation implications – rail, bus and road;

• Develop and analyze at least three alternative scenarios – No Build, Barnum Station as a

commuter rail station only, and Barnum Station as a commuter and intercity rail station;

• Develop site plan for each potential site and scenario with illustrations of parking facilities,

drop-off and pick-up areas, bicycle and pedestrian access, local bus access and green

infrastructure elements; and

• Develop the recommended alternative.

8

An assessment of existing infrastructure will be conducted for each scenario and the order of magnitude

for expanding existing or constructing new infrastructure will be determined for each. The infrastructure

assessment will include, but not be limited to, the catenary power lines, signal system, interlocking,

station constructability, and roadways. In addition, the potential impacts on rail operations will also be

assessed in terms of capacity of the New Haven main line, rail fleet needs, and train schedules.

Deliverable: Technical Memorandum 4: Alternatives Evaluation

2.3.7 Final Report and Public Presentation

A final report will be prepared and reviewed and approved by the City of Bridgeport and the consortium

steering committee. The approval will follow a public presentation of the draft final plan recommendations.

The final report will also include a supplemental report that identifies lessons learned and best practices

for consideration by the Consortium as well as implications for the Program and Execution Plan for

Sustainable Development.

The final product will be a report that synthesizes the analyses, public input and recommendations.

Anticipated outcomes include a financing plan as part of the comprehensive development strategy for the

larger TOD area. This will include ways to capture a portion of the value created by the station to fund

public benefits, including the infrastructure improvements. Along with the TOD projects in the other cities

along the New Haven line corridor, approximately 1,000 acres of infill development will accommodate

much of the area’s housing and commercial development needs for the next generation, including a large

share of affordable housing in locations with excellent job access and energy efficiency.

Deliverable: Final Report

A potential Phase II of the study may be necessary. Determination of the need for a Phase II will be determined during the course of Phase I of this Study, if appropriate and subject to available funding.

3.0 RESPONSES Prospective consultants are asked to submit responses in three parts - Letter of Interest, Technical Response and Financial Supplement. 3.1 LETTER OF INTEREST The Letter of Interest must specify the following: • The name and address of the Consultant. • Name, title and telephone number of the individuals within the firm authorized to commit the company

to this contract. • The name, title and telephone number of the individual RPA should contact regarding questions and

clarifications. • The corporation name and the addresses of all proposed sub-consultants. • A statement that the Consultant's offer will remain in effect for ninety (90) days after acceptance of the

Consultant's proposal by RPA. 3.2 TECHNICAL RESPONSE The Technical Response must contain a description of the consultant's proposed approach with specific reference to: • Project understanding and proposed approach to scope of services


9

• Description of any special services provided • Name and required services of any subcontractors • Project schedule • Resumes of key personnel proposed to work on the assignment with emphasis on relevant experience. • A detailed organization chart. • A description and status of comparable project experience. • Three references from comparable types of projects. • Pertinent examples of related work prepared by the consultant.

3.3 PRICE PROPOSAL The financial supplement shall contain the following: Personnel Costs Personnel Costs must contain the names of all individuals, by job category, who will be assigned to the project. The number of estimated hours and the hourly rate for each individual must be itemized and totaled to arrive at total personnel costs, with overhead multipliers. As specified in HUD’s Cooperative Agreement Provisions, annual compensation for any individual may not exceed the equivalent of the federal General Schedule, GS 15, Step 10, base pay. Travel Perl/Diem (If Applicable) This section must summarize all estimated travel costs of project staff and the cost of food and lodging for the project staff required for the on-site work required under the Scope of Services. Printing/Reproduction The costs of printing and reproducing all required reports and procedural material must be specifically identified and summarized. Miscellaneous Any category of costs, tasks or subtasks not identified in response to the above paragraphs of this Section 3.3 must be specifically identified and summarized in this section. Total Please provide a total price proposal including sub-totals for each major area of work.

4.0 EVALUATION CRITERIA The criteria to be used as guidelines in selecting prospective consultant teams are: • Corporate experience & capacity • Understanding of work to be performed • Understanding of Sustainable Communities program goals • Project organization & staff commitment • Professional expertise of team • Prior experience relative to project • Completeness, feasibility and quality of scope of services and project schedule • Thoroughness, creativity and clarity of suggested approach described in the technical response • Clarity and conciseness of presentation • Fee schedule and cost • Completeness of Technical Response

5.0 SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS Each consultant must submit seven (7) copies and one digital copy on CD in a sealed envelope bearing on the outside the name of each firm, full address, name of the project for which the proposal is submitted, and the date and time proposal is due. The sealed envelope containing the proposal must be enclosed in another envelope addressed to the Consortium contact listed on page 2 of this RFP. RPA

10

must receive the proposal no later than December 2, 2011. Proposals received after the date and time prescribed shall not be considered for contract award and shall be returned to the Offerer. 5.1 FORMAT OF RESPONSES Printed material only will be accepted. Pages must be numbered. All components must be bound and not more than 1" thick. Submissions containing loose items will not be accepted.

6.0 SELECTION Consultants, or consortia of consultants, are asked to demonstrate expertise and experience in all skill areas that may be appropriate to the work contemplated by the consultant. A recommendation of prospective consultants to the Consortium Steering Committee will be made by a review committee consisting of representatives of RPA, GBRC, and other members of the Consortium that are designated by the Steering Committee. The Steering Committee will make a final selection and authorize RPA to communicate selection to the proposers and begin contract negotiations.

7.0 GENERAL PROVISIONS 7.1 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

a) All work shall be performed in accordance with all federal, state, local laws and regulations.

b) The selected Proposer shall uphold with the highest professional standards in all dealings with contractors, suppliers, vendors, engineers, other contractors, entity officials, elected officials, public officials, legal counsel, RPA employees, and all others when representing RPA or the Consortium.

c) It is the intent of RPA and GBRC that all work be performed utilizing state-of-the-art software and hardware. The selected Proposer shall perform all work ensuring compatibility with RPA and GBRC technology. Any multimedia deliverables produced by the selected Proposer shall be of the highest quality and of the most advanced technology.

d) The selected Proposer shall be responsible for identifying, certifying and adhering to any changes in federal, state and local laws and/or provisions that occur throughout the term of the Contract issued pursuant to this RFP and the performance of the work.

e) The selected Proposer shall provide all necessary office space, office supplies, copy and fax machines, communication devices, computer software, hardware and equipment, vehicles and any and all other items necessary to successfully complete the work contemplated in this RFP.

7.2 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

The Proposer will be responsible for the entire contract performance. The Proposer must indicate in the

RFP if it intends to propose a subcontractor or multiple subcontractors for any part of the work. If so, the

Proposer shall identify each proposed subcontractor by name, business address and expertise, and must

include the name(s) of the principal(s) of the proposed subcontracting entity. A full description of the tasks

to be performed by the proposed subcontractor must be included. The Proposer will not be permitted to

subcontract any part of the contract issued pursuant to this RFP or any of the rights and obligations

thereunder without the prior written approval of RPA and GBRC.

The requirements set forth in this RFP shall also apply to any and all proposed subcontractors of any tier, if any.

7.3 DISCLAIMER

RPA and its respective officers, directors, agents, members and employees make no representation or

warranty and assume no responsibility for the accuracy of the information set forth in this RFP. Further,


11

RPA does not warrant nor make any representations as to the quality, content, accuracy or completeness of

the information, text, graphics, links or other facet of this RFP once it has been downloaded or printed from

this or any server, and hereby disclaims any liability for technical errors or difficulties of any nature that may

arise in connection with the Website on which this RFP is posted, or in connection with any other electronic

medium utilized by respondents or potential respondents in connection with or otherwise related to the RFP.

7.4 EXAMINATION OF RECORD

In submitting a proposal, the successful Proposer agrees that RPA shall have access to and the right to

examine directly all pertinent documents, papers and records of the Proposer and/or any approved

subcontractor as related to any contract and/or subcontract resulting from this RFP until six years after final

payment has been made pursuant to any contract awarded as a result of RPA’s acceptance of proposal.

7.5 NEGOTIATED CHANGES

RPA intends to enter into contract negotiations with the firm or firms selected by the RFP Evaluation

Committee, who shall be required to enter into a written contract with RPA in a form approved by legal

counsel for RPA. This RFP and the proposal, or any part thereof, may be incorporated into and made a part

of the contract issued pursuant to this RFP. The contract issued pursuant to this RFP may contain

provisions not contained herein.

RPA reserves the right to negotiate the terms and conditions of the contract issued pursuant to this RFP

with the selected Proposer(s), if any. These negotiations could include all aspects of services and fees.

Neither the selection of a vendor nor the negotiation of the contract with such vendor(s) shall constitute

RPA’s acceptance of the proposal or a binding commitment on behalf of RPA to enter into a contract with

such Vendor(s), as any binding arrangement must be set forth in the contract signed by both parties and is

subject to all requisite approvals.

As indicated in 1.3 above, all questions or concerns regarding this RFP must be directed to the designated contact person. If a Proposer believes that a concern has not been satisfactorily addressed, it may submit a protest in writing to Steering Committee Co-Chair Sarah Goldwyn at the New York City Department of City Planning, 22 Reade Street, 6

th Floor, New York NY 10007.

7.6 INSURANCE

Throughout the Terms of this Agreement, the Consultant will maintain, and will cause all of its subcontractors to maintain, the following insurance: 1) Commercial General Liability Insurance written on an ISO Occurrence Form or its equivalent relating

to work performed under the Agreement providing a limit of not less than $2,000,000 in the aggregate

and not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage

and $1,000,000 products/completed operations and contractual coverage which will remain in effect

for a period of not less than five (5) years beyond the completion of work under this agreement;

2) RPA must be named as additional insured on all policies listed in the foregoing subparagraph (A)

pursuant to endorsements to each of such policies and the Consultant must be named as Additional

insured on all such policies obtained by its subcontractors.

3) Contractors will also maintain Statutory Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability Insurance

covering all Consultant and subcontractor employees engaged in the work performed under this

Agreement; and

Certificates of insurance (and such other evidence of the insurance required to be maintained under this

Paragraph entitled “Insurance” as may be acceptable to RPA, including, without limitation, complete

copies of all such insurance policies and endorsements) in form and substance reasonably acceptable to

RPA, must be supplied for review and approval prior to the commencement of the Work. Contractors shall

12

release and waive all rights of subrogation against RPA possessed by Consultant’s insurers with respect

to the assumption and discharge of the obligations of contractors pursuant to this paragraph, and

Consultant represents and warrants that it is authorized to make such release and waiver under its

policies of insurance. Each issuer of each insurance policy required to be maintained under this

Agreement shall evidence its agreement that each such policy shall not be cancelled or materially

amended without 30 days prior notice to RPA.

8.0 CONTRACT PROVISIONS.

The contract must contain the provisions in paragraph (i) of this section. Federal agencies are permitted to require changes, remedies, changed conditions, access and records retention, suspension of work, and other clauses approved by the Office of Federal Procurement Policy.

1. Administrative, contractual, or legal remedies in instances where contractors violate or breach contract terms, and provide for such sanctions and penalties as may be appropriate. (Contracts more than the simplified acquisition threshold)

2. Termination for cause and for convenience by the grantee or subgrantee including the manner by which it will be effected and the basis for settlement. (All contracts in excess of $10,000)

3. Notice of awarding agency requirements and regulations pertaining to reporting.

4. Notice of awarding agency requirements and regulations pertaining to patent rights with respect to any discovery or invention which arises or is developed in the course of or under such contract.

5. Awarding agency requirements and regulations pertaining to copyrights and rights in data.

6. Access by RPA, the Federal grantor agency, the Comptroller General of the United States, or any of their duly authorized representatives to any books, documents, papers, and records of the contractor which are directly pertinent to that specific contract for the purpose of making audit, examination, excerpts, and transcriptions.

7. Retention of all required records for at least three years after RPA makes final payments and all other pending matters are closed.

8. Compliance with all applicable standards, orders, or requirements issued under section 306 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 1857 (h)), section 508 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1368), Executive Order 11738, and Environmental Protection Agency regulations (40 CFR part 15). (Contracts, subcontracts, and subgrants of amounts in excess of $100,000).

9. Mandatory standards and policies relating to energy efficiency which are contained in the state energy conservation plan issued in compliance with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (Pub. L. 94A 163, 89 Stat. 871).

[53 FR 8068, 8087, Mar. 11, 1988, as amended at 60 FR 19639, 19642, Apr. 19, 1995]

Attachment AU.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Sustainable Housing And Communities

COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT PROVISIONS

FEASIBILITY STUDY OF A NEW COMMUTER RAIL … with existing Metro-North Railroad service to...

Documents

Transcript of FEASIBILITY STUDY OF A NEW COMMUTER RAIL … with existing Metro-North Railroad service to...