engineering assignment
READINGS ARE ATTACHED BELOW!!!!
In both the single and two contract structures, the design professional ultimately works for the owner. However the nature of the design professionals role may differ significantly in each structure.
Compare and contrast the design professionals relationships with builder and owner in each structure.
As a design professional what structure do you believe is more suitable for your profession?
Regarding the three selection processes (Low Bid, Best Value, QBS)
State the advantages and disadvantages of each.
In your opinion, state which selection process best serves the owners needs and why.
Read the City of El Monte Lambert Park Phase 2 (CIP No. 819) RFP (You only need to read the RFP and view Attachment A. You do not need to read the Sample Contract for this lesson):
Explain the purpose of this document. Be specific.
What phases of the Project Delivery Cycle would the services being requested be provided under? Explain and cite the specific section(s) that support your answer.
Would this project be a one-contract or two-contract structure project? Can you determine from the reading the RFP? Explain and cite the specific section(s) that support your answer and explain.
What selection process will be used to determine the winning firm? Cite the information/reason why. For this project do you believe this is the correct selection process or do you believe one of the other processes would be better for this project? Explain your reasons.
Read theGlandale-Burbank Streetcar RFP.
Explain the purpose of this document. Be specific.
What phases of the Project Delivery Cycle would the services being requested be provided under? Explain and cite the specific section(s) that support your answer.
Would this project be a one-contract or two-contract structure project? Can you determine from the reading the RFP? Explain and cite the specific section(s) that support your answer and explain.
What selection process will be used to determine the winning firm? Cite the information/reason why. For this project do you believe this is the correct selection process or do you believe one of the other processes would be better for this project? Explain your reasons
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: [emailprotected]
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 proposers 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) 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/DBEs 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
[emailprotected] 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 Citys 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 areas 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-
hoodoriented 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 citys 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 Companys 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 projects 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 alternatives 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
