Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10 - Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH • • MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Webb and Members of the City Council FROM: Dave Kiff, Assistant City Manager DATE: May 4, 2006 RE: Item #10 -- Big Canyon Creek I respectfully request continuance of the Big Canyon Creek item for two weeks. Public Works staff and I need more time to go through the fee schedule with the proposed consultant. Thank you. Dave City Hall • 3300 Newport Boulevard • Post Office Box 1768 • Newport Beach, California 92659 -1768 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 10 May 9, 2006 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: City Manager's Office Dave Kiff, Assistant City Manager 949/644 -3002 or dkiff @city.newport- beach.ca.us SUBJECT: Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project— Phase II ISSUE: Should the City enter into a $735,000 contract with WRC Consulting Services, Inc. to do Engineering, Design, Permitting, and Final Construction Documents (Phase II of III phases) for the Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project? RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor to sign a professional services agreement with WRC Consulting Services in an amount not to exceed $735,000 (includes a 5% contingency) to conduct design, engineering, permitting, and the preparation of construction documents for the Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project. DISCUSSION: Newport Bay is Newport Beach's most treasured environmental asset. From the ecological reserve and parkland in the Upper Bay to the boating, residential, and visitor - serving uses in the Lower Bay, Newport Bay is home to six endangered species, the nation's largest small craft harbor, tour and charter boat operations, more than sixty different commercial ventures, rowing clubs, yacht races, and millions of visitors annually. Upper Newport Bay - including its Ecological Reserve (administered by the California Department of Fish and Game), its Regional Park (administered by the County of Orange) and the access provided by Back Bay Drive (administered by the City) - is one of California's more challenging resources to manage and protect. Several major and complex Upper Bay projects involving a multitude of agencies are underway today, including: Contract with INRC for Phase It of Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project May 2, 2006 Page 2 • Upper Newport Bay Ecological Restoration Project. This US Army Corps of Engineers -led (US ACE) effort is a $38.5 million dredging project that is underway today. • Newport Bay /San Diego Creek Watershed Feasibility Study. This US ACE -led Study looks at ways to reduce sediment and nutrient deposits in the Upper Bay by keeping the sediment at its source. The Study is identifying locations in the San Diego Creek watershed that will catch sediment, treat runoff (in part via the IRWD's Natural Treatment System or "NTS" project), and preserve and restore habitat. • Sediment/Nutrient TN1DL Compliance. To comply with US EPA - adopted Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) that limit sediment and nutrients into the Bay, the City funds ongoing monitoring and maintenance of upstream environments to meet the TMDLs' limits. Even with these three major efforts, the Upper Bay still faces significant problems relating to the region's heavy use of the Bay as a park, reserve, and local resource. These problems include: • Erosion of the City -, County -, and privately -owned slopes that abut the Bay; • Infestation by non -native plants; • Increased threats to endangered, threatened and species of concern; • Continued serious loss of wetland, saltmarsh, mudflat and transitional habitats; • Trespassing in sensitive areas due to a lack of appropriate public access; and • Inputs of contaminated runoff from Bay - adjacent residential and business areas. While the County and the State of California administer much of the Upper Bay, the City owns and manages Big Canyon Nature Park (see diagram). Big Canyon Nature Park's roughly 58 acres include Big Canyon Creek, a drainage that receives runoff from two square miles of primarily urbanized watershed, the Big Canyon Country Club and adjacent residences. The Nature Park is largely unrestored and has extensive problems with invasive species and poor water quality due to urban runoff. In January 2003, the City Council approved what's referred to as "Phase I" (the development of a concept plan) of a larger Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project (the "Project "). The overall Project would: 1. Improve the water quality of the fresh water Blg Canyon Creek both as it enters the Park and as the Creek enters Upper Newport Bay; 2. Remove exotic species and replace with native, non - invasive species; 3. Create effective riparian, wetlands, coastal sage scrub, and other habitat in the Park (paying close attention to the needs of endangered and threatened species) per the attached Conceptual Plan or an updated iteration of the Conceptual Plan; 1 Contract with WRC for Phase 11 of Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project May 2, 2006 Page 3 4. Design a sound drainage & hydrology system that will convey runoff from significant storm events through Big Canyon Creek; 5. Provide for visitor amenities, including but not limited to parking, comfort station(s), overlooks, interpretive and educational elements, bike facilities, and a disabled - accessible trail (or boardwalk or bridge) allowing access to significant areas of the Park; 6. Design the realignment of key infrastructure in the park, including utilities, utility access facilities, Back Bay Drive, parking lots, bike facilities, comfort stations, etc.; 7. Add to the acreage of mudflat at the mouth of Big Canyon Creek so as to increase overall mudflat acreage in Upper Newport Bay; Big Canyon Creek Area After receiving Council authorization to do so via Resolution 2002 -15 on January 22, 2002, the City applied to the State Coastal Conservancy, via its Southern California Wetlands Recovery Project ( SCWRP), for a grant to complete Phase I. On October 31, 2002, the SCWRP approved a grant of $167,000 for Phase I. The City matched the grant with $110,000 from the Upper Newport Bay Restoration Account. Another $27,000 in in -kind support came from the Newport Bay Naturalists and Friends and from a group that conducted Phase I - Community Conservancy International (CCI). Phase I Work. CC] completed a majority of the Project's Phase I work in Fall 2003. The culmination of the work included a public meetings and a consensus by various resources agencies that one identified alternative - called the Historic Tidal Wetlands Alternative - is the project alternative that should provide the best habitat value for Big Canyon Creek. A schematic of the Alternative is shown within the RFP in the attachments. 3 Contract with WRC for Phase 11 of Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project May 2, 2006 Page 4 What's in Phase II. Phase II continues planning and design work for the Project with the Historic Tidal Wetlands Alternative as the guiding use. Phase II includes a comprehensive study of hydrology and water quality concerns in Big Canyon Creek, along with refinement of the Alternative (including the engineering, design, permitting, and outreach needed to bring the Project to construction -ready documents). Specifically, Phase II includes (see the RFQ for more detailed information): 1. Feasibility Assessment; 2. Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP) and Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP); 3. Preliminary Engineering; 4. Environmental Review; 5. Outreach, Final Engineering & Design; 6. Post - Construction Water Quality Monitoring Plan; and 7. (Optional) - Construction Management Consultant Selection. We issued a full RFP and received three responses, all from reputable firms, at the proposal deadline. Following the qualification -based selection (QBS) process, we scored the three proposals, narrowed them down to two, interviewed the two firms, and then discussed fees with the firm (WRC Consulting Services) we believed was most qualified. The review team was: • Lloyd Dalton, Principal Engineer, Public Works • Dave Kiff, Assistant City Manager • Tom ROSSMiller, Harbor Resources Manager • John Kappeler, Code & Water Quality Division Manager • Brian Shelton, Biologist, Fish and Game • Jack Keating, Newport Bay Naturalists and Friends • Ric Katzmaier, Newport Bay Naturalists and Friends • Karen Bane, State Coastal Conservancy • Terri Stewart, Supervising Biologist, Fish and Game • Wanda Cross, Regional Water Quality Control Board The three proposing firms were WRC Consulting Services, Moffat - Nichol, and EcoSystems Restoration Associates. WRC had a narrow edge over the other firms by the time the proposal scoring and interviews were done. Funding. Funding for Phase II will come from these sources: • State Water Resources Control Board grant -- $200,000.00 (awarded) • State Coastal Conservancy Grant-- $500,000 (awarded) • City Match requirement ($50,000 -in FY 2005 -06 CIP at 7231- C5100709) Contract with WRC for Phase 11 of Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project May 2, 2006 Page 5 Construction Cost Projection. It's difficult to estimate what construction costs will be - in 2003 -04, we estimated these costs at $4 -5 million. We intend to seek construction funding from a variety of sources, including Propositions 12, 13, 40, or 50, the Transportation Corridor Agencies' mitigation funds, the County of Orange's mitigation funds, and other sources should additional grant moneys become available. We are optimistic that the Project, once planned and approved, will successfully secure construction funding given that funding from the above - mentioned propositions is unaffected by the State budget. Environmental Review: Environmental review is not required for this Council action, but environmental review for the Project itself will be done within Phase II. Public Notice: This agenda item requires standard Brown Act notice. Submitted by: Dave 'ff Assistant City Manager Attachments: Phase II RFP WRC Scope of Work Cost Estimate WRC Timeline for Scope of Work Proposed Professional Services Agreement with WRC C, City of Newport Beach, California REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS CONSULTANT SERVICES Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project Phase 11 -- Engineering, Design, Permitting, and Final Construction Documents DATE MAILED: AUGUST 19, 2005 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 3300 NEWPORT BOULEVARD NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92663 Table of Contents A. Introduction ............................. ............................... ...........................Page 2 B. Description of Project .................................................... ..............................3 C. Scope of Work ............................................................. ..............................A D. General Requirements ................................................... ..............................8 E. The City's Responsibilities ............................................. ..............................9 F. Consultant Products ..................................................... .............................10 G. Consultant Qualifications .............................................. .............................10 H. Required Proposal Elements .......................................... .............................11 I. Proposal Submittal ....................................................... .............................12 J. Consultant Selection Process ........................................ .............................13 K. Equal Opportunity Requirements .................................... .............................13 Exhibit A — Project Location Maps .................................. .............................14 Exhibit B— Conceptual Plan .......................................... .............................15 Exhibit C — Standard Professional Services Agreement .... .............................16 Exhibit D — City Attorney's Office PSA Guidelines ............ .............................31 Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project (Phase 11) RFP August2005 Page 2 A. INTRODUCTION Upper Newport Bay (UNB) is a 750 -acre estuary in central Orange County, California. UNB includes an ecological reserve (administered by the California Department of Fish and Game [DFG]), a regional nature preserve (administered by the County of Orange) and City -owned and administered adjacent properties like the 58 -acre Big Canyon Creek Nature Park. UNB is home to six endangered species, including the California Least Tern, the California Brown Pelican, and the Light- Footed Clapper Rail. Big Canyon Creek. Big Canyon Creek is a drainage course that receives runoff from about two square miles of primarily urbanized watershed (including the Big Canyon Country Club and adjacent residences) and that runs through Big Canyon Creek Nature Park before flowing into UNB (see Exhibit A for location information). The Southern California Wetlands Recovery Project ( "WRP ") identified Big Canyon on its Work Plan as an important resource in need of restoration. The Newport Beach City Council directed the City to move forward with an effort to restore the Creek within the Nature Park, calling the effort the Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project. As proposed in 2003, the Project would address: • A restoration plan for wetlands and wetlands - related habitats; • The needs of endangered and threatened species; • Unfiltered urban runoff and impacts on Bay water quality; • Drainage and hydrologic needs of golf course, City storm drains and bluffside homes, including provisions for large storm events; • Public access and connection to Big Canyon Nature Park; and • Maintenance access to City and other agencies' utilities. Phase I Complete. In 2003 and 2004, Community Conservancy International (CCI), with funding from the State Coastal Conservancy on behalf of the WRP, the City, and the Newport Bay Naturalists and Friends ( "NBNF "), conducted Phase I of the Project. Phase I included preliminary analysis and reviews, public meetings, and discussions with regulatory agencies_ The Phase concluded by designating a preferred alternative called the Historic Tidal Wetlands Alternative (see Exhibit B). Please see the full report on Phase I (as completed by CCI) on the City's web site at www.city.newport- beach.ca.us and the State Coastal Conservancy's website at www.scc.ca.gov. About Phase II. The Project is now ready to move to its formal design phase. As the owner of the Big Canyon Creek Nature Park, the City of Newport Beach has committed to its restoration; therefore, the City will be the project lead from final design to construction and management. This Request for Proposals (RFP) solicits proposals from interested firms to complete Phase II ( "Engineering, Design, Permitting, and Final Construction Documents ") of the Project. The following is important to know about Phase II: Its Scope of Work follows this introduction, and includes a P parry review of the Alternative selected in Phase I; rr 1 Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project (Phase ll) RFP August 2005 Page 3 • A key component in Phase II is the water quality analysis and design - this analysis shall include a Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP), a Quality Assurance Program and Plan (CAPP), and shall provide for pre- and post- Project monitoring that demonstrates water quality improvement. • It is funded in part from the City, the State Coastal Conservancy, and the State Water Resources Control Board (via the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region). These three agencies' goals are identical - the improvement of habitat, public access, and water quality; • Consultant selection by the City is subject to approval by the State Coastal Conservancy and the State Water Resources Control Board. • Consultant selection by the City will be a qualifications -based selection ( "QBS ") as described in Section J of this RFP. • The City expects that the Consultant shall complete Phase II 18 months from the date of contract award, though respondents should propose a timeline reflective of the practical and logistical needs of the Phase as opposed to an arbitrary conclusion date. B. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT As refined by Phase I's information, the stakeholders intend to restore the habitat quality of the Big Canyon Creek Nature Park in a manner that will: 1. Improve the water quality of the fresh water Big Canyon Creek both as it enters the Park and as the Creek enters Upper Newport Bay; 2. Remove exotic species and replace with native, non - invasive species; 3. Create effective riparian, wetlands, coastal sage scrub, and other habitat in the Park (paying close attention to the needs of endangered and threatened species) per the attached Conceptual Plan or an updated iteration of the Conceptual Plan; 4. Design a sound drainage system that will convey runoff from significant storm events through Big Canyon Creek; 5. Provide for visitor amenities, including but not limited to parking, comfort station(s), overlooks, interpretive and educational elements, bike facilities, and a disabled - accessible trail (or boardwalk or bridge) allowing access to significant areas of the Park; 6. Design the realignment of key infrastructure in the park, including utilities, utility access facilities, Back Bay Drive, parking lots, bike facilities, comfort stations, etc.; 7. Add to the acreage of mudflat at the mouth of Big Canyon Creek so as to increase overall mudflat acreage in Upper Newport Bay; Consultant services for the Project shall encompass the following elements: 1. A peer- reviewed and stakeholder- involved evaluation of the proposed Conceptual Plan (Exhibit B — Historic Tidal Wetlands Alternative) for the Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project; `F Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project (Phase tl) RFP August 2005 Page 4 2. Further improvement of the Conceptual Plan (or an alternative should the Conceptual Plan be amended as a result of this contract) into fully- approved and permitted construction documents, including but not limited to: • Coordinating all permitting and other Agency Approvals (including CEQA and agency review, including permit requirements of the City of Newport Beach); • All related engineering, landscaping design, biological analyses, and design development, including drainage systems that would maintain and protect any restoration efforts during large storm events. • The establishment of baseline water quality conditions, the evaluation and design of water quality improvements, and the development of a post - construction water quality monitoring plan; 3. Stakeholder and community participation, including arranging for and holding at least two (2) noticed public workshops. The workshop schedule shall be developed with the City, the SCC, and the Regional Board; 4. A Technical Advisory Committee established in consultation with the City, the SCC, and the Regional Board and staffed by the consultant (including agendas and minutes). The TAC will regularly review and comment upon the Scope of Work's work products. 5. The development of a post- construction maintenance plan and an estimate of annual costs for the post- construction maintenance plan; 6. Communication and interaction with the SCC and the Regional Board — as well as with City staff. 7. The development and submittal of an appropriate and Regional Board - accepted Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP) and Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) associated with this Project's water quality monitoring components. 8. The arranging and coordination of a publicly - accessible web site (linked to or hosted at the City's web site) as a repository of all public information about the Project; 9. A Quarterly Report issued once every three months to the City, the SCC, and to the Regional Board in a common format as directed. 10. Final construction documents, including: • Calculations that substantiate the key design features (e.g., flood stage that control structures are designed to withstand); • Detailed construction drawings; and • Specifications that explain the construction drawings. C. SCOPE OF WORK The City desires that the Consultant bring the Project from its Conceptual Plan to final construction drawings. More specifically, the Consultant shall provide these six (with an optional seventh) Parts: I — Feasibility Assessment; II — Water Quality QAPP and SAP; III — Preliminary Engineering; IV — Environmental Review & Grant Opportunities; n, Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project (Phase lt) RFP August 2005 Page 5 V — Outreach, Final Engineering & Design; VI — Post - Construction Water Quality Monitoring Plan; and VII — (Optional) — Construction Management The Consultant may be asked to provide Construction Management for the Project at a later date. Part I -- Feasibility Assessment of Phase One's Conceptual Plan. The Consultant shall assess the Project's feasibility in part by gathering required information to analyze or improve upon Phase One's Historic Wetlands Conceptual Plan. Specific tasks shall include: Establish (in consultation with the City) and convene Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and meet with TAC to review Conceptual Plan. TAC membership is suggested to include representatives of DFG, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service, the City, the State Coastal Conservancy, the Regional Board, and representation from a Non- Governmental Organization, like the NBNF; Gather existing information about the Conceptual Plan, especially whether the Plan will meet water quality objectives and whetherthe plan is hydrologically sound; Meet with impacted resources agency representatives and City staff to discuss the Conceptual Plan, its water quality component, and any alternatives and Based on these meetings, determine the Optimum Plan and additional studies /analysis required, if any, to confirm its feasibility. While it is understood that the time spent during planning can expand to accommodate examining additional options, the Consultant shall clearly define tasks that are reasonably needed to accomplish the Feasibility Assessment phase of the project. Part II — Water Quality QAPP and SAP. The consultant shall review existing water quality data to attempt to characterize the baseline water quality of the Big Canyon system. To further this characterization, the Consultant shall: 1. Develop and submit an approved Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP) to the Regional Board. The QAPP must be consistent with the QAPP for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). 2. Develop, submit, and implement an approved Water Quality Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) to the Regional Board. The SAP shall describe the specific water quality constituents to be monitored and the frequency /schedule for the monitoring activities. Monitoring activities shall include pre- Project baseline monitoring and a specific plan for post- Project monitoring to determine water quality improvement resulting from the restoration project. Post - Project monitoring shall be done by the City or another contractor in the post- construction phase of the Project (see Part VI of the Scope of Work for Post - Construction Monitoring Plan). Sub -tasks here are: a. Conduct the water quality sampling and analysis program per the approved SAP; ,p Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project (Phase ll) RFP August 2005 Page 6 b. Establish a baseline water quality evaluation of the Project area by characterizing contaminants entering or present; C. Submit the water quality data to the Regional Board in report form and electronic format. Part III -- Preliminary Engineering (to 30% design for Alternatives). Services under this Phase shall include: 1. Revise timeline for Phase II (this specific phase of the larger restoration project) If appropriate, include time and budget requirements for additional studies /analysis required to confirm Optimal Plan's feasibility and/or to develop appropriate alternatives for NEPA/CEQA compliance; 2. If the Consultant proposes any changes in the Design Team that the Consultant originally submitted in response to the RFP, the Consultant shall provide such recommended changes to the City, SCC and Regional Board for approval NOTE: At the completion of Steps /// -1 and 111 -2, the consultant must stop further work until receiving a formal Notice to Proceed from the City, SCC, and Regional Board. With a Notice to Proceed in hand, the consultant may proceed to Step 111 -3. 3. Conduct additional studies and a public workshop associated with these studies, if warranted; 4. Develop the Optimal Plan and any design alternatives to a level sufficient for NEPA/CEQA analysis (level of design required for the alternatives shall be 30 %). The Optimal Plan shall include: • Restoration of all habitat areas (riparian, wetlands, meadow, fresh water pond, mudflat, coastal sage scrub); • Removal of all non - natives and replacement with appropriate native and non - invasive species; • Water quality protective measures and facilities. NOTE: water quality improvement measures shall not rely solely on natural treatment systems (please see "Habitat Value of Natural and Constructed Wetlands Used to Treat Urban Runoff., A Literature Review" @ www. scwrp .orgldocumentslSAPlTreatment wetlandslTreatmentWetlandsCover .pdo; • Erosion control, hydrologic, and hydraulic measures and facilities that control 100 -year storm flows and sedimentation such that storm flows and sediment does not damage improvements in the Park or habitat in Upper Newport Bay; • Realignment of Back Bay Drive, pedestrian and bicycle trails, boardwalks and bridges, overlooks, parking, comfort station(s), and interpretive and educational areas for the public, including facilities that provide access to persons with disabilities (to the extent required under ADA and to the extent possible). Interpretive and educational elements should be coordinated with existing educational efforts of the stakeholders; • Hydrologic and hydraulic measures and facilities Realignment of Back Bay Drive (if appropriate) to City specifications, including culverts, grading, paving, etc. • Repair and improvement of tidal structures and/or spillways for fresh water pond areas; 5. Provide detailed control and topographical surveys; 6. Confirm the location of private and publicly -owned utilities within the Project area, and provide pre- engineering to show how they may be serviced and preserved under the Optimal Plan; Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project (Phase II) RFP August 2005 Page 7 7. Provide soil borings and a geotechnical report for the proposed improvements; 8. Conduct biological studies and analysis, including (but not limited to): • Addressing the environmental setting; • Section 7 (Endangered Species Act) consultation with National Marine Fisheries and US Fish and Wildlife Service; • Data collection for candidate and listed species to include in a Biological Assessment for any incidental take statements; and Wetlands delineation. 9. Coordinate pre- design work with City staff through the City's project manager; 10. Develop a detailed preliminary cost estimate for the selected alternative; and 11. Discuss materials and data with TAC, and respond to TAC's comments. Part IV -- Environmental Review & Grant Opportunities. Environmental review services may progress concurrently with Preliminary Engineering tasks (where appropriate) and shall include: 1. Mitigation Opportunity Review /Planning. The Consultant shall evaluate and make recommendations on avenues for construction funding, including coordination with and assistance to interested parties (such as the County of Orange or the Transportation Corridor Agencies) who may need to use the site for mitigation expenditures. In the event that mitigation dollars are available, the Consultant shall adjust CEQA/NEPA process accordingly and detail likely maintenance obligations within CEQA/NEPA process. 2. CEQA/NEPA Review and Documentation: In addition to compliance with the CEQA, the City may need to comply with NEPA in the event that a Federal agency provides construction funding or that a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit is needed. a. Prepare an Initial Study reflecting the Optimal Plan and its alternatives; b. Determine which level of environmental review is appropriate (MND, EIR, other); c. Prepare and submit Notice of Preparation (NOP); d. Hold at least one scoping meeting and receive agency /stakeholder/TAC comments; e. Prepare administrative draft of environmental document and circulate to staff of Regional Board, City, and SCC for comments and revisions; f. Circulate draft environmental document to the public; g. Hold public review meeting and respond to comments; h. Prepare final environmental document, including mitigation measures as necessary. 3. While feedback from agencies on environmental review and permit documents should be sought before proceeding to final design and construction -ready documents, modifications of designs and construction -ready documents may be required to comply with environmental or permitting approvals. 4. Prepare and submit applications for all permits and obtain all agency approvals /permits for the Project. 5. Serve as the lead consultant (with City or other groups' support) to prepare two or more grant applications associated with the Project. Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project (Phase ll) RFP August 2005 Page 8 Part V — Outreach, Final Engineering & Design. Design services comprise a substantial portion of the Scope of Work, and shall bring the Optimal Plan to final design and construction -ready documents. These services shall include: 1. Join City staff and others in communication and up to two (2) meetings with residents and commercial entities upstream to discuss Optimal Plan, including any runoff reduction efforts planned for upstream businesses and residents. 2. Surveying the project site and preparing fully dimensioned base sheets. Survey information shall be provided at close intervals as needed at critical areas. 3. Final Design of the Optimal Plan. This design shall include engineering and preparation of construction -ready documents (to City of Newport Beach Public Works Standards — see later in the RFP) for the installation of all improvements; 4. Preparing detailed special provisions, quantities and a final cost estimate; 5. Development of a post- construction Long -Term Maintenance Plan (with cost estimates) for the Project; 6. Discuss materials and data in Design phase with TAC, respond to comments; 7. With assistance of City staff, convene and staff a workshop with interested stakeholders; and Part VI — Post - Construction Monitoring Plan. Building on the pre- Project SAP for Water Quality in Part II, this section of the Scope of Work shall consist of: Developing and submitting an approved Post - Construction Water Quality Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) to the Regional Board. The SAP shall describe the types of water quality constituents to be monitored and the frequency /schedule for the monitoring activities. No post- construction monitoring is expected from the Consultant; however, the Consultant may later be requested under a separate contract to administer the Post - Construction Monitoring SAP once the Project is constructed. Part VII — (Optional) Construction Management. In the event that the Consultant desires to continue with this Project as its Construction Manager, the Consultant shall provide the following: 1. A summary of the expertise, roles, and duties that a selected Construction Management Team should have and should follow for this specific project. 2. A specific description of the respondent's Consultant Team (its personnel and personnel's qualifications) that would provide construction management, including a summary and qualifications of the Team's construction management experience with related projects. D. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 1. The Consultant shall prepare drawings and design specifications that conform with the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, ADA requirements, and !1J Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project (Phase ll) RFP August 2005 Page 9 requirements of the City of Newport Beach Design Criteria, Special Provisions and Standard Drawings for Public Works Construction 2004 Edition, which augments the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, latest revision. 2. The Consultant shall prepare drawings in AutoCAD Release 2002, plot construction drawings on standard City vellum sheets, and plot As -Built plans on standard City mylar sheets. Electronic files shall be formatted for use in any construction staking. 3. Drawings shall include all details and information required for various City departmental plan checks and for bid and construction purposes. 4. Drawings, special provisions, contract documents and amendments shall be signed by the Consultant and submitted to the City for official signatures. The Consultant shall meet with Public Works Department officials and pursue plan corrections until the plans are declared "construction- ready" by that department. 5. A detailed preliminary cost estimate shall be submitted as a part of Part III (Preliminary Engineering). The final cost estimate shall be updated following Part V (Final Engineering and Design) and submitted to the City for review. 6. The timeline required by Part III -1 must include at least the following mileposts: • Receive Notice to Proceed from the Project Manager; • Submit topographical survey of existing conditions to City Staff; • Submit proposed horizontal control plan and site plan to City Staff; • Submit 30% complete plans to City Staff; • Delivery of preliminary and /or final environmental review documents and permits; • Submit 90% complete plans, specifications and estimate to City Staff; and • Submit Final Plans, specifications, and Engineer's Estimate to the Project Manager for approval signatures. 7. The City encourages frequent informal reviews to keep City staff fully informed. 8. The Consultant shall diligently pursue completion of services. 9. The Consultant shall be responsible for the day -to -day communications with the City and the supervision of construction document preparation. 10. If selected for this Project, the Consultant shall be responsible for completing the specified services in accordance with the City's standard Professional Services Agreement ( "PSA ") without revision. The PSA requires specific insurance coverage and indemnification language. We strongly suggest that respondents review the PSA (attached) before responding to this RFP. 11. Costs for reproduction during project development and for As -Built mylars shall be included in the Consultant's proposal. The City will reproduce the final drawings and specifications for distribution to prospective bidders. 12. This RFP does not commit the City of Newport Beach to pay costs incurred in the preparation of a proposal. Work shall not begin until a Professional Services Agreement is executed and the City has issued a Notice to Proceed. 13. All work shall be the property of the City, SCC and RWQCB. 14. Electronic files of all deliverables, analysis, calculations, figures etcetera shall be submitted to the City, SCC and RWQCB. Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project (Phase 11) RFP August 2005 Page 10 E. THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITIES The City will: Provide reference drawings, survey records and easement information as are available and appurtenant to the project. Provide street, utility, traffic, landscaping, and irrigation design criteria, hydraulic data and other technical information, as are available and appurtenant to the project. Provide a person to be the Project Manager and the Consultant's primary point of contact with the City. Provide the services of City staff to provide concept and technical information for use in the design of the improvements. Waive all City plan check fees. Provide reproduction of final plans and specifications for prospective bidders. F. CONSULTANT PRODUCTS Products from the Consultant will include, but not be limited to: • All necessary environmental documents for project level review • All permit - related documentation, and the required permits • Construction documents ready for all applicable permitting agencies The Consultant shall provide such products in hard copy as directed by the City and in electronic form to assist in public review of the documents. G. CONSULTANT QUALIFICATIONS The consultant team must demonstrate extensive experience in riparian and wetlands (fresh water and tidal) restoration from planning through design and construction, environmental review and documentation, water quality sampling and analysis, design and implementation of structural and non - structural treatment of urban runoff (dry and storm), permitting, and construction documentation. The consultant team must be able to demonstrate how they will work effectively to procure the necessary permits, which may include (but not be limited to) permits from: • The City's Public Works Department • California Department of Fish and Game • US Fish and Wildlife Service • National Marine Fisheries Service • US Army Corps of Engineers • California Coastal Commission • California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region e: Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project (Phase ll) RFP August 2005 Page 11 The consultant team must also clearly demonstrate the ability to work constructively with City staff, members of the public, area stakeholders, and resource agency representatives. The consultant team must propose one project manager as the lead project manager and primary point of contact for the City. The PM must have extensive experience in all aspects and phases of wetland restoration. The consultant team may include subordinate consultants and contractors from which the project manager will draw expertise in order to complete and execute the contract, provided that such subordinates are approved pursuant to Part III -2. The City must be notified of key team member changes in writing prior to commencement of work. The City has the ability to approve or deny changes in key team member assignments after City is notified of such changes. Non - approved changes in key personnel may be considered a contractual breach. H. REQUIRED PROPOSAL ELEMENTS 1. Cover letter. 2. Team Organization Chart with tasks and duties of each Team Member. Include names, addresses, phone numbers, and e-mail addresses of Team Members. 3. Intended Approach showing the Team's process to complete the Scope of Work. List all local, state, and federal approvals /permits the Team expects to be required of this Project. 4. Relevant Project Experience and References. Include names of projects, specific role of Team Members in the projects, and the approximate date that the work was done. For references, include contact name, firm name, phone number, and e-mail address. Projects done in Orange County or greater Southern California are of particular interest to the City. 5. Consultant Fees. Provide a preliminary estimate of the total direct and indirect costs to complete the Scope of Work. Include: • Staff hours and hourly rates, including benefit and overhead costs; • An estimate of all otherdirect costs, such as materials and reproduction costs; • An estimate of subconsultant services, itemized by task; and • An estimate of permitting fees (except for City fees, which are waived for this Project). Permitting fees are a part of the overall budget and must be allocated. The consultant will be responsible for allocating fees for all required permits. Consultant fees shall be submitted with the proposal in a separate, sealed envelope ( "sealed fees envelope "). In the event that the consultant is not selected, the City will return the sealed fees envelope to the proposer. 6. Proposed /Preliminary Timeline. Describe the Team's preliminary timeline for completing the Scope of Work. Given that grant funds will be used for this Project, the timeline should be relatively constricted. Please reflect proposed phasing and overlap of tasks. 7. Conflict of Interest/Financial Disclosure. Consultant Team must fully disclose any existing or planned work that may conflict with the Scope of Work. Consultant Team must agree that it will not perform services with any new client that would conflict with this Scope of I Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project (Phase 11) RFP August 2005 Page 12 Work. Consultant must agree to promptly notify the City in the event that any conflict occurs between consultant's new client(s) and the City when circumstances, known to the consultant, place the City and the consultant's new client(s) in adverse, hostile, or incompatible positions where the interests of the City may be impaired. 8. One individual sample of work that the Consultant (or Team) has produced for a comparable restoration project (pages may vary). The sample should demonstrate that the Consultant has successfully completed one or more projects similar to this one, including public communications /workshops, agency approvals, etc. I. PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL PROPOSALS MUST BE SUBMITTED NO LATER THAN 4:00 P.M. ON THE DUE DATE OF THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 2005 IN THE OFFICE OF THE NEWPORT BEACH CITY CLERK AT THE BELOW ADDRESS. PROPOSALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED AFTER THE DEADLINE. THE 4:00 P.M. DEADLINE IS NON - NEGOTIABLE. Four copies of the complete written proposal (plus one single copy of the firm's previous work per Item #F8) should be submitted to: Mr. Dave Kiff Assistant City Manager ATTN: RFP FOR BIG CANYON CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT c/o City Clerk's Office 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 Inquiries concerning this RFP should be presented in writing via e-mail (dkiff(o�city.newport- beach.ca.us). This RFP does not commit the City to award a contract to or pay for any cost incurred by a respondent for any services. The City reserves the right to accept or reject any or all proposals received as a result of this RFP, to negotiate with any qualified source, and to cancel in part or in whole this RFP. If any proprietary information is contained in any response to this RFP, it must be clearly defined. The City reserves the right to revise the RFP prior to the date the proposals are due. Revisions to the RFP will be mailed to all potential proposers and all holders of the RFP. The proposal shall be signed by an official authorized to bind the proposer. The proposal shall also provide the following information about the person designated to negotiate and contractually bind the proposal, and the person who may be contacted to respond to questions regarding the proposal: Name Title Address Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project (Phase 11) RFP August 2005 Page 13 Telephone number E -mail address J. CONSULTANT SELECTION PROCESS The City will convene a selection panel from City staff, the State Coastal Conservancy, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (other interested agencies may be asked to participate as well). The selection panel will short-list qualified firms for the Project. The selection panel will then invite qualified firms to interview for the proposed contract. The schedule for nomination, selection, and award shall be determined by the City at a future date. RFP and interview responses shall be evaluated with particular attention paid to the Team's: • Understanding of the Project, its required approvals, and the approval process; • Approach and Methodology, including: • Appropriate selection and phasing of assessment and design methods; • Appropriate level and phasing of coordination with City, Public, Agencies, and Technical Advisory Committee; • Appropriate project management including degree of involvement, coordination with staff, contractors, ... • Pertinent experience related to the requested services; • Professional skills and credentials of the staff and consultants to be assigned to the project, till completion, and proposed level of participation of principals and other team members; • Competence and track record of the firm /team's and individual members' with similar projects, including some in the Orange County and Southern California region. • Project manager's expertise and experience with all aspects and stages of restoration projects; • Ability to meet the Project schedule and complete the Scope of Work; • Ability to meet Equal Employment standards. Upon selection of the top - ranked firm, the City will open their sealed fees envelope and will enter into negotiations with the firm. The negotiations will cover the Scope of Work, contract schedule, contract terms and conditions, and budget. If the negotiating team is unable to reach an acceptable agreement with the selected firm, the negotiating team will terminate negotiations with them, open the second - ranked firm's sealed fees envelope and enter into negotiations with them. This selection process will continue until concluded by the City's Project Manager. K. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY REQUIREMENTS Consultant will comply with all applicable City ordinances, the City Charter, Tile VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, Executive Orders 11246, 11375, and 12086, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (sections 12920 - 12921) and any other applicable Federal or State laws and regulations hereinafter enacted. Consultant will not discriminate against Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project (Phase lt) RFP August 2005 Page 14 any employee or applicant for employment based on race, religion, color, ancestry, age, gender, sexual orientation, disability, medical condition, or place of birth. Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project (Phase II) RFP August 2005 Page 15 Exhibit A Project Location Aerial Photograph Vicinity Map — Big Canyon Creek Nature Park r4yEZt - Y70 VKtoria St G, r55 Z*$S of N Colo. Cliff fl Nav" r `. i4 oa � z ,Newport Beach `_ ! s 77 ^N„ Coast Eoy N., ' Uao kir Aarvpat l . C. C 2004 IdaPQueat com, Int., 0 2001 NAVTEQ n d Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project (Phase 1/) RFP August 2005 Page 16 Exhibit B HISTORIC TIDAL WETLANDS ALTERNATIVE WXJEFZ CyLIAV(MMV5MK . AREA JA, AfT MIFAXW --TORE COAGrA� %RV13 MCMT- U1K.HVN1 fArj df T R, vrfrli-f, R To "T ^A(- Q2NP wyn Fr�WA MAI�4i HISTOR[r, U: Of Ti ✓ i N -"' I." � V�Al P fig;SH OASH RIPARIAN FvbrrA-r CKE6K- �1 Contract with WRC for Phase 11 of Big Canyon Creek Restoration Project May 2, 2006 Page 6 Exhibits C and D to f2FP not included here. They are the City's standard PSA documents da-