Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12 - Environmental Services for Civic Center & Park Development PlanCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 12 October 13, 2009 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Planning Department Jaime Murillo Associate Planner 949 - 644 -3209, imurillo (a_)city.newport- beach.ca.us SUBJECT: Amendment No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with LSA Associates, Inc. for Environmental Services on the Civic Center & Park Development Plan ISSUE: Should the City Council approve an amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with LSA Associates, Inc., in the amount of $37,790, for environmental services on the Civic Center and Park Development Plan project? RECOMMENDATION: Approve an amendment (Amendment No. 3) to the Professional Services Agreement with LSA Associates, Inc. and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the amended agreement. DISCUSSION: Background On January 13, 2009, the City Council approved professional services agreements with architects Bohlin Cywinski Jackson and project manager CW Driver. The schedule for the City Hall project called for the architects to refine the design concept and for City Council approval of the refined concept plan by April 14, 2009. Based on preliminary information on the proposed site available at project inception, it was evident that the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) would be required; however, since the design concept required further refinement, the scope of the EIR was not known. Therefore, it was recommended that the environmental work be completed in two phases: PSA Amendment with LSA Associates, Inc for Environmental Services October 13, 2009 Page 2 Phase I- Preparation of technical studies of existing conditions and preliminary impact analysis to assist the design process and help with the development of a design concept that minimizes environmental damage to the site and impacts on the surrounding area. Phase I also included preparation of a Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Initial Study (IS); and Phase II- Preparation of the EIR for the proposed Civic Center and Park Development Plan based on the refined design concept plan. Professional Services Agreement On January 27, 2009, the City Council approved a Professional Services Agreement with LSA Associates, Inc. for Phase I environmental consulting services. The budget for Phase I was $180,000. The technical studies were completed and information was made available to the design team and had a positive effect on the development of the concept plan resulting in the avoidance or minimization of several environmental impacts. The NOP and IS were circulated for a 30 -day public review period on April 1, 2009, and a public scoping meeting was held on April 22, 2009. Amendment No. 1 In the interest of starting the environmental analysis as soon as possible, the original Professional Services Agreement with LSA did not include studies and reports to be prepared by subconsultants. On February 9, 2009, the City Manager approved Amendment No. 1 to the agreement to provide additional technical reports for the project. LSA teamed with Fuscoe Engineering, Inc to provide CEQA -level hydrology and water quality expertise and AMEC Geomatrix, Inc. to provide CEQA -level hazards and hazardous materials support. Amendment No. 1 also includes additional coordination between LSA, the subconsultants, and the architects regarding concept plan refinement. The additional budget for Amendment No. 1 to the agreement was $34,584.00, resulting in a total agreement cost of $214,584.00. Amendment No. 2 — Phase 11 of Environmental Consulting Services On April 14, 2009, The City Council approved Amendment No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement with LSA (Phase II of the environmental consulting services) necessary for the preparation and completion of the EIR for the project. The scope of work for Amendment No. 2 included: • Documentation consistent with CEQA and State Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA necessary to allow for environmental clearance of the project. PSA Amendment with LSA Associates, Inc for Environmental Services October 13, 2009 Page 3 Preparation of the Draft and Final EIRs that will provide a complete and thorough analysis of all environmental aspects of the project. Preparation of Findings of Fact, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, necessary for certification of the Final EIR. • Schedule indicating City Council certification of the Final EIR by November 24, 2009. The additional budget for Amendment No. 2 to the agreement was $250,505.00, resulting in a total agreement cost of $465,089.00. Amendment No. 3 — Budget Amendment Request Preparation of the Draft EIR has been completed and the Draft EIR was distributed for a 45 -day public review period on September 1, 2009, as scheduled. However, in meeting this major milestone in the environmental review process, LSA has incurred some unanticipated costs necessitating a budget amendment: Air Quality and Noise- LSA's original scope and budget included modeling of the project's traffic noise levels and air quality - related emissions based on traffic data received from the project's traffic consultant; however, after the original models were developed and the technical analysis was completed, two revised traffic data sets were received, requiring re- modeling efforts and technical report revisions that were not included in the original scope of work. • Native American Consultation- LSA's original scope and budget assumed limited Native American consultation; however, expanded consultation was performed outside of the original scope of work. A majority of the additional work resulted from multiple correspondence and extensive consultation with one individual who ultimately was unwilling to commit to a meeting with City. LSA contacted the State's Native American Heritage Commission, who ultimately suggested that the City had attempted a good -faith consultation effort with this individual. Revised Administrative Draft EIR- LSA's original scope and budget assumed receiving one set of consolidated City staff comments on the Administrative Draft EIR; however, due to the aggressive schedule and limited staff review time, multiple City staff comments were provided to LSA, necessitating additional LSA staff time to address City comments, confer with City staff, and respond appropriately. PSA Amendment with LSA Associates, Inc for Environmental Services October 13, 2009 Page 4 Rermbursables- Generally, LSA estimates printing costs for an EIR between $85 and $115; however, the actual printing costs for the Draft EIR were $154. Additional budget is required in order to cover the cost to print and distribute the Final EIR. The requested budget amendment is $37,790.00. The total cost of the agreement, including the budget amendment, will be $502,879.00. Funding Availability Funds for environmental services for the City Hall and Park Development Plan are available in the City Hall and Park Design Account, 7410 C1002009. Prepared by: aime Murillo, Associate Planner Submitted by: David Lepo, Planning Director Attachments: Amendment No. 3 to Professional Services Agreement AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FOR THE CITY HALL MASTER PLANNED FACILITY THIS AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, is entered into as of this 13th day of October, 2009, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a Municipal Corporation ( "CITY"), and LSA Associates, Inc., a California Corporation, whose address is 20 Executive Park, Irvine, California, 92614 ( "CONSULTANT "), and is made with reference to the following: RECITALS: A. On the 27th day of January, 2009, CITY and CONSULTANT entered into a Professional Services Agreement, hereinafter referred to as "AGREEMENT ", for environmental services for the City Hall Master Planned Facility hereinafter referred to as "PROJECT ". B. CITY and CONSULTANT have entered into two separate AMENDMENTS of the AGREEMENT, the latest dated April 14, 2009. C. CITY desires to enter into this AMENDMENT NO. 3 to reflect additional services not included in the AGREEMENT or prior AMENDMENTS and to increase the total compensation. D. CITY desires to compensate CONSULTANT for additional professional services needed for PROJECT. E. CITY and CONSULTANT mutually desire to amend AGREEMENT, hereinafter referred to as "AMENDMENT NO. 3, as provided here below. NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows: 1. ADDITIONAL SERVICES TO BE P In addition to the services to be provided pursuant to the AGREEMENT, AMENDMENT NO. 1 and AMENDMENT NO. 2, CONSULTANT shall diligently perform all the services described in AMENDMENT NO. 3 including, but not limited to, all work set forth in the Scope of Services attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. The City may elect to delete certain tasks of the Scope of Services at its sole discretion. 2. COMPENSATION City shall pay Consultant for the services on a time and expense not - to-exceed basis in accordance with the provisions of this Section and the Schedule of Billing Rates attached to the AGREEMENT. Consultant's total amended 0 compensation for all work performed in accordance with this Agreement and prior Amendments, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, shall not exceed Five Hundred Two Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Nine Dollars and no /100 ($502,879) without prior written authorization from City. 2.1 The amended compensation reflects Consultant's additional compensation for additional services to be performed in accordance with this AMENDMENT NO. 3, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, in an amount not to exceed Thirty Seven Thousand Seven Hundred Ninety Dollars and no /100 ($37,790.00), without prior written authorization from City. 3. INTEGRATED CONTRACT Except as expressly modified herein, all other provisions, terms, and covenants set forth in AGREEMENT shall remain unchanged and shall be in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this AMENDMENT NO. 3 on the date first above written. APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY By: Mynette D. Beauchamp Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: By: Leilani Brown, City Clerk CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, A Municipal Corporation By: Edward D. Selich Mayor CONSULTANT: Title: President Print Name: Robert H. McCann M Title: Chief Financial Officer Print Name: James Baum Attachments: Exhibit A — Scope of Services F :IUSER51PLN%SbaredlProfessional Services Agreements & Contracts \City Hall - LSAAmendmentsVA nendment No 3.docx U RIVERSIDE L I.SA ASSOC IA I ES. INC. BERKELEY FRESNO ROCKLIN 20 EXECUTIVE PARS. SUITE 100 949.553.0666 TGL CLARLSBAD PALM SPRINGS SAN LVIS OBISPO 66¢¢ IRVINE. CALIrORNIA 91615 9 ,_9.553.5076 FAX FORT COI.W \S' POINT - RICHMOND SOUTH SAN FRANCISCI September 30, 2009 Jaime Muril.lo, Associate Planner City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92658 Subject: Contract Amendment Request: EIR Dear Jaime: LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) is pleased to have had the opportunity to collaborate: with the City of Newport Beach (City) and other team members on the writing and release of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed City Hall and Park Development Plan Project. The release of the Draft EIR on September 1, 2009, as scheduled, represents a major milestone in the environmental review process. As you are aware, August was an incredibly demanding month in terms of review and changes to the Administrative Draft EIR. This, coupled with unforeseen technical work in previous months, led to some unanticipated costs. LSA was able to obtain permission from Fuscoe Engineering to use the remaining budget allocated for peer review of the Water Quality Management Plan and Hydrology Study to address some of the costs. LSA was also able to shift money between tasks to address some of the costs. However, even with these steps, additional budget is necessary to address the unanticipated costs associated with preparation of the Draft EIR. These unanticipated costs are described itt.greater detail below. ADDITIONAL AND AMENDED TASKS Air Quality and Noise LSA received traffic data forthe modeling of traffic noise levels and air quality- related emissions and /or concentrations for the proposed Newport Beach City Hall and Park Development Plan Project from RBF Consulting. After die original models were development and the technical analysis completed; two revised traffic data sets were received, requiring LSA to redo all of the modeling and revise the technical reports twice. These re- modeling efforts and technical report revisions were not included in the original Scope of Work and Budget, and therefore warrant A budget augment to cover the cost of the re- modeling. Archaeological Assessment Report and Native American Consultation The Newport Beach City Hall and Park Development Plan Project are located on a parcel that is known to contain two archaeological sites. Both of these sites were impacted during previous widening of MacArthur Boulevard; and one site produce a human burial. The burial was removed and 09:30;09 d';1C:Vn090 I Wrojw MunaamienOudge, AugwoOScptcmher 2009 13udad Augment Requtst.&O, ?La.RN!NG ENI'IRt>NVENTAI. I ULSION I 1,EA AS ', IANVS, ZKC. subsequently reburied outside of the current project area. When the budget for Cultural Resource compliance for the Newport Beach City Hall Project was developed, it was anticipated that only Rlaneno representatives would be actively involved in the tribal consultation process. In addition; it was anticipated that a limited Native American consultation list would be provided by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for this project. Subsequent to project initiation, the NAHC provided an initial list for Senate Bill (SB) 18 Native American consultation. Consistent with the approved Scope of Work and Budget, LSA assisted the City in consulting with those tribes listed in the initial NAL-1C letters. After publication oft'he project Notice of Intent (NO[), the NAHC provided a second, substantially longer, fist of Native American contacts for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) consultation. LSA. with the City's approval, then initiated additional consultation with the newly listed representatives. This expanded consultation was beyond the initial scope of work. At rite time. it was hoped that the expanded consultation would be similar o the prior consultation efforts and would not elicit extensive comments. This expanded consultation included numerous representatives of the Gabrielino people, including one individual named John Tommy Rosas. After initial letters were sent to all tribal groups, Mr, Rosas began a series of email and telephone queries about the project, establishing a "protocol" for further consultation between Mr. Rosas and the City, and expressing general concern about the project. Mr. Rosas was deeply concerned that the archaeological sites present within the project area remained highly sensitive. LSA's Native American Consultation specialist, Terri Fulton, spent numerous horn's responding to Mr. Rosas' emails and talking with Mr. Rosas on the phone LSA then prepared a letter to Mr. Rosas suggesting that consultation either needed to advance or be hafted. During the period this letter was in review, Mr. Rosas again sent a series of emails to Ms. Fulton indicating an increase in his concern about the project and restating his desire to enter into "productive" consultation .vitlt the City. Ultimately, however, Mr. Rosas was unwilling to actually commit to meeting with the City. At that Point, another letter to Mr. Rosas was developed by Nit- Steve Conkling. This letter clearly stated that consultation needed to move forward, or halt. Mr. Rosas continues to voice his concerts about the project, but has still not committed to furthering consultation with the City. As several weeks went by with continuing comments from Mr. Rosas, Mr. Conklin- and Ms. Fulton began talking to tile NAHC, requesting assistance facilitating the consultation process. In representing the City in the consultation process, LSA believed there was a need to continue communication with Mr. Rosas until closure was recommended by the NAHC. ultimately. Dave Singleton (NAHC Southern California) suggested that the City had attempted a good -faith consultation effort with Mr. Rosas and should move forward. LSA has now recommended that tine City foreclose further consultation with Mr. Rosas. Revised Administrative Draft EIR As stated in L,SA's proposal dated March 2009, LSA budgeted and specified 80 hours of professional staff time for revisions to the Administrative Draft EIR., LSA spent approximately 220 hours of professional staff time for revisions to the Administrative Draft EIR. fn addition. LSA's scope and budget (Page 2, March 2009) was based on LSA receiving one set of noncontlictingconsolidated staff comments on the Administrative Draft EIR. This was reiterated to City staff when nnuftiple comments were received from the City. LSA received: i19.35(04 <,1'iCN13091)!Vh,*N I Buzf2ct AifC.11011 Rclml: d0c, 7 f 1 LSA A.. SO-C I AIF.S. tS C. • 3 set of comments on the Introduction, Alternatives, and Long-Term Implications Chapters • 3 sets of comments on the Land Use Section, Traffic and Circulation Section, Cultural Resources Section, Geology and Soils Section, Hazards and Hazardous Materials Section, Hydrology and Water Quality Section,, Population and Housing Section, and the Recreation Section • 4 sets of comments on the Aesthetics Section, Air Quality Section, Biological Resources Section, and the Public Services and Utilities Section In some cases, it appears that staff comments may not have been reviewed internally before being provided to LSA, and City staff members who provided comments may not have been fully familiar with the proposed project, resulting in conflicting or inconsistent comments. When multiple sets of comments on one EIR section were received; it necessitated additional LSA staff time to address conflicting City staff comments, confer with City staff, and respond appropriately. Again, a single set of consolidated nonconflicting comments would have resulted in less time spent by LSA on revising the document. Reimbursables As stated in LSA's proposal dated March 2009, printing costs are difficult to quantify because the size and composition (i.e., graphics and medium) are uncertain until the document is sent to the printer. LSA generally estimates printing costs for an EIR to be between $85 and $] 15 per document. The actual printing cost per document for the City Hall and Park Development Plan Project EIR was $154 Per document (a difference of $39 per document). LSA was able to cover the printing costs .for the Draft EIR out of its existing reimbursable budget for the proposed project due to cost savings in other reimbursable areas. There is, however, less than $1,000 remaining in the reimbursable budget, which will not be sufficient to print and distribute the proposed Final FIR. One means of reducing this cost would be for the printer to bill the City directly. BUDGET The following is the estimated budget required to complete the scope of work described above. Task Budget Air Quality _ $1,000 Noise $1,000 Native American Consultation $5,640 Revised Administrative Draft - - - - - $21,150 -- - . _......523.790.... Subtotal .. _.- Reimbursable bepenses $9,0 Total $37.790 With this budget augment, LSA's unrecovered fees (i.e., fees that LSA will absorb) remain at over $10,000. LSA proposes to complete the work for the EIR (i.e., response to comments and preparation of the Final EIR) using previously authorized budget. pvl3(!/C "9 41:iCNF;0901:Prajxt Mannememinudgel AugmvmistSeptrnlba 2909 nudeci Augm.nt Requ,sLdm l 3 LsA ASSOC(-\T[s, INC. Thank you for your consideration. LSA looks forward to successfully completing this project with you. If you have any questions concerning the content of this budget augment request. please contact me or Nicole Dubois at (949) 553 -0666. Sincerely, 9SSdCIATES, INC. 'Ro rt Baler �•- ° V Principal !)913(009,d'i.CNB09t, ITwkct AugnwittiOeptcmber 2001) Budnet Augmant Requs door 4 �y,