HomeMy WebLinkAboutC-2987(A) - Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control/Enhancement - Unit III, Consultant Agreement0 a.
CONSULTANT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this day of 1996, by and
between CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH , a Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to
as "City "), and John M. Tettemer & Associates Ltd., whose address is 3151 Airway
Avenue, Suite Q -1, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant "), is
made with reference to the following:
RECITALS
A. City is a Municipal Corporation duly organized and validly existing
under the laws of the State of California with the power to carry on its business as
it is now being conducted under the statutes of the State of California and the
Charter of the City.
B. City desires to engage Consultant to provide consultant services
which are intended to ensure a smooth transition and continuity of project management
services on various City cooperative projects and programs. upon the terms and
conditions contained in this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned
parties as follows:
1. TERM
0
The Term of this Agreement shall commence on the 15th day of April, 1996, shall
terminate on the 15th day of August, 1996, unless terminated earlier as set forth herein or
extended by written consent of both parties.
2. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED
Consultant shall perform the tasks set forth in Exhibit "A ", Letter of Proposal dated
April 10, 1996, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
3. COMPENSATION TO CONSULTANT
Consultant shall be compensated for services performed pursuant to this
Agreement in the amount and manner set forth in Exhibit "A ", attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference. The maximum fee shall not exceed $25,000.00.
In the event that the City desires services beyond the scope or extent of services
provided for in Exhibit "A ", the maximum fee may be increased 10% ($2,500.00) with the
written approval of the Public Works Director.
4. STANDARD OF CARE
All of the work shall be performed by Consultant or under Consultant's supervision.
Consultant represents that it possesses the professional and technical personnel required
to perform the services required by this Agreement and that it will perform all services in a
manner commensurate with the community professional standards. All services shall be
performed by qualified and experienced personnel who are not employed by City nor
have any contractual relationship with City. The Consultant shall be responsible to City
2
3/96
• •
for any errors or omissions in the execution of this Agreement. Consultant represents
and warrants to City that it has or shall obtain all licenses, permits, qualifications and
approvals required of its profession. Consultant further represents and warrants that it
shall keep in effect all such licenses, permits and other approvals during the term of this
Agreement.
5. INDEPENDENT PARTIES
City retains Consultant on an independent contractor basis and Consultant is not
an employee of the City. The manner and means of conducting the work are under the
control of Consultant, except to the extent they are limited by statute, rule or regulation
and the express terms of this Agreement. No civil service status or other right of
employment with City will be acquired by virtue of Consultant's services. None of the
benefits provided by City to its employees, including, but not limited to, unemployment
insurance, worker's compensation plans, vacation and sick leave, are available from City
to Consultant, its employees or agent. Deductions shall not be made for any state or
federal taxes, FICA payments, PERS payments or other purposes normally associated
with an employer - employee relationship from any fees due Consultant. Payments of the
above items, if required, are the responsibility of Consultant.
6. COOPERATION
Consultant agrees to work closely and cooperate fully with City's designated
Project Administrator, and any other agencies which may have jurisdiction or interest in
the work to be performed. City agrees to cooperate with the Consultant on the project.
3
3/96
0 0
7. PROJECT MANAGER
The Consultant has designated John Wolter to be its Project Manager. This
Project Manager shall be available to the City, as needed, from one to three days per
week.
8. TIME OF PERFORMANCE
The services to be performed by Consultant under and pursuant to this Agreement
shall be provided within term of agreement as set forth in Section 1.
9. CITY POLICY
Consultant will discuss and review all matters relating to policy and project
direction with the Project Administrator in advance of all critical decision points in order to
ensure that the project proceeds in a manner consistent with City goals and policies.
10. CONFORMANCE TO APPLICABLE REQUIREMENT
All work prepared by Consultant shall conform to applicable city, county, state and
federal requirements and be subject to approval of the Project Administrator and City
Council.
11. PROGRESS
Consultant is responsible to keep the Project Administrator and duly authorized
designee informed on a regular basis regarding the status and progress of the work,
activities performed and planned, and any meetings that have been scheduled or are
desired.
4
3/96
0 0
12. HOLD HARMLESS
Consultant agrees to indemnify, defend, save and hold harmless City, its City
Council, boards and commissions, officers and employees from and against any and all
loss, damages, liability, claims, suits, costs and expenses for damages of any nature
whatsoever, including, but not limited to, bodily injury, death, personal injury, property
damages, attorneys fees and court costs arising from any and all negligent actions of
Consultant, its employees, agents or subcontractors in the performance of services or
work conducted or performed pursuant to this Agreement.
Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless City, its City Council, boards and
commissions, officers and employees from and against any and all loss, damages,
liability, claims, suits, costs and expenses whatsoever, including reasonable attorneys'
fees, accruing or resulting to any and all persons, firms or corporations furnishing or
supplying work, services, materials, equipment or supplies arising from or in any manner
connected to the Consultant's negligent performance of services or work conducted or
performed pursuant to this Agreement.
13. INSURANCE
Without limiting Consultant's indemnification of City, Consultant shall obtain and
provide and maintain at its own expense during the term of this Agreement policy or
policies of liability insurance of the type and amounts described below and satisfactory to
the City. Such policies shall be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind
coverage on its behalf and must be filed with the City prior to exercising any right or
s
3196
0
0
performing any work pursuant to this Agreement. All insurance policies with the
exception of professional errors and omissions shall add as additional insured the City, its
elected officials, officers and employees for all liability arising from Consultant's services
as described herein.
Prior to the commencement of any services hereunder, Consultant shall provide to
City certificates of insurance from an insurance company certified to do business in the
State of California, with original endorsements, and copies of policies, if requested by
City, of the following insurance, with Best's Class B or better carriers:
A. Worker's compensation insurance covering all employees and
principals of the Consultant, per the laws of the State of California;
B. Commercial general liability insurance covering third party liability
risks, including without limitation, contractual liability, in a minimum amount of $1
million combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and
property damage. If commercial general liability insurance or other form with a
general aggregate is used, either the general aggregate shall apply separately to
this project, or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the occurrence limit;
C. Commercial auto liability and property insurance covering any owned
and rented vehicles of Consultant in a minimum amount of $1 million combined
single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
6
3196
0
D. Professional errors and omissions insurance which covers the
services to be performed in connection with this Agreement in the minimum
amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000).
Said policy or policies shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be
canceled except after thirty (30) days' prior notice has been given in writing to City.
Consultant shall give to City prompt and timely notice of claim made or suit instituted
arising out of Consultant's operation hereunder. Consultant shall also procure and
maintain, at its own cost and expense, any additional kinds of insurance, which in its own
judgment may be necessary for its proper protection and prosecution of the work.
Consultant agrees that in the event of loss due to any of the perils for which it has
agreed to provide comprehensive general and automotive liability insurance, that
Consultant shall look solely to its insurance for recovery. Consultant hereby grants to
City, on behalf of any insurer providing comprehensive general and automotive liability
insurance to either Consultant or City with respect to the services of Consultant herein, a
waiver of any right of subrogation which any such insurer of said Consultant may acquire
against City by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance.
14. PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS
Consultant shall not assign, sublease, hypothecate or transfer this Agreement or
any interest in this Agreement, directly or indirectly, by operation of law or otherwise
without prior written consent of City. Any attempt to do so without consent of City shall be
7
3/96
i
11
null and void, and any assignee, sublessee, hypothecate or transferee shall acquire no
right or interest by reason of an attempted assignment, hypothecation or transfer.
The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and
outstanding capital stock of Consultant, or of the interest of any general partner or joint
venturer or syndicate member or cotenant if Consultant is a partnership or joint venture or
syndicate or cotenancy, which shall result in changing the control of Consultant, shall be
construed as an assignment of this Agreement. Control means fifty percent (50 %) or
more of the voting power, or twenty -five percent (25 %) or more of the assets of the
corporation, partnership or joint venture.
15. REPORTS
Each and every report, draft, work product, map, record and other document
reproduced, prepared or caused to be prepared by Consultant pursuant to or in
connection with this Agreement shall be the exclusive property of City.
No report, information or other data given to or prepared or assembled by
Consultant pursuant to this Agreement shall be made available to any individual or
organization by Consultant without prior approval by City.
Consultant shall, at such time and in such forms as City may require, furnish
reports concerning the status of services required under this Agreement.
16. CONFIDENTIALITY
The information which results from the services in this Agreement is to be kept
confidential unless the release of information is authorized by the City.
a
3196
0 0
17. CITY'S RESPONSIBILITIES
City shall furnish to Consultant base, maps, existing studies, ordinances, data and
other existing information as shall be requested by Consultant and materials in City's
possession necessary for Consultant to complete the work contemplated by this
Agreement. City further agrees to provide all such materials in a timely manner so as not
to cause delays in Consultant's work schedule.
18. ADMINISTRATION
This Agreement will be administered by the Public Works Department. The Public
Works Director or his designees shall be considered the Project Administrator and shall
have the authority to act for the City under this Agreement. The Project Administrator or
his authorized representative shall represent the City in all matters pertaining to the
services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement.
19. EXTRA WORK
Consultant shall receive compensation for extra work authorized by City in
accordance with the schedule of billing rates set forth in Exhibit "A." All extra work must
be authorized in writing by the Project Administrator and Consultant shall not be entitled
to extra compensation without authorization.
20. RECORDS
Consultant shall keep records and invoices in connection with its work to be
performed under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate
records with respect to the costs incurred under this Agreement. All such records shall be
9
3196
0
10
clearly identifiable. Consultant shall allow a representative of City during normal business
hours to examine, audit and make transcripts or copies of such records. Consultant shall
allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to the
Agreement for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment under this
Agreement.
21. REIMBURSEMENT FOR EXPENSES
Consultant shall not be reimbursed for any expenses unless authorized in writing
by City.
22. MONTHLY INVOICES
Consultant shall submit invoices to the City on a monthly basis in accordance with
Consultant's schedule of fees contained in Exhibit "A" hereof. Each invoice will be
itemized. Each invoice shall show the number of hours worked per person /consultant
and the nature of the work performed.
23. PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION
City shall make payments to Consultant within thirty (30) days of receiving a
monthly invoice unless City disputes the amount Consultant claims is owned under this
Agreement.
24. WITHHOLDINGS
City may withhold payment of any disputed sums until satisfaction of the dispute
with respect to such payment. Such withholding shall not be deemed to constitute a
failure to pay according to the terms of this Agreement. Consultant shall not discontinue
10
3/96
0
0
its work for a period of thirty (30) days from the date of withholding as a result of such
withholding. Consultant shall have an immediate right to appeal to the City Manager or
his designee with respect to such disputed sums. The determination of the City Manager
with respect to such matter shall be final. Consultant shall be entitled to receive interest
on any withheld sums at the rate of seven percent (7 %) per annum from the date of
withholding of any amounts found to have been improperly withheld.
25. ERRORS AND OMISSIONS
In the event that the Project Administrator determines that the Consultant's
negligence, errors or omissions in the performance of work under this Agreement has
resulted in expense to City greater than would have resulted if there were no such
negligence, errors or omissions in the plans or contract specifications, Consultant shall
reimburse City for the additional expenses incurred by the City including engineering,
construction and /or restoration expense. Nothing herein is intended to limit City's rights
under any other Sections of this Agreement.
26. NONDISCRIMINATION BY CONSULTANT
Consultant represents and agrees that Consultant, its affiliates, subsidiaries or
holding companies do not and will not discriminate against any subcontractor, consultant,
employee or applicable for employment because of race, religion, color, sex, handicap or
national origin. Such nondiscrimination shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
employment, upgrading, demotion, transfers, recruitment, recruitment advertising, layoff,
3/96
0
0
termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation and selection for training,
including apprenticeship.
27. CITY'S RIGHT TO EMPLOY OTHER CONSULTANTS
City reserves the right to employ other consultants in connection with this project.
28. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
A. The Consultant or its employees may be subject to the provisions of
the California Political Reform Act of 1974 (the "Act "), which (1) requires such
persons to disclose financial interest that may foreseeably be materially affected
by the work performed under this Agreement, and (2) prohibits such persons from
making, or participating in making, decisions that will foreseeably financially affect
such interest.
B. If subject to the Act, Consultant shall conform to all requirements of
the Act. Failure to do so constitutes a material breach and is grounds for
termination of this Agreement by the City. The Consultant shall indemnify and hold
harmless the City for any claims for damages resulting from the Consultant's
violation of this Section.
29. SUBCONTRACTING
A. Consultant shall not subcontract any portion of the work required by
this Agreement, except as expressly stated herein, without prior approval of City.
B. Subcontracts, if any, shall contain a provision making them subject to
all provisions stipulated in this Agreement.
12
3/96
0
30. NOTICES
All notices, demands, requests or approvals to be given under this Agreement
shall be given in writing and conclusively shall be deemed served when delivered
personally or on the second business day after the deposit thereof in the United States
mail, postage prepaid, registered or certified, addressed as hereinafter provided.
All notices, demands, requests or approvals from Consultant to City shall be
addressed to City at:
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
P. O. Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92659 -1768
Attention: Bill Patapoff, City Engineer
All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Consultant shall be
addressed to Consultant at:
John M. Tettemer and Associates, Ltd.
3151 Airway Avenue, Suite Q -1
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Attention: John Wolter
31. TERMINATION
In the event Consultant hereto fails or refuses to perform any of the provisions
hereof at the time and in the manner required hereunder, Consultant shall be deemed in
default in the performance of this Agreement. If such default is not cured within a period
of two (2) days, or if more than two (2) days are reasonably required to cure the default
and Consultant fails to give adequate assurance of due performance within two (2) days
13
3196
after receipt by Consultant from City of written notice of default, specifying the nature of
such default and the steps necessary to cure such default, City may terminate the
Agreement forthwith by giving to the Consultant written notice thereof.
City shall have the option, at its sole discretion and without cause, of terminating
this Agreement without cause by giving seven (7) days' prior written notice to Consultant
as provided herein. Upon termination of this Agreement, each party shall pay to the other
party that portion of compensation specified in this Agreement that is earned and unpaid
prior to the effective date of termination.
32. COST OF LITIGATION
If any legal action is necessary to enforce any provision hereof or for damages by
reason for an alleged breach of any provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party
shall be entitled to receive from the losing party all costs and expenses in such amount as
the court may adjudge to be reasonable attorneys' fees.
33. COMPLIANCES
Consultant shall comply with all laws, state or federal and all ordinances, rules and
regulations enacted or issued by City.
34. WAIVER
14
3/96
0
A waiver by City of any breach of any term, covenant or condition contained herein
shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other
term, covenant or condition contained herein whether of the same or a different character.
35. INTEGRATED CONTRACT
This Agreement represents the full and complete understanding of every kind or
nature whatsoever between the parties hereto and all preliminary negotiations and
agreements of whatsoever kind or nature are merged herein. No verbal agreement or
implied covenant shall be held to vary the provisions hereon. Any modification of this
Agreement will be effective only by written execution signed by both City and Consultant.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed
on the day and year first written above.
ATTEST:
C RK
j
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
A Municipal Corporatiir
/ i
By_/ /
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
CONSULTANT
By: .,.... - V--r
JOHN . TETTEM R & ASS CIATES LTD.
is
3/96
® J0MMTETTEI'FR &A550CVTEn, LTD
April 10, 1996
Mr. Don Webb
Public Works Director
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92659 -1768
Dear Don:
We are pleased to submit this letter of proposal for consultant services to the City,
which is intended to ensure a smooth transition and continuity of project management
services on various City cooperative projects. Specifically, Mr. John Wolter will be
available to work in your office, as needed, for one to three days a week over the
next three months.
Fees for project management services will be in accordance with the enclosed fee
schedule which reflects hourly rates and reimbursable charges. Actual services
rendered and tasks performed will be closely coordinated with Public Works
Department staff: Total fee anticipated on a "time and materials" basis for an
average of 16 hours per week over the next three months will not exceed $25,000.
The cooperative projects and on -going programs for which project management
services are anticipated to be provided are:
1. Federal Orange County Coast of California Study
2. Federal Beach Erosion Project Surfside/Sunset Beach to
Newport Beach - Stage 10.
3. Federal Upper Newport Bay Feasibility Study
4. Newport Harbor Entrance Jetty Repair
5: Los Angeles 111 Ocean Disposal Site - Permanent Designation
6. American Trader Oil Spill Settlement
7. Irvine Avenue/University Drive Street and Class 1 Bicycle Trail
Improvements
It is understood that the kind of involvement in projects will vary and may be
ENG111EFRIIIG MANAGEMENT PLAHN1110
3151 Airway Avenue, Suite Q -1 Costa Mesa, California 92626 714434-9080 FAX 714 434 -6120
0
Mr. Don Webb
April 10, 1996
Page 2
changed from time to time. The list of projects set forth is not intended to be
restrictive or all- inclusive. The object of this contract is to provide project
management services to the CSty staff and to facilitate a smooth transition of
management services on City projects in a manner that allows flexibility and
adjustment to meet requirements as they arise.
I understand that the proposal will become an attachment to or will be incorporated
into a standard City of Newport Beach consultant contract. Please let me know when
the contract is ready for signature.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit the proposal. I look forward to working
with you and the new Public Works Department staff.
Sincerely,
John M. Tettemer
JMT /fhs
Attachments
J00M. TETTEMER & ASSOCIAms D.
FEE SCHEDULE
Hourly Rates
President $ 133.00
Senior Vice President, Engineering $ 97.00
Vice President, Environmental Engineering $ 95.00
Senior Engineer $ 91.00
Manager, Environmental Services $ 88.00
Senior Environmental Manager $ 81.00
Engineer III
Engineer II . $ 69.00
Environmental Manager $ 67.00
Engineer I $ 57.00
Environmental Planner $ 57.00
Draftsman $ 47.00
Environmental Technician $ 47.00
Executive Secretarial Assistant $ 47.00
Tech/Qerical $ 43.00
Direct Expenses
Expenses such as special project supplies and materials; food, lodging and
transportation for time away from Orange County area; long distance
telephone, outside reproduction; courier /express mail; and, other costs
directly applicable to the project will be charged at cost.
Auto mileage will be charged at $0.32 per mile. Computer processing time
will be charged at $19.00 per hour.
Normal xeroxing will be charged at $0.06 per page. 2510 Xerox will be
charged at $0.50 per square foot for bond, $0.75 per square foot for
vellum, and $1.50 per square foot for mylar. CARD plotting will be
charged at $2.00 per square foot for bond, $2.25 per square foot for
vellum, and $4.50 per square foot for mylar.
FAX transmittals will be charged at $1.00 per page.
John M. Tettemer & Associates, Ltd.
TRANSITION PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES AND TASKS
FOR
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COOPERATIVE PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS
April, 1996
FEDERAL ORANGE COUNTY COAST CALIFORNIA STUDY
■ Represent the City of Newport Beach (City) interest in reaching a consensus on
consultant/scientific information in order to finalize this five -year cooperation
study
■ Review /comment on Craig Everts Ph.D. report summarizing the last nine -year
study of the Balboa Peninsula beaches
■ Review U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and various consultant reports
■ Participate in several workshops with Orange County (County), the City of
Laguna Beach, the City of Huntington Beach, the Corps, the City, and Professor
Robert Wiegal, Ph.D. (a leading coastal scientist from U. C. Berkeley)
■ Participate in public workshops when the report is finalized
■ Present final study to the City Council
■ Prepare final accounting for the City's share of cost
II. FEDERAL BEACH EROSION PROJECT SURFSIDE /SUNSET BEACH TO
NEWPORT BEACH - STAGE 10
■ Review Corps' plans and specifications for West Newport Sand Haul
■ Coordinate project with the City, County, and local residents
■ Report status to City Council
■ Report status to West Newport Improvement Association
■ Prepare City Council report for right of entry permit to allow Corps and their
Contractor to work on the City's beach
■ Coordinate City inspection of construction with Marine Safety, General Service,
and Public Works personnel
III. FEDERAL UPPER NEWPORT BAY FEASIBILITY STUDY
■ Review final Scope of Work
■ Prepare City Council report for approval of funding agreement with the County
■ Meet with Corps and County representatives to initiate study
■ Participate in project oversight meetings during study
■ Prepare request for continued Federal funding for project which is based on 50
percent Federal /50 percent local cost sharing
■ Report status to City Council
■ Coordinate collection of information for study involving Upper Newport Bay Unit
III information to be included in study
IV. NEWPORT 14ARBOR ENTRANCE JETTY REPAIR
■ Continue effort to have the U. S. Congress include the construction of concrete
improvements to the East Jetty
■ Review /comment on Corps' plans and specifications
■ Coordinate project with Corps, County, City, and local residents
■ Report project status and schedule to the City Council (rock repair to west jetty
tentatively scheduled for this summer)
V. LOS ANGELES III OCEAN DISPOSAL SITE - PERMANENT DESIGNATION
■ Continue to initiate and monitor efforts to have Congress include funding for
environmental studies needed to permanently designate the Los Angeles III Ocean
Disposal Site
■ Continue to coordinate efforts with consultants, County, Corps, and U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency to implement studies
VI. AMERICAN TRADER OIL SPILL SETTLEMENT
■ Assist City attorney in negotiation of settlement
■ Present City projects to settlement committee
■ Attend settlement committee meetings
■ Assist City attorney as requested
VII. IRVINE AVENUE/UNIVERSITY DRIVE, STREET AND CLASS I BICYCLE TRAIL
IMPROVEMENTS
■ Meet with the City, County, and Contractor weekly or as needed
■ Assist City project engineer with review sidewalk design along west side of Irvine
Avenue
■ Assist City project engineer with preparation of legal descriptions and grant deeds
for Irvine Avenue and University Drive right -of -way swap with the County
■ Assist City project engineer process grant deeds transferring City property to the
County
■ Assist project engineer and field engineer as requested
VIII. MISCELLANEOUS
■ Assist Public Works director with various projects, i.e. Irvine Ranch Water
District, San Joaquin Marsh development, Buck Gully as requested
•
Fig,
u
NCIL
September 11, 1995
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
ITEM NO. 4
T0: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
%
SUBJECT: UPPER NEWPORT BAY UNIT III SEDIMENT CONTROL AND
ENHANCEMENT PROJECT - STATUS REPORT
RECOMMENDATION.
Receive and file report.
BACKGROUND
On March 27, 1995, and June 26, 1995, the City Council authorized
• consultant agreements to undertake bioassay sampling and testing, California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documentation, topographic surveying, project
management and resource agency permitting for the Upper Newport Bay Unit III
project. Prior to these contracts being initiated, state and federal resource agencies
had approved a minimum of 50 acres of mitigation credit for the Unit III project, with a
potential for additional mitigation credits pending receipt of supporting technical
information by the State Resources Agency. Although funding agreements had not
been secured, these agreements were initiated because of potentially long lead times
associated with these activities, and because it appeared that funding would be
secured within several months. In addition, in an effort to limit further damage to the
Upper Bay and to minimize sediment removal costs, it was deemed desirable to have
permits and approvals in place such that construction could be initiated as soon as
possible after funding was secured.
PROJECT FINANCING
At the present time, the project is competing with the Bolsa Chica
wetlands restoration project for port mitigation funding. With support from Supervisor
• Marian Bergeson's office, efforts are currently underway by senior State Resources
Agency officials to secure necessary funding for construction of the project and a future
maintenance annuity.
State Resources Agency officials are considering several factors in their
efforts to develop funding for the project. These factors include the final amount of
mitigation credits for the project, the price for those credits, and the amount of credits
needed by the ports in light of the Bolsa Chica project. The State Resources Agency is
also coordinating its activities with federal agencies involved in the Bolsa Chica project
q
SUBJECT: UPPER NEWPORT BAY UNIT III SEDIMENT CONTROL AND ENHANCEMENT
PROJECT - STATUS REPORT
September 11, 1995
Page 2
in an effort to develop a funding program that satisfies the needs of both projects. Staff
is hopeful that the funding issue can be resolved within 90 days.
STATUS OF CONSULTING WORK
Significant progress has been made on bioassay, environmental,
surveying and permitting work needed to support the Unit III project. The bioassay
consultant has completed all sediment sampling, and both chemical and
bioaccumulation testing of the samples. Preliminary results of the analysis indicate that
sediment dredged from the site will be suitable for ocean disposal. A final report is
anticipated in mid - September.
Updated ground and aerial site surveys were completed in late July, and
topographic mapping for the Unit III area and access channel were completed in mid -
August. This updated mapping provides the basis for future final design engineering
and sediment removal calculations.
Progress has also been made on preparation of CEQA documentation
and resource agency permits. The project description and initial study are being
completed and on -site surveys for the analysis of visual construction related impacts
have been performed. Resource agencies have been contacted, permitting
requirements verified, and draft permits are under preparation. It is anticipated that
CEQA documentation and resource agency permitting will be completed in early 1996.
SCHEDULE FOR CONSTRUCTION
Environmental clearances and resource agency permitting are continuing
to move forward and are anticipated in early 1996. Assuming that funding for the
project is resolved within the next 90 days, mitigation credit and financing agreements
with the ports and the resource agencies will then need to be prepared and signed. In
addition, final engineering plans, specifications and estimates will also need to be
completed. It is anticipated that these activities could be completed, the project
advertised, and a construction contracted awarded in Spring 1996.
Respectfully Submitted,
r
Don Webb
Public Works Director
ohn Wolter
Cooperative Projects Engineer
•
r:
E
• BY THE CITY C,0U8EA 1
CI� EACH I
i (
mnl 3 M9
• January 23, 1995
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
ITEM NO. 14
TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: UPPER NEWPORT BAY SEDIMENT CONTROL AND ENHANCEMENT
PROJECT
PROGRESS TO DATE
Over the past year, the City has been actively involved in
representing the Executive Committee for the Upper Newport Bay
Sedimentation Control Plan in the development of an urgently needed
sediment removal project for the Upper Bay. The project, known as Unit III, is
designed to restore sediment storage capacity while creating habitat
conditions necessary to enhance fishery values. By enhancing the habitat in
the project area, habitat mitigation credits can be created which may be sold
to the Port of Long Beach to mitigate impacts for new Port facilities. Proceeds
• from the sale of habitat credits can be used to finance all project costs,
including those advanced by the City, and can provide an annuity for funding
future maintenance cleanouts.
The supporting technical justification for the project and its
habitat mitigation value has been reviewed extensively by the State and
responsible resource agencies and has received broad support. Preparations
are underway to initiate final discussions and agreements among the
resource agencies about the number of acres of mitigation credits that will be
allowed, and between State representatives and the Port of Long Beach on the
value of the credits they wish to purchase. A mitigation credit and project
funding agreement between the State, responsible resource agencies, the
Port of Long Beach and the City will be forthcoming within approximately 90
days. The agreement will include provisions to secure the reimbursement of
project development funds advanced by the City.
A summary of the previous Upper Newport Bay sediment control
projects and the currently proposed Unit III project is provided in the attached
• report entitled: "Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control and Enhancement
Project," dated December 1994.
STEPS PRIOR TO IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROIECT
There are a number of key activities that need to take place over
the next six months to move the project to construction. These steps
include:
r
Complete sediment bioassay testing and obtain approval from EPA.
This is required to allow ocean disposal of the sediment.
Prepare project environmental documents for certification by the City.
Prepare and obtain approval of permits through the resource agencies. •
Complete an updated survey and prepare final engineering plans,
specifications and cost estimates.
The financing for completing these tasks and the timing of those
tasks which need to be initiated early in the process are discussed below.
FINANCING
On behalf of the Executive Committee members, the City has
advanced all funding for planning and project development, preliminary
engineering, biological opinion and bioassay program development work
necessary to develop the Unit III project to this point. Prior to receiving
reimbursement and additional funding through the expected sale of
mitigation credits to the Port of Long Beach, additional financing from the
organizations represented on the Executive Committee will be required to
move forward with the project. A summary of the funding advanced by the
City to date and a preliminary estimate of additional expenses that are •
anticipated to be incurred prior to receipt of mitigation funds is as follows:
Funding Advanced by the City
Fiscal Year 1993 -1994 5100,000
Fiscal Year 1994 -1995 $100,000
Total Funding Advanced = $200,000
Expenses to Date
Preliminary engineering, agency
$166,000
approvals, project management
and bioassay program development
Fisheries report
$6,000
Preliminary surveying
$12,000
Subtotal =
$188,000
Estimated Costs for Additional Tasks
Bioassay testing and approval
$135,000
Resource agency permits and fees
$23,000
Surveying
$25,000
Engineering plans and specifications
5250,000
•
Environmental documentation
$15,000
Subtotal =
$448,000
Total Expenses to Date and Estimated
Costs for Additional Tasks = $636,000
Required Additional Advanced Funding = $436,000
' Although the City has taken responsibility for advancing funds to
date, staff believes the magnitude of these additional costs warrant financial
participation by other members of the Executive Committee. Staff will be
pursuing this with the Committee at their next meeting, which is tentatively
scheduled for late February.
• TIMING
Because of long lead times and potential scheduling impacts, it is
desirable that certain activities be initiated in February and March. These
include preparation of environmental documentation, completion of an
updated engineering survey for the site, and bioassay testing. Because of the
timing of these activities, the City will need to work with The Irvine Company
to advance additional funds until commitments for funding can be secured
from the Executive Committee membership. A preliminary cost estimate for
these activities is $173,000. Staff has obtained proposals and is preparing
agreements for this work to be presented to the Council for consideration in
February.
ON -GOING ACTIVITIES
Negotiations with the resource agencies on the acreage of mitigation
credits to be allowed, and with the Port of Long Beach on the value of
those credits.
•
Initiate negotiations on the terms of the mitigation credit and project
funding agreement with the State, resource agencies, the Port of Long
Beach and the City. This will include provisions for reimbursement of
City expenditures and assignment of the City as trustee for the annuity.
Meet with Executive Committee membership to obtain additional
advanced funding needed to continue progress on the project.
Prepare bioassay consultant agreements, and develop scopes of work
for environmental documentation, resource agency permit preparation
and surveying.
Prepare report for February council meeting recommending
authorization for specific activities.
• w�
John Wolter
Cooperative Projects Engineer
JW:so
Attachment
_ -. --- -� .xnnn�rerrenea�A55ociAieS_To
BY THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ENOINEERIf 0 MArlAOEMEfIT PLAfIHINO
5151 Airway Avenue, Suite Q -1 Costa Mesa. California 92626 714 454 -9080 FA?') 714 434 -6120
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION
1
1
1
John M. Tettemer & Associates, Ltd.
UPPER NEWPORT BAY
SEDIMENT CONTROL AND ENHANCEMENT PROJECT
Introduction
This document has been prepared to provide information on the Upper Newport Bay
and the sediment control and enhancement project that is required to protect the Bay.
A private /public sector consortium has developed a watershed -wide sediment control plan
to protect the Bay. A critical element of that Plan is an enhanced habitat and sediment
control project in the Bay that is the subject of this document.
The Upper Bay, which was once a threatened resource, has been restored and is under
continued management. The Executive Committee for the Upper Newport Bay
Sedimentation Control Plan is currently seeking funding to ensure the preservation of
this critical natural resource.
Upper Newport Bay Executive Committee Members
California Department of Fish and Game
County of Orange
City of Tustin
City of Irvine
City of Newport Beach
The Irvine Company
SECTION II
' UPPER NEWPORT BAY SEDIMENT CONTROL
AND ENHANCEMENT PROJECT
' FACT SHEET
[J
11
11
John M. Tettemer & Associates, Ltd.
UPPER NEWPORT BAY SEDIMENT
CONTROL AND ENHANCEMENT PROJECT
Fact Sheet
PARTICIPANTS
State of California, Department of Fish and Game
State of California, Coastal Conservancy
State of California, Water Quality Control Board
Port of Long Beach, California
Orange County, California
City of Irvine, California
City of Tustin, California
City of Newport Beach, California
The Irvine Company
' BAY RESTORATION EXCAVATION
Early Action Project (January, 1983)
Unit I Project (November, 1985)
Unit II Project (April 1988)
Proposed Unit III
71
LI
COSTS
Bay and San Diego Creek Basins
Early Action Project
Unit I Project
Unit II Project
Basin 3, San Diego Creek
Section 208 Study
Total
Upstream Watershed
Best Management Practices
on Agricultural and Developing
Properties
Flood Control /Sediment Basins
Channel Stabilization
Total
GRAND TOTAL
PROPOSED UNIT III PROJECT
Construction
Annuity
Financed by State and local govemment and 71c Irvine Company
Financed primarily by land tln,hpu rnt role rest,
832,417 cubic yards
944,826 cubic yards
1,192,000 cubic yards
650,000 cubic yards
$ 3,719,000
$ 4,134,000
$ 5,643,000
$ 800,000
500,000
$14,796,000 s
$2,170,000
$9,100,000
$101,000.000
$112,270,000
$127,066,000
$ 4,100,000
$ 6.700.000
$10,800,000
SECTION III
UPPER NEWPORT BAY: AN ENVIRONMENTAL SUCCESS STORY
11
UPPER NEWPORT BAY: AN ENVIRONMENTAL SUCCESS STORY
' by
John M. Tettcmer, President
John M. Tettemer & Associates, Ltd.
Environmental Engineers, Costa Mesa
' The restoration of Upper Newport Bay is a success story both uplifting and newsworthy.
It happened because business, local government, and resource agency leaders wanted it
' enough to make it happen. In these crazy days of conflicting objectives and stagnating
' plans, the Upper Bay is a smiling example of a project that succeeded: a gem on the
Pacific coast, restored to provide aesthetic and recreational benefits for the community
and enhanced environmental benefits for wildlife. The long -range program includes not
' only dredging the Bay, but a multitude of projects and practices in the tributary
watershed. The private /public sector consortium which developed and oversees the
' restoration plan works together through an Executive Committee which oversees ongoing
' maintenance, management, and funding. The next step is to undertake a major new
' deep water habitat /sediment control project in the Bay.
' BACKGROUND
Upper Newport Bay is a State Ecological Reserve consisting of 752 acres of marine and
' shoreline wildlife habitat managed by the California Department of Fish and Game
' (CDFG). The 118 - square -mile San Diego Creek watershed, outlined in white on Figure
1, is made up of natural foothills, agricultural land, and the urbanized communities of
' Itvine, Tustin, Newport Beach, and Lake Forest. Storm runoff from the entire area
discharges into the Bay. Erosion in the watershed and deposition of sediment in the
Upper Bay concerned the community, particularly after storms in 1969, 1978, and 1980.
During these storms the area below Jamboree, Road was inundated. Sediment was
_I_
transported with the runoff and covered the area. Gradually portions of the area were
converted to a mudflat. The old salt works was turned into uplands. This alarming trend
threatened to change the characteristics of the Upper Bay. Some sediment was being
moved down the Bay to Dover Shores. A solution was needed, and needed quickly.
A SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN
In 1981, the cities of Irvine and Newport Beach developed a plan to address erosion and
siltation under Section 208 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. The 208 Plan,
as it is called, consists of Agricultural Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce
erosion from agricultural lands, Construction Site BMPs, In- Channel Basins in the lower
end of San Diego Creek to capture coarser sediments before they enter the Upper Bay,
In -Bay Basins in the Upper Bay to capture fine particles, Channel Stabilization to reduce
the erosion of earthen channels, Foothill Basins to capture sediments produced by
natural erosion in the foothills, and Monitoring. These elements are shown on Figure 1.
The program is designed to evolve over the years from a "downstream control' to an
"upstream control" system. The downstream control consists of the sediment basins in
the Upper Bay and in San Diego Creek. These facilities provide direct protection of the
Bay at a relatively economical cost. The upstream system consists of the foothill basins
and the channel stabilization. These are installed as part of the land development
process and under city and County flood control programs.
While early efforts and funding were focused on the downstream In -Bay and In- Channel
Basins to obtain their immediate benefit, the heart of the program is the upstream work.
In the long run, upstream work will comprise the majority of engineering effort and
' financial requirement. To date, over $100,000,000 of a projected $150,000,000 has been
spent on upstream work. About $14.7 million of a projected $19 million has been spent
' on downstream work.
' INTEGRATION OF PLANS: MAKING A "LAYER CAKE"
During the early years of implementation of the 208 Program, The Irvine Company, in
tcooperation with Irvine, Tustin, and the County of Orange, was developing a flood
' control master plan for the San Diego Creek drainage area. This flood control master
plan incorporated retarding basins which capture silt from the natural foothills and
stabilized channels which reduce erosion. Both contribute to protection of the Upper
' Bay. Caltrans also was developing plans for the widening of Interstate 5, and was
confronted with managing numerous drainage crossings of the freeway route through the
master plan area, many of them on The Irvine Company land.
' The Irvine Company recognized that the 208 Plan, the flood control master plan, and the
' Freeway widening presented an opportunity for an integrated solution that would address
' flood control, sediment management, and protection of the Bay. This interest was the
major private sector impetus for what was to follow. The public sector push came from a
' group of agencies which included: CDFG, Orange County, and the cities of Newport
Beach, Irvine, Tustin, and Caltrans. Each actively participated in the Flood Control
Master Plan, the 208 Program, or the Freeway widening.
1
The result was an integrated "layer- cake" planning program where the three plans were
' developed and implemented in concert, driven by the need for early remedial action to
' improve conditions in the Bay. The freeway widening schedule was also important
' because it presented the opportunity for a joint venture if timing and funding could be
tcoordinated. The outcome was a family of carefully fitted master plans which all
' contribute toward protection of the Bay.
' CHALLENGES TRANSFORMED INTO OPPORTUNITIES
One of the challenges was to help each entity to recognize its interest in the overall plan
' and remain committed on a voluntary basis. Traditionally, each entity has its own
' functions, goals, and schedules. In this case, it turned out that looking beyond its
individual function paid dividends. For example, by accepting elements of the flood
' control master plan, Caltrans was able to save money on freeway drainage. In return,
' Caltrans contributed toward the funding of foothill retarding basins. Completion of these
channels and retarding basins helped protect the Bay by preventing erosion and capturing
sediment. As another example, CDFG by itself could not have implemented erosion
controls on agricultural land and construction sites throughout the watershed to protect
its Reserve. The participants in the integrated plan could and did. It would have been
' difficult for each city and the County to effectively discharge its Section 208
' responsibilities on an individual basis. With the integrated plan, each agency's efforts
were focused in an effective manner.
' EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
From the outset, the program has been approached as a cooperative local self-
' determination venture among the CDFG, the county, the cities of Irvine, Tustin, and
' Newport Beach, and The Irvine Company. It is the conviction of these members of the
Upper Bay Executive Committee that local interests, common sense, and economy are
' best served by locally developed and operated programs.
1 4
' The concept of an Executive Committee comprised of policy makers from each
' cooperating organization emerged to provide a forum to discuss planning, design,
implementation, financing, and, above all, the numerous agreements required to put the
program elements in place. The Executive Committee has been very successful. Over
' the years its members have included Orange County business and government leaders.
Currently, the Executive Committee includes: Fred Worthley, California Department of
Fish and Game; Supervisor Thomas F. Riley, Orange County; Mayor Jim Potts, City of
' Tustin; Councilman Barry Hammond, City of Irvine; Councilwoman Jean Watt, City of
' Newport Beach; and Monica Florian, The Irvine Company.
' EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE GETS PROGRESS REPORT
In 1992, the Executive Committee commissioned a review of the program to evaluate its
overall performance, identify needed improvements, and assist in planning future action.
The report concluded that good progress has been made on all program elements.
Opportunities exist for fine tuning some of the facilities to improve efficiency. Most
' importantly, the performance of the In -Bay Basins has been so good it is proposed to
move ahead with a major project to enhance them, as described below.
WHAT IS NEXT?
Executive Committee members have asked the City of Newport Beach to develop plans
and financing for a new Upper Bay enhancement project to be known as the Upper
' Newport Bay Sediment Control and Enhancement Project. The existing sediment basin
' in the Bay just below Jamboree Road (see Figure 2) will be cleaned out and deepened.
The configuration, shown on Figure 3, will include a new 61 -acre deep water marine
-5-
habitat zone. The resulting improved sediment storage capacity will reduce future
cleanout frequency and lower the long -term cost of maintenance.
The work will be done with large barges that will haul the sediment to an approved
ocean disposal site. Approximately 650,000 cubic yards of material will be moved at a
cost of $4.1 million. The firm of John M. Tettemer & Associates, Ltd. of Costa Mesa
has been selected by the City to provide project management engineering and
environmental services. Approvals must be obtained from the U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Regional Water Quality Control
Board, the Coastal Commission, and all the local participants. Work is scheduled to
commence in late 1995 if funding, permits, and approvals can be obtained.
THE LONG -TERM FUTURE
Completion of the upstream channel stabilization and sediment control basins in the
foothills will reduce the amount of sediment generated in the watershed. Even so, some
natural open space areas will continue to generate sediment, and developed areas
generate small amounts of sediment during stormy periods. Therefore, there will
continue to be a need for some periodic maintenance of the In- Channel Basins and the
In -Bay Basins; however, as time goes by, the frequency will diminish.
CONCLUSION
Orange County can take pride in the exceptional achievement represented by the Upper
Newport Bay -San Diego Creek Sedimentation Control Program, as an example of
effective leadership provided by a partnership of business and government at the local
and State levels. The Upper Bay, once a threatened resource, has been restored and is
W
' under continued management. A key factor in the success of the program is the
' integration of a group of related plans for the drainage area. Even though these plans
were directly focused on freeway drainage and flood control requirements miles away
' from the Bay, through the integrated approach they all work together and all work to
' protect the Bay. Likewise, agricultural and construction site BMPs throughout provide
' important contributions.
' Many challenges lie ahead, not the least of which is finding ongoing funding. The track
record spanning more than a decade suggests that the current and future members of the
tExecutive Committee and their cooperating entities will maintain the necessary level of
' interest and determination. The result has been and will continue to be an extraordinary
program that surpasses the expectations of most observers. Congratulations!
[1
7
ra 1
r �
i
k
y Npri, ► ��l� � 1 �, r 4, � -
I Cn� i
I
• � c 1
t ► >Q
► 1
/ t
a
1 i `
4 1 h
{1. I;k° _
Ll
OEM
?, ::p uNld7f
C .�.
aA
I q.
N
j t
I
i
_. - K 77
LL
CL
OM
LLI Z yarti F . . a.. �.
LJJ
CL z
L LI
W
Q
7
LL
�g
ff6_
N
�
8
5
E
W
Q
7
LL
r
F
f,
s '�t
w •S "•IF
i
avoe
33tlpgyybf
rJy�` z
W
m
W
R
m
0
LL
t
W�
L
1
W
Z
W
J
W
U
=0z
Z
W
�zQ
W
�
W
�Z
J
�
O
U
F-
Z
W
W
i
avoe
33tlpgyybf
rJy�` z
W
m
W
R
m
0
LL
SECTION IV
UNIT III UPPER NEWPORT BAY
SEDIMENT CONTROL AND ENHANCEMENT PROJECT
1
'L,
I
�I
[1
' John M. Tettemcr & Associates, Ltd.
UNIT III UPPER NEWPORT BAY
SEDIMENT CONTROL AND ENHANCEMENT PROJECT
' The Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve is a 741 -acre State reserve owned and
' managed by the California Department of Fish and Game. Between the major storm of
' 1968 which destroyed the old salt works and the late 1970's, the amount of sediment
deposited in the Reserve from San Diego Creek had increased greatly. This is due
' largely to the greater efficiency of improved channels which transport the sediment load
from the Upper Watershed area into the Bay instead of depositing it in upstream
ponding areas that existed prior to channel improvements. This increased sedimentation
' decreased the area subject to tidal exchange and was starting to convert some of the Bay
' to mudflats and uplands. Something had to be done.
' The Unit I project was conceived to remove accumulated sediments and create an initial
sediment control basin, and at the same time restore some of the Upper Bay marine
' habitat. The Unit I basin excavation created a basin area of 85 acres with a bottom
depth varying from elevations minus three feet to minus seven feet Mean Sea Level
' (MSL). The project was completed in 1985 and provided sediment storage capacity of
approximately 420,000 cubic yards below elevation zero feet MSL.
The Unit II dredging project was undertaken to restore more of the Upper Bay and
' provide additional sediment accumulation capacity to protect the Upper Bay. The Unit
II basin excavation created a 37 -acre basin below the old salt works dike with a depth to
minus 14 feet MSL. The Unit II project was completed in 1988 and provided sediment
' storage capacity of approximately 535,000 cubic yards below elevation zero feet MSL.
' -I-
The sediment basins have worked well. They now need routine maintenance.
Maintenance dredging is needed to restore the Unit I sediment control basin. The Unit
III project is the answer. It will cause the removal of approximately 650,000 cubic yards
of trapped sediment and deepen the basin and channel to accommodate the dredging
equipment required for ocean disposal. The estimated removal quantity is based on
excavation to elevation minus 14 feet MSL, the same depth as the Unit II project. The
increased depth will provide greater storage capacity and new deep water habitat within
the Unit III sediment control project.
The estimated cost to remove the 650,000 cubic yards of trapped sediment, including all
project development, engineering, and administration costs, is approximately $4.1 million.
In addition to the initial sediment removal costs, it is planned to establish an annuity to
finance future sediment removal projects for maintenance purposes, including biological
monitoring, engineering, environmental approvals, and management. The estimated
present worth of future maintenance projects is $6.7 million.
Discussions have been held with the California Department of Fish and Game and the
National Marine Fisheries to determine if the deep water habitat created by the
excavation will qualify for mitigation credits. It appears that the Resource Agencies are
now supportive of such a proposal. If an acceptable final determination is made, the
Port of Long Beach, which is in need of such credits, would consider financial
participation in the sediment control project.
9_
I
Ll
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92659 -1768
(714) 644 -3005
TO: PURCHASING /FINANCE DEPARTMENT
FROM: CITY CLERK
DATE: July 25, 1995
SUBJECT: Contract No. C- 2987(A)
CWj16 ,
lL�
7''
Description of Contract Amendment No. 2 to Unit ITT - Upper
Newport Bay Sediment Control
Effective date of Contract July 25 1995
Authorized by Minute Action, approved on June 26, 1995
Contract with John M. Tettemer & Associates
Address 3151 Airway Avenue Suite Q -1
Costa Mesa CA 92626
Amount of Contract (See Agreement)
Wanda E. Raggio
City Clerk
WER:pm
Attachment
3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach
June 26, 1995
11 IN 2 6 1995 I I CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
ITEM NO. -8
TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: UPPER NEWPORT BAY UNIT III SEDIMENT CONTROL AND
ENHANCEMENT PROJECT - AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH
SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION, RESOURCE
AGENCY PERMITTING AND ADDITIONAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT
WORK
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Approve Consultant Services Agreement with Rattray & Associates
Inc. to provide aerial, topographic, and ground surveying services
for a fee not to exceed $32,000 and authorize the Mayor and City
Clerk to execute the Agreement.
2%�7(�� 2, Approve Consultant Services Agreement with Helix Environmental
Planning, Inc. for preparation and processing of California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documentation for a fee not to
exceed $39,667 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute
the Agreement.
C_2 %1(A) 3. Approve Amendment to Consultant Services Agreement with John
M. Tettemer & Associates, Ltd. (JMTA) to process and obtain
necessary resource agency permits and provide additional project
management services necessary to pursue mitigation funding and
implement project for a fee not to exceed $70,820 and authorize
Mayor and City Clerk to execute the amended Agreement.
BACKGROUND
As reported in our April 10, 1995 report to the City Council, the City has
been involved over the last year in representing the Executive Committee for the Upper
Newport Bay Sedimentation Control Plan in the development of a sediment removal
project for the Upper Bay. The project, known as Unit III, will restore needed sediment
capacity and create habitat conditions necessary to enhance fishery values. As a result
of our negotiations with State and Federal resource agencies, agreement has been
reached that habitat mitigation credits will be created by the project. These credits can
be sold to agencies, such as the ports of Long Beach, Los Angeles or San Diego, that
SUBJECT: UPPER NIWPORT BAY UNIT III SED14KIT CONTROL AND
ENHANCEMENT PROJECT - AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEEb,WITH
SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION, RESOURCE
AGENCY PERMITTING AND ADDITIONAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT
WORK
June 26, 1995
Page 2
need mitigation for the construction of new facilities. Sale of the mitigation credits will
provide funding for project development costs advanced by the City, project
construction costs, and an annuity for future sediment removal.
Negotiations on the final amount of mitigation credits to be allowed for
construction of the Unit III project are on -going between the City and the resource
agencies, with direct assistance from the State Resources Agency. Since our last
report to the Council, a letter was received regarding project mitigation credits from
Douglas Wheeler, Secretary of the State Resources Agency. The letter confirms the
approval by the resource agencies for a minimum of 50 acres of mitigation credit for the
Unit III project, and indicates that the project may be eligible for additional mitigation
credits, pending the receipt and approval of additional technical information by the State
Resources Agency. The letter further indicates State Resources Agency's commitment
to take the lead on coordinating with other State and Federal resource agencies for the
approval of additional mitigation credits. It also offers the Resources Agency's
assistance in facilitating negotiations between the City, resource agencies and the
Ports on the sale of mitigation credits.
This letter is a key milestone for the project because it firmly
acknowledges that a minimum of 50 acres of credits have been approved. When sold,
the 50 acres of credits will generate enough funding to pay for all of the City's current
and proposed project development costs, all design and construction costs, and a
substantial portion of the proposed maintenance annuity. To secure additional
mitigation credits and fully fund the maintenance annuity, staff and the City's consultant
project manager, JMTA, have developed and submitted the additional technical
justification requested by the Resources Agency. In accordance with the Resources
Agency's letter, it is anticipated that a meeting will be scheduled immediately with State
and Federal resource agency upper level management to review the information
provided and resolve the City's request for additional mitigation credits. We are hopeful
that a funding agreement with one of the ports to purchase mitigation credits will be
signed within 90 to 120 days.
The project is ready to move forward and we are now in the position
where it is necessary to hire consultants to complete the site surveying, CEQA
documentation, resource agency permitting, and to fund additional project management
services. This work includes items that typically have a long processing time, are
necessary to support further work and must be initiated at this time in order to maintain
an early 1996 construction schedule. The following report reviews the work, proposed
financing, and makes recommendations for your consideration.
0 0
SUBJECT: UPPER NEWPORT BAY UNIT III SEDIMENT CONTROL AND
ENHANCEMENT PROJECT - AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH
SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION, RESOURCE
AGENCY PERMITTING AND ADDITIONAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT
WORK
June 26, 1995
Page 3
CURRENTLY PROPOSED WORK
Updated site surveying is required to provide information on the specific
location and the precise amount of sediment to be removed. The timing of the survey is
critical because it provides baseline information for assessing specific environmental
impacts from the project. In addition, an updated survey is required to support the
preparation of final plans and specifications for the project. To meet the currently
proposed schedule, plans and specifications will need to be started within 60 to 90
days. The preparation of final plans and specifications will be brought to the Council in
a future action.
A second important item of currently proposed work for the project is the
CEQA documentation. Although previous environmental clearances have been
obtained for sediment removal work in the Upper Bay, supplementary CEQA
documentation will need to be prepared for this specific project. However, since the
project is providing enhancement and restoration of the Upper Bay, significant
environmental issues are not anticipated. In addition, since impacts for the previous
projects have been thoroughly documented, the proposed CEQA document will be
structured to build on previous experience and information to the extent feasible.
A third item that is necessary to maintaining progress on the project is
initiation of the resource agency permitting process. Specifically, either permits,
agreements or consultations will be required through the U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game,
California Coastal Commission and State Lands Commission. Our previous experience
with the permitting process on earlier Upper Bay projects is that it can be laborious, and
can take many months to complete. Based upon this, it is necessary to initiate the
permitting work with the agencies noted as soon as it is practical.
Finally, an amendment to the Consultant Services Agreement with JMTA
is needed to provide continued technical and management support services for the
project. This continued support is necessary to ensure that the mitigation credit and
financing agreements, engineering, environmental clearances, permits and other
approvals are completed in a coordinated, timely and effective manner.
SUBJECT- UPPER NOPORT BAY UNIT III SEDINAT CONTROL AND
ENHANCEMENT PROJECT - AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH
SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION, RESOURCE
AGENCY PERMITTING AND ADDITIONAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT
WORK
June 26, 1995
Page 4
CONSULTANT SELECTION
Rattray & Associates Inc. of Santa Ana provided surveying services for
the previous Unit I and Unit II sediment basin construction projects and has recently
provided surveying for monitoring the deposition of sediment trapped in the basins.
Rattray & Associates Inc. has established survey control in the Upper Bay and provides
surveying services at standard hourly rates comparable to other surveying companies
in Orange County. Because of their familiarity with the project and experience in the
Upper Bay, staff requested the proposal for surveying services from Rattray &
Associates Inc.
JMTA is currently under agreement with the City to provide project
management services for the project. JMTA is well qualified and experienced in
obtaining resource agency permits for wetland projects. Considering the consultant's
experience with the project, staff has requested a proposal from JMTA to process and
obtain resource agency permits and to continue to provide project management
services.
To prepare the proposed CEQA documentation for the project, a new
consultant needs to be selected. To begin the selection process, several environmental
firms with expertise in preparing CEQA documentation for similar projects were asked
to submit comprehensive statements of qualifications. The statements of qualifications
included a description of the firm's technical expertise, personnel, experience, and
billing rates. A selection committee comprised of a representative from the project
management consultant, JMTA, and City staff from the Public Works Department and
Planning Department was formed. Each firm's qualifications were reviewed by the
selection committee and interviews with the two most qualified firms were arranged.
The two firms selected for an interview included Science Applications International
Corporation, of Santa Barbara, and Helix Environmental Planning, Inc., of La Mesa.
Based upon their statement of qualifications, the interview results and the
references provided, Helix Environmental Planning, Inc. was selected by the committee.
Helix demonstrated a comprehensive understanding of all aspects of the project and
recommended a thoughtful strategy for obtaining CEQA clearance.
SUBJECT: UPPER NEWPORT BAY UNIT III SEDIMENT CONTROL AND
ENHANCEMENT PROJECT - AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH
SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION, RESOURCE
AGENCY PERMITTING AND ADDITIONAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT
WORK
June 26, 1995
Page 5
PROPOSED COSTS AND SCOPE OF WORK
Each of the recommended consultants were asked to submit a proposal for the required
work. A summary of the individual work tasks proposed by each of the consultants and
their associated costs are as follows:
Surveying (Rattray & Associates, Inc.)
1" = 1 00' Orthophotos and Aerial Topography
(1' contour) for Upper Newport Bay Basin,
Access Channel and Lido Channel
SUBTOTAL= $32,000
CEQA Environmental Document (Helix Environmental Planning, Inc.)
• Project Initiation $ 7,240
and Reconnaissance
• Technical Report Preparation $ 19,302
• Draft Initial Study $ 7,675
• Final Initial Study $ 2,790
Response to Comments and Mitigation 2,660
Monitoring Plan
SUBTOTAL= $ 39,667
Resource Agency Permitting (John M. Tettemer & Associates, Ltd.)
• Section 10, 103 and 404 Permits with
$
9,020
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Section 7 Consultation with U. S. Fish
$
5,687
and Wildlife Service
• Section 401 Water Quality Certification
$
3,765
or Waiver of Certification from the
Regional Water Quality Control Board
• Section 1600 Streambed Alteration
$
5,668
Agreement with California Department
of Fish and Game (CDFG)
• Section 2081 Memorandum of Understanding with CDFG
$
2,600
• Dredging Lease with State Lands Commission
$
4,565
(if required)
SUBJECT: UPPER NOPORT BAY UNIT III SEDIAT CONTROL AND
ENHANCEMENT PROJECT - AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH
SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION, RESOURCE
AGENCY PERMITTING AND ADDITIONAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT
WORK
June 26, 1995
Page 6
Coastal Development Permit with the $ 6,715
California Coastal Commission
Reimbursables $-2-80Q
SUBTOTAL= $ 40,820
Project Management (John M. Tettemer & Associates, Ltd.)
Assumes Six Months of Additional $ 30,000
Project Management Services Including:
Mitigation Credit and Funding Agreement
Preparation and Negotiation with
Resource Agencies and Ports, Reporting
and Coordination with Executive Committee,
and General Project Management and Coordination
TOTAL = $142,487
SUMMARY OF FUNDING
In April, the City Council approved a budget amendment in the amount of $305,000 for
the Unit III project which provided for contributions from The Irvine Company, Orange
County, and the Dover Shores Community Association. The City has provided funds in
the current budget and proposes to provide an additional $100,000 in the 1995/96
budget for management of the project. The Upper Newport Bay Executive Committee
has approved the expenditure of project management costs as part of the total project
cost which will be reimbursed when mitigation funds are obtained for the Project Cost
and Maintenance Annuity Fund. Funds available in the current budget and proposed
1995/96 budget are as follows:
1994/95
General Fund Account #7011 P301004A
Contribution Fund Account #7251 P301004A
1995/96
General Fund Account #7011 P301004A
SUBTOTAL
$ 12,602.47
I 93.00-000
$105,602.47
$100 000 00
TOTAL $205,602.47
SUBJECT: UPPER NEWPORT BAY UNIT III SEDIMENT CONTROL AND
ENHANCEMENT PROJECT - AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH
SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION, RESOURCE
AGENCY PERMITTING AND ADDITIONAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT
WORK
June 26, 1995
Page 7
RECOMMENDED NEXT STEPS
1. Initiate surveying, CEQA documentation, resource agency permitting and project
management work as specified under the attached agreements.
2. Continue to work with the resource agencies through the State Resources
Agency on obtaining final agreement on securing additional mitigation credits
over and above the 50 acres already approved for the Unit III project.
3. With assistance from the State Resources Agency, initiate negotiations on the
terms of the mitigation credit and project funding agreement between the
resource agencies, one or more of the ports interested in buying mitigation
credits, and the City. Funding agreement will be developed for future Council
consideration.
4. Develop a scope of work and Consultant Services agreement for the preparation
of plans specifications and estimates for future Council consideration.
Qonebb
Public Works Director
JW:so
0 r
AMENDMENT NO. 2
CONSULTANT AGREEMENT
UNIT III - UPPER NEWPORT BAY
DEEP WATER HABITAT AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PROJECT
PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND RESOURCE AGENCY PERMITTING SERVICES
THIS AMENDMENT, entered into this �Lkday of 1995,
by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corpor on, (hereinafter
referred to as "CITY') and John M. Tettemer & Associates, Ltd. whose address is 3151
Airway Avenue, Suite Q -1, Costa Mesa, California 92626 (hereinafter referred to as
"CONSULTANT ") is made with reference to the following:
RECITALS:
A. CITY is a municipal corporation duly organized and validly existing
under the laws of the State of California with the power to carry on its business as it is
now being conducted under the Statutes of the State of California and the Charter of the
City.
B. CITY and CONSULTANT have entered a Professional Civil Engineering
Services Agreement, signed on February 16, 1994. The CONSULTANT AGREEMENT,
UNIT III, UPPER NEWPORT BAY DEEP WATER HABITAT AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
PROJECT, PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND DESIGN SERVICES, (hereinafter referred to
as "AGREEMENT'), terms were to expire on July 31, 1994. CITY and CONSULTANT
amended the AGREEMENT to extend the service period from July 1, 1994 to June 30,
1995 (hereinafter referred to as "AMENDMENT NO. 1 "). CITY and CONSULTANT now
desire to additionally amend the AGREEMENT to include additional project management
and resource agency permitting services for the Unit III, Upper Newport Bay Deep Water
Habitat and Sediment Control Project, and to extend the period of the AGREEMENT
from July 1, 1995 to January 31, 1996.
C. CITY and CONSULTANT further wish to increase the amount of
consulting fees to be paid from $166,000, as set forth in the AGREEMENT and
AMENDMENT NO. 1 to $236,820, an increase of $70,820. The purpose of the fee
increase is to provide compensation for additional services, and to extend the period of
the AGREEMENT from July 1, 1995 to January 31, 1996.
1
0
NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned
parties as follows:
1. The term of the AGREEMENT be extended by this AMENDMENT to
provide project management and resource agency permitting services in the 1995 -1996
fiscal year and shall terminate on January 31, 1996, unless terminated earlier, as set forth
in the AGREEMENT.
2. The project management and resource agency permitting services
provided under this AMENDMENT shall be as set forth in the Letter Proposal dated June
16, 1995, attached hereto and identified as Exhibit "A ".
3. The amount of the maximum compensation set forth in the AGREEMENT
shall be an increase from $166,000 to $236,820. The maximum fee for the AGREEMENT
shall not exceed $236,820.
All other conditions of the AGREEMENT remain unchanged.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this AMENDMENT to the
AGREEMENT to be executed on the day and year first above written.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Cl Attorney
ATTEST:
City Clerk j r
CSt !:
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH,
a municipal corporation
BY: -AJ tx�--J
Mayor
CONSULTANT
J hn . Tettemer
President
0 0
EXHBIT A
7 -? )OMM TETTEMER &A550CKTEjIiO
I -�.
June 15, 1995
Mr. John Wolter
City of Newport Beach
Public Works Department
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Dear John:
At your request, we are providing this letter proposal to assist the City of Newport
Beach (City) to seek certain approvals for the proposed dredging project within the
Upper Newport Bay located in Newport Beach, California. Specifically, this proposal
outlines a Scope of Work to assist the City by providing resource agency permitting
and project management services for the proposed Unit III project.
Resource Agency Permits
Based on our understanding of the project, we anticipate the following permits will be
required:
■ Section 10, 103, and 404 Permits with the U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps);
■ Section 7 Consultation with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS);
■ Section 1600 Streambed Alteration Agreement with the California
Department of Fish and Game (CDFG);
■ Section 2081 Memorandum of Understanding with the CDFG;
■ Section 401 Water Quality Certification with the Regional Water
Quality Control Board (RWQCB);
■ Dredging Permit with the State Lands Commission (SLC); and
■ Coastal Development Permit (CDP) with the California Coastal
Commission (Commission).
ENOINEERINQ MANAQEMENT PLANNING
3151 Airway Avenue, Suite Q -1 Costa Mesa, California 92626 714 434 -9080 FAX 714 434 -6120
L
Mr. John Wolter
June 15, 1995
Page 2
To assist the City in seeking these permits, we propose to:
E
1. Review existing documentation regarding the project;
2. Prepare a vicinity map for inclusion in the application packages;
3. Revise existing graphics depicting the boundaries of jurisdictional waters for
inclusion in the application packages;
4. Prepare a Biological Assessment for the project for inclusion in the
appropriate application packages;
5. Prepare a Project Description and Alternatives Analysis for inclusion in the
appropriate application packages;
6. Prepare the Section 10, Section 103, Section 404, Section 7, Section 1600,
Section 401, CDP, and SLC Dredging Permit application packages for your
review;
7. Incorporate your comments and submit the application packages;
8. Follow up with the Corps, the USFWS, the CDFG, and the RWQCB to
expedite processing;
9. Follow up with the Coastal Commission staff and the SLC staff to expedite
processing; and
10. Provide client and resource agency coordination. Assumes four meetings with
the client.
Project Management
This task assumes six months of additional project management services including:
1. Mitigation credit and funding agreement preparation;
2. Negotiation of agreements with resource agencies and ports;
3. Reporting and coordination with Upper Bay Executive Committee; and
4. General project management and coordination activities.
Mr. John Wolter
June 15, 1995
Page 3
E
As shown on Exhibit A, the estimated costs" for the resource agency permitting is
$40,820, which includes $2,800 in reimbursable expenses. Project management
services are estimated to be $30,000, for a total contract amount of $70,820. This
estimate does not include resource agencies' application fees, requests for which will
be forwarded to the City once the application packages are prepared.
We bill on a time and materials basis using the Fee Schedule provided as Exhibit B.
We are prepared to begin this work upon your authorization. The schedule for
processing the permits will be dependent on the completion of the environmental
document. Assuming certification of the California Environmental Quality Act
document by November 1995, we estimate that permits could be issued by January,
1996.
Please contact me with any questions.
S' cerely,
o n M. Tettemer
JMT /rmk
Attachments
EBOIXTR
049-03
i
John M. Tettemer & Associates, Ltd.
PROPOSED SCOPE OF SERVICES AND COSTS
Exhibit A
Resource A2encY Permitting
■ Section 10, 103 and 404 Permits with
$
9,020
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
■ Section 7 Consultation with U. S. Fish
$
5,687
and Wildlife Service
■ Section 401 Water Quality Certification
$
3,765
or Waiver of Certification from the
Regional Water Quality Control Board
■ Section 1600 Streambed Alteration
$
5,668
Agreement with California Department
of Fish and Game (CDFG)
■ Section 2081 Memorandum of Understanding with CDFG
$
2,600
■ Dredging Lease with State Lands Commission
$
4,565
(if required)
■ Coastal Development Permit with the
$
6,715
California Coastal Commission
■ Reimbursables including reproduction, mileage, etc.
2,800
SUBTOTAL = $ 40,820
Project Management
■ Assumes Six Months of Additional $ 30,000
Project Management Services Including:
Mitigation Credit and Funding Agreement
Preparation and Negotiation with
Resource Agencies and Ports, Reporting
and Coordination with Executive Committee,
and General Project Management and Coordination
TOTAL = $ 70,820
JOPM. TETTEMER & ASSOCIATES, ,*D.
FEESCHEDULE
Hourly Rates
President
Vice President, Engineering
Manager, Environmental Engineering
Senior Engineer
Manager, Environmental Services
Senior Environmental Manager
Engineer III
Engineer II
Environmental Manager
Engineer I
Environmental Planner
Draftsman
Environmental Technician
Executive Secretarial Assistant
Tech/Clerical
Direct Expenses
$ 133.00
$ 97.00
$ 94.00
$ 91.00
$ 88.00
$ 81.00
$ 81.00
$ 69.00
$ . 67.00
$ 57.00
$ 57.00
$ 47.00
$ 47.00
$ 47.00
$ 43.00
Expenses such as special project supplies and materials; food, lodging and
transportation for time away from Orange County area; long distance
telephone, outside reproduction; courier /express mail; and other costs
directly applicable to the project will be charged at cost.
Auto mileage will be charged at $0.32 per mile. Computer processing time
will be charged at $19.00 per hour.
Normal xeroxing will be charged at $0.06 per page. 2510 Xerox will be
charged at $0.50 per square foot for bond, $0.75 per square foot for
vellum, and $1.50 per square foot for mylar. CADD plotting will be
charged at $2.00 per square foot for bond, $2.25 per square foot for
vellum, and $4.50 per square foot for mylar.
FAX transmittals will be charged at $1.00 per page.
EXHIBIT B
0 0
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658 -8915
TO: FINANCE DIRECTOR
FROM: CITY CLERK
DATE: December 14, 1994
SUBJECT: Contract No. C -2987
(714) 644 -3005
i
Description of Contract Amendment to Project Management and Design
of Unit III Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control
Effective date of Contract December 13 1994
Authorized by Minute Action, approved on November 28-1994
Contract with John M. Tettemer & Associates
Address 3151 Airway Avenue, Suite Q -1
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Amount of Contract (See Agreement)
ZZ" 6' ,
Wanda E. Raggio
City Clerk
WER:pm
Attachment
3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach
• TO
FROM:
0 0
November 28, 1994
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
ry OVE ITEM NO. 8
Y�i�l��i'll�r Lii
MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
<'- 2i6,_7(4)
SUBJECT: UNIT III UPPER NEWPORT BAY PROJECT - PROJECT MANAGEMENT
SERVICES - AMENDED ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute an amendment
to the Engineering Services Agreement for Project Management
and design of the Unit III Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control
and Enhancement Project with John M. Tettemer and Associates.
DISCUSSION:
The Upper Newport Bay Executive Committee proposes a 4 million
• dollar dredging project (Unit III Project) to remove trapped sediment and
deepen the existing Unit I basin and access channel from below Jamboree
Road to the Unit II Basin below the old Salt Works dike. At its January 12,
1994 meeting, the Executive Committee approved the Department of Fish and
Game plan to pursue mitigation funding for the project from proposed port
projects in Southern California; a project schedule to pursue funding and
begin preliminary engineering, environmental documentation and permit
applications as soon as possible to provide for a dredging project in the
1994/95 fiscal year; and requested the City of Newport Beach to act as the
lead agency for the Department of Fish and Game in negotiations for the
mitigation funding and implementation of the project. The Executive
Committee approved all costs for project management and design incurred by
the City to be included as part of the total project cost and to be credited to
the City's share in accordance with the Upper Newport Bay in Bay- Agreement.
In February 1994, City Council approved an Engineering Services
Agreement with John M. Tettemer and associates to provide Project
Management and design as needed to pursue funding, prepare preliminary
• plans, obtain permits and negotiate funding agreements. Since that time, the
consultant has completed field surveys, preliminary design plans, study of
Upstream Sediment Control facility effectiveness, analysis of the original
sediment production model (Boyle Report), analysis of the sediment
monitoring records, report on expected future sediment production and
maintenance needs, preliminary bioassay sampling plans for approval by EPA
and Army Corps of Engineers and a funding agreement for the bioassay with
Orange County. A final contract to perform the bioassay, and funding
agreements with the Dover Shore Community Association and The Irvine
Company are anticipated by February 1995.
/ j,f�
0
SUBJECT: UNIT III UPPER NEWPORT BAY PROJECT - PROJECT MANAGEMENT
SERVICES - AMENDED ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT
November 28, 1994
Page 2
is
In addition, progress has been made in pursuing a financing plan
that would provide funding for the Unit III Project and an annuity for future
management and maintenance of the Upper Bay sediment basins from the
Port of Long Beach in exchange for mitigation credits required for proposed
port improvements. Through our efforts and the support of Senator
Bergeson, there has been a break through in the negotiations. The
Department of Fish and Game and the Federal Resource Agencies have
committed to complete their review of the financing plan by January 1995. If
their review is favorable, funding could become available for the dredging
project in the 1995/96 fiscal year. A copy of the most recent Project Status
Report to the Executive Committee was circulated in the November 17
Council Newsletter.
Once a funding plan for the construction and future maintenance
is approved, the consultant will prepare agreements necessary to formalize
the plan; complete the bioassay testing and environmental documentation;
obtain permits; and begin work to prepare the final construction documents •
for the Project.
The Amendment to the Engineering Services Agreement provides
for the following :
Term: extended through July 1995
Fee: increases fee $75,000.00 for a total not to exceed
$166,000.00 based on standard hourly rates.
Funds for these services are available in the currently budgeted
account, Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control and Restoration Account No.
7011 P 301004A.
(1 wit •
Don Webb
Public Works Director
JW:so
- 1 0 . ( ' %t, i /%)%
AMENDMENT NO. 1
CONSULTANT AGREEMENT
UNIT 111 - UPPER NEWPORT BAY
DEEP WATER HABITAT AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PROJECT
PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND DESIGN SERVICES
THIS AMENDMENT, entered into this �-�� day of X -4eL
1994, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation,
(hereinafter referred to as "CITY "), and John M. Tettemer & Associates, Ltd.,
whose address is 3151 Airway Avenue, Suite Q-1, Costa Mesa, California
92626, (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT'), is made with reference to
the following:
RECITALS:
A. CITY is a municipal corporation duly organized and validly
existing under the laws of the State of California with the power to carry on
its business as it is now being conducted under the Statutes of the State of
California and the Charter of the City.
B. CITY and CONSULTANT have entered a Professional Civil
Engineering Services Agreement, signed on February 16, 1994. The
Agreement terms were to expire on July 31, 1994. CITY and CONSULTANT
desire to amend the Agreement to assure that the Agreement for project
management and engineering for the Unit III, Upper Newport Bay Deep Water
Habitat and Sediment Control Project is extended to include the period from
July 1, 1994 to June 30, 1995.
C. CITY and CONSULTANT further wish to increase the amount
of consulting fees to be paid from $91,000, as set forth in the original
Agreement to cover services between July 1, 1994 and June 30, 1995, to
$166,000, an increase of $75,000.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the
undersigned parties as follows:
1. The term of the CONSULTANT AGREEMENT, UNIT III, UPPER
NEWPORT BAY DEEP WATER HABITAT AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PROJECT,
PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND DESIGN SERVICES, (hereinafter referred to as
"AGREEMENT'), be extended by this Amendment to provide Project
Management and Engineering Services in the 1994 -1995 fiscal year and shall
terminate on the 31 st day of July, 1995, unless terminated earlier, as set forth
in AGREEMENT.
0
0
2. The amount of the maximum compensation set forth in
AGREEMENT shall be an increase from $91,000 to $166,000. The maximum
fee for AGREEMENT shall not exceed $166,000.
All other conditions of AGREEMENT remain unchanged.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this
Amendment to AGREEMENT to be executed on the day and year first above
written.
L UV
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Cit Attorney
ATTEST:
City Clerk
r`
•,'' � . ' =tip.
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH,
a municipal corporation
Mayor
CONSULTANT
Jo - Tettemer & Associates, Ltd.
CITY OF NEWPORT BE• CH
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658 -8915
(714) 644 -3005
TO: FINANCE DIRECTOR Z. 2 J'- � y'
FROM: CITY CLERK
DATE: February 28, 1994
SUBJECT: Contract No. C- 2987(h)
Description of Contract Consultant Agreement for Project Management
and Design of Unit III Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control
Effective date of Contract February 16, 1994
Authorized by Minute Action, approved on February 14, 1994
Contract with John M. Tettemer & Associates
Address 3151 Airway Avenue, Suite Q -1
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Amount of Contract (See Agreement)
Wanda E. Raggio 0�
City Clerk
WER:pm
Attachment
3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach
•
0
February 14, 1993
• CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
ITEM NOS. 12,13,&14
TO: CITY COUNCIL (" .''I,(-7
FROM: Public Works Department
SUBJECT: CONSULTANT SELECTION - PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an Engineering Services
Agreement for Project Management and Design of the Unit III Upper
Newport Bay Sediment Control and Enhancement Project with John M.
Tettemer and Associates.
2. Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an Engineering Services
Agreement for Project Management Services to implement various
• 1993/94 Capital Improvement Projects with Gail P. Pickart P.E.
3. Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an Engineering Services
Agreement for Project Management Services to implement various C i
1993/94 Capital Improvement Projects with Hunter Cook and Associates.
DISCUSSION:
The Public Works Department has requested letters of interest and qualifications from several
local civil engineers to provide project management services and assistance to City staff in
implementing the current Capital Improvement Program. Staff anticipated retaining Project
Management Services for several large projects currently programmed. The Unit III Upper
Newport Bay Sediment Control and Enhancement Project and the MacArthur Boulevard
Improvements between Coast Highway and Ford Road are estimated at 4 million and 13.5 million
dollars respectively, with significant outside funding. In addition, while there has been a reduction
in engineering staff over the last year, there has been an increasing demand on engineering staff
time to manage the new Measure "M" Funding Program and coordinate planning, review
improvement plans, and manage or assist in the management of several regional transportation
projects. Use of the private sector for project management services is consistent with the
- significant privatization of design engineering services which has been utilized by the Public
Works Department for many years.
Unit III Upper Newport Bay Project
The Upper Newport Bay Executive Committee proposes a 4 million dollar dredging project (Unit
III Project) to remove trapped sediment and deepen the existing Unit I basin and access channel
from below Jamboree Road to the Unit II Basin below the old Salt Works dike. At its January
12, 1994 meeting, the Executive Committee approved the Department of Fish and Game plan to
i
•
SUBJECT: CONSULTANT SELECTION - PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES
February 14, 1994
Page 2
pursue mitigation funding for the project from proposed port projects in Southern California; a
project schedule to pursue funding and begin preliminary engineering, environmental
documentation and permit applications as soon as possible to provide
for a dredging project in the 1994/95 fiscal year; and requested the City of Newport Beach to act
as the lead agency for the Department of Fish and Game in negotiations for the mitigation funding
and implementation of the project. The Executive Committee approved all costs for project
management and design incurred by the City to be included as part of the total project cost and to
be credited to the City's share in accordance with the Upper Newport Bay In -Bay Agreement.
MacArthur Boulevard Widening, Coast Highway o Ford Road
The Orange County Transportation Authority approved funding for design of this project in the
current fiscal year and construction of the first phase, Coast Highway to San Joaquin Hills Road,
in the 1994/95 fiscal year. Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates has been retained by the
City, and design for the improvements from Coast Highway to Ford Road is underway. Project
management services are needed to review and coordinate plan submittals to Caltrans, coordinate
and schedule utility relocations and Edison facility undergrounding with the project, negotiate
right -of -way and easement dedications, review and coordinate project with proposed public and
private improvements to adjoining property, and manage and review consultant design work.
Regional Transportation Planning and New Measure "M" Funding Program
The San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor Improvements and related improvements to
Bristol Street, University Drive, Jamboree Road, MacArthur Boulevard and Ford Road; utility
replacements in Coast Highway; Caltrans maintenance and improvements to Coast Highway;
proposed amendment to Orange County's Master Plan of Arterial Highways regarding Santa Ana
River Bridge crossings; ramp construction from the 55 Freeway to the 73 Freeway; the 73
Freeway, 55 Freeway, 405 Freeway confluence improvements in conjunction with construction of
the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor ; Mesa Drive/Birch Street realignment project;
Birch Street bridge widening over 73 Freeway; earthquake retrofit bridge program; Irvine Avenue
realignment and widening project from University Drive to Bristol Street are all projects that
require significant coordination with Caltrans, the Transportation Corridor Agency, the County of
Orange, neighboring cities and various private interests and landowners.
Last year additional funding for highway improvement projects became available through the
Orange County Measure "M" program, which will provide for increased highway funding over the
next 20 years. A portion of the funds, local Measure "M" funds are distributed on the basis of
population and highway mileage. A larger portion of the funds, Regional Measure "M" funds are
distributed to the cities on a competitive basis which considers regional benefits and project
readiness. The new program calls for applications every 2 years, approves funding over a 2 year
period but requires that each City's application details a comprehensive project development
•
0
0 0
SUBJECT: CONSULTANT SELECTION - PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES
February 14, 1994
• Page 3
program over a 5 year period. In order for projects to be competitive for funding, proponents
must demonstrate significant preliminary engineering, environmental documentation and the
support and cooperation of adjoining Cities, and County and State agencies.
Public Works Department staff considered the following criteria in evaluating consultant
engineers' qualifications to provide effective Project Management Services:
1. Experience with similar projects.
2. Experience with the various Federal, State, County and local agencies involved in City
projects.
3. Experience and knowledge with City projects and programs.
4. Availability and ability to commit individual attention on a part-time basis to City projects
• over the remaining fiscal year with consideration for similar commitment in next fiscal year.
5. Flexibility to adjust hours on an as- needed basis.
Requests for interest and qualifications to provide Project Management Services were sent to 4
local engineers. Three engineers responded and were interviewed by City staff. Mr. John M.
Tettemer, John M. Tettemer and Associates; Mr. Hunter Cook, Hunter Cook and Associates; and
Mr. Gail P. Pickart were interviewed; and are all well - qualified to provide Project Management
Services on City projects. A113 engineers live and work in Newport Beach, which will aid their
ability to work closely with City staff.. Each engineer is registered as a Civil Engineer by the
State of California, and is fully qualified professionally to perform Project Management Services.
John M. Tettemer has worked with parties to the Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control program
since 1980. Prior to entering private practice in 1977, Mr. Tettemer was Director of the Los
Angeles County Flood Control District, where he had served for 25 years. Since opening his
consulting firm he has focused his efforts in wetlands restoration, wetland development and flood
control projects for private and public owners in Orange County and the Southwestern states. He
has worked for The Irvine Company on flood control projects, mitigation associated with
• development, the San Joaquin marsh and the Upper Bay Sediment Control Program. Most
recently he worked for Orange County to prepare a status report on implementation of the Upper
Newport Bay /San Diego Creek Watershed Comprehensive Stormwater Sediment Control Plan.
Mr. Tettemer's experience in the Upper Newport Bay and the San Joaquin marsh and his
association with parties to the Upper Newport Bay Program State and Federal Resource agencies
and various State and Federal permitting agencies make him uniquely qualified to manage the Unit
III Upper Newport Bay Project.
0 0
SUBJECT: CONSULTANT SELECTION - PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES
February 14, 1994
Page 4
Hunter Cook was employed by the City of Newport Beach as the Cooperative Projects Engineer •
from 1965 to 1969. Since that time he has worked as a consulting Civil Engineer for various
cities and private land owners in Southern California. As the Cooperative Projects Engineer for
the City and as a Contract City Engineer and Project Manager as a consultant, he has worked
with Caltrans, Orange County, consulting engineers, various State and Federal agencies, local
cities and private land owners. Projects include land development, street, storm drain, sewer,
water and harbor improvements. Mr. Cook is currently the General Manager for Coastal
Municipal Water District. Mr. Cook's experience and knowledge of the City make him well -
qualified to provide project management services over a wide range of capital improvement
projects. Mr. Cook is available to work on City projects up to an average of 12 hours per week.
Gail Pickart was employed by the City of Newport Beach as Subdivision Engineer from 1966 to
1976. Since that time he has worked for several large land development companies, Civil
Engineering firms and most recently as a self - employed Civil Engineer. As Subdivision Engineer
and as a Project Manager in private practice he has worked with Caltrans, Orange County,
consulting engineers, various State and Federal agencies, local cities and private land owners.
Projects include large land development, streets, storm drains, water and sewer improvements in
Newport Beach and Orange County. Mr. Pickart's experience and knowledge of the City make •
him well - qualified to provide project management over a wide -range of capital improvement
projects. Mr. Pickart is currently self - employed and is available to work on City projects up to an
average of 30 hours per week.
Proposals were requested and have been received from all 3 engineers to provide Project
Management Services at standard hourly rates on an as needed basis. The proposal from John M.
Tettemer and Associates also provides for preliminary design services as needed to obtain
mitigation funding and permits. All 3 proposals are for services through July 1994. However it is
anticipated that services will be needed after July 1, 1994, and language has been included in the
agreements providing for extension pursuant to approval by the City Manager. Fees have been
based on standard hourly rates for level of services estimated to pursue funding and permits for
the Unit III project by John M. Tettemer and Associates, and the available time to work on City
projects 30 hours per week for Gail Pickart and 12 hours per week for Hunter Cook. John M.
Tettemer and Associates will provide Project Management and Design Services at standard hourly
rates which are comparable to rates for engineering firms in Orange County, Hunter Cook and
Gail Pickart will provide project management services at $105/hr. and $901hr. and plan check
services at $55/hr. and $60/hr. respectively which are also comparable to rates for engineering
firms in Orange County. Copies of their rate schedules are attached. Engineering Services •
Agreements provide as follows:
UNIT III UPPER NEWPORT BAY PROJECT
CONSULTANT: John M. Tettemer and Associates
TERM: February 1994 through July 1994
FEE: Not to exceed $91,000 based on standard hourly rates
SUBJECT: CONSULTANT SELECTION - PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES
February 14, 1994
• Page 5
SERVICES: Project management and design as needed to pursue funding,
prepare preliminary plans, obtain permits, and negotiate funding
agreements
2. PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES (CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS1
CONSULTANT: Hunter Cook and Associates
TERM: February 1994 through July 1994
FEE: Not to exceed $25,000 based on standard hourly rates
SERVICES: Project management services on as- needed basis up to an average
of 12 hours per week
3. PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES (CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS)
• CONSULTANT: Gail P. Pickart
TERM: February 1994 through July 1994
FEE: Not to exceed $75,000 based on standard hourly rates
SERVICES: Project management services on as- needed basis up to an average
of 30 hours per week
Funds for these services are available in currently budgeted accounts as follows:
Upper Newport Sediment Bay Sediment
Control & Restoration
Measure "M" Local Turnback
Individual Project Accounts
• C r 2p 4
Benjamin B. Nolan
Public Works Director
JW:so
Attachment
$ 91,000.00
$100,000.00
As Needed
7016 98280021
7283 98313090
JOFWI. TETTENIER & ASSOCIATESOrD.
FEE SCHEDULE
President
$
130.00
Vice President, Engineering
$
95.00
Senior Engineer
$
89.00
Engineer III
$
79.00
Senior Environmental Manager
$
79.00
Engineer II
$
67.00
Environmental Manager
$
65.00
Engineer 1
$
56.00
Environmental Planner
$
56.00
Draftsman
$
46.00
Environmental Technician
$
46.00
Executive Secretarial Assistant
$
46.00
Tech /Clerical
$
42.00
Clerical
$
38.00
Direct E32gn5e
Expenses such as special project supplies and materials; food, lodging and
transportation for time away from Orange County area; long distance telephone,
outside reproduction; courier /express mail; and other costs directly applicable to
the project will be charged at cost.
Auto mileage will be charged at $0.32 per mile. Computer processing time will be
charged at $19.00 per hour,
Normal xeroxing will be charged at $0.06 per page. 2510 Xerox will be charged
at $0.50 per square foot for bond, $0.75 per foot for vellum, and $1.50 per
square foot for mylar.
FAX transmittals will be charged at $1.00 per page
L J
r
•
•
•
•
0 0
Gail P. Pickart, P.E.
7 San Mateo Way
Corona del Mar, California 92625
(714) 760 -9608
FEE RATE SCHEDULE
Effective January 1, 1994
I. Professional Services
Title Rate per Ilour
Project Manager 90.00
Technician/Designer/Plan Checker 60.00
Clerical/Word Processing 35.00
II. Reimbursable Expenses
1. Travel and subsistence to locations outside Orange and Los Angeles Counties will be billed
at cost.
2. Reproduction, blueprinting, photocopying and photographing will be billed at cost.
III. Outside Services
Invoice costs of services and expenses charged by independent contract or consultants, specialists, and
professional or technical firms in support of services provided by Gail P. Pickart, P.E. will be billed
at 1.15 times cost.
1 HUNTER COO *& ASSOCIATES
C 3NOULTINO CONOTRUCTI NOINEER5
A Q&LIWRNIA WRRCRATION
• CONaTAO ION MANAOEMONT
• WATSR BUpP v MANAORMENT
ORECIAL ST Ws
FEE SCHEDULE
A. PERSONNEL SERVICES
1. Principal
2. Associate /Engineer /General Superintendent
3. Inspector
4. Technician /DraftsmanRlan Check
5. Clerical
B. TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES
$105 /Hr.
$90 /Hr.
$75 /Hr.
$55 /Hr.
$35 /Hr..
C�
1. Reimbursement for actual travel and subsistence expenses incurred in connection •
with the project plus a service charge of 15 %D.
2. Thirty -five (35) cents per mile for job related travel by private vehicle.
C. OUTSIDE SERVICES
Invoice cost of services and expenses charged by outside consultants, professional or
technical firms not associated with HC &A, engaged in connection with the order plus a service
of 15 %. Associates will be billed at the appropriate rate in the personnel services category.
D. MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES
The invoice cost of materials, supplies, reproduction work, communication expenses and
other specialized services procured from outside sources plus a service charge of 15%.
•
FS294NB
ae10 F C9AOT HIONWAY, BORE 4 (714) 780 -0538 CORONA DEL MAR. CALIFORNIA 92625
CONSULTANT AGREEMENT
Unit III
Upper Newport Bay
Deep Water Habitat and Sediment Control Project
Project Management and Design Services
THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this =7- day of
Z :!,, f`- ,1994, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH,
a municipal corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "CITY ") and
John M. Tettemer & Associates, whose address is 3151 Airway Avenue,
Suite Q -1, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 (hereinafter referred to as
"CONSULTANT ") is made with reference to the following:
R E C I T A L S•
A. CITY is a municipal corporation duly organized and
validly existing under the laws of the State of California with the
power to carry on its business as it is now being conducted under
the Statues of the State of California and the Charter of the City.
B. CITY and CONSULTANT desire to enter into an
agreement for Professional Civil Engineering services to provide
project management and engineering for the Unit III, Upper Newport
Bay Deep Water Habitat and Sediment Control Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the
undersigned parties as follows:
SECTION 1. TERM
A. The term of this agreement shall commence on the 1st
day of February, 1994 and shall terminate on the 31st day of July,
1994, unless terminated earlier as set forth herein.
B. It is anticipated that the Project Management and
Engineering Services provided for in this agreement will also be
desired in the 1994/95 fiscal year. Term of this agreement may be
extended by mutual consent of both parties under the terms of an
amended Consultant Agreement approved by the City Manager.
SECTION 2. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED BY THE CONSULTANT
Consultant Services shall include professional and
technical services necessary to:
A. Provide Project Management
B. Provide Project Engineering
C. obtain environmental approvals
1
0 0
D. Perform miscellaneous coordination activities
Consultant shall provide services as noted above and as
attached hereto set forth in Exhibit "A ", the proposal dated
February 1, 1994.
SECTION 3: COMPENSATION TO CONSULTANT
A. CONSULTANT shall be compensated for services
performed pursuant to this Agreement by invoicing City for services
rendered on a monthly basis. Fee shall be on a time and materials
basis, based on standard hourly rates as set forth in Exhibit "A ",
the Proposal which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by
this reference. The maximum fee — °-- shall not exceed
$91,000.00. In the event of unforseen changes or required
additions to work which are not outlined by this agreement, the
Public Works Director may authorize additional compensation up to
15% of the original contract amount. Such works shall be performed
on a time and materials basis at the rates shown in Exhibit "A ".
B. It is anticipated that Project Management and Design
Services as provided for in this Agreement will also be desired in
the 1994/95 fiscal year. Compensation may be extended for services
performed during the 1994/95 fiscal year by mutual consent of both
parties under the terms of an amended Consultant Agreement approved
by the City Manager.
SECTION 4: STANDARD OF CARE
CONSULTANT agrees to perform all services hereunder in a
manner commensurate with the community professional standards and
agrees that all services shall be performed by qualified and
experienced personnel who are not employed by the CITY nor have any
contractual relationship with CITY.
SECTION 5: INDEPENDENT PARTIES
CITY and CONSULTANT intend that the relation between them
created by this Agreement is that of employer- independent
contractor. The manner and means of conducting the work are under
the control of CONSULTANT, except to the extent they are limited by
statute, rule or regulation and the express terms of this
Agreement.
P:
• •
SECTION 6: HOLD HARMLESS
CONSULTANT shall indemnify and hold harmless CITY, its
CITY Council, boards and commissions, officers and employees from
and against any and all loss, damages, liability, claims, suits,
costs and expenses whatsoever, including reasonable attorneys'
fees, regardless of the merit or outcome of any such claim or suit
arising from or in any manner connected to CONSULTANT'S negligent
performance of services or negligent performance of work conducted
or performed pursuant to this Agreement.
SECTION 7.
Without limiting the consultant's indemnification of
City, Consultant shall obtain and provide and maintain at its own
expense during the term of this Agreement, policy or policies of
liability insurance of the type and amounts described below and
satisfactory to the City. Such policies shall be signed by a
person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf
and must filed with the City prior to exercising any right or
performing any work pursuant to this Agreement. All insurance
policies, except professional Errors and Omissions Insurance, shall
add as insured the City, its elected officials, officers and
employees for all liability arising from Consultant's services as
described herein.
Prior to the commencement of any services hereunder,
Consultant shall provide to City, certificates of insurance from an
insurance company certified to do business in the State of
California, with original endorsements, and copies of policies, if
requested by City, of the following insurance, with Best's Class B
or better carriers:
A. Worker's compensation insurance covering all employees
and principals of the Consultant, per the laws of the
State of California;
B. Commercial general liability insurance covering third
party liability risks, including without limitation,
contractual liability, in a minimum amount of $1 million
combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury,
personal injury and property damage. If commercial
3
0 0
general liability insurance or other form with a general
aggregate is used, either the general aggregate shall
apply separately to this project, or the general
aggregate limit shall be twice the occurrence limit;
C. Commercial auto liability and property insurance covering
any owned and rented vehicles of Consultant in a minimum
amount of $1 million combined single limit per accident
for bodily injury and property damage.
D. Professional errors and omission insurance which covers
the services to be performed in connection with this
agreement in the minimum amount of 1 million dollars
($1,000,000).
Said policy or policies shall be endorsed to state that
coverage shall not be canceled by either party, except after thirty
(30) days' prior notice has been given in writing to City.
Consultant shall give to City prompt timely notice of claim made or
suit instituted arising out of Consultant's operation hereunder.
Consultant shall also procure and maintain, at its own cost and
expense, any additional kinds of insurance, which in its own
judgement may be necessary for its proper protection and
prosecution of the work.
Consultant agrees that in the event of loss due to any of
the perils for which it has agreed to provide comprehensive general
and automotive liability insurance, that Consultant shall look
solely to its insurance for recovery. Consultant hereby grants to
City, on behalf of any insurer providing comprehensive general and
automotive liability insurance to either Consultant or City with
respect to the services of Consultant herein, a waiver of any right
of subrogation which any such insurer of said Consultant may
acquire against City by virtue of the payment of any loss under
such insurance.
SECTION 8. PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFER
CONSULTANT shall not assign, sublease, hypothecate, or
transfer this Agreement or any interest therein directly or
indirectly, by operation of law or otherwise without the prior
written consent of CITY. Any attempt to do so without said consent
4
0 0
shall be null and void, and any assignee, sublessee, hypothecate or
transferee shall acquire no right or interest by reason of such
attempted assignment, hypothecation or transfer.
The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of
any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of CONSULTANT, or
of the interest of any general partner or joint venturer or
syndicate member or cotenant if CONSULTANT is a partnership or
joint venture or syndicate or cotenancy, which shall result in
changing the control of CONSULTANT, shall be construed as an
assignment of this Agreement. Control means fifty percent (50 %) or
more of the voting power of the corporation.
SECTION 9: PERMITS AND LICENSES
CONSULTANT, at its sole expense, shall obtain and
maintain during the term of this Agreement, all appropriate
permits, licenses and certificates that may be required in
connection with the performance of services hereunder.
SECTION 10: REPORTS
Each and every report, draft, work - product, map, record
and other document reproduced, prepared or caused to be prepared by
CONSULTANT pursuant to or in connection with this Agreement shall
be the exclusive property of CITY upon final payment to the
CONSULTANT.
CITY shall make no use of materials prepared by
CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement, except for construction,
maintenance and repair of the Project. Any use of such documents
for other projects, and any use of uncompleted documents, shall be
at the sole risk of the CITY and without liability or legal
exposure of the CONSULTANT.
No report, information or other data given to or prepared
or assembled by the CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement shall be
made available to any individual or organization by the CONSULTANT
without prior approval by CITY.
CONSULTANT shall, at such time and in such form as CITY
may require, furnish reports concerning the status of services
required under this Agreement.
5
0 0
SECTION 11: RECORDS
CONSULTANT shall maintain complete and accurate records
with respect to costs, expenses, receipts and other such
information required by CITY that relate to the performance of
services required under this Agreement.
CONSULTANT shall maintain adequate records of services
provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services.
All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and
readily accessible. CONSULTANT shall provide free access to the
representatives of CITY or its designees at all proper times to
such books and records, and gives CITY the right to examine and
audit same, and to make transcripts therefrom as necessary, and to
allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and
activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with
supporting documents, shall be kept separate from other documents
and records and shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years
after receipt of final payment.
SECTION 12: NOTICES
All notices, demands, requests or approvals to be given
under this Agreement shall be given in writing and conclusively
shall be deemed served when delivered personally or on the second
business day after the deposit thereof in the United States mail,
postage prepaid, registered or certified, addressed as hereinafter
approved.
All notices, demands, requests, or approvals from
CONSULTANT to CITY shall be addressed to CITY at:
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Attention: John Wolter, Project Manager
(714) 644 -3311
All notices, demands, requests, or approvals from CITY to
CONSULTANT shall be addressed to CONSULTANT at:
John M. Tettemer, President
John M. Tettemer & Associates
3151 Airway Avenue, Suite Q -1
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
(714) 434 -9080
11
0 0
SECTION 13: TERMINATION
Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time and
for any reason by giving the other party seven (7) days' prior
written notice; notice shall be deemed served upon deposit in the
United States Mail, postage prepared, addressed to the other
party's business office. In the event of termination due to the
fault of CONSULTANT, CITY shall be obligated to compensate
CONSULTANT for only those authorized services which have been
completed and accepted by CITY. If this Agreement is terminated
for any reason other than fault of CONSULTANT, CITY agrees to
compensate CONSULTANT for the actual services performed up to the
effective date of the Notice of Termination, on the basis of fee
schedule contained above, subject to any maximum amount to be
received for any specific service.
SECTION 14: COST OF LITIGATION
If any legal action is necessary to enforce any provision
hereof or for damages by reason of an alleged breach of any
provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be
entitled to receive from the losing party all costs and expenses in
such amount as the court may adjudge to be reasonable attorneys'
fees.
SECTION 15: COMPLIANCES
CONSULTANT shall comply with all laws, state or federal,
and all ordinances, rules and regulations enacted or issued by
CITY.
SECTION 16: WAIVER
A waiver by CITY or CONSULTANT of any breach of any term,
covenant, or condition contained herein shall not be deemed to be
a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term,
covenant, or condition contained herein whether of the same or a
different character.
SECTION 17: INTEGRATED CONTRACT
This Agreement represents the full and complete
understanding of every kind of nature whatsoever between the
parties hereto and all preliminary negotiations and agreements of
whatsoever kind or nature are merged herein. No verbal agreement
7
E
or implied covenant shall be held to vary the provisions hereof.
Any modification of this Agreement will be effective only by
written execution signed by both CITY and CONSULTANT.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this
Agreement to be executed on the day and year first above written.
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH,
a municipal corporation
i
BY f kil 1//7 s;?-7 /l
yor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
i
1 I /
City Attorney
CONSULTANT
v
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK (311.i.".
�Ct cCyaN�i
E: