The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutC-3652 - Dover Drive Sidewalk Design (north of Cliff Drive)Cl • • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT !Ai ?1;. 1 I . e . , i Agenda Item No. s21 January 22, 2008 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Public Works Department Robert Stein 949 - 644 -3322 or rstein @city.newport- beach.ca.us SUBJECT: DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK — APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT NO. 6 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH VA CONSULTING, INC., FORMERLY KNOWN AS VAN DELL AND ASSOCIATES RECOMMENDATION: Approve Amendment No. 6 to Professional Services Agreement with VA Consulting, Inc., formerly known as Van Dell and Associates for a not to exceed amount of $19,430 . and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Amendment. DISCUSSION: The California Coastal Commission (CCC) has reviewed and approved this project. However, it is requiring modification of the design and the preparation of a mitigation plan. Under this Amendment, VA Consulting will perform these tasks and process the changes with the CCC in order to obtain the Coastal Development Permit. On May 25, 2004, Council approved a Professional Services Agreement with VA Consulting of Irvine California, for the design of the Dover Drive sidewalk at a contract price of $69,838. Along with preparing the final construction documents, VA Consulting's professional services included preparing sidewalk design alternatives, conducting a geotechnical evaluation, preparing and processing jurisdictional agency permits including a Coastal Development Permit, and preparing the environmental documentation for the Project. During the design process, the City asked the Consultant to consider additional options for sidewalk design to consider alternate alignments with various retaining wall alternatives. Over the last 33 months, five Amendments were approved by Council: • On February 22, 2005, Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement was approved in which Consultant's scope of work was expanded to provide additional engineering and geotechnical services for the Project, including a proposal to • shore up the existing slope above Dover Drive, at the Cliff Drive intersection. The additional compensation under Amendment No. 1 was $6,000. Dover Drivealk — Approval of Amendment to Professional Ser Agreement vAth VA Consulting, Inc. January 22, 2008 Page 2 • On August 9, 2005, Amendment No. 2 was approved in which Consultant's • scope of work was expanded to provide additional design and consulting services for the project, including analysis of the sidewalk and retaining wall alternatives for the slope above Dover Drive, preparation of the final design of the boardwalk portion of the project, and project management and coordination services. The additional compensation under Amendment No. 2 was $9,900. On April 4, 2006, Amendment No. 3 was approved in which Consultant's scope of work was expanded to revise the alignment of the proposed sidewalk and curb and gutter adjacent to the slope above Dover Drive, and prepare revised exhibits for the environmental document and resource agency permit applications. The additional compensation under Amendment No. 3 was $3,960. On April 24, 2007, Amendment No. 4 was approved in which Consultant's scope of work was revised to allow for additional assistance with outside jurisdictional agencies and processing permits. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 4 was $5,455. The term of the Agreement was also extended to December 31, 2007. • On October 3, 2007, Amendment No. 5 in the amount of $15,850 was approved in which Consultant's scope of work was revised to include additional services for working with Regional Water Quality Control Board staff regarding the need for a Clean Water Act 401 Water Quality Certification and responding to comments from the California Coastal Commission staff. • Environmental Review: On June 27, 2006, Council adopted a Resolution approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for Dover Drive Sidewalk Project. Public Notice: The public was informed of the Coastal Commission hearing on this project which occurred on November 8, 2007. Funding Availability: Sufficient funds are available in the following account for the project: Account Description Account Number Amount Transportation and Circulation 7261- C5100854 $19,340.00 Total: $19,340.00 ared by: Submitted by: �f Robert Stein, P.E. S p G. Badum Assistant City Engineer u c Works Director • Attachment: Amendment No. 6 I AMENDMENT NO.6 • TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH VA CONSULTING, INC., FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT THIS AMENDMENT NO. 6 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, entered into this day of , 2008, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "City ") and VA CONSULTING, INC., (formerly knows as Van Dell and Associates, a California corporation whose address is 17801 Cartwright Road, Irvine, California, 92614 ( "Consultant'), and is made with reference to the following: RECITALS A. On July 12, 2004, CITY and CONSULTANT entered into a Professional Services Agreement, hereinafter referred to as "Agreement', for design and consulting services for the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project, hereinafter referred to as "Project'. is B. City and Consultant have entered into five separate Amendments of the Agreement, the latest dated April 24, 2007. Per Amendment No. 4, the Agreement expired on December 31, 2007. C. City desires to enter into this Amendment No. 6 to reflect additional services not included in the Agreement or prior Amendments and to extend the term of the Agreement to June 30, 2009. D. City desires to compensate Consultant for additional professional services needed for Project. E. City and Consultant mutually desire to amend Agreement, hereinafter referred to as "Amendment No. 6 ", as provided here below. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Consultant shall be compensated for services performed pursuant to this Amendment No. 6 according to "Exhibit A" dated December 26, 2007, attached hereto. 2. Total additional compensation to Consultant for services performed pursuant to this Amendment No. 6 for all work performed in accordance • with this Amendment, including all reimburseable items and subconsultant 2 - E fees, shall not exceed Nineteen Thousand, Three Hundred Forty and 001100 Dollars ($19,340.00). 3. The term of the Agreement shall be extended to June 30, 2009. 4. Except as expressly modified herein, all other provisions, terms, and covenants set forth in Agreement shall remain unchanged and shall be in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 6 on the date first above written. APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney for the City of Newport Beach ATTEST: (-0 LaVonne Harkless, City Clerk CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, A Municipal Corporation By: Homer Bludau for the City of Newport Beach CONSULTANT: 0 (Corporate Officer) Title: Print Name: (Financial Officer) Title: Print Name: Attachments: Exhibit A — Scope of Services Exhibt B = Fee Summary Exhibit C — Schedule of Billing Rates Muse \pbwlshareftgreementsNfy 07 -081va consultlng -lover sidewalk- amend -6.doc 3 C� • • Exhibit A • CONSULTING • December 26, 2007 Mr. Robert Stein City of Newport Beach Public Works Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92660 Dear Mr. Stein: This letter is a change order request for additional environmental, permitting and design services related to the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project for the City of Newport Beach (our Agreement dated July 12, 2004). This request is for additional services associated with processing the California Costal Commission (CCC) permit and modifications to project plans and contract documents required to incorporate CCC conditions. These activities include time to coordinate with City and CCC staff for preparation of modifications to CCC permit exhibits and revisions to plans and contract documents. The total cost to perform the additional tasks described above is $19,340. A detailed scope of services (Exhibit "A "), and fees (Exhibit "B ") are included with this request. We will perform these services on a time and materials not -to- exceed basis in accordance with the attached fee schedule (Exhibit "C). Please indicate your approval of this change order by signing in the space provided below and returning a copy to our office. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact John Wolter at (951) 340 -0030 or me at (949) 474 -1400. f, P E. and CEO MPV/kam cc: Steve Luy John Wolter Contracts Approved by: Date: Robert Stein VA Consulting, Inc. Corporate office orange County Division 17801 Cartwright Road Irvine, CA 92614 Phone 949.474.1400 Fax 949.261.8482 _• s • EXHIBIT "A" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT ADDITIONAL SERVICES SCOPE OF SERVICES California Costal Commission (CCC) Permit Processing This task includes the preparation of modification to CCC application exhibits required by CCC staff and requested by City staff. 2. Habitat Restoration and Monitoring Plan Preparation This task includes preparation of interpretive sign language and final habitat restoration and monitoring plans as required by the CCC permit conditions. 3. Revisions to Plans and Contract Documents This task includes the incorporation of CCC conditions to reduce the Boardwalk width to five (5) feet. The additional work also includes revisions to Sheets 1, 5 and 6 for new • caisson locations and construction notes; revisions to Sheets 3 and 4 for new structural and framing details; revisions to the structural calculations package and edits to the specifications and bed schedule to incorporate the habitat planting plans and boardwalk modifications. 4. Project Management and Conditions This task includes project management and coordination with the environmental sub - consultant, CCC staff and City staff to finalize the CCC permit approval and incorporate the CCC conditions into the final contract documents. We have assumed 8 hours for project management and 4 hours for attendance at 2 meetings for a total of 12 hours. is %:IP.'*W73_090gMNn� ON Pe uest1TT8W. 0 • • 0 - 0 EXHIBIT "B" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT ADDITIONAL SERVICES FEES 1. California Costal Commission (CCC) Permit Processing .......... ............................... $4,980 2. Habitat Restoration and Monitoring Plan Preparation ............... ............................... $5,400 3. Revisions to Plans and Contract Documents ............................ ............................... $7,050 4. Project Management and Conditions ........................................ ............................... $1,860 5. Reimbursables ............................................................................... ............................... $50 TOTALFEES ..................................................................................... ............................... $19,340 x:wmle 73-03omn IdZ00308 qe Om AepiasL,aSm.cx K- 0 EXHIBIT "C' 0 VA CONSULTING, INC. FEE SCHEDULE 2007 Staff Classification Civil Engineering and Planning Services President...............................:.......................... ............................... Division President/Division Manager ................ ............................... Sr. Vice President/Vice President/ Exec. Director .......................... Director............................................................ ............................... Senior Project Manager ................................... ............................... ProjectManager ............................................... ............................... Assistant Project Manager ............................... ............................... Senior Project Engineer /Senior Design Supervisor /Senior Planner Project Engineer /Design Supervisor ................ ............................... Senior Design Engineer /Senior Designer ........ ............................... Design Engineer / Planner ................................. ............................... Designer........................................................... ............................... Assistant Engineer /Assistant Planner .............. ............................... Research and Processing Coordinator ............ ............................... Senior CADD Technician ................................. ............................... JuniorEngineer ................................................ ............................... CADDTechnician ............................................ ............................... EngineeringIntern ............................................. ............................... Office Support / Clerical ...................................... ............................... Field Survey and Magnin Services Director of Survey and Mapping .............................................. ............................... ...........................$158 Managerof Field Survey .......................................................................................... ............................... $130 Surveyand Mapping Associate .................................................................................. ............................... $95 Surveyand Mapping Technician ................................................................................ ............................... $75 3-Man GPS Crew ..................................................................................................... ............................... $225 2-Man GPS Crew ..................................................................................................... ............................... $200 1 -Man GPS Crew ......................................................:.............................................. ............................... $170 Special Services Litigation......................................................................................... ............................... ........................... $400 Notes: - -- .._.. .,.... - _..._._�.,..... c .rew ..r._a- tarot. - : • - - - 2 Overtime, when requested by the client, will be surcharged at a rate of 1351Y. of the standard hourly rates. Sundays and holidays will be surcharged at a rate of 170% of the standard hourly rates. 3. Reprographics, messenger service, travel (including lodging and meals), and otter direct mpenses will be charged at cost plus 10 %. The services of outside consultants will be charged at cost plus 15% to cover administration and overhead. • 4. In -house reprographics charges: B &W Bond ooplas $1.00/sq.ft, Color Bond $6.00/sq.ft. 5. Mileage will be billed at standard mileage rates set by IRS. 2007 rates currently listed at $0.485 per mile. M1t, sCHFD,T.E EM MIT CJ y 2 G -OC /IE E AMENDMENT NO.5 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH VA CONSULTING, INC. FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT THIS AMENDM)NT NO. 5 TOPROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, entered into this _ day of d7 , 2007, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "City ") and VA CONSULTING, INC., (formerly known as Van Dell and Associates), a California corporation whose address is 17801 Cartwright Road, Irvine, California, 92614 (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant "), is made with reference to the following: RECITALS A. City is planning to install a new sidewalk on the easterly side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 16th Street, adjacent to the Castaways Park in the City of Newport Beach (hereinafter referred to as the "Project "). B. On July 12, 2004, City and Consultant entered into a Professional Services Agreement for Consultant to provide design and consulting services for the Project (hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement "). Among other things, Consultant agreed to prepare sidewalk design alternatives, conduct a geotechnical evaluation, process a Coastal Development permit and prepare the environmental documentation for the Project. The City agreed to pay Consultant $69,838.00 for the services under the Agreement. The Agreement was scheduled to expire on December 31, 2005. C. On February 22, 2005, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's Scope of Work was expanded to provide additional engineering and geotechnical services for the Project, including a proposal to shore up the existing slope above Dover Drive, at the Cliff Drive Intersection. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 1 was $6,000.00. D. On August 9, 2005, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's Scope of Work was expanded to provide additional design and consulting services for the Project, including analysis of the _ sidewalk and retaining wall alternatives for the slope above Dover Drive, preparation of the final design of the Boardwalk portion of the Project, and project management and coordination services. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 2 was $9,900.00. The term of the Agreement was also extended to June 30,2006. 0 0 E. On April 4, 2006, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's Scope of Work was expanded to revise the alignment of the proposed sidewalk/curb and gutter adjacent to the slope above Dover Drive, and prepare revised exhibits for the environmental document and resource agency permit applications. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 3 was $3,960.00. The term of the Agreement was also extended to December 31, 2006. F. On April 24, 2007, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 4 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's Scope of Work was revised to allow for additional assistance with outside jurisdictional agencies and processing permits. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 4 was $5,455.00. The term of the Agreement was also extended to December 31, 2007. G. City now desires that Consultant perform additional services for the Project, including working with Regional Water Quality Control Board staff regarding the need for a Clean Water Act 401 Water Quality Certification and responding to comments from the California Coastal Commission staff. H. City desires to enter into this Amendment No. 5 to compensate Consultant for these additional services, which were not included in the Agreement or the prior Amendments. I. City and Consultant mutually desire to amend Agreement, hereinafter referred to as "Amendment No. 5 ", as provided herein below. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Consultant shall perform the services outlined in the Scope of Work, which is attached hereto as "Exhibit A" and incorporated herein by this reference. 2. City shall pay Consultant for the services on a time and expense not -to- exceed basis in accordance with the provisions of this Section and the Schedule of Hourly Rates attached hereto as "Exhibit B and C," and incorporated herein by this reference. In no event shall Consultant's compensation for all work performed pursuant to this Amendment No. 5, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, exceed Fifteen Thousand, Eight Hundred and Fifty Dollars and no /100 ($15,850.00). 3. Except as expressly modified herein, all other provisions, terms, and covenants set forth in Agreement shall remain unchanged and shall be in full force and effect. E 0 Pi IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 5 on the date first above written. APPROVED AS TO FORM: By A ✓`_— ( _ �--�- Aaron C. Harp, Assistant City Attorney for the City of Newport Beach ATTEST: By LaVonne Harkless, City Clerk Attachments: Exhibit A — Scope of Work Exhibit B — Proposed Fees Exhibit C — Fee Schedule CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, A Municipal. Corporation G By: 1��►+ --- omer Bludau, O y Manager for the City of Newport Beach VA CONSULTING, INC.: By: Co rate Officer) Title: President and CEO Print Name: Max P. Vahir (Financial Officer) Title: Secretary and CFO Print Name: Michael S. Carter f: \users \pbvAsharedhagreements \fy 07 -08\va consulting -dover sidewalk -amend 5.doc n CONSULTING August 8, 2007 Mr. Robert Stein City of Newport Beach Public Works Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92660 Dear Mr. Stein: RtCEIVED AUG 13 2007 public Worms Department . City of Newport Beach This letter is a change order request to our current Agreement dated July 12, 2004 with the City of Newport Beach for Environmental, Permitting and Design Services on the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project. Per our discussion, this request is for additional services associated with the preparation of a mitigation plan to address project impacts to California Coastal Commission (CCC) jurisdiction. The work includes time to coordinate with City and CCC staff during preparation of the mitigation plan. VA can provide the additional services for an estimated fee of $15,850. A detailed scope of services (Exhibit "A "), and proposed fees (Exhibit "B ") are included with this request. We will perform these services on a time and materials not -to- exceed basis in accordance with the attached fee schedule (Exhibit "C "). We will start this work on your Notice to Proceed. If you have any questions or wish to discuss this request, please contact me at (951) 340 -0030. Sincerely, HN S. WOLTER, P.E. nland Empire Division President cc: Steve Luy Max Vahid Contracts VA Consulting, Inc. Inland Empire Division Z555 E. Minton Street, Suite 323 C na, CA 92879 Phone 951.340.0030 Fax 951.340.0041 rw�xa .um�wn_osaaum+ "�cow_aeoeot.ea EXHIBIT "A" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT ADDITIONAL SERVICES SCOPE OF SERVICES Additional Permitting This task provides fora site visit, review of project impact areas, delineation of (CCC) defined wetlands and preparation of a mitigation and monitoring plan to address impacts to CCC jurisdiction. If attendance at CCC hearings is requested, we will submit additional request for authorization. 2. Alternative Sidewalk Location Analysis This task provides for the review of existing sidewalks adjacent to the project site and preparation of a letter report, including photos evaluating the existing sidewalks and demonstrating the justification for the proposed project sidewalk. The report will be included with the response to the CCC and include coordination time with City staff and local naturalist. 3. Project Management, Support and Attendance at Meetings This task provides project management, coordination, preparation of mitigation plan exhibit and attendance at additional meetings with Environmental sub- consultant and City. We have assumed 8 hours for project management and coordination, 8 hours for preparation of exhibits and 4 hours for attendance at 2 additional meetings for a total of 20 hours. 4. Reimbursables This task provides for cost of reproduction of submittals and exhibits, messenger services and mileage, etc. r:wigemvrAne�lva owouarenwou 0loBa]ex EXHIBIT "B" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT ADDITIONAL SERVICES PROPOSED FEES 1. Additional Permitting .............................................................. ............................... $ 9,450 2. Alternative Sidewalk Location Analysis ................................... ............................... $ 3,000 3. Project Management, Support and Attendance at Meetings ... ............................... $ 3,200 4. Reimbursables ........................................................................ ..............................$ 200 TOTALFEES .................................................................................... ............................... $15,850 Offices in.Iruine •CorOnar. Rancho Mirage V4? � CONSULTING Staff Classification EXHIBIT "C" VA CONSULTING, INC... 2007 Fee Schedule Civil Engineering and Planning Services President...................................................................... ............................... Division PresidentfDivision Manager ............................ ............................... Sr. Vice PresidentlVice President/ Exec. Director ........ ............................... Director......................................................................... ............................... SeniorProject Manager ................................................ ............................... ProjectManager ........................................................... ............................... Assistant Project Manager ........................................... ............................... Senior Project Engineer /Senior Design Supervisor /Senior Planner ........... Project Engineer /Design Supervisor ............................ ............................... Senior Design Engineer /Senior Designer ..................... ............................... Design Engineer /Planner ............................................. ............................... Designer....................................................................... ............................... Assistant Engineer /Assistant Planner .......................... ............................... Research and Processing Coordinator ........................ ............................... SeniorCADD Technician .............................................. ............................... JuniorEngineer ............................................................ ............................... CADDTechnician ......................................................... ............................... EngineeringIntern ........................................................ ............................... OfficeSupport / Clerical .................................................. ............................... Field Survey and Mapping Services Hourly Rate Directorof Survey and Mapping ........................................................................ ............................... $158 Managerof Field Survey ......................................................................................... ............................... $130 Surveyand Mapping Associate ..................................................................................... ............................$g5 Surveyand Mapping Technician ................................................................................... ............................$75 3 -Man GPS Crew ..................................................................................................... ............................... $225 2-Man GPS Crew ..................................................................................................... ............................... $200 1-Man GPS Crew ..................................................................................................... ............................... $170 ftecial Services Litigation............................. ............................... ....................... ............................... $400 Notes: 1. Invoices will be prepared for all services through the end of each calendar month. Invoices are due and payable on presentation. 2. Overtime, when requested by the client, will be surcharged at a rate of 135% of the standard hourly rates. Sundays and holidays will be surcharged at a rate of 170% of the standard hourly rates. 3. Reprographics, messenger service, travel Including lodging and meals), and other direct expenses will be charged at cost plus 10 %. The services of outside consultants will be charged at cost plus 15% to cover administration and overhead. 4. In -house reprographics charges: f3&W Bond copies $1.00fsq.ft, Color Bond $6.0Q(sq.R. 5. Mileage will be billed at standard mileage rates set by IRS. 2007 rates currently listed at $0.485 per mile. rwmkasvrvinenTjy�aoVGNn1000e _aAEOr.Uz h • • e -352 AMENDMENT NO.4 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH VA CONSULTING, INC. FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT THIS AMEND ENT NO. 4 T PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, entered into this day of 017( , 2007, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "City ") and VA CONSULTING, INC., (formerly known as Van Dell and Associates), a California corporation whose address is 17801 Cartwright Road, Irvine, California, 92614 (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant "), is made with reference to the following: RECITALS A. City is planning to install a new sidewalk on the easterly side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 16`" Street, adjacent to the Castaways Park in the City of Newport Beach (hereinafter referred to as the "Project "). B. On July 12, 2004, City and Consultant entered into a Professional Services Agreement for Consultant to provide design and consulting services for the Project (hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement "). Among other things, Consultant agreed to prepare sidewalk design alternatives, conduct a geotechnical evaluation, process a Coastal Development permit and prepare the environmental documentation for the Project. The City agreed to pay Consultant $69,838.00 for the services under the Agreement. The Agreement was scheduled to expire on December 31, 2005. C. On February 22, 2005, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's Scope of Work was expanded to provide additional engineering and geotechnical services for the Project, including a proposal to shore up the existing slope above Dover Drive, at the Cliff Drive Intersection. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 1 was $6,000.00. D. On August 9, 2005, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's Scope of Work was expanded to provide additional design and consulting services for the Project, including analysis of the sidewalk and retaining wall alternatives for the slope above Dover Drive, preparation of the final design of the Boardwalk portion of the Project, and project management and coordination services. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 2 was $9,900.00. The term of the Agreement was also extended to June 30, 2006. 1. 0 E. On April 4, 2006, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's Scope of Work was expanded to revise the alignment of the proposed sidewalk/curb and gutter adjacent to the slope above Dover Drive, and prepare revised exhibits for the environmental document and resource agency permit applications. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 3 was $3,960.00. The term of the Agreement was also extended to December 31, 2006. F. City now desires that Consultant perform additional services for the Project, including working with Regional Water Quality Control Board staff regarding the need for a Clean Water Act 401 Water Quality Certification and responding to comments from the California Coastal Commission staff. G. City desires to enter into this Amendment No. 4 to compensate Consultant for these additional services, which were not included in the Agreement or the prior Amendments. H. City and Consultant mutually desire to amend Agreement, hereinafter referred to as "Amendment No. 4 ", as provided herein below. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: Consultant shall perform the services outlined in the Scope of Work, which is attached hereto as "Exhibit A" and incorporated herein by this reference. 2. City shall pay Consultant for the services on a time and expense not -to- exceed basis in accordance with the provisions of this Section and the Schedule of Hourly Rates attached hereto as "Exhibit B," and incorporated herein by this reference. In no event shall Consultant's compensation for all work performed pursuant to this Amendment No. 4, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, exceed Five Thousand, Four Hundred and Fifty -Five Dollars and no /100 ($5,455.00). 3. The term of the Agreement shall be extended to December 31, 2007. 4. Except as expressly covenants set forth in full force and effect. modified herein, all other provisions, terms, and Agreement shall remain unchanged and shall be in 2 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 4 on the date first above written. APPROVED AS TO FORM: p,... c, - Aaron C. Harp Assistant City Attorney for the City of Newport Beach ATTEST: By: 6 x/40_ c A . /6�'� LaVonne Harkless, City Clerk�F*Tsul Attachments: Exhibit A — Scope of Work Exhibit B — Fee Schedule CITY OF NEXPORT BEACH, A un' a(Co poration Steve Rosansky Q Mayor City of Newport Beach VA CONSULTING, INC.: Title: President and CEO Print Name: Max P. Vahid By: A-' t JxtA (Financial Officer) Title: secretary and CFO Print Name: Michael S. Carter f .,Wserslobwlsharedlagreements\fy 06 -071VA Consulting, Inc.I -lover sidewalk- amendment 4.doc 9 2. 3. 9 EXHIBIT "A" • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT ADDITIONAL SERVICES ' SCOPE OF SERVICES Additional Permitting This task provides for additional time required to obtain project approval from RWQCB and CCC. We have assumed 8 hours of additional staff time for coordination and follow - up with the RWQCB and 24 hours of additional staff time for coordination and preparation of response to comments received from the CCC. Attendance and travel for participation at CCC hearings have not been provided for in this estimate. At this time, we do not anticipate that CCC hearings will be required. if CCC hearings are required, we will submit additional request for authorization. Project Management and Meetings This task provides project management, coordination and attendance at additional meetings with Environmental sub - consultant and City. We have assumed 4 hours for project management and coordination and 4 hours for attendance at 2 additional meetings for a total of 8 hours. Reimbursables This task provides for cost of reproduction of submittals and exhibits, messenger services and mileage, etc. Q�m. � l SeWryNTmnpwtly Mt~ FlkAOLK - 12010A EXHIBIT "B" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT ADDITIONAL SERVICES PROPOSED FEES 1. Additional Permitting... 2. Project Management and Coordination ........... 3. Reimbursables ................. ............................... TOTALFEES .............................. ............................... C � and amSno+YM.semizuami ftmavwe ary NIaa01 geeq MccV lnlftdn .........._ ......... ............................_.. $3,835 ...................... ............................... $1,360 ...................... ............................... $ 200 ...................... ............................... $5,455 VA CONSULTING, INC. 2006 Fee Schedule stw Classification Et M A 1M =iTTT_,Ttr—U 71M] president ......- ..._...,....._ ... . ............ ...... ........ ....... .............. "Visfan Prosidonvowislon Manaw ......... ... __ .......... ........................ Sr. Vba PfaviderYVIce Prealdentif excrc. ........................ 01ro= ............... .. .. __ ......................... ...... ... . ................................ sen(arprojea Manager . . . .......................... __ ............. ...... ............. Pr*0Mano9er,_... .. ................. ..................... ............................ AwAstantlewlectManaW . . ....... __ ........... ................... Sonfor"aa EngineadSonW Carp superv%oriOanjor Planner..... lim& Rats Wo am ...... .... 04 311111 Senior Dwon ........ ___ .................. . .. . . __ . ..... ................ _ Si2a Dastgn liagkiee=dnet. .... ................... __ ...... __ ................. . . ........... ........ Destafter...: ....... __........,.:..< .' ...... I ........ . . ................. :. ........ .. - ...... ......... .. Assistant 610eWAselstant Planner ...... . ...... ........ ....... .......... . .... ........ Re"wich and forcoeasimg Coordinator ............ ._........<._..........«.._.. -. ............... ....................- .......5$S Gunior CAW Tethatolan .. ..................... .... . ...... .. ........................ _ ...... . ...................... NO junwl!nglnosr. .... . .............. .......... ...... ...... . ....... ........ ............ ...... . ...................... "s CAMToctmfolan ------ . . ............................ .... .............. .................... . ..................... 381) En*ea" tram .... . . ......... .................... ..... .. ...... ................... OR) OfficeSupportl0wical . ............... ....... . ......... .... ..... ___ ........... .... ............ ........ so Director of survey and mapping %iwRgwroTfWSUrJW ............. WPM and Mappht; Asooftla. "and Mapping Taduticlan 2-Van OPS CW .............. .. I " - I .. r_lr ...... . Man GM Cnrw_..__. ........ . ........... ___. ff71UM=_ I Mplial ........ --m ............ «_................ _ ...............:.......stow . ....................... I . ......... "I ............ 1 . ............8460 z 0n'Mvoo' %too w4Uo&wdhyft0i8KvA11 tewm�wqad M a role of f3%*f6arftftft'J heady We% AUAdXAWWWkbP f4p4pWabot s. Repregreptnot, mgaoaraer v Im, ravel Wudow radohW end mo&I wol aW dbea r *M 66 eAPP4 M CM PhJ% 1015. Pig tw4we of mW69 varonAMIN v4ba choW MUM Oft 15% to A. 5. MIL p wA be bi&d at SO.445 per mile. ceft —me -W ftwnwkrBeYh.6 l 4RWWempwvy Mb Fv. r(1M �'Zlw 0. • 5W /co aDb� • • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 5_ April 24, 2007 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Public Works Department �� rZ Robert Stein .,r 949 -644 -3322 or rstein @city.newport- beach.ca.us SUBJECT: DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK — APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH VA CONSULTING, INC., FORMERLY KNOWN AS VAN DELL AND ASSOCIATES RECOMMENDATIONS: Approve Amendment No. 4 to Professional Services Agreement with VA Consulting, Inc., formerly known as Van Dell and Associates for a not to exceed amount of $5,455 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Amendment. DISCUSSION: On May 25, 2004, Council approved a Professional Services Agreement with VA Consulting of Irvine California, for the design of the Dover Drive sidewalk at a contract price of $69,838. Along with preparing the final construction documents, VA Consulting's professional services included preparing sidewalk design alternatives, conducting a geotechnical evaluation, preparing and processing jurisdictional agency permits including a Coastal Development Permit, and preparing the environmental documentation for the Project. During the design process, the City asked the Consultant to consider additional options for the sidewalk design to consider alternate alignments with various retaining wall alternatives. Over the last two years, three contract amendments were approved by staff: On February 22, 2005, City and Consultant entered into Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's scope of work was expanded to provide additional engineering and geotechnical services for the Project, including a proposal to shore up the existing slope above Dover Drive, at the Cliff Drive intersection. The additional compensation under Amendment No. 1 was $6,000. • On August 9, 2005, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 2 to the • Agreement, in which Consultant's scope of work was expanded to provide additional design and consulting services for the project, including analysis of the sidewalk and retaining wall alternatives for the slope above Dover Drive, preparation of the final design of the boardwalk portion of the project, and project Dover Drive Silk — Approval of Amendment to Professional Servi&reement with VA ConsWting, Inc, April 24, 2107 Page 2 management and coordination services. The additional compensation under • Amendment No. 2 was $9,900. On April 4, 2006; City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's scope of work was expanded to revise the alignment of the proposed sidewalk and curb and gutter adjacent to the slope above Dover Drive, and prepare revised exhibits for the environmental document and resource agency permit applications. The additional compensation under Amendment No. 3 was $3,960. The design is now complete; however VA Consulting has had to expend additional effort working with the jurisdictional agencies to gain approvals. Staff recommends additional funds to compensate the consultant for this extra effort. Below is the status of the project permits. ➢ California Department of Fish and Game issued a 1602 approval in June, 2006. ➢ The Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) determined that the habitat adjacent.to Dover Drive is an isolated wetland and therefore an ACOE 404 permit is not required and has issued a jurisdictional delineation letter. ➢ The Regional Water Quality Control Board will not require a 401 certification. ➢ California Coastal Commission (CCC) received the City's permit application in • August 2006 and, we received comments in December. Supplemental information was submitted and CCC staff indicates the application package is now complete. In the next month, we are hoping to hear that our project has been agendized of an upcoming Commission meeting. Environmental Review: On June 27, 2006, Council adopted a Resolution approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for Dover Drive Sidewalk Project. Public Notice: The public will be informed of the Coastal Commission hearing once that date is determined. • • • n U Dover Drive SIA — Approval of Amendment to Professional Servireement with VA consulting, inc. April 24, 2007 Page 3 Funding Availability: Sufficient funds are available in the following account for the project: Account Description Transportation and Circulation Prepared by: Robert Stein, P.E. Principal Civil Engineer Attachments: Amendment No. Exhibit Account Number 7261 - 05100854 Total Submitted Amount $5,455 $5,455 Works Director 0 AMENDMENT NO.4 • TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH VA CONSULTING, INC. FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT THIS AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, entered into this day of , 2007, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "City") and VA CONSULTING, INC., (formerly known as Van Dell and Associates), a California corporation whose address is 17801 Cartwright Road, Irvine, California, 92614 (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant"), is made with reference to the following: RECITALS A. City is planning to install a new sidewalk on the easterly side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 16th Street, adjacent to the Castaways Park in the City of Newport Beach (hereinafter referred to as the "Project "). B.. On July 12, 2004, City and Consultant . entered into a Professional Services Agreement for Consultant to provide design and consulting services for the • Project (hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement"). Among other things, Consultant agreed to prepare sidewalk design alternatives, conduct a geotechnical evaluation, process a Coastal Development permit and prepare the environmental documentation for the Project. The City agreed to pay Consultant $69,838.00 for the services under the Agreement. The Agreement was scheduled to expire on December 31, 2005. C. On February 22, 2005, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's Scope of Work was expanded to provide additional engineering and geotechnical services for the Project, including a proposal to shore up the existing slope above Dover Drive, at the Cliff Drive Intersection. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 1 was $6,000.00. D. On August 9, 2005, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's Scope of Work was expanded to provide additional design and consulting services for the Project, including analysis of the sidewalk and retaining wall alternatives for the slope above Dover Drive, preparation of the final design of the Boardwalk portion of the Project, and project management and coordination services. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 2 was $9,900.00. The term of the Agreement was also extended to June 30, 2006. • 0 0 • E. On April 4, 2006, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's Scope of Work was expanded to revise the alignment of the proposed sidewalk/curb and gutter adjacent to the slope above Dover Drive, and prepare revised exhibits for the environmental document and resource agency permit applications. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 3 was $3,960.00. The term of the Agreement was also extended to December 31, 2006. • F. City now desires that Consultant perform additional services for the Project, including working with Regional Water Quality Control Board staff regarding the need for a Clean Water Act 401 Water Quality Certification and responding to comments from the California Coastal Commission staff. G. City desires to enter into this Amendment No. 4 to compensate Consultant for these additional services, which were not included in the Agreement or the prior Amendments. H. City and Consultant mutually desire to amend Agreement, hereinafter referred to as "Amendment No. 4 ", as provided herein below. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Consultant shall perform the services outlined in the Scope of Work, which is attached hereto as "Exhibit A" and incorporated herein by this reference. 2. City shall pay Consultant for the services on a time and expense not-to- exceed basis in accordance with the provisions of this Section and the Schedule of Hourly Rates.attached hereto as "Exhibit B," and incorporated herein by this reference. In no event shall ConsutanVs compensation for all work performed pursuant to this Amendment No. 4, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, exceed Five Thousand, Four Hundred and Fifty-Five Dollars and no /100 ($5,455.00). 3. The term of the Agreement shall be extended to December 31, 2007. 4. Except as expressly modified herein, all other provisions, terms, and covenants set forth in Agreement shall remain unchanged and shall be in full force and effect. 2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 4 on the date first above written. APPROVED AS TO FORM: By:—A 6 c Y Aaron C. Harp Assistant City Attorney for the City of Newport Beach ATTEST: By: LaVonne Harkless, City Clerk Attachments: Exhibit A — Scope of Work Exhibit B — Fee Schedule CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, A Municipal Corporation By: Steve Rosansky Mayor City of Newport Beach VA CONSULTING, INC.: By: (Corporate Officer) Title: Print Name: (Financial Officer) Title: Print Name: F. %usmVbNAshareftgreementsVy 0"AVA consulting, Inc.l -dmw sklewalkamendment 4.doc • • EXHIBIT "A" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT ADDITIONAL SERVICES SCOPE OF SERVICES 1. Additional Permitting This task provides for additional time required to obtain project approval from RWQCB and CCC. We have assumed 8 hours of additional staff time for coordination and follow - up with the RWQCB and 24 hours of additional staff time for coordination and preparation of response to comments received from the CCC. Attendance and travel for Participation at CCC hearings have not been provided for in this estimate. At this time, we do not anticipate that CCC hearings will be required. It CCC hearings are required, we will submit additional request for authorization. 2. Project Management and Meetings This task provides project management, coordination and attendance at additional • meetings with Environmental sub - consultant and City. We have assumed 4 hours for Project management and coordination and 4 hours for attendance at 2 additional meetings for a total of 8 hours. 3. Relmbursables 0 This task provides for cost of reproduction of submittals and exhibits, messenger services and mileage, etc. anx�wMn.d a„q�w..waw, sawynriw�.r.wiw �+.u.,moo_, », w.a� 0 EXHIBIT "e" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT ADDITIONAL SERVICES PROPOSED FEES 1. Additional Permitting .............................................................. ............................... $3.895 2. Project Management and Coordination .................................. ............................... $1,360 3. Reimbursables ....................................................................... ............................... $ 200 TOTALFEES .................................................................................... ............................... $5,455 • • cnowvMe.a s�aa a.swn *.�wa�. r... �mo�wco_,m,umx • VA CONSULTING, INC. 2006 Fee Schedule swclasavloft" Br. Vim PrWMW4W PmkkrM Fm r......._ . ........ ...... siso BOOM ... ........ ------ .......... ....... A9ftMtR4ntMWMw . . ...... .......... MAO AWOMEnomedAmbskm ......___...._,_W Reoffch aid Pmmaing 0oor6AaMr-- .... .. ...................... . ... . ' �*,.,r,z . ... . ........ .... . .... . .......... NOt Mp' dBiutletpBdYl6plso11imi5dC1 lltt�ldlm�el/fil� ,' 3. Rommw% mw&w km. tmwomkft Wwadffwft WdewaWoomm *an@ ftwa of adom 4. womm9mviopke dam amoopw aw" SlAbqA calwoumd SuDftA ry. Mbap vAto bMW M16.4" pwmML caeeaaRnurnm amm� W BAka* w�.iurs Sdknffm M Fke0LKW0_iMM . . • • Cog /�aO -�� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 20 June 27, 2006 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY FROM: Public Works Department Stephen Luy I I IUN 2 7 2( 9 949 -644 -3330 or sluy @city.newport- beach.ca.us SUBJECT: DOVER DRIVE, NORTH OF CLIFF DRIVE SIDEWALK NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF CONTRACT NO. 3652 RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for Dover Drive Sidewalk Project. DISCUSSION: The City is proposing the construction of sidewalk along the easterly side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 970 feet North of Cliff Drive. The project involves construction of the following: A variable width sidewalk (4.5 feet to 7.5 feet wide) and new curb and gutter within the existing Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 425 feet North of Cliff Drive. An eight -foot wide boardwalk with post and cable rail will be constructed behind the existing curb from 425 feet North of Cliff Drive to 920 feet North of Cliff drive. A six to eight -foot wide boardwalk will be constructed behind the existing curb to join existing sidewalk from 920 feet North of Cliff Drive to 970 feet North of Cliff Drive (see attached project location map). The City's Consultant, Van Dell Consulting, has contacted the California Department of Fish and Game, United States Army Corp of Engineers and Regional Water Quality Control. All three agencies have indicated that permits are not required for this project. A Coastal Development Permit (CDP) application is being processed with the California Coastal Commission. Van Dell Consulting subconsultant, Chambers Group Inc., prepared the MND and notified residents within a 300 -foot radius that it was available for review from May 4 to June 4, 2006 (see attached). The MND states that the City will mitigate the pruning of large limbs from two existing red willow trees and will plant four new one - gallon size red willow trees adjacent to the site for each of the two trees disturbed by the construction, Drive North of Cliff Drive Sidewalk - Mitigated Nede Declaration for Contract No. 3652 June 27, 2006 Page 2 for a total of eight new trees. The City will establish a Mitigation Monitoring Program that will consist of hand watering and monitoring the eight newly planted red willow trees for a period of one year. In addition all red willow trees trimmed as a result of the construction of the project will also be monitored for a period of one year. The Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Game and Regional Water Quality Control Board have imposed no mitigation requirements on this project. Mitigation measures imposed by the CDP will incorporate into the construction documents. The Notice of Intent for the MND was filed with the County Clerk of Orange County. The City received one e-mail correspondence noting that Page 4, Item 10 of the MND incorrectly states that other agency approvals are not required. Staff responded by email to this individual stating that agency reviews are indeed required for this project and that the aforementioned agencies have been contacted. On May 2, 2006 staff sent the MND to the State Clearinghouse for review of the project by affected agencies. On June 8, 2006 the City received a letter from the State Clearinghouse indicating that the review period had closed June 1, 2006 and no state agency had submitted comments regarding the project. Receipt of this letter indicates that the City has complied with the State Clearinghouse requirements for draft environmental documents pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Prepared by: Submitted b r Stephe u to n . Badum Associate Civil Engineer Wblic Works Director Attachments: Mitigated Negative Declaration Notice of Intent E -mail Comment of Concern Response to Comment of Concern State Clearinghouse Letter Resolution Approving MND 0 0 10 `.J 9 NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION To: From: OX Office of Planning and Research City of Newport Beach 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 3300 Newport Blvd. Sacramento, CA 95814 Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 County Clerk, County of Orange (Orange County) Public Services Division P.O. Box 238 Date received for filing at OPR/County Clerk Santa Ana, CA 92702 POSTED Public review period: May 4. 2006 through June 4, 2006 Newport Beach City Hall Public Works Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA A copy of the Initial Study containing the analysis supporting the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration is attached. Additional plans, studies and /or exhibits relating to the proposed project may be available for public review. If you wish to appeal the appropriateness or adequacy of this document of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, your comments should be submitted in writing prior to the dose of the public review period. Your comments should specifically identify what environmental impacts you believe would result from the project, why they are significant, and what changes or mitigation measures you believe should be adopted to eliminate or reduce these impacts. Written comments should be submitted to: City of Newport Beach Public Works Department Attn: Bob Stein, P.E. 3300 Newport Blvd. Questions on the Initials Study should be directed to: Stephen Luy, Project Engineer 949 -644 -3330 Principal Engineer S MAY 0 � 2006 Name of Project: Dover Drive Street Improvement Project, C -3652 Project Location: East Side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to I e Street. TOA /r. �LERK•RECARDER DERu Project Description: Removal of a portion of existing roadway improvements, construction of new curb, gutter and sidewalk; modification of stormwater inlets; construction of boardwalk with steel post and cable fence. Public Meetings: No public meetings have been scheduled. Hazardous Waste List: The site is not on a list of hazardous waste sites as defined in Government Code section 65962.5 (f). Document Availability: Copies of the initial study and supporting materials are available for public review at the following locations: Newport Beach City Hall Public Works Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA A copy of the Initial Study containing the analysis supporting the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration is attached. Additional plans, studies and /or exhibits relating to the proposed project may be available for public review. If you wish to appeal the appropriateness or adequacy of this document of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, your comments should be submitted in writing prior to the dose of the public review period. Your comments should specifically identify what environmental impacts you believe would result from the project, why they are significant, and what changes or mitigation measures you believe should be adopted to eliminate or reduce these impacts. Written comments should be submitted to: City of Newport Beach Public Works Department Attn: Bob Stein, P.E. 3300 Newport Blvd. Questions on the Initials Study should be directed to: Stephen Luy, Project Engineer 949 -644 -3330 Principal Engineer S Page I of 2 From: Stein, Robert • Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 8:51 AM To: 'JonV3 @aol.com' Cc: Patapoff, Bill Subject: RE: Public Comments: Dover Drive Sidewalk Project, C -3652 Jan, you are correct. this project does require agency approval. we are working with CDFG and will be getting a CDP. Bob Stein 949 -644 -3322 From: JonV3 @aol.com [mailto:JonV3 @aol.com] Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 11:49 PM To: Stein, Robert Cc: Ridgeway, Tod; Webb, Don; don2webb @earthlink.net; Nichols, Dick; City Council; Rosansky, Steven; Daigle, Leslie; Selich, Edward; Curry, Keith; ablemker @coastal.ca.gov Subject: Public Comments: Dover Drive Sidewalk Project, C -3652 June 4, 2006 Dear Mr. Stein and Newport Beach City Councilmembers, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Dover Drive Sideway Project dated May 2006, with the public comment period extending from May 4, 2006 to June 4, 2006, which happens to end on a Sunday. I am generally in favor of this project which will build a sidewalk and boardwalk on the east side of Dover Drive bordering Castaways Park. However, the Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Dec for the project indicates that it will have temporary and permanent impacts to Department of Fish and Game and California Coastal Commission jurisdictional wetlands (see pages 28 to 34, Biological Resources). The report identifies total impacts of .060 acres, or 2,575 square feet. Therefore a Coastal Development Permit should be required, as well as a DFG Streambed Alteration Agreement. 06/07/2006 . • Page 2 of 2 I believe the report erroneously states on page 4, paragraph 10, that no other public agencies approvals are required. The Coastal Commission and DFG should issue permits for this project Ifte these are seemingly small impacts, it is the size of some vernal pools, and there is nothing in the state regulations that Ives the need to comply with regulations of the Coastal Commission or Department of Fish and Game for small impacts to wetlands. In the case of the Coastal Commission, a project impacting coastal wetlands has to meet the test of one of eight water - dependent uses, and mitigation for impacts has to be identified and implemented, with monitoring and requirements for success. In the case of this project, I don't believe a sidewalk is one of the eight permitted uses. Moreover, no mitigation is proposed for the 2,575 square feet of wetlands impacted by the project. However, one of the Coastal Act permitted uses could apply in this case if restoration of the adjacent wetland (called a "unnamed drainage" in the report) is the purpose of the project. This wetland is currently almost entirely choked with cattails. If a restoration project were designed to restore this wetland with open areas of water and a varied assemblage of bulrushes, sedges, and cattails, then the fill associated with the sidewalk and boardwalk might be viewed as a public access amenity to this restored wetland, and the 2,575 square feet could be added as part of the restoration on the eastern and southern border of the wetland. In any case, the Coastal Commission and Department of Fish and Game should be brought into the picture to issue permits. Thanks again for the opportunity to comment. Please notify me of any public hearings or other discretionary actions. I would be happy to work with the City in developing a restoration plan and gaining further approvals for this worthy project. Sincerely, ,fan rD. `tlandersfoot, %(D Jan D. Vandersloot, MD 2221 E 16th Street ort Beach, CA 92663 548 -6326 1] 06/07/2006 S June 2, 2006 • STATE OF CALIFORNIA • Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit Robert Stein City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Dover Drive Sidewalk Project SCH #: 2006051016 Dear Robert Stein: JL M JUN 0 8 2006 aP PIZ Seen Walsh Director City of Newport Bea I The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named Mitigated Negative Declaration to selected state agencies for review. The review period closed on June 1, 2006, and no state agencies submitted comments by that date. This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Please call the State Clearinghouse at (916) 445 -0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process. If you have a question about the above -named project, please refer to the ten -digit State Clearinghouse number when contacting this office. Sincerely, Terry Roberts Director, State Clearinghouse 1400 TENTH STREET P.O. BOX 8044 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95812.8044 TEL (916) 446-0618 FAX (916) 328-8018 www.cpr.ca.90v 0 0 �.J 0 0 Document Details Report State Clearinghouse Data Bas SCH# 2006051016 Project This Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Lead Agency Newport Beach, City of Type MN Mitigated Negative Declaration Description D The sidewalk construction concept would enhance pedestrian access and safety while also minimizing potential impacts to adjacent steep slopes (in Reach 1) and potential wetland vegetation (in Reaches 2 and 3). None of the project reach designs require retaining wall construction. Lead Agency Contact Name Robert Stein Agency City of Newport Beach Phone. (949) 644 -3311 Fax email Address 3300 Newport Boulevard City Newport Beach State CA Zip 92663 Project Location County Orange City Newport Beach Region Cross Streets Dover Drive and Coast Highway Parcel No. Township 6S Range 10W Section 54 Base SB Proximity to: Highways 1 Airports Railways Waterways Upper Newport Bay Schools Ensign Intermediate, Newport Harbor High Land Use The project is located east of residential development along Dover Drive, immediately west and downsiope of Castaways Park, and southwest of Newport Harbor Lutheran Church and School. An unnamed drainage located parallel to Dover Drive appears to contain perennial flowing waters. This drainage flows from north to south for 500 linear feet and contains riparian and wetland species. GP: REDS - Recreational & Environmental Open Space Z: PC -43 - Upper Castaways Planned Community. The proposed project generally would be constructed in road right -of -way. According to the City's Municipal Code, rights -of -way are unzoned and the proposed project is an allowable use within various zoning classifications. Projectissues Wefland /Riparian Reviewing Resources Agency; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 8; Department of Parks and Agencies Recreation; Native American Heritage Commission; Department of Fish and Game, Region 5; Department of Water Resources; California Coastal Commission; California Highway Patrol; Caltrans, District 12; State Lands Commission Date Received 05/03/2006 Start of Review 05/03/2006 End of Review 06/01/2006 Note: Blanks in data fields result from Insufficient information provided by lead agency: 0 RESOLUTION NO. 2006 - 0 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE DOVER DRIVE - NORTH OF CLIFF DRIVE- SIDEWALK. WHEREAS, the Public Works Department of the City of Newport Beach has prepared a design for construction of a sidewalk along the easterly side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 970 feet North of Cliff Drive; and WHEREAS, the Public Works Department of the City of Newport Beach has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Dover Drive Sidewalk and submitted it for public review; and WHEREAS, the California Department of Fish and Game, United States Army Corps of Engineers and Regional Water Quality Control Board have reviewed the project and require no mitigation; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adopt said Mitigated Negative Declaration, and Mitigation Monitoring Program for the construction of the Dover Drive Sidewalk; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby adopts said Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan (attached as Exhibit A) for Dover Drive Sidewalk within the City of Newport Beach. ADOPTED this 27th day of June 2006. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk f: \users\pbMshared \resolutions \greenbook- 2003.doc F:\ Users \PBW \Shared \Resolutions \Dover Drive Sidewalk - 2006.doc , 0 DOVER DRIVE MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN EXHIBIT A The City is proposing the construction of a variable width sidewalk along the easterly side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 970 feet North of Cliff Drive. The proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project has been initiated by the City due to the lack of pedestrian facilities along the project segment of Dover Drive. The sidewalk would provide continuity among the existing facilities north and south of the project reaches, along the west side of Dover Drive at the Cliff Drive intersection, and within the adjacent Castaways Park to the west. The MND states that the City will mitigate the pruning of large limbs from two existing red willow trees and will plant four new one - gallon size red willow trees adjacent to the site for each of the two trees disturbed by the construction, for a total of eight new trees. The City's Mitigation Monitoring Program will consist of, The eight one gallon red willow trees will be planted after construction of the sidewalk but prior to the completion /finalization of the project. • City forces shall hand water and monitor the eight newly planted red willow trees for a period of one year. • All red willow trees trimmed as a result of the construction of the project will be monitored by City forces for a period of one year. 0 Z E DRAFT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION State Clearinghouse Number: DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT City of Newport Beach rJ Prepared for: City of Newport Beach Public Works Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 Prepared by: CHAMBERS GROUP, INC. 17671 Cowan Avenue, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92614 May 2006 9 �0 8387 May 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS ProposedFinding .................................. ............................... ProjectProponent ................................. ............................... Project Location ................................... ............................... Project Purpose ..................................... ............................... Project Description ............................... ............................... Initial Study / Environmental Checklist Form ..................... Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ....................... Page .............2 .............2 .............2 .............2 .............2 .............4 Determination. ................................................................................................................ 6 Checklist of Environmental Impacts .................................................................. .............................13 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ................................................................ .............................24 Sources............................................................................................................... .............................51 List of Figures Page Figure1 — Project Location ................................................................................. ..............................7 Figure2 — USGS Basemap .................................................................................. ..............................8 Figure 3 — Proposed Sidewalk Project Limits... ................................................................................ q Figure 4 — Proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project, Reach 1 Design Concept . .............................10 Figure 5 — Proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project, Reach 2 Design Concept . .............................11 Figure 6 — Proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project, Reach 3 Design Concept . .............................12 List of Tables Table 1 — Estimated Construction Emissions Without Mitigation Table 2 — Jurisdictional Impact Summary ...... ............................... Page ...................27 ...................31 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project l� DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach Public Works Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 PROPOSED FINDING Based upon the information contained in the Initial Study, the City of Newport Beach (City) finds that there could be one or more potentially significant effects to the environment resulting from construction of the proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project. As the CEQA lead agency, the City has agreed to implement the mitigation measures presented herein. The mitigation measures and assurance of their implementation will be formalized in a mitigation monitoring program (MMP) that will be enforced by the City during construction of the proposed project. The facts supporting this finding are presented in the attached Initial Study and in the MMP adopted by the Newport Beach City Council. PROJECT PROPONENT City of Newport Beach Public Works Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 PROJECT LOCATION As shown in Figures 1 through 6 of the attached Initial Study, the City is proposing to construct the Dover Drive sidewalk project along the east side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 970 feet north of Cliff Drive (south of 16th Street), adjacent to Castaways Park, in the City of Newport Beach, Orange County, California. The starting point of the sidewalk project is approximately 950 feet north of the intersection of Dover Drive and Pacific Coast Highway. PROJECT PURPOSE The proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project has been initiated by the City due to the lack of pedestrian facilities along the project segment of Dover Drive. The project is intended to provide a safe pedestrian circulation link along the east side of Dover Drive, while also responding to the design requirements resulting from the site location adjacent to riparian and wetland resources. The sidewalk project would provide continuity among the existing facilities north and south of the project reaches, along the west side of Dover Drive, at the Cliff Drive intersection, and within the adjacent Castaways Park to the west. As discussed in later sections, the sidewalk construction concept resulted from the study of various engineering alternatives, each of which was intended to enhance pedestrian access and safety while also minimizing potential impacts to adjacent steep slopes (in Reach 1) and potential wetland vegetation (in Reaches 2 and 3). PROJECT DESCRIPTION Proposed Facilities and Construction Methods Van Dell and Associates, Inc. (Van Dell) was retained by the City of Newport Beach to provide engineering services for the construction of a sidewalk along the east side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 970 feet north of Cliff Drive. Van Dell initiated the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Alternatives 8387 initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project ,:I- 0 0 Study in September 2004 and completed it in August 2005. The work included geotechnical analysis; resource agency habitat and resource agency jurisdictional delineation mapping; and alternative location and design analyses for the sidewalk project. If approved, the project would culminate in Resource Agency permitting and preparation of plans and technical specifications for the selected design. The Alternatives Study evaluates sidewalk alternatives over three separate reaches within the project limits. Reach I evaluates the adjacent embankment conditions above the existing roadway from Cliff Drive to 425 feet north of Cliff Drive. Reach 2 evaluates the adjacent embankment condition below the existing roadway from 425 feet north Cliff Drive to 920 feet north of Cliff Drive. Reach 3 evaluates the adjacent embankment condition below the existing roadway, with mature willow trees within five feet of the curb, from 920 feet north of Cliff Drive to 970 feet north of Cliff Drive. The Alternatives Study presents the analysis, comparison, and estimated cost of 14 various sidewalk location and design alternatives along the three reaches of the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project. The study considered varying sidewalk widths in each reach, ranging from 4 to 8 feet wide in Reach 1 to 5 to 8 feet wide in Reaches 2 and 3. Due to varying slope conditions in each project reach, the sidewalk concepts were evaluated along with a combination of retaining wall with slope restoration, retaining wall with shoring, and no retaining wall. Based on factors such as pedestrian needs (including ADA requirements), impacts to adjacent wetlands and riparian habitat, geotechnical and slope stability constraints, roadway configuration and project costs, the City selected the following sidewalk design concepts for the three separate reaches: Reach 1— Variable width sidewalk (4.5 feet to 7.5 feet wide) within existing roadway C1iDrive to 415 feet north of CIiDrive (adjacent embankment above existing road) Reach 1 would require construction of new curb and gutter from 4.5 feet to 7.5 feet into the existing Dover Drive. The work will include removal of approximately 50 lineal feet of existing curb and gutter; removal and replacement of asphalt concrete pavement necessary to construct 425 lineal feet of new curb and gutter; construction of 4.5 -foot to 7.5- foot -wide concrete sidewalk; and modifications of the existing curb stormwater inlets. The project would not affect the adjacent embankment and no retaining wall would be necessary. The existing signal standards and traffic and bicycle lane striping on Dover Drive would remain unchanged. Figure 4 illustrates the proposed improvements in Reach 1. Reach 2 — Eight -foot wide boardwalk behind the existing curb 415 feet north of Cliff Drive to 920 feet north of CIiDrlve (adjacent embankment below existing road) Reach 2 would require construction of 495 lineal feet of boardwalk consisting of 18 -inch diameter concrete posts at 8 feet on center with 9 -foot header beams supported on the posts and a concrete footing at the back of the curb. The concrete posts will be at least 10 feet deep. The 8- foot -wide boardwalk would be constructed of wooden deck planking and would include a post and cable rail at the back of the boardwalk. The project would not affect the adjacent embankment and no retaining wall would be necessary. The existing curb and gutter and the traffic and bicycle lane striping on Dover Drive would remain unchanged. Figure 5 illustrates the proposed improvements in Reach 2. Reach 3 — Six to eight -foot wide boardwalk behind the existing curb 920 feet north of Cliff Drive to 970 feet north of Cliff Drive (adjacent embankment below existing road) Reach 3 would require construction of 50 lineal feet of boardwalk consisting of 18 -inch diameter concrete posts at 8 feet on center with 9 -foot header beams supported on the posts and a concrete footing at the back of the curb. The concrete posts will be at least 10 feet deep. The 6 to 8- foot -wide boardwalk would be constructed of wooden deck planking and would include a post and cable rail at the back of the boardwalk. The project would not affect the adjacent embankment and no retaining wall would be 8387 2 initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Rgect 0 0 necessary. The existing curb and gutter and the traffic and bicycle lane striping on Dover Drive would remain unchanged. Figure 6 illustrates the proposed improvements in Reach 3. In Reach 1, an 8 to 10 -foot wide strip of existing paved roadway (approximately 150 cubic yards of asphalt within the emergency parking lane) will be excavated and removed to construct the new sidewalk and curb and gutter. In Reaches 2 and 3, minor excavation (two feet deep by one foot wide, approximately 72 cubic yards) will be required along the back of curb in those reaches in order to construct the base for the boardwalk. Minor excavation of about one to two feet deep (approximately 150 cubic yards total) is also required to provide clearance for the wooden boardwalk support beams along the top of slope in the five to six -foot wide area behind the curb. As indicated previously, the selected project reach designs do not require any retaining walls. Construction Phasing and Scheduling The proposed project would be constructed in a single phase requiring approximately 90 working days. If all project approvals can be obtained as planned, the project would go to bid in early 2006 and construction would begin after the rainy season (i.e., after April 15's 2006). All construction work will be accomplished within the time limits permitted by City's noise ordinance, which allows construction on weekdays between 7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. Work will be conducted on Saturdays between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. only if approved by the Public Works Director for special needs during the construction period. No work will be permitted on holidays or Sundays. The construction contractor will prepare a Traffic Control Plan for approval by the City Traffic Engineer. The City will allow northbound Dover Drive to be reduced to one lane between 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. during construction. Flagging and appropriate signage will direct vehicular and pedestrian traffic. FILING DATE: May _ 2006 PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD: May — to June _, 2006 8387 May 2006 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project A 0 9 0 INITIAL STUDY / ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project title: Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 2. Lead agency name and address: City of Newport Beach Public Works Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 3. Contact person and phone number: Robert Stein, Principal Civil Engineer -- (949) 644 -3311 4. Project location: Along the east side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 970 feet north of Cliff Drive (south of 161h Street), adjacent to Castaways Park in the City of Newport Beach, Orange County, California. Figures 1 and 2 illustrate the regional location and project vicinity. 5. Project sponsor's name and address: City of Newport Beach Public Works Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 6. General plan designation: REOS — Recreational & Environmental Open Space 7. Zoning: PC -43 — Upper Castaways Planned Community The proposed project generally would be constructed in road right -of -way. According to the City's Municipal Code, rights -of -way are unzoned and the proposed project is an allowable use within various zoning classifications. 8. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Please see the detailed Project Description on pages I through 3. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: The proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project is located east of residential development along Dover Drive, immediately west and downslope of Castaways Park, and southwest of Newport Harbor Lutheran Church and School. Figure 3 depicts existing conditions in the project limits and on surrounding properties. An unnamed drainage located parallel to Dover Drive appears to contain perennial flowing waters. This drainage flows from north to south for 500 linear feet and contains riparian and wetland species. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement) None 11. Previous Environmental and /or Engineering Studies: As indicated previously, Van Dell and Associates, Inc. (Van Dell) was retained by the City of Newport Beach to provide engineering services for the construction of the proposed sidewalk 8387 May 2006 initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 15 0 project. Van Dell initiated the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Alternatives Study in September 2004 and completed it in August 2005. The work included geotechnical analysis; resource agency habitat and resource agency jurisdictional delineation mapping; and alternative location and design analyses for the sidewalk project. That study is referenced as applicable throughout this Initial Study evaluation. The following analysis also references relevant portions of the Initial Study /Negative for the Castaways Park Revegetation project (LSA 2001), which evaluated much of the land comprising the proposed project limits. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. n Aesthetics F] Agriculture Resources F1 Air Quality X Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology /Soils Hazards & Hazardous ❑ Hydrology / Water Quality D Land Use / Planning Materials F] Mineral Resources Noise ❑ Population / Housing Fi Public Services ❑ Recreation Transportation/Traffic ri Utilities / Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance 8387 May 2006 5 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project l io 0 DETERMINATION: 0 0 On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. F I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated' impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.. Signature Printed Name and Title 8387 May 2006 Date Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 1� • • 4p 4 Source: Google Mapg, 2005 8387 7 May 2006 .- wlw-� .:*,, Brek 5� ", Figure 1 PROJECT LOCATION Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project • 0 •I E Location f f :Har k I . . . . . . . . . ffeacow Ugh t .�3 ay 0 say d Balboa Pen Source: USGS 7.5'Sedes, Newport Beach Quadrangle, Photorev. 1981 Figure 2 USGS BASEMAP 8387 8 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Dedarefion May 2006 Dover Dfive Sidewalk Project Iq 0 5001,000 2000 Feet. Source: USGS 7.5'Sedes, Newport Beach Quadrangle, Photorev. 1981 Figure 2 USGS BASEMAP 8387 8 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Dedarefion May 2006 Dover Dfive Sidewalk Project Iq IN, 4" ,*M Wf• IT- IOU All - 93.�N kw All DOVER DRIVE --Do PROPOSED C&G- PROPOSED 4.5'-7.5- PROPOSED 104. SIDEW.ALK.-- —Aq-____ Source: Van Dell 2005 8387 May 2006 JOIN REACH 2 EX PMVT EX. RETAINING WALL 2' 2' 4.3.7.5' PROP. C & G LPROP S.W. .W. EX. SLOPE PROP. AC S.W. j �jl %—FX MEDIAN 1—j EX. PAVEMENT—/ 4.5' — 7' EDGE STRIPE CURB LANE EX. MG VARIES Not to Scale -- ---r • No Scale Figure 4 PROPOSED DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT REACH 1 DESIGN CONCEPT 10 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project • JOIN REACH 1 �~- -- .--EXISTING CURB PROPOSED x \ —.BOAROWAwLK� w'w. 3 •` `CABLE RAIDN ti,• �EX MEDIAN EXC &G Not to Scale 3' TEMPORARY WORK AREA CABLE RAILING 6' MAX. ` T /TEMP. SILT FENCE EX. SLOPE IN REAC-Hh3 \ " k No Scale Source: Van Dell 2005 Figure 5 PROPOSED DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT REACH 2 DESIGN CONCEPT 8367 Initial Sludy /Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Si Project C� �.l • 0 t G 400 F R G CURB \BOARDWA ' BOARDWALK co JOIN EXISTING` CAB2RAILI I SlQkZLK \ ' � I rNo Scale Source: Van Dell 2005 8387 May 2006 11 t� 12 Figure 6 PROPOSED DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT REACH 3 DESIGN CONCEPT Initial Study/Millgated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project !1 3p 6' 8' TEMPORARY — WORK AREA MEDIAN VARIES CABLE RAILING �EX PROP. 6' MAX. EX C & G BOARDWALK -- '-• --• —. � _ TEMP. SILT FENCE ,�_ EX. SLOPE 2' 6' ; VR Not to Scale Source: Van Dell 2005 8387 May 2006 11 t� 12 Figure 6 PROPOSED DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT REACH 3 DESIGN CONCEPT Initial Study/Millgated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project !1 i • CHECKLIST OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 1. AESTHETICS — Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic ❑ ❑ ❑ X vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, ❑ ❑ X El including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual El El ❑ X character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or El El El X glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES — In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or El ❑ ❑ X Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as Shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural ❑ ❑ ❑ X use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing 13 ❑ ❑ X environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non - agricultural use? 111. AIR QUALITY -- Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the El El air quality plan? 8387 13 May 2006 ❑ X Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 11 L 0 0 0 Less Than e) Create objectionable odors affecting a El X substantial number of people? IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either X directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any X E riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally ❑ ❑ El protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of X any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife El species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? 6387 14 Initial Study{Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 2= Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute El El X El substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net ❑ 11 X 11 increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial ❑ X ❑ pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a El X substantial number of people? IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either X directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any X E riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally ❑ ❑ El protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of X any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife El species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? 6387 14 Initial Study{Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 2= e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? 8387 May 2006 No Impact El ❑ ❑ X ❑ ❑ Less Than ❑ Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact ❑ ❑ X No Impact El ❑ ❑ X ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ X ❑ ❑ ❑ X ❑ ❑ ❑ X ❑ ❑ ❑ X ❑ ❑ X ❑ ❑ ❑ X ❑ ❑ ❑ X ❑ ❑ ❑ X ❑ 15 Initial Study/Miligated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project - 71 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than ' Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ X 0 b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of El El X . topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is El 11 X El unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in X ❑ Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting El El X the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -- Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the X EJ environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous El El X or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list X of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use ❑ ❑ ❑ X plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, 8387 16 initial Study/Miligated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 71 Less Than Potentially Significant with Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporated within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private El El would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically El 11 with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant El El of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste 11 discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or El substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage patter El the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage patter El the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? Less Than Significant No Impact Impact ❑ X X ❑ X ❑ X ❑ ❑ Lit X F M • X • El X u 8387 17 initial Study/Mdigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project • 7 `j. 0 0 8387 18 May 2008 Initial Study{Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project :0 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact e) Create or contribute runoff water which would ❑ El X exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ n X g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard El X area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area X structures which would impede or redirect flood . flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk X of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X 1X. LAND USE AND PLANNING -- Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ X b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, El X policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat ❑ ❑ X conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? 8387 18 May 2008 Initial Study{Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project :0 8387 May 2006 19 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project L ?i) Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact X. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known X mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- El X important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? XI. NOISE -- Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise X levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of El 11 X excessive groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient X noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in El El X ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use 13 Ej El X plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? t) For a project within the vicinity of a private El El 11 X airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 8387 May 2006 19 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project L ?i) 0 Ic 0 0 0 8387 May 2006 Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? El X C 9D Less Than ❑ Potentially Significant with Less Than ❑ Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an ❑ ❑ El area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing El El El housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, ❑ El ❑ necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES -- a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ 8387 May 2006 Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? El X C 9D ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ No Impact ra X ra X X 99 99 initial Study/Miligated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project �i � 0 0 g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or X programs supporting alternative transportation El (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? 8387 21 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 3� Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact impact XIV. RECREATION — a) Would the project increase the use of existing El 11 11 X neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities El 11 El X or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC -- Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial X in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a X El level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, X including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design X feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? El El X El f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ❑ X g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or X programs supporting alternative transportation El (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? 8387 21 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 3� .9 0 0 0 0 b) Require or result in the construction of new El or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new ❑ storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to ❑ serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater Less Than treatment provider which serves or may serve the Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS -- Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of 11 El El the applicable Regional Water Quality Control and regulations related to solid waste? Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new El or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new ❑ storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to ❑ serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater ❑ treatment provider which serves or may serve the X project that it has adequate capacity to serve the ❑ project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient ❑ permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes ❑ and regulations related to solid waste? XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE -- a) Does the project have the potential to degrade El quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? 8387 22 May 2006 X N' No Impact X X ❑ X ❑ X ❑ X ❑ X ❑ ❑ X ❑ D X ❑ Initial Study/Mitigaled Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 0 0 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) Does the project have impacts that are X individually limited, but cumulatively El considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects X that will cause substantial adverse effects on El human beings, either directly or indirectly? 8387 23 initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 0 0 0 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. AESTHETICS a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? No Impact. The site is within a predominantly urban setting and is surrounded by development. The proposed project is not located within a scenic highway nor would it affect scenic vistas. Short-term aesthetic impacts would occur due to views of the construction activity and temporary obstruction of views by construction equipment. However, construction impacts to scenic resources or visual character would be temporary in nature and considered negligible. After construction, the project would not alter the current aesthetics of the existing urban or natural landscapes. b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? Less Than Significant Impact. The project limits are not within or adjacent to a State - designated scenic highway. The site contains no significant scenic resources or unique visual resources related to geologic formations or historic buildings. Although some red willow trees are present in Reach 3, the project would not require compliance with City Council Policy G -1, "Retention or Removal of City Trees" (as amended April 27, 2004). That policy establishes standards for the removal and reforestation of City trees. The City classifies public trees in one of three categories: Special Trees, Problem Trees, and All Other Trees. Red willow (Salix laevigata) are not among the "Special Trees" called out in Attachment 1 (as amended May 10, 2005) of the City policy, therefore, they are designated as an All Other Tree. It is the City's policy to retain All Other Trees unless removal is necessary for various reasons, including poor tree health, a history of public or private property damage, and liability and public safety. The project would not require removal of willow trees for construction, nor would it jeopardize the health of the existing trees and require their future removal. As described in section IV (Biological Resources), the boardwalk design avoids removal of the red willows in Reach 3. Construction impacts are limited to trimming several overhanging branches and removal of a large (six -inch diameter) limb from two red willow trees. The City's proposed mitigation plan, as described in section IV, is to plant four (4) new one- gallon size red willow trees at the project site for each of the two existing trees that require pruning of large limbs. Since tree removal would not occur, the scenic resource quality of the existing red willow trees would not be substantially damaged by project construction and impacts would be less than significant. C) Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? No Impact. The site is within an urban setting and consists of road right -of -way and an adjacent drainage in a predominantly residential and commercial area. Construction and usage of the proposed sidewalk project would not substantially change the character of the site or its surroundings. There would be no impact. d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light orglare, which would adversely isaffect day or nighttime views in the area? No Impact. No new sources of light or glare are associated with construction or operation of the project. Due to the daytime construction schedule, no impacts resulting from light and glare would result. 8387 24 Initial Sludy/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project >5 II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? No Impact. The site is not currently in agricultural use, nor do the project limits or adjacent properties contain any farmland or soils suitable for agricultural use.. The project site is within and adjacent to road right -of -way in the City of Newport Beach. No parcels adjacent to the project limits are located on Prime or Unique Farmland (Department of Conservation 1998a), nor are they under a Williamson Act contract. There are no local policies for agricultural resources that apply to the project site. As such, the project would not convert Farmland to non - agricultural uses, conflict with existing agricultural zoning or Williamson Act contracts, or indirectly result in the conversion of Farmland to non - agricultural uses. b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The project does not involve any conversion of land use; therefore, the project would not result in a conflict with an agricultural or a Williamson Act contract zoning designation. C) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non - agricultural use? No Impact. The project does not involve any conversion of land use, nor do the project limits contain any farmland or soils suitable for agricultural use. Therefore, the project would not result in the conversion of farmland to non - agricultural use. III. AIR QUALITY The project site is located within the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), which includes Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, and Riverside Counties except for Antelope Valley in Los Angeles County and the desert portion of northern San Bernardino County and the Palo Verde Valley of Riverside County. Both the State and federal governments have established health based Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) for six air pollutants, which include: carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (03), nitrogen dioxide (NOZ), sulfur dioxide (SO2), lead (Pb), and suspended particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter (PMta). The South Coast Air Basin and Orange County do not attain California and federal AAQS for ozone and PMIe. The State AAQS for PMta and 03 are exceeded much more frequently and by a greater amount than the federal standards for these pollutants. The Air Basin in compliance with federal S02, NO2, and Pb standards. a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? No Impact. The project consists of the construction and usage of a public sidewalk approximately 900 feet in length. The new facility would be maintained by existing Public Works personnel who currently travel to various sites to maintain other City facilities. The project will not directly or indirectly contribute to any operational emissions in excess of the threshold values established by the SCAQMD, nor would it exceed ambient air quality standards. As such, the project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 1997 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) or of the Final 1999 Amendment to the 1997 Ozone AQMP for the South Coast Air Basin and the Settlement Agreement on the 1994 Ozone State 8387 2$ Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Ll 0 3J • 0 Implementation Litigation. Construction emissions are also expected to be minor, as described in III.b below. b) Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Less Than Significant Impact. Constructing the proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project would cause temporary air emissions related to minor ground disturbance, application of asphalt pavement, and vehicle and equipment exhaust. Due to the nature of the project, long -term air quality impacts would be less than significant and only construction emissions are evaluated in this section. As indicated previously, construction will occur during a 90-day work period, or about 18 work weeks. hr Reach 1, an 8 to 10- foot -wide strip of existing paved roadway (approximately 150 cubic yards of asphalt within the emergency parking lane) will be excavated and removed to construct the new sidewalk and curb and gutter. In Reaches 2 and 3, minor excavation (two feet deep by one foot wide, approximately 72 cubic yards) will be required along the back of curb in those reaches in order to construct the base for the boardwalk. Minor excavation of about one to two feet deep (approximately 150 cubic yards total) is also required to provide clearance for the wooden boardwalk support beams along the top of slope in the five to six -foot -wide area behind the curb. Based on those construction estimates, the project design engineer provided expected construction equipment types and usage durations, as follows: Equipment(Vehicle Type Usage Frequency Usage During Construction Two pickups for Foremen Each day 90 days (project duration) One backhoe for excavation and removals Each day First 4 weeks Two 10 -wheel dump trucks Each day First 4 weeks One backhoe with bucket auger for post holes Each day Weeks 5 and 6 One ready mix concrete truck and pump 4 hours per day Two days in week 7 One ready mix truck for sidewalk and curb /gutter 4 hours per day Two days in week 9 Paving equipment and pavement roller for 2- foot -wide pavement join strip 4 hours per day One day per week in weeks 9 and 10 One 10 -wheel truck and one roller for asphalt concrete delivery and application 4 hours per day One day per week in weeks 9 and 10 Miscellaneous delivery trucks (10 -wheel size) 4 hours per day One day per week in weeks 6, 7, 8, 14, 15, 16, and 17 Source: Van Dell 2005; URBEMIS 2002 Using the preceding soil disturbance and construction equipment parameters as input to the URBEMIS 2002 air quality model, the model estimates that the following daily construction emissions would result: 8387 26 tnilial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Table 1 Estimated Construction Emissions Without Mitigation (lbs /day) Source ROG NOx CO Sox PM10 Maximum Daily Emissions 9.28 70.68 68.41 0.00 3.18 SCAQMD Daily Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No Source: IJRBEMIS 2002 These construction- related air quality impacts would be temporary and, as shown above, would not exceed SCAQMD daily threshold values. Nevertheless, as is City standard practice, construction equipment would be maintained in good condition to minimize excessive emissions. During construction, watering of exposed earth surfaces would be provided as necessary. All loose material would be compacted to prevent the dispersion of airborne dust. The standards for fugitive dust for this project would be as stated in South Coast Air Quality Management District's Rule No. 403, which the City requires of all its construction contractors. C) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Less Than Significant Impact. In accordance with SCAQMD methodology, any project that does not exceed the threshold values, or can be mitigated to less than these values, would not add to a cumulative impact. Based on the construction emission calculations presented previously, the project - related emissions would be below thresholds and cumulative air quality impacts would be less than significant. d) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less Than Significant Impact. Castaways Park, Bob Henry Park, Newport Harbor Lutheran Church school, and some residences are all within '/4 mile of the project limits. During the construction phase, there will be emissions of all criteria pollutants. Because these emissions will not exceed the SCAQMD's threshold criteria, ambient pollutant impacts would not be expected to exceed significance levels. These emissions will be temporary and will not expose individual receptors for extended periods. During normal usage of the sidewalk project, no air quality pollutant emissions will result. e) Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Less Than Significant Impact. There may be some odors associated with the use of diesel equipment and the asphalt paving during the construction phase. There are residences and schools in the project vicinity; however, the temporary nature of project construction will ensure that these receptors are minimally affected by odors during the construction phase at this site. 8387 27 Initial Stody/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 0 ';r • • ---1 IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Jurisdictional Delineation In August 2004, Chambers Group, Inc. biologists performed a habitat assessment and examined the project site to determine the limits of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) jurisdiction pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) jurisdiction pursuant to the California Fish and Game Code, and California Coastal Commission (CCC) jurisdiction pursuant to the California Coastal Act. Suspected ACOE, CDFG, and CCC jurisdictional areas were mapped on aerial photographs and field checked for the presence of definable channels and/or wetland vegetation, riparian habitat, soils, and hydrology. A letter report prepared in September 2004 summarizes the methodologies and findings of the ACOE, CDFG, and CCC jurisdictional delineations. The report is available for review at the City of Newport Beach Public Works Department. ACOE Jurisdiction An unnamed drainage located parallel to Dover Drive appears to contain perennial flowing waters. This drainage flows from north to south for 500 linear feet and contains riparian and wetland species. As indicated on the wetland data sheets (Chambers 2004), ACOE - defined wetlands are present in the study area within the drainage located below the slope bordering Dover Drive. The northern portion of the drainage contains a wetland vegetated by a red willow (Salix laevigata) woodland with an understory of St. Augustine grass (Stenotaphrum secundatum). Due to the lack of hydric soils, the wetland does not extend up the bank located adjacent to Dover Drive. South of the red willow woodland, ACOE - defined wetlands are found to correspond with the presence of broadleaf cattail (Typha latifolia), which dominates much of the drainage. The slope between Dover Drive and the unnamed drainage is dominated by hydrophytic vegetation including wild heliotrope (Heliotropum curassavicum), saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), and coast goldenbush (Isocoma menziesh), but does not contain the hydric soils necessary to be considered ACOE- defined wetland. Non - dominant upland species such as sweet fennel (Foeniculum vuigare), artichoke thistle (Cynara cardunculus), wild radish (Raphanus sativus), and iceplant (Carpobrotus eduhs) are also present on the slope between Dover Drive and the unnamed drainage. The southern portion of the unnamed drainage and associated wetlands are vegetated with broadleaf cattail, red willow, mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia), arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) and celery (Apium graveolens). CDFG and CCC Jurisdiction Because the extent of CDFG jurisdiction and CCC - defined wetlands are identical, the results of the jurisdictional findings are discussed concurrently below. The Cowardin et al. 1976 wetland classification system defines CCC wetlands, while the California Fish and Game Code defines CDFG jurisdiction. CDFG- defined riparian habitat and CCC- defined wetlands are present onsite within the bed of the unnamed drainage and extend to the western bank that is located adjacent to Dover Drive. As indicated previously, this drainage flows from north to south for approximately 500 linear feet and parallels Dover Drive. The northern portion of the drainage contains a red willow woodland with an understory of St. Augustine grass. The canopy of the red willow woodland extends beyond the curb and overhangs Dover Drive. South of the red willow woodland, CDFG riparian habitat and CCC - defined wetlands correspond with a cattail marsh located within the bed of the channel, while saltgrass, coast goldenbush and wild heliotrope dominate the western bank of the drainage. South of the red willow woodland, the CDFG and CCC jurisdiction (i.e., riparian and wetland plant species) extend to within approximately three feet of the curb of Dover Drive. Also located along the western bank are non - dominant upland species such as sweet fennel, artichoke thistle, wild radish, and iceplant. The southernmost portion of the unnamed drainage is vegetated with broadleaf cattail, red willow, mule fat, arroyo willow, and celery. 8387 28 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project - F+ Other Vegetation Communities U The west- facing slope located adjacent to the unnamed drainage supports planted coastal sage scrub vegetation. The container plantings on this slope are part of a larger restoration effort associated with Castaways Park and the local community. In addition, it appears that exotic species abatement activities have been performed in the project area on the slope between Dover Drive and the unnamed drainage and may have included the removal of non - native species such as castor bean (Ricinus communis), sweet fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), and artichoke thistle (Cynara cardunculus). Jurisdictional Summary Following the delineation fieldwork, a portion of the overall survey area was used to calculate existing jurisdictional acreages. The project impact area was defined based on a worst -case disturbance limit extending I1 feet from the existing face of curb along the Dover Drive project limits. The 2004 Jurisdictional Delineation found that the project impact area contains approximately 0.03 acre of ACOE jurisdiction, all of which consists of ACOE - defined wetlands. The project area also includes approximately 0.21 acre of CDFG jurisdiction (all riparian habitat) and 0.21 acre of CCC- defined wetlands. The southernmost 500 linear feet of the project limits contain no ACOE, CCC, or CDFG jurisdiction. Other Biological Resource Surveys As indicated in the Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the Castaways Park Revegetation (LSA 2001), a biological survey of the project site was conducted by LSA in March of 2001. The survey covered a study area that included the proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project limits. The assessment also included a literature review and records search of the California Natural Diversity Data Base ( CNDDB) and the California Native Plant Society's Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI) of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less Than Significant Impact. The CNDDB search (LSA 2001) for sensitive plant species potentially occurring within or near the project site turned up records for various species for which habitat requirements do not exist on site, as confirmed by Chambers Group biologists during the jurisdictional delineation in 2004. No sensitive plant species were observed in the study area during the biological survey. The southern spike weed, which is a sensitive species, potentially occurs on the Castaways Park site but was not observed during the 2001 site survey. The proposed sidewalk project is not expected to result in significant adverse impacts to any sensitive plant species. The CNDDB search (LSA 2001) for sensitive wildlife species potentially occurring within or near the proposed project limits turned up records for various species, including the coastal California gnatcatcher (CAGN). Although CAGN was not observed during the 2001 biological survey by LSA or the 2004 jurisdictional delineation by Chambers Group, it is known to occur along the bluff adjacent to Reach 1 of the project. However, the sidewalk in Reach 1 will be constructed entirely in the existing roadway and would not affect adjacent bluff vegetation. For the other species identified in the records search, the general project area could support suitable habitat; however, such habitat is considered to be absent from the footprint of the proposed sidewalk project, as confirmed by Chambers Group biologists during the 2004 jurisdictional delineation. No other habitat for any endangered, threatened, or other sensitive species 8387 29 initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project ,,l 0 exists on or adjacent to the project site; therefore, implementation of the project will have no impacts on sensitive species or sensitive species habitats. b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The Jurisdictional Delineation (Chambers 2004) evaluated impacts for construction of a 5- foot -wide sidewalk with an 8- foot -wide impact area, as well as an 8- foot -wide sidewalk with an I1- foot -wide impact area, both along the entire length of the proposed project limits. The 11 -foot -wide impact area most closely represented the impacts of the project at that time. Given those parameters alone, the Jurisdictional Delineation found that ACOE "waters of the United States ", CDFG jurisdictional riparian habitat, and California Coastal Commission jurisdiction would all be potentially impacted by the proposed sidewalk in Reaches 2 and 3. For an 8- foot -wide walkway with an 11- foot -wide overall impact area, the jurisdictional impacts were summarized as follows: • ACOE Jurisdictional Impacts: less than 0.01 acre - Temporary (< 0.01 acre) - Permanent (no impact) • CDFG and CCC Jurisdictional Impacts — 0.09 acre - Temporary (0.03 acre) - Permanent (0.06 acre) The acreages above were indicative of the project design assumptions when the Jurisdictional Delineation was prepared in September 2004. However, several substantial design modifications have been made in the year since the Jurisdictional Delineation was completed. The modifications were made with biological resource impact avoidance as their primary goal. Table 2 on the following page shows the effects of constructing the currently proposed sidewalk/boardwalk project while also incorporating habitat avoidance measures during construction. Table 2 also provides a comparative analysis of the original (i.e., 2004) construction disturbance and sidewalk footprint areas, as well as the net reductions in jurisdictional impacts that would be achieved under the current project design. It is important to note that all impact calculations reflect the area values from the geographic information system (GIS) vegetation mapping files. In contrast to the Jurisdictional Delineation, the following acreages are rounded to three decimal points and converted to square feet (sq. ft.) due to the small impact values and the effects of rounding. For example, a 0.085 -acre impact (3,703 sq. ft.) and a 0.094 -acre impact (4,095 sq. ft.) can both be represented as 0.09 acres when rounded, but the difference measured in square feet is 392 sq. ft. (an area approximately 20 feet by 20 feet). Since the vegetation community impacts are individually very small, it was necessary to use the square footage measurements to determine the relative impact reductions achieved by the proposed project. The high level of precision used, however, does not imply a high level of accuracy since field measurements, aerial photograph resolution, and mapping techniques all result in a loss of accuracy. Therefore, the use of square footage areas is intended primarily as a means of conveying the relative impact reductions that would be achieved by the proposed project. 8387 30 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 11 0 Table 2 Jurisdictional Impact Summary 11 Vegetation Community /Description Temporary Impacts Permanent Impacts Total Impacts Acres Sq. Ft. Acres Sq. Ft. Acres Sq. Ft. EM1'7i� ��1VD3 't..n Ar&,:RW (8�FO9VPERlfA7VEt�Y,,.� FOOTiTEhfPO RY)'AlPAGTZONESns ACOE Jurisdiction Cattail Marsh 0.001 40 none none 0.001 40 18 -inch drainage culvert (in 6'x 3' 0.00042 18 none none 0.0004' 18 box in Cattail Marsh area) Totals 0.0014 58 CDFG/CCC Jurisdiction Red Willow Woodland 0.008 340 0.027 1,186 0.035 1,536 Saltgrass & Heliotrope 0.022 947 0.036 1,564 0.058 2,511 Cattail Marsh 0.001 40 none none 0.001 40 Totals 4,078 O OSEDPR07E(T�(BO L �ESIG fir OM w�0..094 Cam_ P 5...- ...w....>>m. -c, D SNDE[� &�..�YdR. ift, -,!ID yS IZN�I ABR_AT��uy0IDi9 ,..SU., -...ma �w_ ACOE Jurisdiction Cattail Marsh' avoided avoided none none none none 18 -inch drainage culvert (in 6' x 3' avoided avoided none none none none box in Cattail Marsh area)' Totals none none CDFG/CCC Jurisdiction Red Willow Woodland' 0.002 85 0.007 297 0.009 382 Saltgrass & Heliotrope' 0.019 808 0.032 1,385 0.051 2,193 Cattail Marsh' avoided avoided none none none none Totals 0.060 2,575 -0.00141 -581 Are/ Reduction in ACOE Jurisdictional Impacts /(%) (100 %) (I00 %) 0.0341 1,5031 Net Reduction inCDFG /CCC Jurisdictional Impacts /( %) Notes t Represents project disturbance footprint used in 2004 jurisdictional delineation. 2 2004 jurisdictional delineation indicated impact of less than 0.01 acre since it is considered the smallest "measurable impact" area for ACOE delineation purposes. Actual area measurements in acres and square feet are shown above. ' Cattail Marsh fully avoided and Saltgrassftieliotrope partially avoided by restricting the temporary construction area in one 9- foot -long section and in a 15- foot -long section of the boardwalk construction site (southerly portion of Reach 2). Actual avoidance area will measure 60 feet long by 6 feet wide. Support post design avoids boardwalk impacts in culvert area. ' Red Willow tree removal and canopy loss impacts are avoided by boardwalk rather than sidewalk design in Reach 3. Red Willow tree canopy impacts are reduced by approximately 75 percent over original design since project construction would only raise the canopy and remove overhanging limbs for short-term equipment clearance and long -term pedestrian safety. The extent of the tree trimming would only affect about 350 to 400 square feet of the Red Willow tree canopy. 8387 31 Initial Sludy/Miligated Negative Declaration May 2006 _ Dover Drive Sidewalk Project • 0 i'll ACOE Jurisdictional Impacts As indicated, the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project would avoid impacting ACOE jurisdiction. Based on the recommendations in the 2004 Jurisdictional Delineation, the City determined that the ACOE impacts could be completely avoided by restricting the width of the temporary construction area to less than 9 feet wide in two sections of the project limits — one for a length of 9 feet and the second for a length of 15 feet. The actual avoidance area will measure 60 feet long by 6 feet wide in the southerly portion of Reach 2. The proposed support post design for the boardwalk in Reach 2 would avoid impacts in the culvert area, which supports cattail marsh. Also, in order to ensure that fill would not be deposited in the ACOE jurisdiction during construction, silt fences would be installed to control construction- related debris and sediment. CDFG and CCC Jurisdictional Impacts The 2004 Jurisdictional Delineation found that there would not be any riparian or wetland impacts in Reach 1. Although the delineation did not specifically evaluate the proposed Reach 1 design concept (i.e., 4.5 to 7.5- foot -wide sidewalk in the existing road), which was added to the Alternatives Study after the delineation report was completed, the proposed design has a similar footprint to an analyzed alternative with a 5 -foot sidewalk in the existing road. Since that alternative would not have any impacts to habitat or jurisdictional waters, the proposed design concept with a variable width sidewalk in the existing road would also not have any impacts to habitat or jurisdictional waters. As indicated in Table 1, the proposed project would affect a total of 0.06 acre of CDFG jurisdiction, all of which consists of riparian vegetation, and 0.06 acre of CCC - defined wetlands. Of this 0.06 acre, 0.04 acre would be permanently affected and 0.02 acre would be temporarily affected by the proposed project. Of the total impacted area, 0.05 acre is dominated by saltgrass and wild heliotrope. Cattail marsh is fully avoided and saltgrassJheliotrope is partially avoided by restricting the temporary construction area in one 9- foot -long section and in a 15- foot -long section of the boardwalk construction site (i.e., southerly portion of Reach 2). The actual avoidance area will measure 60 feet long by 6 feet wide. As indicated previously, the 2004 Jurisdictional Delineation assumed the complete removal of red willow canopy and trunks within a 0.03 -acre impact area, which included an eight- foot -wide permanent impact zone and a three -foot -wide temporary impact zone in Reach 3. However, the current project design would completely avoid red willow tree removal and would minimize canopy loss impacts by constructing a boardwalk rather than a sidewalk and by varying the boardwalk width at the red willow locations in Reach 3. Construction impacts are limited to trimming several overhanging branches and removal of a large (six - inch diameter) limb from two red willow trees for the purposes of allowing short-term equipment clearance and long -term pedestrian safety. Since no willows would be removed, impact calculations were derived by estimating canopy loss due to the minor trimming and limb removal. The extent of the proposed tree trimming would only affect about 350 to 400 square feet of the existing willow tree canopy, as compared to over 1,500 square feet of canopy and trunk loss under the 2004 impact scenario. The City's proposed mitigation plan is to plant four (4) new one - gallon size red willow trees at the project site for each of the two existing trees that require pruning of large limbs. The 2004 Jurisdictional Delineation (pages 13 and 14) indicated the following regarding CDFG and CCC jurisdictional impacts: CDFG jurisdictional riparian habitat and CCC - defined wetlands are present throughout much of the project site. Avoidance of CDFG and CCC jurisdiction to the maximum extent practicable is recommended in order to expedite the permitting process and reduce the cost of mitigation. In the vicinity of the Newport Harbor Lutheran Church & School parking lot, the limits of construction are likely to encroach on CDFG jurisdictional riparian habitat /CCGdefined wetlands because 8387 32 initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Ll'� several large red willow trees are rooted within 5 -10 feet from the curb of Dover Drive and avoidance of this riparian habitat is unlikely. It is not certain how many mature red willow trees would have to be removed, or would be irreversibly harmed in order to install the 8-fool-wide or the 11 foot -wide sidewalk. Installation of the 8-fool-wide sidewalk would at least result in the removal of some large [willow] trees. In addition, the installation of the sidewalk would require the construction of a two foot deep trench that could harm or kill red [willow] trees by damaging the root system. The impact analysis contained herein resulted from overlaying the project footprints over the canopy of the red willow trees. However, please note that the removal or death or a red willow tree may result in an impact greater than the footprint area depicted on Figures 3 and 4. Since preparation of the Jurisdictional Delineation in 2004, however, the project design in Reach 3 has been modified to avoid removal and root damage impacts to the existing red willow trees. As indicated above, this has been accomplished by using the boardwalk design rather than a concrete sidewalk and by varying the boardwalk width at the red willow locations in Reach 3. Construction - related ground disturbance in Reach 3 would be limited to borings for the 19-inch support posts, as well as minor excavations. The excavations are necessary to 1) construct the base for the boardwalk, which would require a two- foot -deep by one - foot -wide excavation immediately adjacent to the existing back of curb; and 2) to provide ground clearance for the wooden support beams at each corresponding support post, which would require excavating individual areas measuring about one- foot -deep by one - foot -wide by five - feet -long (measured perpendicular from the back of curb) only at those support beam locations along the top of slope. Given those construction parameters, tree roots would not be damaged and impacts to root systems would not result. Mitigation Measures For construction- related impacts resulting from the proposed trimming of several overhanging branches and removal of a large (six -inch diameter) limb from two red willow trees, the City is proposing the following mitigation: Mitigation Measure 1. The City of Newport Beach Public Works Department shall plant four (4) new one - gallon size red willow trees at the project site for each of the two existing trees that require pruning of large limbs, for a total of eight (8) new trees. The City shall determine maintenance requirements and monitoring duration. Approximately 0.06 acre (includes the red willow impacts discussed above) of CDFG and CCC impacts cannot be avoided and the project may require a CDFG Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement and a CCC Coastal Development Permit. If the permits are found to be necessary, as determined by the resource agencies, permit conditions would address temporary and permanent project - related impacts to jurisdictional areas. The resource agencies generally recommend avoidance of impacts and if that is not possible, minimization of the impacts as mitigation. If determined necessary, any additional mitigation would be finalized as conditions of the resource agency permits. Given the project review that will be conducted by the resource agencies, combined with the relatively minor jurisdictional impacts and the City's proposed mitigation measure, impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level with mitigation. 8387 33 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project :j -x 0 C) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Less Than Significant Impact. Please refer to the previous discussion about jurisdictional impacts. The project area contains federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act; however, all federally protected wetlands would be avoided during project construction. By avoiding ACOE jurisdiction through restricting the temporary construction area, the ACOE Section 404 permitting process would not be necessary. d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Less Than Significant Impact. Although wildlife movement corridors may be present in the existing riparian zone adjacent to the project limits, and the project area may support native resident or migratory wildlife species, project - related impacts are expected to be less than significant. The project will not physically encroach on those areas and the proposed project would not directly or indirectly interfere with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a free preservation policy or ordinance? Less Than Significant Impact. Although some red willow trees are present in Reach 3, the project would not require compliance with City Council Policy G -1, "Retention or Removal of City Trees" (as amended April 27, 2004). That policy establishes standards for the removal and reforestation of City trees. The City classifies public trees in one of three categories: Special Trees, Problem Trees, and All Other Trees. Red willow (Salix laevigata) are not among the "Special Trees" called out in Attachment 1 (as amended May 10, 2005) of the City policy; therefore, they are designated as an All Other Tree. It is the City's policy to retain All Other Trees unless removal is necessary for various reasons, including poor tree health, a history of public or private property damage, and liability and public safety. The project would not require removal of willow trees for construction, nor would it jeopardize the health of the existing trees and require their future removal. f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Less Than Significant Impact. As indicated in the Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the Castaways Park Vegetation (LSA 2001), the project site is within the coastal portion of the Orange County Central - Coastal Subregional Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP) program, which includes several thousand acres of natural open space in the San Joaquin Hills that contain dense, relatively undisturbed scrub habitat. The final NCCP /Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for the Central Coastal Subregion was approved in July 1996. The approved NCCP /HCP and applicable Section 10(a) permits identify the project area as outside the designated habitat reserve. 8387 34 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project ,i7 V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Is Previous Cultural Resources Investigations An Initial Study/Negative Declaration was prepared in October 1994 for the Upper Castaways (TTM 15012) project That document and the Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the Castaways Park Revegetation project (LSA 2001) both included evaluations of potential impacts on cultural resources. Those documents are referenced as applicable in the following discussions. The following cultural resource sites were noted in those documents: Ca- Ora-48 — Severely disturbed and no further scientific investigation warranted. • Ca- Ora-49 — Not impacted by the residential or bluff trail development. • Ca- Ora -186 — Not impacted by residential or bluff trail development. a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? No Impact. Since no building(s) 45 years or older will be affected by the proposed project, it is not necessary to assess or evaluate nearby structures for potential historical significance. Construction work will be contained with the road right -of -way or other previously disturbed easements along Dover Drive. Although previous environmental documentation for the area (LSA 2001) noted the presence of several cultural resource sites, none of them contain historic resources eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). No impact will result. b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? No Impact. The majority of ground disturbance associated with the proposed project would occur in Dover Drive or within six feet of the existing back of curb. Soil excavation two feet below existing ground surface by one foot wide will be necessary along the back of curb in Reaches 2 and 3 in order to construct the base for the boardwalk. Minor excavation of about one to two feet deep is also required to provide clearance for the wooden boardwalk support beams along the top of slope in the five to six - foot -wide area behind the curb. Because of the amount of ground disturbance that has occurred here in the past from the establishment of the road, intact archaeological deposits are unlikely to exist and no impacts are expected. This is consistent with the findings in the Negative Declarations for the Upper Castaways (City of Newport Beach 1994) project and the Castaways Park Revegetation (LSA 2001). However, the City may decide to conduct on- site monitoring on an as- needed basis during excavation activities, depending on the known conditions and extents of past soil disturbance areas in the project limits. In the unlikely event that archaeological materials are encountered during ground disturbance, all work in the vicinity of the find would be temporarily halted or redirected until the resource(s) can be documented and evaluated by a qualified archaeologist, as is standard practice on all City construction projects. No mitigation measures are required. C) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? No Impact. Because of the amount of ground disturbance that has occurred here in the past from the establishment of Dover Drive, intact paleontological deposits are unlikely to exist and no impacts are expected. This is consistent with the findings in the Negative Declarations for the Upper Castaways (City 8387 35 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project of Newport Beach 1994) project and the Castaways Park Revegetation (LSA 2001). However, the City may decide to conduct on -site monitoring on an as- needed basis during excavation activities, depending on the known conditions and extents of past soil disturbance areas in the project limits. In the unlikely event that any paleontological resources are encountered, the City would temporarily halt or redirect all work in the vicinity of the find until the resource(s) can be documented and evaluated by a qualified paleontologist, as is standard practice on all City construction projects. No mitigation measures are required. d) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? No Impact. The project area is not known to be the location of a prehistoric or historic -period human burial or cemetery and no human remains have been identified within the project area. Due to the history of disturbance along Dover Drive, no human remains are expected to occur within the project limits and no impacts are anticipated. If human remains are found, all work would stop and the Orange County Coroner would be notified. If the remains were determined to be of Native American origin, the Coroner would contact the California Native American Heritage Commission to identify the Most Likely Descendants to contact regarding repatriation or reburial of the remains. Clearance from these authorities would be obtained prior to resuming work in the vicinity of the find, as is standard practice on all City construction projects. Consistent with the findings in the Negative Declarations for the Upper Castaways (City of Newport Beach 1994) project and the Castaways Park Revegetation (LSA 2001), no impacts would result and no mitigation measures are required. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Geo- Environmental, Inc. (GEI) collected soil samples from borings, performed laboratory testing on the soil samples, and prepared a geotechnical report (GEI 2004) that recommended design criteria for the proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project. The pertinent findings of that report are summarized in the following sections. The specific laboratory testing methodologies and results are provided in the GEI geotechnical report, which is an appendix to the Alternatives Study by Van Dell (2005). Based on field exploration and laboratory test results performed on soil samples obtained from the subject site, it is GEI's opinion that the site is suitable for the proposed sidewalk improvements, provided that the recommendations presented in the GEI geotechnical report are implemented in the design of the structures and their construction, as applicable to the selected reach designs. a) Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving. i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Less Titan Significant Impact. The proposed project would include the construction of a sidewalk in an area that is intensively developed with urban land uses. The Newport Beach USGS 7.5- minute quadrangle contains a Special Studies Zone designated pursuant to the Alquist -Priolo Act. However, the City of Newport Beach, and the project area in particular, is not listed on the California Geological Survey list of Cities and Counties Affected by Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones as of May 1, 1999, nor is the project site shown to be affected by an Earthquake Fault Zone on the official map effective July 1, 1986. 8387 36 initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Nevertheless, the region is seismically active with displacement and deformation occurring along Peninsular Ranges north- south - trending faults and Transverse Ranges east -west trending faults and folds. Quatemary-age faults that express the eastern structural trend of the Peninsular Ranges province include the Newport- Inglewood (L.A. Basin), Newport- Inglewood (Offshore), and Compton Thrust Fault zones. The project site is closest to the Newport- Inglewood (L.A. Basin) fault zone (approximately 2.4 miles), the Newport- Inglewood (Offshore) fault zone (approximately 2.8 miles), and the Compton Thrust Fault zone (approximately 10.4 miles). The largest maximum earthquake site acceleration is 0.596g. Based on field exploration and laboratory test results performed on soil samples obtained from the subject site, GEI (2004) has indicated that the site is suitable for the proposed sidewalk improvements, provided that the recommendations presented in their geotechnical report are implemented in the design of the structures and their construction, as applicable to the selected reach designs. Adherence to standard engineering practices and standard City design criteria relative to seismic and geological hazards would maintain impacts at levels that are less than significant. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? Less Than Significant Impact. As indicated above, the project area in general could be exposed to strong ground shaking. However, engineering design criteria will account for the area's general susceptibility to groundshaking and other seismic - related hazards, as is standard practice for such projects. Based on the GEI (2004) geotechnical report,.the project would not expose people or structures to adverse effects resulting from fault rupture, ground shaking, or ground failure due to its location. Adherence to standard engineering practices and standard City design criteria relative to seismic and geological hazards would maintain impacts at levels that are less than significant. iii) Seismic- related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less Than Significant Impact According to the State Department of Conservation (1998b), the project site is partially within a known liquefaction area, as mapped on the official Newport Beach USGS 7.5- minute seismic hazard map. It is an area where historic occurrence of liquefaction, or local geological, geotechnical and groundwater conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacements such that mitigation as defined in Public Resources Code Section 2693(c) would be required. However, as indicated in the GEI (2004) geotechnical report, the current engineering design criteria reflect the area's general susceptibility to groundshaking and other seismic - related hazards, as is standard practice for such projects. Impacts will be less than significant. iv) Landslides? Less Than Significant Impact. According to the State Department of Conservation (I 998b), the project site is adjacent to areas having the potential for landslides, as mapped on the official Newport Beach USGS 7.5- minute seismic hazard map. These are areas where previous occurrence of landslide movement, or local topographic, geological, and geotechnical conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacements such that mitigation as defined in Public Resources Code Section 2693(c) would be required. However, as indicated in the GEI (2004) geotechnical report, the current engineering design criteria reflect the area's general susceptibility to landsliding and other seismic - related hazards, as is standard practice for such projects. Impacts will be less than significant. 8387 37 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project • l� 9 0 0 b) Would the project result insubstantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less Than Significant Impact. Relatively minor excavations that are necessary to construct the base for the boardwalk (two feet deep by one foot wide) and to provide clearance (approximately one - foot -deep) for the wooden boardwalk support beams along the top of slope in Reaches 2 and 3 would expose soils to short -term erosion by wind and water. As is standard practice for City construction projects, the project would be subject to City requirements for erosion control, which will be implemented by the construction contractor. Impacts would be less than significant. c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in onsile or offske landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would require relatively minor ground surface alterations, including excavations to depths of approximately two feet. Projects of this character generally do not have the potential to cause unstable earth conditions or changes in geological structure. The GEI (2004) geotechnical report found that the project site contains poorly consolidated undocumented fill materials. During the field investigation at the site, unsuitable soils were encountered approximately 7 to 10 feet below the existing surface level of Dover Drive. However, due to the characteristics of the project, recommendations for removal depths of unsuitable material will be on the order of approximately two feet below the existing surface level. GEI found that the existing on -site materials encountered are suitable for the support of the proposed sidewalk. Additionally, the GEI report recommendations pertaining to slope stability and the reduction of total and differential settlement are not applicable to the current project design. Slope stability analysis was not recommended by GEI for the selected boardwalk design in Reaches 2 and 3, or for the variable width sidewalk within the existing road in Reach 1. In Reach 1, the project would avoid impacting (i.e., back cutting) the slope above the existing roadway, thereby precluding the need for a retaining wall in that reach. In Reaches 2 and 3, the proposed sidewalk would be supported on 18 -inch diameter concrete posts. The geotechnical report recommendations for additional slope stability analyses were only applicable to those design alternatives with retaining walls. Based on the GEI (2004) geotechnical report, the project would not expose people or structures to adverse effects resulting from ground failure or landslides. The project would not result in landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse due to its location. Adherence to standard engineering practices and City design criteria relative to seismic and geological hazards would maintain impacts at levels that are less than significant. d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Less Than Significant Impact. As indicated above, the project would not create substantial risks to life or property from expansive soils due to its location. Based on the GEI (2004) geotechnical report, the project would not expose people or structures to adverse effects resulting from expansive soils. Adherence to standard engineering practices and standard City design criteria would maintain impacts at levels that are less than significant. 8387 May 2006 38 initial SladylMitigaled Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 0 0 C) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? No Impact. The proposed project would not require the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal. No impacts will result. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Less Than Significant Impact. Hazardous or flammable substances that may be used during the construction phase of the project would include vehicle fuels and oils for the operation of heavy equipment. Diesel and/or other construction equipment and vehicle fuels would be used; however, the transport, storage, and usage of hazardous materials such as fuels are regulated by the State and would be in compliance with all State regulations during construction. Construction vehicles on -site may require routine or emergency maintenance that could result in the accidental, albeit unlikely, release of oil, diesel fuel, transmission fluid, and/or other materials. However, those types of hazardous materials would not be used in large enough quantities, used for a long enough period, or stored in a manner that would pose a significant threat to the public. The risk of foreseeable upset or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment as a result of this project is minimal and would not be anticipated. Impacts are less than significant. b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Less Than Significant Impact. See paragraph a) above. Impacts would be less than significant. C) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less Than Significant Impact. The project limits are within one - quarter mile of the existing Newport Harbor Lutheran Church and School, which is just northeast of the project site. Although the school facility is located within one - quarter mile of the site, the project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste. Construction is expected to proceed at a relatively rapid rate and would not result in substantial dust or equipment emissions. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? No Impact. According to the State of California Department of Toxic Substances Control, the site is not located on a list of hazardous materials sites. No environmental impacts would result from the proposed project. 8387 39 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan, or within 2 miles of a public or private airport. By its nature, the proposed project does not have the potential to result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. No impact would result. i For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard forpeople residing or working in the project area? No Impact. See paragraph e) above. The project is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip. No environmental impacts would result from the proposed project. g) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency . response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less Than Significant Impact. Project activity would not alter emergency response or emergency evacuation routes. Roadways would remain accessible during construction, and returned to their original condition upon completion of the sidewalk project. The City routinely implements traffic control plans for construction projects, and the plan that will be implemented with the project would ensure that any impacts to emergency response plans or evacuation plans would be less than significant. Further, the City Public Works Department would provide early coordination with City emergency personnel to ensure the planning of alternative emergency routes where necessary. h) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No Impact. Although vegetation communities exist adjacent to and east of the project limits, the site is located in a predominantly urban area and would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death from wildland fires. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY An unnamed drainage located parallel to Dover Drive appears to contain perennial flowing waters. This drainage flows from north to south for about 500 linear feet. Stormwater and urban runoff enter the project limits through a 14 -inch culvert located south of the Newport Harbor Lutheran Church & School parking lot. The stormwater and urban runoff flow for approximately 500 linear feet on the surface and drain offsite through an 18 -inch culvert. Water is also conveyed to the drainage via several landscape irrigation pipes located on the east bank of the drainage. a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Less Than Significant Impact. The construction contractor will be required to implement erosion control measures to ensure that no soil or construction- related materials will enter the storm drain system or upper Newport Bay. In addition, silt fences are called out on the construction plans and will be installed and maintained by the contractor during work adjacent to Reaches 2 and 3 to insure that work activity does not encroach beyond the 11 -foot and 8 -foot project impact areas. The silt fences will ensure that no soil or construction materials fall down slope into sensitive vegetation in the drainage course. The proposed 8387 40 initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project F. � Adbk - Ak - l - project would be in compliance with all codes and regulations governing the prevention of erosion and transport of pollutants during construction. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. b) Would the project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate ofpre - existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? No Impact. The proposed project does not include the consumptive use of water and would not result in the depletion of groundwater resources or a lowering of the groundwater table. Due to the nature of this project, it would not affect the rate of flow or quantity of ground waters. No environmental impacts would result. c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite? Less Than Signifcant Impact. The unnamed drainage downslope of the proposed sidewalk project will be unaffected during project construction and for the life of the project. No grading or structural alterations would occur within the drainage course. Since project construction is planned to commence after the rainy season, and with the implementation of the City's standard Best Management Practices for runoff control during construction, as described in section VIII(a) above, no significant erosion problems would be expected. No change in drainage patterns would result. d) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or offsite? Less Than Significant Impact. The amount of surface water runoff along the project limits would not change relative to current conditions. No aspect of the proposed sidewalk project would result in on- or off -site flooding. See section VIII(c) above. e) Would the project create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Less Than Significant Impact. Construction and daily use of the proposed Dover Drive sidewalk does not involve the discharge of water into any drainage courses. The three existing storm drain inlet structures at the southern end of Reach 1 will be relocated approximately 4.5 to 7.5 feet west to accommodate sidewalk construction in the Dover Drive right -of -way. The project would not result in a net change in the amount of runoff discharge to those facilities since impervious surfaces after project construction would be the same as current conditions. Therefore, the project would not affect existing stormwater drainage systems and no significant impacts would occur. f) Would the project otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Less Than Significant Impact. As indicated above, construction of the sidewalk project would not increase erosion or runoff from impervious surfaces. The only potential to degrade water quality would be if any hazardous materials (such as diesel fuel) onsite during construction would migrate into the water 8387 41 initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project F� "y 0 0 system. However, the appropriate handling of these materials (see section VII(a) above) results in a less than significant impact. g) Would the project place housing within a 100 year food hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other food hazard delineation map? No Impact. The proposed project is not located within a 100 -year floodplain, and the project does not involve placement of housing. No environmental impacts would result. h) Would the project place within a 100 year food hazard area structures that would impede or redirect food flows? No Impact. The project would construct a public sidewalk facility. No structures would be built in the project area that would impede or redirect flood flows in the nearby drainage. No impacts would result. i) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? No Impact The project would not expose people or structure to risk or injury as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. No impact would result. P Would the project inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? No Impact Seiche, tsunami, and mudflow are not hazards in the project area. The project would not expose people or structures to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. No impact would result. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING As previously indicated, the proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project is located east of residential development along Dover Drive, immediately west and downslope of Castaways Park, and southwest of Newport Harbor Lutheran Church and School. Figure 3 depicts existing conditions in the project limits and on surrounding properties. An unnamed drainage located parallel to Dover Drive appears to contain perennial flowing waters. This drainage flows from north to south for 500 linear feet and contains riparian and wetland species. The proposed project site is within the right -of -way of Dover Drive but is designated as REDS (Recreational & Environmental Open Space) in the City's General Plan. The site is located east of land uses that are designated APF (Administrative, Professional, & Financial Commercial) and SFD (Single Family Detached). The project site is zoned as PC -43 (Upper Castaways Planned Community). East of the site are properties zoned APF (Administrative, Professional, Financial) and R -1 (Single - Family Residential). South of Cliff Drive and northeast of the Dover Drive/PCH intersection is a commercial area designated PC -37- MM (Castaways Marina, Mariner's Mile Overlay). a) Would the project physically divide an established community? No Impact. The project is the installation of public sidewalk within an existing arterial right -of -way. Surrounding land uses are primarily residential, commercial, and recreational in nature. There would be no 8387 42 MAW Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project S —> J 0 0 use of any other land for the project, and there would be no division of an established community. No impact would result. b) Would the project conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for fire purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? No Impact. Current land use regulations allow for the proposed use of the road right -of -way for sidewalk construction. The proposed project would not result in an alteration of land use in the area. No environmental impact would result. C) Would the project conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? No Impact. As indicated in the Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the Castaways Park Vegetation (LSA 2001), the project site is within the coastal portion of the Orange County Central- Coastal Subregional Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP) program, which includes several thousand acres of natural open space in the San Joaquin Hills that contain dense, relatively undisturbed scrub habitat. The final NCCP/Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for the Central Coastal Subregion was approved in July 1996. The approved NCCP /HCP and applicable Section 10(a) permits identify the project area as outside the designated habitat reserve. No significant impacts would occur. X. MINERAL RESOURCES a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? No Impact. The project site is located in an urban area and does not contain mineral deposits or resources of regional or State value. No impact would result. b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No Impact. The project site consists of paved roadway and does not contain locally important mineral resources delineated on City land use plans. No impact would result. XI. NOISE Sound is mechanical energy transmitted by pressure waves in a compressible medium such as air. Noise as a pollutant can be defined ag unwanted sound. The decibel (dB) scale is used to quantify sound intensity. Because the human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies within the spectrum, noise measurements are weighted more heavily within those frequencies of maximum human sensitivity in a process called "A- weighting" written as dBA. Noise can be generated from either point sources (stationary equipment) or from a line source, such as a roadway with moving vehicles, or aircraft flying overhead. Noise decreases with distance and over the terrain over which it travels. Existing noise sources at the project site are primarily from traffic along major arterials (Pacific Coast Highway, Dover Drive, Cliff Drive, etc.), as well as occasional construction noise 8387 43 initial StudylMitigafed Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project I-P 0 0 from surrounding projects. Because of the site's location within these roadways and proximity to traffic - generating uses, the existing ambient noise levels are relatively high. The Newport Harbor Lutheran Church school and nearby residences west of Dover Drive are the primary noise - sensitive receptors within one - quarter mile of the project limits. The City of Newport Beach General Plan Noise Element contains interior and exterior noise level standards for both mobile and locally regulated sources. The noise level limits for residential and other noise - sensitive areas are not to exceed 65 dBA Leq for exterior and 45 dBA Leq for interior areas. Non- residential use areas are not to exceed 70 dBA Leq for exterior areas. a) Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Less Than Significant Impact. The project consists of the construction of a public sidewalk in an urbanized area with relatively high traffic volumes. The generation of project - related noise would occur over the short-tern for site preparation and construction activities. However, this noise would not be significant given the context of the existing noise from traffic and existing land uses in the project area. The project construction noise would not conflict with the surrounding residential and school uses, which are the most noise - sensitive. Although located within one - quarter mile of the proposed construction limits, those land uses would not be adversely affected by short-term, temporary noise increases that may occur during construction. The possible impacts would occur over a relatively short duration (i.e., 90 days) and would only occur during the daytime hours. All construction work will be accomplished within the time . limits permitted by City's noise ordinance, which allows construction on weekdays between 7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. Work will be conducted on Saturdays between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. only if approved by the Public Works Director for special needs during the construction period. No work will be permtted on holidays or Sundays. Compliance with those time limits is sufficient to maintain all construction - related noise impacts at levels that are less than significant. By its nature, the proposed sidewalk project would not result in any long -term increases in existing noise levels in the project area. Therefore, both short-term and long -term noise impacts would be less than significant. b) Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less Than Sigrriftcant Impact Excessive groundbome vibration is typically caused by activities such as blasting used in mining operations, or the use of pile drivers during construction. The project will. not require any blasting activities but would involve boring and pile driving to construct the 18 -inch diameter concrete posts that will support the boardwalk header beams in Reaches 2 and 3. Despite the noise and vibration levels associated with such construction, however, it would occur at times of the day and for short enough durations that it would not be a nuisance to noise sensitive uses. Further, given their distance from the project construction limits, occupied structures would not be exposed to excessive groundbome vibration or groundborne noise levels. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. C) Would the project result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? No Impact. The project would not generate any vehicle trips that would add to roadway noise in the long- term. Therefore, ambient noise levels in the project vicinity would be the same as levels existing without the project and no impact would result. 6367 44 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project C, 0 d) Would the project result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in section XI.a above, short-term noise impacts are impacts associated with the installation of the sidewalk reaches. These activities would result in short -term noise levels that would be slightly higher than the existing ambient noise levels in the project area today (e.g., truck traffic and construction activity), but would cease once construction is complete. A less than significant impact would result. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The proposed project does not include any residential or commercial development. The proposed project site is not located within an airport land use plan, or within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport. No environmental impacts would occur. J) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. See paragraph e) above. The project is not located with the vicinity of a private airstrip and would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. No impact would result. . XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING a) Would the project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? No Impact. The proposed project would not directly or indirectly induce population growth. The proposed sidewalk project would serve existing pedestrian users and has no potential for growth inducement. No environmental impacts would result. b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. The proposed sidewalk project will be constrained to the Dover Drive right -of -way. No housing would be displaced by the project. C) Would the project displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact The project would not displace any housing or people. No environmental impact would result. 8387 45 initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Prciect 1] .V XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new orphysically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any public services, including Fire Protection, Police Protection, Schools, Parks, or other public facilities? No Impact. The proposed project would not create a substantial new fire or public safety hazard. New employment would not be generated that would affect the demand for schools, parks, or other public facilities. The project would not result in the need for new or physically altered government facilities nor would it affect emergency response times or other performance objectives for public facilities in Newport Beach. Since the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered public facilities, no environmental impacts would result. XIV. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of-existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? No Impact The proposed project does not involve residential uses and would not cause a direct increase in the population of the project area. No increase in demand for or use of existing parks or recreational facilities would result from the implementation of the proposed project. Castaways Park is located immediately east of and adjacent to the proposed project area and is largely a passive recreation park, but with some paved and unpaved trail facilities. The proposed sidewalk would be constrained along the east side of Dover Drive and would not interfere with park usage. Rather, the proposed project would provide an additional pedestrian linkage to and from the park and surrounding areas. The proposed project would not cause physical deterioration of any recreational facilities and no environmental impacts would result. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion or recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact The proposed project would not include recreational facilities nor require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse effect on the environment. No impact will result. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC The project segment of Dover Drive passes near a mix of commercial, residential, recreational, and other uses. In this area Dover Drive and other surface streets receive moderate to heavy volumes of daily traffic. The nearest major arterial with high traffic volumes is Pacific Coast Highway, which is less than '/4 mile south of the intersection of Cliff Drive and Dover Drive. Short-term traffic impacts would occur only on Dover Drive where construction is scheduled. Since part of the project would be located in the street right - of -way, on- street parking would be affected during construction. Construction vehicles would be required 8387 May 2006 46 Initial Study/Mitrgated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project � �1 • • to park in close proximity to construction activities, thereby further encroaching upon on -street parking spaces. For the most part, the proposed sidewalk project would require grading and excavation only at shallow depths along the project limits. As indicated previously, construction would require temporary closure of one lane of northbound traffic on Dover Drive during construction. A mandatory traffic control plan will minimize the effects of construction on local residents, businesses and schools. The construction contractor will coordinate with City traffic engineering personnel regarding standard construction staging and traffic control plan requirements. Construction vehicles and machinery would be staged in a location on the street that would minimize construction interference with normal traffic patterns. Details of the traffic control plan would include construction vehicle haul routes, use of sidewalks, use of curb parking lanes, lane closures, etc. Additionally, the contractor may be required to build specific parts of the project during restricted times when effects would be minimized. The lane closure on Dover Drive could be limited to 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. in order to avoid the evening rush hour, as determined necessary by the Public Works Department. Flagging and appropriate signage would be installed to minimize potential safety hazards for vehicular and pedestrian traffic. The following evaluations indicate that all traffic impacts would be less than significant. a) Would the project cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (Le., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections) ? Less Than Significant Impact. During construction along Dover Drive, a temporary lane closure would be required, resulting in the potential for congestion, potential safety concerns for pedestrians near work areas, and the potential to restrict emergency access. However, the construction contractor will prepare a traffic control plan that is consistent with the conditions of the encroachment permits normally issued by the City. The traffic and pedestrian control measures in the traffic control plan will be coordinated with the City and would reduce any traffic impacts resulting from the project to less than significant levels. Further, project construction would not result in a permanent increase in traffic load or daily trips because installation of the proposed sidewalk would be temporary. b) Would the project exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Less Than Significant Impact The project would add a relatively minimal amount of construction- related trips during the approximately 90-day construction period. No individually or cumulatively significant level of service impacts would occur. C) Would the project result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? No Impact. The proposed project would not affect air traffic patterns. d) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible rises (eg., farm equipment)? Less Than Significant Impact. The propose sidewalk project would not have any permanent effects on the Dover Drive roadway design, nor would it cause any permanent traffic/transportation hazards. 8387 47 InNaf Study /Mitigated Negative Dedaradon May 2006 Dover Ddve Sidewalk Project 0 e) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Less Than Significant Impact. A traffic control plan to be implemented during construction will provide vehicular and pedestrian traffic control measures along the project segment of Dover Drive. As such, the potential to affect emergency access will be less than significant. f) Would the project result in inadequate parking capacity? No Impact. The project does not propose changes to on- street parking capacity. If applicable, any issues related to on- street parking along the project segment of Dover Drive will be addressed in the City s traffic control plan, which will be prepared by the construction contractor in cooperation with the City Public Works Department. No environmental impact would result. g) Would the project conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouls, bicycle racks)? No Impact. Although project construction would require the temporary closure of one northbound traffic lane on Dover Drive, the project does not conflict with adopted transportation policies. No environmental impact would result. XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS As indicated in the Alternatives Study (Van Dell 2005), the City and other local agencies responsible for utilities in the project vicinity were contacted for information on the location of their utilities. The study found that no storm drains, sewers, water lines or gas mains would be affected by project construction. However, all utility agencies will be notified as part of the final design scope of work. As determined necessary by the City Public Works Department, plans might be submitted for review by utility agencies to verify that existing improvements are shown correctly and, when appropriate, avoided during project construction. a) Would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? No Impact. No treated wastewater would be discharged as a result of the proposed project. The project would not discharge water or wastewater into any existing wastewater treatment facility. Therefore, no environmental impacts would occur. b) Would the project require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? No Impact. The proposed project is the construction of a public sidewalk and no new construction of wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of such facilities would be required. No project- related impacts would result. 8387 qg Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 1�11A • • i c) Would the project require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? No Impact Although the proposed sidewalk project would involve the relocation of several stormwater inlets in Dover Drive, the project would not require new stormwater facilities or the expansion of existing facilities. No environmental impacts would occur. d) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? No Impact. The proposed sidewalk project would not require a long -term water source or a new or expanded water supply. No environmental impacts would occur. e) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? No Impact. The proposed project would not require connections or service by a recycled water treatment provider. As in b) above, no environmental impacts would occur. P Would the project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Less Than Significant Impact A minimal amount of solid waste would be associated with construction. Any excess construction materials such as wood, concrete, asphalt, or metal would have a less than significant impact on landfill capacity in Orange County. g) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Less Than Significant Impact. A minimal amount of solid waste would be associated with construction. The project would comply with all municipal and State solid waste statutes and regulations and impacts would be less than significant. XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict file range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of file major periods of California history or prehistory? Less Than Significant Impact. The project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment and would not have a significant impact on any fish or wildlife or their habitat. The project area has been examined for historic and prehistoric significance and has not been found to contain important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory (see section V — Cultural Resources). The project does not have the potential to eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 8387 49 initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project LOO • • s b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects ofpast projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects ofprobable future projects)? Less Than. Significant Impact. Based on the proposed project's minimal quantitative contribution to traffic, air emissions and noise and its limited geographic extent, the previous sections of this environmental analysis support the determination that the proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project would not have impacts that are cumulatively considerable. c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less Than Significant Impact. The project would have short -term temporary construction impacts, which include traffic congestion/safety and noise concerns that would be alleviated by standard construction specifications and a traffic control plan. Through the application of City construction standards, the project would not have the potential to cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. All short -term temporary construction impacts would be less than significant, or less than significant after mitigation. 6367 May 2006 50 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Ddve Sidewalk Project W 0 0 SOURCES California Department of Conservation 1998a Division of Land Resources Protection, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, 1998 Important Farmlands Map for Orange County. 1998b Division of Mines and Geology, Open File Report 97 -08, Seismic Hazard Evaluation of the Anaheim and Newport Beach 7.5- Minute Quadrangles, Orange County, California. 1994 Division of Mines and Geology, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas, compiled by Charles W. Jennings. California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) 2005 USGS 7.5- minute quadrangle: Newport Beach City of Newport Beach 1994 Initial Study/Negative Declaration far Upper Castaways (TTM 15012). Geo- Environmental, Inc. 2004 Geotechnical Investigation Report, Proposed Dover Drive Improvements Between Cliff Drive and 16th Street, City of Newport Beach, California. Prepared for Van Dell and Associates, Inc. LSA Associates, Inc. 2001 Initial Study /Negative Declaration for the Castaways Park Revegetation Project. Prepared for the City of Newport Beach. RMW Paleo Associates 1997 Cultural Resources Investigation and Monitoring of Grading for the Upper Castaways View Park, Newport Beach, Orange County, California. Prepared for the City of Newport Beach. Van Dell and Associates, Inc. 2005 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Alternatives Study. Prepared for the City of Newport Beach. 8387 gt Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaradon May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Vv PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH VAN DELL AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of this day of 2004, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a Municipal Corporation and Van Dell and Associates, Inc. whose address is 17801 Cartwright Road, Irvine, California, 92614 ( "Consultant"), and 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 City. B. City is planning to install sidewalk on the easterly side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 16th Street, adjacent to Castaways Park. C. City desires to engage Consultant to provide professional design engineering, geotechnical and environmental /biological services to prepare an alternatives analysis; biological assessment; CEQA documentation (Negative Declaration); construction documents, and Coastal Development Permit for the construction of approximately 1,000 feet of new sidewalk, retaining walls/curbs and potential utility adjustments and relocations ( "Project "). D. Consultant possesses the skill, experience, ability, background, certification, and knowledge to provide the services described in this Agreement. E. The principal member of Consultant for purposes of Project shall be John Wolter. F. City has solicited and received a proposal from Consultant, has reviewed the previous experience and evaluated the expertise of Consultant, and desires to retain Consultant to render professional services under the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows: 1. TERM The term of this Agreement shall commence on the above written date, and shall terminate on the 31st day of December, 2005, unless terminated earlier as set forth herein. 0 0 2. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED Consultant shall diligently perform all the services described in the Scope of Services attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. The City may elect to delete certain tasks of the Scope of Services at its sole discretion. 3. TIME OF PERFORMANCE Time is of the essence in the performance of services under this Agreement and Consultant shall perform the services in accordance with the schedule included in Exhibit A. The failure by Consultant to strictly adhere to the schedule may result in termination of this Agreement by City. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Consultant shall not be responsible for delays due to causes beyond Consultant's reasonable control. However, in the case of any such delay in the services to be provided for the Project, each party hereby agrees to provide notice to the other party so that all delays can be addressed. 3.1 Consultant shall submit all requests for extensions of time for performance in writing to the Project Administrator not later than ten (10) calendar days after the start of the condition that purportedly causes a delay. The Project Administrator shall review all such requests and may grant reasonable time extensions for unforeseeable delays that are beyond Consultant's control. 3.2 For all time periods not specifically set forth herein, Consultant shall respond in the most expedient and appropriate manner under the circumstances, by either telephone, fax, hand - delivery or mail. 4. COMPENSATION TO CONSULTANT City shall pay Consultant for the services on a time and expense not -to- exceed basis in accordance with the provisions of this Section and the Schedule of Billing Rates attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference. In no event shall Consultant's compensation for all work performed in accordance with this agreement, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, shall not exceed Sixty Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Thirty Eight Dollars and no /100 ($69,838.00) without additional authorization from City. No billing rate changes shall be made during the term of this Agreement without the prior written approval of City. 4.1 Consultant shall submit monthly invoices to City describing the work performed the preceding month. Consultant's bills shall include the name of the person who performed the work, a brief description of the services performed and /or the specific task in the Scope of Services to which it relates, the date the services were performed, the number of hours spent on all work billed on an hourly basis, and a description of any 2 e1 reimbursable expenditures. City shall pay Consultant no later than thirty (30) days after approval of the monthly invoice by City staff. 4.2 City shall reimburse Consultant only for those costs or expenses specifically approved in this Agreement, or specifically approved in advance by City. Unless otherwise approved, such costs shall be limited and include nothing more than the following costs incurred by Consultant: A. The actual costs of subconsultants for performance of any of the services that Consultant agrees to render pursuant to this Agreement, which have been approved in advance by City and awarded in accordance with this Agreement. B. Approved reproduction charges. C. Actual costs and /or other costs and/or payments specifically authorized in advance in writing and incurred by Consultant in the performance of this Agreement. 4.3 Consultant shall not receive any compensation for Extra Work without the prior written authorization of City. As used herein, "Extra Work" means any work that is determined by City to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services and which the parties did not reasonably anticipate would be necessary at the execution of this Agreement. Compensation for any authorized Extra Work shall be paid in accordance with the Schedule of Billing Rates as set forth in Exhibit B. 5. PROJECT MANAGER Consultant shall designate a Project Manager, who shall coordinate all phases of the Project. This Project Manager shall be available to City at all reasonable times during the Agreement term. Consultant has designated John Wolter to be its Project Manager. Consultant shall not remove or reassign the Project Manager or any personnel listed in Exhibit A or assign any new or replacement personnel to the Project without the prior written consent of City. City's approval shall not be unreasonably withheld with respect to the removal or assignment of non -key personnel. Consultant, at the sole discretion of City, shall remove from the Project any of its personnel assigned to the performance of services upon written request of City. Consultant warrants that it will continuously furnish the necessary personnel to complete the Project on a timely basis as contemplated by this Agreement. 6. ADMINISTRATION This Agreement will be administered by the Public Works Department. Robert Stein shall be the Project Administrator and shall have the authority to act for 191 0 City under this Agreement. The Project Administrator or his /her authorized representative shall represent City in all matters pertaining to the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement. 7. CITY'S RESPONSIBILITIES In order to assist Consultant in the execution of its responsibilities under this Agreement, City agrees to, where applicable: A. Provide access to, and upon request of Consultant, one copy of all existing relevant information on file at City. City will provide all such materials in a timely manner so as not to cause delays in Consultant's work schedule. B. Provide blueprinting and other services through City's reproduction company.for bid documents. Consultant will be required to coordinate the required bid documents with City's reproduction company. All other reproduction will be the responsibility of Consultant and as defined above. C. Provide usable life of facilities criteria and information with regards to new facilities or facilities to be rehabilitated. 8. STANDARD OF CARE 8.1 All of the services 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 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. 8.2 Consultant represents and warrants to City that it has or shall obtain all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatsoever nature that are legally required of Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant further represents and warrants to City that Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep in effect or obtain at all times during the term of this Agreement, any and all licenses, permits, insurance and other approvals that are legally required of Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant shall maintain a City of Newport Beach business license during the term of this Agreement. 8.3 Consultant shall not be responsible for delay, nor shall Consultant be responsible for damages or be in default or deemed to be in default by reason of strikes, lockouts, accidents, or acts of God, or the failure of City to furnish timely information or to approve or disapprove Consultant's work promptly, or delay or faulty performance by City, contractors, or govemmental agencies. M s 9. HOLD HARMLESS r To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents and employees (collectively, the "Indemnified Parties) from and against any and all claims (including, without limitation, claims for bodily injury, death or damage to property), demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including, without limitation, attorney's fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever (individually, a Claim; collectively, "Claims "), which may arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to any work negligently performed or services provided under this Agreement (including, without limitation, defects in workmanship or materials and /or design defects [if the design originated with Consultant]) or Consultant's presence or activities conducted on the Project (including the negligent and /or willful acts, errors and /or omissions of Consultant, its principals, officers, agents, employees, vendors, suppliers, consultants, subcontractors, anyone employed directly or indirectly by any of them or for whose acts they may be liable or any or all of them). Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing herein shall be construed to require Consultant to indemnify the Indemnified Parties from any Claim arising from the active negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties. Nothing in this indemnity shall be construed as authorizing any award of attorney's fees in any action on or to enforce the terms of this Agreement. This indemnity shall apply to all claims and liability regardless of whether any insurance policies are applicable. The policy limits do not act as a limitation upon the amount of indemnification to be provided by the Consultant. 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR It is understood that City retains Consultant on an independent contractor basis and Consultant is not an agent or employee of 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 expressed terms of this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to constitute approval for Consultant or any of Consultant's employees or agents, to be the agents or employees of City. Consultant shall have the responsibility for and control over the means of performing the work, provided that Consultant is in compliance with the terms of this Agreement. Anything in this Agreement that may appear to give City the right to direct Consultant as to the details of the performance or to exercise a measure of control over Consultant shall mean only that Consultant shall follow the desires of City with respect to the results of the services. 11. COOPERATION Consultant agrees to work closely and cooperate fully with City's designated Project Administrator and any other agencies that may have jurisdiction or interest in the work to be performed. City agrees to cooperate with the Consultant on the Project. I. 12. CITY POLICY Consultant shall discuss and review all matters relating to policy and Project direction with City's Project Administrator in advance of all critical decision points in order to ensure the Project proceeds in a manner consistent with City goals and policies. 13. PROGRESS Consultant is responsible for keeping the Project Administrator and/or his/her duly authorized designee informed on a regular basis regarding the status and progress of the Project, activities performed and planned, and any meetings that have been scheduled or are desired. 14. INSURANCE Without limiting Consultant's indemnification of City, and prior to commencement of work. Consultant shall obtain, provide and maintain at its own expense during the term of this Agreement, a policy or policies of liability insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form satisfactory to City. A. Certificates of insurance. Consultant shall provide certificates of insurance with original endorsements to City as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein. Insurance certificates must be approved by City's Risk Manager prior to commencement of performance or issuance of any permit. Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with City at all times during the term of this Agreement. B. Signature. A person authorized by the insurer to bind coverage on its behalf shall sign certification of all required policies. C. Acceptable Insurers. All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact business of insurance in the State of California, with an assigned policyholders' Rating of A (or higher) and Financial Size Category Class VII (or larger) in accordance with the latest edition of Best's Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by the City's Risk Manager. D. Coverage Requirements. i. Workers' Compensation Coverage. Consultant shall maintain Workers' Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance for his or her employees in accordance with the laws of the State of California. In addition, Consultant shall require each subcontractor to similarly maintain Workers' Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance in accordance with the laws of the State of California for all of the subcontractor's employees. Any notice of cancellation or non - renewal of all Workers' Compensation policies must be received by City at least thirty (30) calendar days prior to such change. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against City, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers for losses arising from work performed by Consultant for City. ii. General Liability Coverage. Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance in an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage, including without limitation, contractual liability. If commercial general liability insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work to be performed under this Agreement, or the general aggregate limit shall be at least twice the required occurrence limit. Automobile Liability Coverage. Consultant shall maintain automobile insurance covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of the Consultant arising out of or in connection with work to be performed under this Agreement, including coverage for any owned, hired, non -owned or rented vehicles, in an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit for each occurrence. iv. Professional Errors and Omissions Insurance. Consultant shall maintain 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). E. Endorsements. Each general liability and automobile liability insurance policy shall be endorsed with the following specific language: The City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds with respect to liability arising out of work performed by or on behalf of the Consultant. This policy shall be considered primary insurance as respects to City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers as respects to all claims, losses, or liability arising directly or indirectly from the Consultant's operations or services provided to City. Any insurance maintained by City, including any self- insured retention City may have, shall be considered excess insurance only and not contributory with the insurance provided hereunder. iii. This insurance shall act for each insured and additional insured as though a separate policy had been written for each, except with respect to the limits of liability of the insuring company. iv. The insurer waives all rights of subrogation against City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. 7 V. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers. vi. The insurance provided by this policy shall not be suspended, voided, canceled, or reduced in coverage or in limits, by either party except after thirty (30) calendar days written notice has been received by City. F. Timely Notice of Claims. Consultant shall give City prompt and timely notice of claim made or suit instituted arising out of or resulting from Consultant's performance under this Agreement. G. Additional Insurance. 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. 15. PROHIBITION AGAINST ASSIGNMENTS AND TRANSFERS Except as specifically authorized under this Agreement, the services to be provided under this Agreement shall not be assigned, transferred contracted or subcontracted out without the prior written approval of City. Any of the following shall be construed as an assignment: 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. 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. 16. SUBCONTRACTING Subcontracts Authorized. City and Consultant agree that subconsultants may be used to complete the work outlined in the Scope of Services. The subconsultants authorized by City to perform work on this Project are identified in Exhibit A. Consultant shall be fully responsible to City for all acts and omissions of the subcontractor. Nothing in this Agreement shall create any contractual relationship between City and subcontractor nor shall it create any obligation on the part of City to pay or to see to the payment of any monies due to any such subcontractor other than as otherwise required by law. Except as specifically authorized herein, the services to be provided under this Agreement shall not be otherwise assigned, transferred, contracted or subcontracted out without the prior written approval of City. 17. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS Each and every report, draft, map, record, plan, document and other writing produced (hereinafter "Documents "), prepared or caused to be prepared by Consultant, its officers, employees, agents and subcontractors, in the course of implementing this Agreement, shall become the exclusive property of City, and 93 City shall have the sole right to use such materials in its discretion without further compensation to Consultant or any other party. Consultant shall, at Consultant's expense, provide such Documents to City upon prior written request. Documents, including drawings and specifications, prepared by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement are not intended or represented to be suitable for reuse by City or others on any other project. Any use of completed Documents for other projects and any use of incomplete Documents without specific written authorization from Consultant will be at City's sole risk and without liability to Consultant. Further, any and all liability arising out of changes made to Consultant's deliverables under this Agreement by City or persons other than Consultant is waived against Consultant and City assumes full responsibility for such changes unless City has given Consultant prior notice and has received from Consultant written consent for such changes. All improvement and /or construction plans shall be prepared with indelible waterproof ink or electrostaticly plotted on standard 24 -inch by 36 -inch Mylar with a minimum thickness of three mils. Consultant shall provide to City 'As- Built' drawings, and a copy of digital ACAD and tiff image files of all final sheets within ninety (90) days after finalization of the Project. For more detailed requirements, a copy of the City of Newport Beach Standard Design Requirements is available from the City's Public Works Department. 18. COMPUTER DELIVERABLES CADD data delivered to City shall include the professional stamp of the engineer or architect in charge of or responsible for the work. City agrees that Consultant shall not be liable for claims, liabilities or losses arising out of, or connected with (a) the modification or misuse by City, or anyone authorized by City, of CADD data; (b) the decline of accuracy or readability of CADD data due to inappropriate storage conditions or duration; or (c) any use by City, or anyone authorized by City, of CADD data for additions to this Project, for the completion of this Project by others, or for any other Project, excepting only such use as is authorized, in writing, by Consultant. By acceptance of CADD data, City agrees to indemnify Consultant for damages and liability resulting from the modification or misuse of such CADD data. All original drawings shall be submitted to City in the version of AutoCAD used by City in ".dwg" file format on a CD, and should comply with the City's digital submission requirements for Improvement Plans. The City will provide AutoCAD file of City Title Sheets. All written documents shall be transmitted to City in the City's latest adopted version of Microsoft Word and Excel. 19. CONFIDENTIALITY All Documents, including drafts, preliminary drawings or plans, notes and communications that result from the services in this Agreement, shall be kept confidential unless City authorizes in writing the release of information. N 0 20. OPINION OF COST Any opinion of the construction cost prepared by Consultant represents his/her judgment as a design professional and is supplied for the general guidance of City. Since Consultant has no control over the cost of labor and material, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, Consultant does not guarantee the accuracy of such opinions as compared to contractor bids or actual cost to City. 21. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY INDEMNITY The Consultant shall defend and indemnify City, its agents, officers, representatives and employees against any and all liability, including costs, for infringement of any United States' letters patent, trademark, or copyright infringement, including costs, contained in Consultant's drawings and specifications provided under this Agreement. 22. RECORDS Consultant shall keep records and invoices in connection with the work to be performed under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to the costs incurred under this Agreement and any services, expenditures and disbursements charged to City, for a minimum period of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to Consultant under this Agreement. All such records and invoices shall be clearly identifiable. Consultant shall allow a representative of City to examine, audit and make transcripts or copies of such records and invoices during regular business hours. Consultant shall allow inspection of all worts, data, Documents, proceedings and activities related to the Agreement for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment to Consultant under this Agreement. 23. WITHHOLDINGS City may withhold payment to Consultant 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 work as a result of such withholding. Consultant shall have an immediate right to appeal to the City Manager or his /her designee with respect to such disputed sums. Consultant shall be entitled to receive interest on any withheld sums at the rate of return that City earned on its investments during the time period, from the date of withholding of any amounts found to have been improperly withheld. 24. ERRORS AND OMISSIONS In the event of errors or omissions that are due to the negligence or professional inexperience of Consultant which result in expense to City greater than what would have resulted if there were not errors or omissions in the work accomplished by Consultant, the additional design, construction and /or 10 0 0 restoration expense shall be borne by Consultant. Nothing in this paragraph is intended to limit City's rights under any other sections of this Agreement. 25. CITY'S RIGHT TO EMPLOY OTHER CONSULTANTS City reserves the right to employ other Consultants in connection with the Project. 26. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST 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 any 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. 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 immediate termination of this Agreement by City. Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless City for any and all claims for damages resulting from Consultant's violation of this Section. 27. NOTICES All notices, demands, requests or approvals to be given under the terms of this Agreement shall be given in writing, to City by Consultant and conclusively shall be deemed served when delivered personally, or on the third business day after the deposit thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid, first -class mail, addressed as hereinafter provided. All notices, demands, requests or approvals from Consultant to City shall be addressed to City at: Attn: Robert Stein Public Works Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Phone: 949 - 644 -3322 Fax: 949 - 644 -3308 All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Consultant shall be addressed to Consultant at: Attn: John Wolter Van Dell and Associates, Inc. 17801 Cartwright Road Irvine, CA 92614 Phone: 949 - 474 -1400 Fax: 949 -261 -8482 11 • 28. TERMINATION 0 In the event that either parry fails or refuses to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement at the time and in the manner required, that party shall be deemed in default in the performance of this Agreement. If such default is not cured within a period of two (2) calendar days, or if more than two (2) calendar days are reasonably required to cure the default and the defaulting party fails to give adequate assurance of due performance within two (2) calendar days after receipt of written notice of default, specifying the nature of such default and the steps necessary to cure such default, the non - defaulting party may terminate the Agreement forthwith by giving to the defaulting party written notice thereof. Notwithstanding the above provisions, City shall have the right, at its sole discretion and without cause, of terminating this Agreement at any time by giving seven (7) calendar days prior written notice to Consultant. In the event of termination under this Section, City shall pay Consultant for services satisfactorily performed and costs incurred up to the effective date of termination for which Consultant has not been previously paid. On the effective date of termination, Consultant shall deliver to City all reports, Documents and other information developed or accumulated in the performance of this Agreement, whether in draft or final form. 29. COMPLIANCE WITH ALL LAWS Consultant shall at its own cost and expense comply with all statutes, ordinances, regulations and requirements of all governmental entities, including federal, state, county or municipal, whether now in force or hereinafter enacted. In addition, all work prepared by Consultant shall conform to applicable City, county, state and federal laws, rules, regulations and permit requirements and be subject to approval of the Project Administrator and City. 30. WAIVER A waiver by either party 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. 31. 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 herein. 12 0 0 32. CONFLICTS OR INCONSISTENCIES In the event there are any conflicts or inconsistencies between this Agreement and the Scope of Services or any other attachments attached hereto, the terms of this Agreement shall govern. 33. AMENDMENTS This Agreement may be modified or amended only by a written document executed by both Consultant and City and approved as to form by the City Attorney. 34. SEVERABILITY If any term or portion of this Agreement is held to be invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. 35. CONTROLLING LAW AND VENUE The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement and all matters relating to it and any action brought relating to this Agreement shall be adjudicated in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Orange. 36. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYMENT Consultant represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and it shall not discriminate against any subcontractor, employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, handicap, ancestry, sex or age. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed on the day and year first written above. APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, A Municipal Corporation LaVonne Harkless, City Clerk Mayor for the City of AN DELL AND ASSOCIATES, INC.: Mohammad R. Heist, President Attachments: Exhibit A — Scope of Services Exhibit B — Schedule of Billing Rates f: \userslpbw\sharedlagreementslfy 03- 041van dell -cover drive sidewalk.doc 13 Van Dell and Asso, Inc. Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services fook Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California B.1 WORK PLAN The following are the basic tasks for successful completion of the alternatives analysis, biological assessment, environmental documentation, permit processing, PS &E preparation, and bid support process. Task 1 — Background Research and Data Collection Following the kick -off meeting the initial task is to obtain all available as -built record drawings, survey information, right -of -way data, utility companies' information, and any other pertinent information for this project from City, County and other agencies. VA will visit the site and identify noteworthy features of the existing roadways to verify and supplement the available as -built drawings and survey data provided by the City. These features will include visible utilities and drainage facilities, traffic control devices (signs or signals), and features such as trees, and vegetated areas. Task 2 — Sidewalk Location Design Alternatives Following completion of background research, field inventory, and review of the survey data, the preliminary scope of work identified in the RFP for project location will be confirmed. At the beginning of the design process, VA will prepare a concept exhibit identifying alternatives for the proposed improvements. This exhibit will be used to develop a consensus between the City and the VA team on the design and impacts of the proposed project including analysis of sensitive riparian habitat, vehicle and bicycle traffic, utility and drainage system modifications, Resource Agency permitting and construction costs to implement the improvements. Once consensus on the selected alternative is achieved, the design process can go forward expeditiously, without delay to the project, as key issues will have been identified and resolved during the alternatives analysis. VA will prepare a letter to City confirming the design criteria and selected alternative. Based on our observations made during a site visit, different alternatives for the sidewalk improvements should be considered at different reaches along Dover Drive. the following alternatives would provide for minimum impact to the existing travel lanes and the riparian habitat along the easterly edge of Dover Drive. 1. Dover Drive (Cliff Drive to 250'± North of Cliff Drive) This reach is adjacent to the steep embankment above the easterly edge of Dover Drive. The bike /emergency parking lane is approximately 11 feet wide and the toe of the embankment is located just behind the existing curbs. For this reach potential alternatives are: 8' wide sidewalk behind the existing curb with an 8' to 11' high retaining wall 5' wide sidewalk behind the existing curb with a 5' to 8' high retaining wall construct new curb with 8' wide bike /emergency parking lane, 5' wide sidewalk and a 2' to 3' high retaining wall. This alternative will require restriping in order to utilize the roadway space adjacent to the median. C: Newmer�aM $MM1nO�m�oro�1L0eal$eWngsRamw� dry �MernA PdasWUbSSnopo ol5erv�cea.tloc EXHIBIT A Page 4 Van Deli and Assoc, Inc. Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services f e Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California 2. Dover Drive (250'± North of Cliff Drive to 900' North of Cliff Drive This reach is adjacent to the embankment which drops below the easterly edge of Dover Drive. The existing roadway is 32 feet wide with two 12' wide travel lanes, one 8' wide bike /emergency parking lane and 5'± level dirt area between the curb and top of the embankment slope. For this reach potential alternatives are: 5' wide sidewalk behind the existing curb, 2' to 3' deep cut off wall below the back edge of the sidewalk and a wood or anodized aluminum railing. 8' wide boardwalk behind the existing curb supported on wood poles with a wood railing. 3. Dover Drive (900' North of Cliff Drive to 1000' North of Cliff Drive) This reach is adjacent to the embankment which drops below the easterly edge of Dover Drive. Several mature Willow Trees are located at the top of the slope 5' to 6' behind the existing curb. The existing roadway is 32 feet wide with two 12' wide travel lanes and an 8' wide bike /emergency parking lane. For this reach potential alternatives are: 5' wide sidewalk behind the existing curb with a 2' to 3' deep cut off wall below the back edge of the sidewalk and a wood or anodized aluminum rail. 5' wide boardwalk behind the existing curb supported on wood poles with a wood railing. Task 3 — Geotechnical Investigation and Report The geotechnical investigation will consist of five subtasks: (a) data review /coordination, (b) field investigation, (c) laboratory testing, (d) engineering analyses, and (e) report preparation. These tasks are briefly described below. (The evaluation of the stability of the slopes at the back of curb along a portion of the roadway is not part of the proposed scope of work). a. Data Review /Coordination Available geotechnical and geological data regarding the subject site and surrounding areas will be reviewed. The data review will include review of grading reports and other geotechnical data in the files of the City /County. b. Field Investigation The field investigation will consist of a site reconnaissance and a subsurface exploration. The site reconnaissance will be performed by a Geotechnical Engineer. Results of the site reconnaissance will be used to select the boring locations of the proposed subsurface exploration. Subsurface conditions will be identified by hand augering only three (3) borings to depths of 5 to 10 feet below the existing ground surface. The borings will be backfilled with the soil cuttings immediately after samples are retrieved. C ?Datums 5 sw Sen'ugsvnawi1Lorai 5%u^0� \Tpmptrpry iMamet FiieslOLKlSSwpo M Senic¢xEFc Page 5 ® Van Dell and Asso co, Inc. Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services foe Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California Both drive and bulk soil samples will be collected from the borings during the hand augering operations. The drive samples will be collected at approximately 3- to 5- foot intervals. The samples from the borings will be tested in the soils laboratory as described below. c. Laboratory Testing Samples collected during the field investigations will be examined in the laboratory to confirm field classifications. Selected samples from the borings will be tested to help evaluate engineering properties of the subsurface soils. The numbers and types of tests will depend upon the soils encountered. d. Engineering Analyses Results from the field and laboratory tests, site reconnaissance and GEI's experience will be the basis for the engineering analyses. GEI will provide engineering conclusions and recommendations for the following: • Suitable type of foundation, • Allowable soil pressures for foundation design, • Floor slab support, • Potential settlements and remediation measures, • Expansion properties of on -site soils, • Compaction characteristics of on -site soils, • Suitability of on -site soils for use as fill material, • Lateral earth pressures, • Site preparation for proposed construction. e. Report Preparation GEI's conclusions and recommendations and supporting field and laboratory test results will be presented in an engineering report, and it will be addressed to you as appropriate. We will provide two (2) copies of the report to the City and have made the following assumptions in providing this proposal: • Access to the site is provided • No unusually hard or other unforeseen ground conditions are encountered • Excess soil cuttings may be left on -site • Soil and groundwater are not contaminated Task 4 — Utility Coordination This task includes full service utility coordination including utility research, submittal of utility information request, review and note utility conflicts of planned improvements within the project area, and distribution of preliminary and final plans to the utility companies. Copies of all transmittal letters to and from the utility companies and a summary table tracking all communication will be submitted to the City. Task 5 — Plans, Specification and Cost Estimate_(PS&E) Following completion of geotechnical investigation and confirmation of the selected design alternative, construction plans will be prepared in "Plan and Profile" format at 1' = C:1DOCVmemna Sddl gsuoowy%A Ml SftgsaT mNrary imemm FOZ10LKi51swoa of sowm due Page 6 ® Van Dell , and Asso ,Inc. Proposal Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services f e Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California 20' horizontal scale and 1 °= 4' vertical scale for the required improvements. Individual plan sheets will include all topographic information, prominent features and proposed improvements including retaining wall profiles and reconstruction of drainage facilities as necessary. Structural and hydraulic calculations in support of the proposed design will also be provided to the City. The sidewalk improvements shall be designed to comply with current ADA requirements and the final construction plans will be prepared in acceptable Auto CADD format, under the City Public Works' logo and format, in accordance with City, APWA or OCPF &RD design standards. VA will maintain current editions of the design reference publications as applicable to the project. The final plan set will include the following plan sheets: (1) Title Sheet including Vicinity Map and Sheet Index (1) Notes Sheet including construction notes, general notes, construction symbols and standard plan references ect. (1) Details Sheet including typical roadway and sidewalk improvement sections, retaining wall details, drainage structure modifications and any other miscellaneous details required for Plan Sheets. (2) Roadway and Sidewalk Improvement Sheets including any retaining wall improvements, storm drain modifications and excavation. These sheets will also include profile for any retaining wall improvements. (1) Signing and Striping Plans at 1" = 40" scale will be prepared if existing curb and gutter is relocated to accommodate the new sidewalk. Relocation of the curb is a potential alternative within the reach form Cliff Drive to 250'± northerly of Cliff Drive where sidewalk construction would require excavation of the steep embankment above the roadway and construction of a retaining wall. These plans will show installation of all roadway striping and pavement markings in addition to the locations and types of existing traffic signs within the project limits. Should VA note the need for additional signs, or the removal of existing ones, these items will also be included on the plans. All signing and striping improvements will be designed according to City guidelines, and Caltrans standard details and specifications for traffic signing and striping and pavement markings. It is assumed that the traffic control will be prepared by the contractor and is not included in this scope of work. VA will prepare complete construction bidding documents including specifications and special provisions, construction quantities and cost estimate in accordance with the City format for all items of work included in the project. Deliverables: Plans and estimate will be submitted for review when they are at 60 %, 90% and 100% levels. Contract documents and special provisions will be submitted with the plan submittals at the 90% and 100% levels. At final submittal, a reproducible hard copy of the contract documents, plan sheet blue lines as well as mylar originals and electronic files will be submitted. C:�rooumemsore SeXvgeMr�owy�tacai Somresl�cmtorary imcmm Fim\Oo ?Mmw of Servi®e,E= Page 7 1..! Van Dell and Asso, Inc. Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services f e Dover Drive Sidewalk Project I City of Newport Beach, California Task 6 — Environmental Concerns and Permits Task 6.9 — General Biological/Botanical Surveys and Jurisdictional Delineation a. A literature review will be performed prior to the survey to determine whether there are any existing records for potential sensitive species or habitats within the vicinity of the project site. This task will include a review of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and the California Native Plant Society's Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI) for information relevant to the project site. In addition, the Biologist will review previous documents (if available) of surveys conducted in the immediate vicinity of the project to obtain literature that may be pertinent to the site. After the literature search, . a wildlife biologist and botanist familiar with the resources associated with the project vicinity will conduct a reconnaissance assessment of the biological resources onsite. All plant communities on the project site will be mapped and qualitatively described. The biologists will document the presence of common and sensitive biological resources and evaluate the habitat for the potential presence of sensitive species onsite. It is assumed fieldwork will take no more than one day to complete. After completing the field survey, Environmental Consultant will prepare a technical report of findings that includes the following topics: a) introduction, b) proposed project description, c) methods used to conduct the surveys, d) existing conditions of biological resources onsite, e) sensitive species and communities' discussion, and f) bibliography. Lists of wildlife and plant species observed during the surveys would be included. Field notes and survey forms used during the surveys and the resumes of the biologists who conducted the surveys will be included as appendices to the report. Two copies of a draft biological technical report of findings will be provided to the City for review within 2 weeks of completing the reconnaissance survey. Environmental Consultant will provide two copies of the final report to the City. b. The field delineation will be conducted by the Environmental Consultant's wetlands specialists who have extensive experience conducting jurisdictional delineations. The purpose of the field surveys will be to identify and delineate areas of the project site that fall under the regulatory jurisdiction of the ACOE pursuant to Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) jurisdiction pursuant to Section 1603 of the Fish and Game Code. To determine jurisdictional areas, the biologist will investigate criteria specified by the ACOE. Wetlands boundaries (if present) will be determined using the current accepted methodology prescribed in the ACOE 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual. All wetlands and other jurisdictional waters will be mapped on a topographic map. The Environmental Consultant will deliver a report summarizing the results of the jurisdictional delineation. The report will describe habitat present on site, the limits of biological survey and jurisdiction pursuant to ACOE and CDFG regulations and include a discussion of potential regulatory constraints and the ACOE and CDFG C'IUOam¢MS sm SenmoslmbmWuwi SeVtrgsk7ert mo imem cnesiouas oOo Of SOO,ce,doc Page 8 ® Van Dell and Asso, Inc. Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services f0ee Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California regulatory permitting procedures that may be required for the project. In addition, the report will include a map depicting ACOE and CDFG jurisdiction. As required by the resource agencies, the graphics will include site photographs. The Environmental Consultant will provide 4 copies of the Final delineation report to the City. Task 6.2 - Preparation of CEQA Documentation Preparation of Initial Study The Environmental Consultant will prepare the Initial Study (IS) for the proposed project. The IS will be prepared in accordance with the policies and procedures as identified by the City of Newport Beach. Preparation of Negative Declaration The City has recommended the preparation of a Negative Declaration (ND) for the proposed project. The ND will be prepared in accordance with the policies and procedures as identified by the City of Newport Beach. For the purpose of this proposal, we have assumed that a Negative Declaration will be prepared. If a Mitigated Negative Declaration is required additional compensation will be required based on additional work effort required. Environmental Consultant staff will attend up to four meetings, including the project kickoff meeting, regarding the Negative Declaration. A biologist will attend up to two meetings, including the project kickoff meeting. Task 6.3 — Permit Processing 1. Preparation of Section 404, Section 401, and 1602 Permit Applications, If Necessary If jurisdictional areas are to be affected by the proposed project, then Tasks a through d will be required. This work does not include the development of a restoration plan for the proposed project. If the resource agencies require a restoration plan (e.g., maintenance schedule, plant palette, monitoring standards, etc.) a separate scope of work and cost will be provided for that task. We will assume that all documents (base maps, as -built drawings ect.) provided by the City will be sufficient and complete in order for the resource agencies to process the application. a. Preparation of CDFG Application The Environmental Consultant will prepare and submit a notification to CDFG for a 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement. Unlike the ACOE, CDFG regulates not only the discharge of dredged or fill material, but all activities that alter streams and lakes and their associated habitat. CDFG has no abbreviated permitting process comparable to the ACOE nationwide permits. A CDFG 1602 Agreement is required for all activities resulting in impacts to streambeds and their associated riparian habitats. CDFG generally requires that any impacts to streambeds and adjacent Clo ume aM SelYings4NOCey�l Setltr g)Tempma IMemef Flles\OLK15{Smpa of Sarvi .doc Page 9 - - -, Van Dell and Assoc", Inc. Proposal Provide April 72, 2004 a Design Services Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California riparian habitats be fully mitigated. To ensure rapid and favorable action on a 1602 notification, a mitigation plan should be submitted with the notification package. It normally takes 90 days for the CDFG to process a 1602 notification. The Environmental Consultant will provide one copy of the final application to CDFG and one copy to the City. For projects that exceed $500,000 CDFG charges $1,390.50 to process a streambed alteration agreement. This fee is to be provided by the City. b. Preparation of ACOE Application The amount of work associated with preparing the notification to the ACOE pursuant to Section 404 depends on the magnitude of project impacts on jurisdictional waters and other resources. The proposal assumes that authorization for this project will be provided through the nationwide permit program and a pre - construction notification will not be required. If a notification to the ACOE is required, the Environmental Consultant will submit a proposal for that work. Consultant will provide one copy of the final application to ACOE and one copy to the City. The ACOE does not charge for the filing of their permit. c. Preparation of Written Notification for Water Quality (401) Certification A water quality certification is required from the regional water quality control board (RWQCB) for any activity that requires a federal license or permit (such as a Section 404 permit) and may result in a discharge to jurisdictional waters. The Environmental Consultant will prepare and submit the necessary documentation to the RWQCB for its review of the project pursuant to water quality certification. The Environmental Consultant will provide one copy of the final application to Water Board and one copy to the City. The RWQCB charges for the preparation of a certification of water quality and usually costs less than $1,000.00 for small projects (although their fee schedule is currently being modified). This fee is to be provided by the City. d. Agency Coordination Agency coordination will be initiated as soon as possible after submittal of the application and throughout the permitting process. The Environmental Consultant will coordinate with the ACOE, CDFG and the RWQCB throughout their review of the applications to ensure that any potential problems are made known to the City and resolved at the earliest possible opportunity. This usually involves the coordination of a site visit with the resource agencies. One meeting is anticipated for the completion of these permits. However, the project manager will attend meetings, with the City as requested on a time and materials basis, based on standard billing rates. C1 cuman aW SOirgs4,tlara}W, lSeting Tam gWae tFIIm10LK/SfSc of$mv'r .dx Page 10 ® Van Dell and Asso, Inc. Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 MF Design Services foik Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California 2. Coastal Development Permit Application and Submittal A City administered CDP will be required for the proposed project. The Environmental Consultant will complete the CDP application and submit the application, along with accompanying biological resources report(s). Task 7 — Bidding Process Assistant During the bidding process of the project VA will provide assistance to the City including answers to contractor Requests For Information (RFI) and preparing all required addenda. Task 8 — Project Management and Meetings The project will be diligently managed to ensure timely coordination with City staff, and keep the project on schedule and within budget. VA will prepare monthly progress report with updated schedule and meet and coordinate with the City as required. VA will prepare and distribute meeting agendas 24 -hours before the meeting. Draft of meeting minutes shall be ready within one week after meeting. For the purpose of the fee proposal, it is assumed that there will be four meetings with City during design stages, and one meeting with local community representatives. 13.2 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM VA's Quality Assurance and Quality Control Program is implemented on engineering design and study projects to ensure that the required documents: a Conform with the contract documents; n Are neat, well organized, clear, concise, and complete; n Are technically and grammatically correct; > Comply with generally accepted professional standards of engineering and applicable laws; > Are signed, dated, and stamped as required; and > Are consistent with other related plans and are constructible. All project team members, including drafters, designers, and supervisors, are involved with implementing the QA/QC program and ensuring that a quality product is produced by making every effort to do the work right the first time. C 1 mmeM eM SelfingaMbceylLaral Se ng NTe MU 1m et FiIw1IXJ06 W" of Service¢Uoc Page 11 ® Van Dell and Asso*1 Inc. Amended Proposal to Provide April 29, 2004 Design Services fdlMFe Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California SCOPE OF SERVICES ADDITIONS Additions to Section 13.1 "Work Plan" of Proposal dated April 12, 2004 B.1 WORK PLAN Task 2 — "Sidewalk Location Design Alternatives ": • Cast estimates for each alternative are included. • Recommendations are included in the alternative analysis. Task 6.2 - "Preparation of CEQA Documentation ": • Preparation of the Notice of Completion and Notice of Determination are included. • Preparation of the list of Mitigation Measures is included if a Mitigation Negative Declaration document is required. Task 6.3 — "Permit Processing" Section 2 "Coastal Development Permit Application and Submittal': Attendance at one (1) meeting with Coastal Commission staff is included. • Attendance at one (1) meeting for Coastal Commission Hearing is included. Assumed that Coastal Commission Hearing is in Southern California. If attendance is required in Northern California, additional fees for travel expenses and time will be required. C?➢ocumams eN Selliigslmloca} ALacaI5 e11ingslTemporary lnfemet Fba¢IOIHISiSwpeaf 5ervi� amentlmem.aoc Page 1 Van Dell and Associates, Inc. April 12, 2004 PROJECT SCHEDULE Proposal to Provide Design Services for the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California TASKS MONTH 0 r ] May Jun Jul Aug Sao Dec I I I Background Research and Data Collection jam— I I I I I Sidewalk Location Design Alternatives Geotechnical Investigation Report I II I Utility Coordlna0on Plan Specification and Cost Estimate I I I I Environmental Study and Permit" (- Bidding Process Assistant Proloct Management I and Meetings M I M I M Ay M I I I I J- I I I I City Review I I I u I I I 1 I I I I 5 a a a s m MILESTONES: o Legend: task activities u° E u 3 E QM meetings .� w 9 c a d € m v E € city roviews e Note: We have assumed 30 days for the CEDA Negative Declaration process and 4 to 6 weeks for the Coastal Development permitting. If unforeseen delays are encountered during the CEQA process or Coastal Development permit process, and if a CDFG 1600 agreement and /or an ACDE 404 permit are required. additional permitting lime will he necessary. CO�renb�M3onry •',�k,�,4ya,8„lp,lle+yury Fbnn,FM�q,t)p"1k,9 YT�MiI,}�bC, Page 13 is • ®Van Dell and Assod &, Inc. April 12, 2004 Notes: Proposal to Provide Design Service or the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California VAN DELL AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FEE SCHEDULE City of Newport Beach Department of Public of Works Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Effective January 1, 2004 Staff Classification Clerical /Support Staff Engineering Technical Support CADD Operator /Drafter Design /Survey Staff Professional Staff Senior Professional Staff Project Manager Principal Two -Man Survey Crew Three -Man Survey Crew 1. Billing will be every four weeks. Invoices are due and payable on presentation. 2. Overtime, when requested by the client, will be surcharged at a rate of 135% of the standard houdy rates. Sundays and holidays will be surcharged at a rate of 170% of the standard hourly rates. Hourly Rate $ 45.00 $ 60.00 $ 86.00 $ 95.00 $115.00 $130.00 $130.00 $155.00 $175.00 $205.00 EXHIBIT B QoDmmam are seNin srmlaaa %Wml Sml mt%Tompo,ary Imemel FiI %OWAF y Rmes.Eoc Page 29 • 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT C -3Ws a Agenda Item No. 7 May 25, 2004 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Public Works Department GIT Ur scvYrum Robert Stein 949 - 644 -3311 ZVE rstein @city.newport- beach.ca.us A SUBJECT: DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK DESIGN — APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH VAN DELL AND ASSOCIATES RECOMMENDATIONS Approve a budget amendment in the amount of $19,838 from the Transportation and Circulation fund balance, 260 -3605, to Transportation and Circulation, Dover Drive Sidewalk Design, 7261- C5100712. 2. Approve a Professional Services Agreement with Van Dell and Associates, Inc. (Van Dell), of Irvine, California, for the design of the Dover Drive sidewalk at a contract price of $69,838 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Agreement. DISCUSSION Five engineering consulting firms were invited to submit proposals to provide a comprehensive design for the construction of sidewalk along the easterly side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 16`h Street. The following four firms responded to the City's request for proposals: • Berryman & Henigar • BV Engineering • Dewan, Lundin & Associates • Van Dell and Associates, Inc. The proposals were independently reviewed to evaluate each firm's project understanding, project team's experience and qualifications, and past experience on similar projects, before ranking Van Dell the highest. Van Dell has completed design services competently and professionally on similar projects for other local agencies in Southern California. SUBJECT: Dover Drive Sidewal proval of Professional Services Agreement with ell and Associates May 25, 2004 Page 2 Upon selection, staff negotiated with Van Dell to provide the necessary scope of services for a fee of $69,838. The scope of Van Dell's professional services will include: 1. Considering design options for the sidewalk. One option is to consider construction of the sidewalk behind the existing curb. An alternative is to consider relocating the curb line into the street to minimize cutting into the steep slope that terminates at the back of the existing curb. The consultant will provide recommendations on the preferred alternative based on traffic safety and cost. 2. Providing geotechnical recommendations for slope grading and the proposed retaining wall. 3. Preparing detailed plan and profile drawings and cross sections, signing and striping plans, special provisions, bid proposal, and construction quantity and cost estimates. 4. Contacting the regulatory agencies (State Fish and Game, Corps of Engineers, Coastal Commission and the RWQCB) and determine project and permitting requirements. Preparing all permit applications and CEQA documents. Preparing a biological report for the CDP application. Funding Availability: Upon approval of the recommended Budget Amendment, sufficient funds will be available in the following account: Account Description Account Number Amount Transportation and Circulation Fund 7261- C5100712 $69,838 Environmental Review: The contract includes the preparation of environmental documents. Prepared by: Submitted by Robert Stei E. Step n G. Badum Principal Civil Engineer P6 Ic Works Director Attachment: Professional Services Agreement Budget Amendment L 0 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH VAN DELL AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of this _ day of 2004, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a Municipal Corporation ( "City "), and Van Dell and Associates, Inc. whose address is 17801 Cartwright Road, Irvine], California, 92614 ( "Consultant'), and 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 City. B. City is planning to install sidewalk on the easterly side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 16th Street, adjacent to Castaways Park. C. City desires to engage Consultant to provide professional design engineering, geotechnical and environmental /biological services to prepare an alternatives analysis; biological assessment; CEQA documentation (Negative Declaration); construction documents, and Coastal Development Permit for the construction of approximately 1,000 feet of new sidewalk, retaining walls /curbs and potential utility adjustments and relocations ( "Project "). D. Consultant possesses the skill, experience, ability, background, certification, and knowledge to provide the services described in this Agreement. E. The principal member of Consultant for purposes of Project shall be John Wolter. F. City has solicited and received a proposal from Consultant, has reviewed the previous experience and evaluated the expertise of Consultant, and desires to retain Consultant to render professional services under the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows: 1. TERM The term of this Agreement shall commence on the above written date, and shall terminate on the 31st day of December, 2005, unless terminated earlier as set forth herein. 0 0 2. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED Consultant shall diligently perform all the services described in the Scope of Services attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. The City may elect to delete certain tasks of the Scope of Services at its sole discretion. 3. TIME OF PERFORMANCE Time is of the essence in the performance of services under this Agreement and Consultant shall perform the services in accordance with the schedule included in Exhibit A. The failure by Consultant to strictly adhere to the schedule may result in termination of this Agreement by City. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Consultant shall not be responsible for delays due to causes beyond Consultant's reasonable control. However, in the case of any such delay in the services to be provided for the Project, each party hereby agrees to provide notice to the other party so that all delays can be addressed. 3.1 Consultant shall submit all requests for extensions of time for performance in writing to the Project Administrator not later than ten (10) calendar days after the start of the condition that purportedly causes a delay. The Project Administrator shall review all such requests and may grant reasonable time extensions for unforeseeable delays that are beyond Consultant's control. 3.2 For all time periods not specifically set forth herein, Consultant shall respond in the most expedient and appropriate manner under the circumstances, by either telephone, fax, hand- delivery or mail. 4. COMPENSATION TO CONSULTANT City shall pay Consultant for the services on a time and expense not -to- exceed basis in accordance with the provisions of this Section and the Schedule of Billing Rates attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference. In no event shall Consultant's compensation for all work performed in accordance with this agreement, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, shall not exceed Sixty Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Thirty Eight Dollars and no /100 ($69,838.00) without additional authorization from City. No billing rate changes shall be made during the term of this Agreement without the prior written approval of City. 4.1 Consultant shall submit monthly invoices to City describing the work performed the preceding month. Consultant's bills shall include the name of the person who performed the work, a brief description of the services performed and/or the specific task in the Scope of Services to which it relates, the date the services were performed, the number of hours spent on all work billed on an hourly basis, and a description of any 2 • i reimbursable expenditures. City shall pay Consultant no later than thirty (30) days after approval of the monthly invoice by City staff. 4.2 City shall reimburse Consultant only for those costs or expenses specifically approved in this Agreement, or specifically approved in advance by City. Unless otherwise approved, such costs shall be limited and include nothing more than the following costs incurred by Consultant: A. The actual costs of subconsultants for performance of any of the services that Consultant agrees to render pursuant to this Agreement, which have been approved in advance by City and awarded in accordance with this Agreement. B. Approved reproduction charges. C. Actual costs and /or other costs and/or payments specifically authorized in advance in writing and incurred by Consultant in the performance of this Agreement. 4.3 Consultant shall not receive any compensation for Extra Work without the prior written authorization of City. As used herein, "Extra Work" means any work that is determined by City to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services and which the parties did not reasonably anticipate would be necessary at the execution of this Agreement. Compensation for any authorized Extra Work shall be paid in accordance with the Schedule of Billing Rates as set forth in Exhibit B. 5. PROJECT MANAGER Consultant shall designate a Project Manager, who shall coordinate all phases of the Project. This Project Manager shall be available to City at all reasonable times during the Agreement term. Consultant has designated John Wolter to be its Project Manager. Consultant shall not remove or reassign the Project Manager or any personnel listed in Exhibit A or assign any new or replacement personnel to the Project without the prior written consent of City. Gig's approval shall not be unreasonably withheld with respect to the removal or assignment of non -key personnel. Consultant, at the sole discretion of City, shall remove from the Project any of its personnel assigned to the performance of services upon written request of City. Consultant warrants that it will continuously furnish the necessary personnel to complete the Project on a timely basis as contemplated by this Agreement. 6. ADMINISTRATION This Agreement will be administered by the Public Works Department. Robert Stein shall be the Project Administrator and shall have the authority to act for 3 E E City under this Agreement. The Project Administrator or his /her authorized representative shall represent City in all matters pertaining to the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement. 7. CITY'S RESPONSIBILITIES In order to assist Consultant in the execution of its responsibilities under this Agreement, City agrees to, where applicable: A. Provide access to, and upon request of Consultant, one copy of all existing relevant information on file at City. City will provide all such materials in a timely manner so as not to cause delays in Consultant's work schedule. B. Provide blueprinting and other services through City's reproduction company for bid documents. Consultant will be required to coordinate the required bid documents with City's reproduction company. All other reproduction will be the responsibility of Consultant and as defined above. C. Provide usable life of facilities criteria and information with regards to new facilities or facilities to be rehabilitated. 8. STANDARD OF CARE 8.1 All of the services 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 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. 8.2 Consultant represents and warrants to City that it has or shall obtain all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatsoever nature that are legally required of Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant further represents and warrants to City that Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep in effect or obtain at all times during the term of this Agreement, any and all licenses, permits, insurance and other approvals that are legally required of Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant shall maintain a City of Newport Beach business license during the term of this Agreement. 8.3 Consultant shall not be responsible for delay, nor shall Consultant be responsible for damages or be in default or deemed to be in default by reason of strikes, lockouts, accidents, or acts of God, or the failure of City to furnish timely information or to approve or disapprove Consultant's work promptly, or delay or faulty performance by City, contractors, or governmental agencies. a i i 9. HOLD HARMLESS To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents and employees (collectively, the "Indemnified Parties) from and against any and all claims (including, without limitation, claims for bodily injury, death or damage to property), demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including, without limitation, attorney's fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever (individually, a Claim; collectively, "Claims "), which may arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to any work negligently performed or services provided under this Agreement (including, without limitation, defects in workmanship or materials and /or design defects [if the design originated with Consultant]) or Consultant's presence or activities conducted on the Project (including the negligent and /or willful acts, errors and /or omissions of Consultant, its principals, officers, agents, employees, vendors, suppliers, consultants, subcontractors, anyone employed directly or indirectly by any of them or for whose acts they may be liable or any or all of them). Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing herein shall be construed to require Consultant to indemnify the Indemnified Parties from any Claim arising from the active negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties. Nothing in this indemnity shall be construed as authorizing any award of attorney's fees in any action on or to enforce the terms of this Agreement. This indemnity shall apply to all claims and liability regardless of whether any insurance policies are applicable. The policy limits do not act as a limitation upon the amount of indemnification to be provided by the Consultant. 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR It is understood that City retains Consultant on an independent contractor basis and Consultant is not an agent or employee of 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 expressed terms of this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to constitute approval for Consultant or any of Consultant's employees or agents, to be the agents or employees of City. Consultant shall have the responsibility for and control over the means of performing the work, provided that Consultant is in compliance with the terms of this Agreement. Anything in this Agreement that may appear to give City the right to direct Consultant as to the details of the performance or to exercise a measure of control over Consultant shall mean only that Consultant shall follow the desires of City with respect to the results of the services. 11. COOPERATION Consultant agrees to work closely and cooperate fully with City's designated Project Administrator and any other agencies that may have jurisdiction or interest in the work to be performed. City agrees to cooperate with the Consultant on the Project. F7 L 12. CITY POLICY • Consultant shall discuss and review all matters relating to policy and Project direction with City's Project Administrator in advance of all critical decision points in order to ensure the Project proceeds in a manner consistent with City goals and policies. 13. PROGRESS Consultant is responsible for keeping the Project Administrator and/or his /her duly authorized designee informed on a regular basis regarding the status and progress of the Project, activities performed and planned, and any meetings that have been scheduled or are desired. 14. INSURANCE Without limiting Consultant's indemnification of City, and prior to commencement of work. Consultant shall obtain, provide and maintain at its own expense during the term of this Agreement, a policy or policies of liability insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form satisfactory to City. A. Certificates of Insurance. Consultant shall provide certificates of insurance with original endorsements to City as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein. Insurance certificates must be approved by City's Risk Manager prior to commencement of performance or issuance of any permit. Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with City at all times during the term of this Agreement. B. Signature. A person authorized by the insurer to bind coverage on its behalf shall sign certification of all required policies. C. Acceptable Insurers. All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact business of insurance in the State of California, with an assigned policyholders' Rating of A (or higher) and Financial Size Category Class VII (or larger) in accordance with the latest edition of Best's Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by the City's Risk Manager. D. Coverage Requirements. L Workers' Compensation Coverage. Consultant shall maintain Workers' Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance for his or her employees in accordance with the laws of the State of California. In addition, Consultant shall require each subcontractor to similarly maintain Workers' Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance in accordance with the laws of the State of California for all of the subcontractor's employees. Any notice of cancellation or non - renewal of all Workers' Compensation policies must be received by City at least thirty (30) calendar days prior to such change. The insurer shall 11 0 0 agree to waive all rights of subrogation against City, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers for losses arising from work performed by Consultant for City. ii. General Liability Coverage. Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance in an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage, including without limitation, contractual liability. If commercial general liability insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work to be performed under this Agreement, or the general aggregate limit shall be at least twice the required occurrence limit. iii. Automobile Liability Coverage. Consultant shall maintain automobile insurance covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of the Consultant arising out of or in connection with work to be performed under this Agreement, including coverage for any owned, hired, non -owned or rented vehicles, in an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit for each occurrence. iv. Professional Errors and Omissions Insurance. Consultant shall maintain 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). E. Endorsements. Each general liability and automobile liability insurance policy shall be endorsed with the following specific language: L The City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds with respect to liability arising out of work performed by or on behalf of the Consultant. ii. This policy shall be considered primary insurance as respects to City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers as respects to all claims, losses, or liability arising directly or indirectly from the Consultant's operations or services provided to City. Any insurance maintained by City, including any self- insured retention City may have, shall be considered excess insurance only and not contributory with the insurance provided hereunder. iii. This insurance shall act for each insured and additional insured as though a separate policy had been written for each, except with respect to the limits of liability of the insuring company. iv. The insurer waives all rights of subrogation against City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. 7 0 0 V. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers. vi. The insurance provided by this policy shall not be suspended, voided, canceled, or reduced in coverage or in limits, by either party except after thirty (30) calendar days written notice has been received by City. F. Timely Notice of Claims. Consultant shall give City prompt and timely notice of claim made or suit instituted arising out of or resulting from Consultant's performance under this Agreement. G. Additional Insurance. 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. 15. PROHIBITION AGAINST ASSIGNMENTS AND TRANSFERS Except as specifically authorized under this Agreement, the services to be provided under this Agreement shall not be assigned, transferred contracted or subcontracted out without the prior written approval of City. Any of the following shall be construed as an assignment: 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. 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 orjoint- venture. 16. SUBCONTRACTING Subcontracts Authorized. City and Consultant agree that subconsultants may be used to complete the work outlined in the Scope of Services. The subconsultants authorized by City to perform work on this Project are identified in Exhibit A. Consultant shall be fully responsible to City for all acts and omissions of the subcontractor. Nothing in this Agreement shall create any contractual relationship between City and subcontractor nor shall it create any obligation on the part of City to pay or to see to the payment of any monies due to any such subcontractor other than as otherwise required by law. Except as specifically authorized herein, the services to be provided under this Agreement shall not be otherwise assigned, transferred, contracted or subcontracted out without the prior written approval of City. 17. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS Each and every report, draft, map, record, plan, document and other writing produced (hereinafter "Documents "), prepared or caused to be prepared by Consultant, its officers, employees, agents and subcontractors, in the course of implementing this Agreement, shall become the exclusive property of City, and EV • • City shall have the sole right to use such materials in its discretion without further compensation to Consultant or any other party. Consultant shall, at Consultant's expense, provide such Documents to City upon prior written request. Documents, including drawings and specifications, prepared by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement are not intended or represented to be suitable for reuse by City or others on any other project. Any use of completed Documents for other projects and any use of incomplete Documents without specific written authorization from Consultant will be at City's sole risk and without liability to Consultant. Further, any and all liability arising out of changes made to Consultant's deliverables under this Agreement by City or persons other than Consultant is waived against Consultant and City assumes full responsibility for such changes'unless City has given Consultant prior notice and has received from Consultant written consent for such changes. All improvement and /or construction plans shall be prepared with indelible waterproof ink or electrostaticly plotted on standard 24 -inch by 36 -inch Mylar with a minimum thickness of three mils. Consultant shall provide to City 'As- Built' drawings, and a copy of digital ACAD and tiff image files of all final sheets within ninety (90) days after finalization of the Project. For more detailed requirements, a copy of the City of Newport Beach Standard Design Requirements is available from the City's Public Works Department. 18. COMPUTER DELIVERABLES CADD data delivered to City shall include the professional stamp of the engineer or architect in charge of or responsible for the work. City agrees that Consultant shall not be liable for claims, liabilities or losses arising out of, or connected with (a) the modification or misuse by City, or anyone authorized by City, of CADD data; (b) the decline of accuracy or readability of CADD data due to inappropriate storage conditions or duration; or (c) any use by City, or anyone authorized by City, of CADD data for additions to this Project, for the completion of this Project by others, or for any other Project, excepting only such use as is authorized, in writing, by Consultant. By acceptance of CADD data, City agrees to indemnify Consultant for damages and liability resulting from the modification or misuse of such CADD data. All original drawings shall be submitted to City in the version of AutoCAD used by City in ".dwg" file format on a CD, and should comply with the City's digital submission requirements for Improvement Plans. The City will provide AutoCAD file of City Title Sheets. All written documents shall be transmitted to City in the City's latest adopted version of Microsoft Word and Excel. 19. CONFIDENTIALITY All Documents, including drafts, preliminary drawings or plans, notes and communications that result from the services in this Agreement, shall be kept confidential unless City authorizes in writing the release of information. 0 0 20. OPINION OF COST Any opinion of the construction cost prepared by Consultant represents his/her judgment as a design professional and is supplied for the general guidance of City. Since Consultant has no control over the cost of labor and material, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, Consultant does not guarantee the accuracy of such opinions as compared to contractor bids or actual cost to City. 21. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY INDEMNITY The Consultant shall defend and indemnify City, its agents, officers, representatives and employees against any and all liability, including costs, for infringement of any United States' letters patent, trademark, or copyright infringement, including costs, contained in Consultant's drawings and specifications provided under this Agreement. 22. RECORDS Consultant shall keep records and invoices in connection with the work to be performed under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to the costs incurred under this Agreement and any services, expenditures and disbursements charged to City, for a minimum period of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to Consultant under this Agreement. All such records and invoices shall be clearly identifiable. Consultant shall allow a representative of City to examine, audit and make transcripts or copies of such records and invoices during regular business hours. 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 to Consultant under this Agreement. 23. WITHHOLDINGS City may withhold payment to Consultant 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 work as a result of such withholding. Consultant shall have an immediate right to appeal to the City Manager or his /her designee with respect to such disputed sums. Consultant shall be entitled to receive interest on any withheld sums at the rate of return that City earned on its investments during the time period, from the date of withholding of any amounts found to have been improperly withheld. 24. ERRORS AND OMISSIONS In the event of errors or omissions that are due to the negligence or professional inexperience of Consultant which result in expense to City greater than what would have resulted if there were not errors or omissions in the work accomplished by Consultant, the additional design, construction and /or 10 0 0 restoration expense shall be borne by Consultant. Nothing in this paragraph is intended to limit City's rights under any other sections of this Agreement. 25. CITY'S RIGHT TO EMPLOY OTHER CONSULTANTS City reserves the right to employ other Consultants in connection with the Project. 26. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST 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 any 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. 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 immediate termination of this Agreement by City. Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless City for any and all claims for damages resulting from Consultant's violation of this Section. 27. NOTICES All notices, demands, requests or approvals to be given under the terms of this Agreement shall be given in writing, to City by Consultant and conclusively shall be deemed served when delivered personally, or on the third business day after the deposit thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid, first -class mail, addressed as hereinafter provided. All notices, demands, requests or approvals from Consultant to City shall be addressed to City at: Attn: Robert Stein Public Works Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Phone: 949 - 644 -3322 Fax: 949 - 644 -3308 All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Consultant shall be addressed to Consultant at: Attn: John Wolter Van Dell and Associates, Inc. 17801 Cartwright Road Irvine, CA 92614 Phone: 949 -474 -1400 Fax: 949 -261 -8482 11 r] 28. TERMINATION 0 In the event that either party fails or refuses to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement at the time and in the manner required, that party shall be deemed in default in the performance of this Agreement. If such default is not cured within a period of two (2) calendar days, or if more than two (2) calendar days are reasonably required to cure the default and the defaulting party fails to give adequate assurance of due performance within two (2) calendar days after receipt of written notice of default, specifying the nature of such default and the steps necessary to cure such default, the non - defaulting party may terminate the Agreement forthwith by giving to the defaulting party written notice thereof. Notwithstanding the above provisions, City shall have the right, at its sole discretion and without cause, of terminating this Agreement at any time by giving seven (7) calendar days prior written notice to Consultant. In the event of termination under this Section, City shall pay Consultant for services satisfactorily performed and costs incurred up to the effective date of termination for which Consultant has not been previously paid. On the effective date of termination, Consultant shall deliver to City all reports, Documents and other information developed or accumulated in the performance of this Agreement, whether in draft or final form. 29. COMPLIANCE WITH ALL LAWS Consultant shall at its own cost and expense comply with all statutes, ordinances, regulations and requirements of all governmental entities, including federal, state, county or municipal, whether now in force or hereinafter enacted. In addition, all work prepared by Consultant shall conform to applicable City, county, state and federal laws, rules, regulations and permit requirements and be subject to approval of the Project Administrator and City. 30. WAIVER A waiver by either party 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. 31. 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 herein. 12 0 32. CONFLICTS OR INCONSISTENCIES In the event there are any conflicts or inconsistencies between this Agreement and the Scope of Services or any other attachments attached hereto, the terms of this Agreement shall govern. 33. AMENDMENTS This Agreement may be modified or amended only by a written document executed by both Consultant and City and approved as to form by the City Attorney. 34. SEVERABILITY If any term or portion of this Agreement is held to be invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. 35. CONTROLLING LAW AND VENUE The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement and all matters relating to it and any action brought relating to this Agreement shall be adjudicated in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Orange. 36. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYMENT Consultant represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and it shall not discriminate against any subcontractor, employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, handicap, ancestry, sex or age. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed on the day and year first written above. APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney, for the City of Newport Beach ATTEST: LaVonne Harkless, City Clerk Attachments: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, A Municipal Corporation M Mayor for the City of Newport Beach VAN DELL AND ASSOCIATES, INC.: Exhibit A — Scope of Services Exhibit B — Schedule of Billing Rates f:lusers \pbw\shared \agreements \fy 03- 04\van dell -dover drive sidewalk.doo 13 Van Dell and fates, Inc. Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California SCOPE OF SERVICES B.1 WORK ALAN The following are the basic tasks for successful completion of the alternatives analysis, biological assessment, environmental documentation, permit processing, P5 &E preparation, and bid support process. Task 1 — Background Research and Data Collection Following the kick -off meeting the initial task is to obtain all available as -built record drawings, survey information, right -of -way data, utility companies' information, and any other pertinent information for this project from City, County and other agencies. VA will visit the site and identify noteworthy features of the existing roadways to verify and supplement the available as -built drawings and survey data provided by the City. These features will include visible utilities and drainage facilities, traffic control devices (signs or signals), and features such as trees, and vegetated areas. Task 2 — Sidewalk Location Design Alternatives Following completion of background research, field inventory, and review of the survey data, the preliminary scope of work identified in the RFP for project location will be confirmed. At the beginning of the design process, VA will prepare a concept exhibit identifying alternatives for the proposed improvements. This exhibit will be used to develop a consensus between the City and the VA team on the design and impacts of the proposed project including analysis of sensitive riparian habitat, vehicle and bicycle traffic, utility and drainage system modifications, Resource Agency permitting and construction costs to implement the improvements. Once consensus on the selected alternative is achieved, the design process can go forward expeditiously, without delay to the project, as key issues will have been identified and resolved during the alternatives analysis. VA will prepare a letter to City confirming the design criteria and selected alternative. Based on our observations made during a site visit, different alternatives for the sidewalk improvements should be considered at different reaches along Dover Drive. The following alternatives would provide for minimum impact to the existing travel lanes and the riparian habitat along the easterly edge of Dover Drive. 1. Dover Drive (Cliff Drive to 250't North of Cliff Drive) This reach is adjacent to the steep embankment above the easterly edge of Dover Drive. The bikelemergency parking lane is approximately 11 feet wide and the toe of the embankment is located just behind the existing curbs. For this reach potential alternatives are: 8' wide sidewalk behind the existing curb with an 8' to 11' high retaining wall • 5' wide sidewalk behind the existing curb with a 5' to 8' high retaining wall • construct new curb with 8' wide bikelemergency parking lane, 5' wide sidewalk and a 2' to 3' high retaining wall. This alternative will require restriping in order to utilize the roadway space adjacent to the median. M.uVVronuwlw�.�,zwnwwcwc.na ea.vaa,wra `J'JuwMlSaolu d:wn,:w:xw Page 4 Van Dell and As tes, Inc. Proposal Provide g April 12, 2004 Design Services f e Dover Drive Sidewalk Project �b` City of Newport Beach, California 2. Dover Drive f250'± North of Cliff Drive to 900' North of Cliff Drive This reach is adjacent to the embankment which drops below the easterly edge of Dover Drive. The existing roadway is 32 feet wide with two 12' wide travel lanes, one 8' wide bike /emergency parking lane and 5'± level dirt area between the curb and top of the embankment slope. For this reach potential alternatives are: 5' wide sidewalk behind the existing curb, 2' to 3' deep cut off wall below the back edge of the sidewalk and a wood or anodized aluminum railing. 8' wide boardwalk behind the existing curb supported on wood poles with a wood railing. 3. Dover Drive (900' North of Cliff Drive to 1000' North of Cliff Drivel This reach is adjacent to the embankment which drops below the easterly edge of Dover Drive. Several mature Willow Trees are located at the top of the slope 5' to 6' behind the existing curb. The existing roadway is 32 feet wide with two 12' wide travel lanes and an 8' wide bike /emergency parking lane. For this reach potential alternatives are: ■ 5' wide sidewalk behind the existing curb with a 2' to 3' deep cut off wall below the back edge of the sidewalk and a wood or anodized aluminum rail. 5' wide boardwalk behind the existing curb supported on wood poles with a wood railing. Task 3 — Geotechnical Investigation and Reuort The geotechnical investigation will consist of five subtasks: (a) data review /coordination, (b) field investigation, (c) laboratory testing, (d) engineering analyses, and (e) report preparation. These tasks are briefly described below. (The evaluation of the stability of the slopes at the back of curb along a portion of the roadway is not part of the proposed scope of work). a. Data Review /Coordination Available geotechnical and geological data regarding the subject site and surrounding areas will be reviewed. The data review will include review of grading reports and other geotechnical data in the files of the City /County. b. Field Investigation The field 'investigation will consist of a site reconnaissance and a subsurface exploration. The site reconnaissance will be performed by a Geotechnical Engineer. Results of the site reconnaissance will be used to select the boring locations of the proposed subsurface exploration. Subsurface conditions will be identified by hand augering only three (3) borings to depths of 5 to 10 feet below the existing ground surface. The borings will be backfilled with the soil cuttings immediately after samples are retrieved. %Mlnkaurq�,upo �W xone�p�pw.W,npoM1 Wvn+onw Or SHwmktSVpn ar Servvm.bc Page 5 Van Dell and AqMates, Inc. Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project A City of Newport Beach, California Both drive and bulk soil samples will be collected from the borings during the hand augering operations. The drive samples will be collected at approximately 3- to 5- foot intervals. The samples from the borings will be tested in the soils laboratory as described below. c. Laboratory Testing Samples collected during the field investigations will be examined in the laboratory to confirm field classifications. Selected samples from the borings will be tested to help evaluate engineering properties of the subsurface soils. The numbers and types of tests will depend upon the soils encountered. d. Engineering Analyses Results from the field and laboratory tests, site reconnaissance and GEI's experience will be the basis for the engineering analyses. GEI will provide engineering conclusions and recommendations for the following: • Suitable type of foundation, • Allowable soil pressures for foundation design, • Floor slab support, • Potential settlements and remediation measures, • Expansion properties of on =site soils, Compaction characteristics of on -site soils, • Suitability of on -site soils for use as fill material, • Lateral earth pressures, • Site preparation for proposed construction. e. Report Preparation GEI's conclusions and recommendations and supporting field and laboratory test results will be presented in an engineering report, and it will be addressed to you as appropriate. We will provide two (2) copies of the report to the City and have made the following assumptions in providing this proposal: Access to the site is provided • No unusually hard or other unforeseen ground conditions are encountered • Excess soil cuttings may be left on -site • Soil and groundwater are not contaminated Task 4 - Utitit - Coordination This task includes full service utility coordination including utility research, submittal of utility information request, review and note utility conflicts of planned improvements within the project area, and distribution of preliminary and final plans to the utility companies. Copies of all transmittal letters to and from the utility companies and a summary table tracking all communication will be submitted to the City. Task 5 - Plans, Specification and Cost Esttmate (P5 &E) Fallowing completion of geotechnical investigation and confirmation of the selected design alternative, construction plans will be prepared in "Plan and Profile" format at V = x:,Manaenwown��rs�P �xuw.m.<womn nma�� »r a, uwnims.np, d smic�,mc Page 6 Van Dell and Asotes, Inc. Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 Design Sery ices fo a Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California 20' horizontal scale and 1"= 4' vertical scale for the required improvements. Individual plan sheets will include all topographic information, prominent features and proposed improvements including retaining wall profiles and reconstruction of drainage facilities as necessary. Structural and hydraulic calculations in support of the proposed design will also be provided to the City. The sidewalk improvements shall be designed to comply with current ADA requirements and the final construction plans will be prepared in acceptable Auto CADD format, under the City Public Works' logo and format, in accordance with City, APWA or OCPF &RD design standards. VA will maintain current editions of the design reference publications as applicable to the project. The final plan set will include the following plan sheets: (1) Title Sheet including Vicinity Map and Sheet Index (1) Notes Sheet including construction notes, general notes, construction symbols and standard plan references ect. (1) Details Sheet including typical roadway and sidewalk improvement sections, retaining wall details, drainage structure modifications and any other miscellaneous details required for Plan Sheets. (2) Roadway and Sidewalk Improvement Sheets including any retaining wall improvements, storm drain modifications and excavation. These sheets will also include profile for any retaining wall improvements. (1) Signing and Striping Plans at 1" = 40" scale will be prepared if existing curb and gutter is relocated to accommodate the new sidewalk. Relocation of the curb is a potential alternative within the reach form Cliff Drive to 250't northerly of Cliff Drive where sidewalk construction would require excavation of the steep embankment above the roadway and construction of a retaining wall. These plans will show installation of all roadway striping and pavement markings in addition to the locations and types of existing traffic signs within the project limits. Should VA note the need for additional signs, or the removal of existing ones, these items will also be included on the plans. All signing and striping improvements will be designed according to City guidelines, and Caltrans standard details and specifications for traffic signing and striping and pavement markings. It is assumed that the traffic control will be prepared by the contractor and is not included in this scope of work. VA wiil prepare complete construction bidding documents including specifications and special provisions, construction quantities and cost estimate in accordance with the City format for all items of work included in the project. Deliverables: Plans and estimate will be submitted for review when they are at 60 %, 90% and 100% levels. Contract documents and special provisions will be submitted with the plan submittals at the 90% and 100% levels. At final submittal, a reproducible hard copy of the contract documents, plan sheet blue lines as well as mylar originals and electronic files will be submitted. %.1Wik,rv,.jP,oryau4a� �ataWMlcwn..pM9o-rMOUwrc M..'irt,wnlMTumpOd 9xnu�+,b.: Page 7 Van Dell and As tes, Inc. Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services a Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California Task 6 — Environmental Concerns and Permits Task 6.1— General BiologicallBotanical Surveys and Jurisdictional Delineation a. A literature review will be performed prior to the survey to detenmine whether there are any existing records for potential sensitive species or habitats within the vicinity of the project site. This task will include a review of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and the California Native Plant Society's Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI) for information relevant to the project site. In addition, the Biologist will review previous documents (if available) of surveys conducted in the immediate vicinity of the project to obtain literature that may be pertinent to the site. After the literature search, a wildlife biologist and botanist familiar with the resources associated with the project vicinity will conduct a reconnaissance assessment of the biological resources onsite. All plant communities on the project site will be mapped and qualitatively described. The biologists will document the presence of common and sensitive biological resources and evaluate the habitat for the potential presence of sensitive species onsite. It is assumed fieldwork will take no more than one day to complete. After completing the field survey, Environmental Consultant will prepare a technical report of findings that includes the following topics: a) introduction, b) proposed project description, c) methods used to conduct the surveys, d) existing conditions of biological resources onsite, e) sensitive species and communities' discussion, and f) bibliography. Lists of wildlife and plant species observed during the surveys would be included. Field notes and survey forms used during the surveys and the resumes of the biologists who conducted the surveys will be included as appendices to the report. Two copies of a draft biological technical report of findings will be provided to the City for review within 2 weeks of completing the reconnaissance survey. Environmental Consultant will provide two copies of the final report to the City. b. The field delineation will be conducted by the Environmental Consultant's wetlands specialists who have extensive experience conducting jurisdictional delineations. The purpose of the field surveys will be to identify and delineate areas of the project site that fall under the regulatory jurisdiction of the ACOE pursuant to Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) jurisdiction pursuant to Section 1603 of the Fish and Game Code. To determine jurisdictional areas, the biologist will investigate criteria specified by the ACOE. Wetlands boundaries (if present) will be determined using the current accepted methodology prescribed in the ACOE 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual. All wetlands and other jurisdictional waters will be mapped on a topographic map. The Environmental Consultant will deliver a report summarizing the results of the jurisdictional delineation. The report will describe habitat present on site, the limits of biological survey and jurisdiction pursuant to ACOE and CDFG regulations and include a discussion of potential regulatory constraints and the ACOE and CDFG x.xwkei•gw�nw+a¢�',?nonW yi;nxwyn�, Buu�poxor o-. S+bneblLn�y of Sr..sw uoc Page 8 Van Dell and Asqfttes, Inc. Drive Sidewalk Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services a Dover Drive SFdewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California regulatory permitting procedures that may be required for the project. In addition, the report will include a map depicting ACOE and CDFG jurisdiction. As required by the resource agencies, the graphics will include site photographs. The Environmental Consultant will provide 4 copies of the Final delineation report to the City. Task 6.2 - Preparation of CEQA Documentation Preparation of Initial Study The Environmental Consultant will prepare the Initial Study (IS) for the proposed project. The IS will be prepared in accordance with the policies and procedures as identified by the City of Newport Beach. Preparation of Negative Declaration The City has recommended the preparation of a Negative Declaration (ND) for the proposed project. The ND will be prepared in accordance with the policies and procedures as identified by the City of Newport Beach. For the purpose of this proposal, we have assumed that a Negative Declaration will be prepared. If a Mitigated Negative Declaration is required additional compensation will be required based on additional work effort required. Environmental Consultant staff will attend up to four meetings, including the project kickoff meeting, regarding the Negative Declaration. A biologist will attend up to two meetings, including the project kickoff meeting. Task 6.3 — Permit Processing 1. Preparation of Section 404, Section 401, and 1602 Permit Applications, If Necessary If jurisdictional areas are to be affected by the proposed project, then Tasks a through d will be required. This work does not include the development of a restoration plan for the proposed project. If the resource agencies require a restoration plan (e.g., maintenance schedule, plant palette, monitoring standards, etc.) a separate scope of work and cost will be provided for that task. We will assume that all documents (base maps, as -built drawings ect.) provided by the City will be sufficient and complete in order for the resource agencies to process the application. a. Preparation of CDFG Application The Environmental Consultant will prepare and submit a notification to CDFG for a 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement. Unlike the ALOE, CDFG regulates not only the discharge of dredged or fill material, but all activities that alter streams and lakes and their associated habitat. CDFG has no abbreviated permitting process comparable to the ACOE nationwide permits. A CDFG 1602 Agreement is required for all activities resulting in impacts to streambeds and their associated riparian habitats. CDFG generally requires that any impacts to streambeds and adjacent xwwr..yu��opew.w_z�na�m�cw�. -mm n.m,�mo„xa sw.� +rauna �t:w�nw..aao Page 9 t Van Dell and Aqftiates, Inc. Proposal to Provide jtf.*��111 April 12, 2004 Design Services the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newpon Beach, California riparian habitats be fully mitigated. To ensure rapid and favorable action on a 1602 notification, a mitigation plan should be submitted with the notification package. It normally takes 90 days for the CDFG to process a 1602 notification. The Environmental Consultant will provide one copy of the final application to CDFG and one copy to the City. For projects that exceed $500,000 CDFG charges $1,390.50 to process a streambed alteration agreement. This fee is to be provided by the City. b. Preparation of ACOE Application The amount of work associated with preparing the notification to the ACOE pursuant to Section 404 depends on the magnitude of project impacts on jurisdictional waters and other resources. The proposal assumes that authorization for this project will be provided through the nationwide permit program and a pre- construction notification will not be required. If a notification to the ACOE is required, the Environmental Consultant will submit a proposal for that work. Consultant wilt provide one copy of the final application to ALOE and one copy to the City. The ACOE does not charge for the filing of their permit. C. Preparation of Written Notification for Water Qualms (401) Certification A water quality certification is required from the regional water quality control board (RWQCB) for any activity that requires a federal license or permit (such as a Section 404 permit) and may result in a discharge to jurisdictional waters. The Environmental Consultant will prepare and submit the necessary documentation to the RWQCB for its review of the project pursuant to water quality certification. The Environmental Consultant will provide one copy of the final application to Water Board and one copy to the City. The RWQCB charges for the preparation of a certification of water quality and usually costs less than $1,000.00 for small projects (although their fee schedule is currently being modified). This fee is to be provided by the City. d. Agency Coordination Agency coordination will be initiated as soon as possible after submittal of the application and throughout the permitting process. The Environmental Consultant will coordinate with the ACOE, CDFG and the RWQCB throughout their review of the applications to ensure that any potential problems are made known to the City and resolved at the earliest possible opportunity. This usually involves the coordination of a site visit with the resource agencies. One meeting is anticipated for the completion of these permits. However, the project manager wilt attend meetings, with the City as requested on a time and materials basis, based on standard billing rates. x:uwxrayw.om.,w xawvwxmw•w�n oacn�oo.�. a. smmukvsmr�.nsemc.a aw Page 10 Van Dell and Ass tes, Inc. April 12, 2004 Proposal to Provide Design Services f e Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California 2. Coastal Development Permit Application and Submittal A City administered CDP will be required for the proposed project. The Environmental Consultant will complete the CDP application and submit the application, along with accompanying biological resources report(s). Task 7 — Bidding Process Assistant During the bidding process of the project VA will provide assistance to the City including answers to contractor Requests For Information (RFI) and preparing all required addenda. Task 8-- Project Management and Meetings The project will be diligently managed to ensure timely coordination with City staff, and keep the project on schedule and within budget. VA will prepare monthly progress report with updated schedule and meet and coordinate with the City as required. VA will prepare and distribute meeting agendas 24 -hours before the meeting. Draft of meeting minutes shall be ready within one week after meeting. For the purpose of the fee proposal, it is assumed that there will be four meetings with City during design stages, and one meeting with local community representatives. B.2 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM VA's Quality Assurance and Quality Control Program is implemented on engineering design and study projects to ensure that the required documents: • Conform with the contract documents; • Are neat, well organized, clear, concise, and complete; f Are technically and grammatically correct; Comply with generally accepted professional standards of engineering and applicable laws; > Are signed, dated, and stamped as required; and > Are consistent with other related plans and are constructible. All project team members, including drafters, designers, and supervisors, are involved with implementing the QA(QC program and ensuring that a quality product is produced by making every effort to do the work right the first time. w+ rRN�v } ➢rnpu.'wrC�;rv1tLL1.1ypwuryoR Boh:iillln.•+p. SJww�tSrgpu rrf $tr�vcoc uuR Page 11 .- -- Van Dell and ciates, Inc. April 29,2004W Amended Proposal to Provide Design Servic r the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California Additions to Section B.1 "Work Plan" of Proposal dated April 12, 2004 B.1 WORK PLAN Task 2 — "Sidewalk Location Design Alternatives ": • Cast estimates for each alternative are included. • Recommendations are included in the alternative analysis. Task 6.2 - "Preparation of CEOA Documentation ": • Preparation of the Notice of Completion and Notice of Determination are included. • Preparation of the list of Mitigation Measures is included if a Mitigation Negative Declaration document is required. • Attendance at one (1) meeting with Coastal Commission staff is included. • Attendance at one (1) meeting for Coastal Commission Hearing is included. Assumed that Coastal Commission Hearing is in Southern California. It attendance is required in Northern California, additional fees for travel expenses and time will be required. %w,,,.minar�nnn,Nm�, N0+U4MMFrwNi�i llussMlM�vu�lk saewwk4u:nro u�$.xvkN.+mo�WroM do Page 1 Van Deli and Associates, Inc. April 12, 2004 PROJECT SCHEDULE 2004 Proposal to Provide Design Services for the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California TASKS MoNTN May Jun Jul I Aug I Sep OU Nov I Dec LlBackground Research and Data Collection 2!Sidewalk Location Design Altornatives 3,Geoteeh IcalInvestigationRepoA : Wtillty Coordination t !!Plan, Specification and Cost Estimate I I ;Environmental Study and Permit' ' 131 dding Process Assistant I Project Management land Meetings I " C I IM] : fA 'City Review I I 1 I i l l I I I I ' ' I I I '• 1 I I I I! ( I I I I I r l 1 MILESTONES: f I I!I E' e 3 Legend: task ay. lids n _d � 9 U I a ,M Meetings v € e eI ®cilyM.O.S ?i OI l`• � CIS I note: Via have assumed 30 days for the CE2A Negative Declaration process and 4 to 6 weeks for the Coastal Development permitting. If unforeseen delays are encountered during the CEDA process or Coastal Development permit process. and if a CDPGI600 agreement and/or an ALOE 404 permit are required, additional permitting time will be necessary. Page 13 • is i Van Dell and Asoates, Inc. • Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services for the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California VAN DELL. AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FEE SCHEDULE City of Newport Beach Qggartment of Public of Works Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Effective January 1, 2004 Staff Classification Hourly Rate Clerical /Support Staff $ 45.00 Engineering Technical Support $ 60.00 CADD Operator /Drafter $ 86.00 Design /Survey Staff $ 95.00 Professional Staff $115.00 Senior Professional Staff $130.00 Project Manager $130.00 Principal $155.00 Two -Man Survey Crew $175.00 Three -Man Survey Crew $205.00 Notes: 1. Billing will be every four weeks. Invoices are due and payable on presentation. 2. Overtime. when requested by the client, will be surcharged at a rate of 135 1k of the standard hourly rates. Sundays and holidays will be surcharged at a rate of 170% of the standard hourly rates. xua�wn yamr+^�w_rrouwwuGrrexon u,�,m�a... a s.imwur�.vn+romry wonw.u« Page 29 Q,dy of Newport Bead NO. BA- 04BA -062 BUDGET AMENDMENT 2003 -04 AMOUNT: $19,638.00 EFFECT ON BUDGETARY FUND BALANCE: Increase Revenue Estimates X Increase Expenditure Appropriations AND Transfer Budget Appropriations SOURCE: from existing budget appropriations from additional estimated revenues PX from unappropriated fund balance EXPLANATION: This budget amendment is requested to provide for the following: Increase in Budgetary Fund Balance X Decrease in Budgetary Fund Balance No effect on Budgetary Fund Balance To increase expenditure appropriations for the costs associated with the Dover Drive Sidewalk Design project. ACCOUNTING ENTRY: BUDGETARY FUND BALANCE Fund Account 260 3605 REVENUE ESTIMATES (3601) Fund /Division Account EXPENDITURE APPROPRIATIONS (3603) Amount Description Debit _ Transportation & Circulation Fund Balanc $19,838.00 Description Signed: Signed: Signed: Financial Approval: Administrative Services Director 5 -.e. ZIX Administrative City Manager City Council Approval: City Clerk Credit $19,838.00 % / O Date SAP d Da e Date Description Division Number 7261 Transportation & Circulation Fund Account Number C5100712 Dover Drive Sidewalk Design Division Number Account Number Division Number Account Number Division Number Account Number Signed: Signed: Signed: Financial Approval: Administrative Services Director 5 -.e. ZIX Administrative City Manager City Council Approval: City Clerk Credit $19,838.00 % / O Date SAP d Da e Date #% My of Newport BeaC* NO. BA- 04BA -062 BUDGET AMENDMENT 2003 -04 AMOUNT: $19,838.00 EFFECT ON BUDGETARY FUND BALANCE: Increase Revenue Estimates Increase in Budgetary Fund Balance X Increase Expenditure Appropriations AND AX Decrease in Budgetary Fund Balance Transfer Budget Appropriations No effect on Budgetary Fund Balance SOURCE: from existing budget appropriations from additional estimated revenues X from unappropriated fund balance EXPLANATION: This budget amendment is requested to provide for the following: To increase expenditure appropriations for the costs associated with the Dover Drive Sidewalk Design project. ACCOUNTING ENTRY: BUDGETARY FUND BALANCE Fund Account 260 3605 REVENUE ESTIMATES (3601) Fund /Division Account EXPENDITURE APPROPRIATIONS (3603) Amount Description Debit Credit Transportation & Circulation Fund Balanc $19,838.00 Description Signed: /CA- c-KXKj1fiy A A.{A-It Financial Approval: Administrative Services Signed: /'"'"" 4 Signed: Administrative Approval' City Manager (A liii -P (ffi .. net GM G-�- 6 City Council Approval: City Clerk $19,838.00 o Date V�e Date Description Division Number 7261 Transportation & Circulation Fund Account Number C5100712 Dover Drive Sidewalk Design Division Number Account Number Division Number Account Number Division Number Account Number Signed: /CA- c-KXKj1fiy A A.{A-It Financial Approval: Administrative Services Signed: /'"'"" 4 Signed: Administrative Approval' City Manager (A liii -P (ffi .. net GM G-�- 6 City Council Approval: City Clerk $19,838.00 o Date V�e Date Dover Drivealk — Approval of Amendment to Professional Ser Agreement vAth VA Consulting, Inc. January 22, 2008 Page 2 • On August 9, 2005, Amendment No. 2 was approved in which Consultant's • scope of work was expanded to provide additional design and consulting services for the project, including analysis of the sidewalk and retaining wall alternatives for the slope above Dover Drive, preparation of the final design of the boardwalk portion of the project, and project management and coordination services. The additional compensation under Amendment No. 2 was $9,900. On April 4, 2006, Amendment No. 3 was approved in which Consultant's scope of work was expanded to revise the alignment of the proposed sidewalk and curb and gutter adjacent to the slope above Dover Drive, and prepare revised exhibits for the environmental document and resource agency permit applications. The additional compensation under Amendment No. 3 was $3,960. On April 24, 2007, Amendment No. 4 was approved in which Consultant's scope of work was revised to allow for additional assistance with outside jurisdictional agencies and processing permits. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 4 was $5,455. The term of the Agreement was also extended to December 31, 2007. • On October 3, 2007, Amendment No. 5 in the amount of $15,850 was approved in which Consultant's scope of work was revised to include additional services for working with Regional Water Quality Control Board staff regarding the need for a Clean Water Act 401 Water Quality Certification and responding to comments from the California Coastal Commission staff. • Environmental Review: On June 27, 2006, Council adopted a Resolution approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for Dover Drive Sidewalk Project. Public Notice: The public was informed of the Coastal Commission hearing on this project which occurred on November 8, 2007. Funding Availability: Sufficient funds are available in the following account for the project: Account Description Account Number Amount Transportation and Circulation 7261- C5100854 $19,340.00 Total: $19,340.00 ared by: Submitted by: Robert Stein, P.E. S p G. Badum Assistant City Engineer u c Works Director • Attachment: Amendment No. 6 I AMENDMENT NO.6 • TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH VA CONSULTING, INC., FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT THIS AMENDMENT NO. 6 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, entered into this day of , 2008, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "City ") and VA CONSULTING, INC., (formerly knows as Van Dell and Associates, a California corporation whose address is 17801 Cartwright Road, Irvine, California, 92614 ( "Consultant'), and is made with reference to the following: RECITALS A. On July 12, 2004, CITY and CONSULTANT entered into a Professional Services Agreement, hereinafter referred to as "Agreement', for design and consulting services for the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project, hereinafter referred to as "Project'. is B. City and Consultant have entered into five separate Amendments of the Agreement, the latest dated April 24, 2007. Per Amendment No. 4, the Agreement expired on December 31, 2007. C. City desires to enter into this Amendment No. 6 to reflect additional services not included in the Agreement or prior Amendments and to extend the term of the Agreement to June 30, 2009. D. City desires to compensate Consultant for additional professional services needed for Project. E. City and Consultant mutually desire to amend Agreement, hereinafter referred to as "Amendment No. 6 ", as provided here below. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Consultant shall be compensated for services performed pursuant to this Amendment No. 6 according to "Exhibit A" dated December 26, 2007, attached hereto. 2. Total additional compensation to Consultant for services performed pursuant to this Amendment No. 6 for all work performed in accordance • with this Amendment, including all reimburseable items and subconsultant 2 - E fees, shall not exceed Nineteen Thousand, Three Hundred Forty and 001100 Dollars ($19,340.00). 3. The term of the Agreement shall be extended to June 30, 2009. 4. Except as expressly modified herein, all other provisions, terms, and covenants set forth in Agreement shall remain unchanged and shall be in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 6 on the date first above written. APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney for the City of Newport Beach ATTEST: (-0 LaVonne Harkless, City Clerk CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, A Municipal Corporation By: Homer Bludau for the City of Newport Beach CONSULTANT: 0 (Corporate Officer) Title: Print Name: (Financial Officer) Title: Print Name: Attachments: Exhibit A — Scope of Services Exhibt B = Fee Summary Exhibit C — Schedule of Billing Rates Muse \pbwlshareftgreementsNfy 07 -081va consultlng -lover sidewalk- amend -6.doc 3 C� • • Exhibit A • CONSULTING • December 26, 2007 Mr. Robert Stein City of Newport Beach Public Works Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92660 Dear Mr. Stein: This letter is a change order request for additional environmental, permitting and design services related to the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project for the City of Newport Beach (our Agreement dated July 12, 2004). This request is for additional services associated with processing the California Costal Commission (CCC) permit and modifications to project plans and contract documents required to incorporate CCC conditions. These activities include time to coordinate with City and CCC staff for preparation of modifications to CCC permit exhibits and revisions to plans and contract documents. The total cost to perform the additional tasks described above is $19,340. A detailed scope of services (Exhibit "A "), and fees (Exhibit "B ") are included with this request. We will perform these services on a time and materials not -to- exceed basis in accordance with the attached fee schedule (Exhibit "C). Please indicate your approval of this change order by signing in the space provided below and returning a copy to our office. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact John Wolter at (951) 340 -0030 or me at (949) 474 -1400. f, P E. and CEO MPV/kam cc: Steve Luy John Wolter Contracts Approved by: Date: Robert Stein VA Consulting, Inc. Corporate office orange County Division 17801 Cartwright Road Irvine, CA 92614 Phone 949.474.1400 Fax 949.261.8482 _• s • EXHIBIT "A" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT ADDITIONAL SERVICES SCOPE OF SERVICES California Costal Commission (CCC) Permit Processing This task includes the preparation of modification to CCC application exhibits required by CCC staff and requested by City staff. 2. Habitat Restoration and Monitoring Plan Preparation This task includes preparation of interpretive sign language and final habitat restoration and monitoring plans as required by the CCC permit conditions. 3. Revisions to Plans and Contract Documents This task includes the incorporation of CCC conditions to reduce the Boardwalk width to five (5) feet. The additional work also includes revisions to Sheets 1, 5 and 6 for new • caisson locations and construction notes; revisions to Sheets 3 and 4 for new structural and framing details; revisions to the structural calculations package and edits to the specifications and bed schedule to incorporate the habitat planting plans and boardwalk modifications. 4. Project Management and Conditions This task includes project management and coordination with the environmental sub - consultant, CCC staff and City staff to finalize the CCC permit approval and incorporate the CCC conditions into the final contract documents. We have assumed 8 hours for project management and 4 hours for attendance at 2 meetings for a total of 12 hours. is %:IP.'*W73_090gMNn� ON Pe uest1TT8W. 0 • • 0 0 EXHIBIT "B" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT ADDITIONAL SERVICES FEES 1. California Costal Commission (CCC) Permit Processing .......... ............................... $4,980 2. Habitat Restoration and Monitoring Plan Preparation ............... ............................... $5,400 3. Revisions to Plans and Contract Documents ............................ ............................... $7,050 4. Project Management and Conditions ........................................ ............................... $1,860 5. Reimbursables ............................................................................... ............................... $50 TOTALFEES ..................................................................................... ............................... $19,340 x:wmle 73-03omn IdZ00308 qe Om AepiasL,aSm.cx K- 0 EXHIBIT "C' 0 VA CONSULTING, INC. FEE SCHEDULE 2007 Staff Classification Civil Engineering and Planning Services President...............................:.......................... ............................... Division President/Division Manager ................ ............................... Sr. Vice President/Vice President/ Exec. Director .......................... Director............................................................ ............................... Senior Project Manager ................................... ............................... ProjectManager ............................................... ............................... Assistant Project Manager ............................... ............................... Senior Project Engineer /Senior Design Supervisor /Senior Planner Project Engineer /Design Supervisor ................ ............................... Senior Design Engineer /Senior Designer ........ ............................... Design Engineer / Planner ................................. ............................... Designer........................................................... ............................... Assistant Engineer /Assistant Planner .............. ............................... Research and Processing Coordinator ............ ............................... Senior CADD Technician ................................. ............................... JuniorEngineer ................................................ ............................... CADDTechnician ............................................ ............................... EngineeringIntern ............................................. ............................... Office Support / Clerical ...................................... ............................... Field Survey and Magnin Services Director of Survey and Mapping .............................................. ............................... ...........................$158 Managerof Field Survey .......................................................................................... ............................... $130 Surveyand Mapping Associate .................................................................................. ............................... $95 Surveyand Mapping Technician ................................................................................ ............................... $75 3-Man GPS Crew ..................................................................................................... ............................... $225 2-Man GPS Crew ..................................................................................................... ............................... $200 1 -Man GPS Crew ......................................................:.............................................. ............................... $170 Special Services Litigation......................................................................................... ............................... ........................... $400 Notes: - -- .._.. .,.... - _..._._�.,..... c .rew ..r._a- tarot. - : • - - - 2 Overtime, when requested by the client, will be surcharged at a rate of 1351Y. of the standard hourly rates. Sundays and holidays will be surcharged at a rate of 170% of the standard hourly rates. 3. Reprographics, messenger service, travel (including lodging and meals), and otter direct mpenses will be charged at cost plus 10 %. The services of outside consultants will be charged at cost plus 15% to cover administration and overhead. • 4. In -house reprographics charges: B &W Bond ooplas $1.00/sq.ft, Color Bond $6.00/sq.ft. 5. Mileage will be billed at standard mileage rates set by IRS. 2007 rates currently listed at $0.485 per mile. M1t, sCHFD,T.E EM MIT CJ y 2 G -OC /IE E AMENDMENT NO.5 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH VA CONSULTING, INC. FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT THIS AMENDM)NT NO. 5 TOPROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, entered into this _ day of d7 , 2007, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "City ") and VA CONSULTING, INC., (formerly known as Van Dell and Associates), a California corporation whose address is 17801 Cartwright Road, Irvine, California, 92614 (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant "), is made with reference to the following: RECITALS A. City is planning to install a new sidewalk on the easterly side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 16th Street, adjacent to the Castaways Park in the City of Newport Beach (hereinafter referred to as the "Project "). B. On July 12, 2004, City and Consultant entered into a Professional Services Agreement for Consultant to provide design and consulting services for the Project (hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement "). Among other things, Consultant agreed to prepare sidewalk design alternatives, conduct a geotechnical evaluation, process a Coastal Development permit and prepare the environmental documentation for the Project. The City agreed to pay Consultant $69,838.00 for the services under the Agreement. The Agreement was scheduled to expire on December 31, 2005. C. On February 22, 2005, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's Scope of Work was expanded to provide additional engineering and geotechnical services for the Project, including a proposal to shore up the existing slope above Dover Drive, at the Cliff Drive Intersection. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 1 was $6,000.00. D. On August 9, 2005, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's Scope of Work was expanded to provide additional design and consulting services for the Project, including analysis of the _ sidewalk and retaining wall alternatives for the slope above Dover Drive, preparation of the final design of the Boardwalk portion of the Project, and project management and coordination services. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 2 was $9,900.00. The term of the Agreement was also extended to June 30,2006. 0 0 E. On April 4, 2006, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's Scope of Work was expanded to revise the alignment of the proposed sidewalk/curb and gutter adjacent to the slope above Dover Drive, and prepare revised exhibits for the environmental document and resource agency permit applications. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 3 was $3,960.00. The term of the Agreement was also extended to December 31, 2006. F. On April 24, 2007, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 4 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's Scope of Work was revised to allow for additional assistance with outside jurisdictional agencies and processing permits. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 4 was $5,455.00. The term of the Agreement was also extended to December 31, 2007. G. City now desires that Consultant perform additional services for the Project, including working with Regional Water Quality Control Board staff regarding the need for a Clean Water Act 401 Water Quality Certification and responding to comments from the California Coastal Commission staff. H. City desires to enter into this Amendment No. 5 to compensate Consultant for these additional services, which were not included in the Agreement or the prior Amendments. I. City and Consultant mutually desire to amend Agreement, hereinafter referred to as "Amendment No. 5 ", as provided herein below. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Consultant shall perform the services outlined in the Scope of Work, which is attached hereto as "Exhibit A" and incorporated herein by this reference. 2. City shall pay Consultant for the services on a time and expense not -to- exceed basis in accordance with the provisions of this Section and the Schedule of Hourly Rates attached hereto as "Exhibit B and C," and incorporated herein by this reference. In no event shall Consultant's compensation for all work performed pursuant to this Amendment No. 5, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, exceed Fifteen Thousand, Eight Hundred and Fifty Dollars and no /100 ($15,850.00). 3. Except as expressly modified herein, all other provisions, terms, and covenants set forth in Agreement shall remain unchanged and shall be in full force and effect. E 0 Pi IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 5 on the date first above written. APPROVED AS TO FORM: By A ✓`_— ( _ �--�- Aaron C. Harp, Assistant City Attorney for the City of Newport Beach ATTEST: By LaVonne Harkless, City Clerk Attachments: Exhibit A — Scope of Work Exhibit B — Proposed Fees Exhibit C — Fee Schedule CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, A Municipal. Corporation G By: 1��►+ --- omer Bludau, O y Manager for the City of Newport Beach VA CONSULTING, INC.: By: Co rate Officer) Title: President and CEO Print Name: Max P. Vahir (Financial Officer) Title: Secretary and CFO Print Name: Michael S. Carter f: \users \pbvAsharedhagreements \fy 07 -08\va consulting -dover sidewalk -amend 5.doc n CONSULTING August 8, 2007 Mr. Robert Stein City of Newport Beach Public Works Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92660 Dear Mr. Stein: RtCEIVED AUG 13 2007 public Worms Department . City of Newport Beach This letter is a change order request to our current Agreement dated July 12, 2004 with the City of Newport Beach for Environmental, Permitting and Design Services on the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project. Per our discussion, this request is for additional services associated with the preparation of a mitigation plan to address project impacts to California Coastal Commission (CCC) jurisdiction. The work includes time to coordinate with City and CCC staff during preparation of the mitigation plan. VA can provide the additional services for an estimated fee of $15,850. A detailed scope of services (Exhibit "A "), and proposed fees (Exhibit "B ") are included with this request. We will perform these services on a time and materials not -to- exceed basis in accordance with the attached fee schedule (Exhibit "C "). We will start this work on your Notice to Proceed. If you have any questions or wish to discuss this request, please contact me at (951) 340 -0030. Sincerely, HN S. WOLTER, P.E. nland Empire Division President cc: Steve Luy Max Vahid Contracts VA Consulting, Inc. Inland Empire Division Z555 E. Minton Street, Suite 323 C na, CA 92879 Phone 951.340.0030 Fax 951.340.0041 rw�xa .um�wn_osaaum+ "�cow_aeoeot.ea EXHIBIT "A" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT ADDITIONAL SERVICES SCOPE OF SERVICES Additional Permitting This task provides fora site visit, review of project impact areas, delineation of (CCC) defined wetlands and preparation of a mitigation and monitoring plan to address impacts to CCC jurisdiction. If attendance at CCC hearings is requested, we will submit additional request for authorization. 2. Alternative Sidewalk Location Analysis This task provides for the review of existing sidewalks adjacent to the project site and preparation of a letter report, including photos evaluating the existing sidewalks and demonstrating the justification for the proposed project sidewalk. The report will be included with the response to the CCC and include coordination time with City staff and local naturalist. 3. Project Management, Support and Attendance at Meetings This task provides project management, coordination, preparation of mitigation plan exhibit and attendance at additional meetings with Environmental sub- consultant and City. We have assumed 8 hours for project management and coordination, 8 hours for preparation of exhibits and 4 hours for attendance at 2 additional meetings for a total of 20 hours. 4. Reimbursables This task provides for cost of reproduction of submittals and exhibits, messenger services and mileage, etc. r:wigemvrAne�lva owouarenwou 0loBa]ex EXHIBIT "B" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT ADDITIONAL SERVICES PROPOSED FEES 1. Additional Permitting .............................................................. ............................... $ 9,450 2. Alternative Sidewalk Location Analysis ................................... ............................... $ 3,000 3. Project Management, Support and Attendance at Meetings ... ............................... $ 3,200 4. Reimbursables ........................................................................ ..............................$ 200 TOTALFEES .................................................................................... ............................... $15,850 Offices in.Iruine •CorOnar. Rancho Mirage V4? � CONSULTING Staff Classification EXHIBIT "C" VA CONSULTING, INC... 2007 Fee Schedule Civil Engineering and Planning Services President...................................................................... ............................... Division PresidentfDivision Manager ............................ ............................... Sr. Vice PresidentlVice President/ Exec. Director ........ ............................... Director......................................................................... ............................... SeniorProject Manager ................................................ ............................... ProjectManager ........................................................... ............................... Assistant Project Manager ........................................... ............................... Senior Project Engineer /Senior Design Supervisor /Senior Planner ........... Project Engineer /Design Supervisor ............................ ............................... Senior Design Engineer /Senior Designer ..................... ............................... Design Engineer /Planner ............................................. ............................... Designer....................................................................... ............................... Assistant Engineer /Assistant Planner .......................... ............................... Research and Processing Coordinator ........................ ............................... SeniorCADD Technician .............................................. ............................... JuniorEngineer ............................................................ ............................... CADDTechnician ......................................................... ............................... EngineeringIntern ........................................................ ............................... OfficeSupport / Clerical .................................................. ............................... Field Survey and Mapping Services Hourly Rate Directorof Survey and Mapping ........................................................................ ............................... $158 Managerof Field Survey ......................................................................................... ............................... $130 Surveyand Mapping Associate ..................................................................................... ............................$g5 Surveyand Mapping Technician ................................................................................... ............................$75 3 -Man GPS Crew ..................................................................................................... ............................... $225 2-Man GPS Crew ..................................................................................................... ............................... $200 1-Man GPS Crew ..................................................................................................... ............................... $170 ftecial Services Litigation............................. ............................... ....................... ............................... $400 Notes: 1. Invoices will be prepared for all services through the end of each calendar month. Invoices are due and payable on presentation. 2. Overtime, when requested by the client, will be surcharged at a rate of 135% of the standard hourly rates. Sundays and holidays will be surcharged at a rate of 170% of the standard hourly rates. 3. Reprographics, messenger service, travel Including lodging and meals), and other direct expenses will be charged at cost plus 10 %. The services of outside consultants will be charged at cost plus 15% to cover administration and overhead. 4. In -house reprographics charges: f3&W Bond copies $1.00fsq.ft, Color Bond $6.0Q(sq.R. 5. Mileage will be billed at standard mileage rates set by IRS. 2007 rates currently listed at $0.485 per mile. rwmkasvrvinenTjy�aoVGNn1000e _aAEOr.Uz h • • e -352 AMENDMENT NO.4 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH VA CONSULTING, INC. FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT THIS AMEND ENT NO. 4 T PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, entered into this day of 017( , 2007, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "City ") and VA CONSULTING, INC., (formerly known as Van Dell and Associates), a California corporation whose address is 17801 Cartwright Road, Irvine, California, 92614 (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant "), is made with reference to the following: RECITALS A. City is planning to install a new sidewalk on the easterly side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 16`" Street, adjacent to the Castaways Park in the City of Newport Beach (hereinafter referred to as the "Project "). B. On July 12, 2004, City and Consultant entered into a Professional Services Agreement for Consultant to provide design and consulting services for the Project (hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement "). Among other things, Consultant agreed to prepare sidewalk design alternatives, conduct a geotechnical evaluation, process a Coastal Development permit and prepare the environmental documentation for the Project. The City agreed to pay Consultant $69,838.00 for the services under the Agreement. The Agreement was scheduled to expire on December 31, 2005. C. On February 22, 2005, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's Scope of Work was expanded to provide additional engineering and geotechnical services for the Project, including a proposal to shore up the existing slope above Dover Drive, at the Cliff Drive Intersection. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 1 was $6,000.00. D. On August 9, 2005, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's Scope of Work was expanded to provide additional design and consulting services for the Project, including analysis of the sidewalk and retaining wall alternatives for the slope above Dover Drive, preparation of the final design of the Boardwalk portion of the Project, and project management and coordination services. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 2 was $9,900.00. The term of the Agreement was also extended to June 30, 2006. 1. 0 E. On April 4, 2006, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's Scope of Work was expanded to revise the alignment of the proposed sidewalk/curb and gutter adjacent to the slope above Dover Drive, and prepare revised exhibits for the environmental document and resource agency permit applications. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 3 was $3,960.00. The term of the Agreement was also extended to December 31, 2006. F. City now desires that Consultant perform additional services for the Project, including working with Regional Water Quality Control Board staff regarding the need for a Clean Water Act 401 Water Quality Certification and responding to comments from the California Coastal Commission staff. G. City desires to enter into this Amendment No. 4 to compensate Consultant for these additional services, which were not included in the Agreement or the prior Amendments. H. City and Consultant mutually desire to amend Agreement, hereinafter referred to as "Amendment No. 4 ", as provided herein below. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: Consultant shall perform the services outlined in the Scope of Work, which is attached hereto as "Exhibit A" and incorporated herein by this reference. 2. City shall pay Consultant for the services on a time and expense not -to- exceed basis in accordance with the provisions of this Section and the Schedule of Hourly Rates attached hereto as "Exhibit B," and incorporated herein by this reference. In no event shall Consultant's compensation for all work performed pursuant to this Amendment No. 4, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, exceed Five Thousand, Four Hundred and Fifty -Five Dollars and no /100 ($5,455.00). 3. The term of the Agreement shall be extended to December 31, 2007. 4. Except as expressly covenants set forth in full force and effect. modified herein, all other provisions, terms, and Agreement shall remain unchanged and shall be in 2 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 4 on the date first above written. APPROVED AS TO FORM: p,... c, - Aaron C. Harp Assistant City Attorney for the City of Newport Beach ATTEST: By: 6 x/40_ c A . /6�'� LaVonne Harkless, City Clerk�F*Tsul Attachments: Exhibit A — Scope of Work Exhibit B — Fee Schedule CITY OF NEXPORT BEACH, A un' a(Co poration Steve Rosansky Q Mayor City of Newport Beach VA CONSULTING, INC.: Title: President and CEO Print Name: Max P. Vahid By: A-' t JxtA (Financial Officer) Title: secretary and CFO Print Name: Michael S. Carter f .,Wserslobwlsharedlagreements\fy 06 -071VA Consulting, Inc.I -lover sidewalk- amendment 4.doc 9 9 EXHIBIT "A" 10 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT ADDITIONAL SERVICES ' SCOPE OF SERVICES Additional Permitting This task provides for additional time required to obtain project approval from RWOCB and CCC. We have assumed 8 hours of additional stafff time for coordination and follow - up with the RWQCB and 24 hours of additional staff time for coordination and preparation of response to comments received from the CCC. Attendance and travel for participation at CCC hearings have not been provided for in this estimate. At this time, we do not anticipate that CCC hearings will be required. If CCC hearings are required, we will submit additional request for authorization. 2. Project Management and Meetings This task provides project management, coordination and attendance at additional meetings with Environmental sub - consultant and City. We have assumed 4 hours for project management and coordination and 4 hours for attendance at 2 additional meetings for a total of 8 hours. 3. Reimbursables This task provides for cost of reproduction of submittals and exhibits, messenger services and mileage, etc. cnomnKm— 5eunwyMMnb is VMTenawnv Mte cie� 12010a EXHIBIT "B" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT ADDITIONAL SERVICES PROPOSED FEES 1. Additional Permitting... 2. Project Management and Coordination ........... 3. Reimbursables ................. ............................... TOTALFEES .............................. ............................... C � and amSno+YM.semizuami ftmavwe ary NIaa01 geeq MccV lnlftdn .........._ ......... ............................_.. $3,835 ...................... ............................... $1,360 ...................... ............................... $ 200 ...................... ............................... $5,455 VA CONSULTING, INC. 2006 Fee Schedule stw Classification Et M A 1M =iTTT_,Ttr—U _ 'l 71M] President.. ...- ... ... ........... . ............ ...... ........ ....... .............. "Visfan Prosidonvowislon Manaw ......... ... __ .......... ........................ Sr. Vba PfaviderYVIce Prealdentif excrc. ........................ 01ro= ............... .. .. __ ......................... ...... ... . ................................ sen(arprojea Manager . . . .......................... __ ............. ...... ............. Pr*0Mano9er,_... .. ................. ..................... ............ ............... AwAstantlewlectManaW . . ....... __ ........... ................... Sonfor"aa EngineadSonW Carp superv%oriOanlor Planner..... lim& Rats ....... . . . . . $185 Wo am ...... .... 04 311111 Senior Dwon ........ ___ .................. . .. . . __ . ..... ................ _ Si2a Dastgn liagkiee=dner net. . .... ................... __ ...... __ ................. . . ........... ........ Designer.......... _........ .. %.' ...... I—- . ................. %. ........ .. - ...... ......... .. Assistant SiOeWAsslstant Planner ...... . ...... ........ ....... .......... .... .. ........ Re"wich and forcoeasimg Coordinator ............ ._........<._..........«..... -. ............... ....................- .......5$S Gunior CAW Tethatolan .. ..................... .... . ...... .. ........................ _ ...... . ...................... NO junwl!nglnosr. .... . .............. .......... ...... ...... . ....... ........ ............ ...... . ...................... CAMToctmfolan ------ . . ............................ .... .............. .................... -- .........................µ..... _'_ 381) En*ea" tram ____ ......... .................... - ..... .. ...... ................... _'_ ...... OR) OfficeSupportl0wical. ............... ....... . ......... .... ..... ___ ............:.._._..,..,...:... ...,,..............:........960 W7,!Lr=, ��W D,_77k-=KqM Director of survey and mapping %iwRgwroTfWSUrJW ............. WPM and Mappht; Asooftla. "and Mapping Taduticlan 2-Van OPS CW .............. .. I " - I .. r_lr ...... . Man GM Cnrw_..__. ........ . ........... ___. 97rum=_ I Mpftn ........ --m ............ «_................ _ ...............:.......stow . ....................... I . ......... "I ............ 1 . ............8460 z 0n'Mvoo' %too w4Uo&wdhyft0i8KvA11 tewm�wqad M a role of f3%*f6arftftft'J hMty Wet AUAdXAWWWkbP f4p4pWabot s. Repregreptnot, mgaoaraer v Im, ravel Wudow radohW end mo&I wol aW dbea r *M 66 eAPP4 M CM PhJ% 1015. Pig tw4we of mW69 varonAMIN v4ba choW MUM Oft 15% to 4. 5. MIL p wA be bi&d at SO.445 per mile ceft —me -W ftwnwkrBeYh.t l 4RWWempwvy Mb Fv. r(1M �'Zlw 0. • 5W /co aDb� • • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 5_ April 24, 2007 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Public Works Department �� rZ Robert Stein .,r 949 -644 -3322 or rstein @city.newport- beach.ca.us SUBJECT: DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK — APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH VA CONSULTING, INC., FORMERLY KNOWN AS VAN DELL AND ASSOCIATES RECOMMENDATIONS: Approve Amendment No. 4 to Professional Services Agreement with VA Consulting, Inc., formerly known as Van Dell and Associates for a not to exceed amount of $5,455 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Amendment. DISCUSSION: On May 25, 2004, Council approved a Professional Services Agreement with VA Consulting of Irvine California, for the design of the Dover Drive sidewalk at a contract price of $69,838. Along with preparing the final construction documents, VA Consulting's professional services included preparing sidewalk design alternatives, conducting a geotechnical evaluation, preparing and processing jurisdictional agency permits including a Coastal Development Permit, and preparing the environmental documentation for the Project. During the design process, the City asked the Consultant to consider additional options for the sidewalk design to consider alternate alignments with various retaining wall alternatives. Over the last two years, three contract amendments were approved by staff: On February 22, 2005, City and Consultant entered into Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's scope of work was expanded to provide additional engineering and geotechnical services for the Project, including a proposal to shore up the existing slope above Dover Drive, at the Cliff Drive intersection. The additional compensation under Amendment No. 1 was $6,000. • On August 9, 2005, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 2 to the • Agreement, in which Consultant's scope of work was expanded to provide additional design and consulting services for the project, including analysis of the sidewalk and retaining wall alternatives for the slope above Dover Drive, preparation of the final design of the boardwalk portion of the project, and project Dover Drive Silk — Approval of Amendment to Professional Servi&reement with VA ConsWting, Inc, April 24, 2107 Page 2 management and coordination services. The additional compensation under • Amendment No. 2 was $9,900. On April 4, 2006; City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's scope of work was expanded to revise the alignment of the proposed sidewalk and curb and gutter adjacent to the slope above Dover Drive, and prepare revised exhibits for the environmental document and resource agency permit applications. The additional compensation under Amendment No. 3 was $3,960. The design is now complete; however VA Consulting has had to expend additional effort working with the jurisdictional agencies to gain approvals. Staff recommends additional funds to compensate the consultant for this extra effort. Below is the status of the project permits. ➢ California Department of Fish and Game issued a 1602 approval in June, 2006. ➢ The Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) determined that the habitat adjacent.to Dover Drive is an isolated wetland and therefore an ACOE 404 permit is not required and has issued a jurisdictional delineation letter. ➢ The Regional Water Quality Control Board will not require a 401 certification. ➢ California Coastal Commission (CCC) received the City's permit application in • August 2006 and, we received comments in December. Supplemental information was submitted and CCC staff indicates the application package is now complete. In the next month, we are hoping to hear that our project has been agendized of an upcoming Commission meeting. Environmental Review: On June 27, 2006, Council adopted a Resolution approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for Dover Drive Sidewalk Project. Public Notice: The public will be informed of the Coastal Commission hearing once that date is determined. • • • • Dover Drive S — Approval of Amendment to Professional Servionreement with VA Consulting, Inc. April 24, 2007 Page 3 Funding Availability: Sufficient funds are available in the following account for the project: Account Description Transportation and Circulation Prepared by: r— \Z Robert Stein, P.E. Principal Civil Engineer Attachments: Amendment No. Exhibit Account Number Amount 7261 - 05100854 $5,455 Total: $5,455 Submitted Works Director 0 AMENDMENT NO.4 • TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH VA CONSULTING, INC. FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT THIS AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, entered into this day of , 2007, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "City") and VA CONSULTING, INC., (formerly known as Van Dell and Associates), a California corporation whose address is 17801 Cartwright Road, Irvine, California, 92614 (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant"), is made with reference to the following: RECITALS A. City is planning to install a new sidewalk on the easterly side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 16th Street, adjacent to the Castaways Park in the City of Newport Beach (hereinafter referred to as the "Project "). B.. On July 12, 2004, City and Consultant . entered into a Professional Services Agreement for Consultant to provide design and consulting services for the • Project (hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement"). Among other things, Consultant agreed to prepare sidewalk design alternatives, conduct a geotechnical evaluation, process a Coastal Development permit and prepare the environmental documentation for the Project. The City agreed to pay Consultant $69,838.00 for the services under the Agreement. The Agreement was scheduled to expire on December 31, 2005. C. On February 22, 2005, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's Scope of Work was expanded to provide additional engineering and geotechnical services for the Project, including a proposal to shore up the existing slope above Dover Drive, at the Cliff Drive Intersection. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 1 was $6,000.00. D. On August 9, 2005, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's Scope of Work was expanded to provide additional design and consulting services for the Project, including analysis of the sidewalk and retaining wall alternatives for the slope above Dover Drive, preparation of the final design of the Boardwalk portion of the Project, and project management and coordination services. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 2 was $9,900.00. The term of the Agreement was also extended to June 30, 2006. • 0 0 • E. On April 4, 2006, City and Consultant entered into an Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement, in which Consultant's Scope of Work was expanded to revise the alignment of the proposed sidewalk/curb and gutter adjacent to the slope above Dover Drive, and prepare revised exhibits for the environmental document and resource agency permit applications. The additional compensation due Consultant under Amendment No. 3 was $3,960.00. The term of the Agreement was also extended to December 31, 2006. • F. City now desires that Consultant perform additional services for the Project, including working with Regional Water Quality Control Board staff regarding the need for a Clean Water Act 401 Water Quality Certification and responding to comments from the California Coastal Commission staff. G. City desires to enter into this Amendment No. 4 to compensate Consultant for these additional services, which were not included in the Agreement or the prior Amendments. H. City and Consultant mutually desire to amend Agreement, hereinafter referred to as "Amendment No. 4 ", as provided herein below. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Consultant shall perform the services outlined in the Scope of Work, which is attached hereto as "Exhibit A" and incorporated herein by this reference. 2. City shall pay Consultant for the services on a time and expense not-to- exceed basis in accordance with the provisions of this Section and the Schedule of Hourly Rates.attached hereto as "Exhibit B," and incorporated herein by this reference. In no event shall ConsutanVs compensation for all work performed pursuant to this Amendment No. 4, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, exceed Five Thousand, Four Hundred and Fifty-Five Dollars and no /100 ($5,455.00). 3. The term of the Agreement shall be extended to December 31, 2007. 4. Except as expressly modified herein, all other provisions, terms, and covenants set forth in Agreement shall remain unchanged and shall be in full force and effect. 2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 4 on the date first above written. APPROVED AS TO FORM: By:—A 6 c Y Aaron C. Harp Assistant City Attorney for the City of Newport Beach ATTEST: By: LaVonne Harkless, City Clerk Attachments: Exhibit A — Scope of Work Exhibit B — Fee Schedule CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, A Municipal Corporation By: Steve Rosansky Mayor City of Newport Beach VA CONSULTING, INC.: By: (Corporate Officer) Title: Print Name: (Financial Officer) Title: Print Name: F. %usmVbNAshareftgreementsVy 0"AVA consulting, Inc.l -dmw sklewalkamendment 4.doc • • EXHIBIT "A" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT ADDITIONAL. SERVICES - SCOPE OF SERVICES Additional Permitting This task provides for additional time required to obtain project approval from RWQCB and CCC. We have assumed 8 hours of additional staff time for coordination and follow - up with the RWQCB and 24 hours of additional staff time for coordination and preparation of response to comments received from the CCC. Attendance and travel for participation at CCC hearings have not been provided for in this estimate. At this time, we do not anticipate that CCC hearings will be required. If CCC hearings are required, we will submit additional request for authorization. 2. Project Management and Meetings This task provides project management, coordination and attendance at additional • meetings with Environmental sub - consultant and City. We have assumed 4 hours for project management and coordination and 4 hours for attendance at 2 additional meetings for a total of 8 hours. 3. Reimbursables This task provides for cost of reproduction of submittals and exhibits, messenger services and mileage, etc. 0 0 EXHIBIT "e" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT ADDITIONAL SERVICES PROPOSED FEES 1. Additional Permitting .............................................................. ............................... $3.895 2. Project Management and Coordination .................................. ............................... $1,360 3. Reimbursables ....................................................................... ............................... $ 200 TOTALFEES .................................................................................... ............................... $5,455 • • cnowvMe.a s�aa a.swn *.�wa�. r... �mo�wco_,m,umx • VA CONSULTING, INC. 2006 Fee Schedule swclasavloft" Br. Vim PrWMW4W PmkkrM Fm r......._ . ........ ...... siso BOOM ... ........ ------ .......... ....... A9ftMtR4ntMWMw . . ...... .......... MAO ...... . ........ ReNKch aid Pmmaing 0oor6AaMr-- .... .. ...................... . ... . ' �*,.,r,z . ... . ........ .... . .... . .......... NOt Mp' dBiutletpBdYl6plso11imi5dC1 lltt�ldlm�el/fil� ,' 3. Rommw% mw&w km. tmwomkft Wwadffwft WdewaWoomm *an@ ftwa of adom 4. womm9mviopke dam amoopw aw" SlAbqA calwoumd SuDftA ry. Mbap vAto bMW M16.4" pwmML caeeaaRnurnm amm� W BAka* w�.iurs Sdknffm M Fke0LKW0_iMM . . • • Cog /�aO -�� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 20 June 27, 2006 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY FROM: Public Works Department Stephen Luy I I IUN 2 7 2( 9 949 -644 -3330 or sluy @city.newport- beach.ca.us SUBJECT: DOVER DRIVE, NORTH OF CLIFF DRIVE SIDEWALK NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF CONTRACT NO. 3652 RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for Dover Drive Sidewalk Project. DISCUSSION: The City is proposing the construction of sidewalk along the easterly side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 970 feet North of Cliff Drive. The project involves construction of the following: A variable width sidewalk (4.5 feet to 7.5 feet wide) and new curb and gutter within the existing Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 425 feet North of Cliff Drive. An eight -foot wide boardwalk with post and cable rail will be constructed behind the existing curb from 425 feet North of Cliff Drive to 920 feet North of Cliff drive. A six to eight -foot wide boardwalk will be constructed behind the existing curb to join existing sidewalk from 920 feet North of Cliff Drive to 970 feet North of Cliff Drive (see attached project location map). The City's Consultant, Van Dell Consulting, has contacted the California Department of Fish and Game, United States Army Corp of Engineers and Regional Water Quality Control. All three agencies have indicated that permits are not required for this project. A Coastal Development Permit (CDP) application is being processed with the California Coastal Commission. Van Dell Consulting subconsultant, Chambers Group Inc., prepared the MND and notified residents within a 300 -foot radius that it was available for review from May 4 to June 4, 2006 (see attached). The MND states that the City will mitigate the pruning of large limbs from two existing red willow trees and will plant four new one - gallon size red willow trees adjacent to the site for each of the two trees disturbed by the construction, Drive North of Cliff Drive Sidewalk - Mitigated Nede Declaration for Contract No. 3652 June 27, 2006 Page 2 for a total of eight new trees. The City will establish a Mitigation Monitoring Program that will consist of hand watering and monitoring the eight newly planted red willow trees for a period of one year. In addition all red willow trees trimmed as a result of the construction of the project will also be monitored for a period of one year. The Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Game and Regional Water Quality Control Board have imposed no mitigation requirements on this project. Mitigation measures imposed by the CDP will incorporate into the construction documents. The Notice of Intent for the MND was filed with the County Clerk of Orange County. The City received one e-mail correspondence noting that Page 4, Item 10 of the MND incorrectly states that other agency approvals are not required. Staff responded by email to this individual stating that agency reviews are indeed required for this project and that the aforementioned agencies have been contacted. On May 2, 2006 staff sent the MND to the State Clearinghouse for review of the project by affected agencies. On June 8, 2006 the City received a letter from the State Clearinghouse indicating that the review period had closed June 1, 2006 and no state agency had submitted comments regarding the project. Receipt of this letter indicates that the City has complied with the State Clearinghouse requirements for draft environmental documents pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Prepared by: Submitted b r Stephe u to n . Badum Associate Civil Engineer Wblic Works Director Attachments: Mitigated Negative Declaration Notice of Intent E -mail Comment of Concern Response to Comment of Concern State Clearinghouse Letter Resolution Approving MND 0 0 '1 NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION To: From: 0 Office of Planning and Research City of Newport Beach 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 3300 Newport Blvd. Sacramento, CA 95814 Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 County Clerk, County of Orange (Orange County) Public Services Division P.O. Box 238 Date received for filing at OPR/County Clerk Santa Ana, CA 92702 POSTED Public review period: May 4. 2006 through June 4, 2006 Name of Project: Dover Drive Street Improvement Project, C -3652 MAY 0 � 2006 roa r. Project Location: East Side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to I e Street. r �LERK•RECARDER ti DEPU Project Description: Removal of a portion of existing roadway improvements, construction of new curb, gutter and sidewalk; modification of stormwater inlets; construction of boardwalk with steel post and cable fence. Public Meetings: No public meetings have been scheduled. Hazardous Waste List: The site is not on a list of hazardous waste sites as defined in Government Code section 65962.5 (f). Document Availability: Copies of the initial study and supporting materials are available for public review at the following locations: Newport Beach City Hall Public Works Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA A copy of the Initial Study containing the analysis supporting the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration is attached. Additional plans, studies and /or exhibits relating to the proposed project may be available for public review. If you wish to appeal the appropriateness or adequacy of this document of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, your comments should be submitted in writing prior to the close of the public review period. Your comments should specifically identify what environmental impacts you believe would result from the project, why they are significant, and what changes or mitigation measures you believe should be adopted to eliminate or reduce these impacts. Written comments should be submitted to: Questions on the Initials Study should be directed to: City of Newport Beach Stephen Luy, Project Engineer Public Works Department 949 -644 -3330 Attn: Bob Stein, P.E. 3300 Newport Blvd. Principal Engineer S Page I of 2 From: Stein, Robert • Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 8:51 AM To: 'JonV3 @aol.com' Cc: Patapoff, Bill Subject: RE: Public Comments: Dover Drive Sidewalk Project, C -3652 Jan, you are correct. this project does require agency approval. we are working with CDFG and will be getting a CDP. Bob Stein 949 -644 -3322 From: JonV3 @aol.com [mailto:JonV3 @aol.com] Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 11:49 PM To: Stein, Robert Cc: Ridgeway, Tod; Webb, Don; don2webb @earthlink.net; Nichols, Dick; City Council; Rosansky, Steven; Daigle, Leslie; Selich, Edward; Curry, Keith; ablemker @coastal.ca.gov Subject: Public Comments: Dover Drive Sidewalk Project, C -3652 June 4, 2006 Dear Mr. Stein and Newport Beach City Councilmembers, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Dover Drive Sideway Project dated May 2006, with the public comment period extending from May 4, 2006 to June 4, 2006, which happens to end on a Sunday. I am generally in favor of this project which will build a sidewalk and boardwalk on the east side of Dover Drive bordering Castaways Park. However, the Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Dec for the project indicates that it will have temporary and permanent impacts to Department of Fish and Game and California Coastal Commission jurisdictional wetlands (see pages 28 to 34, Biological Resources). The report identifies total impacts of .060 acres, or 2,575 square feet. Therefore a Coastal Development Permit should be required, as well as a DFG Streambed Alteration Agreement. 06/07/2006 . • Page 2 of 2 I believe the report erroneously states on page 4, paragraph 10, that no other public agencies approvals are required. The Coastal Commission and DFG should issue permits for this project Ifte these are seemingly small impacts, it is the size of some vernal pools, and there is nothing in the state regulations that Ives the need to comply with regulations of the Coastal Commission or Department of Fish and Game for small impacts to wetlands. In the case of the Coastal Commission, a project impacting coastal wetlands has to meet the test of one of eight water - dependent uses, and mitigation for impacts has to be identified and implemented, with monitoring and requirements for success. In the case of this project, I don't believe a sidewalk is one of the eight permitted uses. Moreover, no mitigation is proposed for the 2,575 square feet of wetlands impacted by the project. However, one of the Coastal Act permitted uses could apply in this case if restoration of the adjacent wetland (called a "unnamed drainage" in the report) is the purpose of the project. This wetland is currently almost entirely choked with cattails. If a restoration project were designed to restore this wetland with open areas of water and a varied assemblage of bulrushes, sedges, and cattails, then the fill associated with the sidewalk and boardwalk might be viewed as a public access amenity to this restored wetland, and the 2,575 square feet could be added as part of the restoration on the eastern and southern border of the wetland. In any case, the Coastal Commission and Department of Fish and Game should be brought into the picture to issue permits. Thanks again for the opportunity to comment. Please notify me of any public hearings or other discretionary actions. I would be happy to work with the City in developing a restoration plan and gaining further approvals for this worthy project. Sincerely, ,fan rD. `tlandersfoot, %(D Jan D. Vandersloot, MD 2221 E 16th Street ort Beach, CA 92663 548 -6326 1] 06/07/2006 S June2,2006 • STATE OF CALIFORNIA • Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit Robert Stein City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Dover Drive Sidewalk Project SCH #: 2006051016 Dear Robert Stein: �P,6P PLyy,_ dr�0 N Sean Walsh Director .MN 0 8 2006 PUiSljc �01'nSlJCj?{ City of Netupor, r� a l The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named Mitigated Negative Declaration to selected state agencies for review. The review period closed on June 1, 2006, and no state agencies submitted comments by that date. This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for drat} environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Please call the State Clearinghouse at (916) 445 -0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process. If you have a question about the above -named project, please refer to the ten -digit State Clearinghouse number when contacting this office. Sincerely, Joe Terry Roberts Director, State Clearinghouse 1400 TENTH STREET P.O. BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO, CALIpORN1A 96612.3044 TEL (916) 44 &0613 FAX (916) 323 -3016 www.cpr.ca.gov 7. 0 0 Document Details Report State Clearinghouse Data Bas SCH# 2006051016 Project This Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Lead Agency Newport Beach, City of Type MN Mitigated Negative Declaration Description D The sidewalk construction concept would enhance pedestrian access and safety while also minimizing potential impacts to adjacent steep slopes (in Reach 1) and potential wetland vegetation (in Reaches 2 and 3). None of the project reach designs require retaining wall construction. Lead Agency Contact Name Robert Stein Agency City of Newport Beach Phone. (949) 644 -3311 Fax email Address 3300 Newport Boulevard City Newport Beach State CA Zip 92663 Project Location County Orange City Newport Beach Region Cross Streets Dover Drive and Coast Highway Parcel No. Township 6S Range 10W Section 54 Base SB Proximity to: Highways 1 Airports Railways Waterways Upper Newport Bay Schools Ensign Intermediate, Newport Harbor High Land Use The project is located east of residential development along Dover Drive, immediately west and downsiope of Castaways Park, and southwest of Newport Harbor Lutheran Church and School. An unnamed drainage located parallel to Dover Drive appears to contain perennial flowing waters. This drainage flows from north to south for 500 linear feet and contains riparian and wetland species. GP: REDS - Recreational & Environmental Open Space Z: PC -43 - Upper Castaways Planned Community. The proposed project generally would be constructed in road right -of -way. According to the City's Municipal Code, rights -of -way are unzoned and the proposed project is an allowable use within various zoning classifications. Projectissues Wefland /Riparian Reviewing Resources Agency; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 8; Department of Parks and Agencies Recreation; Native American Heritage Commission; Department of Fish and Game, Region 5; Department of Water Resources; California Coastal Commission; California Highway Patrol; Caltrans, District 12; State Lands Commission Date Received 05/03/2006 Start of Review 05/03/2006 End of Review 06/01/2006 Note: Blanks in data fields result from Insufficient information provided by lead agency: 7 0 RESOLUTION NO. 2006 - 0 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE DOVER DRIVE - NORTH OF CLIFF DRIVE- SIDEWALK. WHEREAS, the Public Works Department of the City of Newport Beach has prepared a design for construction of a sidewalk along the easterly side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 970 feet North of Cliff Drive; and WHEREAS, the Public Works Department of the City of Newport Beach has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Dover Drive Sidewalk and submitted it for public review; and WHEREAS, the California Department of Fish and Game, United States Army Corps of Engineers and Regional Water Quality Control Board have reviewed the project and require no mitigation; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adopt said Mitigated Negative Declaration, and Mitigation Monitoring Program for the construction of the Dover Drive Sidewalk; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby adopts said Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan (attached as Exhibit A) for Dover Drive Sidewalk within the City of Newport Beach. ADOPTED this 27th day of June 2006. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk f: \users\pbMshared \resolutions \greenbook- 2003.doc F:\ Users \PBW \Shared \Resolutions \Dover Drive Sidewalk - 2006.doc , 0 DOVER DRIVE MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN EXHIBIT A The City is proposing the construction of a variable width sidewalk along the easterly side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 970 feet North of Cliff Drive. The proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project has been initiated by the City due to the lack of pedestrian facilities along the project segment of Dover Drive. The sidewalk would provide continuity among the existing facilities north and south of the project reaches, along the west side of Dover Drive at the Cliff Drive intersection, and within the adjacent Castaways Park to the west. The MND states that the City will mitigate the pruning of large limbs from two existing red willow trees and will plant four new one - gallon size red willow trees adjacent to the site for each of the two trees disturbed by the construction, for a total of eight new trees. The City's Mitigation Monitoring Program will consist of, The eight one gallon red willow trees will be planted after construction of the sidewalk but prior to the completion /finalization of the project. • City forces shall hand water and monitor the eight newly planted red willow trees for a period of one year. • All red willow trees trimmed as a result of the construction of the project will be monitored by City forces for a period of one year. 0 Z DRAFT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION State Clearinghouse Number: DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT City of Newport Beach Prepared for: City of Newport Beach Public Works Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 Prepared by: CHAMBERS GROUP, INC. 17671 Cowan Avenue, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92614 May 2006 E rJ �J i 8387 May 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS ProposedFinding .................................. ............................... ProjectProponent ................................. ............................... Project Location ................................... ............................... Project Purpose ..................................... ............................... Project Description ............................... ............................... Initial Study / Environmental Checklist Form ..................... Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ....................... Page .............2 .............2 .............2 .............2 .............2 .............4 Determination. ................................................................................................................ 6 Checklist of Environmental Impacts .................................................................. .............................13 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ................................................................ .............................24 Sources............................................................................................................... .............................51 List of Figures Page Figure1 — Project Location ................................................................................. ..............................7 Figure2 — USGS Basemap .................................................................................. ..............................8 Figure 3 — Proposed Sidewalk Project Limits... ................................................................................ q Figure 4 — Proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project, Reach 1 Design Concept . .............................10 Figure 5 — Proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project, Reach 2 Design Concept . .............................11 Figure 6 — Proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project, Reach 3 Design Concept . .............................12 List of Tables Table 1 — Estimated Construction Emissions Without Mitigation Table 2 — Jurisdictional Impact Summary ...... ............................... Page ...................27 ...................31 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project l� • 1 DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach Public Works Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 PROPOSED FINDING Based upon the information contained in the Initial Study, the City of Newport Beach (City) finds that there could be one or more potentially significant effects to the environment resulting from construction of the proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project. As the CEQA lead agency, the City has agreed to implement the mitigation measures presented herein. The mitigation measures and assurance of their implementation will be formalized in a mitigation monitoring program (MMP) that will be enforced by the City during construction of the proposed project. The facts supporting this finding are presented in the attached Initial Study and in the MMP adopted by the Newport Beach City Council. PROJECT PROPONENT City of Newport Beach Public Works Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 PROJECT LOCATION As shown in Figures 1 through 6 of the attached Initial Study, the City is proposing to construct the Dover Drive sidewalk project along the east side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 970 feet north of Cliff Drive (south of 16th Street), adjacent to Castaways Park, in the City of Newport Beach, Orange County, California. The starting point of the sidewalk project is approximately 950 feet north of the intersection of Dover Drive and Pacific Coast Highway. PROJECT PURPOSE The proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project has been initiated by the City due to the lack of pedestrian facilities along the project segment of Dover Drive. The project is intended to provide a safe pedestrian circulation link along the east side of Dover Drive, while also responding to the design requirements resulting from the site location adjacent to riparian and wetland resources. The sidewalk project would provide continuity among the existing facilities north and south of the project reaches, along the west side of Dover Drive, at the Cliff Drive intersection, and within the adjacent Castaways Park to the west. As discussed in later sections, the sidewalk construction concept resulted from the study of various engineering alternatives, each of which was intended to enhance pedestrian access and safety while also minimizing potential impacts to adjacent steep slopes (in Reach 1) and potential wetland vegetation (in Reaches 2 and 3). PROJECT DESCRIPTION Proposed Facilities and Construction Methods Van Dell and Associates, Inc. (Van Dell) was retained by the City of Newport Beach to provide engineering services for the construction of a sidewalk along the east side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 970 feet north of Cliff Drive. Van Dell initiated the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Alternatives 8387 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Prgect 1�1- 0 0 Study in September 2004 and completed it in August 2005. The work included geotechnical analysis; resource agency habitat and resource agency jurisdictional delineation mapping; and alternative location and design analyses for the sidewalk project. If approved, the project would culminate in Resource Agency permitting and preparation of plans and technical specifications for the selected design. The Alternatives Study evaluates sidewalk alternatives over three separate reaches within the project limits. Reach I evaluates the adjacent embankment conditions above the existing roadway from Cliff Drive to 425 feet north of Cliff Drive. Reach 2 evaluates the adjacent embankment condition below the existing roadway from 425 feet north Cliff Drive to 920 feet north of Cliff Drive. Reach 3 evaluates the adjacent embankment condition below the existing roadway, with mature willow trees within five feet of the curb, from 920 feet north of Cliff Drive to 970 feet north of Cliff Drive. The Alternatives Study presents the analysis, comparison, and estimated cost of 14 various sidewalk location and design alternatives along the three reaches of the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project. The study considered varying sidewalk widths in each reach, ranging from 4 to 8 feet wide in Reach 1 to 5 to 8 feet wide in Reaches 2 and 3. Due to varying slope conditions in each project reach, the sidewalk concepts were evaluated along with a combination of retaining wall with slope restoration, retaining wall with shoring, and no retaining wall. Based on factors such as pedestrian needs (including ADA requirements), impacts to adjacent wetlands and riparian habitat, geotechnical and slope stability constraints, roadway configuration and project costs, the City selected the following sidewalk design concepts for the three separate reaches: Reach 1— Variable width sidewalk (4.5 feet to 7.5 feet wide) within existing roadway C1iDrive to 415 feet north of CIiDrive (adjacent embankment above existing road) Reach 1 would require construction of new curb and gutter from 4.5 feet to 7.5 feet into the existing Dover Drive. The work will include removal of approximately 50 lineal feet of existing curb and gutter; removal and replacement of asphalt concrete pavement necessary to construct 425 lineal feet of new curb and gutter; construction of 4.5 -foot to 7.5- foot -wide concrete sidewalk; and modifications of the existing curb stormwater inlets. The project would not affect the adjacent embankment and no retaining wall would be necessary. The existing signal standards and traffic and bicycle lane striping on Dover Drive would remain unchanged. Figure 4 illustrates the proposed improvements in Reach 1. Reach 2 — Eight -foot wide boardwalk behind the existing curb 415 feet north of Cliff Drive to 920 feet north of CIiDrlve (adjacent embankment below existing road) Reach 2 would require construction of 495 lineal feet of boardwalk consisting of 18 -inch diameter concrete posts at 8 feet on center with 9 -foot header beams supported on the posts and a concrete footing at the back of the curb. The concrete posts will be at least 10 feet deep. The 8- foot -wide boardwalk would be constructed of wooden deck planking and would include a post and cable rail at the back of the boardwalk. The project would not affect the adjacent embankment and no retaining wall would be necessary. The existing curb and gutter and the traffic and bicycle lane striping on Dover Drive would remain unchanged. Figure 5 illustrates the proposed improvements in Reach 2. Reach 3 — Six to eight -foot wide boardwalk behind the existing curb 920 feet north of Cliff Drive to 970 feet north of Cliff Drive (adjacent embankment below existing road) Reach 3 would require construction of 50 lineal feet of boardwalk consisting of 18 -inch diameter concrete posts at 8 feet on center with 9 -foot header beams supported on the posts and a concrete footing at the back of the curb. The concrete posts will be at least 10 feet deep. The 6 to 8- foot -wide boardwalk would be constructed of wooden deck planking and would include a post and cable rail at the back of the boardwalk. The project would not affect the adjacent embankment and no retaining wall would be 8387 2 initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Rgect 0 0 necessary. The existing curb and gutter and the traffic and bicycle lane striping on Dover Drive would remain unchanged. Figure 6 illustrates the proposed improvements in Reach 3. In Reach 1, an 8 to 10 -foot wide strip of existing paved roadway (approximately 150 cubic yards of asphalt within the emergency parking lane) will be excavated and removed to construct the new sidewalk and curb and gutter. In Reaches 2 and 3, minor excavation (two feet deep by one foot wide, approximately 72 cubic yards) will be required along the back of curb in those reaches in order to construct the base for the boardwalk. Minor excavation of about one to two feet deep (approximately 150 cubic yards total) is also required to provide clearance for the wooden boardwalk support beams along the top of slope in the five to six -foot wide area behind the curb. As indicated previously, the selected project reach designs do not require any retaining walls. Construction Phasing and Scheduling The proposed project would be constructed in a single phase requiring approximately 90 working days. If all project approvals can be obtained as planned, the project would go to bid in early 2006 and construction would begin after the rainy season (i.e., after April 15's 2006). All construction work will be accomplished within the time limits permitted by City's noise ordinance, which allows construction on weekdays between 7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. Work will be conducted on Saturdays between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. only if approved by the Public Works Director for special needs during the construction period. No work will be permitted on holidays or Sundays. The construction contractor will prepare a Traffic Control Plan for approval by the City Traffic Engineer. The City will allow northbound Dover Drive to be reduced to one lane between 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. during construction. Flagging and appropriate signage will direct vehicular and pedestrian traffic. FILING DATE: May _ 2006 PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD: May — to June _, 2006 8387 May 2006 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project A 0 9 0 INITIAL STUDY / ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project title: Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 2. Lead agency name and address: City of Newport Beach Public Works Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 3. Contact person and phone number: Robert Stein, Principal Civil Engineer -- (949) 644 -3311 4. Project location: Along the east side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 970 feet north of Cliff Drive (south of 161h Street), adjacent to Castaways Park in the City of Newport Beach, Orange County, California. Figures 1 and 2 illustrate the regional location and project vicinity. 5. Project sponsor's name and address: City of Newport Beach Public Works Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 6. General plan designation: REOS — Recreational & Environmental Open Space 7. Zoning: PC -43 — Upper Castaways Planned Community The proposed project generally would be constructed in road right -of -way. According to the City's Municipal Code, rights -of -way are unzoned and the proposed project is an allowable use within various zoning classifications. 8. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Please see the detailed Project Description on pages I through 3. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: The proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project is located east of residential development along Dover Drive, immediately west and downslope of Castaways Park, and southwest of Newport Harbor Lutheran Church and School. Figure 3 depicts existing conditions in the project limits and on surrounding properties. An unnamed drainage located parallel to Dover Drive appears to contain perennial flowing waters. This drainage flows from north to south for 500 linear feet and contains riparian and wetland species. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement) None 11. Previous Environmental and /or Engineering Studies: As indicated previously, Van Dell and Associates, Inc. (Van Dell) was retained by the City of Newport Beach to provide engineering services for the construction of the proposed sidewalk 8387 May 2006 initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 15 0 project. Van Dell initiated the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Alternatives Study in September 2004 and completed it in August 2005. The work included geotechnical analysis; resource agency habitat and resource agency jurisdictional delineation mapping; and alternative location and design analyses for the sidewalk project. That study is referenced as applicable throughout this Initial Study evaluation. The following analysis also references relevant portions of the Initial Study /Negative for the Castaways Park Revegetation project (LSA 2001), which evaluated much of the land comprising the proposed project limits. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. n Aesthetics F] Agriculture Resources F1 Air Quality X Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology /Soils Hazards & Hazardous ❑ Hydrology / Water Quality D Land Use / Planning Materials Mineral Resources Noise ❑ Population / Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation D Transportation/Traffic ri Utilities / Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance 8387 May 2006 5 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project `.J 0 l la 0 0 0 DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. F I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.. Signature Date Printed Name and Title 8387 6 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 . Dover Drive Sidewalk Project l� • • Akd- i '4. .Y c� •tiq S - .. s � \ Wro±uo _ - IY ,.4milrrr �f�� Ge�vie�b V� Sid } �•. �o Oi(a 6 A 9 Source: Google Maps, 201 8387 May 2006 ♦on Y.,1�Ciy'i� Project sln ion - ; 'i/ 'Tf _w._m t., Figure 1 PROJECT LOCATION 7 Initial StudyyMitigated Negative Declaration Doverl)dve Sidewalk Project •1 0 •I Iq E r. Location kO r-c Is —7 I ZJI F1 E r *U ht Collins '34 21 I d I .... . ...... -1. Ba1b6SZ- 0 5001,000 2,000 Feet. Source: USGS 7.5'Sedes, Newport Beach Quadrangle, Photorev. 1981 Figure 2 USGS BASEMAP 8387 8 initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project III I IT- V IIA ww F-y I 9 P-P V Source: Van Dell 2005 8387 May 2006 DOVER DRIVE PROPOSED PROPOSED 4.5'-7.5' PROPOSED SIDEWALK.---N-- PROP. C & G PROP. AC EX MEDIAN EX. PAVEMENT 4.5' — 7' fEDGE STRIPE CURB LANE VARIES EX' PMVT EX. RETAINING WALL PROP. S.W. EX. SLOPE EX. UG Not to Scale JOIN REACH 2 No Scale Figure 4 PROPOSED DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT REACH 1 DESIGN CONCEPT 10 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project • JOIN ^REACH 1 � .— EXI$TINC CURB PROPOSED `CABLE RAIDN \. \ }N " V C \ �EX MEDIAN _• _ _ EXC &G Not to Scale 3' TEMPORARY WORK AREA CABLE RAILING 6' MAX. \ V TEMP. SILT FENCE �^ � EX. SLOPE IN REA 3 \ No Scale Source: Van Dell 2005 Figure 5 PROPOSED DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT REACH 2 DESIGN CONCEPT 8387 Initial Sludy7Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Siw Project C� l is r\ I I \ 400 - E I G CURB PROPO JOINi2EACC ABOARD CABL`RAILIN t z- IOIN EXISTING` 31DE\ . No Scale Source: Van Dell 2005 8387 May 2006 lJ W 12 Figure 6 PROPOSED DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT REACH 3 DESIGN CONCEPT Initial Study/Millgated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project •1 3' 6' 6' TEMPORARY _ WORK AREA MEDIAN VARIES CABLE RAILING �EX PROP. 6' MAX. EX C & G BOARDWAIJ( -- --• --• —. � _ EMP SILT FENCE ,�_ ` SLOPE 2' 6' `1 Not to Scale Source: Van Dell 2005 8387 May 2006 lJ W 12 Figure 6 PROPOSED DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK PROJECT REACH 3 DESIGN CONCEPT Initial Study/Millgated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project •1 i • �. CHECKLIST OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: b) Substantially damage scenic resources, X including, but not limited to, trees, rock 11 El outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual X character or quality of the site and its El El surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or X glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES — In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or X Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural X use, or a Williamson Act contract? 0 11 El c) Involve other changes in the existing X environment which, due to their location or El nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non - agricultural use? III. AIR QUALITY -- Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the X applicable air quality plan? 8387 13 Initial Study/Mitigaled Negat;m Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project i Is Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact I. AESTHETICS — Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic X vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, X including, but not limited to, trees, rock 11 El outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual X character or quality of the site and its El El surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or X glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES — In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or X Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural X use, or a Williamson Act contract? 0 11 El c) Involve other changes in the existing X environment which, due to their location or El nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non - agricultural use? III. AIR QUALITY -- Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the X applicable air quality plan? 8387 13 Initial Study/Mitigaled Negat;m Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project i Is E U 0 9 b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? • Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact ❑ ❑ X e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? IV- BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES — Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, Policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ FE b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any ❑ riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally ❑ protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited lo, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of El native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? L�J KM X X No Impact El X ❑ X ❑ /M/ X M X Fol C X Ma Y 2006 14 lniYal Shidy/Mirigaied Negative Decioratfon Dover Dave Sidewalk project e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? 8387 May 2006 No Impact El ❑ ❑ X ❑ ❑ Less Than ❑ Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact ❑ ❑ X No Impact El ❑ ❑ X ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ X ❑ ❑ ❑ X ❑ ❑ ❑ X ❑ ❑ ❑ X ❑ ❑ X ❑ ❑ ❑ X ❑ ❑ ❑ X ❑ ❑ ❑ X ❑ 15 Initial Study/Miligated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project - 71 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than ' Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ X 0 b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of El El X . topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is El 11 X El unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in 11 X El Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting El El X the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -- Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the X EJ environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous El El X or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list X of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use ❑ ❑ ❑ X plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, 8387 16 initial Study/Miligated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 71 Less Than Potentially Significant with Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporated within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private El El would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically El 11 with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant El El of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste 11 discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or El substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage patter El the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage patter El the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? Less Than Significant No Impact Impact ❑ X X ❑ X ❑ X ❑ ❑ Lit X F M • X • El X u 8387 17 initial Study/Mdigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project • 7 `j. 0 0 8387 18 May 2008 Initial Study{Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project :0 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact e) Create or contribute runoff water which would ❑ El X exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ n X g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard El X area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area X structures which would impede or redirect flood . flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk X of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X 1X. LAND USE AND PLANNING -- Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ X b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, El X policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat ❑ ❑ X conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? 8387 18 May 2008 Initial Study{Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project :0 8387 19 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project L ?i) Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact X. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known X mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- El X important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? XI. NOISE -- Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise X levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of El 11 X excessive groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient X noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in El El X ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use 13 Ej El X plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? t) For a project within the vicinity of a private El El 11 X airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 8387 19 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project L ?i) 0 Ic 0 0 0 8387 May 2006 Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? El X C 9D Less Than ❑ Potentially Significant with Less Than ❑ Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an ❑ ❑ El area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing El El El housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, ❑ El ❑ necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES -- a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ 8387 May 2006 Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? El X C 9D ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ No Impact ra X ra X X 99 99 initial Study/Miligated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 3i I 0 0 g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or X programs supporting alternative transportation El (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? 8387 21 May 2006 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 3� Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact impact XIV. RECREATION — � a) Would the project increase the use of existing X neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities El 11 El X or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC -- Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial X in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a X El level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, X including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design X feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? El X El f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ❑ X g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or X programs supporting alternative transportation El (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? 8387 21 May 2006 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 3� .9 0 0 0 0 b) Require or result in the construction of new El or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new ❑ storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to ❑ serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater Less Than treatment provider which serves or may serve the Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS -- Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of 11 El El the applicable Regional Water Quality Control and regulations related to solid waste? Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new El or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new ❑ storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to ❑ serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater ❑ treatment provider which serves or may serve the X project that it has adequate capacity to serve the ❑ project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient ❑ permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes ❑ and regulations related to solid waste? XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE -- a) Does the project have the potential to degrade ❑ the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? 8387 22 May 2006 X N' No Impact X X ❑ X ❑ X ❑ X ❑ X ❑ ❑ X ❑ ❑ X ❑ Initial Study/Mitigaled Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 0 0 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) Does the project have impacts that are X individually limited, but cumulatively El considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects X that will cause substantial adverse effects on El human beings, either directly or indirectly? 8387 23 initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 0 0 0 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. AESTHETICS a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? No Impact. The site is within a predominantly urban setting and is surrounded by development. The proposed project is not located within a scenic highway nor would it affect scenic vistas. Short-term aesthetic impacts would occur due to views of the construction activity and temporary obstruction of views by construction equipment. However, construction impacts to scenic resources or visual character would be temporary in nature and considered negligible. After construction, the project would not alter the current aesthetics of the existing urban or natural landscapes. b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? Less Than Significant Impact. The project limits are not within or adjacent to a State - designated scenic highway. The site contains no significant scenic resources or unique visual resources related to geologic formations or historic buildings. Although some red willow trees are present in Reach 3, the project would not require compliance with City Council Policy G -1, "Retention or Removal of City Trees" (as amended April 27, 2004). That policy establishes standards for the removal and reforestation of City trees. The City classifies public trees in one of three categories: Special Trees, Problem Trees, and All Other Trees. Red willow (Salix laevigata) are not among the "Special Trees" called out in Attachment 1 (as amended May 10, 2005) of the City policy, therefore, they are designated as an All Other Tree. It is the City's policy to retain All Other Trees unless removal is necessary for various reasons, including poor tree health, a history of public or private property damage, and liability and public safety. The project would not require removal of willow trees for construction, nor would it jeopardize the health of the existing trees and require their future removal. As described in section IV (Biological Resources), the boardwalk design avoids removal of the red willows in Reach 3. Construction impacts are limited to trimming several overhanging branches and removal of a large (six -inch diameter) limb from two red willow trees. The City's proposed mitigation plan, as described in section IV, is to plant four (4) new one- gallon size red willow trees at the project site for each of the two existing trees that require pruning of large limbs. Since tree removal would not occur, the scenic resource quality of the existing red willow trees would not be substantially damaged by project construction and impacts would be less than significant. C) Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? No Impact. The site is within an urban setting and consists of road right -of -way and an adjacent drainage in a predominantly residential and commercial area. Construction and usage of the proposed sidewalk project would not substantially change the character of the site or its surroundings. There would be no impact. d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light orglare, which would adversely isaffect day or nighttime views in the area? No Impact. No new sources of light or glare are associated with construction or operation of the project. Due to the daytime construction schedule, no impacts resulting from light and glare would result. 8387 24 Initial Sludy/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project >5 II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? No Impact. The site is not currently in agricultural use, nor do the project limits or adjacent properties contain any farmland or soils suitable for agricultural use.. The project site is within and adjacent to road right -of -way in the City of Newport Beach. No parcels adjacent to the project limits are located on Prime or Unique Farmland (Department of Conservation 1998a), nor are they under a Williamson Act contract. There are no local policies for agricultural resources that apply to the project site. As such, the project would not convert Farmland to non - agricultural uses, conflict with existing agricultural zoning or Williamson Act contracts, or indirectly result in the conversion of Farmland to non - agricultural uses. b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The project does not involve any conversion of land use; therefore, the project would not result in a conflict with an agricultural or a Williamson Act contract zoning designation. C) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non - agricultural use? No Impact. The project does not involve any conversion of land use, nor do the project limits contain any farmland or soils suitable for agricultural use. Therefore, the project would not result in the conversion of farmland to non - agricultural use. III. AIR QUALITY The project site is located within the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), which includes Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, and Riverside Counties except for Antelope Valley in Los Angeles County and the desert portion of northern San Bernardino County and the Palo Verde Valley of Riverside County. Both the State and federal governments have established health based Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) for six air pollutants, which include: carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (03), nitrogen dioxide (NOZ), sulfur dioxide (SO2), lead (Pb), and suspended particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter (PMta). The South Coast Air Basin and Orange County do not attain California and federal AAQS for ozone and PMIe. The State AAQS for PMta and 03 are exceeded much more frequently and by a greater amount than the federal standards for these pollutants. The Air Basin in compliance with federal S02, NO2, and Pb standards. a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? No Impact. The project consists of the construction and usage of a public sidewalk approximately 900 feet in length. The new facility would be maintained by existing Public Works personnel who currently travel to various sites to maintain other City facilities. The project will not directly or indirectly contribute to any operational emissions in excess of the threshold values established by the SCAQMD, nor would it exceed ambient air quality standards. As such, the project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 1997 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) or of the Final 1999 Amendment to the 1997 Ozone AQMP for the South Coast Air Basin and the Settlement Agreement on the 1994 Ozone State 8387 2$ Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Ll 3J • 0 Implementation Litigation. Construction emissions are also expected to be minor, as described in III.b below. b) Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Less Than Significant Impact. Constructing the proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project would cause temporary air emissions related to minor ground disturbance, application of asphalt pavement, and vehicle and equipment exhaust. Due to the nature of the project, long -term air quality impacts would be less than significant and only construction emissions are evaluated in this section. As indicated previously, construction will occur during a 90-day work period, or about 18 work weeks. hr Reach 1, an 8 to 10- foot -wide strip of existing paved roadway (approximately 150 cubic yards of asphalt within the emergency parking lane) will be excavated and removed to construct the new sidewalk and curb and gutter. In Reaches 2 and 3, minor excavation (two feet deep by one foot wide, approximately 72 cubic yards) will be required along the back of curb in those reaches in order to construct the base for the boardwalk. Minor excavation of about one to two feet deep (approximately 150 cubic yards total) is also required to provide clearance for the wooden boardwalk support beams along the top of slope in the five to six -foot -wide area behind the curb. Based on those construction estimates, the project design engineer provided expected construction equipment types and usage durations, as follows: Equipment(Vehicle Type Usage Frequency Usage During Construction Two pickups for Foremen Each day 90 days (project duration) One backhoe for excavation and removals Each day First 4 weeks Two 10 -wheel dump trucks Each day First 4 weeks One backhoe with bucket auger for post holes Each day Weeks 5 and 6 One ready mix concrete truck and pump 4 hours per day Two days in week 7 One ready mix truck for sidewalk and curb /gutter 4 hours per day Two days in week 9 Paving equipment and pavement roller for 2- foot -wide pavement join strip 4 hours per day One day per week in weeks 9 and 10 One 10 -wheel truck and one roller for asphalt concrete delivery and application 4 hours per day One day per week in weeks 9 and 10 Miscellaneous delivery trucks (10 -wheel size) 4 hours per day One day per week in weeks 6, 7, 8, 14, 15, 16, and 17 Source: Van Dell 2005; URBEMIS 2002 Using the preceding soil disturbance and construction equipment parameters as input to the URBEMIS 2002 air quality model, the model estimates that the following daily construction emissions would result: 8387 26 tnilial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Table 1 Estimated Construction Emissions Without Mitigation (lbs /day) Source ROG NOx CO Sox PM10 Maximum Daily Emissions 9.28 70.68 68.41 0.00 3.18 SCAQMD Daily Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No Source: IJRBEMIS 2002 These construction- related air quality impacts would be temporary and, as shown above, would not exceed SCAQMD daily threshold values. Nevertheless, as is City standard practice, construction equipment would be maintained in good condition to minimize excessive emissions. During construction, watering of exposed earth surfaces would be provided as necessary. All loose material would be compacted to prevent the dispersion of airborne dust. The standards for fugitive dust for this project would be as stated in South Coast Air Quality Management District's Rule No. 403, which the City requires of all its construction contractors. C) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Less Than Significant Impact. In accordance with SCAQMD methodology, any project that does not exceed the threshold values, or can be mitigated to less than these values, would not add to a cumulative impact. Based on the construction emission calculations presented previously, the project - related emissions would be below thresholds and cumulative air quality impacts would be less than significant. d) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less Than Significant Impact. Castaways Park, Bob Henry Park, Newport Harbor Lutheran Church school, and some residences are all within '/4 mile of the project limits. During the construction phase, there will be emissions of all criteria pollutants. Because these emissions will not exceed the SCAQMD's threshold criteria, ambient pollutant impacts would not be expected to exceed significance levels. These emissions will be temporary and will not expose individual receptors for extended periods. During normal usage of the sidewalk project, no air quality pollutant emissions will result. e) Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Less Than Significant Impact. There may be some odors associated with the use of diesel equipment and the asphalt paving during the construction phase. There are residences and schools in the project vicinity; however, the temporary nature of project construction will ensure that these receptors are minimally affected by odors during the construction phase at this site. 8387 27 Initial Stody/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 0 ';r • • ---1 IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Jurisdictional Delineation In August 2004, Chambers Group, Inc. biologists performed a habitat assessment and examined the project site to determine the limits of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) jurisdiction pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) jurisdiction pursuant to the California Fish and Game Code, and California Coastal Commission (CCC) jurisdiction pursuant to the California Coastal Act. Suspected ACOE, CDFG, and CCC jurisdictional areas were mapped on aerial photographs and field checked for the presence of definable channels and/or wetland vegetation, riparian habitat, soils, and hydrology. A letter report prepared in September 2004 summarizes the methodologies and findings of the ACOE, CDFG, and CCC jurisdictional delineations. The report is available for review at the City of Newport Beach Public Works Department. ACOE Jurisdiction An unnamed drainage located parallel to Dover Drive appears to contain perennial flowing waters. This drainage flows from north to south for 500 linear feet and contains riparian and wetland species. As indicated on the wetland data sheets (Chambers 2004), ACOE - defined wetlands are present in the study area within the drainage located below the slope bordering Dover Drive. The northern portion of the drainage contains a wetland vegetated by a red willow (Salix laevigata) woodland with an understory of St. Augustine grass (Stenotaphrum secundatum). Due to the lack of hydric soils, the wetland does not extend up the bank located adjacent to Dover Drive. South of the red willow woodland, ACOE - defined wetlands are found to correspond with the presence of broadleaf cattail (Typha latifolia), which dominates much of the drainage. The slope between Dover Drive and the unnamed drainage is dominated by hydrophytic vegetation including wild heliotrope (Heliotropum curassavicum), saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), and coast goldenbush (Isocoma menziesh), but does not contain the hydric soils necessary to be considered ACOE- defined wetland. Non - dominant upland species such as sweet fennel (Foeniculum vuigare), artichoke thistle (Cynara cardunculus), wild radish (Raphanus sativus), and iceplant (Carpobrotus eduhs) are also present on the slope between Dover Drive and the unnamed drainage. The southern portion of the unnamed drainage and associated wetlands are vegetated with broadleaf cattail, red willow, mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia), arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) and celery (Apium graveolens). CDFG and CCC Jurisdiction Because the extent of CDFG jurisdiction and CCC - defined wetlands are identical, the results of the jurisdictional findings are discussed concurrently below. The Cowardin et al. 1976 wetland classification system defines CCC wetlands, while the California Fish and Game Code defines CDFG jurisdiction. CDFG- defined riparian habitat and CCC- defined wetlands are present onsite within the bed of the unnamed drainage and extend to the western bank that is located adjacent to Dover Drive. As indicated previously, this drainage flows from north to south for approximately 500 linear feet and parallels Dover Drive. The northern portion of the drainage contains a red willow woodland with an understory of St. Augustine grass. The canopy of the red willow woodland extends beyond the curb and overhangs Dover Drive. South of the red willow woodland, CDFG riparian habitat and CCC - defined wetlands correspond with a cattail marsh located within the bed of the channel, while saltgrass, coast goldenbush and wild heliotrope dominate the western bank of the drainage. South of the red willow woodland, the CDFG and CCC jurisdiction (i.e., riparian and wetland plant species) extend to within approximately three feet of the curb of Dover Drive. Also located along the western bank are non - dominant upland species such as sweet fennel, artichoke thistle, wild radish, and iceplant. The southernmost portion of the unnamed drainage is vegetated with broadleaf cattail, red willow, mule fat, arroyo willow, and celery. 8387 28 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project F+ 0 Other Vegetation Communities 0 The west - facing slope located adjacent to the unnamed drainage supports planted coastal sage scrub vegetation. The container plantings on this slope are part of a larger restoration effort associated with Castaways Park and the local community. In addition, it appears that exotic species abatement activities have been performed in the project area on the slope between Dover Drive and the unnamed drainage and may have included the removal of non - native species such as castor bean (Ricinus communis), sweet fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), and artichoke thistle (Cynara cardunculus). Jurisdictional Summary Following the delineation fieldwork, a portion of the overall survey area was used to calculate existing jurisdictional acreages. The project impact area was defined based on a worst -case disturbance limit extending I1 feet from the existing face of curb along the Dover Drive project limits. The 2004 Jurisdictional Delineation found that the project impact area contains approximately 0.03 acre of ACOE jurisdiction, all of which consists of ACOE- defined wetlands. The project area also includes approximately 0.21 acre of CDFG jurisdiction (all riparian habitat) and 0.21 acre of CCC- defined wetlands. The southernmost 500 linear feet of the project limits contain no ACOE, CCC, or CDFG jurisdiction. Other Biological Resource Surveys As indicated in the Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the Castaways Park Revegetation (LSA 2001), a biological survey of the project site was conducted by LSA in March of 2001. The survey covered a study area that included the proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project limits. The assessment also included a literature review and records search of the California Natural Diversity Data Base ( CNDDB) and the California Native Plant Society's Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI) of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less Than Significant Impact. The CNDDB search (LSA 2001) for sensitive plant species potentially occurring within or near the project site turned up records for various species for which habitat requirements do not exist on site, as confirmed by Chambers Group biologists during the jurisdictional delineation in 2004. No sensitive plant species were observed in the study area during the biological survey. The southern spike weed, which is a sensitive species, potentially occurs on the Castaways Park site but was not observed during the 2001 site survey. The proposed sidewalk project is not expected to result in significant adverse impacts to any sensitive plant species. The CNDDB search (LSA 2001) for sensitive wildlife species potentially occurring within or near the proposed project limits turned up records for various species, including the coastal California gnatcatcher (CAGN). Although CAGN was not observed during the 2001 biological survey by LSA or the 2004 jurisdictional delineation by Chambers Group, it is known to occur along the bluff adjacent to Reach 1 of the project. However, the sidewalk in Reach 1 will be constructed entirely in the existing roadway and would not affect adjacent bluff vegetation. For the other species identified in the records search, the general project area could support suitable habitat; however, such habitat is considered to be absent from the footprint of the proposed sidewalk project, as confirmed by Chambers Group biologists during the 2004 jurisdictional delineation. No other habitat for any endangered, threatened, or other sensitive species 8387 29 initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project ,,l 0 exists on or adjacent to the project site; therefore, implementation of the project will have no impacts on sensitive species or sensitive species habitats. b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The Jurisdictional Delineation (Chambers 2004) evaluated impacts for construction of a 5- foot -wide sidewalk with an 8- foot -wide impact area, as well as an 8- foot -wide sidewalk with an I1- foot -wide impact area, both along the entire length of the proposed project limits. The 11 -foot -wide impact area most closely represented the impacts of the project at that time. Given those parameters alone, the Jurisdictional Delineation found that ACOE "waters of the United States ", CDFG jurisdictional riparian habitat, and California Coastal Commission jurisdiction would all be potentially impacted by the proposed sidewalk in Reaches 2 and 3. For an 8- foot -wide walkway with an 11- foot -wide overall impact area, the jurisdictional impacts were summarized as follows: • ACOE Jurisdictional Impacts: less than 0.01 acre - Temporary (< 0.01 acre) - Permanent (no impact) • CDFG and CCC Jurisdictional Impacts — 0.09 acre - Temporary (0.03 acre) - Permanent (0.06 acre) The acreages above were indicative of the project design assumptions when the Jurisdictional Delineation was prepared in September 2004. However, several substantial design modifications have been made in the year since the Jurisdictional Delineation was completed. The modifications were made with biological resource impact avoidance as their primary goal. Table 2 on the following page shows the effects of constructing the currently proposed sidewalk/boardwalk project while also incorporating habitat avoidance measures during construction. Table 2 also provides a comparative analysis of the original (i.e., 2004) construction disturbance and sidewalk footprint areas, as well as the net reductions in jurisdictional impacts that would be achieved under the current project design. It is important to note that all impact calculations reflect the area values from the geographic information system (GIS) vegetation mapping files. In contrast to the Jurisdictional Delineation, the following acreages are rounded to three decimal points and converted to square feet (sq. ft.) due to the small impact values and the effects of rounding. For example, a 0.085 -acre impact (3,703 sq. ft.) and a 0.094 -acre impact (4,095 sq. ft.) can both be represented as 0.09 acres when rounded, but the difference measured in square feet is 392 sq. ft. (an area approximately 20 feet by 20 feet). Since the vegetation community impacts are individually very small, it was necessary to use the square footage measurements to determine the relative impact reductions achieved by the proposed project. The high level of precision used, however, does not imply a high level of accuracy since field measurements, aerial photograph resolution, and mapping techniques all result in a loss of accuracy. Therefore, the use of square footage areas is intended primarily as a means of conveying the relative impact reductions that would be achieved by the proposed project. 8387 30 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 11 • Table 2 Jurisdictional Impact Summary 11 Vegetation Community /Description Temporary Impacts Permanent Impacts Totat Impacts Acres Ft. Acres Sq. Ft. Acres Sq. Ft. Iw'�00 7 EM1'ZtifPA t�Sq. -F.O� POKrIRYtjAf AkGTZO ESfAs�`U 't n s (B�FOOTPERAfANEM,,.(,dA �TEh „, ,,.g ACOE Jurisdiction' Cattail Marsh 0.001 40 none none 0.001 40 18 -inch drainage culvert (in 6'x 3' 0.00042 18 none none 0.0004' 18 box in Cattail Marsh area) Totals 0.0014 58 CDFG/CCC Jurisdiction Red Willow Woodland 0.008 340 0.027 1,186 0.035 1,526 Saltgrass & Heliotrope 0.022 947 0.036 1,564 0.058 2,512 Cattail Marsh 0.001 40 none none 0.001 40 Totals 0.094 4,078 �f a4:..tt' 4 li.pstw 1i,. 'ey`1'�it caYi v,Yn'i'tj PROPOSED�PR076CTS m2"4. is -.. T^ alLal'�'iaf ��+li {t?(- lM1i.Y• :.•E.7iBRAT��OIDA CEO (B0:4RDtV,1LR/SIDE�t'r, IL�KgDESIGA�&�.. �dRBLE�T ,f',IDTN,�SC,TO�fYI�.l7.5f ACOE Jurisdiction Cattail Marsh' avoided avoided none none none none 18 -inch drainage culvert (in 6' x 3' avoided avoided none none none crone box in Cattail Marsh area)' Totals none none CDFG/CCC Jurisdiction Red Willow Woodland° 0.002 85 0.007 297 0.009 382 Saltgrass & Heliotrope' 0.019 808 0.032 1,385 0.051 2,193 Cattail Marsh' avoided avoided none none none none Totals 0.060 2,575 -0.00141 -581 Net Reduction in ACOE Jurisdictional lnipacts /( %) (100 %) (I00 %) 0.0341 1,5031 Net Reduction inCDFG /CCC Jurisdictional Impacts /( %) Notes t Represents project disturbance footprint used in 2004 jurisdictional delineation. 2 2004 jurisdictional delineation indicated impact of less than 0.01 acre since it is considered the smallest "measurable impact" area for ACOE delineation purposes. Actual area measurements in acres and square feet are shown above. ' Cattail Marsh fully avoided and SaltgrassItleliotrope partially avoided by restricting the temporary construction area in one 9- foot -long section and in a 15- foot -long section of the boardwalk construction site (southerly portion of Reach 2). Actual avoidance area will measure 60 feet long by 6 feet wide. Support post design avoids boardwalk impacts in culvert area. Red Willow tree removal and canopy loss impacts are avoided by boardwalk rather than sidewalk design in Reach 3. Red Willow tree canopy impacts are reduced by approximately 75 percent over original design since project construction would only raise the canopy and remove overhanging limbs for short -tern equipment clearance and long -term pedestrian safety. The extent of the tree trimming would only affect about 350 to 400 square feel of the Red Willow tree canopy. 8387 31 Initial Sludy/Miligated Negative Declaration May 2005 _ Dover Drive Sidewalk Project • 0 i'll ACOE Jurisdictional Impacts As indicated, the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project would avoid impacting ACOE jurisdiction. Based on the recommendations in the 2004 Jurisdictional Delineation, the City determined that the ACOE impacts could be completely avoided by restricting the width of the temporary construction area to less than 9 feet wide in two sections of the project limits — one for a length of 9 feet and the second for a length of 15 feet. The actual avoidance area will measure 60 feet long by 6 feet wide in the southerly portion of Reach 2. The proposed support post design for the boardwalk in Reach 2 would avoid impacts in the culvert area, which supports cattail marsh. Also, in order to ensure that fill would not be deposited in the ACOE jurisdiction during construction, silt fences would be installed to control construction- related debris and sediment. CDFG and CCC Jurisdictional Impacts The 2004 Jurisdictional Delineation found that there would not be any riparian or wetland impacts in Reach 1. Although the delineation did not specifically evaluate the proposed Reach 1 design concept (i.e., 4.5 to 7.5- foot -wide sidewalk in the existing road), which was added to the Alternatives Study after the delineation report was completed, the proposed design has a similar footprint to an analyzed alternative with a 5 -foot sidewalk in the existing road. Since that alternative would not have any impacts to habitat or jurisdictional waters, the proposed design concept with a variable width sidewalk in the existing road would also not have any impacts to habitat or jurisdictional waters. As indicated in Table 1, the proposed project would affect a total of 0.06 acre of CDFG jurisdiction, all of which consists of riparian vegetation, and 0.06 acre of CCC - defined wetlands. Of this 0.06 acre, 0.04 acre would be permanently affected and 0.02 acre would be temporarily affected by the proposed project. Of the total impacted area, 0.05 acre is dominated by saltgrass and wild heliotrope. Cattail marsh is fully avoided and saltgrassJheliotrope is partially avoided by restricting the temporary construction area in one 9- foot -long section and in a 15- foot -long section of the boardwalk construction site (i.e., southerly portion of Reach 2). The actual avoidance area will measure 60 feet long by 6 feet wide. As indicated previously, the 2004 Jurisdictional Delineation assumed the complete removal of red willow canopy and trunks within a 0.03 -acre impact area, which included an eight- foot -wide permanent impact zone and a three -foot -wide temporary impact zone in Reach 3. However, the current project design would completely avoid red willow tree removal and would minimize canopy loss impacts by constructing a boardwalk rather than a sidewalk and by varying the boardwalk width at the red willow locations in Reach 3. Construction impacts are limited to trimming several overhanging branches and removal of a large (six - inch diameter) limb from two red willow trees for the purposes of allowing short-term equipment clearance and long -term pedestrian safety. Since no willows would be removed, impact calculations were derived by estimating canopy loss due to the minor trimming and limb removal. The extent of the proposed tree trimming would only affect about 350 to 400 square feet of the existing willow tree canopy, as compared to over 1,500 square feet of canopy and trunk loss under the 2004 impact scenario. The City's proposed mitigation plan is to plant four (4) new one - gallon size red willow trees at the project site for each of the two existing trees that require pruning of large limbs. The 2004 Jurisdictional Delineation (pages 13 and 14) indicated the following regarding CDFG and CCC jurisdictional impacts: CDFG jurisdictional riparian habitat and CCC - defined wetlands are present throughout much of the project site. Avoidance of CDFG and CCC jurisdiction to the maximum extent practicable is recommended in order to expedite the permitting process and reduce the cost of mitigation. In the vicinity of the Newport Harbor Lutheran Church & School parking lot, the limits of construction are likely to encroach on CDFG jurisdictional riparian habitat /CCGdefined wetlands because 8387 32 initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Ll'� several large red willow trees are rooted within 5 -10 feet from the curb of Dover Drive and avoidance of this riparian habitat is unlikely. It is not certain how many mature red willow trees would have to be removed, or would be irreversibly harmed in order to install the 8-fool-wide or the 11 foot -wide sidewalk. Installation of the 8-fool-wide sidewalk would at least result in the removal of some large [willow] trees. In addition, the installation of the sidewalk would require the construction of a two foot deep trench that could harm or kill red [willow] trees by damaging the root system. The impact analysis contained herein resulted from overlaying the project footprints over the canopy of the red willow trees. However, please note that the removal or death or a red willow tree may result in an impact greater than the footprint area depicted on Figures 3 and 4. Since preparation of the Jurisdictional Delineation in 2004, however, the project design in Reach 3 has been modified to avoid removal and root damage impacts to the existing red willow trees. As indicated above, this has been accomplished by using the boardwalk design rather than a concrete sidewalk and by varying the boardwalk width at the red willow locations in Reach 3. Construction - related ground disturbance in Reach 3 would be limited to borings for the 19-inch support posts, as well as minor excavations. The excavations are necessary to 1) construct the base for the boardwalk, which would require a two- foot -deep by one - foot -wide excavation immediately adjacent to the existing back of curb; and 2) to provide ground clearance for the wooden support beams at each corresponding support post, which would require excavating individual areas measuring about one- foot -deep by one - foot -wide by five - feet -long (measured perpendicular from the back of curb) only at those support beam locations along the top of slope. Given those construction parameters, tree roots would not be damaged and impacts to root systems would not result. Mitigation Measures For construction- related impacts resulting from the proposed trimming of several overhanging branches and removal of a large (six -inch diameter) limb from two red willow trees, the City is proposing the following mitigation: Mitigation Measure 1. The City of Newport Beach Public Works Department shall plant four (4) new one - gallon size red willow trees at the project site for each of the two existing trees that require pruning of large limbs, for a total of eight (8) new trees. The City shall determine maintenance requirements and monitoring duration. Approximately 0.06 acre (includes the red willow impacts discussed above) of CDFG and CCC impacts cannot be avoided and the project may require a CDFG Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement and a CCC Coastal Development Permit. If the permits are found to be necessary, as determined by the resource agencies, permit conditions would address temporary and permanent project - related impacts to jurisdictional areas. The resource agencies generally recommend avoidance of impacts and if that is not possible, minimization of the impacts as mitigation. If determined necessary, any additional mitigation would be finalized as conditions of the resource agency permits. Given the project review that will be conducted by the resource agencies, combined with the relatively minor jurisdictional impacts and the City's proposed mitigation measure, impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level with mitigation. 8387 33 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project :j -x 0 C) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Less Than Significant Impact. Please refer to the previous discussion about jurisdictional impacts. The project area contains federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act; however, all federally protected wetlands would be avoided during project construction. By avoiding ACOE jurisdiction through restricting the temporary construction area, the ACOE Section 404 permitting process would not be necessary. d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Less Than Significant Impact. Although wildlife movement corridors may be present in the existing riparian zone adjacent to the project limits, and the project area may support native resident or migratory wildlife species, project - related impacts are expected to be less than significant. The project will not physically encroach on those areas and the proposed project would not directly or indirectly interfere with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a free preservation policy or ordinance? Less Than Significant Impact. Although some red willow trees are present in Reach 3, the project would not require compliance with City Council Policy G -1, "Retention or Removal of City Trees" (as amended April 27, 2004). That policy establishes standards for the removal and reforestation of City trees. The City classifies public trees in one of three categories: Special Trees, Problem Trees, and All Other Trees. Red willow (Salix laevigata) are not among the "Special Trees" called out in Attachment 1 (as amended May 10, 2005) of the City policy; therefore, they are designated as an All Other Tree. It is the City's policy to retain All Other Trees unless removal is necessary for various reasons, including poor tree health, a history of public or private property damage, and liability and public safety. The project would not require removal of willow trees for construction, nor would it jeopardize the health of the existing trees and require their future removal. f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Less Than Significant Impact. As indicated in the Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the Castaways Park Vegetation (LSA 2001), the project site is within the coastal portion of the Orange County Central - Coastal Subregional Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP) program, which includes several thousand acres of natural open space in the San Joaquin Hills that contain dense, relatively undisturbed scrub habitat. The final NCCP /Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for the Central Coastal Subregion was approved in July 1996. The approved NCCP /HCP and applicable Section 10(a) permits identify the project area as outside the designated habitat reserve. 8387 May 2006 34 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project +i7 V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Is Previous Cultural Resources Investigations An Initial Study/Negative Declaration was prepared in October 1994 for the Upper Castaways (TTM 15012) project That document and the Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the Castaways Park Revegetation project (LSA 2001) both included evaluations of potential impacts on cultural resources. Those documents are referenced as applicable in the following discussions. The following cultural resource sites were noted in those documents: Ca- Ora-48 — Severely disturbed and no further scientific investigation warranted. • Ca- Ora-49 — Not impacted by the residential or bluff trail development. • Ca- Ora -186 — Not impacted by residential or bluff trail development. a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? No Impact. Since no building(s) 45 years or older will be affected by the proposed project, it is not necessary to assess or evaluate nearby structures for potential historical significance. Construction work will be contained with the road right -of -way or other previously disturbed easements along Dover Drive. Although previous environmental documentation for the area (LSA 2001) noted the presence of several cultural resource sites, none of them contain historic resources eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). No impact will result. b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? No Impact. The majority of ground disturbance associated with the proposed project would occur in Dover Drive or within six feet of the existing back of curb. Soil excavation two feet below existing ground surface by one foot wide will be necessary along the back of curb in Reaches 2 and 3 in order to construct the base for the boardwalk. Minor excavation of about one to two feet deep is also required to provide clearance for the wooden boardwalk support beams along the top of slope in the five to six - foot -wide area behind the curb. Because of the amount of ground disturbance that has occurred here in the past from the establishment of the road, intact archaeological deposits are unlikely to exist and no impacts are expected. This is consistent with the findings in the Negative Declarations for the Upper Castaways (City of Newport Beach 1994) project and the Castaways Park Revegetation (LSA 2001). However, the City may decide to conduct on- site monitoring on an as- needed basis during excavation activities, depending on the known conditions and extents of past soil disturbance areas in the project limits. In the unlikely event that archaeological materials are encountered during ground disturbance, all work in the vicinity of the find would be temporarily halted or redirected until the resource(s) can be documented and evaluated by a qualified archaeologist, as is standard practice on all City construction projects. No mitigation measures are required. C) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? No Impact. Because of the amount of ground disturbance that has occurred here in the past from the establishment of Dover Drive, intact paleontological deposits are unlikely to exist and no impacts are expected. This is consistent with the findings in the Negative Declarations for the Upper Castaways (City 8387 35 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project of Newport Beach 1994) project and the Castaways Park Revegetation (LSA 2001). However, the City may decide to conduct on -site monitoring on an as- needed basis during excavation activities, depending on the known conditions and extents of past soil disturbance areas in the project limits. In the unlikely event that any paleontological resources are encountered, the City would temporarily halt or redirect all work in the vicinity of the find until the resource(s) can be documented and evaluated by a qualified paleontologist, as is standard practice on all City construction projects. No mitigation measures are required. d) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? No Impact. The project area is not known to be the location of a prehistoric or historic -period human burial or cemetery and no human remains have been identified within the project area. Due to the history of disturbance along Dover Drive, no human remains are expected to occur within the project limits and no impacts are anticipated. If human remains are found, all work would stop and the Orange County Coroner would be notified. If the remains were determined to be of Native American origin, the Coroner would contact the California Native American Heritage Commission to identify the Most Likely Descendants to contact regarding repatriation or reburial of the remains. Clearance from these authorities would be obtained prior to resuming work in the vicinity of the find, as is standard practice on all City construction projects. Consistent with the findings in the Negative Declarations for the Upper Castaways (City of Newport Beach 1994) project and the Castaways Park Revegetation (LSA 2001), no impacts would result and no mitigation measures are required. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Geo- Environmental, Inc. (GEI) collected soil samples from borings, performed laboratory testing on the soil samples, and prepared a geotechnical report (GEI 2004) that recommended design criteria for the proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project. The pertinent findings of that report are summarized in the following sections. The specific laboratory testing methodologies and results are provided in the GEI geotechnical report, which is an appendix to the Alternatives Study by Van Dell (2005). Based on field exploration and laboratory test results performed on soil samples obtained from the subject site, it is GEI's opinion that the site is suitable for the proposed sidewalk improvements, provided that the recommendations presented in the GEI geotechnical report are implemented in the design of the structures and their construction, as applicable to the selected reach designs. a) Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving. i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist 'Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project would include the construction of a sidewalk in an area that is intensively developed with urban land uses. The Newport Beach USGS 7.5- minute quadrangle contains a Special Studies Zone designated pursuant to the Alquist -Priolo Act. However, the City of Newport Beach, and the project area in particular, is not listed on the California Geological Survey list of Cities and Counties Affected by Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones as of May 1, 1999, nor is the project site shown to be affected by an Earthquake Fault Zone on the official map effective July 1, 1986. 6367 36 initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Nevertheless, the region is seismically active with displacement and deformation occurring along Peninsular Ranges north- south - trending faults and Transverse Ranges east -west trending faults and folds. Quatemary-age faults that express the eastern structural trend of the Peninsular Ranges province include the Newport- Inglewood (L.A. Basin), Newport- Inglewood (Offshore), and Compton Thrust Fault zones. The project site is closest to the Newport- Inglewood (L.A. Basin) fault zone (approximately 2.4 miles), the Newport- Inglewood (Offshore) fault zone (approximately 2.8 miles), and the Compton Thrust Fault zone (approximately 10.4 miles). The largest maximum earthquake site acceleration is 0.596g. Based on field exploration and laboratory test results performed on soil samples obtained from the subject site, GEI (2004) has indicated that the site is suitable for the proposed sidewalk improvements, provided that the recommendations presented in their geotechnical report are implemented in the design of the structures and their construction, as applicable to the selected reach designs. Adherence to standard engineering practices and standard City design criteria relative to seismic and geological hazards would maintain impacts at levels that are less than significant. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? Less Than Significant Impact. As indicated above, the project area in general could be exposed to strong ground shaking. However, engineering design criteria will account for the area's general susceptibility to groundshaking and other seismic - related hazards, as is standard practice for such projects. Based on the GEI (2004) geotechnical report,.the project would not expose people or structures to adverse effects resulting from fault rupture, ground shaking, or ground failure due to its location. Adherence to standard engineering practices and standard City design criteria relative to seismic and geological hazards would maintain impacts at levels that are less than significant. iii) Seismic- related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less Than Significant Impact According to the State Department of Conservation (1998b), the project site is partially within a known liquefaction area, as mapped on the official Newport Beach USGS 7.5- minute seismic hazard map. It is an area where historic occurrence of liquefaction, or local geological, geotechnical and groundwater conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacements such that mitigation as defined in Public Resources Code Section 2693(c) would be required. However, as indicated in the GEI (2004) geotechnical report, the current engineering design criteria reflect the area's general susceptibility to groundshaking and other seismic - related hazards, as is standard practice for such projects. Impacts will be less than significant. iv) Landslides? Less Than Significant Impact. According to the State Department of Conservation (I 998b), the project site is adjacent to areas having the potential for landslides, as mapped on the official Newport Beach USGS 7.5- minute seismic hazard map. These are areas where previous occurrence of landslide movement, or local topographic, geological, and geotechnical conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacements such that mitigation as defined in Public Resources Code Section 2693(c) would be required. However, as indicated in the GEI (2004) geotechnical report, the current engineering design criteria reflect the area's general susceptibility to landsliding and other seismic - related hazards, as is standard practice for such projects. Impacts will be less than significant. 8387 37 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project • l� 9 0 0 b) Would the project result insubstantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less Than Significant Impact. Relatively minor excavations that are necessary to construct the base for the boardwalk (two feet deep by one foot wide) and to provide clearance (approximately one - foot -deep) for the wooden boardwalk support beams along the top of slope in Reaches 2 and 3 would expose soils to short -term erosion by wind and water. As is standard practice for City construction projects, the project would be subject to City requirements for erosion control, which will be implemented by the construction contractor. Impacts would be less than significant. c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in onsile or offske landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would require relatively minor ground surface alterations, including excavations to depths of approximately two feet. Projects of this character generally do not have the potential to cause unstable earth conditions or changes in geological structure. The GEI (2004) geotechnical report found that the project site contains poorly consolidated undocumented fill materials. During the field investigation at the site, unsuitable soils were encountered approximately 7 to 10 feet below the existing surface level of Dover Drive. However, due to the characteristics of the project, recommendations for removal depths of unsuitable material will be on the order of approximately two feet below the existing surface level. GEI found that the existing on -site materials encountered are suitable for the support of the proposed sidewalk. Additionally, the GEI report recommendations pertaining to slope stability and the reduction of total and differential settlement are not applicable to the current project design. Slope stability analysis was not recommended by GEI for the selected boardwalk design in Reaches 2 and 3, or for the variable width sidewalk within the existing road in Reach 1. In Reach 1, the project would avoid impacting (i.e., back cutting) the slope above the existing roadway, thereby precluding the need for a retaining wall in that reach. In Reaches 2 and 3, the proposed sidewalk would be supported on 18 -inch diameter concrete posts. The geotechnical report recommendations for additional slope stability analyses were only applicable to those design alternatives with retaining walls. Based on the GEI (2004) geotechnical report, the project would not expose people or structures to adverse effects resulting from ground failure or landslides. The project would not result in landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse due to its location. Adherence to standard engineering practices and City design criteria relative to seismic and geological hazards would maintain impacts at levels that are less than significant. d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Less Than Significant Impact. As indicated above, the project would not create substantial risks to life or property from expansive soils due to its location. Based on the GEI (2004) geotechnical report, the project would not expose people or structures to adverse effects resulting from expansive soils. Adherence to standard engineering practices and standard City design criteria would maintain impacts at levels that are less than significant. 8387 May 2006 38 initial SladylMitigaled Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 0 0 C) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? No Impact. The proposed project would not require the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal. No impacts will result. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Less Than Significant Impact. Hazardous or flammable substances that may be used during the construction phase of the project would include vehicle fuels and oils for the operation of heavy equipment. Diesel and/or other construction equipment and vehicle fuels would be used; however, the transport, storage, and usage of hazardous materials such as fuels are regulated by the State and would be in compliance with all State regulations during construction. Construction vehicles on -site may require routine or emergency maintenance that could result in the accidental, albeit unlikely, release of oil, diesel fuel, transmission fluid, and/or other materials. However, those types of hazardous materials would not be used in large enough quantities, used for a long enough period, or stored in a manner that would pose a significant threat to the public. The risk of foreseeable upset or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment as a result of this project is minimal and would not be anticipated. Impacts are less than significant. b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Less Than Significant Impact. See paragraph a) above. Impacts would be less than significant. C) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less Than Significant Impact. The project limits are within one - quarter mile of the existing Newport Harbor Lutheran Church and School, which is just northeast of the project site. Although the school facility is located within one - quarter mile of the site, the project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste. Construction is expected to proceed at a relatively rapid rate and would not result in substantial dust or equipment emissions. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? No Impact. According to the State of California Department of Toxic Substances Control, the site is not located on a list of hazardous materials sites. No environmental impacts would result from the proposed project. 8387 39 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project c.D e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan, or within 2 miles of a public or private airport. By its nature, the proposed project does not have the potential to result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. No impact would result. i For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard forpeople residing or working in the project area? No Impact. See paragraph e) above. The project is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip. No environmental impacts would result from the proposed project. g) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency . response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less Than Significant Impact. Project activity would not alter emergency response or emergency evacuation routes. Roadways would remain accessible during construction, and returned to their original condition upon completion of the sidewalk project. The City routinely implements traffic control plans for construction projects, and the plan that will be implemented with the project would ensure that any impacts to emergency response plans or evacuation plans would be less than significant. Further, the City Public Works Department would provide early coordination with City emergency personnel to ensure the planning of alternative emergency routes where necessary. h) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No Impact. Although vegetation communities exist adjacent to and east of the project limits, the site is located in a predominantly urban area and would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death from wildland fires. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY An unnamed drainage located parallel to Dover Drive appears to contain perennial flowing waters. This drainage flows from north to south for about 500 linear feet. Stormwater and urban runoff enter the project limits through a 14 -inch culvert located south of the Newport Harbor Lutheran Church & School parking lot. The stormwater and urban runoff flow for approximately 500 linear feet on the surface and drain offsite through an 18 -inch culvert. Water is also conveyed to the drainage via several landscape irrigation pipes located on the east bank of the drainage. a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Less Than Significant Impact. The construction contractor will be required to implement erosion control measures to ensure that no soil or construction- related materials will enter the storm drain system or upper Newport Bay. In addition, silt fences are called out on the construction plans and will be installed and maintained by the contractor during work adjacent to Reaches 2 and 3 to insure that work activity does not encroach beyond the 11 -foot and 8 -foot project impact areas. The silt fences will ensure that no soil or construction materials fall down slope into sensitive vegetation in the drainage course. The proposed 8387 40 initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project F. � Adbk . Ak . -i — project would be in compliance with all codes and regulations governing the prevention of erosion and transport of pollutants during construction. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. b) Would the project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate ofpre - existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? No Impact. The proposed project does not include the consumptive use of water and would not result in the depletion of groundwater resources or a lowering of the groundwater table. Due to the nature of this project, it would not affect the rate of flow or quantity of ground waters. No environmental impacts would result. c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite? Less Than Signifcant Impact. The unnamed drainage downslope of the proposed sidewalk project will be unaffected during project construction and for the life of the project. No grading or structural alterations would occur within the drainage course. Since project construction is planned to commence after the rainy season, and with the implementation of the City's standard Best Management Practices for runoff control during construction, as described in section VIII(a) above, no significant erosion problems would be expected. No change in drainage patterns would result. d) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or offsite? Less Than Significant Impact. The amount of surface water runoff along the project limits would not change relative to current conditions. No aspect of the proposed sidewalk project would result in on- or off -site flooding. See section VIII(c) above. e) Would the project create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Less Than Significant Impact. Construction and daily use of the proposed Dover Drive sidewalk does not involve the discharge of water into any drainage courses. The three existing storm drain inlet structures at the southern end of Reach 1 will be relocated approximately 4.5 to 7.5 feet west to accommodate sidewalk construction in the Dover Drive right -of -way. The project would not result in a net change in the amount of runoff discharge to those facilities since impervious surfaces after project construction would be the same as current conditions. Therefore, the project would not affect existing stormwater drainage systems and no significant impacts would occur. f) Would the project otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Less Than Significant Impact. As indicated above, construction of the sidewalk project would not increase erosion or runoff from impervious surfaces. The only potential to degrade water quality would be if any hazardous materials (such as diesel fuel) onsite during construction would migrate into the water 8387 41 initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project F� "y 0 0 system. However, the appropriate handling of these materials (see section VII(a) above) results in a less than significant impact. g) Would the project place housing within a 100 year food hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other food hazard delineation map? No Impact. The proposed project is not located within a 100 -year floodplain, and the project does not involve placement of housing. No environmental impacts would result. h) Would the project place within a 100 year food hazard area structures that would impede or redirect food flows? No Impact. The project would construct a public sidewalk facility. No structures would be built in the project area that would impede or redirect flood flows in the nearby drainage. No impacts would result. i) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? No Impact The project would not expose people or structure to risk or injury as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. No impact would result. P Would the project inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? No Impact Seiche, tsunami, and mudflow are not hazards in the project area. The project would not expose people or structures to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. No impact would result. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING As previously indicated, the proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project is located east of residential development along Dover Drive, immediately west and downslope of Castaways Park, and southwest of Newport Harbor Lutheran Church and School. Figure 3 depicts existing conditions in the project limits and on surrounding properties. An unnamed drainage located parallel to Dover Drive appears to contain perennial flowing waters. This drainage flows from north to south for 500 linear feet and contains riparian and wetland species. The proposed project site is within the right -of -way of Dover Drive but is designated as REDS (Recreational & Environmental Open Space) in the City's General Plan. The site is located east of land uses that are designated APF (Administrative, Professional, & Financial Commercial) and SFD (Single Family Detached). The project site is zoned as PC -43 (Upper Castaways Planned Community). East of the site are properties zoned APF (Administrative, Professional, Financial) and R -1 (Single - Family Residential). South of Cliff Drive and northeast of the Dover Drive/PCH intersection is a commercial area designated PC -37- MM (Castaways Marina, Mariner's Mile Overlay). a) Would the project physically divide an established community? No Impact. The project is the installation of public sidewalk within an existing arterial right -of -way. Surrounding land uses are primarily residential, commercial, and recreational in nature. There would be no 8387 42 MAW Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project S —> J 0 0 use of any other land for the project, and there would be no division of an established community. No impact would result. b) Would the project conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for fire purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? No Impact. Current land use regulations allow for the proposed use of the road right -of -way for sidewalk construction. The proposed project would not result in an alteration of land use in the area. No environmental impact would result. C) Would the project conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? No Impact. As indicated in the Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the Castaways Park Vegetation (LSA 2001), the project site is within the coastal portion of the Orange County Central- Coastal Subregional Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP) program, which includes several thousand acres of natural open space in the San Joaquin Hills that contain dense, relatively undisturbed scrub habitat. The final NCCP/Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for the Central Coastal Subregion was approved in July 1996. The approved NCCP /HCP and applicable Section 10(a) permits identify the project area as outside the designated habitat reserve. No significant impacts would occur. X. MINERAL RESOURCES a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? No Impact. The project site is located in an urban area and does not contain mineral deposits or resources of regional or State value. No impact would result. b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No Impact. The project site consists of paved roadway and does not contain locally important mineral resources delineated on City land use plans. No impact would result. XI. NOISE Sound is mechanical energy transmitted by pressure waves in a compressible medium such as air. Noise as a pollutant can be defined ag unwanted sound. The decibel (dB) scale is used to quantify sound intensity. Because the human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies within the spectrum, noise measurements are weighted more heavily within those frequencies of maximum human sensitivity in a process called "A- weighting" written as dBA. Noise can be generated from either point sources (stationary equipment) or from a line source, such as a roadway with moving vehicles, or aircraft flying overhead. Noise decreases with distance and over the terrain over which it travels. Existing noise sources at the project site are primarily from traffic along major arterials (Pacific Coast Highway, Dover Drive, Cliff Drive, etc.), as well as occasional construction noise 8387 43 initial StudylMitigafed Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project I-P 0 0 from surrounding projects. Because of the site's location within these roadways and proximity to traffic - generating uses, the existing ambient noise levels are relatively high. The Newport Harbor Lutheran Church school and nearby residences west of Dover Drive are the primary noise - sensitive receptors within one - quarter mile of the project limits. The City of Newport Beach General Plan Noise Element contains interior and exterior noise level standards for both mobile and locally regulated sources. The noise level limits for residential and other noise - sensitive areas are not to exceed 65 dBA Leq for exterior and 45 dBA Leq for interior areas. Non- residential use areas are not to exceed 70 dBA Leq for exterior areas. a) Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Less Than Significant Impact. The project consists of the construction of a public sidewalk in an urbanized area with relatively high traffic volumes. The generation of project - related noise would occur over the short-tern for site preparation and construction activities. However, this noise would not be significant given the context of the existing noise from traffic and existing land uses in the project area. The project construction noise would not conflict with the surrounding residential and school uses, which are the most noise - sensitive. Although located within one - quarter mile of the proposed construction limits, those land uses would not be adversely affected by short-term, temporary noise increases that may occur during construction. The possible impacts would occur over a relatively short duration (i.e., 90 days) and would only occur during the daytime hours. All construction work will be accomplished within the time . limits permitted by City's noise ordinance, which allows construction on weekdays between 7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. Work will be conducted on Saturdays between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. only if approved by the Public Works Director for special needs during the construction period. No work will be permtted on holidays or Sundays. Compliance with those time limits is sufficient to maintain all construction - related noise impacts at levels that are less than significant. By its nature, the proposed sidewalk project would not result in any long -term increases in existing noise levels in the project area. Therefore, both short-term and long -term noise impacts would be less than significant. b) Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less Than Sigrriftcant Impact Excessive groundbome vibration is typically caused by activities such as blasting used in mining operations, or the use of pile drivers during construction. The project will. not require any blasting activities but would involve boring and pile driving to construct the 18 -inch diameter concrete posts that will support the boardwalk header beams in Reaches 2 and 3. Despite the noise and vibration levels associated with such construction, however, it would occur at times of the day and for short enough durations that it would not be a nuisance to noise sensitive uses. Further, given their distance from the project construction limits, occupied structures would not be exposed to excessive groundbome vibration or groundborne noise levels. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. C) Would the project result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? No Impact. The project would not generate any vehicle trips that would add to roadway noise in the long- term. Therefore, ambient noise levels in the project vicinity would be the same as levels existing without the project and no impact would result. 6367 44 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project C, 0 d) Would the project result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in section XI.a above, short-term noise impacts are impacts associated with the installation of the sidewalk reaches. These activities would result in short -term noise levels that would be slightly higher than the existing ambient noise levels in the project area today (e.g., truck traffic and construction activity), but would cease once construction is complete. A less than significant impact would result. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The proposed project does not include any residential or commercial development. The proposed project site is not located within an airport land use plan, or within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport. No environmental impacts would occur. J) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. See paragraph e) above. The project is not located with the vicinity of a private airstrip and would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. No impact would result. . XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING a) Would the project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? No Impact. The proposed project would not directly or indirectly induce population growth. The proposed sidewalk project would serve existing pedestrian users and has no potential for growth inducement. No environmental impacts would result. b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. The proposed sidewalk project will be constrained to the Dover Drive right -of -way. No housing would be displaced by the project. C) Would the project displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact The project would not displace any housing or people. No environmental impact would result. 8387 45 initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Prciect 1] .V XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new orphysically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any public services, including Fire Protection, Police Protection, Schools, Parks, or other public facilities? No Impact. The proposed project would not create a substantial new fire or public safety hazard. New employment would not be generated that would affect the demand for schools, parks, or other public facilities. The project would not result in the need for new or physically altered government facilities nor would it affect emergency response times or other performance objectives for public facilities in Newport Beach. Since the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered public facilities, no environmental impacts would result. XIV. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of-existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? No Impact The proposed project does not involve residential uses and would not cause a direct increase in the population of the project area. No increase in demand for or use of existing parks or recreational facilities would result from the implementation of the proposed project. Castaways Park is located immediately east of and adjacent to the proposed project area and is largely a passive recreation park, but with some paved and unpaved trail facilities. The proposed sidewalk would be constrained along the east side of Dover Drive and would not interfere with park usage. Rather, the proposed project would provide an additional pedestrian linkage to and from the park and surrounding areas. The proposed project would not cause physical deterioration of any recreational facilities and no environmental impacts would result. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion or recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact The proposed project would not include recreational facilities nor require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse effect on the environment. No impact will result. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC The project segment of Dover Drive passes near a mix of commercial, residential, recreational, and other uses. In this area Dover Drive and other surface streets receive moderate to heavy volumes of daily traffic. The nearest major arterial with high traffic volumes is Pacific Coast Highway, which is less than '/4 mile south of the intersection of Cliff Drive and Dover Drive. Short-term traffic impacts would occur only on Dover Drive where construction is scheduled. Since part of the project would be located in the street right - of -way, on- street parking would be affected during construction. Construction vehicles would be required 8387 May 2006 46 Initial Study/Mitrgated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project � �1 • • to park in close proximity to construction activities, thereby further encroaching upon on -street parking spaces. For the most part, the proposed sidewalk project would require grading and excavation only at shallow depths along the project limits. As indicated previously, construction would require temporary closure of one lane of northbound traffic on Dover Drive during construction. A mandatory traffic control plan will minimize the effects of construction on local residents, businesses and schools. The construction contractor will coordinate with City traffic engineering personnel regarding standard construction staging and traffic control plan requirements. Construction vehicles and machinery would be staged in a location on the street that would minimize construction interference with normal traffic patterns. Details of the traffic control plan would include construction vehicle haul routes, use of sidewalks, use of curb parking lanes, lane closures, etc. Additionally, the contractor may be required to build specific parts of the project during restricted times when effects would be minimized. The lane closure on Dover Drive could be limited to 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. in order to avoid the evening rush hour, as determined necessary by the Public Works Department. Flagging and appropriate signage would be installed to minimize potential safety hazards for vehicular and pedestrian traffic. The following evaluations indicate that all traffic impacts would be less than significant. a) Would the project cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (Le., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections) ? Less Than Significant Impact. During construction along Dover Drive, a temporary lane closure would be required, resulting in the potential for congestion, potential safety concerns for pedestrians near work areas, and the potential to restrict emergency access. However, the construction contractor will prepare a traffic control plan that is consistent with the conditions of the encroachment permits normally issued by the City. The traffic and pedestrian control measures in the traffic control plan will be coordinated with the City and would reduce any traffic impacts resulting from the project to less than significant levels. Further, project construction would not result in a permanent increase in traffic load or daily trips because installation of the proposed sidewalk would be temporary. b) Would the project exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Less Than Significant Impact The project would add a relatively minimal amount of construction- related trips during the approximately 90-day construction period. No individually or cumulatively significant level of service impacts would occur. C) Would the project result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? No Impact. The proposed project would not affect air traffic patterns. d) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible rises (eg., farm equipment)? Less Than Significant Impact. The propose sidewalk project would not have any permanent effects on the Dover Drive roadway design, nor would it cause any permanent traffic/transportation hazards. 8387 47 InNaf Study /Mitigated Negative Dedaradon May 2006 Dover Ddve Sidewalk Project e) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Less Than Significant Impact A traffic control plan to be implemented during construction will provide vehicular and pedestrian traffic control measures along the project segment of Dover Drive. As such, the potential to affect emergency access will be less than significant. fi Would the project result in inadequate parking capacity? No Impact. The project does not propose changes to on- street parking capacity. If applicable, any issues related to on -street parking along the project segment of Dover Drive will be addressed in the City's traffic control plan, which will be prepared by the construction contractor in cooperation with the City Public Works Department. No environmental impact would result. g) Would the project conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? No Impact. Although project construction would require the temporary closure of one northbound traffic lane on Dover Drive, the project does not conflict with adopted transportation policies. No environmental impact would result. XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS As indicated in the Alternatives Study (Van Dell 2005), the City and other local agencies responsible for utilities in the project vicinity were contacted for information on the location of their utilities. The study found that no storm drains, sewers, water lines or gas mains would be affected by project construction. However, all utility agencies will be notified as part of the final design scope of work. As determined necessary by the City Public Works Department, plans might be submitted for review by utility agencies to verify that existing improvements are shown correctly and, when appropriate, avoided during project construction. a) Would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? No Impact. No treated wastewater would be discharged as a result of the proposed project. The project would not discharge water or wastewater into any existing wastewater treatment facility. Therefore, no environmental impacts would occur. b) Would the project require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? No Impact. The proposed project is the construction of a public sidewalk and no new construction of wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of such facilities would be required. No project- related impacts would result. 8387 May 2006 48 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Dover Drive Sidewalk Project IrIA c) Would the project require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? No Impact Although the proposed sidewalk project would involve the relocation of several stormwater inlets in Dover Drive, the project would not require new stormwater facilities or the expansion of existing facilities. No environmental impacts would occur. d) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? No Impact. The proposed sidewalk project would not require a long -term water source or a new or expanded water supply. No environmental impacts would occur. e) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? No Impact. The proposed project would not require connections or service by a recycled water treatment provider. As in b) above, no environmental impacts would occur. P Would the project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Less Than Significant Impact A minimal amount of solid waste would be associated with construction. Any excess construction materials such as wood, concrete, asphalt, or metal would have a less than significant impact on landfill capacity in Orange County. g) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Less Than Significant Impact. A minimal amount of solid waste would be associated with construction. The project would comply with all municipal and State solid waste statutes and regulations and impacts would be less than significant. XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict file range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of file major periods of California history or prehistory? Less Than Significant Impact. The project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment and would not have a significant impact on any fish or wildlife or their habitat. The project area has been examined for historic and prehistoric significance and has not been found to contain important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory (see section V — Cultural Resources). The project does not have the potential to eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 8387 49 initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project 0 LOO • s b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects ofpast projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects ofprobable future projects)? Less Than. Significant Impact Based on the proposed project's minimal quantitative contribution to traffic, air emissions and noise and its limited geographic extent, the previous sections of this environmental analysis support the determination that the proposed Dover Drive Sidewalk Project would not have impacts that are cumulatively considerable. c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less Than Significant Impact. The project would have short-term temporary construction impacts, which include traffic congestion/safety and noise concerns that would be alleviated by standard construction specifications and a traffic control plan. Through the application of City construction standards, the project would not have the potential to cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. All short -term temporary construction impacts would be less than significant, or less than significant after mitigation. 8387 50 initial Study /Mitigated Negative Dedaratlon May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project W 0 0 SOURCES California Department of Conservation 1998a Division of Land Resources Protection, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, 1998 Important Farmlands Map for Orange County. 1998b Division of Mines and Geology, Open File Report 97 -08, Seismic Hazard Evaluation of the Anaheim and Newport Beach 7.5- Minute Quadrangles, Orange County, California. 1994 Division of Mines and Geology, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas, compiled by Charles W. Jennings. California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) 2005 USGS 7.5- minute quadrangle: Newport Beach City of Newport Beach 1994 Initial Study/Negative Declaration far Upper Castaways (TTM 15012). Geo- Environmental, Inc. 2004 Geotechnical Investigation Report, Proposed Dover Drive Improvements Between Cliff Drive and 16th Street, City of Newport Beach, California. Prepared for Van Dell and Associates, Inc. LSA Associates, Inc. 2001 Initial Study /Negative Declaration for the Castaways Park Revegetation Project. Prepared for the City of Newport Beach. RMW Paleo Associates 1997 Cultural Resources Investigation and Monitoring of Grading for the Upper Castaways View Park, Newport Beach, Orange County, California. Prepared for the City of Newport Beach. Van Dell and Associates, Inc. 2005 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Alternatives Study. Prepared for the City of Newport Beach. 8387 gt Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaradon May 2006 Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Vv PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH VAN DELL AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of this day of 2004, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a Municipal Corporation and Van Dell and Associates, Inc. whose address is 17801 Cartwright Road, Irvine, California, 92614 ( "Consultant"), and 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 City. B. City is planning to install sidewalk on the easterly side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 16th Street, adjacent to Castaways Park. C. City desires to engage Consultant to provide professional design engineering, geotechnical and environmental /biological services to prepare an alternatives analysis; biological assessment; CEQA documentation (Negative Declaration); construction documents, and Coastal Development Permit for the construction of approximately 1,000 feet of new sidewalk, retaining walls/curbs and potential utility adjustments and relocations ( "Project "). D. Consultant possesses the skill, experience, ability, background, certification, and knowledge to provide the services described in this Agreement. E. The principal member of Consultant for purposes of Project shall be John Wolter. F. City has solicited and received a proposal from Consultant, has reviewed the previous experience and evaluated the expertise of Consultant, and desires to retain Consultant to render professional services under the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows: 1. TERM The term of this Agreement shall commence on the above written date, and shall terminate on the 31st day of December, 2005, unless terminated earlier as set forth herein. 0 0 2. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED Consultant shall diligently perform all the services described in the Scope of Services attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. The City may elect to delete certain tasks of the Scope of Services at its sole discretion. 3. TIME OF PERFORMANCE Time is of the essence in the performance of services under this Agreement and Consultant shall perform the services in accordance with the schedule included in Exhibit A. The failure by Consultant to strictly adhere to the schedule may result in termination of this Agreement by City. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Consultant shall not be responsible for delays due to causes beyond Consultant's reasonable control. However, in the case of any such delay in the services to be provided for the Project, each party hereby agrees to provide notice to the other party so that all delays can be addressed. 3.1 Consultant shall submit all requests for extensions of time for performance in writing to the Project Administrator not later than ten (10) calendar days after the start of the condition that purportedly causes a delay. The Project Administrator shall review all such requests and may grant reasonable time extensions for unforeseeable delays that are beyond Consultant's control. 3.2 For all time periods not specifically set forth herein, Consultant shall respond in the most expedient and appropriate manner under the circumstances, by either telephone, fax, hand - delivery or mail. 4. COMPENSATION TO CONSULTANT City shall pay Consultant for the services on a time and expense not -to- exceed basis in accordance with the provisions of this Section and the Schedule of Billing Rates attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference. In no event shall Consultant's compensation for all work performed in accordance with this agreement, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, shall not exceed Sixty Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Thirty Eight Dollars and no /100 ($69,838.00) without additional authorization from City. No billing rate changes shall be made during the term of this Agreement without the prior written approval of City. 4.1 Consultant shall submit monthly invoices to City describing the work performed the preceding month. Consultant's bills shall include the name of the person who performed the work, a brief description of the services performed and /or the specific task in the Scope of Services to which it relates, the date the services were performed, the number of hours spent on all work billed on an hourly basis, and a description of any 2 reimbursable expenditures. City shall pay Consultant no later than thirty (30) days after approval of the monthly invoice by City staff. 4.2 City shall reimburse Consultant only for those costs or expenses specifically approved in this Agreement, or specifically approved in advance by City. Unless otherwise approved, such costs shall be limited and include nothing more than the following costs incurred by Consultant: A. The actual costs of subconsultants for performance of any of the services that Consultant agrees to render pursuant to this Agreement, which have been approved in advance by City and awarded in accordance with this Agreement. B. Approved reproduction charges. C. Actual costs and /or other costs and/or payments specifically authorized in advance in writing and incurred by Consultant in the performance of this Agreement. 4.3 Consultant shall not receive any compensation for Extra Work without the prior written authorization of City. As used herein, "Extra Work" means any work that is determined by City to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services and which the parties did not reasonably anticipate would be necessary at the execution of this Agreement. Compensation for any authorized Extra Work shall be paid in accordance with the Schedule of Billing Rates as set forth in Exhibit B. 5. PROJECT MANAGER Consultant shall designate a Project Manager, who shall coordinate all phases of the Project. This Project Manager shall be available to City at all reasonable times during the Agreement term. Consultant has designated John Wolter to be its Project Manager. Consultant shall not remove or reassign the Project Manager or any personnel listed in Exhibit A or assign any new or replacement personnel to the Project without the prior written consent of City. City's approval shall not be unreasonably withheld with respect to the removal or assignment of non -key personnel. Consultant, at the sole discretion of City, shall remove from the Project any of its personnel assigned to the performance of services upon written request of City. Consultant warrants that it will continuously furnish the necessary personnel to complete the Project on a timely basis as contemplated by this Agreement. 6. ADMINISTRATION This Agreement will be administered by the Public Works Department. Robert Stein shall be the Project Administrator and shall have the authority to act for 3 0 City under this Agreement. The Project Administrator or his /her authorized representative shall represent City in all matters pertaining to the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement. 7. CITY'S RESPONSIBILITIES In order to assist Consultant in the execution of its responsibilities under this Agreement, City agrees to, where applicable: A. Provide access to, and upon request of Consultant, one copy of all existing relevant information on file at City. City will provide all such materials in a timely manner so as not to cause delays in Consultant's work schedule. B. Provide blueprinting and other services through City's reproduction company.for bid documents. Consultant will be required to coordinate the required bid documents with City's reproduction company. All other reproduction will be the responsibility of Consultant and as defined above. C. Provide usable life of facilities criteria and information with regards to new facilities or facilities to be rehabilitated. 8. STANDARD OF CARE 8.1 All of the services 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 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. 8.2 Consultant represents and warrants to City that it has or shall obtain all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatsoever nature that are legally required of Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant further represents and warrants to City that Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep in effect or obtain at all times during the term of this Agreement, any and all licenses, permits, insurance and other approvals that are legally required of Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant shall maintain a City of Newport Beach business license during the term of this Agreement. 8.3 Consultant shall not be responsible for delay, nor shall Consultant be responsible for damages or be in default or deemed to be in default by reason of strikes, lockouts, accidents, or acts of God, or the failure of City to furnish timely information or to approve or disapprove Consultant's work promptly, or delay or faulty performance by City, contractors, or govemmental agencies. M s 9. HOLD HARMLESS r To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents and employees (collectively, the "Indemnified Parties) from and against any and all claims (including, without limitation, claims for bodily injury, death or damage to property), demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including, without limitation, attorney's fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever (individually, a Claim; collectively, "Claims "), which may arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to any work negligently performed or services provided under this Agreement (including, without limitation, defects in workmanship or materials and /or design defects [if the design originated with Consultant]) or Consultant's presence or activities conducted on the Project (including the negligent and /or willful acts, errors and /or omissions of Consultant, its principals, officers, agents, employees, vendors, suppliers, consultants, subcontractors, anyone employed directly or indirectly by any of them or for whose acts they may be liable or any or all of them). Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing herein shall be construed to require Consultant to indemnify the Indemnified Parties from any Claim arising from the active negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties. Nothing in this indemnity shall be construed as authorizing any award of attorney's fees in any action on or to enforce the terms of this Agreement. This indemnity shall apply to all claims and liability regardless of whether any insurance policies are applicable. The policy limits do not act as a limitation upon the amount of indemnification to be provided by the Consultant. 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR It is understood that City retains Consultant on an independent contractor basis and Consultant is not an agent or employee of 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 expressed terms of this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to constitute approval for Consultant or any of Consultant's employees or agents, to be the agents or employees of City. Consultant shall have the responsibility for and control over the means of performing the work, provided that Consultant is in compliance with the terms of this Agreement. Anything in this Agreement that may appear to give City the right to direct Consultant as to the details of the performance or to exercise a measure of control over Consultant shall mean only that Consultant shall follow the desires of City with respect to the results of the services. 11. COOPERATION Consultant agrees to work closely and cooperate fully with City's designated Project Administrator and any other agencies that may have jurisdiction or interest in the work to be performed. City agrees to cooperate with the Consultant on the Project. I. 12. CITY POLICY Consultant shall discuss and review all matters relating to policy and Project direction with City's Project Administrator in advance of all critical decision points in order to ensure the Project proceeds in a manner consistent with City goals and policies. 13. PROGRESS Consultant is responsible for keeping the Project Administrator and/or his/her duly authorized designee informed on a regular basis regarding the status and progress of the Project, activities performed and planned, and any meetings that have been scheduled or are desired. 14. INSURANCE Without limiting Consultant's indemnification of City, and prior to commencement of work. Consultant shall obtain, provide and maintain at its own expense during the term of this Agreement, a policy or policies of liability insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form satisfactory to City. A. Certificates of insurance. Consultant shall provide certificates of insurance with original endorsements to City as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein. Insurance certificates must be approved by City's Risk Manager prior to commencement of performance or issuance of any permit. Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with City at all times during the term of this Agreement. B. Signature. A person authorized by the insurer to bind coverage on its behalf shall sign certification of all required policies. C. Acceptable Insurers. All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact business of insurance in the State of California, with an assigned policyholders' Rating of A (or higher) and Financial Size Category Class VII (or larger) in accordance with the latest edition of Best's Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by the City's Risk Manager. D. Coverage Requirements. i. Workers' Compensation Coverage. Consultant shall maintain Workers' Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance for his or her employees in accordance with the laws of the State of California. In addition, Consultant shall require each subcontractor to similarly maintain Workers' Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance in accordance with the laws of the State of California for all of the subcontractor's employees. Any notice of cancellation or non - renewal of all Workers' Compensation policies must be received by City at least thirty (30) calendar days prior to such change. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against City, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers for losses arising from work performed by Consultant for City. ii. General Liability Coverage. Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance in an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage, including without limitation, contractual liability. If commercial general liability insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work to be performed under this Agreement, or the general aggregate limit shall be at least twice the required occurrence limit. Automobile Liability Coverage. Consultant shall maintain automobile insurance covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of the Consultant arising out of or in connection with work to be performed under this Agreement, including coverage for any owned, hired, non -owned or rented vehicles, in an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit for each occurrence. iv. Professional Errors and Omissions Insurance. Consultant shall maintain 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). E. Endorsements. Each general liability and automobile liability insurance policy shall be endorsed with the following specific language: The City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds with respect to liability arising out of work performed by or on behalf of the Consultant. This policy shall be considered primary insurance as respects to City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers as respects to all claims, losses, or liability arising directly or indirectly from the Consultant's operations or services provided to City. Any insurance maintained by City, including any self- insured retention City may have, shall be considered excess insurance only and not contributory with the insurance provided hereunder. iii. This insurance shall act for each insured and additional insured as though a separate policy had been written for each, except with respect to the limits of liability of the insuring company. iv. The insurer waives all rights of subrogation against City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. 7 V. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers. vi. The insurance provided by this policy shall not be suspended, voided, canceled, or reduced in coverage or in limits, by either party except after thirty (30) calendar days written notice has been received by City. F. Timely Notice of Claims. Consultant shall give City prompt and timely notice of claim made or suit instituted arising out of or resulting from Consultant's performance under this Agreement. G. Additional Insurance. 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. 15. PROHIBITION AGAINST ASSIGNMENTS AND TRANSFERS Except as specifically authorized under this Agreement, the services to be provided under this Agreement shall not be assigned, transferred contracted or subcontracted out without the prior written approval of City. Any of the following shall be construed as an assignment: 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. 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. 16. SUBCONTRACTING Subcontracts Authorized. City and Consultant agree that subconsultants may be used to complete the work outlined in the Scope of Services. The subconsultants authorized by City to perform work on this Project are identified in Exhibit A. Consultant shall be fully responsible to City for all acts and omissions of the subcontractor. Nothing in this Agreement shall create any contractual relationship between City and subcontractor nor shall it create any obligation on the part of City to pay or to see to the payment of any monies due to any such subcontractor other than as otherwise required by law. Except as specifically authorized herein, the services to be provided under this Agreement shall not be otherwise assigned, transferred, contracted or subcontracted out without the prior written approval of City. 17. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS Each and every report, draft, map, record, plan, document and other writing produced (hereinafter "Documents "), prepared or caused to be prepared by Consultant, its officers, employees, agents and subcontractors, in the course of implementing this Agreement, shall become the exclusive property of City, and 93 City shall have the sole right to use such materials in its discretion without further compensation to Consultant or any other party. Consultant shall, at Consultant's expense, provide such Documents to City upon prior written request. Documents, including drawings and specifications, prepared by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement are not intended or represented to be suitable for reuse by City or others on any other project. Any use of completed Documents for other projects and any use of incomplete Documents without specific written authorization from Consultant will be at City's sole risk and without liability to Consultant. Further, any and all liability arising out of changes made to Consultant's deliverables under this Agreement by City or persons other than Consultant is waived against Consultant and City assumes full responsibility for such changes unless City has given Consultant prior notice and has received from Consultant written consent for such changes. All improvement and /or construction plans shall be prepared with indelible waterproof ink or electrostaticly plotted on standard 24 -inch by 36 -inch Mylar with a minimum thickness of three mils. Consultant shall provide to City 'As- Built' drawings, and a copy of digital ACAD and tiff image files of all final sheets within ninety (90) days after finalization of the Project. For more detailed requirements, a copy of the City of Newport Beach Standard Design Requirements is available from the City's Public Works Department. 18. COMPUTER DELIVERABLES CADD data delivered to City shall include the professional stamp of the engineer or architect in charge of or responsible for the work. City agrees that Consultant shall not be liable for claims, liabilities or losses arising out of, or connected with (a) the modification or misuse by City, or anyone authorized by City, of CADD data; (b) the decline of accuracy or readability of CADD data due to inappropriate storage conditions or duration; or (c) any use by City, or anyone authorized by City, of CADD data for additions to this Project, for the completion of this Project by others, or for any other Project, excepting only such use as is authorized, in writing, by Consultant. By acceptance of CADD data, City agrees to indemnify Consultant for damages and liability resulting from the modification or misuse of such CADD data. All original drawings shall be submitted to City in the version of AutoCAD used by City in ".dwg" file format on a CD, and should comply with the City's digital submission requirements for Improvement Plans. The City will provide AutoCAD file of City Title Sheets. All written documents shall be transmitted to City in the City's latest adopted version of Microsoft Word and Excel. 19. CONFIDENTIALITY All Documents, including drafts, preliminary drawings or plans, notes and communications that result from the services in this Agreement, shall be kept confidential unless City authorizes in writing the release of information. N 0 20. OPINION OF COST Any opinion of the construction cost prepared by Consultant represents his/her judgment as a design professional and is supplied for the general guidance of City. Since Consultant has no control over the cost of labor and material, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, Consultant does not guarantee the accuracy of such opinions as compared to contractor bids or actual cost to City. 21. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY INDEMNITY The Consultant shall defend and indemnify City, its agents, officers, representatives and employees against any and all liability, including costs, for infringement of any United States' letters patent, trademark, or copyright infringement, including costs, contained in Consultant's drawings and specifications provided under this Agreement. 22. RECORDS Consultant shall keep records and invoices in connection with the work to be performed under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to the costs incurred under this Agreement and any services, expenditures and disbursements charged to City, for a minimum period of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to Consultant under this Agreement. All such records and invoices shall be clearly identifiable. Consultant shall allow a representative of City to examine, audit and make transcripts or copies of such records and invoices during regular business hours. Consultant shall allow inspection of all worts, data, Documents, proceedings and activities related to the Agreement for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment to Consultant under this Agreement. 23. WITHHOLDINGS City may withhold payment to Consultant 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 work as a result of such withholding. Consultant shall have an immediate right to appeal to the City Manager or his /her designee with respect to such disputed sums. Consultant shall be entitled to receive interest on any withheld sums at the rate of return that City earned on its investments during the time period, from the date of withholding of any amounts found to have been improperly withheld. 24. ERRORS AND OMISSIONS In the event of errors or omissions that are due to the negligence or professional inexperience of Consultant which result in expense to City greater than what would have resulted if there were not errors or omissions in the work accomplished by Consultant, the additional design, construction and /or 10 0 0 restoration expense shall be borne by Consultant. Nothing in this paragraph is intended to limit City's rights under any other sections of this Agreement. 25. CITY'S RIGHT TO EMPLOY OTHER CONSULTANTS City reserves the right to employ other Consultants in connection with the Project. 26. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST 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 any 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. 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 immediate termination of this Agreement by City. Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless City for any and all claims for damages resulting from Consultant's violation of this Section. 27. NOTICES All notices, demands, requests or approvals to be given under the terms of this Agreement shall be given in writing, to City by Consultant and conclusively shall be deemed served when delivered personally, or on the third business day after the deposit thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid, first -class mail, addressed as hereinafter provided. All notices, demands, requests or approvals from Consultant to City shall be addressed to City at: Attn: Robert Stein Public Works Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Phone: 949 - 644 -3322 Fax: 949 - 644 -3308 All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Consultant shall be addressed to Consultant at: Attn: John Wolter Van Dell and Associates, Inc. 17801 Cartwright Road Irvine, CA 92614 Phone: 949 - 474 -1400 Fax: 949 -261 -8482 11 • 28. TERMINATION 0 In the event that either parry fails or refuses to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement at the time and in the manner required, that party shall be deemed in default in the performance of this Agreement. If such default is not cured within a period of two (2) calendar days, or if more than two (2) calendar days are reasonably required to cure the default and the defaulting party fails to give adequate assurance of due performance within two (2) calendar days after receipt of written notice of default, specifying the nature of such default and the steps necessary to cure such default, the non - defaulting party may terminate the Agreement forthwith by giving to the defaulting party written notice thereof. Notwithstanding the above provisions, City shall have the right, at its sole discretion and without cause, of terminating this Agreement at any time by giving seven (7) calendar days prior written notice to Consultant. In the event of termination under this Section, City shall pay Consultant for services satisfactorily performed and costs incurred up to the effective date of termination for which Consultant has not been previously paid. On the effective date of termination, Consultant shall deliver to City all reports, Documents and other information developed or accumulated in the performance of this Agreement, whether in draft or final form. 29. COMPLIANCE WITH ALL LAWS Consultant shall at its own cost and expense comply with all statutes, ordinances, regulations and requirements of all governmental entities, including federal, state, county or municipal, whether now in force or hereinafter enacted. In addition, all work prepared by Consultant shall conform to applicable City, county, state and federal laws, rules, regulations and permit requirements and be subject to approval of the Project Administrator and City. 30. WAIVER A waiver by either party 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. 31. 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 herein. 12 0 0 32. CONFLICTS OR INCONSISTENCIES In the event there are any conflicts or inconsistencies between this Agreement and the Scope of Services or any other attachments attached hereto, the terms of this Agreement shall govern. 33. AMENDMENTS This Agreement may be modified or amended only by a written document executed by both Consultant and City and approved as to form by the City Attorney. 34. SEVERABILITY If any term or portion of this Agreement is held to be invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. 35. CONTROLLING LAW AND VENUE The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement and all matters relating to it and any action brought relating to this Agreement shall be adjudicated in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Orange. 36. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYMENT Consultant represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and it shall not discriminate against any subcontractor, employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, handicap, ancestry, sex or age. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed on the day and year first written above. APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, A Municipal Corporation LaVonne Harkless, City Clerk Mayor for the City of AN DELL AND ASSOCIATES, INC.: Mohammad R. Heist, President Attachments: Exhibit A — Scope of Services Exhibit B — Schedule of Billing Rates f: \userslpbw\sharedlagreementslfy 03- 041van dell -cover drive sidewalk.doc 13 Van Dell and Asso, Inc. Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services fook Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California B.1 WORK PLAN The following are the basic tasks for successful completion of the alternatives analysis, biological assessment, environmental documentation, permit processing, PS &E preparation, and bid support process. Task 1 — Background Research and Data Collection Following the kick -off meeting the initial task is to obtain all available as -built record drawings, survey information, right -of -way data, utility companies' information, and any other pertinent information for this project from City, County and other agencies. VA will visit the site and identify noteworthy features of the existing roadways to verify and supplement the available as -built drawings and survey data provided by the City. These features will include visible utilities and drainage facilities, traffic control devices (signs or signals), and features such as trees, and vegetated areas. Task 2 — Sidewalk Location Design Alternatives Following completion of background research, field inventory, and review of the survey data, the preliminary scope of work identified in the RFP for project location will be confirmed. At the beginning of the design process, VA will prepare a concept exhibit identifying alternatives for the proposed improvements. This exhibit will be used to develop a consensus between the City and the VA team on the design and impacts of the proposed project including analysis of sensitive riparian habitat, vehicle and bicycle traffic, utility and drainage system modifications, Resource Agency permitting and construction costs to implement the improvements. Once consensus on the selected alternative is achieved, the design process can go forward expeditiously, without delay to the project, as key issues will have been identified and resolved during the alternatives analysis. VA will prepare a letter to City confirming the design criteria and selected alternative. Based on our observations made during a site visit, different alternatives for the sidewalk improvements should be considered at different reaches along Dover Drive. the following alternatives would provide for minimum impact to the existing travel lanes and the riparian habitat along the easterly edge of Dover Drive. 1. Dover Drive (Cliff Drive to 250'± North of Cliff Drive) This reach is adjacent to the steep embankment above the easterly edge of Dover Drive. The bike /emergency parking lane is approximately 11 feet wide and the toe of the embankment is located just behind the existing curbs. For this reach potential alternatives are: 8' wide sidewalk behind the existing curb with an 8' to 11' high retaining wall 5' wide sidewalk behind the existing curb with a 5' to 8' high retaining wall construct new curb with 8' wide bike /emergency parking lane, 5' wide sidewalk and a 2' to 3' high retaining wall. This alternative will require restriping in order to utilize the roadway space adjacent to the median. C: Newmer�aM $MM1nO�m�oro�1L0eal$eWngsRamw� dry �MernA PdasWUbSSnopo ol5erv�cea.tloc EXHIBIT A Page 4 Van Deli and Assoc, Inc. Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services f e Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California 2. Dover Drive (250'± North of Cliff Drive to 900' North of Cliff Drive This reach is adjacent to the embankment which drops below the easterly edge of Dover Drive. The existing roadway is 32 feet wide with two 12' wide travel lanes, one 8' wide bike /emergency parking lane and 5'± level dirt area between the curb and top of the embankment slope. For this reach potential alternatives are: 5' wide sidewalk behind the existing curb, 2' to 3' deep cut off wall below the back edge of the sidewalk and a wood or anodized aluminum railing. 8' wide boardwalk behind the existing curb supported on wood poles with a wood railing. 3. Dover Drive (900' North of Cliff Drive to 1000' North of Cliff Drive) This reach is adjacent to the embankment which drops below the easterly edge of Dover Drive. Several mature Willow Trees are located at the top of the slope 5' to 6' behind the existing curb. The existing roadway is 32 feet wide with two 12' wide travel lanes and an 8' wide bike /emergency parking lane. For this reach potential alternatives are: 5' wide sidewalk behind the existing curb with a 2' to 3' deep cut off wall below the back edge of the sidewalk and a wood or anodized aluminum rail. 5' wide boardwalk behind the existing curb supported on wood poles with a wood railing. Task 3 — Geotechnical Investigation and Report The geotechnical investigation will consist of five subtasks: (a) data review /coordination, (b) field investigation, (c) laboratory testing, (d) engineering analyses, and (e) report preparation. These tasks are briefly described below. (The evaluation of the stability of the slopes at the back of curb along a portion of the roadway is not part of the proposed scope of work). a. Data Review /Coordination Available geotechnical and geological data regarding the subject site and surrounding areas will be reviewed. The data review will include review of grading reports and other geotechnical data in the files of the City /County. b. Field Investigation The field investigation will consist of a site reconnaissance and a subsurface exploration. The site reconnaissance will be performed by a Geotechnical Engineer. Results of the site reconnaissance will be used to select the boring locations of the proposed subsurface exploration. Subsurface conditions will be identified by hand augering only three (3) borings to depths of 5 to 10 feet below the existing ground surface. The borings will be backfilled with the soil cuttings immediately after samples are retrieved. C ?Datums 5 sw sen^9ty ^awi1lorai SMU�gs \Tpmotrpry iMame\ FiieslOLKlSSwpo M Senic¢xEFc Page 5 ® Van Dell and Asso co, Inc. Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services foe Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California Both drive and bulk soil samples will be collected from the borings during the hand augering operations. The drive samples will be collected at approximately 3- to 5- foot intervals. The samples from the borings will be tested in the soils laboratory as described below. c. Laboratory Testing Samples collected during the field investigations will be examined in the laboratory to confirm field classifications. Selected samples from the borings will be tested to help evaluate engineering properties of the subsurface soils. The numbers and types of tests will depend upon the soils encountered. d. Engineering Analyses Results from the field and laboratory tests, site reconnaissance and GEI's experience will be the basis for the engineering analyses. GEI will provide engineering conclusions and recommendations for the following: • Suitable type of foundation, • Allowable soil pressures for foundation design, • Floor slab support, • Potential settlements and remediation measures, • Expansion properties of on -site soils, • Compaction characteristics of on -site soils, • Suitability of on -site soils for use as fill material, • Lateral earth pressures, • Site preparation for proposed construction. e. Report Preparation GEI's conclusions and recommendations and supporting field and laboratory test results will be presented in an engineering report, and it will be addressed to you as appropriate. We will provide two (2) copies of the report to the City and have made the following assumptions in providing this proposal: • Access to the site is provided • No unusually hard or other unforeseen ground conditions are encountered • Excess soil cuttings may be left on -site • Soil and groundwater are not contaminated Task 4 — Utility Coordination This task includes full service utility coordination including utility research, submittal of utility information request, review and note utility conflicts of planned improvements within the project area, and distribution of preliminary and final plans to the utility companies. Copies of all transmittal letters to and from the utility companies and a summary table tracking all communication will be submitted to the City. Task 5 — Plans, Specification and Cost Estimate_(PS&E) Following completion of geotechnical investigation and confirmation of the selected design alternative, construction plans will be prepared in "Plan and Profile" format at 1' = C:1D Mbmna Sddl Oslmeuuy% edl SftgSlTemfrorery imemm FOZ10LKi51$woa of Sowm due Page 6 ® Van Dell , and Asso ,Inc. Proposal Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services f e Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California 20' horizontal scale and 1 °= 4' vertical scale for the required improvements. Individual plan sheets will include all topographic information, prominent features and proposed improvements including retaining wall profiles and reconstruction of drainage facilities as necessary. Structural and hydraulic calculations in support of the proposed design will also be provided to the City. The sidewalk improvements shall be designed to comply with current ADA requirements and the final construction plans will be prepared in acceptable Auto CADD format, under the City Public Works' logo and format, in accordance with City, APWA or OCPF &RD design standards. VA will maintain current editions of the design reference publications as applicable to the project. The final plan set will include the following plan sheets: (1) Title Sheet including Vicinity Map and Sheet Index (1) Notes Sheet including construction notes, general notes, construction symbols and standard plan references ect. (1) Details Sheet including typical roadway and sidewalk improvement sections, retaining wall details, drainage structure modifications and any other miscellaneous details required for Plan Sheets. (2) Roadway and Sidewalk Improvement Sheets including any retaining wall improvements, storm drain modifications and excavation. These sheets will also include profile for any retaining wall improvements. (1) Signing and Striping Plans at 1" = 40" scale will be prepared if existing curb and gutter is relocated to accommodate the new sidewalk. Relocation of the curb is a potential alternative within the reach form Cliff Drive to 250'± northerly of Cliff Drive where sidewalk construction would require excavation of the steep embankment above the roadway and construction of a retaining wall. These plans will show installation of all roadway striping and pavement markings in addition to the locations and types of existing traffic signs within the project limits. Should VA note the need for additional signs, or the removal of existing ones, these items will also be included on the plans. All signing and striping improvements will be designed according to City guidelines, and Caltrans standard details and specifications for traffic signing and striping and pavement markings. It is assumed that the traffic control will be prepared by the contractor and is not included in this scope of work. VA will prepare complete construction bidding documents including specifications and special provisions, construction quantities and cost estimate in accordance with the City format for all items of work included in the project. Deliverables: Plans and estimate will be submitted for review when they are at 60 %, 90% and 100% levels. Contract documents and special provisions will be submitted with the plan submittals at the 90% and 100% levels. At final submittal, a reproducible hard copy of the contract documents, plan sheet blue lines as well as mylar originals and electronic files will be submitted. C:�roounbmsore SeXvgeMr�owy�tacai Somresl�cmtorary imcmm Fim\Oo ?Mmw of Servi®e,E= Page 7 1..! Van Dell and Asso, Inc. Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services f e Dover Drive Sidewalk Project I City of Newport Beach, California Task 6 — Environmental Concerns and Permits Task 6.9 — General Biological/Botanical Surveys and Jurisdictional Delineation a. A literature review will be performed prior to the survey to determine whether there are any existing records for potential sensitive species or habitats within the vicinity of the project site. This task will include a review of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and the California Native Plant Society's Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI) for information relevant to the project site. In addition, the Biologist will review previous documents (if available) of surveys conducted in the immediate vicinity of the project to obtain literature that may be pertinent to the site. After the literature search, . a wildlife biologist and botanist familiar with the resources associated with the project vicinity will conduct a reconnaissance assessment of the biological resources onsite. All plant communities on the project site will be mapped and qualitatively described. The biologists will document the presence of common and sensitive biological resources and evaluate the habitat for the potential presence of sensitive species onsite. It is assumed fieldwork will take no more than one day to complete. After completing the field survey, Environmental Consultant will prepare a technical report of findings that includes the following topics: a) introduction, b) proposed project description, c) methods used to conduct the surveys, d) existing conditions of biological resources onsite, e) sensitive species and communities' discussion, and f) bibliography. Lists of wildlife and plant species observed during the surveys would be included. Field notes and survey forms used during the surveys and the resumes of the biologists who conducted the surveys will be included as appendices to the report. Two copies of a draft biological technical report of findings will be provided to the City for review within 2 weeks of completing the reconnaissance survey. Environmental Consultant will provide two copies of the final report to the City. b. The field delineation will be conducted by the Environmental Consultant's wetlands specialists who have extensive experience conducting jurisdictional delineations. The purpose of the field surveys will be to identify and delineate areas of the project site that fall under the regulatory jurisdiction of the ACOE pursuant to Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) jurisdiction pursuant to Section 1603 of the Fish and Game Code. To determine jurisdictional areas, the biologist will investigate criteria specified by the ACOE. Wetlands boundaries (if present) will be determined using the current accepted methodology prescribed in the ACOE 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual. All wetlands and other jurisdictional waters will be mapped on a topographic map. The Environmental Consultant will deliver a report summarizing the results of the jurisdictional delineation. The report will describe habitat present on site, the limits of biological survey and jurisdiction pursuant to ACOE and CDFG regulations and include a discussion of potential regulatory constraints and the ACOE and CDFG C'IUOam¢MS sm SenmoslmbmWuwi SeVtrgsk7ert mo imem cnesiouas oOo Of SOO,ce,doc Page 8 ® Van Dell and Asso, Inc. Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services f0ee Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California regulatory permitting procedures that may be required for the project. In addition, the report will include a map depicting ACOE and CDFG jurisdiction. As required by the resource agencies, the graphics will include site photographs. The Environmental Consultant will provide 4 copies of the Final delineation report to the City. Task 6.2 - Preparation of CEQA Documentation Preparation of Initial Study The Environmental Consultant will prepare the Initial Study (IS) for the proposed project. The IS will be prepared in accordance with the policies and procedures as identified by the City of Newport Beach. Preparation of Negative Declaration The City has recommended the preparation of a Negative Declaration (ND) for the proposed project. The ND will be prepared in accordance with the policies and procedures as identified by the City of Newport Beach. For the purpose of this proposal, we have assumed that a Negative Declaration will be prepared. If a Mitigated Negative Declaration is required additional compensation will be required based on additional work effort required. Environmental Consultant staff will attend up to four meetings, including the project kickoff meeting, regarding the Negative Declaration. A biologist will attend up to two meetings, including the project kickoff meeting. Task 6.3 — Permit Processing 1. Preparation of Section 404, Section 401, and 1602 Permit Applications, If Necessary If jurisdictional areas are to be affected by the proposed project, then Tasks a through d will be required. This work does not include the development of a restoration plan for the proposed project. If the resource agencies require a restoration plan (e.g., maintenance schedule, plant palette, monitoring standards, etc.) a separate scope of work and cost will be provided for that task. We will assume that all documents (base maps, as -built drawings ect.) provided by the City will be sufficient and complete in order for the resource agencies to process the application. a. Preparation of CDFG Application The Environmental Consultant will prepare and submit a notification to CDFG for a 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement. Unlike the ACOE, CDFG regulates not only the discharge of dredged or fill material, but all activities that alter streams and lakes and their associated habitat. CDFG has no abbreviated permitting process comparable to the ACOE nationwide permits. A CDFG 1602 Agreement is required for all activities resulting in impacts to streambeds and their associated riparian habitats. CDFG generally requires that any impacts to streambeds and adjacent Clo ume aM SelYings4NOCey�l Setltr g)Tempma IMemef Flles\OLK15{Smpa of Sarvi .doc Page 9 - - -, Van Dell and Assoc", Inc. Proposal Provide April 72, 2004 a Design Services Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California riparian habitats be fully mitigated. To ensure rapid and favorable action on a 1602 notification, a mitigation plan should be submitted with the notification package. It normally takes 90 days for the CDFG to process a 1602 notification. The Environmental Consultant will provide one copy of the final application to CDFG and one copy to the City. For projects that exceed $500,000 CDFG charges $1,390.50 to process a streambed alteration agreement. This fee is to be provided by the City. b. Preparation of ACOE Application The amount of work associated with preparing the notification to the ACOE pursuant to Section 404 depends on the magnitude of project impacts on jurisdictional waters and other resources. The proposal assumes that authorization for this project will be provided through the nationwide permit program and a pre - construction notification will not be required. If a notification to the ACOE is required, the Environmental Consultant will submit a proposal for that work. Consultant will provide one copy of the final application to ACOE and one copy to the City. The ACOE does not charge for the filing of their permit. c. Preparation of Written Notification for Water Quality (401) Certification A water quality certification is required from the regional water quality control board (RWQCB) for any activity that requires a federal license or permit (such as a Section 404 permit) and may result in a discharge to jurisdictional waters. The Environmental Consultant will prepare and submit the necessary documentation to the RWQCB for its review of the project pursuant to water quality certification. The Environmental Consultant will provide one copy of the final application to Water Board and one copy to the City. The RWQCB charges for the preparation of a certification of water quality and usually costs less than $1,000.00 for small projects (although their fee schedule is currently being modified). This fee is to be provided by the City. d. Agency Coordination Agency coordination will be initiated as soon as possible after submittal of the application and throughout the permitting process. The Environmental Consultant will coordinate with the ACOE, CDFG and the RWQCB throughout their review of the applications to ensure that any potential problems are made known to the City and resolved at the earliest possible opportunity. This usually involves the coordination of a site visit with the resource agencies. One meeting is anticipated for the completion of these permits. However, the project manager will attend meetings, with the City as requested on a time and materials basis, based on standard billing rates. C cumaa aaa SOiM,aaa AWE lSa ima Tam gWamaf FIIW Vss af� .ma Page 10 ® Van Dell and Asso, Inc. Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 MF Design Services foik Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California 2. Coastal Development Permit Application and Submittal A City administered CDP will be required for the proposed project. The Environmental Consultant will complete the CDP application and submit the application, along with accompanying biological resources report(s). Task 7 — Bidding Process Assistant During the bidding process of the project VA will provide assistance to the City including answers to contractor Requests For Information (RFI) and preparing all required addenda. Task 8 — Project Management and Meetings The project will be diligently managed to ensure timely coordination with City staff, and keep the project on schedule and within budget. VA will prepare monthly progress report with updated schedule and meet and coordinate with the City as required. VA will prepare and distribute meeting agendas 24 -hours before the meeting. Draft of meeting minutes shall be ready within one week after meeting. For the purpose of the fee proposal, it is assumed that there will be four meetings with City during design stages, and one meeting with local community representatives. 13.2 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM VA's Quality Assurance and Quality Control Program is implemented on engineering design and study projects to ensure that the required documents: a Conform with the contract documents; n Are neat, well organized, clear, concise, and complete; n Are technically and grammatically correct; > Comply with generally accepted professional standards of engineering and applicable laws; > Are signed, dated, and stamped as required; and > Are consistent with other related plans and are constructible. All project team members, including drafters, designers, and supervisors, are involved with implementing the QA/QC program and ensuring that a quality product is produced by making every effort to do the work right the first time. C 1 mmeM eM SelfingaMroceylLaral Se ng NTe MU 1m et FiIw1IXJ06 W" of Service¢ooc Page 11 ® Van Dell and Asso*1 Inc. Amended Proposal to Provide April 29, 2004 Design Services fdlMFe Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California SCOPE OF SERVICES ADDITIONS Additions to Section 13.1 "Work Plan" of Proposal dated April 12, 2004 B.1 WORK PLAN Task 2 — "Sidewalk Location Design Alternatives ": • Cast estimates for each alternative are included. • Recommendations are included in the alternative analysis. Task 6.2 - "Preparation of CEQA Documentation ": • Preparation of the Notice of Completion and Notice of Determination are included. • Preparation of the list of Mitigation Measures is included if a Mitigation Negative Declaration document is required. Task 6.3 — "Permit Processing" Section 2 "Coastal Development Permit Application and Submittal': Attendance at one (1) meeting with Coastal Commission staff is included. • Attendance at one (1) meeting for Coastal Commission Hearing is included. Assumed that Coastal Commission Hearing is in Southern California. If attendance is required in Northern California, additional fees for travel expenses and time will be required. C?➢ocumams em selliigslmloca} ALacaI5 e11ingslTemporary lnfemet Fba¢IOIHISiSwpeaf 5ervi� amentlmem.aoc Page 1 Van Dell and Associates, Inc. April 12, 2004 PROJECT SCHEDULE Proposal to Provide Design Services for the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California Note: We have assumed 30 days for the CEQA Negative Declaration process and 4 to 6 weeks for the Coastal Development permitting. It unforeseen delays are encountered during the CEQA processor Coastal Development permit process, and if CDFG 1600 agreement and/or an ACOE 404 permit are required. additional permitting time . will be necessary. COmnenG�M 8e11ryYlnk[�,4ctl,Mbp,llerp r�ry FYms,FMVAIt)p'}N9 Qalpp+h� -T.�C, Page 13 is • 1 ] TASKS MONTH May Jun ul Aug Sao ct Nov Dec I I I I Background Research and Data Collection jam_ I I I I Sidewalk Location Design Alternatives Geotechnical Investigation Report II Utility Coordination Coordination r _ I 1 I Plan Specification and Cost Estimate I 9 I I Environmental Study and Permif' I I I I I I Bidding Process Process Assistant Proloct Management f Jl and Meetings M I M I M i t M I 1 1 City Review I 1 I 1 U= I I � - -- _ f I a v e s' p� MILESTONES: Legend: FA task aclivilies E w v 8 a U QM meetings 9 city roviews e Note: We have assumed 30 days for the CEQA Negative Declaration process and 4 to 6 weeks for the Coastal Development permitting. It unforeseen delays are encountered during the CEQA processor Coastal Development permit process, and if CDFG 1600 agreement and/or an ACOE 404 permit are required. additional permitting time . will be necessary. COmnenG�M 8e11ryYlnk[�,4ctl,Mbp,llerp r�ry FYms,FMVAIt)p'}N9 Qalpp+h� -T.�C, Page 13 is • ®Van Dell and Assod &, Inc. April 12, 2004 Notes: Proposal to Provide Design Service or the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California VAN DELL AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FEE SCHEDULE City of Newport Beach Department of Public of Works Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Effective January 1, 2004 Staff Classification Clerical /Support Staff Engineering Technical Support CADD Operator /Drafter Design /Survey Staff Professional Staff Senior Professional Staff Project Manager Principal Two -Man Survey Crew Three -Man Survey Crew 1. Billing will be every four weeks. Invoices are due and payable on presentation. 2. Overtime, when requested by the client, will be surcharged at a rate of 135% of the standard houdy rates. Sundays and holidays will be surcharged at a rate of 170% of the standard hourly rates. Hourly Rate $ 45.00 $ 60.00 $ 86.00 $ 95.00 $115.00 $130.00 $130.00 $155.00 $175.00 $205.00 EXHIBIT B QoDmmam are seNin srmlaaa %Wml Sml mt%Tompo,ary Imemel FiI %OWA�y Rmes.Eoc Page 29 • 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT C -3Ws a Agenda Item No. 7 May 25, 2004 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Public Works Department GIT Ur scvYrum Robert Stein 949 - 644 -3311 ZVE rstein @city.newport- beach.ca.us A SUBJECT: DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK DESIGN — APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH VAN DELL AND ASSOCIATES RECOMMENDATIONS Approve a budget amendment in the amount of $19,838 from the Transportation and Circulation fund balance, 260 -3605, to Transportation and Circulation, Dover Drive Sidewalk Design, 7261- C5100712. 2. Approve a Professional Services Agreement with Van Dell and Associates, Inc. (Van Dell), of Irvine, California, for the design of the Dover Drive sidewalk at a contract price of $69,838 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Agreement. DISCUSSION Five engineering consulting firms were invited to submit proposals to provide a comprehensive design for the construction of sidewalk along the easterly side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 16`h Street. The following four firms responded to the City's request for proposals: • Berryman & Henigar • BV Engineering • Dewan, Lundin & Associates • Van Dell and Associates, Inc. The proposals were independently reviewed to evaluate each firm's project understanding, project team's experience and qualifications, and past experience on similar projects, before ranking Van Dell the highest. Van Dell has completed design services competently and professionally on similar projects for other local agencies in Southern California. SUBJECT: Dover Drive Sidewal proval of Professional Services Agreement with ell and Associates May 25, 2004 Page 2 Upon selection, staff negotiated with Van Dell to provide the necessary scope of services for a fee of $69,838. The scope of Van Dell's professional services will include: 1. Considering design options for the sidewalk. One option is to consider construction of the sidewalk behind the existing curb. An alternative is to consider relocating the curb line into the street to minimize cutting into the steep slope that terminates at the back of the existing curb. The consultant will provide recommendations on the preferred alternative based on traffic safety and cost. 2. Providing geotechnical recommendations for slope grading and the proposed retaining wall. 3. Preparing detailed plan and profile drawings and cross sections, signing and striping plans, special provisions, bid proposal, and construction quantity and cost estimates. 4. Contacting the regulatory agencies (State Fish and Game, Corps of Engineers, Coastal Commission and the RWQCB) and determine project and permitting requirements. Preparing all permit applications and CEQA documents. Preparing a biological report for the CDP application. Funding Availability: Upon approval of the recommended Budget Amendment, sufficient funds will be available in the following account: Account Description Account Number Amount Transportation and Circulation Fund 7261- C5100712 $69,838 Environmental Review: The contract includes the preparation of environmental documents. Prepared by: Submitted boy- Robert Stei E. Step n G. Badum Principal Civil Engineer P6 Ic Works Director Attachment: Professional Services Agreement Budget Amendment L 0 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH VAN DELL AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR DOVER DRIVE SIDEWALK THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of this _ day of 2004, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a Municipal Corporation ( "City "), and Van Dell and Associates, Inc. whose address is 17801 Cartwright Road, Irvine], California, 92614 ( "Consultant'), and 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 City. B. City is planning to install sidewalk on the easterly side of Dover Drive from Cliff Drive to 16th Street, adjacent to Castaways Park. C. City desires to engage Consultant to provide professional design engineering, geotechnical and environmental /biological services to prepare an alternatives analysis; biological assessment; CEQA documentation (Negative Declaration); construction documents, and Coastal Development Permit for the construction of approximately 1,000 feet of new sidewalk, retaining walls /curbs and potential utility adjustments and relocations ( "Project "). D. Consultant possesses the skill, experience, ability, background, certification, and knowledge to provide the services described in this Agreement. E. The principal member of Consultant for purposes of Project shall be John Wolter. F. City has solicited and received a proposal from Consultant, has reviewed the previous experience and evaluated the expertise of Consultant, and desires to retain Consultant to render professional services under the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows: 1. TERM The term of this Agreement shall commence on the above written date, and shall terminate on the 31st day of December, 2005, unless terminated earlier as set forth herein. 0 0 2. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED Consultant shall diligently perform all the services described in the Scope of Services attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. The City may elect to delete certain tasks of the Scope of Services at its sole discretion. 3. TIME OF PERFORMANCE Time is of the essence in the performance of services under this Agreement and Consultant shall perform the services in accordance with the schedule included in Exhibit A. The failure by Consultant to strictly adhere to the schedule may result in termination of this Agreement by City. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Consultant shall not be responsible for delays due to causes beyond Consultant's reasonable control. However, in the case of any such delay in the services to be provided for the Project, each party hereby agrees to provide notice to the other party so that all delays can be addressed. 3.1 Consultant shall submit all requests for extensions of time for performance in writing to the Project Administrator not later than ten (10) calendar days after the start of the condition that purportedly causes a delay. The Project Administrator shall review all such requests and may grant reasonable time extensions for unforeseeable delays that are beyond Consultant's control. 3.2 For all time periods not specifically set forth herein, Consultant shall respond in the most expedient and appropriate manner under the circumstances, by either telephone, fax, hand- delivery or mail. 4. COMPENSATION TO CONSULTANT City shall pay Consultant for the services on a time and expense not -to- exceed basis in accordance with the provisions of this Section and the Schedule of Billing Rates attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference. In no event shall Consultant's compensation for all work performed in accordance with this agreement, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, shall not exceed Sixty Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Thirty Eight Dollars and no /100 ($69,838.00) without additional authorization from City. No billing rate changes shall be made during the term of this Agreement without the prior written approval of City. 4.1 Consultant shall submit monthly invoices to City describing the work performed the preceding month. Consultant's bills shall include the name of the person who performed the work, a brief description of the services performed and/or the specific task in the Scope of Services to which it relates, the date the services were performed, the number of hours spent on all work billed on an hourly basis, and a description of any 2 • i reimbursable expenditures. City shall pay Consultant no later than thirty (30) days after approval of the monthly invoice by City staff. 4.2 City shall reimburse Consultant only for those costs or expenses specifically approved in this Agreement, or specifically approved in advance by City. Unless otherwise approved, such costs shall be limited and include nothing more than the following costs incurred by Consultant: A. The actual costs of subconsultants for performance of any of the services that Consultant agrees to render pursuant to this Agreement, which have been approved in advance by City and awarded in accordance with this Agreement. B. Approved reproduction charges. C. Actual costs and /or other costs and/or payments specifically authorized in advance in writing and incurred by Consultant in the performance of this Agreement. 4.3 Consultant shall not receive any compensation for Extra Work without the prior written authorization of City. As used herein, "Extra Work" means any work that is determined by City to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services and which the parties did not reasonably anticipate would be necessary at the execution of this Agreement. Compensation for any authorized Extra Work shall be paid in accordance with the Schedule of Billing Rates as set forth in Exhibit B. 5. PROJECT MANAGER Consultant shall designate a Project Manager, who shall coordinate all phases of the Project. This Project Manager shall be available to City at all reasonable times during the Agreement term. Consultant has designated John Wolter to be its Project Manager. Consultant shall not remove or reassign the Project Manager or any personnel listed in Exhibit A or assign any new or replacement personnel to the Project without the prior written consent of City. Gig's approval shall not be unreasonably withheld with respect to the removal or assignment of non -key personnel. Consultant, at the sole discretion of City, shall remove from the Project any of its personnel assigned to the performance of services upon written request of City. Consultant warrants that it will continuously furnish the necessary personnel to complete the Project on a timely basis as contemplated by this Agreement. 6. ADMINISTRATION This Agreement will be administered by the Public Works Department. Robert Stein shall be the Project Administrator and shall have the authority to act for 3 E E City under this Agreement. The Project Administrator or his /her authorized representative shall represent City in all matters pertaining to the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement. 7. CITY'S RESPONSIBILITIES In order to assist Consultant in the execution of its responsibilities under this Agreement, City agrees to, where applicable: A. Provide access to, and upon request of Consultant, one copy of all existing relevant information on file at City. City will provide all such materials in a timely manner so as not to cause delays in Consultant's work schedule. B. Provide blueprinting and other services through City's reproduction company for bid documents. Consultant will be required to coordinate the required bid documents with City's reproduction company. All other reproduction will be the responsibility of Consultant and as defined above. C. Provide usable life of facilities criteria and information with regards to new facilities or facilities to be rehabilitated. 8. STANDARD OF CARE 8.1 All of the services 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 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. 8.2 Consultant represents and warrants to City that it has or shall obtain all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatsoever nature that are legally required of Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant further represents and warrants to City that Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep in effect or obtain at all times during the term of this Agreement, any and all licenses, permits, insurance and other approvals that are legally required of Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant shall maintain a City of Newport Beach business license during the term of this Agreement. 8.3 Consultant shall not be responsible for delay, nor shall Consultant be responsible for damages or be in default or deemed to be in default by reason of strikes, lockouts, accidents, or acts of God, or the failure of City to furnish timely information or to approve or disapprove Consultant's work promptly, or delay or faulty performance by City, contractors, or governmental agencies. a i i 9. HOLD HARMLESS To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents and employees (collectively, the "Indemnified Parties) from and against any and all claims (including, without limitation, claims for bodily injury, death or damage to property), demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including, without limitation, attorney's fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever (individually, a Claim; collectively, "Claims "), which may arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to any work negligently performed or services provided under this Agreement (including, without limitation, defects in workmanship or materials and /or design defects [if the design originated with Consultant]) or Consultant's presence or activities conducted on the Project (including the negligent and /or willful acts, errors and /or omissions of Consultant, its principals, officers, agents, employees, vendors, suppliers, consultants, subcontractors, anyone employed directly or indirectly by any of them or for whose acts they may be liable or any or all of them). Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing herein shall be construed to require Consultant to indemnify the Indemnified Parties from any Claim arising from the active negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties. Nothing in this indemnity shall be construed as authorizing any award of attorney's fees in any action on or to enforce the terms of this Agreement. This indemnity shall apply to all claims and liability regardless of whether any insurance policies are applicable. The policy limits do not act as a limitation upon the amount of indemnification to be provided by the Consultant. 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR It is understood that City retains Consultant on an independent contractor basis and Consultant is not an agent or employee of 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 expressed terms of this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to constitute approval for Consultant or any of Consultant's employees or agents, to be the agents or employees of City. Consultant shall have the responsibility for and control over the means of performing the work, provided that Consultant is in compliance with the terms of this Agreement. Anything in this Agreement that may appear to give City the right to direct Consultant as to the details of the performance or to exercise a measure of control over Consultant shall mean only that Consultant shall follow the desires of City with respect to the results of the services. 11. COOPERATION Consultant agrees to work closely and cooperate fully with City's designated Project Administrator and any other agencies that may have jurisdiction or interest in the work to be performed. City agrees to cooperate with the Consultant on the Project. F7 0 • 12. CITY POLICY Consultant shall discuss and review all matters relating to policy and Project direction with City's Project Administrator in advance of all critical decision points in order to ensure the Project proceeds in a manner consistent with City goals and policies. 13. PROGRESS Consultant is responsible for keeping the Project Administrator andfor his/her duly authorized designee informed on a regular basis regarding the status and progress of the Project, activities performed and planned, and any meetings that have been scheduled or are desired. 14. INSURANCE Without limiting Consultant's indemnification of City, and prior to commencement of work Consultant shall obtain, provide and maintain at its own expense during the term of this Agreement, a policy or policies of liability insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form satisfactory to City. A. Certificates of Insurance. Consultant shall provide certificates of insurance with original endorsements to City as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein. Insurance certificates must be approved by City's Risk Manager prior to commencement of performance or issuance of any permit. Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with City at all times during the term of this Agreement. B. Signature. A person authorized by the insurer to bind coverage on its behalf shall sign certification of all required policies. C. Acceptable Insurers. All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact business of insurance in the State of California, with an assigned policyholders' Rating of A (or higher) and Financial Size Category Class VII (or larger) in accordance with the latest edition of Best's Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by -the City's Risk Manager. D. Coverage Requirements Workers' Compensation Coverage. Consultant shall maintain Workers' Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance for his or her employees in accordance with the laws of the State of California. In addition, Consultant shall require each subcontractor to similarly maintain Workers' Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance in accordance with the laws of the State of California for all of the subcontractor's employees. ' Any notice of cancellation or non - renewal of all Workers' Compensation policies must be received by City at least thirty (30) calendar days prior to such change. The insurer shall 11 0 0 agree to waive all rights of subrogation against City, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers for losses arising from work performed by Consultant for City. ii. General Liability Coverage. Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance in an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage, including without limitation, contractual liability. If commercial general liability insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work to be performed under this Agreement, or the general aggregate limit shall be at least twice the required occurrence limit. iii. Automobile Liability Coverage. Consultant shall maintain automobile insurance covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of the Consultant arising out of or in connection with work to be performed under this Agreement, including coverage for any owned, hired, non -owned or rented vehicles, in an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit for each occurrence. iv. Professional Errors and Omissions Insurance. Consultant shall maintain 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). E. Endorsements. Each general liability and automobile liability insurance policy shall be endorsed with the following specific language: L The City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds with respect to liability arising out of work performed by or on behalf of the Consultant. ii. This policy shall be considered primary insurance as respects to City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers as respects to all claims, losses, or liability arising directly or indirectly from the Consultant's operations or services provided to City. Any insurance maintained by City, including any self- insured retention City may have, shall be considered excess insurance only and not contributory with the insurance provided hereunder. iii. This insurance shall act for each insured and additional insured as though a separate policy had been written for each, except with respect to the limits of liability of the insuring company. iv. The insurer waives all rights of subrogation against City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. 7 0 0 V. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers. vi. The insurance provided by this policy shall not be suspended, voided, canceled, or reduced in coverage or in limits, by either party except after thirty (30) calendar days written notice has been received by City. F. Timely Notice of Claims. Consultant shall give City prompt and timely notice of claim made or suit instituted arising out of or resulting from Consultant's performance under this Agreement. G. Additional Insurance. 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. 15. PROHIBITION AGAINST ASSIGNMENTS AND TRANSFERS Except as specifically authorized under this Agreement, the services to be provided under this Agreement shall not be assigned, transferred contracted or subcontracted out without the prior written approval of City. Any of the following shall be construed as an assignment: 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. 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 orjoint- venture. 16. SUBCONTRACTING Subcontracts Authorized. City and Consultant agree that subconsultants may be used to complete the work outlined in the Scope of Services. The subconsultants authorized by City to perform work on this Project are identified in Exhibit A. Consultant shall be fully responsible to City for all acts and omissions of the subcontractor. Nothing in this Agreement shall create any contractual relationship between City and subcontractor nor shall it create any obligation on the part of City to pay or to see to the payment of any monies due to any such subcontractor other than as otherwise required by law. Except as specifically authorized herein, the services to be provided under this Agreement shall not be otherwise assigned, transferred, contracted or subcontracted out without the prior written approval of City. 17. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS Each and every report, draft, map, record, plan, document and other writing produced (hereinafter "Documents "), prepared or caused to be prepared by Consultant, its officers, employees, agents and subcontractors, in the course of implementing this Agreement, shall become the exclusive property of City, and EV • • City shall have the sole right to use such materials in its discretion without further compensation to Consultant or any other party. Consultant shall, at Consultant's expense, provide such Documents to City upon prior written request. Documents, including drawings and specifications, prepared by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement are not intended or represented to be suitable for reuse by City or others on any other project. Any use of completed Documents for other projects and any use of incomplete Documents without specific written authorization from Consultant will be at City's sole risk and without liability to Consultant. Further, any and all liability arising out of changes made to Consultant's deliverables under this Agreement by City or persons other than Consultant is waived against Consultant and City assumes full responsibility for such changes'unless City has given Consultant prior notice and has received from Consultant written consent for such changes. All improvement and /or construction plans shall be prepared with indelible waterproof ink or electrostaticly plotted on standard 24 -inch by 36 -inch Mylar with a minimum thickness of three mils. Consultant shall provide to City 'As- Built' drawings, and a copy of digital ACAD and tiff image files of all final sheets within ninety (90) days after finalization of the Project. For more detailed requirements, a copy of the City of Newport Beach Standard Design Requirements is available from the City's Public Works Department. 18. COMPUTER DELIVERABLES CADD data delivered to City shall include the professional stamp of the engineer or architect in charge of or responsible for the work. City agrees that Consultant shall not be liable for claims, liabilities or losses arising out of, or connected with (a) the modification or misuse by City, or anyone authorized by City, of CADD data; (b) the decline of accuracy or readability of CADD data due to inappropriate storage conditions or duration; or (c) any use by City, or anyone authorized by City, of CADD data for additions to this Project, for the completion of this Project by others, or for any other Project, excepting only such use as is authorized, in writing, by Consultant. By acceptance of CADD data, City agrees to indemnify Consultant for damages and liability resulting from the modification or misuse of such CADD data. All original drawings shall be submitted to City in the version of AutoCAD used by City in ".dwg" file format on a CD, and should comply with the City's digital submission requirements for Improvement Plans. The City will provide AutoCAD file of City Title Sheets. All written documents shall be transmitted to City in the City's latest adopted version of Microsoft Word and Excel. 19. CONFIDENTIALITY All Documents, including drafts, preliminary drawings or plans, notes and communications that result from the services in this Agreement, shall be kept confidential unless City authorizes in writing the release of information. 0 0 20. OPINION OF COST Any opinion of the construction cost prepared by Consultant represents his/her judgment as a design professional and is supplied for the general guidance of City. Since Consultant has no control over the cost of labor and material, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, Consultant does not guarantee the accuracy of such opinions as compared to contractor bids or actual cost to City. 21. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY INDEMNITY The Consultant shall defend and indemnify City, its agents, officers, representatives and employees against any and all liability, including costs, for infringement of any United States' letters patent, trademark, or copyright infringement, including costs, contained in Consultant's drawings and specifications provided under this Agreement. 22. RECORDS Consultant shall keep records and invoices in connection with the work to be performed under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to the costs incurred under this Agreement and any services, expenditures and disbursements charged to City, for a minimum period of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to Consultant under this Agreement. All such records and invoices shall be clearly identifiable. Consultant shall allow a representative of City to examine, audit and make transcripts or copies of such records and invoices during regular business hours. 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 to Consultant under this Agreement. 23. WITHHOLDINGS City may withhold payment to Consultant 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 work as a result of such withholding. Consultant shall have an immediate right to appeal to the City Manager or his /her designee with respect to such disputed sums. Consultant shall be entitled to receive interest on any withheld sums at the rate of return that City earned on its investments during the time period, from the date of withholding of any amounts found to have been improperly withheld. 24. ERRORS AND OMISSIONS In the event of errors or omissions that are due to the negligence or professional inexperience of Consultant which result in expense to City greater than what would have resulted if there were not errors or omissions in the work accomplished by Consultant, the additional design, construction and /or 10 0 0 restoration expense shall be borne by Consultant. Nothing in this paragraph is intended to limit City's rights under any other sections of this Agreement. 25. CITY'S RIGHT TO EMPLOY OTHER CONSULTANTS City reserves the right to employ other Consultants in connection with the Project. 26. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST 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 any 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. 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 immediate termination of this Agreement by City. Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless City for any and all claims for damages resulting from Consultant's violation of this Section. 27. NOTICES All notices, demands, requests or approvals to be given under the terms of this Agreement shall be given in writing, to City by Consultant and conclusively shall be deemed served when delivered personally, or on the third business day after the deposit thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid, first -class mail, addressed as hereinafter provided. All notices, demands, requests or approvals from Consultant to City shall be addressed to City at: Attn: Robert Stein Public Works Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Phone: 949 - 644 -3322 Fax: 949 - 644 -3308 All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Consultant shall be addressed to Consultant at: Attn: John Wolter Van Dell and Associates, Inc. 17801 Cartwright Road Irvine, CA 92614 Phone: 949 -474 -1400 Fax: 949 -261 -8482 11 r] 28. TERMINATION 0 In the event that either party fails or refuses to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement at the time and in the manner required, that party shall be deemed in default in the performance of this Agreement. If such default is not cured within a period of two (2) calendar days, or if more than two (2) calendar days are reasonably required to cure the default and the defaulting party fails to give adequate assurance of due performance within two (2) calendar days after receipt of written notice of default, specifying the nature of such default and the steps necessary to cure such default, the non - defaulting party may terminate the Agreement forthwith by giving to the defaulting party written notice thereof. Notwithstanding the above provisions, City shall have the right, at its sole discretion and without cause, of terminating this Agreement at any time by giving seven (7) calendar days prior written notice to Consultant. In the event of termination under this Section, City shall pay Consultant for services satisfactorily performed and costs incurred up to the effective date of termination for which Consultant has not been previously paid. On the effective date of termination, Consultant shall deliver to City all reports, Documents and other information developed or accumulated in the performance of this Agreement, whether in draft or final form. 29. COMPLIANCE WITH ALL LAWS Consultant shall at its own cost and expense comply with all statutes, ordinances, regulations and requirements of all governmental entities, including federal, state, county or municipal, whether now in force or hereinafter enacted. In addition, all work prepared by Consultant shall conform to applicable City, county, state and federal laws, rules, regulations and permit requirements and be subject to approval of the Project Administrator and City. 30. WAIVER A waiver by either party 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. 31. 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 herein. 12 0 32. CONFLICTS OR INCONSISTENCIES In the event there are any conflicts or inconsistencies between this Agreement and the Scope of Services or any other attachments attached hereto, the terms of this Agreement shall govern. 33. AMENDMENTS This Agreement may be modified or amended only by a written document executed by both Consultant and City and approved as to form by the City Attorney. 34. SEVERABILITY If any term or portion of this Agreement is held to be invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. 35. CONTROLLING LAW AND VENUE The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement and all matters relating to it and any action brought relating to this Agreement shall be adjudicated in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Orange. 36. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYMENT Consultant represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and it shall not discriminate against any subcontractor, employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, handicap, ancestry, sex or age. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed on the day and year first written above. APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney, for the City of Newport Beach ATTEST: LaVonne Harkless, City Clerk Attachments: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, A Municipal Corporation M Mayor for the City of Newport Beach VAN DELL AND ASSOCIATES, INC.: Exhibit A — Scope of Services Exhibit B — Schedule of Billing Rates f:lusers \pbw\shared \agreements \fy 03- 04\van dell -dover drive sidewalk.doo 13 Van Dell and fates, Inc. Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California SCOPE OF SERVICES B.1 WORK ALAN The following are the basic tasks for successful completion of the alternatives analysis, biological assessment, environmental documentation, permit processing, P5 &E preparation, and bid support process. Task 1 — Background Research and Data Collection Following the kick -off meeting the initial task is to obtain all available as -built record drawings, survey information, right -of -way data, utility companies' information, and any other pertinent information for this project from City, County and other agencies. VA will visit the site and identify noteworthy features of the existing roadways to verify and supplement the available as -built drawings and survey data provided by the City. These features will include visible utilities and drainage facilities, traffic control devices (signs or signals), and features such as trees, and vegetated areas. Task 2 — Sidewalk Location Design Alternatives Following completion of background research, field inventory, and review of the survey data, the preliminary scope of work identified in the RFP for project location will be confirmed. At the beginning of the design process, VA will prepare a concept exhibit identifying alternatives for the proposed improvements. This exhibit will be used to develop a consensus between the City and the VA team on the design and impacts of the proposed project including analysis of sensitive riparian habitat, vehicle and bicycle traffic, utility and drainage system modifications, Resource Agency permitting and construction costs to implement the improvements. Once consensus on the selected alternative is achieved, the design process can go forward expeditiously, without delay to the project, as key issues will have been identified and resolved during the alternatives analysis. VA will prepare a letter to City confirming the design criteria and selected alternative. Based on our observations made during a site visit, different alternatives for the sidewalk improvements should be considered at different reaches along Dover Drive. The following alternatives would provide for minimum impact to the existing travel lanes and the riparian habitat along the easterly edge of Dover Drive. 1. Dover Drive (Cliff Drive to 250't North of Cliff Drive) This reach is adjacent to the steep embankment above the easterly edge of Dover Drive. The bikelemergency parking lane is approximately 11 feet wide and the toe of the embankment is located just behind the existing curbs. For this reach potential alternatives are: 8' wide sidewalk behind the existing curb with an 8' to 11' high retaining wall • 5' wide sidewalk behind the existing curb with a 5' to 8' high retaining wall • construct new curb with 8' wide bikelemergency parking lane, 5' wide sidewalk and a 2' to 3' high retaining wall. This alternative will require restriping in order to utilize the roadway space adjacent to the median. M.uVVronuwlw�.�,zwnwwcwc.na ea.vaa,wra `J'JuwMlSaolu d:wn,:w:xw Page 4 Van Dell and As tes, Inc. Proposal Provide g April 12, 2004 Design Services f e Dover Drive Sidewalk Project �b` City of Newport Beach, California 2. Dover Drive f250'± North of Cliff Drive to 900' North of Cliff Drive This reach is adjacent to the embankment which drops below the easterly edge of Dover Drive. The existing roadway is 32 feet wide with two 12' wide travel lanes, one 8' wide bike /emergency parking lane and 5'± level dirt area between the curb and top of the embankment slope. For this reach potential alternatives are: 5' wide sidewalk behind the existing curb, 2' to 3' deep cut off wall below the back edge of the sidewalk and a wood or anodized aluminum railing. 8' wide boardwalk behind the existing curb supported on wood poles with a wood railing. 3. Dover Drive (900' North of Cliff Drive to 1000' North of Cliff Drivel This reach is adjacent to the embankment which drops below the easterly edge of Dover Drive. Several mature Willow Trees are located at the top of the slope 5' to 6' behind the existing curb. The existing roadway is 32 feet wide with two 12' wide travel lanes and an 8' wide bike /emergency parking lane. For this reach potential alternatives are: ■ 5' wide sidewalk behind the existing curb with a 2' to 3' deep cut off wall below the back edge of the sidewalk and a wood or anodized aluminum rail. 5' wide boardwalk behind the existing curb supported on wood poles with a wood railing. Task 3 — Geotechnical Investigation and Reuort The geotechnical investigation will consist of five subtasks: (a) data review /coordination, (b) field investigation, (c) laboratory testing, (d) engineering analyses, and (e) report preparation. These tasks are briefly described below. (The evaluation of the stability of the slopes at the back of curb along a portion of the roadway is not part of the proposed scope of work). a. Data Review /Coordination Available geotechnical and geological data regarding the subject site and surrounding areas will be reviewed. The data review will include review of grading reports and other geotechnical data in the files of the City /County. b. Field Investigation The field 'investigation will consist of a site reconnaissance and a subsurface exploration. The site reconnaissance will be performed by a Geotechnical Engineer. Results of the site reconnaissance will be used to select the boring locations of the proposed subsurface exploration. Subsurface conditions will be identified by hand augering only three (3) borings to depths of 5 to 10 feet below the existing ground surface. The borings will be backfilled with the soil cuttings immediately after samples are retrieved. %Mlnkaurq�,upo �W xone�p�pw.W,npoM1 Wvn+onw Or S�IwmktSVpn ar Servvm.bc Page 5 Van Dell and AqMates, Inc. Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project A City of Newport Beach, California Both drive and bulk soil samples will be collected from the borings during the hand augering operations. The drive samples will be collected at approximately 3- to 5- foot intervals. The samples from the borings will be tested in the soils laboratory as described below. c. Laboratory Testing Samples collected during the field investigations will be examined in the laboratory to confirm field classifications. Selected samples from the borings will be tested to help evaluate engineering properties of the subsurface soils. The numbers and types of tests will depend upon the soils encountered. d. Engineering Analyses Results from the field and laboratory tests, site reconnaissance and GEI's experience will be the basis for the engineering analyses. GEI will provide engineering conclusions and recommendations for the following: • Suitable type of foundation, • Allowable soil pressures for foundation design, • Floor slab support, • Potential settlements and remediation measures, • Expansion properties of on =site soils, Compaction characteristics of on -site soils, • Suitability of on -site soils for use as fill material, • Lateral earth pressures, • Site preparation for proposed construction. e. Report Preparation GEI's conclusions and recommendations and supporting field and laboratory test results will be presented in an engineering report, and it will be addressed to you as appropriate. We will provide two (2) copies of the report to the City and have made the following assumptions in providing this proposal: Access to the site is provided • No unusually hard or other unforeseen ground conditions are encountered • Excess soil cuttings may be left on -site • Soil and groundwater are not contaminated Task 4 - Utitit - Coordination This task includes full service utility coordination including utility research, submittal of utility information request, review and note utility conflicts of planned improvements within the project area, and distribution of preliminary and final plans to the utility companies. Copies of all transmittal letters to and from the utility companies and a summary table tracking all communication will be submitted to the City. Task 5 - Plans, Specification and Cost Esttmate (P5 &E) Fallowing completion of geotechnical investigation and confirmation of the selected design alternative, construction plans will be prepared in "Plan and Profile" format at V = x:,Manaenwown��rs�P �xuw.m.<womn nma�� »r a, uwnims.np, d smic�,mc Page 6 Van Dell and Asotes, Inc. Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 Design Sery ices fo a Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California 20' horizontal scale and 1"= 4' vertical scale for the required improvements. Individual plan sheets will include all topographic information, prominent features and proposed improvements including retaining wall profiles and reconstruction of drainage facilities as necessary. Structural and hydraulic calculations in support of the proposed design will also be provided to the City. The sidewalk improvements shall be designed to comply with current ADA requirements and the final construction plans will be prepared in acceptable Auto CADD format, under the City Public Works' logo and format, in accordance with City, APWA or OCPF &RD design standards. VA will maintain current editions of the design reference publications as applicable to the project. The final plan set will include the following plan sheets: (1) Title Sheet including Vicinity Map and Sheet Index (1) Notes Sheet including construction notes, general notes, construction symbols and standard plan references ect. (1) Details Sheet including typical roadway and sidewalk improvement sections, retaining wall details, drainage structure modifications and any other miscellaneous details required for Plan Sheets. (2) Roadway and Sidewalk Improvement Sheets including any retaining wall improvements, storm drain modifications and excavation. These sheets will also include profile for any retaining wall improvements. (1) Signing and Striping Plans at 1" = 40" scale will be prepared if existing curb and gutter is relocated to accommodate the new sidewalk. Relocation of the curb is a potential alternative within the reach form Cliff Drive to 250't northerly of Cliff Drive where sidewalk construction would require excavation of the steep embankment above the roadway and construction of a retaining wall. These plans will show installation of all roadway striping and pavement markings in addition to the locations and types of existing traffic signs within the project limits. Should VA note the need for additional signs, or the removal of existing ones, these items will also be included on the plans. All signing and striping improvements will be designed according to City guidelines, and Caltrans standard details and specifications for traffic signing and striping and pavement markings. It is assumed that the traffic control will be prepared by the contractor and is not included in this scope of work. VA wiil prepare complete construction bidding documents including specifications and special provisions, construction quantities and cost estimate in accordance with the City format for all items of work included in the project. Deliverables: Plans and estimate will be submitted for review when they are at 60 %, 90% and 100% levels. Contract documents and special provisions will be submitted with the plan submittals at the 90% and 100% levels. At final submittal, a reproducible hard copy of the contract documents, plan sheet blue lines as well as mylar originals and electronic files will be submitted. %.1Wik,rv,.jP,oryau4a� �ataWMlcwn..pM9o-rMOUwrc M..'irt,wnlMTumpOd 9xnu�+,b.: Page 7 Van Dell and As tes, Inc. Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services a Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California Task 6 — Environmental Concerns and Permits Task 6.1— General BiologicallBotanical Surveys and Jurisdictional Delineation a. A literature review will be performed prior to the survey to detenmine whether there are any existing records for potential sensitive species or habitats within the vicinity of the project site. This task will include a review of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and the California Native Plant Society's Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI) for information relevant to the project site. In addition, the Biologist will review previous documents (if available) of surveys conducted in the immediate vicinity of the project to obtain literature that may be pertinent to the site. After the literature search, a wildlife biologist and botanist familiar with the resources associated with the project vicinity will conduct a reconnaissance assessment of the biological resources onsite. All plant communities on the project site will be mapped and qualitatively described. The biologists will document the presence of common and sensitive biological resources and evaluate the habitat for the potential presence of sensitive species onsite. It is assumed fieldwork will take no more than one day to complete. After completing the field survey, Environmental Consultant will prepare a technical report of findings that includes the following topics: a) introduction, b) proposed project description, c) methods used to conduct the surveys, d) existing conditions of biological resources onsite, e) sensitive species and communities' discussion, and f) bibliography. Lists of wildlife and plant species observed during the surveys would be included. Field notes and survey forms used during the surveys and the resumes of the biologists who conducted the surveys will be included as appendices to the report. Two copies of a draft biological technical report of findings will be provided to the City for review within 2 weeks of completing the reconnaissance survey. Environmental Consultant will provide two copies of the final report to the City. b. The field delineation will be conducted by the Environmental Consultant's wetlands specialists who have extensive experience conducting jurisdictional delineations. The purpose of the field surveys will be to identify and delineate areas of the project site that fall under the regulatory jurisdiction of the ACOE pursuant to Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) jurisdiction pursuant to Section 1603 of the Fish and Game Code. To determine jurisdictional areas, the biologist will investigate criteria specified by the ACOE. Wetlands boundaries (if present) will be determined using the current accepted methodology prescribed in the ACOE 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual. All wetlands and other jurisdictional waters will be mapped on a topographic map. The Environmental Consultant will deliver a report summarizing the results of the jurisdictional delineation. The report will describe habitat present on site, the limits of biological survey and jurisdiction pursuant to ACOE and CDFG regulations and include a discussion of potential regulatory constraints and the ACOE and CDFG x.xwkei•gw�nw+a¢�',?nonW yi;nxwyn�, Buu�poxor o-. S+bneblLn�y of Sr..sw uoc Page 8 Van Dell and Asqfttes, Inc. Drive Sidewalk Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services a Dover Drive SFdewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California regulatory permitting procedures that may be required for the project. In addition, the report will include a map depicting ACOE and CDFG jurisdiction. As required by the resource agencies, the graphics will include site photographs. The Environmental Consultant will provide 4 copies of the Final delineation report to the City. Task 6.2 - Preparation of CEQA Documentation Preparation of Initial Study The Environmental Consultant will prepare the Initial Study (1S) for the proposed project. The IS will be prepared in accordance with the policies and procedures as identified by the City of Newport Beach. Preparation of Negative Declaration The City has recommended the preparation of a Negative Declaration (ND) for the proposed project. The ND will be prepared in accordance with the policies and procedures as identified by the City of Newport Beach. For the purpose of this proposal, we have assumed that a Negative Declaration will be prepared. If a Mitigated Negative Declaration is required additional compensation will be required based on additional work effort required. Environmental Consultant staff will attend up to four meetings, including the project kickoff meeting, regarding the Negative Declaration. A biologist will attend up to two meetings, including the project kickoff meeting. Task 6.3 — Permit Processing 1. Preparation of Section 404, Section 401, and 1602 Permit Applications, If Necessary If jurisdictional areas are to be affected by the proposed project, then Tasks a through d will be required. This work does not include the development of a restoration plan for the proposed project. If the resource agencies require a restoration plan (e.g., maintenance schedule, plant palette, monitoring standards, etc.) a separate scope of work and cost will be provided for that task. We will assume that all documents (base maps, as -built drawings ect.) provided by the City will be sufficient and complete in order for the resource agencies to process the application. a. Preparation of CDFG Application The Environmental Consultant will prepare and submit a notification to CDFG for a 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement. Unlike the ALOE, CDFG regulates not only the discharge of dredged or fill material, but all activities that alter streams and lakes and their associated habitat. CDFG has no abbreviated permitting process comparable to the ACOE nationwide permits. A CDFG 1602 Agreement is required for all activities resulting in impacts to streambeds and their associated riparian habitats. CDFG generally requires that any impacts to streambeds and adjacent xwwr..yu��opew.w_z�na�m�cw�. -mm n.m,�mo„xa sw.� +rauna �t:w�nw..aao Page 9 t Van Dell and Aqftiates, Inc. Proposal to Provide jtf.*��111 April 12, 2004 Design Services the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newpon Beach, California riparian habitats be fully mitigated. To ensure rapid and favorable action on a 1602 notification, a mitigation plan should be submitted with the notification package. It normally takes 90 days for the CDFG to process a 1602 notification. The Environmental Consultant will provide one copy of the final application to CDFG and one copy to the City. For projects that exceed $500,000 CDFG charges $1,390.50 to process a streambed alteration agreement. This fee is to be provided by the City. b. Preparation of ACOE Application The amount of work associated with preparing the notification to the ACOE pursuant to Section 404 depends on the magnitude of project impacts on jurisdictional waters and other resources. The proposal assumes that authorization for this project will be provided through the nationwide permit program and a pre- construction notification will not be required. If a notification to the ACOE is required, the Environmental Consultant will submit a proposal for that work. Consultant wilt provide one copy of the final application to ALOE and one copy to the City. The ACOE does not charge for the filing of their permit. C. Preparation of Written Notification for Water Qualms (401) Certification A water quality certification is required from the regional water quality control board (RWQCB) for any activity that requires a federal license or permit (such as a Section 404 permit) and may result in a discharge to jurisdictional waters. The Environmental Consultant will prepare and submit the necessary documentation to the RWQCB for its review of the project pursuant to water quality certification. The Environmental Consultant will provide one copy of the final application to Water Board and one copy to the City. The RWQCB charges for the preparation of a certification of water quality and usually costs less than $1,000.00 for small projects (although their fee schedule is currently being modified). This fee is to be provided by the City. d. Agency Coordination Agency coordination will be initiated as soon as possible after submittal of the application and throughout the permitting process. The Environmental Consultant will coordinate with the ACOE, CDFG and the RWQCB throughout their review of the applications to ensure that any potential problems are made known to the City and resolved at the earliest possible opportunity. This usually involves the coordination of a site visit with the resource agencies. One meeting is anticipated for the completion of these permits. However, the project manager wilt attend meetings, with the City as requested on a time and materials basis, based on standard billing rates. x:uwxrayw.om.,w xawvwxmw•w�n oacn�oo.�. a. smawakvsm„ �msemc.a aw Page 10 Van Dell and Ass tes, Inc. April 12, 2004 Proposal to Provide Design Services f e Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California 2. Coastal Development Permit Application and Submittal A City administered CDP will be required for the proposed project. The Environmental Consultant will complete the CDP application and submit the application, along with accompanying biological resources report(s). Task 7 — Bidding Process Assistant During the bidding process of the project VA will provide assistance to the City including answers to contractor Requests For Information (RFI) and preparing all required addenda. Task 8-- Project Management and Meetings The project will be diligently managed to ensure timely coordination with City staff, and keep the project on schedule and within budget. VA will prepare monthly progress report with updated schedule and meet and coordinate with the City as required. VA will prepare and distribute meeting agendas 24 -hours before the meeting. Draft of meeting minutes shall be ready within one week after meeting. For the purpose of the fee proposal, it is assumed that there will be four meetings with City during design stages, and one meeting with local community representatives. B.2 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM VA's Quality Assurance and Quality Control Program is implemented on engineering design and study projects to ensure that the required documents: • Conform with the contract documents; • Are neat, well organized, clear, concise, and complete; f Are technically and grammatically correct; Comply with generally accepted professional standards of engineering and applicable laws; > Are signed, dated, and stamped as required; and > Are consistent with other related plans and are constructible. All project team members, including drafters, designers, and supervisors, are involved with implementing the QA(QC program and ensuring that a quality product is produced by making every effort to do the work right the first time. w+ rRN�v } ➢rnpu.'wrC�;rv1tLL1.1ypwuryoR Boh:iillln.•+p. SJww�tSrgpu rrf $tr�vcoc uuR Page 11 .- -- Van Dell and ciates, Inc. April 29,2004W Amended Proposal to Provide Design Servic r the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California Additions to Section B.1 "Work Plan" of Proposal dated April 12, 2004 B.1 WORK PLAN Task 2 — "Sidewalk Location Design Alternatives ": • Cast estimates for each alternative are included. • Recommendations are included in the alternative analysis. Task 6.2 - "Preparation of CEOA Documentation ": • Preparation of the Notice of Completion and Notice of Determination are included. • Preparation of the list of Mitigation Measures is included if a Mitigation Negative Declaration document is required. • Attendance at one (1) meeting with Coastal Commission staff is included. • Attendance at one (1) meeting for Coastal Commission Hearing is included. Assumed that Coastal Commission Hearing is in Southern California. It attendance is required in Northern California, additional fees for travel expenses and time will be required. %w,,,.mina��,nn,Nm�, N0+U4MMFrwNi�i llussMlM�vu�lk saewwk4u:nro u�$.xvkN.+mo�WroM do Page 1 Van Deli and Associates, Inc. April 12, 2004 PROJECT SCHEDULE 2004 Proposal to Provide Design Services for the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California a TASKS hfONTN AfaY Jun I a ] a I Jul Aug I SBP OCf Nev I O¢P I f3ackground Research and Data Collection 21Sidowalk Location Design Alternatives 3;Geotechnlcal Investigation Report llUtillty Coordination ijPlan, Specification and Cost Estimate (,Environmental Study and Permit* 8ldding Process Assistant ! I ' I KIMMM 1 Project Management !and Meetings I ' i I IMI ! M I I N1 I f I M I to City Review I l t l I I I I I I l l l j i I t i j l '' I i I i ! I I I '• 1 l i 1 1 1 1 I I I l r l l h111ES70NE5r it I Legend: task arlvties c III U s a , h mee:fngs ® ci1Y revleu'S Note: Via have assumed 30 days for the CE)A Negative Declaration process and 4 10 6 weeks for the Coastal Development permitting. If unforeseen delays are encountered during the CEDA process or Coastal Development permit process. and if a CDFGt 600 agreement and/or an ACCE 404 permit are required, additional permitting time will be necessary. ♦ u✓. nKA •,y„ili:..:+'➢�a::nm'd.u�.Ca.eh fJ.- .'.CCC.6:...a .. Page 13 • Is i Van Dell and Asoates, Inc. • Proposal to Provide April 12, 2004 Design Services for the Dover Drive Sidewalk Project City of Newport Beach, California VAN DELL. AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FEE SCHEDULE City of Newport Beach Qggartment of Public of Works Dover Drive Sidewalk Project Effective January 1, 2004 Staff Classification Hourly Rate Clerical /Support Staff $ 45.00 Engineering Technical Support $ 60.00 CADD Operator /Drafter $ 86.00 Design /Survey Staff $ 95.00 Professional Staff $115.00 Senior Professional Staff $130.00 Project Manager $130.00 Principal $155.00 Two -Man Survey Crew $175.00 Three -Man Survey Crew $205.00 Notes: 1. Billing will be every four weeks. Invoices are due and payable on presentation. 2. Overtime. when requested by the client, will be surcharged at a rate of 135 1k of the standard hourly rates. Sundays and holidays will be surcharged at a rate of 170% of the standard hourly rates. xua�wn yamr+^�w_rrouwwuGrrexon u,�,m�a... a s.iowaar�n.vn+romry wonw.u« Page 29 Q,dy of Newport Bead NO. BA- 04BA -062 BUDGET AMENDMENT 2003 -04 AMOUNT: $19,638.00 EFFECT ON BUDGETARY FUND BALANCE: Increase Revenue Estimates X Increase Expenditure Appropriations AND Transfer Budget Appropriations SOURCE: from existing budget appropriations from additional estimated revenues PX from unappropriated fund balance EXPLANATION: This budget amendment is requested to provide for the following: Increase in Budgetary Fund Balance X Decrease in Budgetary Fund Balance No effect on Budgetary Fund Balance To increase expenditure appropriations for the costs associated with the Dover Drive Sidewalk Design project. ACCOUNTING ENTRY: BUDGETARY FUND BALANCE Fund Account 260 3605 REVENUE ESTIMATES (3601) Fund /Division Account EXPENDITURE APPROPRIATIONS (3603) Amount Description Debit _ Transportation & Circulation Fund Balanc $19,838.00 Description Signed: Signed: Signed: Financial Approval: Administrative Services Director 5 -.e. ZIX Administrative City Manager City Council Approval: City Clerk Credit $19,838.00 % / O Date SAP d Da e Date Description Division Number 7261 Transportation & Circulation Fund Account Number C5100712 Dover Drive Sidewalk Design Division Number Account Number Division Number Account Number Division Number Account Number Signed: Signed: Signed: Financial Approval: Administrative Services Director 5 -.e. ZIX Administrative City Manager City Council Approval: City Clerk Credit $19,838.00 % / O Date SAP d Da e Date #% My of Newport BeaC* NO. BA- 04BA -062 BUDGET AMENDMENT 2003 -04 AMOUNT: $19,838.00 EFFECT ON BUDGETARY FUND BALANCE: Increase Revenue Estimates Increase in Budgetary Fund Balance X Increase Expenditure Appropriations AND AX Decrease in Budgetary Fund Balance Transfer Budget Appropriations No effect on Budgetary Fund Balance SOURCE: from existing budget appropriations from additional estimated revenues X from unappropriated fund balance EXPLANATION: This budget amendment is requested to provide for the following: To increase expenditure appropriations for the costs associated with the Dover Drive Sidewalk Design project. ACCOUNTING ENTRY: BUDGETARY FUND BALANCE Fund Account 260 3605 REVENUE ESTIMATES (3601) Fund /Division Account EXPENDITURE APPROPRIATIONS (3603) Amount Description Debit Credit Transportation & Circulation Fund Balanc $19,838.00 Description Signed: /CA- c-KXKj1fiy A A.{A-It Financial Approval: Administrative Services Signed: /'"'"" 4 Signed: Administrative Approval' City Manager (A liii -P (ffi .. net GM G-�- 6 City Council Approval: City Clerk $19,838.00 o Date V�e Date Description Division Number 7261 Transportation & Circulation Fund Account Number C5100712 Dover Drive Sidewalk Design Division Number Account Number Division Number Account Number Division Number Account Number Signed: /CA- c-KXKj1fiy A A.{A-It Financial Approval: Administrative Services Signed: /'"'"" 4 Signed: Administrative Approval' City Manager (A liii -P (ffi .. net GM G-�- 6 City Council Approval: City Clerk $19,838.00 o Date V�e Date