Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutC-5567(A) - PSA for City Hall Complex Environmental Impact Reportr-- U AMENDMENT NO. ONE TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH RBF CONSULTING FOR CITY HALL COMPLEX ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT THIS AMENDMENT NO. ONE TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT ( "Amendment No. One ") is made and entered into as of this 21st day of March, 2014 ( "Effective Date "), by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a California municipal corporation and charter city ( "City "), and RBF CONSULTING, a California corporation ( "Consultant "), whose address is 14725 Alton Parkway, Irvine, CA 92618, and is made with reference to the following: RECITALS A. On October 9, 2013, City and Consultant entered into a Professional Services Agreement ( "Agreement ") to assess potential impacts and identify mitigation measures for the re- development of the former City Hall Complex. All work is to be prepared in accordance with the criteria, standards and provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), California CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.), the City of Newport Beach Environmental Guidelines and the regulations, requirements and procedures of any other responsible public agency with jurisdiction by law ( "Project "). B. City desires to enter into this Amendment No. One to reflect additional services not included in the Agreement and to increase the total compensation. C. City and Consultant mutually desire to amend the Agreement, as provided below. NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows: 1. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED Exhibit A to the Agreement shall be supplemented to include the Scope of Services dated March 5, 2014, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated .herein by reference ( "Services" or "Work'). Exhibit A of the Agreement and Exhibit A of Amendment No. One shall collectively be known as "Exhibit A." The City may elect to delete certain Services within the Scope of Services at its sole discretion. 2. COMPENSATION TO CONSULTANT Exhibit B to the Agreement shall be supplemented to include the Schedule of Billing Rates attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference. Exhibit B of the Agreement and Exhibit B of Amendment No. One shall collectively be known as "Exhibit B." Section 4.1 of the Agreement is amended in its entirety and replaced with the following: "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. Consultant's compensation for all Work performed in accordance with this Agreement, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, shall not exceed Two Hundred Fifteen Thousand Two Hundred Twenty Five Dollars and 00/100 ($215,225.00), without prior written authorization from City. No billing rate changes shall be made during the term of this Agreement without the prior written approval of City." The total amended compensation reflects Consultant's additional compensation for additional Services to be performed in accordance with this Amendment No. One, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, in an amount not to exceed Six Thousand Nine Hundred Twenty Five Dollars and 00/100 ($6,925.00). 3. INTEGRATED CONTRACT Except as expressly modified herein, all other provisions, terms, and covenants set forth in the Agreement shall remain unchanged and shall be. in full force and effect. [SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE] RBF Consulting, a Company of Michael Baker Corporation Page 2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Amendment No. One to be executed on the dates written below. APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CITY ATMY'S OFFICE a California municipal corporation Date: Date: N ZS \1`� By: By: Aaron C. Harp Dave City Attorney ow City Manager ATTEST: CONSULTANT: RBF Consulting„ a Date: U California coW ion Date: + '7 + By: —d Leilani I. Brown City Clerk1 P S. Robert Kallenbaugh Chief Executive Officer Date: y� �/ / 5 If B: Y ao Michael J. Burke Assistant Secretary [END OF SIGNATURES] Attachments: Exhibit A — Scope of Services Exhibit B — Schedule of Billing Rates RBF Consulting, a Company of Michael Baker Corporation Page 3 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES RBF Consulting, a Company of Michael Baker Corporation Page A -1 WORK REQUEST SUMMARY Client: Citv of Newport Beach Work Requested By: Mr. Tony Brine City Traffic Engineer Date: March 5, 2014 Project: Lido House Hotel EIR JN: Summary of Work: On February 20, 2014 RBF received direction from the City's Public Works Department to modify the cumulative projects list. The list was modified by adjusting the land uses for the Balboa Marina West Expansion and adding the Banning Ranch Project. As a result, RBF will have to modify and re -run cumulative conditions analysis in the following manner: • Add Banning Ranch to cumulative projects (requires modification of traffic analysis network) • Revise trip generation for Balboa Marina Expansion cumulative project • Re -run LOS analysis and update related text, LOS tables, and cumulative conditions exhibits • Revise the cumulative impact analysis for all other environmental areas that will be addressed in the EIR (i.e., air quality, noise, etc.). Additionally, model data plots were not provided by Urban Crossroads for four (4) of the study area intersections under General Plan Buildout Conditions. This resulted in the following out of scope work: • Develop turning movement volumes at the following intersections for "without" and "with project" conditions: • Orange SVCoast Hwy • Balboa Blvd /32nd St • Newport Blvd /Finley Ave • Newport Blvd /28u St Fee for Added Work: $6,925 Prepared By: Eddie Torres, Senior Associate Approved By: EXHIBIT B SCHEDULE OF BILLING RATES RBF Consulting, a Company of Michael Baker Corporation Page B -1 TASK A.M. 120 B.M. 235 M.E. 220 G.G. 145 Total Hours Repro * / Mailing Total Cost 1.0 Additional Work Request #1 1.1 Revisions based on new cumulative projects list 11 3 2 16 32 $4785 1.2 Development of four 4 turning movements plots 2 1 10 13 $2,140 TOTAL HOURS 11 5 3 26 45 `Percent of Total Labor Hours 24.4% 11.1% 6.7% 57.8% SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS $1,320 $1,175 $660 $3,770 $6,925 A.M. = Achilles Malisos B.M. = Bob Matson M.E. = Mike Erickson G.G. = Giancarlo Gandini 3- PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH RBF CONSULTING In FOR CITY HALL COMPLEX ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 3 THIS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT ( "Agreement ") is made and entered into as of this 9th day of October, 2013 ('Effective Date'), by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a California municipal corporation and charter city ( "City "), and RBF CONSULTING, a California corporation ( "Consultant "), whose address is 14725 Alton Parkway, Irvine, CA 92618, 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 desires to engage Consultant to assess potential impacts and identify mitigation measures for the re- development of the former City Hall Complex. All work is to be prepared in accordance with the criteria, standards and provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), California CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.), the City of Newport Beach Environmental Guidelines and the regulations, requirements and procedures of any other responsible public agency with jurisdiction by law (`Project "). C. Consultant possesses the skill, experience, ability, background, certification and knowledge to provide the professional services described in this Agreement. D. 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: The term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date, and shall terminate on December 31, 2014, unless terminated earlier as set forth herein. 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 (`Services" or "Work"). City may elect to delete certain Services within the Scope of Services at its sole discretion. 3. TIME OF PERFORMANCE 3.1 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. In the absence of a specific schedule, the Services shall be performed to completion in a diligent and timely manner. The failure by Consultant to strictly adhere to the schedule set forth in Exhibit A, if any, or perform the Services in a diligent and timely manner may result in termination of this Agreement by City. 3.2 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 within two (2) calendar days of the occurrence causing the delay to the other party so that all delays can be addressed. 3.3 Consultant shall submit all requests for extensions of time for performance in writing to the Project Administrator as defined herein 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. 3.4 For all time periods not specifically set forth herein, Consultant shall respond in the most expedient and appropriate manner under the circumstances, by hand-delivery or mail. 4. COMPENSATION TO CONSULTANT 4.1 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. Consultant's compensation for all Work performed in accordance With this Agreement, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, shall not exceed Two Hundred Eight Thousand Three Hundred Dollars and 00/100 ($208,300.00), without prior written authorization from City. No billing rate changes shall be made during the term of this Agreement without the prior written approval of City. 4.2 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 reimbursable expenditures. City shall pay Consultant no later than thirty (30) calendar days after approval of the monthly invoice by City staff, 4.3 City shall reimburse Consultant only for those costs or expenses specifically identified in Exhibit B to this Agreement or specifically approved in writing in advance by City. RBF Consulting Page 2 4.4 Consultant shall not receive any compensation for Extra Work performed 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 5.1 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 Eddie Torres, INCE 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. 5.2 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. 5.3 If Consultant is performing inspection services for City, the Project Manager and any other assigned staff shall be equipped with a cellular phone to communicate with City staff. The Project Managers cellular phone number shall be provided to City. 6. ADMINISTRATION This Agreement will be administered by the Community Development Department. City's Principal Planner or designee shall be the Project Administrator and shall have the authority to act for City under this Agreement. The Project Administrator shall represent City in all matters pertaining to the Services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement. 7. CITY'S RESPONSIBILITIES To assist Consultant in the execution of its responsibilities under this Agreement, City agrees to 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. 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 RBF Consulting Page 3 perform all Services in a manner commensurate with the highest professional standards. For purposes of this Agreement, the phrase "highest professional standards" shall mean those standards of practice recognized by one (1) or more first- class firms performing similar work under similar circumstances. 8.2 All Services shall be performed by qualified and experienced personnel who are not employed by City. By delivery of completed Work, Consultant certifies that the Work conforms to the requirements of this Agreement, all applicable federal, state and local laws, and the highest professional standard. 8.3 Consultant represents and warrants to City that it has, shall obtain, and shall keep in full force and effect during the term hereof, at its sole cost and expense, all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatsoever nature that is legally required of Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant shall maintain a City of Newport Beach business license during the term of this Agreement. 8.4 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, 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, 9. HOLD HARMLESS 9.1 To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, volunteers 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, attorneys' 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 breach of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, any Work performed or Services provided under this Agreement including, without limitation, defects in workmanship or materials or Consultant's presence or activities conducted on the Project (including the negligent, reckless, 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). 9.2 Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing herein shall be construed to require Consultant to indemnify the Indemnified Parties from any Claim arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties. Nothing in this indemnity shall be construed as authorizing any award of attorneys' 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 RBF Consulting Page 4 limits do not act as a limitation upon the amount of indemnification to be provided by Consultant. 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. No civil service status or other right of employment shall accrue to Consultant or its employees. 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 of the Work 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. 11 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 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 or for other periods as specified in this Agreement, policies of insurance of the type, amounts, terms and conditions described in the insurance Requirements attached hereto as Exhibit C, and incorporated herein by reference. RBF Consulting Page 5 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 co- tenancy, 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 The subcontractors authorized by City, if any, to perform Work on this Project are identified in Exhibit A. Consultant shall be fully responsible to City for all acts and omissions of any subcontractor. Nothing in this Agreement shall create any contractual relationship between City and any 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. City is an intended beneficiary of any Work performed by the subcontractor for purposes of establishing a duty of care between the subcontractor and City. 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 17.1 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 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. 17.2 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. RBF Consulting Page 6 17.3 All written documents shall be transmitted to City in formats compatible with Microsoft Office and /or viewable with Adobe Acrobat. 18. 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 expressly authorizes in writing the release of information. 19. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY INDEMNITY Consultant shall defend and indemnify City, its agents, officers, representatives and employees against any and all liability, including costs, for infringement or alleged infringement of any United States' letters patent, trademark, or copyright, including costs, contained in Consultant's Documents provided under this Agreement. 20. RECORDS Consultant shall keep records and invoices in connection with the Services 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. 21. 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 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. 22. 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 restoration expense shall be RBF Consulting Page 7 borne by Consultant. Nothing in this Section is intended to limit City's rights under the law or any other sections of this Agreement. 23. CITY'S RIGHT TO EMPLOY OTHER CONSULTANTS City reserves the right to employ other Consultants in connection with the Project. 24. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST 24.1 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. 241 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. 25. NOTICES 25.1 All notices, demands, requests or approvals, including any change in mailing address, to be given under the terms of this Agreement shall be given in writing, 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. 25.2 All notices, demands, requests or approvals from Consultant to City shall be addressed to City at: Attn: James Campbell, Principal Planner Community Development Department City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive PO Box 1788 Newport Beach, CA 92858 25.3 All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Consultant shall be addressed to Consultant at: Attn: Eddie Torres, INCE, Senior Associate RBF Consulting 14725 Alton Parkway Irvine, CA 92818 RBF Consulting Page 8 26. CLAIMS Unless a shorter time is specified elsewhere in this Agreement, before making its final request for payment under this Agreement, Consultant shall submit to City, in writing, all claims for compensation under or arising out of this Agreement. Consultant's acceptance of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims for compensation under or arising out of this Agreement except those previously made in writing and identified by Consultant in writing as unsettled at the time of its final request for payment. Consultant and City expressly agree that in addition to any claims filing requirements set forth in the Agreement, Consultant shall be required to file any claim Consultant may have against City in strict conformance with the Government Claims Act (Government Code sections 900 et seq.). 27. TERMINATION 27.1 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, and thereafter diligently take steps to cure the default, the non-defaulting party may terminate the Agreement forthwith by giving to the defaulting party written notice thereof. 27.2 Notwithstanding the above provisions, City shall have the right, at its sole and absolute discretion and without cause, of terminating this Agreement at any time by giving no less than 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. 28, STANDARD PROVISIONS 28.1 Recitals. City and Consultant acknowledge that the above Recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference into this Agreement. 28.2 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, RBF Consulting Page 9 28.3 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. 28.4 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. 28.5 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. 28.6 Interpretation. The terms of this Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the meaning of the language used and shall not be construed for or against either party by reason of the authorship of the Agreement or any other rule of construction which might otherwise apply. 28.7 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. 28.8 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. 28.9 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, State of California. 28.10 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, age or any other impermissible basis under law. 28.11 No Attorneys' Fees. In the event of any dispute or legal action arising under this Agreement, the prevailing party shall not be entitled to attorneys' fees, 28.12 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which together shall constitute one (1) and the same instrument. [SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE] RBF Consulting Page 10 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed on the dates written below. APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Date: l l it 1113 Jj Aaron Harp City Attorney ATTEST: Date: (O-c� , i3 Fil City Clerk ►a U "faRr4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a California municipal corporation Date: By: Keith D. Curry Mayor CONSULTANT: RBF Consulting, a California coora ion Date: 167, ! 3 By: --��-1�v� S. Robert Kallenbaugh Chief Executive Officer Date: \011.\ (n By: Michael J. Burke Assistant Secretary [END OF SIGNATURES] Attachments: Exhibit A — Scope of Services Exhibit B — Schedule of Billing Rates Exhibit C — Insurance Requirements RBF Consulting Page 11 M RBF Consulting Page A -1 RBF Consulting has submitted this Proposal to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to assess potential impacts and identify mitigation measures forthe Redevelopment of the Former City Hall Complex in the City of Newport Beach. The Draft EIR, Final EIR, and associated work products will be prepared in accordance with the criteria, standards and provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources Code Section 21000 at seq.), California CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 at seq.), the City of Newport Beach Environmental Guidelines, and the regulations requirements and procedures of any other responsible Public Agency with jurisdiction by law. RBF will, throughout the document, and where appropriate, relate the proposed Project to the general trends in Newport Beach and the surrounding area. Each of the issues studied in the EIR will be approached thoroughly in order to fully assess all potential impacts, establish thresholds of significance, and identify mitigation measures. RBF is the lead firm for this work program and will provide services from our Corporate Headquarters in Irvine. The following affirms RBF's commitment to the City of Newport Beach and the proposed work program: 1. The proposed services to be provided by the RBF Consulting team involve the preparation of environmental compliance documentation, pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, for the Redevelopment of the Former City Hall Complex in Newport Beach; California. 2. RBF Consulting is focused on a comprehensive and complete review process. The RBF team will provide services, pursuant to the goals set forth by the City, and as detailed in this proposal. 3. RBF Consulting will thoroughly address each environmental issue area and will recommend the appropriate analysis methodology for the project. RBF Consulting holds as the top priority, the integrity of documentation and processing, focusing on legal defensibility and full compliance with CEQA. 4. All aspects of RBF Consulting's proposal, including costs, have been determined independently, without consultation with any other prospective Consultant or competitors for the purpose of restricting competition. 5. The RBF Consulting team agrees to provide the City of Newport Beach with any other information that the City determines to be necessary for an accurate determination of the Consultant's ability to perform services as proposed. 6. If RBF Consulting is selected for this and all other assignments with the City, RBF Consulting will comply with all applicable rules, laws and regulations. 7. RBF has a dedicated team whom maintains the in -house Library /Filing Management System. All project related files are categorized and independently filed to preserve the integrity of the Administrative Record. Documentation of all project transactions are kept in a central file readily accessible to project team members. Any public records act or Administrative Record requests are coordinated with the Lead Agency, and implemented per applicable laws and regulations. JN 132203 e 1 • September 26, 2013 + The City of Newport Beach is seeking a consultant to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the redevelopment of the former City Hall complex, The 4.27 acre site is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Newport Boulevard and 32 "d Street on the Balboa Peninsula in the Lido Village area. The property is currently occupied by the Newport Beach City Hall Complex, which supports 53,971 square feet, including 44,018 gross square feet of administrationloffice floor area within the City Hall Office Complex and 9,953 gross floor area comprising the existing Newport Beach Fire Department Fire Station No. 2. The City relocated City Hall staff from the site to the new Civic Center located in Newport Center in May of 2013. Fire Station No. 2 remains staffed and in operation. The City plans to lease the majority of the site for the development of the 130 room Lido House Hotel (140 modulest130 keys). The proposed hotel would also include meeting rooms, accessory retail spaces, a restaurant, lobby bar, rooftop bar, guest pool and recreational areas, and all required appurtenant facilities including, but not limited to on -site parking, landscaping, utilities, and adjoining public improvements. The hotel would be no larger than 99,675 gross square feet. The proposal also includes public open spaces consisting of pedestrian plazas, landscape areas, and other amenities proposed to be located along Newport Boulevard and 32"d Street, The City is considering relocating the existing, angled, metered parking on the north side of 32nd just south of the old Council Chambers further to the eastto be in front of St. James Church, which is located just west of Lafayette. Currently, there is extra lane capacity in 32"d just west of Lafayette that would be reduced to accommodate angled parking along the north side of 32 "1 Street in frontof the church. This would also pull the curb line along the project site south and 32nd Street would be restriped with the intent to modestly "straighten" out the westbound traffic lane to improve vehicle maneuvering. The project includes the following discretionary actions: 1. General Plan Amendment (GPA) - The amendment includes a text and map change to replace the existing Public Facilities (PF) designation for the site with a new mixed -use land use category (MU -H5) and establish density and intensity limits within Table LU -2 of the Land Use Element by establishing a new anomaly location. 2., Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment (CLUP) - The amendment includes a text and map change to replace the existing Public Facilities (PF) designation for the site with a new mixed -use land use category (MU) and establish density and intensity limits within Table 2.1.1 -1. The proposed amendment also includes a change to Policy 4.4.2 -1 to establish a policy basis for higher height limits. 3. Zoning Code Amendment - The amendment includes a text and map change to replace the existing Public Facilities (PF) zoning designation for the site with a new zone MU -LV (Mixed - Use -Lido Village) and establish density and intensity limits consistent with the proposed General Plan amendment. Development standards and allowed uses would also be established. 4. Site Development Review or Planned Development Permit - Either application process is authorized by the Zoning Code for the redevelopment of the site with the proposed Lido House Hotel. Redevelopment of the site includes the demolition of all on -site structures with the exception of Fire Station No. 2 and its appurtenant facilities. The project will include the JN 132203 -2- September 26, 2013 City of Newport Beach H ' ' Proposal for the Redevelopment of the Former City Mall Complex Environmental Impact Report CAL R�lg provision of necessary utility connections to serve the proposed project. Public improvements consisting of modifying existing street improvements within abutting rights of way are also included. The project applicant will provide detailed plans including a site plan, floor plans, and elevation plans. 5. Parcel Map - The project includes the processing of a parcel map to resubdivide the existing lots creating 2 or more lots (one for the proposed hotel and one for the existing fire station) and to dedicate existing area within Newport Boulevard and 32"' Street for roadway purposes. The initiation of the CEQA process will involve a detailed scoping process including a review of Issues, constraints and project opportunities. RBF, working closely and in collaboration with City Staff, will embark on an agency consultation process, which will include a public scoping session, which will provide an opportunity to obtain a better understanding of key environmental concerns of concerned agencies and the community, as well as informing the public as to the purpose of the CEQA review and determination process. The Initial Study will be circulated with the Notice of Preparation for a 30 -day review. Comments received during the review period will be evaluated as part of preparation of the Draft EIR, The Draft EIR will include the Introduction and Purpose, Executive Summary and Project Description, The Environmental Analysis section wilI evaluate the necessary information with respect to the existing conditions, the potential adverse effects of Project construction and implementation (both individual and cumulative), and measures to mitigate such effects. Environmental issues raised during the scoping process (Notice of Preparation responses; Public Scoping mailing; and any other relevant and valid informative sources) will also be evaluated. The environmental analysis section of the EIR will thoroughly discuss the existing conditions for each environmental issue area; identify short-term and long -term environmental impacts associated with the project and their levels of significance. Feasible mitigation measures will be recommended to reduce the significance of impacts and identify areas of unavoidable significant adverse impacts even after mitigation. The environmental documentation will assist in identifying constraints, modifications and improvements which may be incorporated into the land planning process. The RBF Team will be viewed as an integral component in the project review and will participate in meetings with staff and public hearings, as required by the City. The RBF Team will have the responsibility of leading the public participation program for the environmental review, including the Public Scoping meeting, Draft EIR public review meeting, and throughout the public hearing process for certification of the EIR. The RBF Team will assist decision makers and the public in understanding the analysis, conclusions of the EIR review and guide the CEQA review process. RBF has served in this role with a countless number of agencies and with a wide range of projects of great interest to communities. RBF will complete the environmental review process, respond to all comments received during the Draft EIR public review period, prepare the mitigation monitoring program and draft the necessary Findings and possible Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to Sections 15091 and 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines. The environmental review process will result in the presentation of pertinent information associated with Project impacts and findings to the City decision makers for determination and CEQA certification. A 132203 • 3 - September 26, 2013 �s�tygwhat; t"� �� City of Newport Brach ,� � s � Proposal fnr the Redevelopment of the Former City Hali Comptex Environmental tmFact Report n� r •,irrnss*'� 1.0 PROJECT 1.1 PROJECT iC - >F AND PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS The EIR work program will be initiated with a kick -off meeting with City Staff to discuss the project in greater detail. This initial meeting is vital to the success of the CEQA process and will be a key milestone in order to confirm the parameters of the analysis, the details of construction proposed buildout conditions, scheduling and overall communications. Priorto the kick -off, RBF will distribute a kick -off meeting agenda and detailed memorandum, which will identify information needs. Based upon the detailed project information obtained at the project kick -off meeting, RBF will draft a preliminary project description for review and approval by City Staff. 1.2 RESEARCH AND INVESTIGATION RBF will obtain and review available referenced data for the project area, including policy documentation from the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State and Federal agencies, the Southern California Association of Governments and all other agencies which may be affected by the Project. This information, along with environmental data and information available from the City and other nearby jurisdictions, will become part of the foundation of the EIR and will be reviewed and incorporated into the analysis, as deemed appropriate. This task includes a visit to the project area, which will include a detailed photographic recording of on- and off -site conditions. 1.3 AGENCY CONSULTATION As indicated in Section 15083 of the CEQA Guidelines, many public agencies have found thatearly consultation solves many potential conflicts that could arise in more serious forms later in the review process. Although the Notice of Preparation and Public Scoping Meeting will provide that opportunity, RBF will conduct additional discussions with local, state and federal agencies which will assist in the early stages of the analysis and issue delineation. This scoping can be an effective way to bring together and resolve the concerns of affected Federal, State and local agencies as well as the local community. t. � «, «; a:tid�lxiyTilifi7`a`! RBF will prepare, distribute and file the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the EiR. A Draft NOP will be prepared and forwarded to City Staff for review and comment. RBF will then finalize the NOP for distribution. The distribution will be based on a City- approved distribution list to be provided by City staff. Comments received in response to the NOP will be evaluated during the preparation of the EIR. A public scoping meeting, which can also involve Federal, State or other local agencies, will be scheduled during the NOP public review period, in order that the community can gain an understanding of the proposed project and provide comments on environmental concerns. The Scoping Meeting will orient the community on the CEQA review process and will be presented in a manner which the community can gain a greater understanding of the proposal, intent of CEQA and the key issue areas to be addressed in the EIR. RBF will provide a PowerPoint presentation, handouts and presentation -size graphics to supplement the discussion. Fallowing the presentation, JN 132203 -4- September 26, 2013 the meeting will be devoted to public participation, questions and comments. Written comment forms will be provided far this purpose, and these comments, along with oral comments, will become a part of the administrative record. 2.0 PREPARATION I T TI FT EIR 2.1 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE The Introduction will cite the provisions of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Newport Beach CEQA Implementation procedures forwhich the proposed project is subject. This section will identify the purpose of the study and statutory authority as well document scoping procedures, summary of the EIR format, listing of responsible and trustee agencies and documentation incorporated by reference. 2.2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Executive Summary will include a Project Summary, an overview of project impacts, mitigation and levels of significance after mitigation, summary of project alternatives and areas of controversy and issues to be resolved. The Environmental Summary will be presented in a columnar format. 2.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project Description section of this EIRwill detail the project location, background and history of the project, discretionary actions, characteristics (addressed in Task 1.1), goals and objectives, construction program, phasing, agreements, and required permits and approvals that are required based on available information. This section will include a summary of the Project's local environmental setting forthe project. Exhibits depicting the regional and site vicinitywill be included in this section. This section will provide a comprehensive description of thresholds of significance for each issue area of the environmental analysis. The significance threshold criteria will be described and will provide the basis for conclusions of significance. Primary sources to be used in identifying the criteria include the CEQA Guidelines, local, State, Federal or other standards applicable to an impact category. r ^* In accordance with Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines, the EIR will include a section providing a detailed listing of cumulative projects and actions under consideration for the analysis. The likelihood of occurrence and level of severity will be studied. The purpose of the section is to present a listing and description of projects, past, present and anticipated in the reasonably foreseeable future, even if those projects are outside of Newport Beach's jurisdiction, The potential for impact and levels of significance are contingent upon the radius or area of interaction with the project area. RBF will consult with City staff and other applicable local jurisdictions to define the appropriate study area for the cumulative analysis. The cumulative analysis for each topical area will be incorporated throughout the analyses in Section 2.6. JN 132203 .5. September 26, 2013 City of Newport Beach y Proposal for the Redevelopment of the Former city Hall Complex Environmental Impact Report pAN�* the meeting will be devoted to public participation, questions and comments. Written comment forms will be provided far this purpose, and these comments, along with oral comments, will become a part of the administrative record. 2.0 PREPARATION I T TI FT EIR 2.1 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE The Introduction will cite the provisions of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Newport Beach CEQA Implementation procedures forwhich the proposed project is subject. This section will identify the purpose of the study and statutory authority as well document scoping procedures, summary of the EIR format, listing of responsible and trustee agencies and documentation incorporated by reference. 2.2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Executive Summary will include a Project Summary, an overview of project impacts, mitigation and levels of significance after mitigation, summary of project alternatives and areas of controversy and issues to be resolved. The Environmental Summary will be presented in a columnar format. 2.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project Description section of this EIRwill detail the project location, background and history of the project, discretionary actions, characteristics (addressed in Task 1.1), goals and objectives, construction program, phasing, agreements, and required permits and approvals that are required based on available information. This section will include a summary of the Project's local environmental setting forthe project. Exhibits depicting the regional and site vicinitywill be included in this section. This section will provide a comprehensive description of thresholds of significance for each issue area of the environmental analysis. The significance threshold criteria will be described and will provide the basis for conclusions of significance. Primary sources to be used in identifying the criteria include the CEQA Guidelines, local, State, Federal or other standards applicable to an impact category. r ^* In accordance with Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines, the EIR will include a section providing a detailed listing of cumulative projects and actions under consideration for the analysis. The likelihood of occurrence and level of severity will be studied. The purpose of the section is to present a listing and description of projects, past, present and anticipated in the reasonably foreseeable future, even if those projects are outside of Newport Beach's jurisdiction, The potential for impact and levels of significance are contingent upon the radius or area of interaction with the project area. RBF will consult with City staff and other applicable local jurisdictions to define the appropriate study area for the cumulative analysis. The cumulative analysis for each topical area will be incorporated throughout the analyses in Section 2.6. JN 132203 .5. September 26, 2013 ,�y;4iP,lR �� �� City of Nmwport Beach ' Proposal far the F:mdmvelapment of thm Farmer City Hall Complex `� a Enviranmentat Impac# Report .S ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS RBF will evaluate the necessary information with respect to the existing conditions, the potential adverse effects of Project implementation (both individual and cumulative), and measures to mitigate such effects. Environmental issues raised during the scoping process (Notice of Preparation responses, Public Scoping Meeting, and any other relevant and valid informative sources) will also be evaluated, The analyses will be based upon all available data, results from additional research, and an assessment of existing technical data. These analyses will be performed by qualified Environmental Analysts, CEQA experts and Planners at RBF. The Environmental Analysis section of the EIR will thoroughly discuss the existing conditions for each environmental issue area, identify short -term construction and long -term operational impacts associated with the project and their levels of significance. The impact analysis will be in a consistent order of environmental factors as Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines (Aesthetics, Agricultural, Air Quality, etc.). For each Environmental Factor Analysis Section, the Impacts Subsection will begin with a list of all issues contained in the Initial Study. The thresholds for significance shall be identified for every environmental issue. A brief discussion will be provided for all environmental issues determined to be No impact or Less Than Significant impact in the Initial Study, explaining why these determinations were made and that no further analysis in the EIR is warranted. The Impact Subsection will provide a detailed analysis of each issue determined to be Less Than Significant With Mitigation incorporated or Potentially Significant Impact in the same order as these issues are provided in the Initial Study. For each environmental issue requiring EIR analysis, the EIR will state the level of significance as determined in the Initial Study, and then provide the analysis discussion, mitigation measures specific to this environmental issue, and level of significance after mitigation for that environmental issue. This section will include analysis for the following environmental issue areas: A. Aesthetics and ShadelShadow Existing Conditions. This section will characterize the existing aesthetic environment and visual resources for the site, including a discussion of views within the site and views from surrounding areas. A visual inventory of the project area will be conducted in order to verify the visual character and viewshed. Color site photographs will be provided to illustrate on -site and surrounding views. Construction - Related Impacts. Short -term demolition and construction impacts will be studied within the EIR. Potential impacts to sensitive uses as a result of staging areas and visible earthwork activities will be addressed. Construction related haul trucks and activities will also be analyzed. Scenic View&Vistas Analysis. RBF will analyze the potential visual impacts to scenic views/vistas in the project's viewshed, including those views from Sunset View Park, Cliff Drive Park, and Ensign View Park, Particularly, impacts to designated visual resources as well as view blockage as a result of the project's proposed height increases will be considered. Character/Quality Analysis. The analysis will consider the potential for the modification of the surrounding character /quality. The compatibility of the proposed land uses, building heights and possible building materials, as compared to the surrounding area, will be studied. This section will include an analysis of the City's existing policies, including the consideration of project design and appearance of structures comply with all applicable development and design standards /guidelines, and minimize potential adverse effects pertaining to aesthetic impact on the community and JN 132203 .6. September 26, 2013 c �, N Y Y ;t, n City of Newport Beach Proposal for the Redevelopment of the Former City Hall Complex Environmental Impact Report surrounding uses. Specific considerations for the project's consistencywith the Lido Village Design Guidelines will be included. Photosimulations. RBF proposes up to three photosimulations to determine the project's impacts on scenic vistas /views from Sunset View Park, Cliff Drive Park, and Ensign View Park. RBF will provide the City with the preliminary photographs, atwhich time the City will comment and approve up to three Key View photographs, which will then be simulated for the project. The simulated model will be masked onto the selected photographs. All modeled objects will be colored and textured utilizing advanced mapping techniques such as decals, transparency, and reflective maps. All available resources will be used to create a depiction of the subject that is as close to photorealism as possible. Shade /Shadow Diagrams. Shade and shadow issues pertain to the blockage of direct sunlight by on -site buildings (which affect adjacent properties). Shading is an Important environmental issue because the users or occupants of certain land uses, such as residential, recreational, churches, schools, outdoor restaurants, and pedestrian areas have expectations for direct sunlight and warmth from the sun. These land uses are termed "shadow- sensitive." Due to the potential impact of shading onto shadow - sensitive areas adjacent to the project site, RBF will perform a shade and shadow analysis in order to analyze the shadow related impacts of the proposed project. Based upon the Project Description, RBF will develop a massing model from electronic plans and elevations (if available) provided by the City and prepare shade and shadow drawings for time intervals throughout the day on the summer /winter solstices and vemal /autumnal equinoxes. The analysis will reflect both existing and project buildout conditions. RBF will create a 3D model of the existing and proposed structures based on drawings and elevations provided by the client. Note that this analysis considers shadow effects associated with proposed building massing only; the shadow patterns associated with proposed landscaping are not addressed. RBF will provide a description of the existing shade /shadow conditions at the site and surrounding area (as a result of the existing on -site building). The impact threshold of shading onto 50 percent of a shadow - sensitive use or area for at least 50 percent of the time between 9:00 a,m. and 3:00 p.m. Pacific Standard Time (PST) (between late October and early April) or between 9:00 a.m, and 5:00 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time (PDT) (between early April and Late October) will be used. A description of the summer and winter solstice and vernal and autumnal equinox will be provided in the Shade /Shadow Study. RBF will prepare a written analysis of the shade and shadow affects, along with supporting graphics addressing potentially significant impacts generated by the proposed project on the surrounding area. This analysis will include a review of any existing City policies and guidelines regarding shade and shadow impacts. Light and Glare Analysis. RBF will address the potential for significant impacts to be generated by the introduction of light and glare associated with the development of the project. RBF will review and incorporate existing City policies and guidelines (including the Lido Village Design Guidelines) regarding light and glare for inclusion within the EIR. Existing ConditionslReaulatory Framework, The project is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Baseline meteorological and air quality data developed through the California Air Resources Board (GARB) will be utilized forthe description of existing ambient airquaiily. Air quality JN 132203 -7- September 26, 2013 City of Newport beach Proposal for the Redevelopment of the Former City Hall Complex r Esvlronmental Impact Report data from the nearest air quality monitoring station (located in the City of Costa Mesa) will be included to help highlight existing air quality local to the project area. The analysis will also describe and address the requirements set forth by the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook. Construction - Related Emissions. Based on data provided by the project applicant, emissions generated during demolition, earthwork, paving, and building activities will be quantified. A general description of the major phases of construction and their timing will be required. The air pollutant emissions during construction will be compared to the SCAQMD Regional Thresholds of Significance. RBF will also qualitatively discuss naturally occurring asbestos impacts. Long -Term Emissions. RBF will quantify operational (Le,, area and mobile source) emissions and provide a comparison to the SCAQMD regional thresholds of significance, The emissions will be quantitatively derived utilizing the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod). Primary sources of emissions will be related to area sources and localfregional vehicle miles traveled. Project consistency with the 2012 Air Quality Management Plan will be evaluated. Localized Emissions. The project is located within the SCAQMD's Source ReceptorArea 20 (Central Orange County Coastal). Based on localized meteorological data for SRA 20, RBF will analyze localized impacts based upon the SCAQMD's Localized Significance Thresholds (LST) methodology. 310000Y1 Literature Review. RBF will review all technical reports previously prepared for the project, and any data for the site to determine which sensitive resources are likely to occur onsite or within the general area. In addition a detailed review of the Central and Coastal Orange County Natural Community Conservation Plan will be conducted for its implications of the proposed project. A database search of the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) and California Native Plant Society (CNPS) listings regarding sensitive biological resouces known to occur in the region and vicinity of the site will be conducted. Additional information sources will be consulted including the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and histoncicurrent aerial photographs as appropriate to define the habitat requirements for sensitive species potentially occurring onsite. This will allow RBF to focus its field visit on those sensitive biological resources present or likelyto be present on the site. HabitatAssessmentlEield Survey. The site will be systematically surveyed to verifyexisfing conditions of the project site and its ability to support any listed species or habitat type. Particular attention will be given to the suitability of the vegetation on and surrounding the proposed project site for its ability to provide suitable avian nesting opportunities. In addition, the six "special trees" that were identified by a City arbodst in a recent report (Special Trees — City Hall Complex, dated November 16, 2012) will be documented using a handheld GPS to verify their locations on the proposed project. Notes will be taken on all flora and fauna species observed. This survey will provide an understanding of the overall project setting and biological resources occurring with the area. The habitat assessmentwill not includefocused surveys or formal jurisdictional delineations. The impact analysis will be prepared using the results from the habitat assessment and will document all wildlife and habitats occurring on the project site, the potential to support any listed species, and whether the site supports potential jurisdictional features. The analysis will include a detailed map of the plant communities occurring onsite and their respective acreages. The analysis Will also address the mitigation measures previously identified by the City to mitigate the potential loss of the six "special trees.` JN 132203 -8- September 26, 2013 City of Newport Beach Proposal forth e Redevelopment of the Former City Hall Complex Envfronmental Impact Report l9» Cultural and Historic Resources The analysis will cite the provisions of CEQA Guidelines 15064.5 (Historical and Archaeological Resources). No known sites of cultural significance are known to exist at the site and SB18 consultation has previously been conducted by the City, However, should the City choose to complete the consultation again due to the passage of time, this scope assumes that the City would be responsible for the effort. The results of consultation effort will summarize the analysis by RBF. This analysis will also include a search of Native American Heritage Commission files. E. Geology and Sells This scope of work assumes that geotechnical documentation has been prepared by the Project Applicant and provided for use within the environmental study. To assist in ensuring a comprehensive and defensible review of impacts related to geology and soils, a technical peer review will be conducted. The peer review would consist of the following: • A review of relevant geologiclsoiis data, color aerial photographs, as well as contacting the City and County Emergency Management Agency to request records of any relevant geotechnical reports; • A technical peer review of the Applicant- prepared geotechnical report for the projectfor the purpose of assessing the adequacy of the consultant's evaluation of site - specific geologic hazards and potentially significant geotechnical constraints, and mitigation measures associated with the proposed development; and • A review of the most recent proposed grading plan. This effort would include two rounds of peer review, involving an initial letter report that would address the adequacy of the geotechnical consultant's report in terms of characterization of geotechnical/geologic hazards and constraints, and associated mitigation recommendations. The second round of the review would involve an assessment of the adequacy of their responses to initial peer review comments. No assessment of soil or groundwater contamination is included for this review. The finalized geotechnical report would be utilized by RBF to support the conclusions within the EIR. The impact section will provide a description of existing conditions; potential project impacts and hazards, and applicable mitigation measures, if necessary, F. Greenhouse Gas Analysis /Climate Change RBF will also prepare an inventory of the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (i.e., nitrous oxide, methane, and carbon dioxide) from both direct and indirect sources. The emissions inventory will be quantified with the CalEEMod model. The analysis will determine the project's impact by determining if it is consistent with the Assembly Bill 32 mandate of reducing GHG's beyond "Business as Usual" conditions. The GHG reduction associated with the project's design features will be quantified utilizing the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) methodology (Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures — A Resource for Local Government to Assess Emission Reductions from Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures. As the projectwould create a renewable energysource, RBFwill also quantifythe GHG emissions that the proposed solar facility would offset from traditional fossil fuel power plants. JN 132203 • 9 0 September 26, 2013 � w n ' �"btlll>BTTV City of Newport Beach Proposal for the Redevelopment of the Former City Hall Complex Environmental Impact Report RBF will also analyze the energy implications of the project pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21100(b)(3) and Appendix F ofthe CEQA Guidelines. These statutes and guidelines require an EIR to describe, where relevant, the wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy caused by a project. The analysis will analyze energy consumption associated with short - term construction activities, long -term operations, buildings, and transportation. RBF will conduct a peer review and prepare a summary technical memorandum on the existing Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) (provided by the City) that has been prepared forthe former City Hall Complex, located at 3300 Newport Boulevard, within the City of Newport Beach (herein referenced as the "project site "). The project site is approximately 4.27 acres. Based on the documentation provided in the Phase I ESA, RBF will discuss the findings, opinions, and conclusions made in the Phase I ESA. This Task does not include an RBF site inspection, interviews, review of public records, or completion of other ASTM Standard Practice E 1527 -05 areas that may or may not be present in the ESA document during the peer review_ RBF will utilize the above referenced research to analyze potential project - related impacts, as they pertain to hazardous materials per the CEQA thresholds outlined above. Should a potentially significant impact arise, RBF will recommend mitigation measures to reduce these impacts to the extent feasible. This scope of work assumes that a hydrology /water quality study will be prepared for prepared by the Project Applicant by Fuscoe engineering. To assist in ensuring a comprehensive and defensible review of impacts related to hydrology /water quality, a technical peer review will be conducted. The peer review would consist of the following: Hydrology Study Review. RBF's stormwater department will perform a peer review of the applicant's hydrology study for the approximately 4.3 acre Former City Hall in Newport Beach, Orange County, CA. RBF will review the report to ensure that it contains a review of existing documentation, watershed boundary delineation, existing conditions analysis, analysis of proposed hydrology, analysis of existing drainage facilities, potential impacts to existing drainage systems and floodplain impacts. Water Quality Management Plan Review. RBF's stormwater department will perform a peer review of the applicant's Water Quality Management Plan (W QMP). RBF will review the plan to ensure that it complies with the latest M34 permit for North Orange County. The review will include evaluation of the completeness of the discussion of 303(d) list pollutants and any associated TMDL. requirements, Hydrologic Conditions of Concern (HCOC) requirements, appropriate sizing and locating of Best Management Practices and review of proposed Low Impact Development (LID) strategies. RBF will summarize the findings of the analysis and will summarize existing infrastructure, existing flowrates, possible impacts of development, and potential mitigation requirements. The analysis will be conducted at a planning level to determine impacts and propose mitigation measures, if necessary. JN 132203 .10. September 2S, 2013 F � w�r�kT � n dry , U 3/ +xis: City of Newport Beach Proposal for the Redevelopment of the Former City Hall Complex Environmental Impact Report The project involves a General Plan Amendment which would include a text and map change to replace the existing Public Facilities (PF) designation for the site with a new mixed -use land use category (MU -H5) and establish density and intensity limits within Table LU -2 of the Land Use Element by establishing a new anomaly location. A Zoning Code Amendment would also include a text and map change to replace the existing Public Facilities (PF) zoning designation forthe site with a new zone MU -LV (Mixed - Use -Lido Village) and establish density and intensity limits consistent with the proposed General Plan amendment. The consistency review will focus on General Plan policies and the standards /provisions set forth in the City's Zoning Code. This portion of the review will include any proposed modification to development and design standards. The interface of the project with nearby uses will be studied. Development standards and allowed uses would also be established. The impact analysis will also address the proposed Site Development Review or Planned Development Permit and the Parcel Map, The Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment would include a text and map change to replace the existing Public Facilities (PF) designation for the site with a new mixed -use land use category (MU) and establish density and intensity limits within Table 2.1,1 -1. The proposed amendment also includes a change to Policy 4.4.2 -1 to establish a policy basis for higher height limits. The project is anticipated to be subject to compliance with the Coastal Act Section 30600(c), which requires that a coastal development permit be obtained from the California Coastal Commission. RBF will conduct a consistency review with Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act. In addition; the regional planning review will include consistency with the SCAG Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide policies. J. Noise Existing C:onditionslReoufatory Framework. RBF will review applicable noise and land use compatibility criteria for the project area. Noise standards regulating noise impacts will be discussed for land uses on and adjacent to the project site. RBF will conduct a site visit throughout the project site. During the site visit, RBF will conduct short -term noise level measurements along the project area. The noise monitoring survey will be conducted at up to three separate locations to establish baseline noise levels in the project area. Noise recording lengths are anticipated to require approximately 15 minutes at each location. This scope excludes 24 -hour noise measurements. Construction - Related Noise and Vibration. Construction would occur during implementation of the proposed project. Noise impacts from construction sources will be analyzed based on the anticipated equipment to be used, length of a specific construction task, equipment power type (gasoline or diesel engine), horsepower, load factor, and percentage of time in use. The construction noise impacts will be evaluated in terms of maximum levels (Lmax) and hourly equivalent continuous noise levels (Leq) and the frequency of occurrence at adjacent sensitive locations. Analysis requirements will be based on the sensitivity of the area and the Noise Ordinance specifications and the Federal Transit Administration's vibration analysis guidance, Operational Noise Sources. The proposed project is anticipated to generate vehicular traffic trips from future growth. On- and off -site noise impacts from vehicular traffic will be assessed using the U.S. Federal Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA -RD -77 -105). The analysis will focus on noise impacts associated with the development of the proposed project. Model input data will include average daily traffic volumes, day /night percentages of autos, medium and heavy trucks, vehicle speeds, ground attenuation factors, and madwaywidths. The 24- hourweighted Community Noise Equivalent Levels (CNEL) will be presented in a tabular format. If necessary, mitigation will JN 132203 0 11 + September 26, 2013 wa eT u � City of Newport Beach Proposal for the Redevelopment of the Former City Hall Complex Environmental Impact Report be identified to ensure that on -site noise levels do not exceed the City's standards. Stationary source noise impacts (both impacting the proposed project and emanating from the project )will be addressed. RBF will contact potentially affected agencies to confirm relevant existing conditions, project impacts and recommended mitigation measures. The discussion will focus on the potential alteration of existing facilities, extension or expansion of new facilities and the increased demand on services based on the proposed land uses. RBF will evaluate the ability of the project to receive adequate service based on applicable City and County standards and, where adequate services are not available, will identify the effects of inadequate service and recommended mitigation measures. Issues discussed include: Public Services: Solid Wasfe. Solid waste generation resulting from the proposed uses may impact landfill capacities. The analysis will establish baseline projections for solid waste, including composting and recycling for both construction and operation of the project. Project's compliance with AB 939 will also be addressed. Fire. The overall need for Fire Services would potentially increase beyond existing conditions as a result of the project. The Fire Services review will include a review of existing services /facilities in the area, response times to the site (which includes hazardous material responses to emergencies), available fire flow, project impacts and required mitigation. Police. The Police Service review will focus upon response times to the site, available personnel and overall protection services. The overall need for police protection services would likely not significantly increase beyond existing conditions as a result of the project. Mitigation incorporated into the project design, including lighting, signage and security hardware to further reduce potential crime activity will be identified. Schools. Potential impacts to schools focusing on existing conditions, student capacities, current enrollment and facility locations. Generation rates resulting from the project will be the basis for the impact analysis. Mitigation measures will be provided to reduce the significance of impacts. Parks and Recreation. The review will include overall parkland conditions in the City and impacts which the project may have on the park system. Potential impacts will be identified with mitigation to reduce the significance of impacts. Public Utilities: Water. Based upon technical information provided by the City, existing capacities and deficiencies will be addressed. The on -site potable and non - potable water system conditions will be presented, Off -site potable and non - potable water storage, pumping and transmission facilities will be studied. Sewer. Based upon technical information provided by the City, existing capacities and deficiencies will be addressed. Major off -site sewer conveyance, treatment and disposal will be JN 132203 0 12 a September 26, 2013 a a. City of Newport Beach Proposal for the Redevelopment of the Former City Hall Complex Environmental Impact Report presented. Project generation, infrastructure connections, easement modifications and upgrades to the existing system will be studied. Electrical. Existing facilities, project impacts, infrastructure relocation, undergrounding of overhead lines, easements and necessary mitigation. Telephone. Existing facilities, project impacts, infrastructure relocated, undergrounding of overhead lines, easements and necessary. Gas. Existing facilities, project impacts, infrastructure relocation, easements and necessary mitigation. F209dwav Maintenance. The proposed project may incrementally increase the maintenance of streets, storm drains, and other below surface facilities. RBF will consult with the project team and City Public Works Division to ascertain key concerns /impacts due to increased utilization of area roads. Traffic Anal. RBF will prepare a traffic impact analysis to support environmental documentation of the proposed project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as well as address the applicable City Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) analysis for the proposed project. Additionally, the traffic analysis will include a State Highway analysis for the study intersections located along Coast Highway (SR -1) under the jurisdiction of Caltrans, as well as include an applicable Orange County Congestion Management Program (CMP) discussion for the West Coast Highway (SR -1) /Newport Boulevard Ramps location. The traffic impact analysis will assume the project site is vacant and not currently generating trips. For informational purposes, a comparative trip generation analysis between trips forecast to be generated by the proposed project and trips generated by the prior City Hall use on the project site will be included. Study Area The study intersections will consist of the following twenty (20) intersections identified by the Cities of Newport Beach and Costa Mesa. City of Newport Beach • Orange StreetfWest Coast Highway; • Superior Avenue /Placentia Avenue; Superior Avenue /Balboa Boulevard -West Coast Highway; • 32 "0 Street/Balboa Boulevard; • Newport Boulevard /Hospital Road • Newport Boulevard/West Coast Highway Ramp; • Newport Boulevard/Via Lido; • Newport Boulevard /FinelyAvenue; • Newport Boulevard /32nd Street .1N 132203 a 13 • September 26, 2013 4�gwa ��� � n Y U ftRt4*k��'~ City of Newport Beach Proposal for the Redevelopment of the Former City Hall Complex Environmental Impact Report • Newport Boulevard/28'l' Street; • Riverside DriveWest Coast Highway; • Tustin Avenue/West Coast Highway; and • Dover Drive/West Coast Highway. Citv of Costa Mesa This scope assumes 7 study intersections will be analyzed in the City of Costa Mesa; the precise location of the study intersections will be identified based on discussion with City of Costa Mesa staff. As part of the analysis, RBF will collect a.m. peak period (7:00 a.m. to 9.00 a.m.) and p.m. peak period (4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.) intersection movement counts at the twenty (20) study intersections on a typical weekday (Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday). The analysis will utilize the highest hour of traffic count data collected within each peak period. This scope of work does not assume vehicle classification counts. Analysis Scenarios The analysis will document typical weekday a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour study intersection conditions for the following analysis scenarios: • Existing Conditions • Forecast Year 2018 Without Project Conditions (TPO) Forecast Year 2028 With Project Conditions (TPO) • Forecast Cumulative Without Project Conditions • Forecast Cumulative Without Project Conditions Forecast General Plan Buildout Without Project Conditions • Forecast General Plan Buildout Without Project Conditions Analysis Methodology The analysis will document the existing and forecast operation of the study intersections for the above identified analysis scenarios. The City of Newport Beach and Orange County CMP intersection analyses will utilize the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) analysis methodology; the State Highway intersection analysis will utilize the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) analysis methodology. The traffic impact study will identify the number of daily and peak hour trips forecast to be generated by the proposed project, using the City of Newport Beach Traffic Analysis Model (NBTAM) Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), g° Edition (2012) trip generation rates, or other source as directed by the City. This scope of assumes the Citywill provide RBF NBTAM model ICU runs at the study intersections for all analysis scenarios with exception of the Forecast General Plan Buildout With Project Conditions analysis scenario which RBF will manually derive; manual trip distribution and assignment will be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to utilization in the analysis. Utilizing applicable agency analysis methodology, and based on applicable agency performance criteria and thresholds of significance, RBF will determine whetherthe proposed project is forecast JN 132203 • 14 • September 26, 2093 y1�w Fib, City of Newport Beach F n' Proposal for the Redevelopment of the Farmer City Hall Gomplex 4 Environmental impact Report to result insignificant traffic impacts at the study intersections. Mitigation measures will be identified in accordance with applicable agency criteria to eliminate or reduce identified significant traffic impacts. The City's potential changes to 32nd Street that are under consideration will be qualitatively be evaluated by RBF since these changes appear to be part of the proposed project. The analysis will include for informational purposes a trip generation analysis comparison between the number of trips generated by the former City Hall use in comparison to the trips forecast to be generated by the proposed hotel project. State Highway Intersection Analysis This scope of assumes up to 10 of the 20 study intersections will be located on State Highway routes, and will be analyzed utilizing the HCM analysis methodology in accordance with Caltrans guidelines. Parking Analysis, RBF will peer review the project traffic study submitted by the project applicant for compliance with City of Newport Beach requirements and adequacy for inclusion in the project CEQA document. The results of the peer review will be documented in a memorandum submitted to City staff (Traffic Study Peer Review Memo #1). RBF will peer review the revised project traffic study in conjunction with Traffic Study Peer Review Memo #1; the results of the second peer review of the project traffic study will be documented in a memorandum to City staff (Traffic Study Peer Review Memo #2 RBF will provide a project specific analysis update of potential growth - inducing impacts pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126(g). The analysis in this section was based on data from the City of Newport Beach, California Department of Finance, and U.S, Census, The section discusses ways in which the proposed project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. The analysis addresses growth - inducing impacts in terms of whether the project influences the rate, location, and the amount of growth. Growth - inducing impacts are assessed based on the project's consistency with adopted /proposed plans that have addressed growth management from a local and regional standpoint. Potential growth - inducing impacts from the proposed development will be analyzed as they relate to population, housing and employment factors. The range of Alternatives is expected to include the No Project, a reduced /modified design, and one other Alternative that may be considered through the Project Review process. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6, RBF will provide an analysis of a "reasonable range" of alternatives, comparing environmental impacts of each alternative in each impact area to the project. For each alternative, RBF will provide a qualitative analysis, which will include traffic (based upon available data in the Traffic Report), air quality, noise, infrastructure, land use and global climate change. One important element of the Alternatives section will be an impact matrix which will offer a comparison of the varying levels of impact of each alternative being analyzed. This matrix will be prepared in a format to allow decision - makers a reference that will be easily understood, while providing a calculated (where feasible), accurate comparison of each alternative. JN 132203 • 15 4 September 26, 2013 City of Newport Beach � a; � ` Proposal for the Redevelopment of the Farmer City ball Complex '' � Environmental Impact Report a� The alternatives section will conform to both amendments to Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines and to recent and applicable court cases. RBF will discuss as required by the CEQA Guidelines, the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and the reasons for rejecting or recommending the project alternatives stated. This alternatives section will culminate with the selection of the environmentally superior alternative in accordance with CEQA requirements. 2.9 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM To comply with the Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 (AB 32180), RBF will prepare a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to be defined through working with City staff to identify appropriate monitoring steps /procedures and in order to provide a basis for monitoring such measures during and upon Project implementation. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Checklist will serve as the foundation of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program forthe proposed Project. The Checklist indicates the mitigation measure number as outlined in the EIR, the EIR reference page (where the measure is documented), a list of Mitigation Measure /Conditions of Approval (in chronological order underthe appropriate topic), the Monitoring Milestone (at what agency /department responsible for verifying implementation of the measure), Method of Verification (documentation, field checks, etc.), and a verification section for the initials of the verifying Individual date of verification, and pertinent remarks. RBF will provide additional sections in the EIR to meet CEQA and City requirements including the following: Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes That Would Be Involved In the Proposed Action Should It Be Implemented, Effects Found Not To Be Significant, Inventory of Unavoidable Adverse Impacts, and Organizations and Persons Consulted /Bibliography, RBF will respond to one complete set of City comments on the Administrative Draft EIR. If desired by the City, RBF will provide the Preliminary Draft of the EIR with all changes highlighted to assist the second check of the document. RBF will respond to a second review of the Preliminary Draft EIR and will prepare the report for a final pre -print review by the City. In addition, RBF will prepare the Notice of Completion (NOC) for submittal to the Office of Planning and Research (OPR). RBF will also work with the City to develop a distribution listing for the NOC and Draft EIR. JN 132203 • 16 > September 26, 2013 City of Newport Beach (ti� �! Proposal for the Redevelopment of the Former City Mall Complex Environmental Impact Report M4 A 4.0 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT S;. I RESPONSE TO COMMENTS RBF will respond to comments received on the Draft EIR during the 45 -day public review period, and any additional comments raised during public hearings. RBF will prepare thorough, reasoned and sensitive responses to relevant environmental issues, This task includes written responses to both written and oral comments received on the Draft EIR (includes review of hearing transcripts, as required). The Draft Responses to Comments will be prepared for review by City staff. Following review of the Draft Responses to Comments, RBF will finalize this section for inclusion in the Administrative Final EIR. It is noted that it is unknown at this time the extent of public and agency comments that will result from the review process. Per the City's RFP, RBF has budgeted 140 hours for responses to comments. Should the level of comments and response exceed our estimate, RBF will submit additional funding requests to the City in order to complete the responses. The Final EIR will consist of the revised Draft EIR text, as necessary, and the "Comments to Responses" section, The Draft EIR will be revised in accordance with the responses to public comments on the EIR. To facilitate City review, RBF will format the Final EIR with shaded text for any new or modified text, and "strike out" any text which has been deleted from the Final EIR. RBF will also prepare and file the Notice of Determination within five (5) days of EIR approval. This scope of work also includes the required fees for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (GDFW ). 4.3 FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS RBF will provide administrative assistance to facilitate the CEQA process including the preparation of the Notice of Determination, Statement of Overriding Considerations and Findings for City use in the Project review process. RBF will prepare the Findings in accordance with the provisions of Section 15091 and 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines and in a form specified by the City. RBF will submit the Draft Findings for City review and will respond to one set of City comments. 5.0 PROJECT COORDINATION AND MEETINGS 5.1 PUBLIC NOTICES RBF will prepare, submit, and mail all CEQA public notices required for the proposed project. Public notices are anticipated to include: • Notice of Preparation: As stated above within Task 1.5, RBF will prepare the NOP for the proposed project to initiate the 30 -day NOP public review period. RBF will distribute the NOP to appropriate agencies, parties, and individuals (including the State Clearinghouse). RBF will also post the NOP at the County Clerk, JN 132203 -17- September 26, 2013 f c City of Newport Beach Proposal for the Redevelopment of the Farmer City Hall Complex Environmental Impact Report • Notice ofAvailabilitY: RBF will prepare a Notice of Availability (NOA) to be distributed at the onset of the 45 -day public review period for the project. The NOA will include required project information, such as a brief project description, the start/end dates of the public review period, locations where the EIR is available for review, and contact information for City staff. Notice of Completion: RBF will prepare a Notice of Completion for submittal to the State Clearinghouse at the onset of both the 34 -day NOP public review period and the 45 -day EIR public review period. The NOC will follow the format recommended by the State Clearinghouse. • Notice of Determination: As stated above within Task 4.2, RBF will prepare a Notice of Determination, to be filed with the County Clerk and sent to the State Clearinghouse within five days of EIR certification. This scope assumes that the City would be responsible for any radius mailing or newspaper notices required for the proposed project. Mr. Glenn Lajoie and Mr. Eddie Torres will be responsible for management and supervision of the EIR Project Team as well as consultation with the City staff to incorporate City policies into the EIR. Mr. Lajoie and Mr. Torres will undertake consultation and coordination of the project and review the EIR for compliance with CEQA requirements and guidelines and City CEQA procedures. RBF will coordinate with state and local agencies regarding this environmental document. Mc Lajoie and Mr. Torres will coordinate with all technical staff, consultants, support staff and word processing toward the timely completion of the EIR. It is the goal of RBF to serve as an extension of City staff throughout the duration of the EIR Project. Mr. Lajoie, and/or Mr. Torres, will attend up to two staff meetings and will represent the Project Team at public hearings and make presentations as necessary. RBF anticipates a "kick -off meeting" (refer to Task 1.1), progress meetings, and public meetings and hearings. Mr. Lajoie and Mr. Torres along with other key Project Team personnel will also be available to attend meetings with affected jurisdictions, agencies and organizations as needed to identify issues, assess impacts and define mitigation. The estimated cost for additional meetings is approximately $1,200 per person. • One (1) kickoff meeting with City Staff (refer to Task 1.1). • One (1) community /neighborhood scoping meeting (refer to Task 1.6), • Progress meetings with City Staff assumes six (6) meetings to provide written arl¢ oral Progress reports, resolve issues, review comments on Administrative documents and receive any necessary direction from City Staff. Three (3) public hearings with presentations as necessary. This includes Planning Commission and City Council meetings. JN 132203 • 18 • September 26, 2013 `W Yp Q s� City of Newport Beach ri Propasai for the Redevelopment of the Farmer City Hall Complex r Environmental impact Report t'tLIPe1Xt'4Y The following is a breakdown of all products /deliverables. The listed deliverables assume a standard number of deliverables for a project of this type and can be adjusted, as directed by the City. RBF can also provide a cost, per document, and can provide billing on a time and materials basis, as requested by the City. • Two (2) copies of the Draft Project Description and EIR Outline One (1) Electronic copy of the Draft Project Description and EIR Outline • Two (2) copies of the Notice of Preparation /Initial Study • One (1) Electronic Copy of the Notice of Preparation /Initial Study • Fifty (50) copies of the Notice of Preparation /Initial Study Five (5) copies of the Administrative Draft EIR #1 and Technical Appendices on CD One (1) Electronic copy of the Administrative Draft EIR #1 Five (5) copies of the Administrative Draft EIR #2 and Technical Appendices on CD • One (1) Electronic copy of the Administrative Draft EIR #2 Two (2) copies of the Pre -print Draft EIR and Technical Appendices on CD • One (1) Electronic copy of the Preprint Draft EIR Fifty (50) copies of the Draft EIR (Technical Appendices on CD) • One (1) electronic copy in Adobe Acrobat (PDF) Format for web posting • Two (2) copies of the Draft Technical Reports • Two (2) copies of the Final Technical Reports • k, a • Fifty (50) copies of the Response to Comments /Errata Two (2) copies of the Final EIR and with Technical Appendices on CD Five (5) CD's containing the Final EIR and Technical Appendices • One (1) electronic copy of the Notices, Initial Study, Final EIR, and Final Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations ,iN 132203 .19. September 26, 2013 City of Newport Beach Proposal for the Redevelopment of the Former City Hall Complex Environmental Impact Report Additional information sources will be consulted including the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and historic /current aerial photographs as appropriate to define the habitat requirements for sensitive species potentially occurring onsite. This will allow RBF to focus its field visit on those sensitive biological resources present or likely to be present on the site. Habitat Assessment/Field Survev. The site wilt be systematically surveyed to verify existing conditions of the project site and its ability to support any listed species or habitat type. Particular attention will be given to the suitability of the vegetation on and surrounding the proposed project site for its ability to provide suitable avian nesting opportunities. In addition, the six "special trees" that were identified by a City arborist in a recent report (Special Tees — City Hall Complex, dated November 16, 2012) will be documented using a handheld GPS to verify their locations on the proposed project. Notes will be taken on all flora and fauna species observed. This survey will provide an understanding of the overall project setting and biological resources occurring with the area. The habitat assessment will not include focused surveys or formal jurisdictional delineations. The impact analysis will be prepared using the results from the habitat assessment and will document all wildlife and habitats occurring on the project site, the potential to support any listed species, and whether the site supports potential jurisdictional features. The analysis will include a detailed map of the plant communities occurring onsite and their respective acreages. The analysis will also address the mitigation measures previously identified by the City to mitigate the potential loss of the six "special trees:' D. Cultural and Historic Resources The analysis will cite the provisions of CEQA Guidelines 15064.5 (Historical and Archaeological Resources). No known sites of cultural significance are known to exist at the site and SB18 consultation has previously been conducted by the City. However, should the City choose to complete the consultation again due to the passage of time, this scope assumes that the City would be responsible for the effort. The results of consultation effort will summarize the analysis by RBF. This analysis will also include a search of Native American Heritage Commission files. E. Geology and Solis This scope of work assumes that geotechnical documentation has been prepared by the Project Applicant and provided for use within the environmental study. To assist in ensuring a comprehensive and defensible review of impacts related to geology and soils, a technical peer review will be conducted. The peer review would consist of the following: A review of relevant geologic /soils data, color aerial photographs, as well as contacting the City and County Emergency Management Agency to request records of any relevant geotechnical reports; A technical peer review of the Applicant - prepared geotechnical report for the project for the purpose of assessing the adequacy of the consultant's evaluation of site - specific geologic hazards and potentially significant geotechnical constraints, and mitigation measures associated with the proposed development; and A review of the most recent proposed grading plan. 3N 132203 -23- August 26, 2018 F7mEMMMW RBF Consulting Page i x W 0 CII a n E � 0 O _ � y E Z 00 e U � � 0 O L y GS � W Q Gt 0. 0 J d a d t w O 0. O 0. R �y r mA¢ Sau ©�Q ttNU nmm f¢ fWy mEa �mm -Aq QNL f� II fl £fflID QNY :g J�tl fJWU JI-Z owu d m E Cr C v" m ¢2 Fryq Ems oU� d4 EyC a €y £WO =d aP� mcA mEa t=o6 vG� a� av�p �C 0 . q w 0' e GYQ <�F tm Ewt °ern �v �4ry LEN a €� pmx v q ems ac A_ N v o s4 m N d &' N zE� Z Rv°mf nms+m 4'1 rja G N moOmamNmmnm�mm N N ONOOOOOOONO °N Y]q0 a.; DONO ammo fm°°m °°cf om�v Norn�mNOarn n,m or.nm.- ma;m �'�rnmn t= V fn w ie rc� -� f-m `env N Qi mmnmNao-N .- amrvnimam�� mmtio �m «. m ��FN St- S QNC � (d +il Ca pfd 6N 1 F� N m° N N � ry fNp� N Y� a K � t m � f a7� m` N Y � N I mN RN ry OLLJ Mm0 fp� � CCmll p N I N d w otm c+a o,°v vs fe w T IT T o - « v.-•- ma U O C a <N „0rr pry yao N JN tim O N rc atea{� L F W Q a s m F ! O � £•mv L W i g 5 MR .., m 4 °y dO a° gym`' fn eo O�"o "Stt Es om �¢.� viZ 3ta. n Cmm�� t5 m=VO wOZ E 'N Z `l Z _'e9N LL4NG�( OcE. E.� w'o ap ea ON °c W`m t 6�dCUf G L' wF �a 44Q mmJ tkttq o OR L� vmZ o l�m 0 �,_ m N LD °umi O� mcE JO U c O ❑OOO EU tZ m m- WNZ °a z J U T) FY OQ. O O (� m C�� ry}� OLW O.Om -.cp fn C ° (( IIIO �F moW 'q U'GWU06a ti2$"6 '3G�f��4a�VtJ Z5i-Gm mKm ffiZ� >"mIt'SgoEEENo ZZ cZ�F f9SS w. ouaEJOw opwoc a nazaww M) M bnw�ic�'_� sJoE O ¢` ww < �0a ww`z� Z yd.-ry Nana. -rvrv+a v {m I o0 w U Wye !-� N _C' NNwmMeavva.n ui .n .n t-. mA¢ Sau ©�Q ttNU nmm f¢ fWy mEa �mm -Aq QNL f� II fl £fflID QNY :g J�tl fJWU JI-Z owu d m E Cr C v" m ¢2 Fryq Ems oU� d4 EyC a €y £WO =d aP� mcA mEa t=o6 vG� a� av�p �C 0 . q w 0' e GYQ <�F tm Ewt °ern �v �4ry LEN a €� pmx v q ems ac A_ N v o s4 m N d &' N zE� Z i CONSULTING A - Company HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE Effective January 2013 through December 2013 OFFICE PERSONNEL $/ Hr. SeniorPrincipal.. ................................................................................. ............................... ........................$275.00 Principal............................................................................................... ............................... .........................250.00 ProjectDirector .................................................................................... ............................... .........................225.00 ProgramManager ................................................................................ ............................... .........................215.00 SeniorProject Manager._..... ... _ ....................................................................... ......................................... 200.00 ProjectManager .................................................................................. ............................... .........................195.00 StructuralEngineer .............................................................................. ............................... .........................195.00 TechnicalManager .............................................................................. ............................... .........................180.00 SeniorEngineer ................................................................................... ............................... .........................163.00 SeniorPlanner ..................................................................................... ............................... .........................163.00 Electrical Engineer ...... ............................... Landscape Architect.. ............... ........... Senior GIS Analyst ..... ............................... Project Engineer ......... ............................... Project Planner ........... ............................... Survey Crew Support Manager... ............... Environmental Specialist ............................ Design Engineer /Senior Designer /Mapper, GIS Analyst ................. ............................... Des igner /Planner ........ ............................... Project Coordinator ..... ............................... Graphic Artist .............. ............................... Environmental Analyst/Staff Planner ......... Design Technician ...... ............................... Assistant Engineer/Planner., ...................... Permit Processor ........ ............................... Engineering Aid /Planning Aid .. Office Support/ Clerical............ FIELD PERSONNEL ........................ 97.00 .. ............................... 97.00 ......................................................... .. ...... I.,................ 97.00 ..................................................... ............................... 93.00 ..................................................... ............................... 83.00 ........................... ............................... .......................... 75.00 .......... ................................. ........... I ........... .................. 63.00 2- Person Survey Crew.. ... ................................. ................................... .......................................... $250.00 1- Person Survey Crew ......................................................................... ............................... .........................165.00 LicensedSurveyor ............................................................................... ............................... .........................175.00 FieldSupervisor ................................................................................... ............................... .........................175.00 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PERSONNEL ConstructionManager ......................................................................... ............................... ........................$190.00 ResidentEngineer ............................................................................... ............................... .........................160.00 Construction Inspector (Prevailing Wage) ............................................ ............................... .........................136.00 Construction Inspector (Non - Prevailing Wage) .................................... ............................... .........................113.00 FieldOffice Engineer..... ................................................................ __ ................ ...... ........................... __ 113.00 ConstructionTechnician ....................................................................... ............................... ..........................97.00 Note: Blueprinting, reproduction, messenger service and other direct expenses will be charged as an additional cost plus 15 %. A Sub - consultant Management Fee of fifteen- percent (15 %) will be added to the direct cost of all sub - consultant services to provide for the cost of administration, sub - consultant consultation and insurance. Vehicle mileage will be charged as an additional cost at the IRS approved rate. EXHIBIT C INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS — PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1. Provision of 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, policies of insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form satisfactory to City. Consultant agrees to provide insurance in accordance with requirements set forth here. If Consultant uses existing coverage to comply and that coverage does not meet these requirements, Consultant agrees to amend, supplement or endorse the existing coverage. 2. 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. 3, Coverage Requirements. A. Workers' Compensation Insurance. Consultant shall maintain Workers' Compensation Insurance, statutory limits, and Employer's Liability Insurance with limits of at least one million dollars ($1,000,000) each accident for bodily injury by accident and each employee for bodily injury by disease in accordance with the laws of the State of California, Section 3700 of the Labor Code. Consultant shall submit to City, along with the certificate of insurance, a Waiver of Subrogation endorsement in favor of City, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers. B. General Liability Insurance. Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance, and if necessary umbrella liability insurance, with coverage at least as broad as provided by Insurance Services Office form CG 00 01, in an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence, one million dollars ($1,000,000) general aggregate. The policy shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, personal and advertising injury, and liability assumed under an insured contract (including the tort liability of another assumed in a business contract) with no endorsement or modification limiting the scope of coverage for liability assumed under a contract. C. Automobile Liability Insurance. Consultant shall maintain automobile insurance at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CA 00 01 covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of 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 RBF Consulting Page C -1 0 5. vehicles, in an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit each accident. D. Professional Liability (Errors & Omissions) Insurance. Consultant shall maintain professional liability insurance that covers the Services to be performed in connection with this Agreement, in the minimum amount of one million dollars ($1,000,000) per claim and in the aggregate. Any policy inception date, continuity date, or retroactive date must be before the Effective Date of this Agreement and Consultant agrees to maintain continuous coverage through a period no less than three years after completion of the Services required by this Agreement. Other Insurance Requirements. The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: A. Waiver of Subrogation. All insurance coverage maintained or procured pursuant to this Agreement shall be endorsed to waive subrogation against City, its elected or appointed officers, agents, officials, employees and volunteers or shall specifically allow Consultant or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these requirements to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss. Consultant hereby waives its own right of recovery against City, and shall require similar written express waivers from each of its subconsultants. B. Additional Insured Status. All liability policies including general liability, excess liability, pollution liability, and automobile liability, if required, but not including professional liability, shall provide or be endorsed to provide that City and its officers, officials, employees, and agents shall be included as insureds under such policies. C. Primary and Non Contributory. All liability coverage shall apply on a primary basis and shall not require contribution from any insurance or self - insurance maintained by City. D. Notice of Cancellation. All policies shall provide City with thirty (30) calendar days notice of cancellation (except for nonpayment for which ten (10) calendar days notice is required) or nonrenewal of coverage for each required coverage. Additional Aqreements Between the Parties. The parties hereby agree to the following: A. Evidence of Insurance. Consultant shall provide certificates of insurance to City as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein, along with a waiver of subrogation endorsement for workers' compensation and other endorsements as specified herein for each coverage. Insurance certificates and endorsement must be approved by City's Risk Manager prior to commencement of performance. Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with City at all times during the term of this RBF Consulting Page C -2 Agreement. City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. B. City's Right to Revise Requirements. City reserves the right at any time during the term of the Agreement to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving Consultant sixty (60) calendar days advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to Consultant, City and Consultant may renegotiate Consultant's compensation. C. Enforcement of Agreement Provisions. Consultant acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of City to inform Consultant of non- compliance with any requirement imposes no additional obligations on City nor does it waive any rights hereunder. D. Requirements not Limiting. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this Section are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits or other requirements, or a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue and is not intended by any party or insured to be all inclusive, or to the exclusion of other coverage, or a waiver of any type. E. Self - insured Retentions. Any self- insured retentions must be declared to and approved by City. City reserves the right to require that self- insured retentions be eliminated, lowered, or replaced by a deductible. Self - insurance will not be considered to comply with these requirements unless approved by City. F. City Remedies for Non - Compliance. If Consultant or any subconsultant fails to provide and maintain insurance as required herein, then City shall have the right but not the obligation, to purchase such insurance, to terminate this Agreement, or to suspend Consultant's right to proceed until proper evidence of insurance is provided. Any amounts paid by City shall, at City's sole option, be deducted from amounts payable to Consultant or reimbursed by Consultant upon demand. G. Timely Notice of Claims. Contractor shall give City prompt and timely notice of claims made or suits instituted that arise out of or result from Contractor's performance under this Contract, and that involve or may involve coverage under any of the required liability policies. City assumes no obligation or liability by such notice, but has the right (but not the duty) to monitor the handling of any such claim or claims if they are likely to involve City. H. Consultant's 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. RBF Consulting Page C -3 �EW `Rr CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Staff Report Agenda Item No. 4 October 8, 2013 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Community Development Department Kimberly Brandt, AICP, Director 949 - 644 -3226, kbrandt @newportbeachca.gov PREPARED BY: James Campbell, Principal Planner APPROVED: 0. K� TITLE: Professional Service Agreement with RBF Consulting for Environmental Services for the Redevelopment of the Former City Hall Complex located at 3300 Newport Boulevard (PA2012 -031) ABSTRACT: Community Development staff requests approval of a professional service agreement (PSA) with RBF Consulting for environmental services for the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for the Redevelopment of the Former City Hall Complex. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the attached professional service agreement, and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Agreement. FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: There is no fiscal impact related to this item. The entire cost of the agreement will be the responsibility of the applicant Olson Real Estate Group, Inc. (RD Olson). DISCUSSION: On July 9, 2013, the Newport Beach City Council selected RD Olson as the development team to negotiate a lease agreement for the future development and operation of a 130 -room, upscale hotel at the former City Hall Complex. The project will include the previously initiated General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Zoning Amendments. Before the amendments, project, or lease can be acted upon, environmental review must be performed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Staff, in consultation with RD Olson, has chosen to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the project to identify potential impacts and facilitate an informed public process. 1 Professional Service Agreement with RBF for the Redevelopment of the Former City Hall Complex October 08, 2013 Page 2 Consistent with City Council Policy F -14, the staff issued a Request for Proposals for environmental consulting services and four proposals were received. Each of the respondents was deemed qualified; however, two of the respondents have not worked on a project in Newport Beach previously. Given the overall importance of the project, and need to maintain a fixed schedule, staff selected RBF Consulting (RBF) based on the firm's proven record of successful projects in the City. Additionally, RBF has the ability to prepare the necessary technical analysis in -house and is familiar with the City's transportation system and complex analytical requirements. Lastly, staff has reviewed the scope of work and cost ($208,300) and determined they are appropriate for the project. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The recommended action to approve the PSA is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. NOTICING: The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of the meeting at which the City Council considers the item). Submitted by: Kimberly Brand , All Director Attachment: Professional Services Agreement with RBF 2 City Council Attachment 1 Professional Services Agreement with RFB 3 4 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH RBF CONSULTING FOR CITY HALL COMPLEX ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT THIS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT ( "Agreement') is made and entered into as of this 9th day of October, 2013 ( "Effective Date "), by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a California municipal corporation and charter city ( "City "), and RBF CONSULTING, a California corporation ( "Consultant'), whose address is 14725 Alton Parkway, Irvine, CA 92618, 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 desires to engage Consultant to assess potential impacts and identify mitigation measures for the re- development of the former City Hall Complex. All work is to be prepared in accordance with the criteria, standards and provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), California CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.), the City of Newport Beach Environmental Guidelines and the regulations, requirements and procedures of any other responsible public agency with jurisdiction by law ('Project'). C. Consultant possesses the skill, experience, ability, background, certification and knowledge to provide the professional services described in this Agreement. D. 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 Effective Date, and shall terminate on December 31, 2014, unless terminated earlier as set forth herein. 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 ( "Services" or "Work "). City may elect to delete certain Services within the Scope of Services at its sole discretion. 5 3. TIME OF PERFORMANCE 3.1 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. In the absence of a specific schedule, the Services shall be performed to completion in a diligent and timely manner. The failure by Consultant to strictly adhere to the schedule set forth in Exhibit A, if any, or perform the Services in a diligent and timely manner may result in termination of this Agreement by City. 3.2 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 within two (2) calendar days of the occurrence causing the delay to the other party so that all delays can be addressed. 3.3 Consultant shall submit all requests for extensions of time for performance in writing to the Project Administrator as defined herein 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. 3.4 For all time periods not specifically set forth herein, Consultant shall respond in the most expedient and appropriate manner under the circumstances, by hand - delivery or mail. 4. COMPENSATION TO CONSULTANT 4.1 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. Consultant's compensation for all Work performed in accordance with this Agreement, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, shall not exceed Two Hundred Eight Thousand Three Hundred Dollars and 00 /100 ($208,300.00), without prior written authorization from City. No billing rate changes shall be made during the term of this Agreement without the prior written approval of City. 4.2 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 reimbursable expenditures. City shall pay Consultant no later than thirty (30) calendar days after approval of the monthly invoice by City staff. 4.3 City shall reimburse Consultant only for those costs or expenses specifically identified in Exhibit B to this Agreement or specifically approved in writing in advance by City. RBF Consulting Page 2 4.4 Consultant shall not receive any compensation for Extra Work performed 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 5.1 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 Eddie Torres, INCE 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. 5.2 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. 5.3 If Consultant is performing inspection services for City, the Project Manager and any other assigned staff shall be equipped with a cellular phone to communicate with City staff. The Project Manager's cellular phone number shall be provided to City. 6. ADMINISTRATION This Agreement will be administered by the Community Development Department. City's Principal Planner or designee shall be the Project Administrator and shall have the authority to act for City under this Agreement. The Project Administrator shall represent City in all matters pertaining to the Services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement. 7. CITY'S RESPONSIBILITIES To assist Consultant in the execution of its responsibilities under this Agreement, City agrees to 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. 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 RBF Consulting Page 3 7 perform all Services in a manner commensurate with the highest professional standards. For purposes of this Agreement, the phrase "highest professional standards" shall mean those standards of practice recognized by one (1) or more first - class firms performing similar work under similar circumstances. 8.2 All Services shall be performed by qualified and experienced personnel who are not employed by City. By delivery of completed Work, Consultant certifies that the Work conforms to the requirements of this Agreement, all applicable federal, state and local laws, and the highest professional standard. 8.3 Consultant represents and warrants to City that it has, shall obtain, and shall keep in full force and effect during the term hereof, at its sole cost and expense, all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatsoever nature that is legally required of Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant shall maintain a City of Newport Beach business license during the term of this Agreement. 8.4 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, 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. 9. HOLD HARMLESS 9.1 To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, volunteers 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, attorneys' 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 breach of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, any Work performed or Services provided under this Agreement including, without limitation, defects in workmanship or materials or Consultant's presence or activities conducted on the Project (including the negligent, reckless, 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). 9.2 Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing herein shall be construed to require Consultant to indemnify the Indemnified Parties from any Claim arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties. Nothing in this indemnity shall be construed as authorizing any award of attorneys' 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 RBF Consulting Page 4 2 limits do not act as a limitation upon the amount of indemnification to be provided by 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. No civil service status or other right of employment shall accrue to Consultant or its employees. 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 of the Work 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. 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 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 or for other periods as specified in this Agreement, policies of insurance of the type, amounts, terms and conditions described in the Insurance Requirements attached hereto as Exhibit C, and incorporated herein by reference. RBF Consulting Page 5 9 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 co- tenancy, 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 The subcontractors authorized by City, if any, to perform Work on this Project are identified in Exhibit A. Consultant shall be fully responsible to City for all acts and omissions of any subcontractor. Nothing in this Agreement shall create any contractual relationship between City and any 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. City is an intended beneficiary of any Work performed by the subcontractor for purposes of establishing a duty of care between the subcontractor and City. 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 17.1 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 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. 17.2 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. RBF Consulting Page 6 10 17.3 All written documents shall be transmitted to City in formats compatible with Microsoft Office and /or viewable with Adobe Acrobat. 18. 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 expressly authorizes in writing the release of information. 19. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY INDEMNITY Consultant shall defend and indemnify City, its agents, officers, representatives and employees against any and all liability, including costs, for infringement or alleged infringement of any United States' letters patent, trademark, or copyright, including costs, contained in Consultant's Documents provided under this Agreement. 20. RECORDS Consultant shall keep records and invoices in connection with the Services 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. 21. 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 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. 22. 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 restoration expense shall be RBF Consulting Page 7 11 borne by Consultant. Nothing in this Section is intended to limit City's rights under the law or any other sections of this Agreement. 23. CITY'S RIGHT TO EMPLOY OTHER CONSULTANTS City reserves the right to employ other Consultants in connection with the Project. 24. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST 24.1 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. 24.2 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. 25. NOTICES 25.1 All notices, demands, requests or approvals, including any change in mailing address, to be given under the terms of this Agreement shall be given in writing, 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. 25.2 All notices, demands, requests or approvals from Consultant to City shall be addressed to City at: Attn: James Campbell, Principal Planner Community Development Department City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive PO Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658 25.3 All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Consultant shall be addressed to Consultant at: Attn: Eddie Torres, INCE, Senior Associate RBF Consulting 14725 Alton Parkway Irvine, CA 92618 RBF Consulting Page 8 12 PZ�yW_11f7I.y Unless a shorter time is specified elsewhere in this Agreement, before making its final request for payment under this Agreement, Consultant shall submit to City, in writing, all claims for compensation under or arising out of this Agreement. Consultant's acceptance of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims for compensation under or arising out of this Agreement except those previously made in writing and identified by Consultant in writing as unsettled at the time of its final request for payment. Consultant and City expressly agree that in addition to any claims filing requirements set forth in the Agreement, Consultant shall be required to file any claim Consultant may have against City in strict conformance with the Government Claims Act (Government Code sections 900 et seq.). 27. TERMINATION 27.1 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, and thereafter diligently take steps to cure the default, the non - defaulting party may terminate the Agreement forthwith by giving to the defaulting party written notice thereof. 27.2 Notwithstanding the above provisions, City shall have the right, at its sole and absolute discretion and without cause, of terminating this Agreement at any time by giving no less than 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. 28. STANDARD PROVISIONS 28.1 Recitals. City and Consultant acknowledge that the above Recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference into this Agreement. 28.2 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. RBF Consulting Page 9 i3 28.3 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. 28.4 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. 28.5 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. 28.6 Interpretation. The terms of this Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the meaning of the language used and shall not be construed for or against either party by reason of the authorship of the Agreement or any other rule of construction which might otherwise apply. 28.7 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. 28.8 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. 28.9 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, State of California. 28.10 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, age or any other impermissible basis under law. 28.11 No Attorneys' Fees. In the event of any dispute or legal action arising under this Agreement, the prevailing party shall not be entitled to attorneys' fees. 28.12 Counterparts, This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which together shall constitute one (1) and the same instrument. [SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE] RBF Consulting Page 10 14 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed on the dates written below. APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a California municipal corporation Date: Bv: Aaront. Harp I Keith D. Curry City Attorney �T- Mayor ATTEST: CONSULTANT: RBF Date: California corporation Date: By: By: Leilani I. Brown S. Robert Kallenbaugh City Clerk Chief Executive Officer Date: By: Michael J. Burke Assistant Secretary [END OF SIGNATURES] Attachments: Exhibit A — Scope of Services Exhibit B — Schedule of Billing Rates Exhibit C — Insurance Requirements Consulting, a RBF Consulting Page 11 i5 EXHIBIT SCOPE OF SERVICES RBF Consulting Page City Proposal for the Redevelopment of the � E vi Farmer rqjimei aAfr 21 RBF CgosLiitlhg:htls.,gU!?Mjt.ted.this Prop6s�aIJO,prepar-e- 6hilEnvir-onme'rital Impact Report (EIR)to assets potential'impacts,and identify ,y. mitigagion measures for the Redevelopment of the eFor, rn prOft y Hall Complex' n the. City of Newport.seach. The Draitt 1`R, Final EIR, and. associated Work prod ucts will be prepared in accordance: With '.the criteria, standdrds and provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act I (CEQ(­A.) (California Public . Resources e.s . C gde S'ectipp 211.00 Qet s e q;), California, CEOA'Goldblinp5.(Oaliforniq Code ofRe guI tio §, T tle 141 Section 15000 at seq. ) Jhe City of Newport Envjrbnhenlal Guidelines, Ahcthe rdoUlgtior§t6quireme6ts and proced ures % of any other responsible Public.Agency.wIth jurisdic6on by. law. RBF Will, throughout the Oopurnent, and .where. appropriate ',relate the proposed ..Projepta the 1) s in Newport Beachbndthe surrounding area. Each of the issues stu . a i .. .. proacIft- d 6 hl .:djo in the EIR will be ap oroug..y in. ordOr to fulYiast6ss all potential iiitpacts: establish thresholds;ofsignific'anee, i y mitigation measures. es. RBF is the lead firm for this work program and will provide services frOM'our Corporate Headquarters in )r�in,e, I �RB " Beach ik The f0lowing affirms F!s: c.qfnmitmen� to the City iN'.6Wppft R brid 1,,',e proposed work 1; The proposed services to be provided bytheIR8.1F Con.sUlOng'10' I t I h preparation I m !nvo me , a of . , docubehOidi pursuant tb.156 CECA:Guldblifiesi for the Redevelopment ofth6 Former City Hall Oomplex in Newport ot rt ;ea1 ch;, Q0f9i. a ­ 2. R8F Consulting 1s fbdus_Oil.on a compreh'e-asN.6 and cbrnpleterevi6w process. The 'RBF team will OirbVide services, pursuant-t6%the goals se! forth Dy the City; -andqsrde this proposa). 3: ejaneq and will recommend brisud.brig, '.holds as the top on IeQ:aI 6efe:n§ibiIitV-and fdll 4. All aspects of RBF proposal, incliuding costs;, have been determined'. ladepehdbhtly, without consultation With any other prospective Consultant or competitors for the purpose of restridting,pqrnpetition. 5. The RBF Consulting team agrees to provide the City of Newport Beach with any other information that the City determines to be necessary-for an accurate determination of the Consultant's ability to perform services as proposed. 6. If RBF Consulting is selected for this and all other assignments with the City, RBF B I F Consulting will comply with all applicable rules, laws and regulations. 7., RBF has a dedicated team whom maintains the in -house Library/Filing Management System. All project related files are categorized and independently filed to preserve the integrity ,oftheAdministrative Record. Documentation of all project transactions are kept in a. central file readily accessible to project team members. Any public records act or Administrative Record requests are coordinated with the Lead Agency, and implemebt6d per applicable lavVs and regulations. J,N 132203 a 1 September 26, , 2613 17 City-of Newport Beach Proposal fbr'the Redevelopment. of the Former:clty Hall Complex The City of Newport Beach- N . � g... . sqI . t . pot to preparq, rdnrnOntal Im is seekin a con in. Eoyl for the :.redevelopment .of:th&fofmdr City Hall complex. The.427.acre Site is Iodated at the northeast. corner of the intersection of NewpoFt.Bo.uAlevard plod. 32'd Street on the Balboa Peninsula In'the Lido Village area The property. Is currently occupied. by t,e In Newport .Beab.h City Hall. Complex, which. supports 53,9711AOre f6et, including 44,0 - 18 gross sqUaPefeetof adriiinigthbtion/office floor area within the- City Hal'I.Office Complex and 9.1,953 gross floor area. comprising the existing I I 1, Newport, Beach Fire bepart'rTi.eriir,'Iro;�(pt;ipr).No. Z The•City relocated City Hall stafffir df�n the steb.the, new Civic Center located . in Newport Cebt6f. ih:M 0, y6f-2013 Fire. Station No; 2 remains staffed and in operation, The City plans. t6 lease the 1114jority.of the site fO the deMoomktof the. 180 room Lido House Hotel (146 modules. /130 Rays); The proposed hotel would also include meeting F-oQrn%:OqcOssor y retail spaces jarestaurant, I 6byb..arrooftop '.6 ,.ar,.g e, i ..po 'Q .;a 'peas :a In 'd , all required public improvements.. The hotel Would al.s..o . includes: public 600 amenities ONO!o§6d. to be located :a ong relocating the geAstingi anqled,, metere to a.6com mod ate a also pull the curb Ii to modestly i's ratgi parking alongthe larger than, 9 - 9675gross: :squoreke r The: proposal larger . I . . - 1. �. . of ;pedestrian j' I' aZa' landscape: e areas, an d oth er he r ok.Bouleveiff6rid K° Street. The City is considering <ing on " the north side:of 821d just: south Of the old runt ofst. James Church, which is located just- we "stof tYth 3 2 fuls t West of Lafayette fthMWbuld 66 reduced th pide of...82P& Street ,in front . of "the-c I hurch. This would ut ,would hOnd32n Streot bef e - t r I po d With the 1 61 ent Wit lane tb:.rripffiV6 vehicle, M6fiedvIbein The project includes the following ns: 1. General P16M Amendment (.GPA) -The amendment i-ncludes.a text;and map change to rpOi6ce'the exisfingPubflc'Facilifies (PF) dOslqnptiorr or the ,.siie with a now mixed -use Wrid use ca.t0gory (MU71-15) and. establish density .and: Intensity limits withill. Tdblel LU-2 6fthe L6hd,Use :0,6ment by:establisKing:a new anomaly location. 2. dopstqf Land- Use Plan Amo:hdrhom(CLUP) - Thbiarherfdrdentincludes p text an , d map change to replace the existing Public Facilities (PF).designation for J the In e site withp new mixedmuse land use categqry, (MU) and establish density and intensity limits Within Table The pirbi p.0 so d :amendm6ht also includes, a changeJo Policy 4.4.2 -1 to establish a policy basis.for higher height limits. Zoning Code Amendment -The amendment includes a text and map 6hbhgd to replace the existing Public Facilities (PF) zoning designation for the site with a new zone MU-LV (Mixed- Use-Lido Village) and establish density and intensity I , Imits consistent with the pfoposed, Oeneirpl* Plan amendment. Development standards and allowed uses would also be established. 4. Site Development Review or Planned DbVelooment Permit- Either application orocess'.115 authorized by the Zoning Code for the redevelopment of the s * Re with the proposed I Lido House Hotel, Redevelopment of the site includes the demolition of all onwsito structures with the excep#on of Fire< Statlon No. 2 and its appurt0hantfatflitles. The -project Will include the M 1-*43 -.2 6 September 26;'201.3 _T 2 0 provision.. of 0 improvements c way are also:Ind floor p Proposal for the elo ment Redo of 0 Y ppq � the coihnedtlons to seNb the proposed :et. Public ng iights.of a site plan:, 5. Parcel M . ap - The pyol'e'dt.includes the processin g o parcel map to resubdiyide.the existing f.. a map lots creaiing,26,r mor.elots(dmeforthe propbse'd hotel and one for the 6xiMing1de station) and to dedicate eAsting area within Newport. BopleY.P.4 and Vd Street for roadway purposes. The Initiation of the CEQA,pfomss will involve a detaiiied scoping process. including a review of .issuesi constraints and project opportunities. RBF„ working 66eJytand in collaboration With City Staff vlll:er baik on an agency con sullation process, w1il'inclO e a publi c scoping session, which will provide an(�006�,tdhity'toobtain a better understanding of key e6lronmenfdj concerns of condempd ggpno , fes an , d the community, a..$ well' as iriform'66 tho, polblidds to'the . purpose' of'the vie Std'y.!wi- �an determination pf.oc6ss- Thd. lhitial. d 11 b.e..birc:ijl6t6d'W.ith:the'Notibe of CE revi Preparation fora 3O day review Comments received during the rev ew.peNod wf e Hit a e'.. va I ul d. as part of•preppropri of the . Draft The Draft:. EIR Will indlOdb. the Introduction and Purpose, Executive 5q4m.qipry and Project th with respect Des.cript.,ion. The Environmental Analysis sectiorwllleval6ait6 pqpc6ss4r I ...... necessary to the existing , conditions, the potential adverse �rfb�i�'b'f?Vbj6dt boh§tFQc'ti"onand" mp'I e— enta: -tion (both individual and cUmula ti Vb) and measures to. mitigate such effects. Environmental issues raised durin'g the ' scoping " process ' (Notice o_. f Pr1e. pa, ration resp OnPqs;, P ublc ScqPJig mailing; and other relevant anti valid informative soUtces) lllaisb-be Vdlbetdd;. The analysis e ' s loh of will t the existing conditionsfor each environmental . Jssue area; ct the - horbugftlydisdussi identify short term and long -term .environmental )Mpacts,8ssQ O ated, with the project r th eir 6iels of s - i g 0 T i fi pe ce, easib le miflja t ion measures wilt be recbMtfehdod to redd i�Jh§ significance of impacts and identity areas of unavoidable significant adverse impacts even after mitigation. Th'e environmental ' d_ocument'ation w_ill,assist in Identifying constraints, modifications;aiYdrmprovements w h'ch'maybe i hcorpomtedinto T6 land planning `process. The RBFTeam,.Mll'be vi:ew e d - as anlinte graf-compone:ntin the project _review and will pOrttolpite in meetings with st af and public Bearings, as rsquk dUy the city ". the RBF Team will have the eOspoh8!bl[ity'6f leading the public partcip&ti6h Ofooram-f6rthe environmental- review, including the; Public Scolping meeting, Draft EIR public review meeting, qndthrqIughou.t.jhe' pu_blio hearing process for certifiration of the EIR. The RBF Team 'Will assist declsidn makers and the Public in Understanding the [analysis, 60nclusiions of the EIR review and guide the CEQA review iprocess.. RBF has served.01his role with a countless number of , agencies and with .a Wide range of projects ofgreai,lM.t.erest to communities. RBF will complete the environmental review process, respond to all comments received during the Draft E0 public review period, prepare the mitigation monitoring program and draft the necessary Findings and posslble atat6merit of Overriding Considerations pursuant to -Sections 15091. and 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines. The environmental review process will result in the presentation of pertinent information associated with Project impacts and findings to the City decision` makers for determination and CEQA certification, JN 132ZO3 b 3 m September H; -2013 19 Otyof Newport Bea6h Proposal far the' Redevelopment- of the:Former City Wall Complex Report PROJECT SGOPIM3 11.1 PRdJECTIKUOk.OVF ANO PROAECT C 411ARA TEIRUSTICS The EIR wbrk:program Will b6initl8ted With a klok-6ff meeting -With City Staff to discuss the project"in greater detail, This is initial meeting is vital to the success of the.01HOA Process•:qn.d will. be a,key mlleslonp i ri,order to confirm.the paramotors of the affalysis, the details of construction proposed bLiildout conditiohs,bOKOd(tlirig.a-n'd overall &oti!Cnunication8. POorto the kick-off, RBF will distribute, -a kick-off meeting agenda and detailed I mememorandum., which will iidentify irif9rmation. Reeds I I . Based upon the:detafled project, information obtained at the project. kick -off meeting,. RBF Wi I I draft 4 preliminary project desdriptibbIor review and sapproval by Cit Y' Staff. IA. 9501EARCH AND INVF-STIGATION RBF Wid obtain 40d. review available rbfen6fij5� data: f6,r the pi�OjMct area, :including, policy documentation 6uffieritatidtiftirn theC!tybf NewportBeachi Cojuntyof Orange ':State and Foderal� a ge.nIPl-qs'rtIbQ 5outhem:CallfornlaASSoclatton of .Governments an..d all other agencies which niay be affected by the :06il a4bl.e:frJffi the City and 6therr nearby jurisdid-lonsi%wil'I become paft of the foundation of EIR and will . .' reviewed and incorporated into fhp-pqqjyqlsj as deemed appropriate.. Thls:f6Wincl s.a :visit AbIthe project area which will,lncltXdea detdiiled ph6tographI'C',r6b6,rdjhlj 6f ror(r: and tiff site.bonditions. 1.3 AGEMOr taksu.L.T I ION As indicated Section tonI5,0_06,therE A.Guidel4es,irnah.y public have fb ad that early . ic agencies iave oun a ear y consultation solves mahy'potiahtidl coriflidt§,that.6ould arise 'in iri'more:seriousforms later in the-review - ­1 1; P pin that ocess., Although the Notice of reparation and Public Sob g P Ig.,-Pe-ting will :prpvi e ., a opportUrtity,KBF wil[(johdIucj,a,dd& discussions is-o6sisi OnsWithlocal, state and federal "' agencies which will assist ]h'the early §tage-s of the analysis brid'Mue delMea-tio n. ]-his scoping ran be-an effective I , I rail "1 .1 effective I way to bring together,and resolve the concerns of affected rederalj '$Iqfo and . [boa , Ag I an , c 1 1 a — a , as well 611 - 815 the local. community.. IA NOTICIEVIF:11PREPARATIGH RBF will prepare, - distribute and file the Notice of Preparation (NOP) fort-he EIR. A graft NOP wilf-be prepared and forwarded to City Ste for review and comment. RBF will theri finalize the N . OP for distribution, The disfirl tibn Will be based on a City--approved distribuiti6h list'tobe provided by City staff.. Comments received -in response to the NOP will be evaluated during the preparation of the EIR. lis OCOPONG MEETMG A public scoping meeting, which can also involve Federal, State or other local agencies, Will be scheduled during the NOP public review period, in order that the community can gain an understanding of the • proposed project and provide comments on environmental concerns, The ,Scopihg Meeting will orient the community on the CEQA review process and Will be presented-in a mahnerwhich the communitycangain a greater understanding of the •propp8aIjntent)of OEQA and the kpy issue areas to be addressed in the FIR. RBF will provide a PowerPoint presentation, handouts and presentation-size greohibs to suppl6hieritthe discussion. Following the presentation, JN 132203 -4- Sopteffiber 26, 2013 20 Proposal for the Redevelopment of the Former C City of Environments the meeting . will be ;devoted to publ n questions l and comments. Written comment forms will be provided for tlhiqpurpo,se, and these comments, along With oral comments, Will,bbbomb ., a pbrtafthe admihIstrativ6,re6ord. INIT111111 11 The Introduction will cite the. provisions of QEQA.the CEQA Guidelines, and the Cit l , City .of Newport Beach CE.QA Implementation procedures forwhich the proposed project s . iI s. . subject; This section I will identify the purpose of ffie stud y and statutory authority as Well document sdoping pro cedu re s, onhay of the,EIR fbhm at, li s ting of re§00 and tustee agencies and: d oc umentation incorporated. by reference.. 012. EkOd.lUTINE SUMMAO T� haI. Executwe .. 8QmM0 will include and levels Of si§tilficb"n-p'e;;'aft'e"'r"m-itig'a'tiE)'n., summary o,f.,p,roj*ect'alfbtri6fiv6s arid areas of controversy andissue be resolved;. The a resent . pd I in a columnar format, to i af u m ry�will be p . 11 . 1. , .. . �i - rowont 8 1 2.3 PROJECT bEsAggOTACH, The Projopt, Ppscription, sectign of t.h, . IR Willdeiall - the project i.00dtibh,beoI - ( ground and higt6rybf the prnjeet, discre£ionary actions, clhaeadterlstft {addressed in construction program, phasing; agreqments, and reqqlred that are required based I o. n. @ I4. ,6I bl e . .fq^hnotiO ., This soc W I Include a summary o p Proeds ocal en viron rn en tal s Oti hjfQrthept6I E I 50bits-depidtihg tb6 if.eglonbl andslt(§.VlbiH[ty:wi[l'bb:lncluded in this: section. 2.4 THkESMOLD'S. OF SIG.N.0114A00E This section will provide a. comprehensive d . Lst Opfl dlpf th(esholds, gi�hifl c anbef- or each issue .area :.ofLth(eE)hvir06m6htalab5lysis, ThO sighiflca6cb threshold .criteria will .bedescribed and will provide the basis f.6r conclusions of significance, Primary. sources to be used i_n1identifying, Elie criteria a i clpd,e the. Guidelines, local St0te,. Federal or other standards - applicable: to an impact category; 2.5 CUMULATIVE PROJEtTSIANALYSIS. Inaccordance with Section 15130 of the­-CEQA Guidelines, thp.EIR will include a section v Pro i idlhg a detalled listing of curniQlative projects. actions qnddr corigider6ti(jiq for the ahaysls. The likelihood of occurrence : and level of severity Will be;studied. The purpose of the section s -to present a listiq and despciption of projects, past present and anticipated In the '0 Q e reas riably foreseeable future; even if those projects -are outside of Newport Beach's jurisdiction. The potential for impact aJndldvels, of sigiriffidance. are contingent upon the radius or area of Interaction with the project area RBF,will consult with City staff.and other applicable local j lud i 'd, ic. ti G.n,s to define the; appropriate study area for the cumulative analysis. The cumulative analysts f or eac h topical area Will be incorporated throughout the analyses in Section 2.6. A 13220 5 a SbOarribbe 2G, 2013 21 City of Newport:Beach. Proposal for the Redevelopment oVthe Former.-.City Hall :Comple,x RBF will evaluate the necessary information with respect:to the 'existing oonditions" the potential adverse effects of Project. implement @:tion (both. individual and ,cumulative), and 'measures to mitigate such effect's Environmental issues taiseii doting the: scoping process (Notice of Preparation responses, Public $coping Meeting, and: any other relevant and valid informative sources) will alsn:.be evalu „ated, The analyses wiill be based upon all available data, results' from additlonal, research, and an assessment of exiMing, technical data. These :analyses will be. performed byqualified Environment@) Analysts;_ GEQA experts and :Planners at RBF:. The Environrneintal.Analysis section of tbe. EIR will thoroughly"discuss the ezisting,.conditions' for each environmental issue area; rdentifysbort term construction and long.term'operational:impacts associated wtth fhe: project and their levels of significan. ce, The: Impact aa:alYsis will .be in a consistent order of "envirohmental.:factors as .Appendix G of the: CEQA Guidelines (Aesthetics, Agricultural Air Quality etc.). For each Environmental .Factor Analysis Section, the. Impacts Subsection will begin with."a'list of all issues contalned In 'the Initial. Study. Th'e thresholds for signrficanGe shall, tie: Identified :forevety'..environmeritai issue:.A brief'discussion will be provided for all ehAronmental'issuesAefermined to be No Impactor Less Than `Siignficant Lmpact In the Initial S „tudy; e.Xplammg Why these determinations were r»ade and`that no`further analysis rh the EIR is W 'arranted'. The Impact Subsection will'provrtle a detailed analysis of efth issue'defermined to. be Less Than Significant With Mitigation incorporafed. or Pbtentially Significant Impact in $$same orderas these issues.are provided jn the•lnitial Study For'each envrrp.n rital'ssue requirii g E,R analysis; `the EIR will swbjh6i level of significance as determined ih'the Initial Study,; and: #hen provide the - analysis discussion, mitigation measures speclfic.to this environmental' issue;;and level ofsi' d6ificance after mitigation fiorthat : environmental, issue,. Thissecfionwillinclu "d.eanolyslsforthe following environmental issue:areasi A. Ae!skheticewind Shadef.Shadow t:xisthq Conditions; This section will characterize the existing aesthetic environment and visual resources for the site, including .a discussion of views within the site. aid views from surrounding areas. A "visual inventory ofthe project arbo %Mll be conducted in orderto verify the visual character and viewshed Color site photographs will be provided to iitusirate on =site and surrounding Views:, Construction- Related Impacts: Short-tefm demolition and.constructionimpacts will be studied'w'ithin the EIR. Potential impacts to sensitive uses, as a result of staging areas and visible earthwork activities will be addressed. Construction related haul trucks and activities will also be arialyzed. Scenic Views/Vistas Analysis: RBF will analyze the potential visual Impacts to scenlc views %vistas in the project`s viewshed, including those views from Sunset View Park, Cliff Drive Park, and Ensign View Park. Particutarly, impacts to designated visual resources as well as view blockage a$ a result of the project's proposed height increases will be considered. Char'acter/Quality Analysis. The analysis will consider the potential for the modification of the surrounding character /quality. The compatibilityof`the proposed land uses, building heights and possible buildirg materials,. as, compared to the surrounding area, will be studied. This section will include an analysis of the.City"s_existing policies, including the consideration of project design and appearance of structures comply with all applicable development and design standards /guidelines, and minimize potential adverse effecfs pertaining to aesthetic impact' on the community and JN 132205 .6. September 2%2013 22 o City of Newport.Booeh. Proposal forthe Redevelopment ofttie Former City Hall C.nmplex Environmental Impact Report surrounding uses: Specific considerationsforthe project's consistency:with the Lido Village Design, Guide)jnes will be included., Photosimu/atlons. RBF proposes up;tothree photosimulations to determine the project'•s impacts on scenic vistas /views from Sunset View Park, Cliff prive Park, and .En "sign View Park. RBF will provide the City with the preliminary photographs, at.which time the City will comment and. approve up to three Key View photographs which, will.. then be simulated forthe project. The simulated model will.be masked onto the selected photograph's: All :modeled bbjecta will.be colbred and textured utilizing advanced mapping techniques such as decals,transparency, and reflective maps. All available resources will be used to create a depiction of the subject that is as I close to photorealism as possible,. Shade /Shadow Diaorams. Shade and shadow: issue s;pertain. to the biocka.ye on site buildings (which affect adlacent;ptnpenies),. Shading is an (mponant.: becaus6b6 users or occupants 'of cdffain land uses; such as resi den; tial„ reel schools ; outdoor rest aurants; and pedestrian areas have expectations.' #ordirect; from the su.h. These land uses are termed "shadow= sersitve' Dae'to the. shading onto shadow sensitive areas adjacent to the..project.site; RBF' will pg shadow analysisin orderfio: analyze the shadow relafed .impacts of'the, prgpoz Based upon the.Prcj6ct De"script16h;, RBF will develop ea massing model from: electronic plans,and. elevations.'(if available) provided by The. City and prepare .shade and..shadow drawings.fio "r time intervals throughout the day.on the summeriwintersolstices ;and vern(0900u 6al:equinoxes. l "ne. analysis will.reflectboth eAsting and prcject.buildout conditions: RBF will.create a 3D model of the existing and proposed structures based on drawings and eleyajions provided bythe, client. N' that this analysis considers shadow effects associated with proposed building `masslncg .only; he. : "shadow paftems.assooiated with prop6,190d landscaping are.not addressed'. RBF will provide a:description otthe existing sha'd'e /shadow.conditions atthe st"e;and surroundihcd area (as a;result offhe existing;on site building)• The impact thresh61d;6f shading onto 50 percent of a shadow- sensifjve use :or area forrat least50 percent, of the time between 9:06 a.M, and 3:00 p.m. Pacific Standard Time (PST) (between iat6bctoberandearlyApril) orbetween 9:00 6,rir, and :5:00 p.m,. Pacific Daylight Time (PDT) (between early April and Late. October) will be used. A description of the summer an..d wmfer salstce artd vernal and.autumnal e.qumox;will ,be provided' n: the Shade /Shadow Study. RBF will prepare a:wiitten analysis o t e s hade and "stiadow affects,, . along with supporlinggraphics a'ddr'essing potentially significant impacts .generatedby the 'proposed . projection. the surrounding area,: This analysiswill inciud. e:'a.:review of any existing'611ty policies anal guidelines regarding shade and shadowimpacts. Lloht and Glare Analysis. RB.F`wlli•address the potential for significant impacts'to be generated by the introduction of light and glare associated with the deuetopmentofthe project. BF will review and incorporate existing City policies and guidelines (including the Lido Village. Des-, ign Guidelines.) regarding light and glare for inclusion within the EIIR: B. Air Quaility Existing bonditiohslReayfato>r ' l Framework. The project is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMR). Baseline meteorological and air quality data: developed through iihe California Air Resources Board (GARB) will be utilized for the description of existing ambient air quality. Air quality JN 132203. a 7 a September 26; 2013 23 `4 Tee City of g Proposal tfie.`Redevelopmenf of the Former C Environrlieht€ data from the nearest air quality monitofing staijbn (located in the City of Costa Mesa) will be included to:help htgtilightexist n`g airqualitylocal.to "the project area The analysis will also describe and address the. requirements set forth by the„ SCAQMb CEQA Air Quality Handbook!. Construction- Related Emission's.. Based on data provided by the project applicant; emissions generated during demolition; earthwork, . paying, and building activities will be quantified. A general description of the major phases of. constructionand their timing will be required. The air' pollutant emissions during constructioii' will be compared to the SCAQMD Regional Thresholds of Significance. RBF :will also qualitatively discuss naturally occurring asbestos impacts. LdhowTemEmissi6hs. RBF *ill quantify operad6hal (Le., area and mobile source) emissions and provide a comparison to the- SCAQMD regional thresholds,of significance, The emissions will be quantilafiyely deriv ed utll2ing the California Emissions Estimator Model (Ca(EEMod): Primary sources of`emissi6nt will. 46.r'elated'to:area• sources and locallregional vehicle miles traveled. Project consisfency with the 2092 A {r Quality Management Plan will be evaluated,, Loee%zed 1"mh&dtI s. The p`roj"ect is located within the SCAQMD' loc Oran, Coastal), Based on localizedmeteorological: localzed. "impacts :based upon tti:e SCAQMD.'s Localized meth doiog... 0. Hilotwfficalt R866 U&66 66 forthe site to determine wliichsensitVeresources are likelyta occuronsitc orwittiiotho general area, In addition a detailed review of the; Central and Coastal Orange County Natural Community Conservation Plan will "be >. conducted for its imphcaUons of theproposed project. A.database search of the, Galjfornia Natural Diversity Data. Base (CNDDB) and California; NativeP,lant Society (GNPs} listings-'re, arding sensitive biological'r.6 odL4 s .khowii fo occur in the region and vicinity of the site -will be conducted. Additional information sources.w.ill be.consultod including the California Dapartmentof.Fishand iNildlif6 (CDFW); United State's Fish.and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and historicicunent aerial photographs at appropriate to., defirie:the habita'tm.gUirements for sensitive species,potentially occumng onsite. This will allow "RBFtofccus -its field visit on thosesensitiye biological resources present or likely to be present on the site: 1-labitatAssessmenf/Feld Survey. The site will be.systematically surveyed to verlf ex sting Condit onsof th. e projecf site and its ability #o support any Fisted species or habitat type. Particularattentian wilt begiven to the suitability of the - vegetation on and surrounding the. proposed project site for'its ability to provide suitable avian nesting opportunities. In addition, the six "special trees" that were 'identified by a City arborist in a recent'report (Special Trees =— City Hal/ Complex, dated November 16, 2012) will be documented using a handheld GPS to Verifytheir locations on the proposed project. Notes will betaken on all'flora and fauna species observed..,This surveywiil provide an understanding of the overall project sefting and biologicafresources occurring with the area. The habitat assessImentwill not includefocUsed. surveys'orformal jurisdictional delineations. The impact analysis will be prepared using'the results from the habitat assessment and will document all Wildlife and fiabitats.00curring on the project site; the potential to support any listed species, and whether the site suppods potential jurisdictional features. The an will inr Ode a detailed map of the plant communities occurring onsite and their respective acreages. The analysis will also address-the mitigation measures previously identified by the City to mitigate the potential loss of the six ".special trees:" JN 132203 s 8 a September 26, 2013 24 itn 4 Stu City of Newport Beach PrO-,6sal forAhb:Redevelooment of the Former City Ball Complex Environmental lmpai6t.Replort 0. adliturbo ilihd HM011,11C. Resolifrods The analysis - will cit0hd OrbVisl6ns of CEQA Guidelines 15064.5 (Historical and Archaeological. Res�ourqes). No known .'rtes. of cq.lfqrql significance. Oro.knoWn to exist at the site and SB1 8 consultation :, has pr6­Vious�ly been conducted by the City: However, should the City choose to complete the consultation again due to the passage of time, this scope assumes that the Citywguld be responsible for the etoo.. cons m Thq results of ...Ultation effort Wil summarize m8flze the analysis by RBFI This - analysis . ysis Will aiwinclN . 6 6 searc h'Of . Native American Heritage ComrriSSiohfles, E. Gedlid shell aoillsi: This scope of work assumes. that geotechnical doomprner�tgllpn ha S been prepared by the Project Applicant pod .provided for' usJO Within— the environmental study. To assist in ensuring a comprehensive oftfaheh§ive bind. d6f6risibib. review of ir.rIp6dts related to: geology and soils, a technical peer review w ill be conducted_ The peer review would consist of the folfow; g kl. A : — . .1. .. Emergency I I .. data, rolo_r'eerial,pibtograohs,'as well as c ontacting the City and County Management Agency to r�quegf record s of any relevant Opol purpose of assessing the adequacy or the con sultant' evaluation of site- specific geologic hb;e&dS and potentially dlly,. _siqnifiddnt gb6tebhhical c6nstir.Wnits, and mitiga-flon measures associated -with the proposed development; and, This effort would. include two rp�iri& I olvirio an Initial letter report that Would ... ........... . ... . .. of peer review,, irvv_. address the adequacy of the gedte-ichn-16al consultants. report in terms of'characterization of d.60tdbhnibal/.96of6g!6 hazards and constraints, andassociated mitigation recommendations, The second round of ,the review wdi: assessment. of involve an assessmentofthe adequa of their responses to I cy initial peer review cornrh&htg. No assessment offsoil or groundwater contamination 16 included for this.•.616w: The final'Itod gedtechnl6ji report WoUld.00 utilized byRBFtb supportilheconclUsibriswithin the EIR. The impact section will provide a. description of . . . existing conditions; potential project -impacts and ha4qrds, and applicablemifgatibn measures, if. necessary. F. Grednhouse Gaz AnallysisICRImMe Chang' e RBF will also prepare an inventory of the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions issions nitrous oxide, ,methane., and carbondioAde) from both direct andindirect sources. I The emissions inventory will be quantified with the CalEEMod model. The analysis Will deterrhine the project's impact Pact by determining if it is cbrisistent with the Assembly Bill 32 mandate of reducing GH . G's beyond Business as Usual": conditions. The Q 11 H I G reduction associated With the project's.closign features Will 66 quantified . utilizing the California Air 'Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) methodology (Quantifying GreehhbUse Gas Mitigation Measures — A Resoqrqa for Local Government to Assess Emission Reductions fro, m, Greenhouso'GaS.Mitigition Measures.. As the project would create areneftble, energy source, RBF will also quantify the GHG emissions that the proposed. solar facility Would offset from traditional fossil fuel Power.plants, JN 132263 0 9 s September 26, 2013 25 � Proposal for the.Redevelopment of the Former Gjty Hall Complex RBr Will aIso. analyze the ab6roy Impli.65tors, of the Project Oursuant.to Public Resources Code "Section 211 Q0(b)(3) and Appendix F of .the GuldePnes Se statutes and -fd gU(dellnesrequire - pri. EIR. to describe, where ..,416van t, th'ewlste Wasteful, I . nefficiefit,, and I unnecessary consumption of e nergy caused by a: project. The ansI ysiswi analyze energy consumption associated with short- .term construction activities.-,. long -term operatloris; :buildings; and transportation. RBF.wjjI conduct peerf.re-view and prepare-•a summary technical rremorandurn on the existing Phase I Environmental Site Assessment ' L- 4 . I site "). I. (E. SA)(pro v . id. , 1 e d by the CI ityI) that ha. s . b een prepared for the f 6rmer Q4 H411'Complex, lwatod:at 36Q0:1ewper Boulevard, WIN I n t he City o f Newport Beach (herein referenced as the "proje t The project site is approximately 4.27.acres, Based on the docuhbrtation provi ded I n t he Phase..I ESAA RBF will diSCLISS the findings; opinions, and cqnclusipht made in the Phrase I E SA. This Ta s k do a s not Include an RBF site inspectloh, interviews, .reVIOW-6f. publid records, or completion of other ASTM Standard Practice E 1527-05 areas that - m6y or may not be present in the ESA document during the peer review; RBF,WiII-.LitfIik6 t.hO-.a-bbve.,r.OfOtbhced:research fbaftaly2e potential . I.; j project - related d impacts. ; I as I ObftWn t6 Hazardous materials per the.. CEQA thresholds oyQred above, 0hould a potentially signIfiben-t Impact arise, . BF wiI,050mMen&mItigqt Jon measure s to rpduoel these impacts to the extent feasible:. H, Hydrdl6g1jo, a6d wmeirt wfill�� This scbP.e:6fV6fk�assLjmbs that-a'hydrol6gy/water quality study Will be prepared for prepared by h Project Applic�q nt� by Fu h, si�eoand defensible review of impacts related to liydrologyLwaterquaiity, a technicahpeerreview will be' conducted. The. peer review would consist of the following; the f rig a compre, en HAtoicav UdvA606W. R91710 storr))Watbr a . Pplioant's llydrolbgy study for the approximati Orange Coun-ty , ,CA ' R B F . will review : the lreps documentation, watershed bounday0011hedfibn hyftlogy,ahalyss.of 6isting drainage-facilities floodplairi fmPac.184 department will pbrform 6 0a.0 -review of the. ly-4.3 acre Former City He'll in ,Newport t Beach, 11 to ensure that it contains a review of existing existing conditions analysis, analysis of proposed potential impacts to existing drainage systems and RBF'§ ston-riwaterdepart.ment will perform a pw review of the appji.canfsW.aterQuailtyM@n.qge.rr,t,ent.Plan (WQMP). RB F will revieWthe plan to ehs-u re that it odirri plies MW the latest MS4 'perrolt for North ofairigeCou rity. The review Will include evaluation of the completeness of the. discussion of 303(d) list pollutants and any associated TMDL requirements; Hydrologic Conditions of Concern (HCOC) requhrements, appropriate sizing and locating of Best , Management Practices and rbVlow of proposed Low Impact Development (LID) strategies. ROF Will summarize the findings of the analysis and Will summarize existing infrastructure, existing flowrates, possible impacts of development, and potential mitigation tion requi , rementsr.., The analysis will be conducted at a planning level to dbfer.m.ine impacts and propose Mitigation measures, If niecessary. JN 132203 10 = September 26, 2613 M 0 Progpsal fdr1th.o.R§dPvQItipiYieh Former City. Hall 'Com 0101 1. Lamous''O ano keldvant 112 . I.anhino The project involves :e Q-eoerbl Plan Arhbh'drn6ht which:Would include a tkt.and rn,60 charge to reiplace4he existing. Public Facilities. (PF) designation for the site with a.new mixed -use land use categor density -and .. .... 4 " I Table LU ' (MO-H'5) and establish intensity% limis WIth.n , 6 -2 �of the Land Use Lie rin 6ni b y I e I stablIs - hin.g. a new. . ano . ma .. I . y.location. A-Zon,in,g Cod . e Amendment would also. include a text,and map change to replace the existing.Pu.bi.io.Fa.c.ilitibs,(PF,) zoning des;gna.flon.forthe.site with anew zone MU-Lv.(' xedibse Li Village) and . establish d . ensity and:lnton sityl . it . I ts consistent. with the proposed General Plan amendment. The consistency r6��.W jeill focus on Genera[ Plan policies and. the standards /provisions` -set forth. in the City's Zoning C ode. This portion of the reVi w will include any proposed mo ifiqqtio'h to development -dd.. opmen and design standards. The interface. of the protect with nearby: uses will be stbdied; Develbpmelltst6hdards And Allowed u§es-would'also be established, The impact analysis will also address the propo�;ed'Site, Development, , Rev. e 1.w :or Planned QoVel'opmentF'erniicii)dfh Parcel Map'. The Coastal Land. Use Pk e I I r I" xisting:PLIblic 0,cilities and establish. density and includes a change to Policy anticipated to be subject to i I'll J. it WQUIO: include -a text and map .,.change 'to. replace the �r6e site with a hi e- W mlx'ed',=qs_ a. lan.d.'u'seo5fiegoN (MU) Withlb Table 2.1.1-1.,, The prbPosb"d:am6hdm'e 6W also Comittssion.. RBF will conduct Nqregional plAnningrOgw.will and ;Guide ' pbl icies. beh§UHa. Con&66ri,§vk - vi t , -equ orV P� a ;ram6iMo RBF Will tevie'W b'pplidable nbl§b and land use. compatibility criteria for the project area: -Noise standards regulating, n6ise impact,§Milf be discussed fbr land' uses on and 1. qdjamitto the project site: k6lF will tiond I it' oughoutthe site. During tN�sjlte vi0t; RBFWilf rondu6tsboft-166-6 hbis:e level along lh6'prp , ibbt area. The.fioisb ffionIt6e1ng,.sUN6y Will be conducted at LIP to three separate locations to establish Baseline noise levels in the project area Noise recording lengths are anticipate d , to requi ro approximately i5 minutes di each location. This scope excludes 24 -hour noise measurements: Construction-Related Noise and Vibration. Construction would occur clurit - rig implementation of .the: proposed project. , Noise impacts from construction sources Will be marialyidd based 'on the Anticipated equiptnent to be used., length of a specific construction task,, equipment power type (gasoline or diesel engine), horsepower; load factor, and percentage of time In use. The construction noise impacts will be, evaluated In terms of maximum levels (Lmax) and hourly equivalent continuous noise levels (Leq) and the frequency of occurrence at ad . jaq.erit sensitive locations,. Analysis requirements will be based on the sensitivity of the area and the Noise Ordinance specifications and the Federal Transit Administration's vibration analysis guidance, Operational Noise Sources. The proposed project is anticipated to generate vehicular traffic trips from future growth. On- and off-site noise impacts from vehicular traffic "Will be assessed using the U.S. Federal Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108). The analysis Will focus on noise impacts mpacts associated with the development of the proposed project. Model input . data will include average daily traffic volumes, clay/rilght Percentages of autos, medium and heavy trucks, vehicle speeds, ground attenuation factors, and roadway widths. The 24-hourweigh-t.ed Community Noi.se,Equivalent'Lev.els - CNE L) will be presented in a tabular format. If necessary, mitigation will JN 13k03 pterfiber26,,201,3 27 Proposal forthe Peoevelopm of the hn F Zrrrier d0 rd e City v! r E onma be 11:16 on -site o noise, eves o ricitlexceed the, City's standards. Stationary rifified to ensure that on� be source n6Fsee irnpabts:(both iftipb6ting the proposed project and emanating from, the pro]ect)wljl;be FDO60110 Services. 'a.nd, Ufffitips RE314 ; fl:con wl taict potentially affected agencle.sto confirm relevant .existing .conditions, project impacts and recommbnd6d mitigation measures: The discussion will focus on the. potenfla.l.alteraflon of existing fqcilitiesi. ex ifies and the increased demand on,'ser�llc6s' extension or e?�p PnP new facil based . ed on the proposed ea. land Uses. �knp!F wlfl.evaloatelhe awlify:df the prbjdct'to:receIve adequate service based on applicable City and County standards. and.. Wheip pqequPt.e, services are not available,, will i'oenfif y q effects of I na 0 cgote service and recommended mitigation ion measures. Is s ues discussed include; P.u.b.liq $qryicqs'* Solid'Waste. Solid Was'td,denorati& resulting from the proposed uses may impact landfil qpRAcities; T and recycling for both boh.stfuldbo" ti6ho thii§P-r006t, Prbj V q an, opera p,ccmpliance:W! h AB .gag wile also M addressed. result of thel project. The Fi(e. Services review Will include :a review of existing servic- es/fI ar .ilities n th e I , area, response Imes to.the site :(which I n udes 1iazardous,Aaterial resp o rse s 10 en erge n ci as), 6vaiiable fire' -flow, - r ; alm - ts and r-eq' I dMifigdtion., p. ojec pad s. u ire 8QII&e; Thq.Pq(kqq 5eryico treview will focus upoq response "times to the, site, available perso nel,and overall protection services _... -!1 - 6uld likely not et:overa nee . significantly t . _ I I , incorporated project design, including lighting, plgragp pfd-tecurRyba rdw aiofo` rt he r reducc potential prir.ne activity will beldentiflod. Schools, Potential' impacts to schools focusing an existing , .. , _ ' conditions, student capacities,, current ourrentenrollmcOt'4ndfOCii�ivi�caiior�. Generation f ro m the project'W ill berthe basis for tha impacf analysis. Mitigation measures will b6pirovided to reducethe:signlflcance of impacts, Parks and Recreation . The review will include overall 4parkI , and conditions ' , in the City , ity end i.m Pots-wh ich the project ;may have on the part( system. Potential impacts will beldentifiod with mitigation to reduce. the significance of impacts. Public Utilities: Water. Based, upon technical Information provided by the City, existing capacities and defior6ncies will be addressed. The on -site potable and non-pbbab(b water system conditions will be presented. Cffsite potable and non-potable water storage, pumping and transmission facilities Will be studied. f�L .Qw r. Baised upon technical information provided by the City, existing capacities and deficiencies. will be addressed. Major off-site sewer conveyance, treatment and disposal will be ON 132203 a 12 o September 26, 2013 22 04 o City of Newport "each e Proposal for the Redevelopment of the .r.City Hall Complex En lvi Formeronm tal I rnp aot port R prep nt cl-,Rrqjpq gppoq�f� Uct e e iln'T'.-P. �re con necf-ioinS, epsernerit, modifications 8hd,Up to the.qX(sting -system willbo studied. Electrical. Existing facili— ties I projppt impacts,: infrastructure relocatioI n, underground I ing of overhead 00s; easements .and .necessary Mitigation. Telephone. Exikin g, facilit—ieS, , project impacts, infrastructure relocated, uqdergrouncihg of overhe, lines;. -si. easernerits and necessary. Gas; ExistingJaciliti.es, pjr0je.ctJMpqqts,, infrastructure rel pcetipl, easements and necessary Mitigation, Roadway 7mainten , 8tCe. The proposed project.may-incrementally in. aseIt enalh maintenance of streets, storm chains, and other belowsurfbd6feicilitlebi RBF Will consult with.the project team and,City POIJIIc;Works Divisoh to ascertain key.concerns/impad . tsdue.foinpMped,ilitiliz tiond 'area, road's. Viratfic . and 0aieking aRqly�jp to qqp pn fron.men.q opurn pareaa.traffic impact Pprj� Vi t I d efit t on.of.the proposed 00 qco . rid ht-%Wfthih'e'C'afif6rniaEhV.i"r-onth.6ntaIQ061it A-t(CEQA)',.6-�"Wi�lidg�addr��bsth6 Y City Traffic Phasing Oirdibance (TPO.) anWy§iis for the proposed project Additionally, ally.; thQ Isis . �W!(( include a State Highway analysis fbi-the study intersections .. n er elj'u'ris�. ic ion o. .. id rqns,a.s.Weil. as..IndUdb an applicable OWgb.Gbuhty R- d i a f d. it i Mandgemie'n't P'..rdg'rbifi,(PMF�) W60 916h for -the West -Coast Hi 8. - JyNew Highway I..IPPq Ramps joeatro.n.; The t ra (fic. i rn p ct an a I ys ! s V I I i: 'a ss-u me the p`rbjje . cfzite is vacant,and notcurrently generating trips.: For lnformatonal'pqrlposes,.- a comparative trip generation .analysis between trips forecast to be generated by will I be ih6ftlided. studyArea The study intersections will -cons . ist.of the following twenty (2Q) intersections identified bythe Cities' of Newport Be6ch.. and Costa Mesa. tCity of Newpotl. Beach • Orange Stredt[West Coast Highway.; • Superior Avenue/Placentla Avenue, • superior. Avenue /Balboa Boulevard -West. Codst Hlg.hWaY;: 32n1 strebt/Balbod. Boulevard; • Newport l3oulevardlAospital Road • Newport QodleVard/West 6bast Highw6y Ramp; Newport BbUf6Verd/Via Lido; Newport Boulevard /Finely Avenue; • Newport Boulevard /32 d Boulevard/32 d 8VOet. A I 32jb'3 Septeffiber A.2013 City of Nowp o Proposa fortho Redevelopment of ihe= OrT orC 1 ty Hatl Cmmplex tivrpn on t a mp a • Newport 30U[evar& 6'h Street, • Riv&sidd DdVe/We§t Coast ,HighWoy; • TO§jiq AyeriueNV ,, est Poast Highwpy', qpd • power :bdveWbstCoast Highway. City of Costa Mesa This sd6pia assumosi 7 study intersections Will be analyzed in the City,of Costa Mesa; the p,repise location of the study Intersections -will, , be identified 'based onydiscu9sion with City of Costa,mesa staff., As part of the analysis ,j.,R.B.,F will collect:P m,. peak 0,ed I od . :(7:00 a.m..Ito 0:00 p.m,) and p,rh. peak period, ?),I. nte . fsection t.aoun1sb�t.the. o6ty'(20)�.tudy.intbf§66tib'h§. ;,(*0Q,ipA._jq6:.6Q:p,ffi moyehlen oaa ty0balw6606y'( Tuesday', Wedheg'day; or Thursday). The.analys. is will u.. tilize.-thlelhighpst,hopr of traffic,count data c lI q e4with't n each; p qOk ;pe rod 'Jfti sscopp c ... f Wor k . does not a sumovehidlo, classification counts, Analysis-,ScamKios Th6analysis Will. d6ciJh)ef5t h). peak hou r -and p.m, �peak; hourrstud intersection c,ond.it1i96§f�r,t.hef. 1 1 g a lysi .9 P4 scenarios. P Exlstihg 9 nQreU4sLAu11:1U1&L1vt,- Y. Forecast Ourquistive V. • Forecast Qoneraj, Pion Analysis Methodology The analysis wilt document the existing rand Oreukzj operation of the gqdy]o aforlh& itersoction above identified apalysis. scenarios,_ .- . e 1 13 , h ­.d 0... lTh­ City o. NeWpAr ..e.a.c and , range:CountyCMP nterseetitm analyses will,utilze the intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) analysis rnethodoogy;tlie State Highway intersection analysis: will utilize the Highway Capacity Manual (HQM ) analysis m. p th qd 61 qq y.. The traffic impact study will identify the number of daily and peak hour tri . ps forecast orecast I to be!genetot generated by the proposed prcjlect _U666 the Ci of,N, eW .. rfB .. ead . h.:Trt�f . fi . d . Analysis . Model I . . N f. BTAM)fttjfute. of Transportation Engineers (ITE),. 9r" Edition (2012) trip,geh&aton rates,, or other source as directed by the City. This scope of CityWill prbvid6.RBFNBTAM model ICU runs at the study intersections for all analysis scenarios With exception . o. f the forecast GeI neral Plan Buildout With ' i Project Conditions onalysis scenario Which ROF will manually d6f ivu; manual. t rip Vtr&Aon and assigOrnerft Will be .'reviewed and approved by City staff prior to utilization in the analysis. Utilizing applicable e agency analysis methodology, and based on applicable agency performance criteria aodahresliolds of significance, RBF Will determine wheth&theproposed projectisforeop,st JN 132203 • 14 September 26j 2013 30 City,,of Newport Beach Proposal for the Redevelopment of the Former City Hall Complex to result in sigrlficanttro. ff , i-c-limp acts at th6 guoy intersections: Mitigation measures will I be I i I d entifI e'd i n accordance with p 1 cab a - bigency,ciritbrid to :eliminate or r6duceIddritified significant traffic impacts. The City's Obtdilt; i. changes to, l 32 a , nd S#eet that are under consideration will bb qualitatively be evaluated by KBF-since these changes appeartobe. part.of the proposed project. The anal Ainclud I I analysis WJ I -e for iriforrhatidrial,purposos atrip generation analysis comparison between the number of trips generated by the former City Hall use in comparison ..f.o,'the,.I.rips forecast to be geriprated'by'the proppsedhote 7 1 . . . . horoiw' State Righway lntersecflon-Analysis This scope of assumes up; to IGbfthe 20 stctdy:int6r§ebtions% will :bb,1668tbd on State Highway routes,. and Will be analyzed utilizing the,HCM analysis methodology in, accordance With'Caltrans. g1gidplinles%, study ih of the p RBF.will peer reviewth city; of Newport �eMh The.. h. peer ..Studv Peer Review Me Memo 92 'a, meMbfMcIUM to. City staff.jeaffic F'Will provide project specific ppqlysis update ,qfpqlen(161 grcwth-,lp4Pci.n9impacfS pursuant-to 6'6). The btlbaWas: bi�sedbO data kb'M tke'atyof A�Qwj.'0400s Sdct6rd51,2,..( .. ebhii�tA.inthis§6 NeW06ff B60bh,'C;-�ilif.ot'n�'i-a.D.bPb"t't-�m'eh-tof Fllhance,.and U.S, Census; 7 qAp�.fiq n discusses ways ibwhich the proposed projeci gould foster eq 061C.'Or, pppyla . tiongrowth., OrI . lle:Q ' 0 . risti`Uptich of adaftional'I't.ou'siag, eithe.r- dire'cify Or. indirectly, in th6 surrounding environment. The analysis ad.dr6ts6.�.g'roWth.- j'n'd"ucingJ impacts hn.tbfritis of Whether the project influences the rataj� I locat! ' on, and in I the amount of growth. G.-rovA114 dq i impacts the - Ping r! , 6 proje�ts c.onsistel GY with a 'd opt e . proposOd . . Plan s that have , growt'h monag.eme6tfrbM a local And regional standpoint. Pot6htl61..g r oWth-inducing impacts ftrin the pr6posed:devblopmgn.t-will ,b,e analyzed as they relate to population, housing and a n o rne�nt factors; .y The ranoe.of Alternatives .is expected taiablud6thb No Project,a rO-dU66d[.itodiffedd6§igh,:and one other AltornAve that maybe considered through the Project Review process:. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126A, RQF Will provide an analysis of 0 "rea.sohable range" of alterhbtives,- con�panng environmental , , , impacts of each altemrativ& in each. impact area t64he-pr6ject. Foreach alternative, RBF will provide a qualitative analysis which will f includetraffic(based upon qva, IaLle data 1 the Report); air qu6i��,,rl(jise,:ihfra�tructuto, iand use and gl 'bbl climate change. I I . n I � � Ti:affic: Re 0 One important element of the Altdr.natiVeis section will. be an impact matr'i�, which will offer a. cornparison of th6 varying levels of impact of each.,alternative be , Ing , This will be prepared in a.form—at I to allow deci sion-makers g. reference that Will be easily understood,. While providing, a calculated (where feasible), accurate comparison of each alt6friative, A 132203 86pternti6r 26, 2013 SI The alternOtives 866tidh will cdhf6rifi to both amendments to Section 15126.6 of the C , EQA Guidelines and to recent and applicdble court cases. RBF F vvili'discoss as-required b.y- the: .0EdA 1P elines, the and disadvqi gq8,gfeno ha A er mativeindthe.reasons for rejecting bir foboftimericlln�g the Pirbj6dt 61terhativdsstatbd, This altethatives section will -culminate W1111 the selectic)riof the ,e,nvi,ronm,enfal,ly.superiQ.ralternq(iyel.naccordance *th C A requi I mment I s., EQ 2.0 MITICIAT110M MONITOKING AWO REFORT11.46 PROGRAM, To comply with the PuNic Res.o.urce.s:. ode Section. 21.081:6. (Ag k160), RBF will prepare a Mitigation Wriltbeing. and Reporting Program to be.-defined through working wiftCity staff to identify appropriate moriitoririg ste s' ro d In orogr to provide a bas.ls. for monitoring such p p measure cl i and Project c .s.,untrigan. upon tatiba. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ing Pligcklisf; will serve as the foyn tion of jbq'Mitigption osod Project. The .ChecklistirididdtisAW . mitigation measure hUrfiber.'as outlined, ib thb EIR, -the EIR f.eference page (WWO the measure is documented), a list of Mitigation Measurel. .9ioris,of Approyal (in chronological. ord 'appropriate , I . I.. ­' ' .. '.. __. .... .... qrunderft topic);.'the Montt 0 cy,. epa'ft ht responsible jn�slble for. vahfyM'g WtWhattagen '/d pring.....q.es on ma.. t sp� IrOplerndnt6tlidkdf thb Merdsbre), Method dfVefficati.'on. (documentation i.',field checks, etc),arida verification section for AhQ initials : of . ,g ifldi�.iduaj 'date ofa� Tication,, and pori.inent Ilip e" remarks,. If ti 001 I f: 1 PEIF Will provide g0ditichal sections in fhe,EIRtI a - r e et C OA and O lty .r 6 ' W 'meats I including th 6 fjll6Wihd: Sig hfi66ntlHeVWVslbl6 EnWormbrta I Ch 1 ng es Tha t Wo b Id B a I nvolved I n the Pro posed Action Should 11 Be implemenied 8ffbdtg FoQnd -Not To Be Significant, Inyentory:of UlSayodable AdV�e­ispllrnpaciv, and Or.garlizOtipns in' .Persons 60).sUjied/, 601l­ ograpk .' Y: Sia _DRAFT. E1_R 3.1 PRELIMINARY"AFT IEHR RBF will respond to o.ne complete set of CJly comments on.fhe Administrative pra, EIR. .lfdesired by the City, RBF will P_ ide the. Preliminary' .Draft of the EIR with l all cinanges.highlight6d to assist tho.sedohd check of the document:. RBF will respond.to a,second review of the Preliminary Drift EIR and will proparethe reportfor a final pre-print review by the dity. In addition, RBF °wjll prepare the Notice of Completion (NOC) for submittal to the Office of Planning and Resede6h (OPR). RBF will also work with the Cify to develop a cl.istiribution., listing for the NOQ,ancl Draft EIR.; JN 132203 P 16 a Sqp(Mber26' ,.2013 32 WPO tQ City of Neiwport Beach OrlopOsE'jl fgrthd Redevelopment Othe Former City Hall Complex Environinental Impact Report =7 RBFwJll r6sP6hdt6 oomffients received on the Draft EIRclurinig the 45-clay public review period, and 'any addidonal comments: raised du.ring public. hearings, RBF-will prepare.thoro.ugh, reasoned and sensitive responses to . relev.drit.einvimhrindhttil issues. This task Includes written responses to both Mlt6h and oral comments received on the Dr review o hearing transcripts, as . alt PR (includes rev f required):: The Praft,,Resp.Onsepto Comments will be prepaji-edfor review by Clystaff. Following review. of the Draft Responses `to Cdrrirhehts, RBF Will finalize 'this section for inclusion in the Adminis'tr6tiVe Final EIR; It is hotedthat it is.0h1knOWn, atjh tune the extent 6M cy ti of public and agen comments that will result from the Per the. City's RFP, RBF has budgeted. 1. 00 hours, for responses to comments;. the ipyo-1:qf comments and response exceed R& Will submit on eed our addifn quests to the City ln:brd6rA6,bcm'Pletd the responses, 4Z FORALEIR The Final EIR wilt 66`6slst 6f':th6 eeviged Draft EIR text .as necessary a d1hp Comments to Responses" isection. , The q ' Draff EIR wilt be rpviseq, in accorda I ncQ,wifh the re: sgons6s to public. on To 46ilitate City review, RBF will ofmat the Final EIR with shaded textfor : any new or modified teikt. and "strike out" any text -which has been delated from the Final EIR. RBF will also prepare, and file: theNdfice � of DeWmnihatiol, within five (5) day6 if Elk 1. This al .. .. ..". .. .-- .,! 1. � — I I'll 11 1 five q approval. scope . I of work also )nclu.Ods, the O�ufifed, fees for the. California Department offish and Wildlife RBF will provide administrative _assistance to facilitate the CE OA QA- rocetsincludihg the preparation of the Notice of Deterrnihatlon,.Staternehtbf bverriding Gonsider6tions and Findings for City use in the Pr'oj'e'c't'review prodes§,;. RBF will prepare the Findings In taccordance with: the provisions of Section 1'6091 -and 15093 of the State 0%,6, Quidelinjqs�and in a form specified by the City, RBF will s b Fi dinosforCit�re,4eWand Will 8pbhdt6t)hb��tof. City to�nrfib6ts, submit re RBF Will prepare, submit, and mail all CEOA public notiGasrequired for the proposed project. Public .notices a,ro.qnfici.pated to includ-e; e Notice of Preparation: As stated above within Task 1.6, RBF will prepare the NOP for the proposed project to . initiate the M-day.NOP public review period. RBF twill dlstdbutd the NOP 'to.appropriate agencies, parties, and individuals (including the State Clearinghouse), RBF will also post the NOP at the County Cleric JN 13220 Spiptern bor26,2013 33 City: of Prop_psal f6r theftedayolopfinent of th.6 Fdym6r Qlt ' V Notice .IdfAiM#aWflN RBFWJJ Prepare a Notioeiof Availability (NO,A)Ao'be distributed at the onset of the X45 -day public review period for the. project. The .N,OA'wili 'ind I I , ode. required project information, such a's a brief project desoription,. the start/end cates of the public review Porlddjocatibns wh&& the EIR is available for review,, and contact informAonfor Citys aff :9 NoLfd_6 df'Coftfetloh: RBF will. prepare a Notice of Completion for submittal to the State Clearinghouse at the onset of both the 30 -day 4OP public review opriod , and the 4 'day ,i 1R PqWip review period. Th .6 -OC will brow the format r6b6mrn6hd6d by the State Clearinghouse., No ice bt. Determination :. A5 stated, above within Task 4:2;. RBF will prepare a Notice of Ue—temNn6fiohl t6 be.-rited With the County Clerk and.sent.t.0 the S.tat0.Cje.a.riQghQuse within, a live-d.ys of , E1lR.certlfiPqflon., T. scope assumes IhdV the: City would-be responsible for any radjus rna.i.lipg or newspaper not . ices required forthe proposed' project:: Mr' eh01,j fa.pnd[Mr.5066TorresAli be rd9pd)-d�lbforna na—getii- eR;- a u ' Ni§ibn:dfthe EIR ProjeofTWi:ds the.Cify staff to'li-rcorp6rate C-ityp6licles into the Elk. Mr. Lajole and Mr, Torres will underiake,consultafion and.coordinaii6n of the , Project a rid review the EIR for jogmLplig orWit , li��A:re g,60ern6s and City CEQAp6bbdures. RBF:Will Rc � W obordlnatd.With,sthte and loco [agencie's r'.-6-0'rdi"hg'-this.environmentaI document. .-Ar.LqJ :and Mr. Torres will coordina - mwith all technical staff; consultants, support staff and ward processing toward the -timely completion of the .EIR. goal of RBF to serve : Wan.Wen"910h of City staff throdg hoult the dge6r6fY of the EIR Project, Mr. Lajdie, andfor Mr. 'Torres, will attend Up to two Staff. meeting's - - -- and, will represent the "Rrqjbdt Tea m at, public hearings and make .presentations as h�ces s4y. R B F anticipates a "kickr6ff meeting." (refer to Task 1- 1), progress meetings,, and public meetings and hearings; Mr; Laj616 and Mr. Torres along with other key Project -ream personnef will also be available. to- attend meetings with affected jurisdictions, agencies and tioris,)s needed toldt�.htl�16S,U'-eE�,l assess i�hpt�ol,�, arganiza and define: mitigation. The estimated cost for addifi6hal meetings is approximately $1,;200 per person. One (1).kickoff meeting with City Staff (refer to Task 1.1). One (1) community /neigh,borhood scoping meeting .(refer to Task 1.6). Progress meetings with City Staff assumes six (6) meetings to provide written and oral progress fepg".rts, resolve issues, review comments on Administrative documents and receive any necessary direction. from City Staff. Three .(3) public hearings with- presentations as necessary. This includes Planning C6mmission and City Council meetings. JN 132203 .18 $qjpternber 2s, 2013 3.4 Proposal for the f i The JOJOWing Is a. breakdo'wn df'all OrOdVcWdEilivOrabl6s. The. li'§tbd deliver4bles lassume :a ,standard number.of defiverables; f6r a pr9jpctof fiHis.,type and can be adfqsted• as directqdty the City. IROF can also Provide q. coqt, per document, and sari provide billing.on-a fime and materials basis, as.requostaid-.bythe City. TWO (2) . qopl'pp of the Draft Project Diecriptiorl. pn.d.... Elk. - ... z , '.' . , � - Qufhne One n ccPpy of braft-0 'i 0-1 r.0i6dt.Ddsdp.Ioh and-EIR Outlihe .0 Two '(2)... copies .bf th6.Notice of:Preparation/Initial Study One 41) Electronls Copy of1he N pfae.of Or pa ratio /' . It I.$ tudy Fifty. 50) coPies. bf the NOUce of -PrepbMionlihitial Study Five, '16's of Adrn!n flye 0 El. q#-! ari6 Technical -'M 'ct on Ob cop, . ,.,ppen ices Rd cdPY EIR #.I P :FW& (5 copies 6fAhe"AdminWrative Draft ER-P and Technical ,ppendk -:on CD prip (I ) El`e,Qlronicwpy of the Adirirriistrat6e.br4t bkk' TWO oplel nfthe Pre+ri(ntbraff EIR bndTe�dlhhibal Appendices 6n.CD One(1) Electronid 60y 6flh , e Pre�print Draft Elq ® Ffty'(5Q) copies of tlie• Draft Elk.(Techneal Appendices do CD) Oh&(1)'616--dtr i6 06pyIh-Adobe Acrobat:(POF) Format fqrweb Pastin• TECHMICAL REPORITS o Two (2) copies, of the. Drift Technical Reports TWO (2) copies of the Final Technical Repofts° Fifty (5Q) copies of thq'Response to Comments/Errata - Two (2.) coplas of the Final Elk and with Technical Appendices on CD Five. (5) CD's containing the Rhal EIR and Technical Appendices One (i) electronic copy Of the, Notices, Initial Study, Final EIR., and Final Findings and Statement of Overriding. Considerations JIN 132203 • 19. September 28 „2093 35 City of Newport Beach Proposal for the Redevelopment of the Former City Hall Complex Environmental Impact Report Additional information sources will be consulted including the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and historic /current aerial photographs as appropriate to define the habitat requirements for sensitive species potentially occurring onsite. This will allow RBF to focus its field visit on those sensitive biological resources present or likely to be present on the site. Habitat Assessment/Field Survey. The site will be systematically surveyed to verify existing conditions of the project site and its abilityto support any listed species or habitat type. Particular attention will be given to the suitability of the vegetation on and surrounding the proposed project site for its ability to provide suitable avian nesting opportunities. In addition, the six "special trees" that were identified by a City arborist in a recent report (Special Trees — City Hall Complex, dated November 16, 2012) will be documented using a handheld GPS to verify their locations on the proposed project. Notes will be taken on all flora and fauna species observed. This survey will provide an understanding of the overall project setting and biological resources occurring with the area. The habitat assessment will not include focused surveys or formal jurisdictional delineations. The impact analysis will be prepared using the results from the habitat assessment and will document all wildlife and habitats occurring on the project site, the potential to support any listed species, and whether the site supports potential jurisdictional features. The analysis will include a detailed map of the plant communities occurring onsite and their respective acreages. The analysis will also address the mitigation measures previously identified by the City to mitigate the potential loss of the six "special trees." D. Cultural and Historic Resources The analysis will cite the provisions of CEQA Guidelines 15064.5 (Historical and Archaeological Resources). No known sites of cultural significance are known to exist at the site and S1318 consultation has previously been conducted by the City. However, should the City choose to complete the consultation again due to the passage of time, this scope assumes that the City would be responsible for the effort. The results of consultation effort will summarize the analysis by RBF. This analysis will also include a search of Native American Heritage Commission files. E. Geology and Soils This scope of work assumes that geotechnical documentation has been prepared by the Project Applicant and provided for use within the environmental study. To assist in ensuring a comprehensive and defensible review of impacts related to geology and soils, a technical peer review will be conducted. The peer review would consist of the following: A review of relevant geologic /soils data, color aerial photographs, as well as contacting the City and County Emergency Management Agency to request records of any relevant geotechnical reports; A technical peer review of the Applicant- prepared geotechnical report for the project for the purpose of assessing the adequacy of the consultant's evaluation of site - specific geologic hazards and potentially significant geotechnical constraints, and mitigation measures associated with the proposed development; and A review of the most recent proposed grading plan. JN 132203 • 23 • August 26, 2013 M EXHIBIT B SCHEDULE OF BILLING RATES RBF Consulting Page B w�AWP24 City of Newport Beach FzA Proposal for the Redevelopment of the Former City Hall Complex y Environmental Impact Report v BUDGET TASK G,l- 25b C. to 210 E.T. 165 ''A.M, 920 S.B. 145 K.B. 120 B.M., 236 M.E :220 R.K. 165 R.B. 190 S.M. 180 G A 90 Total Heurs. Repro.7 Mailing Total Coat 1.0. PROJECTSCOPING 1.1 Paiect Kick -0g and Pm'ect CharaotanSicv 4 8 12 '$2320 1R Research and.'COnsu6dIroeaEgstion 4 4 $580 . L3 ' en ti 4 4. $eea 4 O e.Of Pee arMlbn 1 11 $165 Scot 15 SCbA 4 6 10 $1.990 ION STRATVE`DRAFT"EIR 22.1PREPARATION 2.1 d Purpose ose 2 2 330 E.0.utdl Zurome:, 2.2 Executive SUmm '1 6 7 $2695 2.3 Ptresn Deem Son 1 9 :3' 12 17 :$2695 q:e .4 T,=Mtty. ofei 1 1 $4S5 .2.5 clhtt Pao ectslMal is .3 9' $495 En lteabve 2.8 Envimnmentel Mal sis A. etlrs,and Shatle/Ehatlbw 1 '1 65 So 130 Q ,v, O B. Uali 1 6 6 40 47 .,$6,040 C. io iml esoumes Slo 1 in 2 39 $8,935 'D. 'Cultufal and Histortc Res..rca. 1 "1 12 13 $1905 E. Geblb and Soil. 1 12 30 43 $7,305 F, .Graannousa,Gas Anal is/Climata Chan a -2 5 37 $4.530 G. HNYard.. and Hazardous Materials 1 24 25 $3.045 1. Hodmlo and Water Ouali 2 20 50 7z $11. Sd I: Land Use antl RelevantPlerinin .2 '1 5 So 59 8 950 J. Noise :2 45 47 $5730 K.. Public 5ervi[es'eid. Wulities .2 30 32' $4.600 L.. Ta(ficand Paddn . `1. 1 '6 20 120 16 164 36:070 2.7 Grorvlh MdOdcmt,nt '1 '2 10 13 $1 780 2.8- ARamalives W the PrO.$ed Act.. 2 1 24 1 1 1 1 35 $5,510 Pm ra'1 29. Mitlgatioh Oni[brin'antl.Re ortin m M 5 7 $885 2.W. Mditional Seclions - .2 20 8 30 .$4';]90 3.e DRAFT FIR 3.1 Preliminary Deeft EIR. �4 '.4 '20 4 30 10 6 78 $1 1;710 3:2 Com legon of Na Orar EIR :2 '1 5 1S G' 31 $4,560.. 4,0 FINAL ENVIRONMEMAL IMPACT REPDRT 4.1 Response- NCOmments. 4 '4. 16.. -.8 33 20 8 2 2 t 2 100 $15,645. 4.2" Final EIR t '1. 4 16 22 x$3440 4.3- Findin s5tatamaM'nt OVaTridin Considerations 1 '-0 10 12 '. 1910. 5.0 COORDINATION AND MEETINGS: 5.1 Public Noti.s: 1 .6 ] $1240 5.2' EmirbnmeM2l Review COOMinaNOn 20 -24 q4 x$8960 5:3- Emirbnmental Review Maetin s 24 55 12 '12 1 03 $19335 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL, DELIVERABLES $7,500 :$7500 TOTAL HOURB 74 16 211 932 325 155 140 18 52 29 30 69 1251 'PeMontof Total Labor N.cua) 5,9% L3% 16:9:e 16.6% 26.0% 124% tt 2% t4%o 4.245 23% 24% '0 b% SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS $18.5001 $3,3601 1 $15,840 $42;125 $13,500) _,$32.900. $3.960 $8,5301 $5,510 1_$5.4001 $6,210 _ $7{500 $206,300 GL =Glenn. Lejoie AN, -A HN - -Obb Mallon R,81= Rcha,d Seek E.T, dEddie Torres- S8 „ =5iatla a.m., Me: MicaEridabn: $M,MSIctlmagviien CM_= C.11.c..M.,. K.Bi =Kd5en Eogue R:K.= Rebecca l4nney GA=Gmpbic ArtiS Note: U v cM will be performed at a 'Nat to eztted- ccr cc pncc, which Will - become. the Flrzn -fixed price upo0 [Ompleton.vf g b tivns.witn'_tfl2 Clical The' octal butlget inGutles.,dll ".11aneovs costs to, ho Vrnl..... reprotluc[mn., Te6nbury ca1cles; felepbvne, pvstil, tlelivery; refe ce matemisand inddental .Peose V RSF wiIITe CG a paymenC.e [h r a perwntage bass toting mteau ne:rof by Mnr ly billing. ,,det&r incd W the Cliehf, TNe RBF prole. manage, receives meH httb mekeaajustments to Scan allocvscos- aneceisa,y wcnin the wean budget Thls fee also includes the NOD filing fee- and the Callfomla'DeDarbmeM of Filth and Wildlife filing fee (S3'OT9).. JN 132203 • 1 • September 26, 2013 SR o CONSULTING A =-= Company HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE Effective January 2013 through December 2013 OFFICE PERSONNEL $/ Hr. SeniorPrincipal ................................................................................... ............................... ........................$275.00 Principal .......................................................................................... ..... ............................ ... .........................250.00 ProjectDirector .................................................................................... ............................... .........................225.00 ProgramManager ................................................................................ ............................... .........................215.00 SeniorProject Manager.... ............................ .................................... ......................................................... 2DO.00 ProjectManager .................................................................................. ............................... .........................195.00 StructuralEngineer ............................................................................................................. .........................195.DO TechnicalManager .............................................................................. ............................... .........................180.00 SeniorEngineer..... .......................................... ........................... ............................................................... 163.00 SeniorPlanner... ......... ...... _ ...... __ ........... ................ ............ .................... ................................... ........... 163.00 ElectricalEngineer ............................................................................... ............................... .........................163.00 LandscapeArchitect ............................................................................ ............................... .........................150.00 SeniorGIS Analyst .............................................................................. ............................... .........................150.00 ProjectEngineer. .............. ..................... ............................................................................................ 148.00 ProjectPlanner .................................................................................... ............................... .........................148.00 Survey Crew Support Manager ............................................................ ............................... .........................145.00 EnvironmentalSpecialist ...................................................................... ............................... .........................138.00 Design Engineer/Senior Designer/ Mapper ........................................... ............................... .........................135.00 GISAnalyst .......................................................................................... ............................... .........................122.00 Designer/Planner, ................................ ........... ............................................ .......................................... 118.00 ProjectCoordinator .............................................................................. ............................... .........................110.00 GraphicArtist ........................................................................................ ............................... ..........................97.00 Environmental Analyst/Staff Planner .................................................... ............................... ..........................97.00 DesignTechnician ................................................................................ ............................... ..........................97.00 Assistant Engineer / Planner ................................................................... ............................... ..........................93.00 PermitProcessor .................................................................................. ............................... ..........................83.00 Engineering Aid /Planning Aid ............................................................... ............................... ..........................75.00 OfficeSupport/ Clerical ......................................................................... ............................... ..........................63.00 FIELD PERSONNEL 2- Person Survey Crew ........................................................................ ............................... ........................$250.00 1- Person Survey Crew ......................................................................... ............................... .........................165.00 LicensedSurveyor ............................................................................... ............................... .........................175.00 FieldSupervisor ................................................................................... ............................... .........................175.00 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PERSONNEL ConstructionManager ......................................................................... ............................... ........................$190.00 ResidentEngineer ............................................................................... ............................... .........................160.00 Construction Inspector (Prevailing Wage) ............................................ ............................... .........................136.00 Construction Inspector (Non - Prevailing Wage) .................................... ............................... .........................113.00 FieldOffice Engineer ........................................................................... ............................... .........................113.00 ConstructionTechnician ....................................................................... ............................... ..........................97.00 Note: Blueprinting, reproduction, messenger service and other direct expenses will be charged as an additional cost plus 151. A Sub - consultant Management Fee of fifteen - percent (15 %) will be added to the direct cost of all sub - consultant services to provide far the cost of administration, sub - consultant consultation and Insurance. Vehicle mileage will be charged as an additional cost at the IRS approved rate. 3J° EXHIBIT C INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS — PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1. Provision of 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, policies of insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form satisfactory to City. Consultant agrees to provide insurance in accordance with requirements set forth here. If Consultant uses existing coverage to comply and that coverage does not meet these requirements, Consultant agrees to amend, supplement or endorse the existing coverage. 2. 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. 3. Coverage Requirements. A. Workers' Compensation Insurance. Consultant shall maintain Workers' Compensation Insurance, statutory limits, and Employer's Liability Insurance with limits of at least one million dollars ($1,000,000) each accident for bodily injury by accident and each employee for bodily injury by disease in accordance with the laws of the State of California, Section 3700 of the Labor Code. Consultant shall submit to City, along with the certificate of insurance, a Waiver of Subrogation endorsement in favor of City, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers. B. General Liability Insurance. Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance, and if necessary umbrella liability insurance, with coverage at least as broad as provided by Insurance Services Office form CG 00 01, in an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence, one million dollars ($1,000,000) general aggregate. The policy shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, personal and advertising injury, and liability assumed under an insured contract (including the tort liability of another assumed in a business contract) with no endorsement or modification limiting the scope of coverage for liability assumed under a contract. C. Automobile Liability Insurance. Consultant shall maintain automobile insurance at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CA 00 01 covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of 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 RBF Consulting Page �CO1 vehicles, in an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit each accident. D. Professional Liability (Errors & Omissions) Insurance. Consultant shall maintain professional liability insurance that covers the Services to be performed in connection with this Agreement, in the minimum amount of one million dollars ($1,000,000) per claim and in the aggregate. Any policy inception date, continuity date, or retroactive date must be before the Effective Date of this Agreement and Consultant agrees to maintain continuous coverage through a period no less than three years after completion of the Services required by this Agreement. 4. Other Insurance Requirements. The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: A. Waiver of Subrogation. All insurance coverage maintained or procured pursuant to this Agreement shall be endorsed to waive subrogation against City, its elected or appointed officers, agents, officials, employees and volunteers or shall specifically allow Consultant or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these requirements to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss. Consultant hereby waives its own right of recovery against City, and shall require similar written express waivers from each of its subconsultants. B. Additional Insured Status. All liability policies including general liability, excess liability, pollution liability, and automobile liability, if required, but not including professional liability, shall provide or be endorsed to provide that City and its officers, officials, employees, and agents shall be included as insureds under such policies. C. Primary and Non Contributory. All liability coverage shall apply on a primary basis and shall not require contribution from any insurance or self - insurance maintained by City. D. Notice of Cancellation. All policies shall provide City with thirty (30) calendar days notice of cancellation (except for nonpayment for which ten (10) calendar days notice is required) or nonrenewal of coverage for each required coverage. 5. Additional Agreements Between the Parties. The parties hereby agree to the following: A. Evidence of Insurance. Consultant shall provide certificates of insurance to City as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein, along with a waiver of subrogation endorsement for workers' compensation and other endorsements as specified herein for each coverage. Insurance certificates and endorsement must be approved by City's Risk Manager prior to commencement of performance. Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with City at all times during the term of this RBF Consulting Page C -2 Agreement. City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. B. City's Right to Revise Requirements. City reserves the right at any time during the term of the Agreement to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving Consultant sixty (60) calendar days advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to Consultant, City and Consultant may renegotiate Consultant's compensation. C. Enforcement of Agreement Provisions. Consultant acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of City to inform Consultant of non - compliance with any requirement imposes no additional obligations on City nor does it waive any rights hereunder. D. Requirements not Limiting. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this Section are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits or other requirements, or a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue and is not intended by any party or insured to be all inclusive, or to the exclusion of other coverage, or a waiver of any type. E. Self- insured Retentions. Any self- insured retentions must be declared to and approved by City. City reserves the right to require that self- insured retentions be eliminated, lowered, or replaced by a deductible. Self - insurance will not be considered to comply with these requirements unless approved by City. F. City Remedies for Non - Compliance. If Consultant or any subconsultant fails to provide and maintain insurance as required herein, then City shall have the right but not the obligation, to purchase such insurance, to terminate this Agreement, or to suspend Consultant's right to proceed until proper evidence of insurance is provided. Any amounts paid by City shall, at City's sole option, be deducted from amounts payable to Consultant or reimbursed by Consultant upon demand. G. Timely Notice of Claims. Contractor shall give City prompt and timely notice of claims made or suits instituted that arise out of or result from Contractor's performance under this Contract, and that involve or may involve coverage under any of the required liability policies. City assumes no obligation or liability by such notice, but has the right (but not the duty) to monitor the handling of any such claim or claims if they are likely to involve City. H. Consultant's 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. RBF Consulting Page C73