Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AG PKT 2014-09-08 #F SEA(eF s AGENDA STAFF REPORT F cq,C/FORN�P: DATE: September 8, 2014 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council THRU: Jill R. Ingram, City Manager FROM: Jim Basham, Director of Community Development /Community Services SUBJECT: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WESTBERG AND WHITE, INC. FOR PREPARATION OF A FEASIBLITY STUDY, SITE DESIGN AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR A COMMUNITY AQUATIC CENTER SUMMARY OF REQUEST: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 6499 approving professional services agreement., in the amount not exceed $238,930, with Westberg and White, Inc. for preparation of a feasibility study, preliminary site design, and environmental assessment for a community aquatic center. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS: In 2013, the City Council adopted the Parks and Community Services Master Plan which provided recommendations to improve and expand recreational activities for various parks throughout the City. The Master Plan also evaluated the program needs for a community aquatic facility and the community's desire to participate in a study for identifying the site location. In order for staff to determine the most suitable location to establish a community aquatic center, it was important to solicit the services of a qualified architectural firm that comprises a project team of various unique skills and experiences in cost feasibility analysis, site design, engineering, environmental services and public relations. In selecting a firm, staff forwarded a Request for Proposal (RFP) to various firms and highlighted key essential components. Staff was looking for creative methods and tools to successfully accomplish a comprehensive community wide outreach program to obtain participation from residents in establishing the ranking of multiple sites and determining which pool size is most desirable. The feasibility analysis and site design plans should include sufficient details and costs for acquisition and construction to ensure that the aquatic center meets City standards and can be used to implement the project. Agenda Item F The scope of work included in the RFP emphasize the community's unique geographical boundaries and tools and methods available to pull together the residents of multiple Planning Districts to participate in the land use and site selection process. After receiving responses, staff assembled an interview panel consisting of the Seal Beach Parks and Recreation Commission Chair and Vice-Chair, the City of Long Beach Aquatic Superintendent, and in-house staff to conduct interviews of the top three firms. After interviewing each of the top three candidates, the selection team recommended the firm of Westberg and White, Inc. Westberg and White, Inc. has demonstrated that it has the experience to complete the project and deliver a quality feasibility study. One of the features of the proposal that made Westberg and White, Inc. the most desirable firm Was their commitment to the public outreach process and its unique approach to engaging the public. As part of the agreement with Westberg and White, Inc., the firm will be charged to deliver a feasibility study that identifies a preferred site for the future location of an aquatic facility. The firm will also be required to provide initial conceptual design and prepare environmental documents. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS An environmental assessment will be prepared as part of the feasibility and site analysis. No further environmental assessment is required at this time. LEGAL ANALYSIS: The City Attorney has reviewed and approved as to form FINANCIAL IMPACT: Project No. 8G0904, for a new swimming pool, was included in the adopted budget for fiscal year 2014115. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 6499 approving professional services agreement., in the amount not to exceed $238,930, with Westberg and White, Inc. for preparation of a feasibility study, preliminary site design, and environmental assessment for a community aquatic center. Page 2 S MITTED BY: NOTED AND APPROVED- MT Basham I R. Ingram, City a ager erector of Community Development/ Community Services Prepared by: Tim Kelsey, Recreation Manager Attachments: A. Resolution No. 6499 B. Professional Services Agreement with Westberg and White, Inc. Page 3 RESOLUTION NUMBER 6499 A RESOLUTION OF THE SEAL BEACH CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WESTBERG AND WHITE, INC. FOR PREPARATION OF FEASIBILITY STUDY, PRELIMINARY SITE DESIGN, AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR A COMMUNITY AQUATIC CENTER THE SEAL BEACH CITY COUNCIL DOES HEREBY RESOLVE: Section 1. The City Council hereby approves the professional services agreement ("Agreement") between the City of Seal Beach and Westberg and White, Inc for preparation of a feasibility study, preliminary site design and environmental assessment for a community aquatic center in the amount of $238,930.00. Section 2. The Council hereby directs the City Manager to execute the Agreement. Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the Seal Beach City Council at a regular meeting held on the 8th day of September , 2014 by the following vote: AYES: Council Members NOES: Council Members ABSENT.- Council Members ABSTAIN: Council Members Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE SS CITY OF SEAL BEACH 1, Linda Devine, City Clerk of the City of Seal Beach, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is the original copy of Resolution Number 6499 on file in the office of the City Clerk, passed, approved, and adopted by the Seal Beach City Council at a regular meeting held on the 8th day of September , 2014. City Clerk PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT Between SEA1 CD 01 FR 27 WN City of Seal each 211 - 8th Street .Seal Beach, CA 90740 Wester g + White, Inc. 1775 Hancock St., Ste. 120 San Diego, CA 92110 619-542-1188 -rhis Professional Service Agreement ("the Agreement") is made as of September 8, 2014 (the "Effective Date"), by and between Westberg + White, Inc. ("Consultant"), a California Corporation, and the City of Seal Beach ("City"), a California charter city, (collectively, "the Parties"). RECITALS A. City desires certain professional services. B. Consultant represents that it is qualified and able to provide City with such services. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the Parties' performance of the promises, covenants, and conditions stated herein, the Parties hereto agree as follows. AGREEMENT 1.0 Scope of Services 11. Consultant shall provide those services ("Services") set forth in the attached Exhibit A, which is hereby incorporated by this reference. To the extent that there is any conflict between Exhibit A and this Agreement, this Agreement shall control. 1.2. Consultant shall perform all Services under this Agreement in accordance with the standard of care generally exercised by like professionals under similar circumstances and in a manner reasonably satisfactory to City. 1.3. In performing this Agreement, Consultant shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local law. 1.4. Consultant will not be compensated for any work performed not specified in the Scope of Services unless the City authorizes such work in advance and in writing. The City Manger may authorize extra work to fund unforeseen conditions up to $28,850. Payment for additional work in excess of this amount requires prior City Council authorization. 2.0 Term This term of this Agreement shall commence as of the Effective Date and shall continue until all tasks identified in the scope of service are completed or unless previously terminated as provided by this Agreement. 3.0 Consultant's Compensation City will pay Consultant in accordance with the hourly rates shown on the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit B for Services but in no event will the City pay more than $238,930.00. Any additional work authorized by the City pursuant to Section 1.4 will be compensated in accordance with the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit B. 2 of 9 4.0 Method of Payment 4.1. Consultant shall submit to City monthly invoices for all services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Such invoices shall be submitted within 15 days of the end of the month during which the services were rendered and shall describe in detail the services rendered during the period, the days worked, number of hours worked, the hourly rates charged, and the services performed for each day in the period. City will pay Consultant within 30 days of receiving Consultant's invoice. City will not withhold any applicable federal or state payroll and other required taxes, or other authorized deductions from payments made to Consultant. 4.2. Upon 24-hour notice from City, Consultant shall allow City or City's agents or representatives to inspect at Consultant's offices during reasonable business hours all records, invoices, time cards, cost control sheets and other records maintained by Consultant in connection with this Agreement. City's rights under this Section 4.2 shall survive for two years following the termination of this Agreement. 5.0 Termination 5.1. This Agreement may be terminated by City, without cause, or by Consultant based on reasonable cause, upon giving the other party written notice thereof not less than 30 days prior to the date of termination. 5.2. This Agreement may be terminated by City upon 10 days' notice to Consultant if Consultant fails to provide satisfactory evidence of renewal or replacement of comprehensive general liability insurance as required by this Agreement at least 20 days before the expiration date of the previous policy. 6.0 Party Representatives 6.1. The City Manager is the City's representative for purposes of this Agreement. 6.2. Frisco White is the Consultant's primary representative for purposes of this Agreement. 7.0 Notices 7.1. All notices permitted or required under this Agreement shall be deemed made when personally delivered or when mailed 48 hours after deposit in the United States Mail, first class postage prepaid and addressed to the party at the following addresses: 3 of 9 To City: City of Seal Beach 211-8th Street Seal Beach, California 90740 Aftn.- City Manager To Consultant* Westberg + White, Inc. 1775 Hancock St., Ste. 120 San Diego, CA 92110 Attn' Frisco White 7.2- Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred, regardless of the method of service. 8.0 Independent Contractor 8.1. Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. All services provided pursuant to this Agreement shall be performed by Consultant or under its supervision. Consultant will determine the means, methods, and details of performing the services. Any additional personnel performing services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall also not be employees of City and shall at all time be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Consultant shall pay all wages, salaries, and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their performance of services under this Agreement and as required by law. Consultant shall be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such additional personnel, including, but not limited to: social security taxes, income tax withholding, unemployment insurance, disability insurance, and workers' compensation insurance. 8.2. Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless City and its elected officials, officers, employees, servants, designated volunteers, and agents serving as independent contractors in the role of City officials, from any and all liability, damages, claims, costs and expenses of any nature to the extent arising from Consultant's personnel practices. City shall have the right to offset against the amount of any fees due to Consultant under this Agreement any amount due to City from Consultant as a result of Consultant's failure to promptly pay to City any reimbursement or indemnification arising under this Section. 9.0 Subcontractors No portion of this Agreement shall be subcontracted without the prior written approval of the City. Consultant is fully responsible to City for the performance of any and all subcontractors. 4 of 9 10.0 Assignment Consultant shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement whether by assignment or novation, without the prior written consent of City. Any purported assignment without such consent shall be void and without effect. 11.0 Insurance 11.1. Consultant shall not commence work under this Agreement until it has provided evidence satisfactory to the City that Consultant has secured all insurance required under this Section. Consultant shall furnish City with original certificates of insurance and endorsements effecting coverage required by this Agreement on forms satisfactory to the City. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy shall be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf, and shall be on forms provided by the City if requested. All certificates and endorsements shall be received and approved by the City before work commences, The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. 11.2. Consultant shall, at its expense, procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property that may arise from or in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating no less than A:VIll, licensed to do business in California, and satisfactory to the City. Coverage shall be at least as broad as the latest version of the following- (1) General Liability: Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001)" (2) Automobile Liability: Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form number CA 0001, code 1 (any auto); and, if required by the City, (3) Professional Liability. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: (1) General Liability.- $2,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage and if Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this Agreement/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit; (2) Automobile Liability, $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage-, and (3) Professional Liability: $1,000,000 per claim/aggregate, 11.3. The insurance policies shall contain the following provisions, or Consultant shall provide endorsements on forms supplied or approved by the City to state: (1) coverage shall not be suspended, voided, reduced or canceled except after 30 days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City; (2) any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies, including breaches of warranties, shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its directors, officials, officers, (3) coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its directors, officials, officers, 5 of 9 employees, agents and volunteers, or if excess, shall stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the Consultant's scheduled underlying coverage and that any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it; (4) for general liability insurance, that the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the services or operations performed by or on behalf of the Consultant, including materials, parts or equipment furnished in connection with such work; and (5) for automobile liability, that the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the ownership, operation, maintenance, use, loading or unloading of any auto owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant or for which the Consultant is responsible. 11.4. All insurance required by this Section shall contain standard separation of insureds provisions and shall not contain any special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers. 11.5. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions shall be declared to and approved by the City. Consultant guarantees that, at the option of the City, either: (1) the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers; or (2) the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigation costs, claims and administrative and defense expenses. 12.0 Indemnification, Hold Harmless, and Duty to Defend Consultant shall defend, indemnify, and hold the City, its officials, officers, employees, volunteers and agents serving as independent contractors in the role of city officials (collectively "Indemnitees") free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to any acts or omissions of Consultant, its employees, or its agents in connection with the performance of this Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all consequential damages and attorneys' fees and other related costs and expenses, except for such loss or damage arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City. With respect to any and all such aforesaid suits, actions, or other legal proceedings of every kind that may be brought or instituted against Indemnitees, Consultant shall.defend Indemnitees, at Consultant's own cost, expense, and risk, and shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award, or decree that may be rendered against Indemnitees. Consultant shall reimburse City and its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and/or volunteers, for any and all legal expenses and costs incurred by each of them in connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity 6 of 9 herein provided. Consultant's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by Consultant, the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents or volunteers. All duties of Consultant under this Section shall survive termination of this Agreement. 13.0 Equal Opportunity Consultant affirmatively represents that it is an equal opportunity employer. Consultant shall not discriminate against any subcontractor, employee, or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, handicap, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, or age. Such non-discrimination includes, but is not limited to, all activities related to initial employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff, or termination. 14.0 Labor Certification By its signature hereunder, Consultant certifies that it is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code that require every employer to be insured against liability for Workers' Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and agrees to comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Services. 15.0 Entire Agreement This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior negotiations, understandings, or agreements. This Agreement may only be modified by a writing signed by both parties. 16.0 Severability The invalidity in whole or in part of any provisions of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of the other provisions of this Agreement. 17.0 Governing Law This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 18.0 No Third Party Rights No third party shall be deemed to have any rights hereunder against either party as a result of this Agreement. 7 of 9 19.0 Waiver No waiver of any default shall constitute a waiver of any other default or breach, whether of the same or other covenant or condition. No waiver, benefit, privilege, or service voluntarily given or performed by a party shall give the other party any contractual rights by custom, estoppel, or otherwise. 20.0 Prohibited Interests; Conflict of Interest 20.1. Consultant covenants that it presently has no interest and shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, which may be affected by the Services, or which would conflict in any manner with the performance of the Services. Consultant further covenants that, in performance of this Agreement, no person having any such interest shall be employed by it. Furthermore, Consultant shall avoid the appearance of having any interest, which would conflict in any manner with the performance of the Services. Consultant shall not accept any employment or representation during the term of this Agreement which is or may likely make Consultant "financially interested" (as provided in California Government Code §§1090 and 87100) in any decision made by City on any matter in connection with which Consultant has been retained. 20.2. Consultant further warrants and maintains that it has not employed or retained any person or entity, other than a bona fide employee working exclusively for Consultant, to solicit or obtain this Agreement. Nor has Consultant paid or agreed to pay any person or entity, other than a bona fide employee working exclusively for Consultant, any fee, commission, gift, percentage, or any other consideration contingent upon the execution of this Agreement. Upon any breach or violation of this warranty, City shall have the right, at its sole and absolute discretion, to terminate this Agreement without further liability, or to deduct from any sums payable to Consultant hereunder the full amount or value of any such fee, commission, percentage or gift. 20.3. Consultant warrants and maintains that it has no knowledge that any officer or employee of City has any interest, whether contractual, non- contractual, financial, proprietary, or otherwise, in this transaction or in the business of Consultant, and that if any such interest comes to the knowledge of Consultant at any time during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall immediately make a complete, written disclosure of such interest to City, even if such interest would not be deemed a prohibited "conflict of interest" under applicable laws as described in this subsection. 21® Attorneys' Fees If either party commences an action against the other party, legal, administrative or otherwise, arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing 8 of 9 party in such litigation shall be entitled to have and recover from the losing party all of its attorneys' fees and other costs incurred in connection therewith. 22.0 Exhibits All exhibits referenced in this Agreement are hereby incorporated into the Agreement as if set forth in full herein. In the event of any material discrepancy between the terms of any exhibit so incorporated and the terms of this Agreement, the terms of this Agreement shall control. 23.0 Corporate Authority The person executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants that he or she is duly authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of said Party and that by his or her execution, the Consultant is formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto, through their respective authorized representatives have executed this Agreement as of the date and year first above written. CITY OF SEAL BEACH CONSTANT By: By: Jill R. Ingram, City Manager Name: Frisco White Attest: Its: President By: By: Linda Devine, City Clerk Name: Approved as to Form: Its: By: Steven L. Flower, City Attorney 9of9 City of Seal Beach EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF WORK NARRATIVE Task I Euhk&Lticipalkn Emuu and Ara alubi The City of Seal Beach has stated that they are seeking "creative methods and tools to successfully accomplish a comprehensive community wide outreach program to obtain participation from residents in establishing the ranking of multiple sites and determining if a 30 or 50 meter sized pool is most desirable." Our Team, with Community Change Partners leading this phase will begin by creating a demographic profile of a community surrounding a potential project which we have already completed and has been included in this proposal. Information was garnered from census data as well as from site visits. To begin the community outreach process, elected officials, key stakeholders, community and business groups, non-profits, schools and other community institutions are identified and a database compiled. Interfacing with the City of Seal Beach elected representatives and City departments and staff will be an important component of outreach efforts to understand their needs and desires for the project at the outset and keep them in the communication loop as the community engagement process proceeds. To engage the entire community of Seal Beach and pool users to identify locations for a new aquatics center and then to give feedback and input on design features, we would do initial PR, media and outreach about the effort (developing a name for the campaign/effort) and create a fun kick-off event for the community. The kick-off event would be similar to a community fair with food and fun activities to provide feedback on locations and desired features for the new aquatics facility. As part of the event, we would create a citywide scavenger hunt to have people go to various parts of the city to identify sites and get points which can be redeemed for prizes. We will prepare site recommendation forms to be used and provide cameras to take pictures of sites. After the event, we will have a window of time for people to submit additional sites for consideration. We will also do our own reconnaissance and work with local real estate agents and city planning and recreation staff to identify appropriate sites. Once we have compiled a list of appropriate sites and the feasibility analysis phase has begun, we will begin engaging the community around the various sites. We will conduct individual meetings with key stakeholders, small group meetings and go door to door to talk with those immediately adjacent to the sites to understand their needs and concerns. We feel that this develops mutual respect and trust with key stakeholders that will ensure a smoother process in the long run. At this stage we will be talking with people about site issues and design features desired. We will also conduct outreach at the existing pool facility to understand the needs and concerns of current pool users and seek input from potential users, such as those interested in water polo and competition swim meets to understand their requirements. We will create a consensus building decision process to decide on a site once the feasibility analysis is completed and pros and cons of each site enumerated. We will use on-line polling tools for people to rank their preference of sites. While the site selection process is occurring, we will provide the architect with input from the community on design features to begin creating conceptual ideas for the aquatics center. Once a site is selected, we will work closely with the surrounding neighborhood to address any concerns they have involving them in the process to gain buy-in. Having effectively engaged the greater community through small group or individual meetings, workshops and door-to-door outreach, we are better able to prepare a design that incorporates stakeholder needs and concerns from the outset, allowing for a more respectful dialogue, more being accomplished at meetings and workshops and more meaningful input being provided. A write-up is completed for all meetings and outreach efforts, providing the client, architect and planners with information that will be needed to design or modify the project. There will be a back and forth iterative process with the design team and stakeholders. Formats can include public meetings, workshops, on-line public meeting tools, focus groups, and surveys. Ongoing communication with the surrounding neighborhood(s) and interested stakeholders is critical throughout the process, from conceptual izatontO project completion. VVe foresee using various means tn communicate with the Seal Beach community which could include: emnmi||ng updates, creating a Facebook page, creating a vmmbs|te, and using &8indK8imar, an on-line public engagement tool. HoxVemar, even when providing electronic updates, in person update meetings and phone calls are very effective in onasd|ng a personal connection that people appreciate, We will work with the schools and libraries to help people provide input who dO not have access to aoomputer. In addition, we believe that through an engagement process fora community facilities project, such as this one, there is an opportunity to create a sense of community not found in all neighborhoods, which will enhance the project and its constituents, customers and stakeholders for the long-term. This can be accomplished through special activities and events specifically designed to bring people together around the project inafunandre|eventxvaysuohasdesoribedforthehick-offevent, VVehawebroademperience in developing ideas for activities and events and implementing them. We understand that wewill be required use our professional expertise and analysis to recommend the most practical site to !ooaba a multi-generational community aquatic center within the City limits based upon |ouaUon, costs and design. Selecting the most appropriate and practical site is an important and vital consideration for this project. The (ocet\Vn, size, shape, mrientabon, aucems, vimwm, surrounding neighbmrS, gew|Ogy, water table, hazardous material and drainage among others will greatly influence the site selection and affect the program master plan. Our approach is to develop the community aquatic program and master plan and select the site based upon the interrelationships of the program that was developed through the public participation process. Once preliminary program is developed that conceptually illustrates the present and future needs of the community aquatic center we should begin the site selection process. Because the perfect site may not be able to be located that meets all the criteria of the prognann, we'll need to Wet priorities for the site selection and be prepared to make compromises. After walking the potential sites with the site selection oonnmnittee, we should consider selecting three (3) sites and ranking the sites based on the Feasibility Analysis. Successful real estate feasibility analysis must be based on community input and the results of the public participation process to define the program and relevant factors to consider when ranking sites- All feasibility starts with "highest and best use" for each property — uses that are physically feasible, legally permissible, and financially optimal — but selecting the best site for a community recreational amenity has to consider wide range of additional measures including aouesmibi|ity, impacts on nearby uses, and the ability tm mitigate those impacts. James Suhr & Associates (JS/\) will prepare a feasibility study for the proposed Seal Beach Community Aquatics Center, as part of the VVeetberA + White b*am, which builds on the community outreach naau|ta to be generated by team member Community Change Partners. Among the many factors ho be used to rank pobsntial eites, community suitability and community accessibility will be heavily weighted so that the process does not generate unviab|e site selections. Jim Suhr, principal ofJSA. holds a California broker's |iuense, and will work with City staff closely on the selection of the recommended site(s) and negotiation with property owners for site acquisitions. Suhr has 30 years of experience as a developer and consultant in Southern California na8| estate rnorkeba, with particular expertise on site due diligence, feasibility, and acquisitions. As noted in the RFp, the naa| estate market in Seal Beach is verytight — few sites are available at any point in Uma, and huge portions of the City are subject to significant constraints (Naval Weapons Shadon, National VVi|d|iha Refuge, Leisure World) placing much of the jurisdiction out Of reach, Not withstanding the difficulty, we should keep the Navy and Wildlife Refuge at the discussion table. JSA will work with City staff and the local brokerage community to identify anylall available properties, as well as using adaptive reuse and redevelopment creativity to identify additional potential sites that are off-market. City staff and the selected team will need to explore shared-use alternatives with existing facilities to create as large a list of potential sites for consideration. Potential sites for the Sea[ Beach Community Aquatics Center would be evaluated using the following preliminary matrixtweighting system. Each site will be scored using a 0-5 scale for each factor, other than estimated cost categories, and then each category subtotal score will be adjusted by the weighting factor shown below to arrive at the overall weighted score for each candidate property. Site NamVAdM= 10MU MR&M MAUI LdQ Phpical Feasibility(20%of total) Site size adequate for use Site existing improvements ExistingInewparking adequate for use Environmental condition for use SoilsfWater Table condition for use Permitted use by existing zoning Ability to satisfy all code req'ts Community Suitability(50%of total) Accessibility—pedestrian/bike Accessibility—transit Accessibility—private vehicle No impacts on adjoininguses Adjoininguses favor Aquatics Center Financial FeasibiUly(3 0 116 of total) Estimated acquisition cost(relative to lowest Estimated site prep cost(relative to lowest Overall Weighted Scare This evaluation process will result in a ranked list of potential Aquatics Center sites, factoring in the community outreach and stakeholder input responses gathered by the team, which will serve to guide City staff and JSA in subsequent real estate negotiations. TaILI Site information and dualais We understand that we will be expected to provide a detailed analysis of the site being recommended. This analysis will include but not limited to the following features: acreage, surrounding land uses, soil types, environmental issues, historic uses, floodplains, drainage and zoning. The process that will be used for our analysis is illustrated in Task 2 -Site Selection Recommendation. Seal Beach has many amenities including 25 parks or community facilities, including the beach. The existing aquatics center is located on the campus of McGaugh Elementary School, The City runs a robust aquatics program, which includes lap swimming, aquasize classes, swim team, recreational swim, swim lessons, and a summer swim program. At the current site, the swim team cannot host competitions and the pool cannot support a water polo program which is desired by many. There are two pools currently: the large pool with 6 lanes for lap swimming and an area called "the widths" for people to lounge and water walk. There is an adjacent small shallow pool that does not get much use most of the year. It is used during the summer months for recreational swimming or for games as a reward after swim lessons. During the summer months, the pool complex can be rented out for pool parties. Pool users include the local residential community in Seal Beach and surrounding areas of all ages and people who work in Seal Beach. There are only a few people that come from Leisure World since they have multiple pools within their complex. In getting a preliminary sense of the interests from those currently using the pool, we learned that people would like a pool that will allow for competition swim meets and water polo matches. The people we spoke with said that a fountain area or splash pad would be fun for young kids and get more use than the shallow pool. Current pool users would like to see a 50 meter pool that would allow for 8 lanes for lap swimming. When shown the photo of Splash! La Mirada Regional Aquatics Center, people were very excited with the prospect of having a similar facility in Seal Beach. The people we spoke with thought that a larger pool complex would be quickly filled with activities and become well-used. They also thought that such a destination facility would generate more income from pool parties, activities and usage fees to help maintain the multi-generational facility. We heard from stakeholders that a few years ago the City considered locating the new aquatics center at the vacant site along First Street north of Central Avenue adjacent to Marina Park and Community Center. We were told that the project was shelved because the Marina neighborhood did not want a larger pool facility in that location fearing noise and traffic that would lower the value of their properties. We also understand that this site is contaminated and would have to be cleaned or sealed if the aquatics center were to be located there. Given that this site is one of the few vacant properties of a substantial size in the city, the site will most likely be analyzed in the feasibility study. The issues previously raised by the Marina neighborhood will have to be addressed in the public outreach and engagement process and environmental review process. BRG Consulting, Inc. (BRG) will assist the Team during the identification of alternative sites by providing an ongoing Environmental Opportunities and Constraints Analysis of the potential candidate sites and surrounding areas. BRG will focus on opportunities to maximize existing environmental values of the project areas and avoid potential adverse impacts on significant environmental and community resources at the candidate sites. A guide to this environmental evaluation will be the Mandatory Significance Findings in Section 15065 of the State CEQA Guidelines. One of the goals of this environmental planning component of the site selection process is to avoid significant environmental impacts and thereby simplify the CEQA document required for the project. Task 4—Actiyitvand Aauatk Center Analysis We will identify the community's programming and aquatic center needs for the site that was developed in Task 1, Task 2 and Task 3. In addition to the aquatic center's physical analysis we will also provide a Financial Impact Study that will be developed as an opinion of the facility financial performance and an opinion of suggested operations for the planned facility. The study will include the following elements: 1. Economic Impact: This part of the study will incorporate an analysis of the economic impact of the facility to the City. In this segment of the study the following will be researched, analyzed and reported: a. Demographic research will be completed to appropriately evaluate the proposed facility. Analysis will include population and age distribution, income, weather analysis, and local economic considerations that could affect the project's viability, b. An opinion of probable expenses will be developed and it will include demands on labor, contract services, supplies, utilities, maintenance, and funds needed for future repair. c. An opinion of revenue will be developed. Market area demographics for population, age, and income will be analyzed to understand the economics of the region and the level of discretionary income that may be used for leisure and competitive aquatic activity. d. Revenue projections will be derived from the likely market penetration, special user groups through creative programming, and the potential of income. The analysis may include a study of the influence of the tourism. This analysis will incorporate an opinion of attendance and offer recommendations of a competitive fee structure for all facilities, 2. Operational Impact Phis part of the study incorporates an analysis of the operational impact of the facility to the City. In this segment of the study the following will be researched, analyzed and reported: a. A facility management outline will be completed that includes a facility operating schedule, facility capacity limits, organization chart, job descriptions, and a wage structure for all employees. b. Area aquatic user groups will be identified to determine organizations that will contribute to filling available capacity in the facility. c. A marketing program will be prepared to aid in creatively promoting the facility once the project is completed. Task 5—A auat& Center Reagmalaudatign We will recommend to the City the most feasible site based upon the public participation's desire, location, costs, facility needs and design. Our recommendation will account for the program needs that were developed through public participation along with necessary support facilities. This recommendation, which is the product of our analysis of Tasks 1 through 4 will include: 1. Preparation and submittal of an outline of the Design Program of spaces and features for the proposed aquatic center describing the natatorium, pool size, shape and support spaces based on preliminary discussions and meetings noted above. 2. Based on the meetings and committee's review of the outline program, develop with the you a Design Program for the building with recommendations on the size and shape of the pool(s) as well as architectural and engineering features of the building and support spaces. 3. Make a final presentation to the project committee outlining the methods and results of the study. Litisk 6— Qwcrwtual Plans and Cost Anal Ws We will provide conceptual site plan, plans and elevations for the aquatic center that incorporates the needs of the entire community and the program as developed and prioritized during the public participation and Tasks 1 through 5. The conceptual plans that we will present will be the Vision, Translation and Implementation of the Program balancing the needs as follows'. A, Based on the agreed upon program, we will prepare three concepts. Typically these concepts consist of an ideal, preferred and minimum acceptable. The ideal concept includes areas of programming without taking into account budget considerations. The preferred facility supports the design program with costs to meet the proposed budget. The minimum acceptable concept is a facility that will be considered if the project experiences limited funding. Through our experience site planning a number of these types of facilities,VVeatberg + White and Coune8|nnan-Hunsoker have learned that itis important hoprovide separate areas for the competitive swim users and recreational users, The competitive users will require a large amount of deck space for staging, asthere are many swimmers but few in the water at the same time. The recreational users are best served by thinking of the facility inthree areas with corresponding water depths: Tots Characterized by O^to 12^ Deep Water Family-Characterized by0^to3^-6^ Deep Water Teen/Adult-Characterized by3'-8" to12'-6'' Deep Water Asanexample at Splash! mtLa Mirada Aquatic Park, vxe creatively separated the cornpeddma and recreational umana. Each designated user had their own bathhouse and separate and independent heating and filtration systems. For instance during the cooler periods Vf the year the less used recreational pools' mechanical and plumbing systems and bathhouse were shut down tosave energy and maintenance costs. The competitive side remained usable and operational. B. VVe will provide a conceptual plan of each building. The purpose of the plans will beho Illustrate ways tm organize the spaces in a functional arrangement and to confirm that the Building footprint will contain the areas proposed in the Design Program. For the Bathhouse facility, the location, size, and layout will be developed as an integral part of the overall site plan. Over the years and through multiple projects we know that these facilities need tube functional, well-ventilated and lighted and low maintenance while meeting the basic code requirements and operational requirements of the facility. ASa support facility tothe aquatic center we carefully select the structural systems and finishes that are attractive yet economical so that most mf the budget can be used for the pool. Since the public does not come tom family aquatic center or waterpark for the bathhouse, This concept of Recreation First! is a consistent theme throughout our work. C. As an integral decision-making tool, we will prepare detailed (}pinion of Probable Construction Cost for the new facility. Recent project bid figures of similar projects will beused as well as national estimating guides and local cost adjustment factors. The hard construction cost figures will be supplemented by a development cost factor, which will include such "soft" costs as professional fees, survey, geotechnical report, document reproduction, advertisement for bids and all anticipated expenses related tothe administration uf the project. The sum of these two cost figures will bethe total project oom±sothsdyuuvvi!| have acomprehensive overview before making an informed decision about the project By making recreation and operations the focus we have successfully stayed within budget, minimized staffing reQu|rementa, and made every possible dollar available for outdoor family aquatic recreation. It is likely that the new Community Aquatics Center will qualify for preparation of Negative Declaration (N[}) or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND)` which will focus on only the potential significant environmental impacts of the project(CEC>AGuide|ines/\rtio|e@). VVithBRG's participation during the site selection process (Task 3) and the active community outreach program (Task 1), it is anticipated that potential significant impacts will be avoided to the rDaN|n3um extent possible during the planning and site selection phase, thereby improving the likelihood that an ND or K8WD can be prepared for the project. The N[VK8ND document needs to be circulated for a 21-day public review, compared to 45 days for an E|R. The WD/88ND will be based on the Initial Study Checklist form found in Appendix G of the State CEOA Guidelines. As described in Task 3. our Environmental Opportunities and Constraints review of the alternative sites will focus on potential environmental issues relative to the Mandatory Significance Findings |n Section 15U65of the CEC)AGuidelines. If the Initial Study for the proposed alternative identifies any significant adverse impacts that cannot be fully mitigated or avoided, then an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will need to be prepared. The EIR will be prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA(Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq.), the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq.), and the City's Guidelines for Compliance with CEQA. The following provides a detailed scope of work for preparation of the EIR: 1. Emirml Initiatign. NQE! and Data Collection: Our first task to initiate preparation of the EIR is for the Team to meet with City staff to confirm the project description and scope of analysis for the EIR. The first task to start the public timeline for the EIR will be preparation and publication of the Notice of Preparation (NOP). 2. Project Deacriatim CEQA requires that the EIR description of the project shall contain certain information but should not supply extensive detail beyond that needed for evaluation and review of the environmental impact. BRG's project description will provide the following required elements: 1) the precise location and boundaries of the Proposed Project shall be shown on a detailed local map and on a regional map, using the Base Maps prepared for the site selection study; 2) a statement of objectives sought for the Proposed Project, 3) a general description of the project's technical, economic, and environmental characteristics, considering the principal engineering plans, if any, and supporting public service facilities; and, 4) a description of the intended uses of the EIR including a list of the agencies that are expected to use the document in their decision making; a list of permits and other approvals required to implement the project and a list of related environmental review and consultation requirements required by federal, state, or local laws, regulations, or policies. The project description will also list the City decisions subject to CEQA in the order in which they will occur. For this reason, the project description can be a living document initially, incorporating additional detail as it is developed. Ultimately, the project description must become a finite, stable document for the environmental analysis to be prepared and reported in the First and Subsequent Screencheck Draft and Final EIRs. 3. Eraiect Alternatives: Properly defining the project objectives is a critical component of any EIR because CEQA requires that an EIR shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which could feasibly attain most of the objectives of the project, but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project. Identification of project objectives would be one of the first tasks undertaken. Based on those objectives, an initial set of alternatives would be prepared. We would also work with City staff to determine the level of detail for project description information and environmental analysis that would be prepared for the alternatives. We anticipate identifying an initial set of alternatives based on City staff and the Team's knowledge of the project and site. Such alternatives would be reported and analyzed in the First Screencheck Draft EIR, CEQA Alternatives cannot be fully defined until the environmental analysis is initially drafted so that City staff and the BRG Team understand the environmental impacts that rise to a level of significance. City review of the First Screencheck Draft EIR, we would work with City staff and Team to identify any additional alternatives that might need to be considered in the EIR based on the detailed analysis presented in the First Screencheck Draft EIR. Such alternatives would be developed and reported in the Second Screencheck Draft EIR and all subsequent EIR submittals. For the purpose of this proposal, we have assumed the EIR will analyze the Proposed Project, two project alternatives, as well as the No- Project Alternative. 4. Pre aratit�rt of Technical Studies, BRG specializes in the preparation of environmental documentation for compliance with the requirements of CEQA. For over thirty years, the firm has successfully managed the preparation of technical studies by others that support the CEQA documents we prepare. It may be appropriate to develop specific technical studies, depending on the environmental issues associated with the Proposed Project, Our principals and project managers review every technical document we receive, including the appendices to the technical studies. 5. Eiml Ureambed Dr ft LIS, BRG will prepare an EIR for the Proposed Project, The EIR and associated technical studies will assemble all data, originate new studies where necessary, and provide an assessment of the probable direct and indirect, and short- and long-term cumulative impacts of the Proposed Project. The Draft EIR will provide an evaluation of feasible mitigation measures, which could be carried out to reduce or eliminate significant adverse impacts of the Proposed Project. One of our initial tasks will be to confirm overall document format with City staff. The document will include the basis of analysis, a description of the relevant existing conditions, thresholds of significance, impacts, level of significance prior to mitigation, recommended mitigation measures to substantially reduce or avoid significant impacts, an analysis of the level of significance after mitigation measures are applied, and evaluation of the project alternatives. The discussion of mitigation measures will provide the background for the Candidate Findings under CEQA Guidelines§15091(a). Environmental Issues J!2 e Addressed in EIR The following environmental issues will be addressed in the EIR: air quality, biological resources, climate change/greenhouse gas emissions/sea level rise, energy, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, noise, public services, transportation/traffic/parking, utilities and service systems, and cumulative impacts. We understand that some environmental issues may be added based on responses received during the public scoping and Notice of Preparation review process. The following section summarizes BIRG's proposed approach to the environmental issues to be addressed in the EIR. CumUlglive Iml2gpIs The cumulative impacts associated with the Proposed Project will be identified and assessed. Our approach would be to utilize the project list approach provided by CEQA. On a resource-by resource basis, we would identify a study area within which cumulative impacts might be expected. We would work with City staff to identify all of the potential past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects that should be considered in the Cumulative Impacts analysis. We also will coordinate as necessary with the City, the Navy, and the resources agencies that may provide the necessary cumulative project information. We will provide a map showing the cumulative impact study area and the location of each project, a brief description of each project, and a summary of environmental effects for each project organized by each environmental resource that may be impacted. We would then provide analysis and discussion as to any significant cumulative impacts. Mitigation would be identified if necessary. Other Required Considerations This section will discuss growth inducement, significant irreversible environmental changes, and effects found not to be significant. Quality Assurance/Quality Qgnlrof BRG will implement its rigorous Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) procedures in reviewing the First Screencheck Draft EIR (and subsequent submittals as well), and related technical reports that will be included as appendices to the EIR document. In addition to an independent QA/QC review by our Principal Environmental Planner, BRG will assure that all deliverables undergo a Project Management review. BRG is dedicated to delivering high quality deliverables that have been thoroughly reviewed prior to submittal, 6.E2013A 5Q22002Gh 121aft EIR: BRG will carefully review City staff comments on the First Screencheck Draft EIR. We will prepare a matrix detailing all substantial comments and identify how each comment is addressed in the EIR. At this time, we will also make a recommendation as to whether we feel additional alternatives need to be added to the EIR and discuss our recommendation with City staff. We will incorporate City comments and perform a final quality control review before submitting the Second Screencheck DEIR to the City. We will complete the comments matrix by providing a summary of each response and where each response can be found in the EIR. Z. 12raft EIR f2i Eublir.,Rayipm'. BRG will carefully review City staff comments on the Second Screencheck Draft EIR. We will incorporate City comments and perform a final quality control review before submitting the Camera-Ready DEIR to the City. We will prepare a matrix detailing all substantial comments as described above, We will meet with City Staff to discuss how we responded to all comments. During this meeting we will discuss any further changes that may be necessary. After the meeting, BRG will complete any additional changes, perform a final QA/QC review, then will have one final meeting with City staff to review the Draft EIR. I First SuerorbacK Deal LIEL We understand the First Screencheck Final EIR will consist of the following deliverables: Response to Comments, revised text, First Screencheck Final EIR, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), Findings of Fact (Findings), Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC), figures, and attachments. Rgal;lgl2gig IQ CgMMQQJgi Upon close of the Draft EIR public review period, BRG will review all comments, number them, and distribute them to the City. We will assign specific individuals to prepare responses to comments, based on the nature of each comment. Each individual will be responsible for preparation of a response to their assigned comments. BRG will assemble and review all responses for adequacy and consistency. BRG will identify any responses that affect information contained in the Draft EIR and may require revising or supplementing information in the EIR. The format of the responses will be in a side-by-side presentation with the comment letter reduced but legible on the left and corresponding responses on the right. First&rggnghggk Final EIR. Figures, and Attachments BRG will assemble the First Screencheck Final EIR, which will include the responses to Comments on the Draft EIR and any text that has been revised in response to comments received during the public review period. The First Screencheck Final EIR will also include all Figures and Appendices. Again, BRG will implement its QA/QC procedures on the First Screencheck Final EIR document prior to submittal to the City. Mitigation Mgpilg[iog and B112g[tiog Pro ram BRG will prepare the MMRP that presents necessary information in table format. The MMRP will be prepared in accordance with Public Resources Code§21081.6(a)(1) and CEQA Guidelines §15091. The MMRP will identify the party responsible for monitoring and will include monitoring qualifications, specific monitoring activities, a reporting system and criteria for evaluating the success of the mitigation measures, Findings of Fact BRG Consulting will prepare draft Candidate Findings in accordance with the requirements of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091. The Findings will follow past formats used by the City and we will confirm the format prior to beginning work on the Findings, Statement gf Overriding Conaiderations |n the event there are significant and unmitigable impacts of the Proposed Project identified in the E|R. BRG will prepare the draft Statement of Overriding Considerations(S(]C) inaccordance with the requirements ofState CE(]AGuide|inee Section 15093. BRG would work closely with City staff k)draft the SOC. incorporating evidence provided bythe City for the Findings to support approval of the Proposed Project shmu|dithave significant and unmitiQab|eimpacts. The S[}C would document the specific economic, |ega|, amcia|, technological, or other benefits, including region-wide Orstatewide environmental benefits, Vf the Proposed Project against its unavoidable environmental risks. The S{}C would state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final E|R and/or other information |n the record, BRGwi|l carefully review all City comments, We will prepare a comments response matrix as described previously. We will incorporate comments to prepare the Second Scpeennheoksubnoitto| to include the revised response to cUDOrDents. E|R 0gx1, K8k0RP, Findings, SC]C, figu/es, and attachments. BRG will again implement its QA/QC procedures on the Second Scnaenoheck Final E|R document prior to submittal b/the City. BRG will carefully review all City comments, We will prepare a comments response matrix as described previously. We will incorporate comments to prepare the Final E|R submittal to include the revised response to oVmnnenbs. BR text. N1MRP. Findings. SOC, figunas, and attachments. We will implement our CA/QC procedures in reviewing the Final E|R document prior to submittal to the City. We will meet with City Staff and discuss how we responded ho all comments, During the meeting we will discuss any further changes that may be necessary. After the meeting we will complete such changes and perform a final O/VC)C review, We will then have one final meeting with City staff to review the Final E|RtV include the revised response tocomments, E|Rtext. K8IVIRP, Findings, SOC, fi8unas, and attachments. BRG and our team members anticipate participating in regular meetings with City staff and/or the design team throughout preparation of the E{R, and that the majority of these meetings will be conducted via telephone conference call, We will ensure the appropriate project team members are at each meeting. We will prepare meeting notes to document action items and responsibilities. A proposed schedule for completing all work specified in this Scope of Services is provided on the following page. BRG proposes to complete the E|R within approximately nine (g) months of receiving the Notice to Proceed. This is an accelerated schedule that will require significant coordination with City Staff and the Team The BRG team will manage the project schedule canafu||y, keeping a close xveb:h on udUce| path basks. City of Seal Beach EXHIBIT COST PROPOSAL AND FEES SCOPE OF WORK FEE MAN HOURS Task I Public Participation Process and Analysis $36,800.00 209 Task 2 Site Selection Recommendation &Analysis Task 3 Site Information and Analysis $62,190.00 358 Task 4 Activity and Aquatic Center Analysis $17,390.00 114 Task 5 Aquatic Center Recommendation $8,600.00 64 Task 6 Conceptual Plans and Cost Analysis $35,130.00 270 Task 7 Environmental Preparation $63,320.00 399 Kick-Off Event Refreshment Allowance $5,000,00 Mindmixer Online Platform Allowance $3,000.00 Traffic Engineer Allowance $7,500.00 Total: $238,930.00 1,414 Westberg +White(Architect) Hourly Rates Partner $230.00 Project Arch itect/Manager $175.00 Senior Designer $135.00 CAD, Senior $80.00 CAD, Intermediate $65.00 Administrative $60.00 Counsilman-Hunsaker(Aquatic Design) Hourly Rates Principal/Studio Director $160.00 Project Manager $135.00 Project Engineer $110.00 Design Associate $90.00 Administrative $55.00 Community Change Partners (Outreach) Hourly Rates Partner $180.00 James Suhr&Associates(Feasibility Study) Hourly Rates Partner $175.00 BRG Consulting(CEQA) Hourly Rates Principal $285.00 Senior Project Manager $165.00 Asst. Project Manager $120.00 Environ Analyst 11 $95-00 Environ Analyst 1 $75.00 GI S Specialist $95.00 Documents Manager $85,00 Leverton&Associates (Cost Estimating) Hourly Rates Partner UUO Notes: While we believe a (Mitigated) Negative Declaration will likely be the appropriate CEQA document for the project, it may be determined that an EIR would be the recommended document for compliance with CEQA. This determination will be possible once the site selection process has narrowed the choice of feasible alternative sites, including community input during the public outreach and our initial environmental review. In the event an EIR is necessary, the probable range of cost would likely be from $95,000 to $150,000, including all technical studies. The actual cost of preparing the EIR would be highly dependent on the number and nature of significant issues to be addressed. This cost would be negotiated with the City and would replace, not be in addition to, the currently proposed $63,320,00 budget for Task 7. As we proceed with the task of identifying potential sites and making a site selection, other services may be necessary such as GeotechnicallHydrology Reports, Civil Engineering and Topographic Surveys, etc. which will be considered as Reimbursable Expenses. The fee for the real estate transaction involvement of James Suhr to represent the City as the buyer would typically result in a 1% fee based on purchase price.