HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AG PKT 2008-10-13 #RAGENDA STAFF REPORT
DATE: October 13, 2008
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
THRU: David Carmany, City Manager
FROM: Vince Mastrosimone, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: STATE REVOLVING FUND LOAN ENVIRONMENTAL
DOCUMENT PREPARATION -APPROVAL OF
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, CP No.
SS0901
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
The City Council is asked to adopt Resolution No. 5797 approving a professional
services agreement with RBF Consulting for $44,565 for the preparation of the
environmental document for the Sewer Capital Improvement Program.
BACKGROUND:
At the July 14, 2008 City Council Meeting, Council authorized staff to pursue the
State Revolving Fund (SRF) Loan administered through the State Water
Resource Control Board for the Sewer Capital Improvement Program. The Sewer
Capital Improvement Program strategies include the upsizing of pipes to increase
the capacity; rehabilitating sewer pump stations; replacement of cracked
deteriorated pipes and installation of pipe liners to rehabilitate pipe. As part of the
loan application, an environmental assessment of potential project impacts is
required.
Staff has prepared a Request for Proposal (RFP) from qualified consultants to
provide the needed services. Three proposals were received on August 14,
2008. After a detailed review and interview of the most qualified consultant, staff
is recommending RBF Consulting. Staff has verified their references and quality
of work. They have done previous environmental documents in Seal Beach.
The attached tables (2-4) from the sewer master plan describe the projects to be
reviewed.
Agenda Item f~
Page 2
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The current 08/09 FY Budget has $2,000,000 allocated for the sewer capital
improvements to finance the consultant cost of $44,565.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended City Council adopt Resolution No. 5797 approving a
professional services agreement with RBF Consulting for $44,565 for the
preparation of the environmental document for the Sewer Capital Improvement
Program.
SUB ED
Vince Mastrosimone
Director of Public Works
NOTED AND APPROVED:
®-%~
David Carman ,City Manager
Attachments:
A. Sewer Master Plan Tables 2-4
B. Resolution No. 5797
C. Professional Services Agreement
D. Proposal
RESOLUTION NUMBER 5797
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SEAL BEACH APPROVING THE STATE REVOLVING FUND
LOAN ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT PREPARATION
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH RBF
CONSULTING, CIP NO. SS0901
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE:
SECTION 1. The City Council hereby approves the professional services
agreement between the City of Seal Beach and RBF Consulting
for the State Revolving Fund Loan Environmental Document
Preparation, No. SS0901 ("Agreement').
SECTION 2. The Council hereby directs the City Manager to execute the
agreement.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of Seal Beach, at a
meeting hereof held on the 13th day of October , 2008 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA }
COUNTY OF ORANGE } SS
CITY OF SEAL BEACH }
I, Linda Devine, City Clerk of Seal Beach, California, do hereby certify that the
foregoing resolution is the original copy of Resolution Number 5797 on file in
the office of the City Clerk, passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of
the City of Seal Beach, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 13th day
of October , 2008.
City Clerk
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
FOR
CITY WIDE SEWER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT NO. SS0901
between
City of Seal Beach
211 - 8th Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
RBF Consulting
14725 Alton Parkway
Irvine, CA 92618-2027
(949) 472-3415
(949) 837-4122 FAX
This Professional Service Agreement ("the Agreement"} is made as of October 13; 2008 {the
"Effective Date"), by and between RBF Consulting ("Consultant"}, a California Corporation, and
the City of Seal Beach ("City"), a California charter city, (collectively, "the Parties").
L~
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
I.1. Consultant must 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 must control.
1.2. Consultant must 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 Authority.
1.3. In performing this Agreement, Consultant must 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
Manager may authorize payment for such work up to a cumulative maximum of $10,000.
Payment for additional work in excess of $10,000 requires prior City Council authorization.
2.0 Term
This term of this Agreement shall commence as of the Effective Date and shall continue
for a term of 60 days unless previously terminated as provided by this Agreement.
3.0 Consultant's Compensation
City will pay Consultant in accordance with the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit _for
Services but in no event will the City pay more than $44,565.00. Any additional work
authorized by the City pursuant to Section 1.4 will be compensated in accordance with the rate
schedule set forth in Exhibit A, Appendix A.
4.0 Method of Payment
4.1. Consultant must submit to City monthly invoices for all services rendered
p~usuant to his Agreement. Such invoices must be submitted within 15 days of the end of the
month during which the services were rendered and must 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
1 of 6
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 hours notice from City, Consultant must 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 thirty
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. Eddie Torres is the Consultant's sole representative for purposes of this
Agreelr~ent.
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 U.S. Mail, first class
postage prepaid acid addressed to the party at the following addresses:
To City; City of Seal Beach
911 Seal Beach Boulevard
Seal Beach, California 90740
Attn: City Manager
To Consultant: RBF Consulting
14725 Alton Parkway
Irvine, CA 92618-2027
Attn: Eddie.Torres
7.2. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred,
regardless of the method of service.
2 of 6
8.0 Independent contractor
8.1. Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee of the Gity. 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 times 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 and employees, servants, designated volunteers, and agents serving as independent
contractors in the role of city or agency officials, from any and all liability, damages, claims,
costs and expenses of any nature to the extent arising from Consultant's alleged violations of
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 5.
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.
IU.U Assignment
Consultant must 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 must 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 must 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 must be signed by a person authorised by that
insurer to bind coverage on its behalf, and must be on forms provided by the City if requested.
All certificates and endorsements must 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 must, at its expense, procure and maintain for the duration of the
Agreement, insw•ance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property that may
3 of 6
~~
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:t~III, licensed to do business in
California, and satisfactory to the City. Coverage must 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); and (2) Automobile Liability: Insurance Services Office
Business Auto Coverage form number CA 0001, code 1 (any auto}. Consultant must 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
Agreemendiocation or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit;
and (2) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
11.3. The insurance policies must contain the following provisions, or Consultant must
provide endorsements on forms supplied or approved by the City to state: (])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 must be primary
insurance as respects the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers;
or if excess, must 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 must 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 must contain standard separation of
insureds provisions and must 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 must be declared to and approved by
the City. Consultant guarantees that the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or
self-insured retentions as respects the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents,
and volunteers.
12.0 Indemnification, Hold Harmless, and Duty to Defend
12.1. Indemnity for Professional Services. In connection with its professional services,
Consultant shall defend, hold harmless and indemnify City, and its elected officials, officers,
employees, servants, designated volunteers, and those City agents serving as independent
contractors in the role of city or agency officials (collectively, "Indemnitees"), with respect to
any and all claims, demands, damages, liabilities, losses, costs or expenses {collectively,
4of6
~~:
"Claims" hereinafter), including but not limited to Claims relating to death or injury to any
person and injury to any property, to the extent to which they arise out of, pertain to, or relate to
the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Consultant or any of its officers,
employees, subcontractors, or agents in the performance of its professional services under this
Agreement, but not to the extent the result of the negligence or willful misconduct of the City or
of other third parties not under the control or the supervision of Consultant.. Architect's
obligation to defend pursuant to this Section 11.1 shall apply independent of any prior,
concurrent or subsequent misconduct, negligent acts, errors or omissions of Indemnitees.
Architect shall defend Indemnitees in any action or actions filed in connection with any of said
claims with counsel of City's choice, and shall pay all costs and expenses, including all
attorneys' fees actually incurred in connection with such defense.
12.2. Other Indemnities. In connection with all Claims riot covered by Section 11.1,
Consultant shall defend, hold harmless and indemnify the Indemnitees with respect to any and all
Claims including but not limited to Claims relating to death or injury to any person and injury to
any property, which arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the acts or omissions of Consultant or any
of its officers, employees, subcontractors, or agents in the performance of this Agreement.
Consultant shall defend Indemnitees in any action or actions filed in connection with any such
Claims with counsel of City's choice, and shall pay all costs and expenses, including all
attorneys' fees and experts' costs actually incurred in connection with such defense. Architect's
duty to defend pursuant to this Section 11.2 shall apply independent of any prior, concurrent or
subsequent misconduct, negligent acts, errors or omissions of Indemnitees. Architect shall
defend Indemnitees in any action or actions filed in connection with any of said claims, damages,
penalties, obligations, or liabilities with counsel of City's choice and shall pay all costs and
expenses, inchiding attorneys' fees actually incurred in connection with such defense.
13.U Equal Opportunity
Consultant affirmatively represents that it is an equal opportunity employer. Consultant
tmtst not discriminate against any subcontractor, employee, or applicant for emplo}nnent because
of race, religion, color, national origin, handicap, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, or age. Such
non-discrimination includes, but is not be 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 Worker's Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the
provisions of that Code, and agrees to comply with such provisions before conurtencing the
perf'ortnatlce 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
Agreet~tent may only be modified by a writing signed by both parties.
5 of 6
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.
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.U Prohibited Interests
Consultant maintains and warrants that it has not employed nor retained any company or
person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, to solicit or secure this
Agreement. Further, Consultant warrants that it has not paid nor has it agreed to pay any
company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, any fee,
commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting
from the award or making of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, City has
the right to rescind this Agreement without liability. For the term of this Agreement, no
member, officel• or employee of City, during the term of his or her service with City, shall have
any direct interest in this Agreement, or obtain any present or anticipated material benefit arising
therefrom.
21.0 Attorneys' Fees
If either Party commences an action against the other Party, either legal, administrative or
otherwise, arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing Party in such
litigation shall be entitled to have and recover from the losing Party all of its attorney's fees and
other costs incurred in connection with such action.
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.
6 of 6
~~
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 CONSULTANT RBF CONSULTING"
By: By:
David Carmany, City Manager
Name: Glenn Laj of e . AICP
Attest:
Its: Vice President, Planning & Environmental
Services
By:
Linda Devine, City Clerk By:
Approved as to Fonn: /f
Name: C-art Armstrong
Its: Senior Vice President
By:
Quinn Barrow, City Attorney
7 of 6
r
^ ^ ^
CONSULTING
---+..
City a,~Seal Beach
September 18, 2008 Public Works D N 10-106528.999
~Pgr:m~nt
SEP 1 8 ?008
Mr. Michael Ho RECEIVED
City Engineer
City of Seal Beach
211 8th Street
Seal Beach, California 90740
Subject: Proposal for Consulting Services: City Wide Sewer Capital Improvement
Project Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Dear Mr. Ho:
RBF Consulting is pleased to submit this proposal to the City of Seal Beach (City) for the City W ide
Sewer Capital Improvement Project Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND). It is our
understanding that the project involves the implementation of the approved 2005 Sewer System
Master Plan (Sewer Master Plan). The Sewer Master Plan identifies over $15 million in Capital
Improvement Projects that include increasing the diameter of existing sewer pipes, replacing
damaged pipes, installing a liner in the pipes, and rehabilitating sewer pump stations.
Based upon our review of available project information and discussions with City staff, we have
developed a greater understanding of the project and potential environmental issues. We believe
that our background with similar projects and the experience of ourteam members are key attributes
that we offer to the City for this project. In summary, RBF offers the following benefits for your
consideration:
^ Project Team Commitment and Availability: The designated team will be led by Mr.
Eddie Torres, serving as Project Director, and Ms. Kristen Bogue, serving as Project
Manager. Resumes for each team member are included in this submittal.
^ Legally Defensible Documentation: Preparation of legally defensible documents is
imperative in today's environment. Throughout RBF's 36 years of preparing environmental
documentation, we have attained extensive experience in writing accurate, legally defensible
environmental documents for all types of controversial projects.
Multi-Disciplinary Capabilities: RBF possess a unique in-house network of professionals
in disciplines including Planning/Environmental Services, Transportation/Traffic Engineering,
Civil Engineering (including Grading, Public Works, Water/Wastewater and Hydrology),
Mechanical/Electrical/Energy Engineering, Computer Aided Design and Drafting (CADD)
and GIS Services, Mapping, Surveying, Aerial Photogrammetry and Media Services, which
results in a coordinated and efficient effort, with full-service consulting capabilities within one
firm.
PLANNING ^ DE91GN ^ CON~TRUCTIDN
14725 Alton Parkway, Irvine, CA 9261 &2027 ^ P.O Box 57057, Irvine, CA 9281 X7057 ^ 949 472 3505 ^ Fax 949 472.8373
Offices located throughout California, Arizona & Nevada ^ www RBFcom
pnntad on racyded paper
Mr, Michael Ho
City Engineer
September 18, 2008
Page 2
^ Knowledge and Background in Seal Beach: We are extremely familiar with the
community as a result of our past work program involving the Seal Beach Townhomes
Project (Seal Beach, CA), Capistrano Bluffs /Pines Park Sewer Improvements Project
(Dana Point, CA), Los Alamitos Pump Station Project (Los Alamitos, CA), and the Boeing
Specific Plan EIR (Seal Beach, CA).
^ Experience in CEQA-Plus Compliance Documentation: We have executed many CEQA-
Plus compliant documents, as defined by the State Water Resources Control Board,
Division of Financial Assistance. With implementation of the CEQA-Plus process RBF
outlines potential environmental impacts with regard to the Endangered Species Act, Clean
Air Act, and National Historic Preservation Act.
Diverse Planning and Environmental Services: RBF's Planning Department offers an
extensive background of services and expertise for projects including General Plans,
Specific Plans, Environmental Impact Reports, Due Diligence Reports, Mitigated and
Negative Declarations, Urban Design, Entitlement Processing, NEPA Review, Noise
Studies, Visual Analyses, Hazardous Materials Assessments, and Air Quality Modeling. The
RBF Planning Department also includes the Urban Design Studio (UDS) division.
^ Excellent Track Record of Meeting Schedules and Budgets: RBF has proven
capabilities to effectively complete environmental studies on time and on budget.
Per your request, RBF has included a separate sealed envelope with our fees for this proposal as
well as a CD with RBF's three most recent projects that are similar in nature to the proposed project.
W e welcome the opportunity to meet with you to discuss further clarify the work program. Please do
not hesitate to contact me at 949.855.3612, or Ms. Kristen Bogue at 949.855.5747, if you have any
questions or would like additional information.
Sincerely,
~~~,._
Eddie Torres, INCE
Associate/Project Director
Planning and Environmental Services
^
CCNSULTIN3
PLANNING ^ DE81GN ^ CDNHTRU CTIDN
PROPOSAL
FOR CONSULTING SERVICES
City wide Sewer
Capital Improvement Project
Initial Study and
Mitigated Negative Declaration
Prepared for.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
Submitted by:
RBF CONSULTING
September 18, 2008
TABLE 4F C®NTENTS
Introduction and Understanding of the Project ................................................................... 1
1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Understanding of the Project .................................................................................. 1
II. Scope of Work ..................................................................................................................... 3
1.0 Project Kick-Off and Project Description ................................................................ 3
2.0 Research and Investigation .................................................................................... 3
3.0 Surveys and Studies ............................................................................................... 3
3.1 Biological Surveys ....................................................................................... 3
3.2 Cultural Resources Database Search ........................................................ 4
4.0 CEQA Initial Study/Assessment ............................................................................. 5
4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 5
4.2 Environmental Checklist ............................................................................. 5
4.3 Environmental Analysis ..................,............................................................. 5
4.4 Initial Study Determination .......................................................................... 7
4.5 Graphic Exhibits .......................................................................................... 7
4.6 Draft Initial Study ......................................................................................... 7
5.0 Mitigated Negative Declaration Preparation ........................................................... 8
6.0 CEQA-Plus Compliance Documentation ................................................................ 8
6.1 Consultation W ith SW RCB Environmental Services Staff ......................... 8
6.2 CEQA-Plus Compliant Biological Resources Investigation ........................ 8
6.3 CEQA-Plus Compliant Cultural Resources Investigation ........................... 9
6.4 CEQA-Plus Clean Air Act (CAA) General Conformity Analysis .................. 9
6.5 Incorporation of CEQA-Plus Analysis Within the Initial Study .................... 9
7.0 Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration .................................................. 9
8.0 Project Coordination and Meetings ....................................................................... 10
9.0 Community Involvement Program (Optional Task) ............................................... 10
III. Preliminary Project Schedule ............................................................................................ 12
IV. Summary of Qualifications ................................................................................................ 13
V. RBF Project Team ............................................................................................................ 21
VI. References ........................................................................................................................38
VII. Liability Insurance ............................................................................................................. 39
VIII. Statement of Financial Conditions .................................................................................... 40
„ SFa~•~,(~ City of Seal Beach
`y'°°'-'`'~~ Proposal~forthe Clty Wide Capital Improvement Project
Ci • ( 'Fa
~~ ,~ ` a.}'~i Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
~`'si"r
1. INTRODUCTION AND UNDERSTANDING OF
Ti•IE PROJECT
1.1 INTRODUCTION
RBF Consulting (RBF) has submitted this proposal to prepare an Initial Study and Mitigated
Negative Declaration to assess potential impacts for the City Wide Capital Improvement
Project in the City of Seal Beach. The evaluation and associated work products will be
prepared in .accordance with the criteria, standards, and provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, Public Resources Code Section 21080 (c);
CEQA Guidelines Section 15070, and the City of Seal Beach Environmental Guidelines.
RBF will throughout the documentation, and where appropriate, relate the proposed project
to the general trends in the City of Seal Beach and the surrounding area.
'1.2 UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROJECT
It is our understanding that the City of Seal Beach is seeking consulting services in order to
prepare and process CEQA compliance documentation for the City Wide Capital
Improvement Project. The project involves the implementation of the approved 2005 Sewer
System Master Plan (Sewer Master Plan). The Sewer Master Plan identifies over $15
million in Capital Improvement Projects (ClP) that include increasing the diameter of existing
sewer pipes, replacing damaged pipes, installing a liner in the pipes, and rehabilitating
sewer pump stations within the City of Seal Beach.
Geographically, half of the city is located within the coastal zone. Westminster Boulevard is
the dividing line between the coastal and non coastal zones. The CIP's south of
Westminster Boulevard would require approval from the Coastal Commission. The
remaining work north of Westminster Boulevard would not require Coastal Commission
Approval.
The proposed work program, as detailed in Section II, Scope of Work, considers the
preparation of an Initial Study as the supporting analysis for a Mitigated Negative
Declaration. The project kick-off will confirm the project description, references, scheduling
and site visit. The Initial Study will be prepared in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines
Sections 15063, 15070 to 15075, 15102, 15105, and 15107. Each topical area will be
analyzed and significance of impacts will be concluded. Mitigation measures will be
incorporated, as necessary. Additionally, as the project proposes to obtain funding through
the State Water Resources Control Board's (SWRCB) State Revolving Fund (SRF) Loan
Program, the project is required to undergo "CEQA-Plus" requirements. RBF will include the
CEQA-Plus compliance requirements in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, in
consultation with the SWRCB.
RBF will serve as an extension to staff to assure that the entire CEQA process is conducted
in a comprehensive manner, which will include consideration of recent CEQA legislation and
requirements of review agencies. The RBF project management team, led by Mr. Eddie
Torres and Ms. Kristen Bogue will provide regular and consistent communications and
• 1 • September 18, 2008
04 SES(
,. t. t
~~a?,f-~;~:
~ ~i~l1N ~
City of Seal Beach
Proposal for the City Wide Capital Improvement Project
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
updates to the City's project team on the progression of the work program and status of the
analysis. The environmental review process will result in the presentation of the
environmental/CEQA findings to the City decision makers for the determination of
compliance with CEQA.
• 2 • September 18, 2008
O~SEA~~
as a:~.k,• 4
r =.
~ip~~.~,~ a.`\toc
`9a~0up~
City of Seal Beach
Proposal for the City Wide Capital Improvement Project
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
11. SCOFF OF WORK
The following Scope of Work has been prepared pursuant to the information received from the City.
The cost estimate, which is itemized according to task and issue, is attached to this proposal in a
sealed envelope.
1.0 PROJECT KICK-OFF AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The work program will be initiated with akick-off conference call with City representatives to
discuss the project features in greater detail. This initial call is vital to the success of the
CEQA process and will be a key milestone in order to confirm the parameters of the
analysis, project construction program, proposed buildout conditions, scheduling and overall
communications. Prior to the kick-off, RBF will distribute akick-off meeting agenda and
detailed memorandum, which will identify information needs. Based upon the detailed
project information obtained at the project kick-off, RBF will draft a preliminary project
description for review and approval by City Staff.
Z.0 RESEARCH AND INVESTIGATION
RBF will evaluate the necessary information with respect to the City Wide Capital
Improvement Project. Project research will include coordination with the City to acquire
relevant environmental data, previous studies for the area and other available files, exhibits,
maps, and reference documents. The investigation will include a site visit to review existing
land uses and environmental conditions, as well as a photographic inventory of on-site and
surrounding uses. Also, RBF Consulting will perform consultation with the SWRCB in
regards to specific CEQA-Plus impact analyses, documentformat,ond review requirements.
3.0 SURVEYS AND STUDIES
3.1 BIOLOGICAL SURVEYS
Harmsworth will conduct baseline biological surveys, review existing biological data
and prepare a report for the Seal Beach City Wide Capital Improvement Project.
The methodologies utilized for the Biological Surveys will be conducted per CEQA-
Plus requirements in consultation with the SWRCB. Harmsworth will review existing
agency databases such as the Califomia Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB), as
well as conduct site visits, general plant and wildlife surveys, habitat assessments for
federal, state, and other listed special status plant and wildlife species that might be
present on-site.
Harmsworth will determine if any federal/state and other listed special status species
are present or have the potential to occur on-site. Harmsworth will also determine
the need for agency permits such as the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) 404,
Regional Board 401, Califomia Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) streambed
alteration agreement and Coastal Commission certification. All areas with potential
to support federal/state listed and other special status species, that might require
• 3 • September 18, 2008
io z. a' eF . City of Seal Beach
~s~n~~'• sy Proposal forthe City Wide Capital~lmprovement Project
Fy v~ :.~ ~ ;~~~ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
.,\~
+~ dye ;: t
lHt Y~ pr
additional surveys or that might require agency permits will be identified and
mapped. A biological report will be prepared, including the findings of the field
surveys, habitat assessments, and constraints analysis. The report and maps will
document and discuss all areas with potential to support federal/state listed and
other special status species, that might require additional surveys or that might
require agency permits.
3.2 CULTURAL RESOURCES DATABASE SEARCH
CRM Tech will conduct due diligence review of known historical/ archaeological and
Native American resources for the proposed project. The Area of Potential Effects
(APE) is located within the City of Seal Beach. As the project proposes to utilize
State Revolving Funds, this task will comply with CEQA-Plus, Secretary of Interior
Standards, as well as Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966,
as amended.
CRM Tech will search for known historical/archaeological and Native American
cultural resources within the defined APE boundary. CRM TECH will accomplish the
following tasks:
1. Initiate/conduct an archaeological/historical records search at the South
Central Coastal Information Center located on the campus of the California
State University at Fullerton;
2. Request a sacred lands record search from the Native American Heritage
Commission and contact local Native American representatives for any
information they may have regarding Native American resources in or near
the APE;
3. Review historical archival materials and early maps depicting the general
area to ascertain the history of the APE;
4. Conduct a geomorphologic literature survey to determine the
prehistoric/historic landscapes and possible human use ofthose landscapes
and thus assess the vertical APE;
5. Prepare a report to document the findings of the procedures outlined above,
identify known historicaVarchaeological sites and areas of Native American
concern within or adjacent to the APE, discuss their integrity and historical
significance based on the information provided, and recommend subsequent
courses of actions regarding such resources, if necessary.
Note that a brief review of the geomorphologic literature and maps of the APE and
vicinity to determine the prehistoric/historic landscapes and possible human use of
those landscapes will be conducted to substantiate the claim that the proposed
project will not be impacting any sensitive soils.
• 4 • September 18, 2008
~±,¢p~ Sf AI 9
k /~j~!
,p P •~T~• Ylt'"
'~C4Ufli~~
City of Seal Beach
Proposal for the City Wide Capital Improvement Project
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.0 CEQA INITIAL STUDYlASSESSMENT
RBF will prepare an Initial Study in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines. The Initial Study
will include detailed explanations of all checklist determinations and discussions of potential
environmental impacts. The analysis shall be in accordance with Public Resources Code
Section 21080 (c) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15070. The Initial Study report will be
presented as follows:
4.1 INTRODUCTION
This section will cite the environmental review requirements of the Project, pursuant
to the CEQA Guidelines. The Introduction will include the Project location,
environmental setting, existing uses on- and off-site, the Project Description
(confirmed by the City in Task 1.0), Project phasing, and relevant background/history
information.
4.2 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
This section will include a summary page of Project information followed by an
explanation of factors considered for potential impacts. The Initial Study Checklist
will be presented in a four column layout, identifying: (1) potentially significant
impacts, (2) potentially significant impacts unless mitigated, (3) less than significant
impacts, and (4) issues resulting in no impacts.
4.3 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The Environmental Analysis sections will provide vital supporting information forthe
conclusions rendered for the Environmental Checklist. This section will review the
following issues:
Aesfhefics. Licht, and Glare: Short-term construction impacts and long-term
visual impacts (i.e., visual character, views from adjacent public areas, and
City designated scenic vistas) resulting from the Project will be reviewed. It
is anticipated that no new sources of light and glare would result, as the
project consists of existing infrastructure (i.e., existing sewer pipelines and
pump stations). However, if identified, these potential impacts will be
evaluated.
^ Aaricu/fural Resources: The project area is not designated for agricultural
production, thus, the Initial Study will confirm that there is no effect on
farmland.
Air ual' :Short-term construction related and long-term project build-out
air emissions will be evaluated in accordance with the South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD) criteria. The SCAQMD's current
guidelines and emission thresholds established in the CEQA Air Quality
Handbook, updated November 1993, will be used in the air quality analysis
for the proposed project. Project consistency with regional air quality plans,
• 5 • September 18, 2008
o s "! of City of Seal Beach
i ~.~
y "v#Ar q Proposal for the City Wide Capital Improvement Project
' °~ ~~ .: ~~~ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
including the 2007 Air Quality Management Plan for the South Coast Air
Basin, will be evaluated. A discussion relative to Global Climate Change will
be provided, and will include relevant project design features that would
depict energy efficient measures.
^ Bioloaical Resources: On-site conditions with regard to existing plant and
wildlife species will be confirmed. The analysis will be based on the technical
data contained within the Biological Surveys (Task 3.1, above), and will
comply with CEQ-Plus requirements.
Cu/fural Resources: The analysis will cite the provisions of CEQA Guidelines
15064.5 (Historical and Archaeological Resources). The analysis will be
based on the technical data contained within the Cultural Resources
Database Search (Task 3.2, above). This task will comply with CEQA-Plus,
Secretary of Interior Standards, as well as Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended
Geologv and Soils: The Initial Study will examine the grading and excavation
effects, based upon technical information provided by City staff. The
analysis will be based on the technical data contained within the CityofSeal
Beach General Plan, dated December 2003. A particular emphasis will be
placed on the Project's proximity to the Newport-Englewood fault, which
traverses the City of Seal Beach in a northlsouth direction. No separate
technical studies are proposed.
^ Hazards and Hazardous Materials: Analysis will review the potential for
construction hazards.
^ Hvdrologv and Water Qualify: The Project impacts, including potential
beneficial impacts, on runoff volumes and waterquality will be analyzed. The
analysis will be based on the City of Seal Beach General Plan, dated
December 2003. No separate technical studies are proposed.
^ Land Use and Relevant Planning: The land use analysis will reflect
consistency with the City of Seal Beach General Plan, which includes
consistency with the Capital Improvement Program cited in the Growth
Management Element.
^ Mineral Resources: Analysis will note that there the Project will not result in
impacts to mineral resources, as the project would not impact existing oil
operations and mineral resources associated with the Hellman Ranch
property, Esther Island, or the Seal Beach Weapons Station.
^ Noise: The analysis will focus on short-term constnaction noise impacts and
overall changes in ambient noise levels. Project noise impacts resulting from
both construction and operations that may affect sensitive receptors in close
proximity to the Project area will be addressed. Impacts to sensitive
receptors in the vicinity will be analyzed.
• 6 • September 18, 2008
t sFAi Clty of Seal Beach
yt.~.~``;~4~,y~ Proposal for the City Wide Capital Improvement Project
'~ : = ' .: ~~) Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
~ s. ~ t~0~
'~y~UMYY~°,+
^ Population: The analysis will address the potential for growth inducement
impacts as a result in increased sewer capacity.
^ Public Services: Potential impacts to public services, such as potential
increases to public facilities, fire services, and police protection, as a result of
potential growth inducement will be analyzed.
Traffic and Parking: The analysis will address potential construction related
traffic impacts as a result of proposed improvements. RBF will provide traffic
support to determine potential traffic constraints along the proposed
improvement areas. RBF will review Cify of Seal Beach General Plan, dated
December 2003, will be reviewed to determine if any documented traffic
issues are present at or in the vicinity of the project. Anticipated circulation
issues for review may include the operation of key intersections within the
City and current level of truck traffic on key roadways nearby. No separate
technical studies are proposed.
Utilities: The project's impacts, including beneficial impacts, to public
services will be analyzed in terms of reduced demand for wastewater
facilities. The ability of existing infrastructure to support development that
may result from growth inducement will be confirmed in terms of increased
demand/generation of utilities, including water, electricity, and gas.
^ Mandatory Findings of Significance: Focus on cumulative affects and
considerations.
4.4 INITIAL STUDY DETERMINATION
The determination page will conclude the appropriate action based upon the Initial
Study evaluation.
4.5 GRAPHIC EXHIBITS
The environmental document will include a maximum of five (5) exhibits to enhance
the written text and clarify the project and potential environmental impacts.
4.6 DRAFT INITIAL STUDY
RBF will submit five (5) copies of the Draft Initial Study for review and comment by
the City. Should additional copies be required, additional copies will be provided by
RBF at an additional fee. RBF will also submit one (1) °check copy" of the final draft
document, which will incorporate one complete set of comments received from the
City. Changes to the draft document will be highlighted to assist the review.
• 7 • September 18, 2008
OE SEAhB
j~'t, *a
~~.
~~~~`r
City of Seal Beach
Proposal for the City Wide Capital Improvement Project
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
5.0 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PREPARATION
W ith a conclusion in the Initial Study that no significant environmental effects will occur as a
result of implementation of the project, a Mitigated Negative Declaration wilt be prepared.
Following this determination, RBF will prepare the Notice of Intent (NOI) to Adopt and the
Mitigated Negative Declaration for City review. The NOI and Mitigated Negative Declaration
will be attached to the Initial Study to fully explain the proposed project and its affects. Fifty
(50) copies, one (1) camera-ready original, and an electronic file of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration will be provided to the City. RBF will provide the submittal to the State
Clearinghouse and additional distribution as directed by the City.
6.0 CEQA-PLUS COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTATION
The project proposes to obtain funding through the SWRCB State Revolving Fund (SRF)
Loan Program. Since the SRF Loan Program is partially funded by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), certain federal environmental regulations will need to be
addressed in the project's environmental compliance document. These specific federal
regulations are known as "CEQA-Plus" requirements. This task includes the following:
6.1 CONSULTATION WITH SWRCB ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
STAFF
The CEQA-Plus process will necessitate consultation with the SWRCB
Environmental Services staff. RBF Consulting will perform consultation atthe onset
of Initial Study preparation to obtain feedback from the SW RCB in regards to specific
CEQA-Plus impact analyses, document format, and review requirements. This task
also includes providing assistance to the SWRCB for consultation with outside
Federal/State agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA),
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and Califomia Office of Historic
Preservation (OHP}, and California Air Resources Board (GARB), if necessary.
6.2 CEQA-PLUS COMPLIANT BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
INVESTIGATION
RBF has retained the services of CRM Tech for preparation of the Biological
Resources Memorandum. The Biological Resources Memorandum will be prepared
in accordance with CEQA-Plus criteria, paying special attention to Federal
endangered species issues. The Memorandum will include the necessary research
to identify potential Federally Endangered or Threatened species at the project site,
and will include a review of the most recent Federal Register listing package and
critical habitat determination for Federal species.
• 8 • September 18, 2008
~ SA/B
n`=~~ ~ R•
~7 ~,
~~~»~ ~~
City of Seal Beach
Proposal for the City Wide Capital Improvement Project
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
6.3 CEQA-PLUS COMPLIANT CULTURAL RESOURCES
INVESTIGATION
RBF has retained the services of CRM Tech for preparation of the Cultural
Resources Memorandum for the proposed project. In consultation with Cookie Him
of the State Water Resources Control Board Department of Financial Assistance
(DFA), the Study will analyze archaeological, historical, and paleontological
resources in accordance with CEQA-Plus criteria. The Study will include a literature
records search overlaid with the project impactarea (perthe request of DFA) and will
include consultation with local Native American tribes.
6.4 CEQA-PLUS CLEAN AIR ACT (CAA) GENERAL CONFORMITY
ANALYSIS
For SRF-funded projects, a Clean Air Act (CAA) General Conformity Analysis is
necessary for projects in a nonattainment area or an attainment area subject to a
maintenance plan and is required for each criteria pollutant for which an area has
been designated nonattainment or maintenance. Currently, the South Coast Air
Basin (SCAB) is currently in nonattainment for PM~o, PMZ,Si and Ozone by State and
Federal Standards. In order to determine the project's conformity to the CAA, RBF
will quantitatively analyze the construction and operational related impacts. In
particular, RBF will discuss the requirements of Section 176 of the CAA regarding
general conformity, and the de minimus levels that trigger the need for a general
conformity determination. If necessary, RBF will provide a list of EPA approved
mitigation measures for incorporation into the Construction Mitigation Plan. RBF will
also coordinate with State Water Resources Control Board in obtaining the General
Conformity letter from the EPA.
6.5 INCORPORATION OF CEQA-PLUS ANALYSIS WITHIN THE
INITIAL STUDY
Utilizing feedback from the SWRCB and the abovementioned technical
memorandums tailored to Federal requirements (biology, cultural resources, and air
quality), RBF will incorporate information into the Initial Study necessary to satisfy
CEQA-Plus requirements. The Initial Study will analyze certain impact categories
according to both CEQA and Federal requirements (e.g. Federal Endangered
Species Act, Clean Air Act, and Native American consultation). This task is limited to
CEQA-Plus only and excludes preparation of a NEPA-level document.
7.0 FINAL INITIAL STUDY/
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
RBF will prepare a draft final document for City review and approval. RBF will respond to
City comments on the draft final document. The final document will include a purpose
subsection, reference the review process, comments received, responses and any required
edits/updates to the Public Review document. Also included in the final document is the
Mitigation Monitoring Program in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6
• 9 • September 18, 2008
sEa, City of Seal Beach
64~~~~^M''`~=~ Proposal for the City Wide Capital Improvement Project
~a°,,: ~•~ ~ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
~~~;nr ti*
(AB 3180). Fifty copies (50), one (1) camera-ready original, and an electronic file of the
Final Initial Study/(Mitigated) Negative Declaration will be provided to the City. RBF will
prepare the NOI and Notice of Determination and will file the notices at the Orange County
Recorders Office. This scope of work excludes the required fees for the California
Department of Fish and Game (CDFG).
8.0 PROJECT COORDINATION AND MEETINGS
Mr. Eddie Torres will be responsible for management and supervision of the
environmental review as well as consultation with the City. Mr. Torres and/or Ms.
Kristen Bogue will undertake consultation and coordination of the project and the
environmental review for compliance with CEQA requirements. Mr. Torres and/or
Ms. Bogue will consult with State and local agencies regarding the environmental
documents. RBF will provide management services to implement the CEQA-Plus
process and coordinate the effort with the Client and subconsultants. This task also
covers costs necessary to administer the contract for this effort.
Mr. T'on'es, and/or Ms. Bogue, will attend all scheduled staff meetings and will
represent the Project Team at public hearings and make presentations as
necessary. RBF anticipates several meetings with City staff, including a "kick-off
meeting" (refer to Task 1.0) and public hearings. Mr. Torres and Ms. Bogue along
with other key Project Team personnel will be available to attend meetings with
affected jurisdictions, agencies and organizations as needed to identify issues,
assess impacts and define mitigation. Should the City determine that additional
meetings beyond the following listed meetings, below, are necessary, services will
be provided under a separate scope of work on a time and materials basis. The
estimated cost for additional meetings is approximately $1,200 per person, which
also accounts for travel expenses.
One kick-off meeting with City Staff (Refer to Task 1.0), and
Two public hearings with presentations as necessary.
9,0 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM
(Optional Task)
RBF has successfully completed numerous projects involving extensive participation for
capital improvement and planning-related projects, many of which also included coordination
and communication with public agencies, such as local, state, regional, and federal
agencies. Recognizing that different people participate best in different ways, RBF employs
a variety of creative, one-of-a-kind, and fun opportunities for involvement that engage all
community members in both a comfortable and meaningful manner. Developing dynamic
working relationships with other organizations and the public has been key to many of our
successful, award-winning community involvement efforts. Recent public involvement
awards include: the Downtown Sierra Madre Educational Series, Plan Santa Paula and
Santa Paula Citywide Visioning, Pasadena Green Building Education Program, the Prescott
Valley General Plan (Prescott, AZ).
• 10 • September 18, 2008
5 A(~ City of Seal Beach
yi _ w ~' B~'C'Z A
i ~ `~ Proposal for the Clty Wide Capital Improvement Project
4$t . ~}~ • Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
~f q ~• J. `O •
~~~~
RBF has exceptional experience and capabilities in the strategic planning, presentation, and
technical support of public participation programs. RBF is currently implementing public
outreach programs for several city General Plans, and facilitated the Aesthetics process for
improvements to the SR-22/I-405 Corridor. RBF also has a complete in-house Media Arts
Studio, which can develop virtually anyfomt of public communication piece, including project
web sites, video, PowerPoint presentation, illustrative graphics, multi-lingual newsletters,
and other materials. Community involvement efforts and informational materials can include,
but are not limited to the following:
• Workshops: Including hands-on, interactive group exercises
^ Focus and/or Discussion Groups: Facilitated small group dialogue with
key stakeholders or groups
^ Project Area Walks: Interactive walking tours of project sites to discuss
issues and opportunities
• Open Houses: Drop-in events with "stations" pertaining to important aspects
of a project
^ Educational Presentations/Roadshows: PowerPoint-based presentations
designed to educate local community members
^ Youth Events: Workshops and activities specifically inviting youth input
^ Informational Pamphlet Introduces interested parties to the project
^ Information Center. Central station to keep people informed,
^ Workshop Flyers /Posters: Usually posted at various locations throughout
the project area
^ Community Master Calendar. Committee meetings, workshops, newsletter
distribution, etc.
^ Newsletter. Periodically describes project activities and maintains
enthusiasm
^ Local Media Coordination: Develop partnerships to promote upcoming
events, coordinate press releases, radio announcements, etc.
^ Web Site: 24-hour access to project information and visual presentations,
FAQ's, list of contacts, schedules, and meeting notices; can also be used as
a survey tool
This optional task assumes that the Community Involvement Program will be provided on a
time and materials basis, as requested by the City.
• 11 • September 18, 2008
o` sEA;, f City of Seal Beach
ti .,ah-xy•
~ • ~ i Y''~`';• Proposal for the City Wide Capital Improvement Protect
9 ~ ; ' to
° - <p Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
4/7'4.`\
N
tll. PRELIMINARY PROJECT SCHEDULE
The following Preliminary Schedule assumes authorization to proceed with the work program in mid
October 2008. A date specific schedule can be provided prior to the kick-off meeting.
Kick-Off Conference Call Week 1
Draft Project Description Preparation Week 1
City Review of Draft Project Description Week 2
RBF prepares Administrative Draft Initial Study/MND Weeks 3-6
City Review of Administrative Draft Initial Study/MND Week 7
RBF completes Draft Initial Study/MND Week 8
Printing and distributes Public Review Initial Study/MND Week 8
30-Day Public Review Weeks 9-11
RBF prepares Final Initial Study/MND Week 12
Printing and distributes Final Initial Study/MND Week 13
Hearing TBD
• 12 • September 18, 2008
tS~~
rte., ~ ~r~~ %
e+t
~59t,.;~. ,:. ~a
F~~'ssv • . J. ••`4
City of Seal Beach
Proposal for the City Wide Capital Improvement Project
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
IV. SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS
RBF Consulting is amulti-disciplinary planning, engineering and surveying firm with offices in Contra
Costa, Marin, Santa Clara, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura, Los Angeles, and San
Diego counties. With over 60 years of public and private sector experience, RBF is respected and
recognized in the profession of consulting planning, environmental, and engineering services
throughout the state of California. RBF has in-house expertise in disciplines including
Environmental Analysis, Planning, GIS Services, Surveying, Aerial Photogrammetry, Mapping, Real
Estate Assessments, Transportation/Traffic Engineering, Civil Engineering (including Grading,
Public Works, Water/Wastewater, Hydrology), Mechanical/ Electrical/Energy Services, Computer
Aided Design and Drafting (CADD) and Media Services. Over 90 professionals are dedicated to
Planning, Environmental Services and Landscape Architecture.
RBF possesses the full range of disciplines necessary to provide tum-key planning, design and
implementation of a wide range of projects. We combine our expertise in development projects and
urban planning, transportation and air quality management, to develop and assess project designs
that minimize impacts to the natural environment and community. The following is a comprehensive
list of RBF departments and services:
DEPARTMENTS AREAS OF EXPERTISE
Land Planning and Urban Conceptual Design; Master Planning; Site Planning; Hillside
Design: Grading; Landscape Architecture; Redevelopment and Infill Land
Use Planning; Illustrative Plans; Pedestrian and Vehicular Trail
Studies; Visual Analysis; Design Guidelines and Development
Standards.
Policy Planning: Specific Plans, General Plans; Community Participation Programs;
Project Management and Coordination; Feasibility/Special Studies;
Fee Programs; Entitlement to Use (including zone changes,
General Plan Amendments and annexation studies);
Redevelopment Studies; Consultant Coordination; Governmental
Agencies/Public Liaison; and Development Support Services
through Construction.
Environmental Services: Environmental Impact Reports/Statements; Expanded Initial
Studies/Negative Declarations; Mitigation Monitoring Programs;
Public Participation Programs; Natural Resource Management;
Resource Mitigation Permits; EIR and EIS Review; Noticing;
Statements of Overriding Considerations; Findings; and Special
Studies, such as Phase I Site Assessment for hazardous materials,
as well as noise and air quality monitoring and modeling.
Transportation Planning: Master Plans of Circulation; Transportation Planning/Engineering;
Traffic Impact Studies; Traffic Control Plans; Traffic Signal
Coordination; Traffic Signal Design; Congestion Management
• Programs; Street Lighting; Signing, Striping, and Construction
Detour Plans.
• 13 • September 18, 2008
5 Al
.+/y~,~~~, F,~;
V~ [ ~ ~;~
g P
w $' .t^ y0~
~uMrr cp`.
City of Seal Beach
Proposal for the City Wide Capital Improvement Protect
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Media Services: Report Graphics; Presentation Graphics; View Analysis;
Illustrations; Slide Shows; Vdeo Services; and CADD Illustrative
Plans.
Civil Engineering: Subdivision Engineering; Structural Engineering; Engineering
Design; and CADD mapping.
Mechanical/E/ectrica! Commercial Office Buildings; Retail Shopping Center; Educational
Engineering: Facilities; Hotel/Motel; Industrial; Special Energy Systems;
Entertainment Performing Arts Centers; and Computer Centers.
RBF has experienced professionals in a wide range of planning, engineering and related disciplines.
With over 60 years of experience throughout California, our staff is actively involved in professional
and local issues through serving as local and state officers for various professional organizations.
We provide a full range of engineering and planning services, with particular expertise in the
planning, design and permitting of major commercial/industrial and mixed use projects. Our staff
includes:
^ 34 American Institute of Certified Planners
^ 6 Registered Environmental Assessors
^ 2 Certified Environmental Inspectors
^ 1 EPA -Certified Building Inspector and Management Planner for Asbestos
^ 1 Registered Geologist/Certified Engineering Geologist
^ 8 Licensed Landscape Architects
^ UCI Certificate in Environmental Site Assessment and Remediation/40 hour OSHA Training
^ Instructors in the areas of Energy Efficiency, Environmental Engineering and Water
Resources
^ Over 300 Registered Civil, Traffic, Structural and Mechanical Engineers
ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
As a leader in the environmental field, RBF offers an extensive array of services associated with
environmental compliance and documentation. RBF provides evaluation for the full range of
environmental effects for all types of projects. Our award-winning team offers documentation in
compliance with environmental laws and regulations including CEQA, NEPA, the Clean WaterAct,
the Clean Air Act and other applicable environmental laws.
Environmental documents prepared at RBF address the full range of environmental and technical
issues, with in-house specialists providing technical evaluation for traffic and transportation, flood
control and drainage, air quality, noise, land use, socioeconomics, utilities and services, energy
conservation, visual and aesthetic effects, relevant planning, Phase I hazardous materials,
neighborhood and construction effects, landform modification, agricultural suitability and many other
environmental issue areas. RBF draws upon the profession's leading subconsultants for specialized
biological, archeological, geotechnical and fiscal/economic studies tobuild amulti-disciplinary team
of environmental analysts. State-of-the-art computer facilities including Computer Aided Drafting
and Design (CADD), ARC/INFO, and specially created computer programs are utilized in obtaining
the highest level of technical completeness and efficiency. The following are Representative Project
Sheets for key projects prepared by RBF.
• 14 • September 18, 2008
t s~a~
~~ B'~~
~~
tlti
~~~~, y..:;,
~/NIY a~
~,.s
City of Seal Beach
Proposal for the City Wide Capital Improvement Project
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
V. RBF PROJECT TEAM
s~
'~. ~~ CITY OF
~~' ~ SEAL BEACH
Eddie Torres, INCE
Project Director
Kristen Bogue, CEI
Project Manager
RBF TEAM
Kristen Bogue, CEI
Pro%ect Manager/
Environmental Analyst
Rita Garcia
Senior Environmental Analyst
Achilles Malisos
Environmental Analyst
Rebecca Kinney, P.E.
Hydrology and Water Quality
Paul Martin, P.E., T.E.
Transportation Specialist
SUBCONSULTANTS
HARMSWORTH ASSOCIATES
Biologics! Resources
CRM TECH
Cultural Resources
• 21 • September 18, 2008
SEA( 9
~k~ *~
~~i~
~~~~~
City of Seal Beach
Proposal for the City Wide Capital Improvement Project
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
VI1. LIABILITY INSURANCE
RBF has general liability insurance in the amount of $4,000,000. RBF's Professional Liability (Errors
and Omissions) amounts to $3,000,000. RBF also carries automobile liability, excess liability,
worker's compensation, and employer's liability. Further information and/or certificates of insurance
will be provided by RBF, as requested by the City.
• 39 • September 18, 2008
4 Mta, ~ City of Seal Beach
;~°'""~q~'~", Proposal for the City Wide Capital Improvement Project
~ ~ ~e~ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
-~„_Hi,Y,~~
VI11. STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITIONS
This Proposal shall be valid for a period of 90 days. Progress billings will be forwarded based on
payment criteria established by the City. These billings will include the fees earned for the billing
period. The City shall make every reasonable effort to review invoices within fifteen (15) working
days from the date of receipt of the invoices and notify Consultant In writing of any particular item
that is alleged to be incorrect.
Invoices shall specifically identify all project team members as well as all tasks and deliverables
covered in the billing period. For each task and deliverable, the amount in the billing will be
identified and the remaining amount left in the budget after the current billing period will also be
identified. Hourly billing rates will be identified for each project team member, as well as the total
hours charged to each task and deliverable.
Deviations or modifications from the Scope of Work will result in potential re-evaluation of the
associated fees. Items not soecifically stated in the proposal will be considered an additional work
item.
All work will be performed at a "Not to Exceed" contract price, which will become the fixed price upon
completion of negotiations with the City Staff authorized to negotiate and agreement. The total
budget includes all miscellaneous costs for travellmileage, reproduction, telephone, postal, delivery,
reference materials and incidental expenses.
The budget provides a breakdown of our estimated cost of performing the services described in this
Scope of Services. Our Scope of Services and its associated cost are based on several key
assumptions, including the following:
1. The budget is valid for a period of 90 days from the date of submittal/opening, after which it
may be subject to revision.
2. City will develop the mailing list for distribution of the IS/MND and notices. The Applicant or
the City will be responsible for newspaper cost of publication of notices, which will be billed
directly to the City, so they are not included in the proposed budget.
3. Photocopy costs included in the proposal are for the specified number of copies of
deliverables and reasonable .incidental and in-team photocopying. If additional copies of
deliverables are needed, they can be provided with an amendment to the proposed budget.
4. Review cycles for preliminary documents are presented in the scope of work. Additional
review cycles or additional versions of administrative drafts are assumed to not be needed.
5. The proposed work addresses CEQA requirements of the proposed action. Work related to
NEPA compliance, Section 404 compliance, or other permitting processes is not included
(although these can be added, as needed, with a contract amendment). Work concludes at
the acceptance of the final deliverable.
• 40 • September 18, 2008
E sta~~, City of Seal Beach
~o ~ ; ~`~ Proposal for the City Wide Capital Improvement Project
`~9~, r ~ ;~:-~ Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
~~,~rY~~
6. The budget is based on completion of work within an agreed upon schedule. If substantial
delay occurs, an amendment of the budget would be warranted to accommodate additional
project management time and other costs. Substantial delay is normally defined as 90 days
or more.
7. Costs are included for the number of meetings specified in the scope of work. If additional
meetings are needed, they can be included with an amendment of the budget.
8. The extent of public comment on a Draft IS/MND is not predictable. The proposed budget
includes a reasonable, preliminary estimate time to respond to comments. RBF will consult
with the City after the valuation of the comments to determine if the preliminarily estimated
budget is sufficient.
9. Costs have been allocated to tasks to determine the total budget. RBF may reallocate costs
among tasks, as needed, as long as the total budget is not exceeded.
10. The CEQA statutes or guidelines may change during the course of this IS/MND. If
amendments require redoing work already performed or substantially increasing effort, a
contract amendment may be warranted.
• 41 September 18, 2008
d
m
3
m
i
r
O
O~
O
y
Z
a
v
w
d
'o
L
a
c
d
d
O
L
Q
is
a
c~
V
V
O
N
' O
N
~t 0
~ 0
O 0
W ~0
C7
t~ ~0
in
N 0
10 ~0
~
N 10
d'
IC 0
~-
O ~0
O
N 0
(7
O 0
C0
W 0
e-
d' 0
O
O ~O
10
47 Vn
~,
C O '
~ ~ ~ N
~ N
I
fH U9 ~
~ i9 Vl ~ ~ ~ M M ~
~
H V ~ ~
~ O a OD O N N m N O W N M N ~ N
~"' _
~ ~ ~ T ~
~ N
o
N N
~ ~
V
~ ~
S
W ~ ~ M N N 0 00 ~ o
~ h
~
N ~
d
00 ~° v ,or 3e
~ o
o
~ .
a:
C
~ ~
'~ < ~ ~ ~ ' ~- N T OD y
~ 3e
"'• 0
~
~ uri
m iE1
Y
ov wn ~ ~ o r v v v ao
~
r 00
1C n
~
~
H
LL7
O
.
~
O ~
O
C
~ b Q 0
r
w
H d m A C W
~
m
Z
~ OA
m
`o
~
w
g
y o
m 9
:° v
p
9
~ W
a
L
_
~ N ~ ~ w c . p m x O
d
_
~
m
{0 v ~
~ p W N
•~ ~ m m a U Q ~ ~
~ ,~ C 07 c W
a N
v
~ ~ 3 in ~' ~ ~ e
m c
m ~
W ~
- ~
m E a ~
•- p
~ ~
Q
m
u v
e
Oi N
v
C -
8 aC
-
m in
-
R o
S
7
E
C
E
C ~
N
t
~
'~
Z o
v
w w
N
-
~
Q Z
W
N
'~ Q
m O
V
'Y
L
~
«~.
=
c
9
~
~
m
~
tC
4
~
a
~
(~
J
m
d'
I~-
~ fY
O
m
~ ~ ~ m U (a
J ~ w w ~ C9 0 ~ (Q
~ ~ ~ Q~ p
J 's
C a
Y
o. d
C
w ~-
ri N
ri itl
v ~-
a N
~ ~
v R
v X0
v 10
v .:'
~ W
t~ C
li
a -~'
~
<
` C
f-
~
Q o 0 o O o 0 0 o W O m
~ ~ 0
H ~ N !'~ ~ Yi 07 A OD D 1- a
' N H
N
L~ _
•~
~ V
E ~ o.
mU~
= II II
II ~
Q
xUC7
m ~
~'a~
N N
~Vrc~m
Yea
II II II
aG C~ g
YOCQ
H
L
gU
a~
m
~~
N
~ C_
~v
E y
pW~
O i
~~
Q
ao
E E
rn~
m
`o
E m
~ c
~~_
,`Q E .s
c ~$'
y 7
$~a
w
y
m
c m o
mom
~~~
W ~a
y mZ`
~_
O y
C L
~ ~ m
~ ~
~_ ~0~ O
m a~
~ ~
=s
3
~ly.y..
y~ m
m ui
~ ~ ~
C
~ ~~
m
E ~ E
FcE
N v r
c ~ •c
c-m
~ y
m
d
°.
~ E `m
.~~~
a~~
m
o .2 LL
Zv~