Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Resolution 11866 (Village Loch Lomond Project)RESOLUTION NO. 11866 RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO AN AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WITH RBF CONSULTING FOR ASSISTANCE NEEDED TO PREPARE AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE VILLAGE AT LOCH LOMOND MARINA PROJECT (Term of Agreement: from March 1, 2004 to August 1, 2006, for an amount not to Exceed $376,597.00) WHEREAS, on March 1, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11508, which authorized the execution of an Agreement for Professional Services with RBF Consulting to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Village at Loch Lomond Marina project. The Agreement for Professional Services established a budget limit of $246,947.00 and a term limit ending on March 1, 2006; and WHEREAS, on June 20, 2005, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11778, which approved an amendment to the initial Agreement for Professional Services. The amendment was required to address expanded study topics for the EIR, including the preparation of a parking study by Kin -ley Horn Associates, transportation consultants. The amendment authorized services in the amount of $55,657.00, which with the initial Agreement budget, authorized a total not -to -exceed budget of $302,604.00; and WHEREAS, during the EIR preparation process, it was determined that expanded analysis of specific EIR was necessary, which included the need for additional coordination and attendance at additional meetings by RBF Consulting. Furthermore, staff has requested review of a second Administrative Draft EIR, which is necessary to ensure all EIR topics are adequately assessed; and WHEREAS, RBF Consultant has prepared a scope of work for the amended services, which are outlined in attached Exhibit `A.' The proposal for additional services includes a not -to - exceed budget of $73,993.00, which would be added to the current not -to -exceed budget of $302,604.00 not -to -exceed budget established under the executed Agreement for Professional Services, resulting in a total budget of $376,597.00; and WHEREAS, the developer has agreed to pay all consultant costs associated with the preparation of the EIR. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of San Rafael does hereby authorize the Interim City Manager to execute, on behalf of the City of San Rafael, Amendment No. 2 to an Agreement for Professional Services with RBF Consulting in the form attached as Exhibit `A.' I, Jeanne M. Leoncini, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of said City on Monday, the 19th day of December 2005, by the following vote to wit: AYES: Councilmembers: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips and Mayor Boro NOES: Councilmembers: None ABSENT: Councilmembers: None ANNE M. LEONCIlVI, City Clerk EXHIBIT `A' AMENDMENT NO.2 TO AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Amendment No. 2 to an Agreement for Professional Services is made and entered into on the 190' day of December 2005, by and between the CITY OF SAN RAFAEL (hereinafter "CITY"), and RBF Consulting (hereinafter "CONTRACTOR"). RECITALS WHEREAS, on March 2, 2004, CITY entered into an Agreement for Professional Services with CONTRACTOR to assist in preparing an Environmental Impact Report for the Village at Loch Lomond Marina development project; and WHEREAS, Section 4 (Compensation) of the Agreement for Professional Services includes a not -to -exceed budget of $246,947.00; and WHEREAS, following the completion of the Notice of Preparation process, which initiated the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), it was recommended that the scope be expanded to include several additional topics of study. As a result, in June 2005, an Amendment to the Agreement for Professional Services was approved increasing the not -to - exceed budget to $302,604.00; and WHEREAS, during the process of the preparing the EIR, it was determined that expanded study and additional, detailed analysis of some of the study topics was necessary WHEREAS, CONTRACTOR has prepared a budget for the additional scope and topics of issues to be studied in the EIR, which is presented in attached Exhibit "A." AMENDMENT NO.2 TO AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereby agree to amend the following sections of Agreement for Professional Services (March 2, 2004): 4. COMPENSATION. For the full performance of the services described herein by CONTRACTOR, CITY shall pay CONTRACTOR an amount not to exceed $376,597.00 based upon the budget described in Scope of Work, Budget and Project Schedule ($246,947.00) of the initial Agreement of March 2, 2004; the amended budget approved in June 2005 ($55,657.00); and the Request for Contract Amendment and Re-establishment of Contingency Fees ($73,993.00, attached herein). CONTRACTOR shall be compensated on a time and material basis. Payment will be made upon receipt by PROJECT MANAGER of itemized invoices submitted by CONTRACTOR. ��10:3:7u[0]ffte1:1:1c1u1o10IV The term of this Agreement shall be from March 2, 2004 and conclude on August 1, 2006. Upon mutual agreement of the parties, and subject to the approval of the City Manager the term of this Agreement shall be extended for an additional period. All of the other provisions, terms and obligations of the Agreement for Professional Services executed on March 2, 2004, and the subsequent Amendment executed in June 2005 shall remain valid and shall be in force with the execution of this Amendment No. 2. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement No. 2 as of the day, month, and year first above written. CITY OF SAN RAFAEL . A . ORDHOFF,Interim nager ATTEST: ANNE M. LEO&CINI, City Clerk Attorney 2 CONTRACTOR Name: Laura Worthington Forbes Title: Principal BF F . . CONSULTING November 23, 2005 Mr. Paul Jensen, AICP, Contract Planner City of San Rafael 1400 Fifth Avenue San Rafael, CA 94915-1560 EXHIBIT A JN: 40-100212.001 Subject: Request for Contract Addendum and Re-establishment of Contingency Fees for the Villages at Loch Lomand Project EIR Dear Mr. Jensen: Per your request, this letter details the out of scope expenses RBF has incurred with respect to: (1) responding to the City's comments on the Villages at Loch Lomond Administrative Draft EIR; (2) augmenting the analyses and modifying the mitigation measures provided by the applicant's consultants; (3) reviewing and responding to information provided by the applicant; (4) coordinating with City staff, the applicant, and the applicant's consultants; and, (5) managing the project. This project has continued to undergo increasing public scrutiny since project inception. Accordingly, the City's level of review and specificity of comments was conducted with the expectation of intense public and legal scrutiny of the Draft EIR. This detailed level of review by the City has been reflected in the time RBF staff have spent responding to the City's comments. Our original expectation, as detailed in our approved scope of work, was that revisions to the Administrative Draft EIR made as a result of City comments would require approximately 96 hours of professional staff labor at a cost of $10,840. To date, RBF has spent 462.5 hours at a cost of $37,054 responding to City staff comments, outside legal council and contract consultant comments, as well project information additions/modifications submitted by the project applicant as follows: • Environmental Specialist - 68 hours; • Environmental Planner —132 hours; • Environmental Analyst —142.5 hours; • Assistant Planner —112 hours; and • Administrative Assistant — 8 hours. Similarly, the analyses and mitigation measures provided by the applicant's consultants required revisions and supplements in anticipation of the heightened public and legal scrutiny of the Draft EIR. To date, RBF has spent 153 hours at a cost of $11,705 researching and coordinating with subject -area experts in order to augment the analyses and mitigation measures provided by the applicant's consultants. These costs have been incurred as follows: 004 14725 Alton Parkway, Irvine, CA 92618-2027 ■ P.O. Box 57057, Irvine, CA 92619-7057 ■ 949.472.3505 ■ FAX 949.472.8373 Offices located throughout California, Arizona & Nevada ■ www.RBF.com FBF CONSULTING • Project Manager - 1 hour; • Environmental Planner — 18 hours; • Environmental Analyst — 113.5 hours; and • Assistant Planner — 20.5 hours. The extension of the schedule resulting from the additional work described above; coordinating with City staff, the applicant, and the applicant's consultants; as well as reviewing and responding to additional information submitted by the applicant has also resulted in out of scope expenses. To date, RBF has spent 208.5 hours at a cost of $23,271 in project management time, meetings, and coordination with subconsultants, City staff, the applicant, and the applicant's consultants. These costs have been incurred as follows: • Principal -in -Charge — 64.5 hours; • Project Manager - 4 hours; • Environmental Planner — 2 hours; • Environmental Analyst — 135.5 hours; and • Administrative Assistant — 2.5 hours. The above summary of additional work, which totals $72,030, identifies the work effort and technical breadth/detail provided by RBF above and beyond our original scope of work. Categorized by CEQA issue area, the additional effort is approximately divided as follows: • Project Description — 10% (researching and responding to City comments; updating the Project Description with new and revised exhibits; updating the Project Description with the new landscape and recreational plans; and updating the Project Description with the surcharge program and construction traffic); • Land Use and Relevant Planning — 15% (researching and responding to City comments and revising and supplementing the General Plan policy analysis per City comments and new and revised applicant -submitted information); • Biological Resources — 15% (researching and responding to City comments and addressing additional wetland buffers issues); • Hydrology, Drainage, and Water Quality — 20% (researching and responding to City comments; researching potential global warming scenarios and possible impacts; coordinating with applicant's consultants and City staff regarding possible impacts related to global warming; researching potential tsunami run-up scenarios in light of global warming -induced sea level rise; coordinating with applicant's consultant's and City staff on new tsunami run-up scenarios; coordinating with applicant's consultants and City staff regarding discrepancies in mean tide elevation scenarios; researching, coordinating with applicant's consultants, and revising document to develop performance measures for hydrology and water quality mitigation measures; and supplementing the section with new impervious area and stormwater volume data); • Geology, Soils, and Seismicity — 20% (researching and responding to City comments; coordinating with applicant's consultants to develop performance measures for mitigation measures; researching and developing performance measures for mitigation 6�a"L004 14725 Alton Parkway, Irvine, CA 92618-2027 ■ P.O. Box 57057, Irvine, CA 92619-7057 a 949.472.3505 ■ FAX 949.472.8373 Offices located throughout California, Arizona & Nevada ■ www RBF.com FBF CONSULTING measures; and revising and incorporating new applicant -provided information on existing site conditions and the proposed surcharge program); Public Utilities — 15%; and (researching and responding to City comments and reviewing and responding to the incomplete sewer study); and Cultural Resources —10% (researching and responding to City comments); Other CEQA Sections — 5% (researching and responding to City comments). As a result of keeping the project moving forward, we have now expended nearly all approved contract dollars by advancing dollars targeted for later/subsequent tasks. By moving forward with one of the options described below, we will have the funds for these subsequent tasks. Based on our telephone conversation on November 22, 2005, we understand the City's and applicants concern that the breadth of comments received on the Administrative Draft EIR is, in part, the result of lack of detail and/or insufficient analysis/errors provided or caused by RBF. Prior to submitting our addendum request, we carefully reviewed the City's comments to determine our level of professional responsibility and burden for corrective actions to the document. I do not take this responsibility lightly, as our quality is something I take very personally. We did not reflect this effort (RBF's responsibility for corrective actions) in our contract addendum request as it was our understanding (based on my conversation with you) that the City was most interested in quantifying the work effort and associated cost that would be necessary to complete the document from this point forward. The effort quantified herein is our best estimate of the work above and beyond our approved scope of work. Our contract addendum does not include any requests to recover expenses that are appropriately our responsibility, based on our error or our judgment. Additionally, please remember that in our attempt to maintain the project schedule absent complete applicant technical analysis, we submitted an incomplete Administrative Draft EIR, which likely exacerbates the perspective that our document was of not up to RBF standards. We clearly recognize that the cost associated with managing the EIR preparation in the manner we have all agreed to is higher than any of us have predicted at the outset. In addition, given the concerns expressed, we are willing to bear a greater degree of responsibility for the expenses incurred than are reflected on page 1 of this letter. As such, and based on our mutual discussions (on November 21 and 22, 2005), RBF agrees to hold firm to a not to exceed fee of $73,993. In addition, we will forgo the 10% contingency fee that we had previously requested to address other unanticipated out -of -scope or other requested task assignments as may be required. This proposal would provide RBF with a contract amendment for the completion and publication of the Draft EIR, as described above, as well as responses to public comments and completion of the Final EIR based upon the expected work effort outlined in our original scope (116 hours for responses to comments). Therefore, this approach would result in an amendment to our contract to take us through completion of the project. The total amount requested would be $73,993. Based on our electronic mail (e-mail) exchange on November 22, 2005, we -nth 14725 Alton Parkway, Irvine, CA 92618-2027 ■ P.O. Box 57057, Irvine, CA 92619-7057 ■ 949.472.3505 ■ FAX 949.472.8373 Offices located throughout California, Arizona & Nevada ■ www RBF.com Pod WSM CONSULTING acknowledge that the City will leave "open" the option to revisit the budget once the DER public review process has closed. Attached for your review is a spreadsheet summarizing the Administrative Draft EIR work efforts described above. I would be more than happy to discuss any aspects of this letter or the attached spreadsheet with you, as well as providing additional detail where necessary. Please let me know if you wish additional information or would like any clarification. Thank you for your time in reviewing our request. Sincerely, Laura Worthington -Forbes Vice President — Planning & Environmental Services Attachment Y=:Jh« 2C3C} �r-�,th 14725 Alton Parkway, Irvine, CA 92618-2027 ■ P.O. Box 57057, Irvine, CA 92619-7057 ■ 949.472.3505 ■ FAX 949.472.8373 Offices located throughout California, Arizona & Nevada 0 www.RBF.com