The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2001-2181 RESOLUTION NO. 2001-218 2 3 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE PLANNING CENTER FOR PROVIDING PROFESSIONAL 4 SERVICES TO UPDATE THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN. 5 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: 6 7 SECTION 1. That the Mayor is authorized to execute the Agreement with The Planning 8 Center for providing Professional Services to update the City's Plan (attached and incorporated 9 herein as Exhibit "A"). A contract is entered into with said firm for the actual costs incurred, not 10 to exceed $530,000.00, but such agreement shall be effective only upon being fully executed by I1 both parties. The Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement on behalf 1 of the City. 14I I SECTION Z. This agreement and any amendment or modifications thereto shall not 15 take effect or become operative until fully signed and executed by the parties and no party shall 16 be obligated hereunder until the time of such full execution. No oral agreements, amendments, 17 modifications or waivers are intended or authorized and shall not be implied from any act or 18 course of conduct of any party. 19~ ~ SECTION 3. This resolution is rescinded if the parties to the contract fail to exeoute rt 21 I I within sixty (60) days of passage of the resolution. /// ~ /// 24 25 26 27 28 -1- 2001-218 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 211 26 27 28 RESOLUTION...APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE PLANNING CENTER FOR PROVIDING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO UPDATE THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino at a ] oint regular meeting thereof, held on the 9th day of July , 2001, by the following vote, to wit: Council Members: AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT ESTRADA x LIEN x MC GINNIS x SCHNETZ x x SUAREZ ANDERSON x MC CAMMACK x ,~ City Clerk The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this 12 t~ Approved as to form and legal content: JAMES F. PENMAN, City Attorney By: /// 2001. of San Bernardino -2- a 1, ~ ~ zoos-zis AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this 9th day of July 2001, by and between the CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ("City") and THE PLANNING CENTER ("Consultant"). RECITALS 1. Purpose The purpose of this Agreement is to allow the City to procure the services of an experienced professional firm to update the City's General Plan. 2. Mission The City hereby retains the Consultant for provision of the services described in Attachment A (Consultant's Proposal). Consultant hereby accepts such responsibility as described herein. During the course of the study, if additional tasks are identified that would be beneficial to the City, the Director may request a written proposal for that work. The Director may also request additional meetings as warranted. 3. Terms This Agreement shall commence as of the day and year first above shown and shall remain in full force and effect until the contract is completed or unless terminated earlier, as provided herein. The Director of Development Services (Director) has been duly authorized to approve line item adjustments to the program budget contained in the consultant's proposal provided that such adjustments do not materially alter this agreement or increase the cost to the city hereunder. However, the Director may authorize additional work and/or meetings as specified in Section 2. 4. Consultant Responsibilities Consultant shall complete the work program described in Attachment A. Consultant commits the principal personnel listed below to the project for its duration: Consultant: Richard Ramella, Consulting Principal Alfred Bell, Senior Advisor and Technical Editor Brian James, Project Manager Dwayne Mears, Principal, Director of Environmental Services 1 '' 2001-218 5. Replacement of Named Personnel It has been determined that the individuals named in this Agreement are necessary for the successful performance of this Agreement. No diversion or replacement of these individuals shall be made by Consultant without written consent of the Director of Development Services. If the Director fails to respond to Consultant within ten (10) days of notification by Consultant, said personnel diversion or replacement shall be deemed approved. 6. Release of News Information No news release, including photographs, public announcements or confirmation of same, of any part of the subject matter of this Agreement or any phase of any program hereunder shall be made without prior written approval of the Director of Development Services. 7. Confidentiality of Reports Consultant shall keep confidential all reports, information and data received, prepared or assembled pursuant to performance hereunder and which is designated as confidential by the Director of Development Services. Such confidential information shall not be made available to any person, firm, corporation or entity without the prior written consent of the Director. 8. Compensation The Consultant will be paid a not to exceed fee of $530,000 for all work and services performed under this Agreement. The City agrees to pay Consultant on a monthly basis in accordance with the method of compensation described in Attachment A. The Consultant shall submit invoices on a monthly basis to the Director of Development Services for review and determination as to compliance with method of compensation. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice. Such payment shall be made payable to Consultant. Compensation for any additional work, as outlined in Sections 2 and 3 of this Agreement, will be processed in the same manner. The total fee for additional tasks and/or meetings shall not exceed $10,500. The total fee for this Agreement, including the work outlined in Attachment A shall not exceed $530,000. 2 zoos-zls 9. Department Support The City of San Bernardino shall provide Consultant with any plans, publications, reports, statistics, records or other data or information pertinent to the services to be provided hereunder which are reasonably available. lO.Independent Contractor Consultant shall perform the services as contained herein as an independent contractor and shall not be considered an employee of the City. This Agreement is by and between Consultant and the City, and is not intended, and shall not be construed, to create the relationship of agent, servant, employee, partnership, joint venture, or association, between the Consultant and the City. 11. Conflict of Interest Consultant agrees for the term of this Agreement not to enter into any agreement that will be detrimental or adverse to any interest of the City of San Bernardino or its Economic Development Agency. 12. Successor and Assignment The services as contained herein are to be rendered by Consultant whose name is as appears first above written and said Consultant shall not assign nor transfer any interest in this Agreement without the prior written consent of the Director of Development Services. 13. Indemnification Consultant agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City of San Bernardino, and its agents, officers and employees from and against any and all liability, expense and claims for damages of any nature whatsoever, including, but not limited to, costs, bodily injury, death, personal injury, or property damages, arising from or connected with Consultant's negligent operations, or willful misconduct or any aspect of its performance under this Agreement. 14. Compliance with Laws The parties agree to be bound by applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations and directives as they pertain to the performance of this Agreement. 3 2001-218 15. Non-Discrimination In the fulfillment of the work program established under this Agreement, either as to employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination, rates of pay or other terms of compensation, selection for training, including apprenticeship or participation in the program or the receiving of any benefits under the program, Consultant agrees not to discriminate nor to allow any subcontractor to discriminate on the basis of age, race, color, creed, religion, national origin, ancestry, sex, marital status or physical handicap. 16. Severability In the event that any provision herein contained is held to be invalid, void or illegal by any court of competent jurisdiction, the same shall be deemed severable from the remainder of this Agreement and shall in no way affect, impair or invalidate any other provision contained herein. If any such provision shall be deemed invalid due to its scope or breadth, such provision shall be deemed valid to the extent of the scope or breadth permitted by law. 17. Interpretation No provision of this Agreement is to be interpreted for or against either party because that party or that party's legal representative drafted such provision, but this Agreement is to be construed as if it were drafted by both parties hereto. 18. Entire Agreement This Agreement with Attachment A constitutes the entire understanding and agreement of the parties. 19. Waiver No breach of any provision can be waived unless in writing. Waiver of any one breach of any provision shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other breach of the same or any other provision hereof. 20. Contract Evaluation and Review The ongoing assessment and monitoring of this Agreement is the responsibility of the Director of Development Services or his designee. 2001-218 21. Termination The City or Consultant may terminate this Agreement either with or without cause or for any reason at any time by mailing by certified mail 30 days prior written notice of termination to the other party. In this event, the Consultant shall be paid the reasonable value of services rendered to the date of termination. In the event of any such termination, Consultant shall provide to the City, without chazge, all documents, notes, maps, reports and data accumulated to the date of such termination. Consultant further covenants to give its good-faith cooperation in the transfer of the work to the City or to any other consultant designated by the City following such termination, and to attend and participate in any meetings at no cost to the City as shall be deemed necessary by the City to effectively accomplish such transfer. 22. Warranty Consultant expressly warrants that the economic feasibility study will be performed with care, skill, reasonable expedience, professional due diligence and faithfulness and that the deliverables and/or reports shall be appropriate and proper for their intended use by the City. Consultant further warrants that all work required under this Agreement will be performed in accordance with generally accepted professional practices within the area of expertise of the consultant. 23. Liability/Insurance The Consultant shall maintain insurance policies meeting the minimum requirements set forth herein. All insurance maintained by the Consultant shall be provided by insurers satisfactory to the City. Certificates evidencing all insurance coverage required herein shall be delivered to the City prior to the Consultant performing any of services under this Agreement. All insurance certificates required herein shall name the City as an additional insured and provide for thirty (30) days written notice from the insurer to the City prior to cancellation of any insurance policy of the Consultant. A. Comprehensive General Liability Insurance. The Consultant shall maintain comprehensive general liability insurance with a combined single limit of not less than One Million Dollazs ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence. B. Automobile Insurance. The Consultant shall maintain comprehensive automobile liability insurance with a combined single limits of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence covering al] vehicles leased or owned by the Consultant and which are used or which maybe used to perform any services under this Agreement. C. Worker's Compensation Insurance. The Consultant shall maintain worker's compensation insurance in accordance with the laws of the State of California for all workers employed by the Consultant. 2001-218 24. Notice Notices, herein shall be presented in person or by certified or registered U.S. mail, as follows: To Consultant: ld-~la pwr~Y-.+f~ M~rsS Cerr.~t~itire~-P~ei~ei GBc~ 1580 Metro Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92626 To City: James Funk, Director Development Services Department 300 N. "D" Street, 3`a Floor San Bernardino, CA 92418 Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to prevent the giving of notice by personal service. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the day and year first above shown. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO By: Approved as to form and legal content: By: ter.,-, City Attorney THE PLANNING CENTER By: Name: ~~~,~~ '. "~~''/~'`~ v /, Title: / C/ 6 2001-218 Statement of Qualifications: CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AND EIR ~~ submitted ta: CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Development Services Department Contact: James G. Funk, 300 North "D" Street Director San Bernardino, CA 92418 Tel: 909.384.5057 submitted bv: THE PLANNING CENTER 1580 Metro Drive Contact: Richard Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Ramella, Consulting Tel: 714.966.9220 • Fax: 714.966.9221 Principal E-mail: costamesa@planningcenter.com Website: www.planningcenter.com APRIL 5, 2001 Table of Contents ~'~ I'' Section 1. INTRODUCTION AND APPROACH ........................................1 2. PERSONNEL & QUAL/FICATIONS .........................................5 APPENDIX A -RESUMES APPENDIX B -PRODUCTS San Bernardino General Plan Update Pagez Table of Contents This page intentionally left blank. Page ii ~jThe Planning Center 1. Introduction and Approach Your Situation The General Plan for the City of San Bernardino has not been comprehensively updated since 1989. The City has been laying the groundwork for this update through the update of your Housing Element and the Economic Survey. Your Need The City of San Bernardino desires to comprehensively update its General Plan so that: "I really appreciated that The Planning Center had our interests foremost in their minds and they did the bent possible jab that could be done in our behalf. It made them stand out from other consultants in their fteld." -John Wright Director of Planning & Dev. Services City of Clovis General Plan Update completed 1993 Your Requirements We believe the City requires a consultant with the vision to • The General Plan addresses contemporary topics so that it represents an appropriate guide for decision making. • The elements of the General Plan are integrated and coordinated to provide a unified and consistent direction. • The General Plan provides clear direction for future development and growth. The General Plan is rooted in comprehensive background studies that provide an underpinning for contemporary policy direction and ensure the defensibility of the General Plan. appreciate the possibilities. They must have sufficient experience to avoid having to learn on the City's time. They must have enough time available to be able to give this project the energy it needs when it needs it. They must have a track record with not only the technical capabilities the City needs, but also a personal sense of commitment and belief in the importance of this project. Most importantly, the City needs a consultant who will listen and incorporate what they hear into action. The City requires a consultant that can lead the comprehensive update of the General Plan, perform the necessary environmental analysis and background studies. How we propose to serve your needs and who we are is what the rest of this Statement of Qualifications is about. Our Response The Planning Center would be the lead consultant, acting as the prime contact coordinating schedules, budget and products. We have chosen to provide only our firm's qualifications at this stage, but will round out the team with other qualified consultants as dictated by the Scope of Work. They will be identified and goals provided at the Proposal Stage, in order to be most responsive to the City. The Planning Center would be responsible for the update of the General Plan and Environmental Impact Report. Richard Ramella would serve as the Principal-in-Charge of the project. Brian James would serve as the Project Manager responsible for the day-to-day operations and technical aspects of the plan, and Dwayne Mears would be overseeing the preparation of the Environmental Analysis. UCity Of San Bernardino General Plan Update Page 1 m:IroVllcv~te. &rwdi.olSOQdr ~~ 1. Introduction and Approach ' We will call upon the experience of key individuals in the firm, and ' have included their resumes in Appendix A. Instrumental to our approach is the integration of our skills, responsibilities, and experience working together and with a variety ' of jurisdictions. While each component of the General Plan and accompanying environmental analysis require specialized knowledge and expertise, the essential ingredient to a successful ' comprehensive plan is a continual integration of the issues and tasks at hand. From the preliminary stages of data analysis, to public outreach, to the development and implementation of the plan, the work of each team member will be coordinated and ' integrated into a unified plan that results in "innovative, effective, and practical" solutions. ' Furthermore, we want to be in this for the long haul. Our most satisfying work has been with projects driven by a lasting vision that energizes commitments to make a difference. It is not uncommon , for us to be involved with a project for five or ten years or even longer. Not because it takes that long to prepare a particular plan: it is because many worthwhile plans, of necessity, go through many phases. Our commitment is to make a difference at each step of , the way. General Plan Process Every General Plan is unique in that it is a reflection of the ' community it portrays. However, a basic approach to the process of updating a General Plan is necessary to ensure consistency, comprehensiveness, and conformance with laws and guidelines. As such, The Planning Center recommends the following basic ' tasks in updating a General Plan: "The Planning Center's professional Due Diligence -The General Plan update should be initiated ' performance resulted in the approval by data collection necessary to conduct the update. ofa $1.36 million General Plan Environmental, geotechnical, and transportation conditions and EIR without challenee " should be documented. Existing policy and implementation ' . programs will be reviewed and assessed to determine what -sorry Hand, is necessary, fundable, completed or politically infeasible. Community Development Director Out of this effort, an environmental setting can be city of Tracy established and baseline information for future technical , General Plan update completed 1993 Studies documented. • Community Outreach - It has been our experience that in order to find out what the issues are and where the , community desires to go in the future, one must simply ask. We recommend that a series of outreach or visioning sessions be conducted with city staff, elected officials, ' citizen advisory committees, the general public, and other stakeholders to seek the core issues of the community. Out of this, a vision, which depicts the essential characteristics ' and qualities of the Community, can be created. A vision can be a simple way to describe what the City of San Bernardino is all about and a unifying force for the update orocess. Page 2 The Planning Center ' M:ILOV11LPy~ 9er.sMin~SOQJa 1. Introduction and Approach process. Implementation Program - We believe that a General Plan must be functional and its policies achievable and realistic. Simply put, do not put policies in the General Plan that are unrealistic or infeasible. Our basic approach is to work both from the big picture and the specific action level at the same time. Working with City department heads, City staff and appropriate stakeholders, an effective implementation plan would be formulated to accompany the policies of the General Plan. This could include components such as a master environmental assessment and mitigation framework for application during review of subsequent development projects; formulation of additional design guidelines; specific plans to address the unique character of certain portions of the City; and revisions to the City Zoning Code or other development standards. • General Plan Preparation -Each element would be updated based upon issues raised in the first three steps, knowledge of the Government Cade, case law, and contemporary experience. "Of particular importance to me as a Environmental Analysis -The General Plan must be Department Head it The Planning accompanied and incorporate appropriate environmental ^^ ,, Center's demonstrated ability to `~. analysis. All aspects required by CEQA should be ~~ communicate effectzvely with The addressed. Our experience in the concurrent preparation of (vvvv~ General Plans and related environmental documentation Planning Commission, City Council provides the ability to integrate critical environmental issues and the public, an obviously critical effectively into the comprehensive planning process itself, ingredient in bringing credibility to thus maximizing the opportunities for the City to develop a the technical products." plan that is "self-mitigating". • Public Hearings through Adoption -The public hearing -Mark D. Lloyd process is the most critical phase of the project; however, if Development Services Director the legwork is completed in the first phases, it should be a City of Stanton General Plen Update completed 1992 relatively simple matter. The Planning Commission and City Council Hearings should be focused and informative. The goal is to adopt a plan that is workable at all levels so that it is used. As mentioned, these are basic steps and it is assumed that, if we are selected, the City would have the opportunity to refine and elaborate on these steps after consultation with The Planning Center team, decision-makers and key stakeholders in the community. ' UCity Of San Bernardino General Plan Update Page 3 M:1GON1GWe~ Bmud•..u'OQbr 1. Introduction and Approach 1 1 This page intentionally left blank. ' ~~ I! Page 4 The Planning Center ' M:1G0V1\G%Se. &.mdi~ASOQ.da 1 C~ THE PLANNING CENTER 2. Personnel and Qualification. I wanted to toy how much I enjoyed workittg with The Planning Center on the revision oJthe Sbrba Linda General Plan. I found {them to be} extremely cooperative and respnraive to the City's requesu, and all work was done in a timely manner ... Ez~eryane hat expreued satisjactiwz with the~nal project." - Pat Haley Community Development Director City of Yorba Linda General Plan Update completed 1993 Firm Background The Planning Center is a private consulting firm providing multi- disciplinary services to both governmental agencies and the private sector. Since its founding in 1975, The Planning Center has been devoted to the development of viable planning solutions to the physical, social and environmental problems that arise from urbanization. Full Range of Professional Most clients, like you, who use planning and research services in Service today's highly charged governmental decision-making environment need a diverse team of highly trained and experienced professionals. The firm embodies a full complement of professional disciplines, including environmental analysis; EIR and EIS preparation; policy and regulatory specific plan preparation; policy and general plan preparation; housing elements; air quality planning; air quality assessments; congestion management planning; land use planning; landscape architecture; site planning; design guidelines; redevelopment and rehabilitation plans; assessments; economic and fiscal impact analysis, and computerized planning system applications. Recognized Excellence The Planning Center is recognized as one of the top west coast planning firms and is noted for the quality of its work. The firm's reputation for excellence in land use planning and design is its trademark. Your need for excellence and quality is well served by our established reputation, earned through the firm's consistent production of effective, achievable plans and programs. Our Firm's Status is Solid The controlling interests of The Planning Center are held by three principals of notable planning experience: Richard E. Ramella, Randal W. Jackson, and Dwayne S. Mears. The Planning Center has never failed or refused to complete a contract and will not accept other projects that may represent a conflict of interest. Depth of Staff The experience of The Planning Center's key personnel at the different levels of government results in an ideal team to address the critical challenges posed by emerging planning requirements. You can call upon us to assemble the multiple disciplines for your project into an integrated framework under the direction of our Principals. L~JCity Of San Bernardino General Plan Update m:womcvs.. a..,..e..otsoQer Page 5 ~~ 2. Personnel and Qualifications ' 1 Principal and Senior Project The Principals' involvement in each project ensures efficient Management Involvement management and critical attention to detail. We can assure you that ' we will be directly involved in all aspects of planning on your projects. We take pride in the fact that when we are involved in a project, the principals and senior project managers have direct ' "hands-on" involvement with the project from start to completion. Responsiveness to Client Needs We understand the importance of project timing and adherence to project schedules. We are frequently required to work within tight ' project schedules. With a staff of over 40 people, we have the ability to arrange staffing assignments and resources to meet our clients' needs. If we ever fail to return one of your phone calls or e- ' mails within 24 hours, we will reduce our contract amount by $100 (on each occurrence) Our Work is Consistent Our management and products are consistently of the quality we , can be proud of. We use an in-house quality control system to ensure that our products are accurate, technically sound and presentable. ' Creative and Workable Solutions We take a creative approach to our projects and look at each project as a new challenge that requires unique solutions. In this manner, we are able to evaluate each project objectively and , formulate a plan and programs that are workable. Creativity in Master Planning The Planning Center is noted for its special skills in preparing large- , scale community plans. Public and private aspirations for enduring communities and neighborhoods are reflected in industry applauded case studies of effective leadership by The Planning , Center in this complex field. We believe our creative and innovative solutions can enhance your project's marketability. Specific Plans For this tool to be effective on your behalf, it must rely on modern ' technologies to assemble and illustrate the myriad of potential futures that you may wish to explore for the project. You must also have confidence that this technology is backed up by good old- ' fashioned common sense and insight. Our expertise and reputation regarding the use of this effective planning tool in California is unequaled. ' Environmental Impact Reports Your challenge is to create a more healthy, livable and thriving community that makes sense. Our job is to help you position yourself where you need to be. If your preferred approach ' combines creative problem solving, integrity, accuracy and attention to detail, then we can help. Environmental analysis is an integral part of our services to you because we believe it belongs in ' the arsenal of tools that may make the difference between your project's success or failure. You may need to confront a variety of difficult environmental issues; we can respond with the appropriate focus. ' Page 6 ~Tbe Planning Center ' M:ILOV1IL%Sa. HernedinolfIXl dr 2. Personnel and Qualifications Governmental Services If your project requires uniting public and private sector interests in dynamic urban development settings, you need consultants who can confront complex challenges. Within this formidable environment, The Planning Center is acknowledged as an accomplished facilitator of coordinated public planning strategies and an implementer of practical solutions. We make available to you a team of experienced professionals who are technically proficient in the areas of public policy, large scale development, implementation techniques, neighborhood planning, multi- jurisdictional coordination and public participation processes. You can be assured of experienced support. Recognition "The Planning Center hat fulfilled their contractual obligations raaeujully and timely. Bared on their performance for the Crty ojBrentwaod, I nrou/d recommend The Planning Center. They have been responsive to our needs and have worked dorely with our staff. " -Eddie Peabody, Jr., AICP Community Development Director City of Brentwootl General Plan Update completed 7993 All of us enjoy being told that we have done our job well, Formal recognition for professional quality work is a gratiTying acknowledgement of ongoing excellence. By meeting the challenge to do quality work for you, The Planning Center has succeeded in being recognized by local governments, the land development industry and professional associations. As rewarding as this type of recognition of planning achievement is, our greatest satisfaction comes from ongoing relationships with those we serve. You are the ultimate judges of our firm's service. Representative Projects The Planning Center has prepared over 25 General Plans, many including Environmental Analyses and Housing Elements. Listed below are a few examples that fulfill your request. A matrix highlighting our General Plan experience follows at the end of this section. CURRENT PROJECTS The Planning Center is currently updating the General Plans for Riverside County and the Cities of Rancho Cucamonga, San "This:stbeoppmrunirythatwilldetermine Buenaventura, and Anaheim. We are also updating the Housing whar kind of(egacy we will leave our elements for San Bernardino and Orange Counties and the Cities of grandcb:'/dren. ^ Upland, Westminster, Santa Ana, La Quinta, Stanton, Tustin, -superYsor Tom MWlen, str, District, Fountain Valley, San Marino, Perris, Palm Springs, and Lake Riverside County Elsinore. Comprehensive Plan Update The Planning Center was hired to assist the City in the first major San Buenaventura update to its Comprehensive Plan since 1989. Over the past year and a half the community has been involved in ambitious effort to set the stage for this update through a series of outreach efforts called "Seize the Future". As a community that has reached a level of maturity, the City of Ventura has a significant challenge and opportunity ahead how to capitalize upon and preserve unique natural and physical assets, while providing the sound economic base necessary for continued health and vitality. The Planning Center is leading a team of six consultants through City Of San Bernardino General Plan Update page 7 nr.gcor'(1cVSe. a....e;.e~soQ e~ ~~ 2. Personnel and Qualifications ' 1 this 18 month effort. ' In addition to the preparation of the Plan Elements, the scope of work includes a proposed outreach program, the formulation of an ' implementation strategy, and the preparation of a Comprehensive policy level Program EIR. General Plan/EIR The Planning Center is currently updating and modernizing the City ' Rancho Cucamonga of Rancho Cucamonga's General Plan, leading a team of nine Tr consultants for the City. We are approximately 90% completed with the Update. The City's current plan is nearly 20 years old. Periodic ' technical updates to the Plan have been made to respond to the ever-growing population and employment base of the City. This project focuses on economic development and land planning ' for key opportunity areas throughout the City. The team has examined a range of land use options, in light of regional development trends, population growth, and service/facility needs of the community. One of the main objectives of the update ' process is to re-position the City so that it may maximize its future development potential with the right amount, type, and location of commercial, recreation, and office development. The team is ' currently identifying the many issues that need to be addressed in the project. Response to these issues may involve a land use change, policy change, revision to an implementation program, or some combination thereof. The team is also identifying the key ' opportunity areas within the community, and the range of options or choices regarding future development or improvement. G ' eneral Plan Update/EIR The Planning Center recently completed a comprehensive update La Palma to the City of La Palma's General Plan. The project included all state-mandated elements, optional components covering public facilities and parks and recreation, and an environmental impact ' report. The project resulted in the first Housing Element for the City to be certified by the Housing and Community Development Department. ' The intimate size and social and economic stability of the City allowed for an uncommon approach in writing and structuring the General Plan. The final document is a concise, focused, and highly ' personal plan for the community. The goals, policies, and implementing actions flow directly from the vision and values of the community -family, pride of ownership, opportunity, and security. ' As part of the comprehensive General Plan update, The Planning Center completed the preparation of the Housing Element. This is the first accredited Housing Element for the City. The plan was ' shaped by the City's history and development pattern. The City is nearly fully built-out; only one vacant site remains which is appropriate for housing. The majority of the housing in the City is ' owner-occupied single family. Since the housing stock is a source of pride in the community, the housing programs identified in the element focused on maintaining the high quality of the existing ' Page 8 The Planning Center m:~covncwe, s,.,,e;,.o~soQ.ea 2. Personnel and Qualifications stock, rather than adding to it dramatically. Programs have been identified to identity and correct minor maintenance conditions before they escalate, and to assist elderly residents with home maintenance they might not be able to undertake on their own. Attention is also being paid to augmenting and preserving the City's stock of low-income multifamily housing, and very low-income senior housing. Riverside County Integrated Over the last two years, The Planning Center has been working on Planning Process: the General Plan Update as part of the historic Riverside County Riverside County General Plan Integrated Planning Process (RCIP). The RCIP is a comprehensive, Update three-part program to determine planning, transportation, and conservation needs for Riverside County residents and future generations. The three parts include: ^ Updating the County's General Plan "I would like to thank you and your staff for a fine presentation to the Planning Commission. The PowerPoint on community centers war excellent. I thank The Planning Center for being the true partner in this effort that rt it. Dan Silver, Coordinator Endangered Habitats League • Identifying transportation corridors to meet Western Riverside County's future transportation needs through the Community & Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP) • Creating a Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) to ensure the preservation of open space and endangered species and habitats for Western Riverside County. The RCIP process is truly a momentous task, considering the County spans over 7,200 square miles, nearly the size of New Jersey. While the CETAP and MSHCP cover the Western Riverside County area, the General Plan Update covers the unincorporated areas of the entire county. To create a meaningful vision for the County and to ensure successful implementation of the plan, the process was one of a "bottom-up" nature. The Planning Center and the RCIP team solicited input from the residents of Riverside County and various stakeholders, including environmental organizations, building associations, and property owners, as well as the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) and state and federal agencies. General Plan Update/EIR The Planning Center prepared a complete update of the City of Yorba Linda Yorba Linda's General Plan. This project also involved extensive environmental analysis and an integrated EIR. The General Plan update program included developing a list of important issues that were then utilized to define the most critical items to address in the general plan. An important component of this work was the interviews with City officials that were conducted at the initial stages of the planning process. Key issues to be addressed in the process were identified and formed the basis for five subsequent issue papers. These Key issues were maintenance of the quality of life, hazardous waste disposal, annexation, the superstreet proposal, growth ~~ Of San Bernardino General Plan Update Page 9 ,. ~.,,.~;.e~s~.Qa 2. Personnel and Qlaalification.r ' 1 management and circulation. ' The City of Yorba Linda is almost "built out," and as such, the General Plan and EIR addressed infill development, redevelopment, annexations and development within the City's sphere of influence. ' Other issues addressed included fiscal, economic development, specific plan areas, traffic, noise and safety. ' A council appointed steering committee representing varied community interests reviewed every element of the General Plan in initial draft and final draft form. Two members of the Planning Commission and City Council participated actively. Several ' potentially disruptive issues were satisfactorily resolved in this process, marking the public hearings substantially more positive than they would otherwise have been. ' SPECIFIC PLANS 'By my observation, The Planning Center4 approach to specific plan preparation has always been creative and responsive to the clients' and jurisdictional needs. " , -Mike McDougall, Project Manager Palisades Properties, Inc Highland 2010 Strategic Plan Faced with increasing budget pressures citywide, and deteriorating ' Highland conditions in certain portions of the city, the Highland City Council directed the preparation of a unique combination of strategic plan and associated physical plans. This combination enabled the ' testing of certain strategies in actual physical case situations and, at the same time, made it possible to generate ideas from the physical planning that contributed to the City's strategic thinking. , atrard Winne Strategic direction was developed in several key subject areas: r 1995APA, California Chapter 1995, APA, Inland Empire public safety and security; public facilities and services; economic development and revitalization; neighborhood preservation and , revitalization; cost effective governance; and historic preservation. A comprehensive vision of the City integrating all of these topics was developed reinforced by a computerized array of actions to t implement the vision through a system of multi-year work programs hammered out by the City Council. This system enables the City to frequently assess priorities for implementing the Strategic Plan and allocate resources to the selected actions. A random sample citizen ' survey reinforced the establishment of current priorities. In terms of associated physical planning, there were two areas of ' focus; the Historic Old Town, representing the original townsite; and Southwest Highland, and area of residential, industrial and commercial development with varying degrees of stability and deterioration. A set of design guidelines provides direction for , revitalizing and preserving the character of Old Town. The key physical design concepts which emerged for Southwest Highland included: f) the creation of a new downtown with design themes ' and transportation connections linking it functionally and visually with the original town center; 2) the expansion of Base Line into a varied commercial spine serving the western part of the City; 3) ' Page 10 ~QThe Planning Center ,u: icomcrs,. ~.,,~.e..osrop.ea 2. Personnel and Qualifications ' establishment of a central residential arterial highway as the Ninth Street Pedestrian Promenade, linking neighborhoods and schools in a pedestrian dominated safe route system; and 4) establishment of an International Parkway connecting the Route 30 Freeway to the San Bernardino International Airport. In all cases, unique design guidance concepts were developed to reinforce the special functions each area provides for the community. ' Tustin MCAS Reuse/Specific The Planning Center was part of a team of consultants hired by the Plan City to prepare the Reuse/Specific Plan and EIR/EIS for the 1,574- ' Tustin acre Marine helicopter base in the City of Tustin. Our role was to manage tasks involving issue identification, reuse alternatives, and community participation. The Planning Center was also responsible ' for preparing the Specific Plan, particularly in the development of the land use plan and design guidelines. The Plan included adaptive reuse of some existing buildings; redevelopment of others; and new use of currently vacant lands. The community outreach program involved a Community Opinion Survey, a series of Community Workshops, public newsletters, and ' meetings with key community groups, public agencies, and other "I wanted to rake rhzr opportunity zo stakeholders. The Community Workshops were structured as small commend you on the signiftcant efforts group working sessions to focus on clarification and resolution of issues regarding disposal, environmental clean-up, and re-use of ' that The Planning Center put into the the base. Our approach was to anticipate, understand, and {MCAS Tustin} Reuse Plan. As you effectively address community concerns from the beginning of the know, military bate cloture it a much planning process, which was key to the successful approval of the ' more complex planning process than Reuse Plan by the Reuse Task Force. either of ur have ever experienced. However, The Planning Censer was While the reuse plan/specific plan in this case did not involve always open, responsive and flexible in continuation of an active airport component, it did include a strong ' light of the cumberrame federal emphasis on transit connection, effective reuse of existing military requirements that influenced the improvements, preservation of historic aviation structures, and planning protest. The timeliness of a[I extensive adaptation of proposed uses to adjacent existing ' your deliverables alto allowed ut to meet development. critrcal time tcheduk needs. " The Plan provides for 450 acres of residential uses, 802 acres of ' -cnristine Shingieton commercial/business uses and 348 acres of institutional and Assistant city Manager recreational uses. The Plan has been divided into 8 distinct City of Tustin neighborhoods and can accommodate a total of 4,601 dwelling units. ' ^ Uses with the best revenue generation potential are located in areas positioned for early development in order to fund the infrastructure needed to make other areas of the site developable in the future. ^ The care area of the Plan will permit a variety of future development opportunities when market conditions are suitable for high value use of the property. ^ Approximately 20 percent of the Plan area will be dedicated to ' ®City Of San Bernardino General Plan Update Page 11 M:IG01?1GPtSon 9..neMinolSGYidrc ~~ 2. Personnel and Qualifications recreation and open space uses, including an 84-acre Urban Regional Park, a 25-acre Community Park, neighborhood parks dispersed within the residential enclaves, and an 18-hole publicly accessible golf course. ^ The extension of Tustin Ranch Road and Warner Avenue through the site will complete significant segments of the regional arterial system. Garland Village Neighborhood The Village Specific Plan was recently adopted by the Inglewood Specific Plan City Council, and calls for the revitalization of a neighborhood of Inglewood nearly 900 apartments located southwest of Century Boulevard and Crenshaw Boulevard. The Planning Center was hired to create a new vision of the neighborhood. awardWinner~ The Plan is about moving away from the image and reality /999Wesrside Prize, Westside previously known as "the bottoms" to the compelling new vision of Urlxin Forum The Village. It is far more than a name change; it is a distinct shift in how the neighborhood is perceived, how it works, and how it looks. The Plan is based on a challenging vision in which property owners prosper, residents feel safe and enjoy neighborhood amenities that have never before existed, and business prospers in a newly expanded commercial center. "I want to extend our rongratulatianr and appreciation to you and your team at The Planning Center for a job avel[ done. It war along road but with the recent adoption of The Vidlage Spuifac Plan by the City Council, I am confident that real change will occur in the Village neighborhood On this very afternoon, we have a meeting with Senator Dianne Feinstein who hat expretred her support ojthe project and it preparing to quirt ur in the implementation ojthe plan and its rompanenu which were ra carefully prepared by The Planning Center. Your personal dedication to this project and your concern for the reridentt war evident at every stage of the development ojthe plan. I very much enjoyed our lore working relatronrbip and 7 am hopeful that this will continue in the future. It would be my great pleasure to off r my recommendation to others who may reek your expertise. " -Mike Randall, AICP Associate Planner City of Inglewood The Village Specific Plan consists of three strategies: f) a physical overhaul of both public and private spaces; 2) a new organizational structure within the neighborhood and the City committed to the process; and 3) a broad ranging, yet focused implementation plan. The Plan addresses and overcomes several major constraints. The greatest of these is that the neighborhood is directly beneath the path of low flying jet aircraft on their way to LAX. In addition, while the housing stock is only 50 years old, it has been severely neglected. The City, in concert with the Plan, is committed to the mitigation and revitalization of a significant portion of the area through appropriate insulating and architectural improvements. Extremely high densities are not in balance with appropriate community resources such as open space, play equipment and courts, meeting and gathering spaces, of which there are exactly none. Already a small park has been created, and larger facilities are soon to become a reality. To those who know "the bottoms", this vision seemed impossible, yet already there has been a dramatic drop in crime, the resources of a wide variety of community development agencies are being focused on the area, and interest by residential and commercial developers is very high. Community Development Block Grant funds is committed, approved and ready to fuel the implementation of many of the plan's objectives. The Village is in the process of reinventing itself. The Village Specific Plan is the blueprint for making it happen. Page 12 M: ~L()Vt1 LNe. lk~vedi~olSOQ.dar f~jThe Planning Center 1 I! t n ~J 2. Personnel and Qasalification.r LEADERSHIP When your project requires a discipline that we don't have in-house, we team with only those expert firms that meet the high standards of quality and professionalism we would provide for you. We are known for putting together specialized teams to accomplish our clients' goals, and for successfully leading those teams to an effective conclusion. Our goal is to not only provide you with the best consultants available, but to provide these services with a seamless approach for you. In addition to the effective teams illustrated in the previous project descriptions, we are especially proud of the following effort. ' EI Toro Reuse Plan The Planning Center was selected by the County of Orange to County of Orange prepare the non-aviation component of the reuse plan for MCAS EI ' Toro in central Orange County. Working in conjunction with the "Everyone it very excited about your plan aviation consultant preparing the master plan for the proposed 28.8 and exhibiu. Please parr our thanks to Million Annual Passenger International Airport and associated hard working rraffat The Planning Center. facilities, The Planning Center assisted the County in the land use, We know rhey are working early and lase to circulation and landscaping for the remaining 2,400 acres of the get this roll-out ready." properly. - 6ryan Speegie The Planning Center not only led the team of eight consultants ' County of Orange EI Toro Program Office through atwo-year planning process, but coordinated the planning activities with the Team responsible for the aviation component of the Plan. ' "! war particularly impressed by the way they were able to diplomatically resolve the differences that periodically emerged among a proposal team ronrirting of seven different ' organizations. They deserve to be rommended ar much for their statesmanship ar for their award-winning grant writing skills." - Alan Burks EV Media ' Personnel Richard E. Ramella Dick Ramella will be responsible for the performance of The Consulting Principal Planning Center team on the San Bernardino General Plan project. He will ensure that the City's needs are being met in a responsive ' manner, that work efforts are fully coordinated and schedules met, and will be responsible for quality control. He has been a professional planner for over 40 years and, as founding principal of The Planning Center and Principal-in-Charge over the last 26 years, he has been associated with a wide range of very large projects. His participation includes strategic and physical planning, as well as contract administration and project management. The following are a few of the more significant planning programs with which he has been involved: the 18,000-acre Chino Hills Specific Plan in San Bernardino County; the 25,000-acre South Sutter County General ' Plan Amendment for Sutter County; the 105,000-acre urban growth management plan/general plan for the City of Tracy; the 47,000- acre General Plan Update for the City of Clovis, the General Plan Update for the County of Riverside, the Reuse Plan for MCAS EI ' Toro, Orange County, and the 10,000-acre community plan for ®City Of San Bernardino General Plan Update Page 13 M:IGOVIILPVSen &rnmliiwlrOQ.dn ~~ 2. Personnel and Qualifications ' 1 Castle & Cooke in Madera County. ' Mr. Ramella's experience is not limited to large-scale projects. In addition, he has managed contracts for a variety of planning ' projects, including the Highway 111 Specific Plan and the Eagle at Rancho Mirage Specific Plan, both for the City of Rancho Mirage; the Harbor Corridor Specific Plan in Garden Grove; the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan for the City of Newport Beach; ' and the Big Horn Resort Community in Palm Desert. Prior to the formation of The Planning Center, Mr. Ramella served as general planning program administrator for the County of Orange, ' California. In this capacity, he was responsible for the development, management and coordination of the County's long-range planning programs. He oversaw the development of all elements of the ' County's General Plan. In addition, he was responsible for the preparation of eight new community plans totaling over eighty- thousand acres of land and two community redevelopment projects. , Mr. Ramella has served throughout the State of California as a guest ' lecturer for the University of California extension services on the subject of specific plans. He has long been an advocate of improved relationships between the public and private sectors in the planning process. He is widely recognized far his abilities to , work with citizen's organizations, special interest groups and decision-makers. Brian James Brian James will serve as the Project Manager. His role will consist ' Project Manager of directing and participating in the technical aspects of the project including the Research and Analysis Tasks, directing staff and consultant activities, workshop participation, and coordination with ' City staff. Brian has nine years of public and private sector planning experience with an extensive background in policy planning and ' land use planning. He has expertise in the areas of General Plans, Specific Plans, coastal plans and permit processing, environmental review and project entitlement. ' Prior to joining The Planning Center several years ago, Brian worked for the Cities of Huntington Beach and Santa Barbara where he worked on long range policy documents, assisted citizen , participation efforts and pertormed design, environmental and coastal reviews. At The Planning Center, Brian has managed or participated in the preparation of General Plan and local Coastal ' Program Amendments, Zoning Code Amendments, Specific Plans, Initial Studies and Environmental Impact Reports. AI Bell Mr. Bell has been a professional planner for over 40 years, bringing , Senior Planner to The Planning Center extensive public and private sector experience in land use policy and strategic planning. He will serve as Senior Planner for the project. Mr. Bell is well known for his ' Page 14 ~jThe Planning Center m:~camcnse. n...,ww~soQ.na 1 1 u 1 Dwayne S. Mears, AICP Principal "Showing a high level of expertise and professionalism, The Planning Center has provided the City with tinuly and accurate environmental docuneents. 1 highly recommend The Planning Center far any environmental consulting needs of the private or public sector. There have been ro many raccerrful rtorier - the profenianalirm, expertise, perrirtence and hard work of Dwayne and his staff have contributed greatly to there suaesser. Overall, it should be said that much of the rotten and growth of the City of Industry during the part several yearn it the result ojhard work performed by The Planning Center and Dwayne Mears. ° Mike Kissell, Planning Director City of Industry 2. Personnel and Qualifications innovative approaches and brainstorming techniques. As a principal of The Planning Center, he has played a key role in a number of general plans, specific plans, regional and subregional planning programs, strategic plans, congestion management programs and air quality programs with an emphasis in Orange, Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties. Mr. Bell has played a prime role on the following General Plan programs: Cathedral City General Plan, Paramount General Plan, Las Vegas General Plan, Los Angeles County General Plan Streamlining, Stanton General Plan, Laguna Niguel General Plan, South Sutter County General Plan Amendment, Yorba Linda General Plan, Temecula General Plan, Fullerton General Plan, La Palma General Plan and Clovis General Plan. Dwayne Mears will serve as the Principal-in-Charge for the preparation of the environmental documentation. Mr. Mears has 21 years of private and public planning experience and has an extensive background in environmental planning and processing. He is the author of three educational pamphlets on the California Environmental Quality Act: "A Practical Guide to the Environmental Process in California," "A Practical Guide to Mitigation Monitoring," and his latest, "The New Practical Guide to the Environmental Process in California." His booklets have received awards from the Association of Environmental Professionals and the American Planning Association, Orange Section. He has managed or directed numerous highly complex EIRs. These have involved a full range of projects, including land development, infrastructure, hazardous materials, planning policy, and public facilities. Some notable examples of his work include the 24,000-acre South Sutter County "New Town", the 4.1 million sq. ft. MacArthur Place "urban village" in Santa Ana, the City Center Mills EntertainmenUOutlet Center in Orange, and the controversial 592-acre Ball Ranch recreation-oriented residential development in Fresno County, California. Matt Disston Matthew has an extensive background in real estate, marketing Director of Economics research, consumer research and economic consulting for a broad spectrum of national and international clients. He brings to The Planning Center and your project important skills, particularly analytical abilities in the pertormance of both public and private sector market feasibility studies, fiscal analysis, development processing, consumer research and economic analysis. Matt has previously been associated with The Planning Center for almost twenty years, as a partner of his own firm, The Research Network. Governmental Team The remainder of The Planning Center's governmental team will be Staff Support available to assist the project team. This team of highly trained, experienced and motivated planners specializes in governmental projects, mainly consisting of General Plan and Environmental Documentation preparation for cities and counties. The team's Of San Bernardino General Plan Update Page I S ~~ 2. Personnel and Qualifications areas of expertise includes the visionary process, environmental analysis, developing community goals, objectives and policies, the creation of General Plan Elements, strategic plans and action programs, implementation plans, economic and fiscal analysis, consistency analysis, GIS mapping, public outreach programs and conducting public workshops. The resumes of the entire team are included for your review. "When wm'king with The Planning Center, we know that we are getting the lalen and molt tophi.rticated information available from a friendly and helpjul.rtaff. " -Arlene Andrew, Senior Planner City of La Verne References: Mr. Brad Buller Planner City o/Rancho Cucamonga 10600 Civic Center Drive P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 93612 909.477.2700 Ms. Joan Hoesterey Planning Manager City Of La Palma 7822 Walker Street La Palma, CA 906231771 714.523.7700 Gary Thornhill Community Development Director City of Temecula City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92589-9033 909.694.6400 Chuck Coe Director o/Community Development City Of Chino P.O. Box 667 Chino, CA 91708-0667 909.591.9812 Page 16 ~jThe Plannzng Center M:IG~V11GPtfen M.e.Ji~o150Q.drc i~ 0 1 1 1 11 General Plan Experience v d W d v u 6 ~v c _ ^~ W u I - O C y N d W ~ N T pNj C U I _ Z W m v m a o r v p O ~-: ~ ~ ~ L O~ O v~ w °' C ¢ - m ~n O W e, w $ s _ c ° v v v E ~ w =° R v m m d ~ o ~ E ~ O m 2 W w w ~ u ~ E c g o r N U N T ~ O O v, PROJECTS V `9 a° E a' _ v N z° ci w w ~s ~. . - • Anaheim, California -General Plan and EIR (expected 2003) ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ • San Buenaventura, California -Comprehensive Plan (expected 2002) • County of Riverside, California -General Plan Update (2001) • Rancho Cucamonga, California-General Plan and EIR (2001) • Safford, Arizona-Comprehensive Plan (2000) • La Palma, California-General Plen and EIR, (1999) • Truckee, California -General Plan and EIR (1996) • Brentwood, California - Generel Plan and E(R (1993) • Clovis, California -General Plan Update and EIR (1993) • Temecula, California -General Plan Update and dR (1993) • Yorba Linda, California -General Plan Update antl EIR, (1993) • Tracy, California-Urban Growth Mgmt Plan, General Plan, DR (1993) • Bishop, California -General Plan Update and (]R (1992) • Laguna Niguel -General Plan (1992) • Nogales, Arizona-General Plan Update (1992) • S. Sutter County, California -General Plan Amendment and DR (1992) • Stanton, California -General Plan Update and EIR (1992) • Paramount, California - Generel Plan Update (1991) • Upland, California - Generel PIaNEIR for S.E. Quadrent (1991) • Los Angeles Co., California -General Plan Streamlining Program (198 ~~ ~ ® ~~ ~~~ ~ *~~~ •s ~a~~~ • ~~ ~ l~~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~•~ ~~ • Adelanto, California -General Plan/Strategic Services (1985) The Planiring Center PROPOSAL: CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AND EIR ~~ rabmttted to CITY OF SAN BERNARD/NO Contact: James G. Funk, Director submitted by. THE PLANNING CENTER Contact: Richard Ramella, Consulting Principal MAY 18, 2001 May 18, 2001 1 Mr. James G. Funk Director of Development Services City of San Bernardino 300 North "D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418-5080 ~~ P~LP,NNING ~'V CENTER Subject: General Plan Update and Environmental Analysis Dear Mr. Funk: (,arrrn rq¢nte( lnttae~ Planui vt; 6 C,Lrrn Drirgn linrr rnnnrcnml Stiedicr LmuG,.th~ .'I rchtfe, nrre 7580 Metre Dnve Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Phone: 714.966 9220 Fax: 774.966.9221 Email: costamesa(o?planningcenter. com As with any project of this magnitude, the City San Bernardino requires a consultant that offers a range of capabilities and experience to effectively address your unique issues. Your consultant must be able to creatively respond to the issues that, at this point, may be unknown but will surely appear during the project. We believe that we offer the City of San Bernardino not only the strongest technical abilities, but also the range and depth of experience to be the most effective in meeting the City's long-range objectives. The group of consultants assembled for this project provides the City with a fully integrated team. The Planning Center, in cooperation with Psomas, Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, and Transtech, appreciates the opportunity to submit this Proposal for the preparation of a General Plan and Environmental Impact Report. The City's method described in the RFP is, we believe, the correct approach. Our Proposal is structured to provide the City with a menu of choices from which the most effective approach to the General Plan may be tailored. We provide a scope and budget for the level of effort involved with a basic update to the General Plan (Component One). We also provide a scope and budget for a menu of items above and beyond this basic level of effort that would, if so desired by the City, strengthen the new General Plan (Component Two). Our Proposal also highlights areas where we believe the City may achieve efficiencies and realize a significant cost savings. In particular, we would like to highlight a portion of our Proposal that varies from the City's REP. We suggest combining Task 4.1 and 4.2 from the RFP with Task 2.1 and 2.2 from the REP. This allows the outreach efforts to be focused into two distinct efforts: 1) initial input on vision, issues and opportunities and 2) input on the land use alternatives and feedback on the vision. We also propose that the Staff/consultant coordination meetings be scheduled at key milestones in the project, 1 rather than at regularly spaced intervals. Along with a thorough Scope of Work, we believe that we offer the City a very competitive budget. The estimated budget for the Component One General Plan update and EIR is $354,305. If the City chooses to include all the items offered in Component One and Component Two, the estimated budget would be $908,158. M:~oovncv~c~ry a sar, e~„ara~na~~~r iener.aoc May 18, 2001 Page 2 I am speaking for all the members of The Planning Center team when I say that we are grateful for the opportunity to submit this Proposal and look forward to the opportunity to discuss in greater detail our scope of work, schedule, and budget. We would welcome the opportunity to work again with the City of San Bernardino. Again, I would like to assure you that we will bring a passion and commitment to this project that will exceed your expectations. Feel free to contact Brain James or myself at (714) 966-9220 if there is any additional information you desire at this time. Sincerely, THE PLANNI G C TER ~~ i~ Ri hard E. Ramella Consulting Principal ~~ M'\GOVI~GP~Ciry of Sen Bernartlino\mver leper tloc PROPOSAL: CITY OF SAN BERNARD/NO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AND EIR ~~ ~i r:ebmitted to: C/TY OF SAN BERNARD/NO Development Services Department Contact: James G. Funk, 300 North "D" Street Director San Bernardino, CA 92418 rabmitted bv: THE PLANNING CENTER 1580 Metro Drive Contact: Richard Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Ramella, Consulting Tel: 714.966.9220 • Fax: 714.966.9221 Principal E-mail: costamesa@planningcentercom Website: www.planningcenter.com MAY 18, 2001 Table of Contents ~ Section 1. EXEC. SUMMARY AND PROJECT UNDERSTANDING ........ 1 2. TEAM ORGANIZATION .......................................................... 3 3. WORK PROGRAM ..................................................................5 4. REFERENCES .....................•--.......................----•--.................25 APPENDIX A -COMPONENT TWO, T/PPECANOE SPECIAL STUDY AND EIR SUPPORT APPENDIX B -SCHEDULE APPENDIX C -BUDGET APPENDIX D -TEAM QUALIFICATIONS APPENDIX E -RESUMES General Plan Update And Eir Page i M:IGOV/1GPItny af5'.r. 9erneNinolCiry u/So. 9..n.rAiv P~.py+l.Ar Table of Contents , This page intentionally left blank. t J 1 ~' Page ii ~ The Planning Center , ni: wovncvwer ,/s,. x.,.,.,roir,ir yse, n.,.,,.,o.o v,v",,,..re,. 1. Execattive Sz~mmary and Project Underftanding ' EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND "Pride in Progress," as the logo of the existing General Plan states, PROJECT UNDERSTANDING is a telling statement about the City of San Bernardino. The City of San Bernardino desires to "progress" into a community with a distinct identity and to "achieve a higher quality of life" for its residents. The existing General Plan describes a number of methods to achieve this goal, from building upon existing assets 1 and addressing existing issues, to realizing new opportunities. These are admirable goals and goals that can be expanded upon in this General Plan update process. In fact that is the basic assumption of our proposal: that the existing General Plan is the basis upon which to build. Our approach will be to preserve and build upon what is useful in 1 the existing General Plan. The challenge will be to refine, augment, streamline, and, where appropriate, delete material that is outdated in order to make the new General Plan not only a comprehensive ' guide for the community's future but a contemporary one as well. Our central effort will be to focus on portions of the General Plan that require more detailed attention and to focus the General Plan so that achievable action items are identified. In essence, our goal will be to create an action-oriented plan so that progress toward the vision can be achieved. The basic steps in this approach are outlined below and are detailed in the following Scope of Work: ' The bulk of the existing General Plan policies are adequate and the focus of this update is to streamline, and focus policies and create an action-oriented plan. A constant theme of this effort will be to get results. To this end, we will create useful and flexible implementation strategies and monitoring tools to ensure that the plan can become reality. • The General Plan must thoroughly address contemporary topics so that it can function as an effective guide for decision- making and so that it is legally defensible. To this end, a series of workshops and outreach efforts are proposed to discover issues, opportunities and constraints that are most important to the City. ' The General Plan will focus on targeted areas that require detailed policy direction that "get results." These target areas may include the Verdemont area, Hospitality Lane, the Cal-State University area, Downtown, the Inland Center Mall, and the Airport, to name a few. • The General Plan must articulate methods to achieve a sense of ' community identity. The General Plan must be clear, concise and easy to use. • The Housing Element, which is currently being updated in a separate effort, must be incorporated into the update General Plan. ' General Plan Update And Eir PaKe 1 Mi(.OV(1G%Ciry f5.. &rvMirlc•ry MSan 9...mAi... Rupwol d.. ~~ 1. Executive Summary grad Project Underrtcanding • Prepare environmental analyses to support the update of the , General Plan and Housing Element. Our goal is to integrate the consideration of important environmental issues into the General Plan process itself to the maximum extent feasible in order to develop a plan that is "self -mitigating". In response to the City's scheduling and budget needs, our approach involves atwo-track process: Component One General , Plan and EIR work and Component Two, optional special studies. In this manner, the City is provided with a basic level of effort to update the General Plan (Component One) as well as a menu of items that would, if chosen by the City, strengthen the new General , Plan (Component Two). The City may then determine the aspects above and beyond their basic needs that are the best fit based upon budget and schedule. , The Planning Center Team views its role in the update process as an extension of the City of San Bernardino staff. We will provide the City with the range of in-depth experience, technical expertise, and objective analysis necessary to the successfully complete the General Plan and EIR. Our role will be to facilitate the City's ability ' to make informed decisions, ensuring an understanding of potential consequences and benefits. 1 J Page 2 ~ The Planning Center , ,x.-~cnimeei, ,,, ~~ c~„ i4m,,.d;,,~u.,,, „/ s.. i~~,,,,d;.,, r.,~,.,..ta,. 2. Teem Oy~T~tnization OVERVIEW To respond to the specific issues in updating the City of San Bernardino General Plan and the detailed work program identified in the Request for Proposals, The Planning Center has hand picked a team of highly qualified consultants to effectively perform the General Plan update. They are: "! really appreaarnd that The The Planning Center -Project Management, Visioning, Public ' Plmrrung Center had our zriteresu Outreach, General Plan, Area Plan, and Environmental Analysis foremost in dierr mrnds and they psomas - GIS, Infrastructure Master Plan did the best posstble~ob that could 6e done zn mfr behalf It mute Stanley R. Hoffman Associates -Fiscal/Economic Analysis, Economic Development Element them stand out from tither ' conrultants in thezr field. " Transtech -Traffic Analysis, Circulation Element ~lonn wrignt As shown on the following organizational chart, The Planning ' Director of Planning & Dev. Services city of c~ovis Center will be the lead consultant, acting as the prime contact, coordinating schedules, budget and products. We will be Genera/Plan Update completed responsible for the update of the General Plan and Environmental 1993 Impact Report, and the management of the consultant team. ' Richard Ramella will serve as the Consulting Principal of the project. Brian James will serve as the Project Manager responsible for the day-to-day operations and technical aspects of the plan, and Dwayne Mears will act as Principal-in-Charge of the EIR and Marie ' Gilliam will serve as Project Manager for the environmental analysis. We will call upon the experience of key individuals in the firm as merited by the task and level of effort. Their resumes are included in Appendix A of the Statement of Qualifications. The qualities and capabilities that you need for this assignment are ' °6o-eryone it very exdted about your plan and exhibits. Please pall our [banks to reflected in part through relevant experience, in part through th i h h b t ween e n part t roug synergy e Individual achievements, and hard working traffar The Plann,ng team members. Center. We know they are working early and late to get this roll-out ready. " The Planning Center enjoys a long and successful working -Bryan speegle relationship with each of these subconsultants on a variety of public County o/ Orange EI Toro Program and private sector projects. We are currently working with Psomas. t office on the Glen Helen Specific Plan, on the Chino Specific Plan, and the City of Anaheim's General Plan Update. Stanley Hoffman is a team member for our Riverside and Rancho Cucamonga General Plan work, and Transtech is assisting us on a variety of EIRs we are doing under contract to the City of Industry. Together, we form a solid team that can very efficiently develop the plans, policies, and regulations and implementation needed to guide the update of the General Plan and environmental analysis. The resumes of each individual are included in an attachment along with the Firms' Qualifications. ~~ General Plan Update And Eir Page 3 AI: AG04914Nt~p x/ Sw IMUrAinep!rl ^, A~~ MnunLn.. Yne.~..LL. 1 1 3. Work Prograyn COMPONENT ONE This section of the proposal describes the work to be done and the products to result from it. While we believe that this work program is responsive to the City's needs, it is also important to point out that it is completely negotiable in order to arrive at a best fit with the City's needs. It is our experience that the most important step we will take toward a productive project is the mutual refinement of the work program based on insights the City has gained during the selection process and mutual discussion, using this version as a point of departure. TASK 1.0 This portion of the update process is designed to set the stage for GENERAL PLAN UPDATE effective collaboration between the City and its consultants by PROGRAM INITIATION clarifying what is to be accomplished, who is to do it, and when they must get it done. Task 1.1 The City staff and consultant team must work in close collaboration Project Initiation Meeting if the work envisioned is to be completed with the desired quality and within the time frame and budget allowed. A team orientation meeting is proposed to: • Allow City staff to provide an overview of issues and "Experienre with many other projeru environmental setting ,ruggetu char inveuing the proper retourrer Introduce and define roles of key participants and attention at this stage ojtbe project wr!l yield rub,tantial divrdendr later on." Identify contact agencies, organizations and individuals //^~~~~• • Refine Work Program, Scope and Schedule ~~ • Share expectations and develop a strategy for the project (vim • Gather documents, data and base map • Discuss formatting information Task 1.1 Deliverables • Kick-off meeting • Schedule of Tasks with milestone dates Task 1.2 The Planning Center will collect and analyze the necessary Data Gathering and Review elements involved in the General Plan Update and accompanying of Existing Documents and EIR, including information from the City and Federal, State, regional Resource Materials and local agencies and recent studies such as the Economic Survey currently being prepared by Economic Research Associates. We will also perform a comprehensive evaluation of the City's existing General Plan. We will combine the City's existing General Plan issues, goals, objectives, policies and implementation into a consolidated matrix to assist in evaluation. Working with the evaluation matrix, we will establish a system to classify those statements that are still appropriate, have been accomplished, should be modified, or are no longer relevant. We will also work with City Staff to identify the appropriateness of the land use designations, physical setting, analysis of City surveys and review relevant information provided by the City and surrounding local governments. What this does is capture insight that only the City Staff can provide regarding the usefulness and guidance of the current General Plan. Genera! Plan Update And Eir ni.wnmcv,~..~ /r.. iw,.e..tµ~ry> y s. a...,,.n;m v,.rdeiea Page 5 3. Work Program ' ~J Task 1.2 Deliverables , • General Plan Evaluation Matrix Task 1,3 Psomas will oversee the integration of existing GIS coverages and , Base Map Preparation the addition or update of GIS data for the creation of a GIS Base Map covering the existing City and areas within the City's Sphere of Influence. Data relating to the many aspects of this General Plan Update such as land use, circulation, and environmental resources will be created and incorporated into a compatible format with the City's existing system. , The GIS base map will be produced for project use, utilizing existing City information as noted in the RFP. Focus area maps for selected areas will also be produced. Graphic standards and protocols for use throughout the project will be established. When the General ' Plan map has been adopted, digital files of the map will be transferred to the City. Appropriate layers (land use, boundaries, etc.) will be established in the City's GIS files to allow for updating , information and subsequent linking to the parcel database. Task 1.3 Deliverables • General Plan Base Map , • Updated Land use Data Files in City's GIS Files TASK 2.0 This task will be devoted to ensuring a solid understanding of the , COMMUNITY ISSUES conditions, trends, issues, and potentials to be addressed in the REPORT updated General Plan. It will also begin the serious exploration of policy options City leaders should consider. ' Task 2.1 Based on the "getting smart" tasks described in Task 1.0 and our Community Issues Report meetings with City Staff and community members described in Task Preparation 2.2, we will compile an inventory of issues relevant to the , preparation of the General Plan and EIR. The inventory will include a summary of present conditions, analysis of key changes and constraints and the interrelationship among the planning issues addressed. The feedback generated from the public participation , process will be incorporated into a Community Issues Report and Vision Statement. A draft Community Issues Report will be prepared prior to the public participation process described in Task 2.2. with , the Final Report being prepared after Task 2.2. C S To save time and budget, we propose combining the General Plan Profile into Tasks 2 1 and 3 2 , ost avings Opportunity . . . Task 2.1 Deliverables: • General Plan Update Issues Report and Vision Statement , Task 2.2 The purpose of this task is centered on gaining an understanding of Public Participation Process the major issues facing the City, stimulating public support, , ensuring that key sectors of the community are given a voice and are heard in the process, and framing the vision for the future. Page ~ ~ The Planning Center , M:IGOV/~GPIGry.~tb"&~+...Ji"oltx, /fu"Ik."~.Aina l'..pwWl Av 3. Work Program TASK 3.0 ALTERNATIVES The Planning Center will participate in seven community workshops in order to inform the community about the General Plan Update, obtain their input on key issues, and ensure that the Mayor and City Council will have had the benefit of a broad involvement by the community when the Plan is adopted. The locations of the workshops shall be determined by the City. The City shall also be responsible for notifying the public of the meetings. Focus groups are the preferred method of participation for community and business leaders, and community service providers. Focus group meetings are topical discussions with key stakeholder groups to obtain their "focused" input regarding issues, goals, and vision considerations. Task 2.2 Deliverables • Seven (7) focus group meetings • Seven (7) community workshops This task utilizes the information discovered in the first two tasks to create alternative General Plan concepts. Sufficient detail and analysis will be provided to select a preferred concept at the conclusion of the task. Task 3.1 Widespread changes in land use patterns are not anticipated. l///~~~~1''' Target Areas and Land Use However, selective focus areas require detailed policy direction and ~~ Scenarios attention. The Planning Center, based on input from City Staff and Task 2, will develop a list of up to ten target areas potentially including the: Lakes and Streams, Downtown, Hub, Hospitality Lane, University, Inland Center Mall, Rail Road Depot and the Airport. Establish and Prepare Based on the preceding input and issues evaluation, focused Land Use Alternatives Community Plan alternatives will be formulated for the target areas. Research to be conducted on economic and demographic trends, economic development opportunities, the appropriateness of current land use patterns, regulations and infrastructure resources will be utilized in structuring practical concepts where particular problems and/or opportunities have been identified. Concept formulation will take into account the possible effects of alternatives on the City and its communities. The need to adjust or modify existing City regulations and policies will also be addressed for each alternative. ' Genera! Plan Update And Eir Pa%e 7 ,~i. wmmor~a,~ „~ s.. e.,..~o..\a,r q c,. w,.,.d;.,, v,.p,..,ur 3. Work Program Target Area Infrastructure The Public Infrastructure System phase involves developing a ' Analysis baseline of existing information for comparison with the public infrastructure required to support the future land use as proposed by the City's General Plan update process. This process of analysis , will include the identification of key issues, data collection and synthesis, development of baseline conditions, and assessment of potential impact from the proposed land use in the updated General Plan. It is assumed that the updated General Plan land use will ' have been developed. The areas to be studied have yet to be precisely defined. It is ' assumed that each of the study areas will be approximately 2-5 city blocks in size, will not require comprehensive infrastructure master plans, and will be collectively described in the EIR. We have provided a cost per study area in our proposed budget. This allows , the City to decide the number of studies required based upon the specifics of each area and on budget conditions. , Collect and synthesize data The purpose of this phase is to leverage work previously done by others. A second purpose is to identify relevant regulations, standards and guidelines, such as NPDES permits and County specific standards, to ensure consistency with the General Plan. Existing information and data may include topographic data, existing improvement plans, and existing master plans and/or study , reports. Develop baseline conditions t Areas where previous studies have been conducted will be identified and mapped. Where possible, previous studies and or Master Plans will be used to define the baseline conditions for the ' purposes of this analysis. It is anticipated that the target areas will be small (on the order of 2-5 city blocks). With regard to drainage, it is assumed there will be 2-5 small drainage areas required per ' target area and that simplified rational or modified rational method calculations would be sufficient. It is assumed, with regard to sewers, that all study areas will have been previous studied and analyzed as part of the sanitary sewer master plan scope of work, which is currently underway, and the sewer trunk lines sized and located. This information will be used in ' assessing impacts from the proposed land use. In regards to water, it is assumed that the existing water master/ distribution plan is sufficiently comprehensive and up-to-date for use as an initial baseline information about the City's water supply, demands and system. It has been anticipated that some discussions with City staff will be required to ascertain changes in ' the City's water facilities since development of the master/ distribution plan. r~ ~~ Page 8 ~ The Planning Center , m:1GOVI1c%Cn~ ys. h~..rdindGry.~/S.r f4nvMiv. Pnip.w/Av 3. Work Program The purpose of this task is to characterize existing conditions to be used in developing both baseline conditions and impact assessments. The conditions developed in this task will be used when determining the impact the proposed land uses will have on infrastructure for the selected target areas that the City elects to perform infrastructure analysis. Assumptions: Without knowledge of the size of the subject target areas, it is assumed that they will be on average 2-5 city blocks in size with no areas larger than the Tippecanoe Light Industrial Area, and requiring no more than 5 separate drainage analyses per target area. It is assumed a pollutant loads assessment will not be required in the evaluation of water quality. • The existing water master/distribution plan is sufficiently comprehensive and up-to-date for use as baseline information about the City's water supply, demands, and system in evaluating land use scenarios. • The sewer master plan underway as part of a separate scope of work will be substantially complete such that it can be used as the baseline condition for analysis of impacts from the proposed land use identified in the updated General Plan. Assess potential impacts The purpose of this task is to assess the potential impacts associated with the proposed updated General Plan land use plan in accordance with CEQA guidelines. The potential impacts will be summarized and included in the documentation for each area. Establish potential mitigation measures Potential mitigation measures including policies, procedures and practices, and summarize for inclusion in the EIR will be identified. Where multiple impacts are identified, multi-objective mitigation measures will be identified. Prepare documentation The purpose of this task is to document the analyses described above, for the EIR in accordance with CEQA guidelines. Task 3.1 Deliverables • Up to ten target area alternatives with a brief summary of key issues • Infrastructure Analysis ~~ General Plan Update And Eir Page 9 M:IGOVTGFlGry q~Se. g.rvdiiol(yt /Sen M:a.Ai.. Prr.~wu(Aw 3. Work Program 1 n ~!~ Task 3.2 The Planning Center will participate in a public workshop to review , Alternatives Presentation and receive comment on the Plan Alternatives, Vision Statement Workshop and Issues Report. We will also participate in a joint meeting of the Planning Commission, Mayor and Common Council to solicit ' comments on the Community Issues and Alternatives Report and to select a preferred plan. As the issues to be discussed in this Task are similar to the General ' Cost Savings Opportunity Plan Profile Workshop, described in the City's RFP. The Planning Center recommends the workshops be combined into Task 3.2 to increase efficiency. ' Task 3.2 Deliverables • One (1) Community Workshop • One (1) joint meeting with the Planning Commission, Mayor , and Common Council TASK 4.0 This Task includes the preparation of a new General Plan based , GENERAL PLAN upon work completed in previous tasks, environmental analysis, PREPARATION knowledge of the Government Code, case law, and contemporary experience , Task 4.1 The Planning Center, working with Psomas, will create a Draft Land Use Plan Preferred Land Use Plan from the preferred alternative selected by the City. The Draft Preferred Land Use Plan will be presented on , the base map selected by the City. From this point, environmental, traffic and fiscal analysis of the , Cost Savings Opportunity General Plan will be based upon this plan. In order to reduce consultant costs, it is important that significant changes in the land use plan after this point be minimized as it may require the studies and analysis to be revised. Task 4.2 Deliverables • Draft Preferred Land Use Plan • Final Preferred Land Use Plan Task 4.2 This task involves development of the General Plan, including Land Genera/ Plan Elements Use, Circulation, Open Space, Conservation, Noise and Satety Elements that reflect community goals and that meet legal requirements. The basis of our proposal is that the majority of the policies are adequate and the primary goal of our effort is to ' streamline and focus the new General Plan in order to create an action oriented, achievable list of policies and implementation items. , Page 10 ~ The Planning Center , mncoVn~nu,~ qs., u..,,.m,.i~r /z„ 9,,,W.d;,.. rnw,•te„ 3. Work Program Task 4.2.Y The purpose of this phase of the task is to agree upon a structure General Plan Structuro & Format and format that will produce an easy to read, clear and user friendly document, particularly for decision-makers and City Staff. We will explore format options with City staff, including combining related elements. The Planning Center will prepare a draft General Plan Format, for Staff review with a common structure and hierarchy to be used for all elements. Additionally, the Housing Element will be incorporated into the agreed upon format to match the rest of the General Plan document. Task 4.2.2 Land use designations, definitions and patterns will be reviewed Land Use Element with particular focus on opportunity areas in which change may either be imminent or desired. Particular attention will be paid to the Hillside Management Overlay District and to the target areas identified in Task 3.1. Task 4.2.3 Transtech will prepare the General Plan Circulation Element Update. Circulation Element The Circulation Element will outline the necessary transportation system components to serve the future needs of the City, and will provide a policy framework for improving the system. The element will use the policy framework and Circulation Plan to project conditions and identify necessary measures to achieve the desired system. A circulation plan map showing the future roadway transportation network will be prepared. The network will include the functional as well as locational criteria to provide improved mobility and access to existing and future use areas. The network will be depicted on a street classification map, which will identify major roadway widths, number of lanes, future right-of-way needs and intersection configurations. The Circulation Element will also outline bikeway, pedestrian and transit needs as critical components to the circulation system. The traffic analysis will comply with the requirements of the CEQA and San Bernardino County Congestion Management Program (CMP). The level of service (LOS) will be calculated per the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology (ICU method will not be used). The existing volume to capacity ratio and LOS will be determined for each critical intersection and roadway segments. In general it is anticipated that, because the PM peak period experiences the greatest demand for traffic movements in an urban area, only the PM peak hour capacity and level of service will be determined. However, where necessary, we will also conduct AM peak period analysis. The 24-hour count data will be used to determine the capacity and level of service of the previously identified key roadway segments, Based on our conversations with the City Traffic Engineer we assumed to include in the LOS analysis maximum 50 selected major intersections and roadway segments. ~~ ' General Plan Update And E:r Page 11 M:\GOV/\GP1Gq' /Sen &Nnrt(rndCiry of San l4rnurv(ino l'rywm(An 3. Work Program Task 4.2.4 Open Space and Conservation Element Task 4.2.5 Noise Element The list of anticipated future development projects and transportation improvement projects and programs would be evaluated and analyzed to determine traffic conditions for the future study year. In addition, any allowable development in accordance with general plan land use and zoning will be identified for consideration of anticipated future development. Mitigation measures will be identified for intersections and roadway segments that exceed established minimum acceptable LOS criteria. Mitigation measures will include geometric and physical improvements identifying: improvements that can be achieved within existing right-of-way, and improvements requiring additional right-of-way; and other traffic demand reduction measures including a TDM ordinance, increasing transit service, providing bicycle routes, traffic operational improvements, prohibition of turn movements during peak hours, prohibition of on-street parking during peak hours, etc. Upon finalizing the feasible mitigation measures with City staff, planning level cost estimates will be prepared for the programming and implementation of the proposed improvements. The Planning Center Team will prepare an Open Space and Conservation Element that addresses archaeological, energy, water resources, plant and animal resources and natural resources. The Planning Center proposes a technical approach that will both meet the needs of the City and produce an exemplary document in which the City can take pride. Our proposed scope of work includes: • An update of the Noise Element to include a discussion of the effects of noise on the local population as well as land use compatibility issues. • A discussion of appropriate standards and criteria for noise exposure. • Identification and appraisal of existing noise sources within the City. Noise monitoring shall be conducted using a certified Type 2 noise meter. No less than 20 measurements shall be obtained in representative areas. • F.H.W.A. Noise Prediction Modeling to determine traffic- generated noise along major arterial roadways. The projected noise levels shall be included in a contour map which illustrates the distances to various acceptable noise levels for various types of land uses (e.g. 70, 65 and 60 dBA CNEL). • Identification of existing noise sensitive land uses, including residential areas, schools, and churches. These uses shall be ascertained from the Land Use Element, from the field survey, and consultation with City Staff. Page 12 ~ij The Planning Center , M:IGOVI1GYlury u/Ss~ tli.+Miwk.•w q~S.. N...a.J•.e Yryeo~.(Ja 3. Work Program Vehicle noise modeling using build-out vehicle projections and the F.H.W.A. Noise Prediction model to determine future projected noise contours. A discussion of applicable techniques that may effectively be used to reduce excessive noise within the City. Task 4.2.6 The Planning Center will utilize existing studies provided by the City Satery Element and the existing General Plan to update the Safety Element. Careful consideration will be given to its consistency with the Open Space and Conservation Element. The primary issues to be addressed in the element include geology, seismic safety, flood hazards/flood control facilities, wind and fire and hazardous materials management. Task 4.2 Deliverables • Two (2) photo ready Screencheck Draft and Final Land Use, (one (1) copy with color maps and one (1) copy with black and white maps) • Noise Element Contour Map Task 4.3 This portion of the General Plan Update is part plan and part Implementation strategy. We propose to consolidate all implementation related material into an Implementation Program that articulates basic short and long-term strategies for implementation, as well as specific actions and programs that must be established, modified, adapted, or combined. We propose to begin building this component from the day the project begins, and will include: action and description; implementation responsibility and timing; priority category; and estimated cost and funding source(s) Technical assistance from team specialists (e.g., transportation; infrastructure) will be used to calibrate costs and help identify potential funding sources and financing mechanisms. As part of this task, any necessary changes to the Development Code will be identified. The Planning Center will generally describe what impediments to respond to General Plan issues/policies are contained in the Development Code and how they can be addressed. The Planning Center shall also review the local noise ordinance, and provide written comment on the applicably of the ordinance and any conflicts between the ordinance and the Element. Task 4.3 Deliverables • One (1) Screencheck, Draft and Final Implementation Program (contained in General Plan) ~~ General Plan Update And Eir Page ]3 M:ILOV11LPCi,v / {~. gerv.Ai~e1LAr e/tin W.wiAi.. Prpuaul Au 3. Work Program TASK 5.0 The Planning Center will be responsible for preparing CEQA ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT documentation for the General Plan update. The purpose of this REPORT Phase is to prepare complete and legally defensible environmental analysis that complies with State law. The following tasks describe the steps to prepare the environmental analysis. Program EIR The Program EIR is a very flexible tool and appropriate for a General Plan update. The major focus of the document is to address the potential consequences of the plan from a broad, regional and cumulative perspective. The following Tasks describe the specific tasks involved in completing the CEQA process. Task 5.1 The Planning Center will prepare a Notice of Preparation and Initial NOP Initial Study Study for the General Plan update. The Initial Study and the NOP process will be used to define the scope of the EIR. The EIR will be focused on issues potentially impacted by the General Plan update. The Initial Study will include a project description, checklist and environmental evaluation. The Planning Center will work with the City to establish a mailing list of agencies to receive the NOP and will be responsible for distributing the NOP. The firm will prepare a newspaper notice for the City's publication in a local newspaper. A meeting with City staff will be held after the close of the NOP review period to discuss all NOP comments and to modify the EIR scope, as appropriate. Task 5.1 Deliverables • Screencheck NOP/Initial Study • NOP/Initial Study • Mailing List Task 5.2 The Planning Center will prepare a "Screencheck" Draft EIR based Draft EIR/NOC on the scope established in the NOP. After the City has reviewed the screencheck Draft EIR, The Planning Center will meet with City staff to review the City's comments and discuss necessary changes. After the revisions are made a proof copy will be provided for the City project manager to review and approve for publication. Upon approval, The Planning Center will print and distribute the Notice of Completion and Draft EIR. The Mitigation Monitoring Program will be a simple matrix listing all mitigation measures without additional processes or details. Task 5.2 Deliverables • Screencheck Draft EIR • Mitigation Monitoring Program • Draft EIR • Notice of Completion/Mailing • Notice of Availability/Newspaper Notice • SCH Transmittal Form Page 14 ~ The Planning Center M:IGOVIIGTCnY ySs. B...edi..IGry .rSs• 6.•mL.a P..yvl dv 3. Work Program 1 ' Task 5.3 The EIR team will prepare written responses to Draft EIR comments Response to Comments/ received during the public review period. The Responses to ' Final EIR/NOD Comments package will include a list of all persons who commented on the EIR, a copy of written correspondence, appropriate written responses and an errata section identifying any changes to the Draft EIR text. The firm will prepare the Notice of Determination following approval of the General Plan and file it with the State Clearinghouse Task 5.3 Deliverables • Responses to Comments • Notice of Determination Task 5.4 The Planning Center will prepare a Statement of Overriding Statement of Overriding Considerations where significant environmental effects have not Considerations been substantially mitigated and the Lead Agency has considered ' the balance of unavoidable consequences against the benefits of the proposed project. Each statement will provide the specific reasons in support of the Lead Agency's judgment to approve the project. The support for these statements of overriding consideration must be contained in the Final EIR or other information contained in the administrative record. ' Task 5.4 Deliverables • Statement of Overriding Considerations ' TASK 6.0 GENERAL PLAN ADOPT/ON PROCESS ' Task 6.1 The Planning Center and consultants, as necessary, will attend up Public Hearings to two D/ERC meetings, two Planning Commission meetings and two City Council meetings. We will conduct presentations, answer questions, prepare presentation graphics and handout materials. Task 6.1 Deliverables • Two (2) D/ERC meetings • Two (2) Planning Commission meetings • Two (2} City Council meetings Task 6.2 Prior to certification of the Final EIR, The Planning Center will Findings for General Plan prepare the Statement of Facts and Findings for the significant Adoption and EIR environmental effects identified in the EIR. The Findings will Certification individually identify the significant environmental effect of the proposed project and provide a reasoned discussion of the appropriate finding of the Lead Agency. By law, the agency must make one of three findings for each potentially significant impact. Task 6.2 Deliverables • Statement of Facts and Findings ~~ ' General Plan Update And Eir Page 1 S M:ILOVI1LPIfi'ry .JS.e~ 9mudi.e\CO~ a{Ss~ BervrJi.o P.pw+ldr 3. Work Program 1 1 Task 6.3 The Planning Center will revise the Draft General Plan to reflect final ' Final General Plan comments. The Planning Center will then produce one (1) camera ready copy of the Final General Plan. , Task 6.3 Deliverables • Twenty-five slant three ring clear view cover binders to serve as workbooks for the elected and appointed officials and staff members ' • One (t) photo ready copy of the Final General Plan TASK 7.0 ' PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION Task 7.1 Program Management This task involves overall Project Management provided by The Planning Center. This task is necessary to provide for the day-to- ' day management of the preparation of the Plan and overseeing the products, including coordination with consultant team, City Staff, billing activities, and schedule maintenance. The Planning Center ' will prepare follow-up memos from the team meeting and Planning Commission/City Council workshops. The Planning Center, will also prepare monthly Progress Reports describing meetings attended, major milestones, adherence to the schedule and budget. ' To increase efficiency and team coordination, The Planning Center will utilize its Internet publishing capabilities to create a project , collaboration website. The Planning Center will establish and maintain a secured section on our website (www.planningcenter.com) that can be accessed by team members to view products, check updated meeting dates and times, contact ' team members and view project related information and links. Task 7.t Deliverables ' • Monthly Status Reports Follow-up memo • Project Collaboration Website ' Task 7.2 We propose scheduling staff/consultant coordination meetings at Meetings key milestones in the project, rather than at regularly spaced intervals. These meetings will be "product focused" so that the ' direction resulting from them has immediate effect. A total of 8 meetings are estimated. ' Task 7.2 Deliverables • 8 (eight) meetings with City Staff Task 7.3 Psomas will oversee the integration of existing GIS coverages and GIS Data/Mapping the addition or update of GIS data produced in support of the General Plan update and EIR efforts. Data analysis and exhibit production will be conducted utilizing the GIS system and , incorporate relevant data created by the project team. Data will be maintained in an ESRI Arc/Info Version 8 format and provided to the city accordingly. Exhibits and GIS coverage as specified in the RFP , Page f ~ ~ The Planning Center ' M:1<AVIICPItiry /Ln /krnvrdrwlCiry y.,1., /kmv.Ana Pnrpoa(J.. j. Work Pro~r~m will be produced based upon the efforts and analysis of the protect team. GIS data created will be according to the City's existing GIS Metadata structures and documented accordingly. Psomas will work closely with the City's existing GIS coordinator to facilitate a smooth transfer of GIS data and to minimize any request upon the City's resources. For purposes of this Scope of Work and budget, Psomas assumes the following tasks in relation to the products: • City coordination and correspondence • Data acquisition and review • Conversation of incoming project team information Analysis efforts to support project team efforts • General Plan and Land Use designation maps and accompanying geographic data files formatted in ESRI's coverage and shapefile format. • Mapping and GIS data files to support the EIR certification. • Exhibit and Map production and revisions (Revisions estimated at three (3) copies and one (1) final rendering) • Data delivery and project close-out Task 7.3 Deliverables Arc/Info Version 8 coverages and or shapefiles of all data created in support of the General Plan update and EIR ~~ 1 • Documentation of GIS coverages ~ V • Exhibits required supporting the General Plan and EIR Genera! Plan Update And Eir 111(.IIU%1(./~1 i~v .n l~n R„vrv/mid nv it \~n /LVVnLin Yrµ.ul.F. Page 1 ~ I tt r-I_ril`aly 1 Na l:tN I khC 'f 14 'rkRi tl4ri r r. Ne JlN-2f-1Pk11 1'f ~ 43 3. Work Program COMPONENT' TWO At the discretion of the City, the following optional Tasks would bs pertomtad concurrently with the tasks fisted strove. These tsak6 ~vouki directly contribute ~ the quality antl success of the Component One tasks due to the type and quality of iMOrmetlon they wt{i produce. Each of these tasks would ba fully integrated into the scope and schedule of Componem One Tasks in order to echleve full consistency nntl time and budget efficiencies. /tPstorlc Rssourees E/en+ent A Historic Resources Elemerd provides the framework for (update) idantit)ring, preserving and enhancing algniflcant sites antl structures within the City. The Plertning Center's work e1foR vWll focus on fine-tuning end updating policie's to be corrsiatant wilk-the Yrsion end Land Use Element, es opposed ~ perfomrkrg new technical studies and major reorganaetion of the existing elsrrtant. San Buenaventura Research Associates wiN perform a basic htatcric analysis that intrudes a literature and records search, compAing e list of knovmfdesignated historic properties, preparing a history of the City. estai~lishing areas of the City which are likely to be or to become tilstork preservation issues within the plan's time horltor4 as well as assistlng in the preparation of the Historic Resources Element. Deliverable: • Screencheck Draft and Fnal Draft Historic Resources dement r ;~ ,; Page 1 B ~ The Plasrrnrg Cnrm 3. Work Program Parks amt Recroatlon A Perks and Recreation Element Is a popular optional element for Element (update) jurisdictions to preserve and enhance the quality of IHe through recreational opportunities. The update of this element will focus on verifying existing data and poNcies and accommodating the need for additional redeational Facilities. The Planning Center will review available perks and traits data, review parkland acquisttion end developrnerrt standards and analyze the effectiveness of implemar>tation and tundlrfg measures, The need for additional facilities will be addressed as a result of this analysis and in conjunction with the preparation of the land use and open space elements. Deliverable: • Screencheck Draft end Final Draft Parks and Recreation Element Eoanomh Dave/opment Stan Holtman and Associates will closely coordinate with the City's Element (update) Planning and Economic Developmerrt staff to provide guidance in the preparation of economic goals end policies for the Economic Development Element. The work will build upon ell of the ongoing economic and demographic trend analysis. We will assist The Planning Center in kfentihring the key target industries and economic policies that will lead to a strong local economy and generate aufficieM public rovenues commensurate with a high quality of public services. •_j.. A key component of the economic development element will be to identity possible implementation actions. In marry cases this will involve continuing to use existing techniques, such as redevelopmerrt powers and corrrmuntty development block greets. In other cases, it may involve assessments, community facilities districts, development impact fees, end other targeted loans and grants. Also, ft may invove the idertttf~cation of new techniques, such as business improvement districts, use of the State's infrestruoture financing bank or public-private partnerships. Each of the economic approaches will be prioritized in coordination with the City Staff in terms of its availability, effectiveness and political acceptabllily. Deliverable: • Screencheck Draft end Feel Draft Economic Development Element Geae-i! P/ar Updare itrd Eli Page 19 .ricon,r.~ca,~+~,...~ru,.«.,,.~.n.. JUrCO-GWa c,i ~~ ,, ,~ ~,____ 3. Work Program Econonrie and Alarket Working closely with City staff, Sten Hoffman end Associates will Syrrfhests assemble existing population, housing end employment data for the City of San Bemardlno. This work would draw from etdsting documertrs, induding the Cigna economic analysis currently bektg prepared by ERA, PCR Kotln and others. Additbnally, informatbn would be compiled from the Courriy of San Bernardino, SANBAG, and the Southern California Association of Government's soda economic databases as they apply to G'dy. Working closely with the City's Planning and Economic Development staff, projected economic poternlsl would be assembled from existing data sources, again including the economic study 6etng prepared by ERA. This task would identity key target Industries that the City would likely bs competitive in attracting. fl would focus on the market conditions, including ttrxi- residential absorption rates and product valuations, as well as taxable sales performance d retell shopping establishments. DNiverable; • Economic DevebpmeM Fxisiing Contlitions and Trends RepOR Tippecanoe BasNine The Tippecanoe Baseline Infrestrudure Plan B intended to assist Mlrssfrueture Plan and development in the Tippecanoe area, which is lacking adequate EnvironmsMal Analysts infrastructure, by preparing a baseline analysts of the existing systems and future infrastructure Heads based upon genera( plan land uses. 'the intent is to reduce or eliminate the need for individual property owners to have to arratyze large areas in order to plan and design irrfreswcture for their property. Preparing a baseline infrastructure plan rww, before construction the construction and impact of warehouse distribution facAtdes to tM abutting area will help streamline the development proceae, 9arve as an incentive to develop, and lie cost effective for the individual owners of smell properties. This task assumes a reasonable maximum lot coverage for light industrial and business park development in the Tippecanoe area and includes an accompanying traffic analysis, performed by Transtech, es wetl as the preparretion of the environmental analysis, descrbed below. Due to the expanded nature of this task, we have provided a - summary here and a more detailed scope of work for the bssNine infrastructure analysis as an attachment. In summary, the scope of services will be similar to those for the target areas with the additional requirement for preparation d a baseline inhaswcarre plan encompassing sewer, water, drainage and traffic elreubtion system. It is assumed however, that the Tippecanoe Nee w91 be larger end require al"ightly more analyses #ran the aforemerdioned target areas. The boundary of Tippecanoe Nee is generaly described as being bounded on the south by the Santa Ana River, Warm Creek on the west, Tippecanoe on the East and Ninth Street to the north. The basic tasks will be t) task stag-up, 2) collect and synthesize tlata, 3) deveop baseline conditions, 4) determination Of Pace 20 ,a+wm4rn~r. e.~+.u....+n,r.i~.. ~ The Planrtia; Ceara ._ .'i `~~ TDTi~ P.03 3. Work Pxogram basic sizes required to support general plan land use, and 5) attend meetings. The Planning Center well expand Ks analysis of the Tippecanoe area within the General Plan Program EIR. Our approach would be to supplement the General Plan Program EIR with more deDalletl analysts for the Tippecanoe area. Preparing a Program EIfl in advance of a specific project prapoaed in the Tippecanoe area will help to streamline the development process. Projects found consistent with this environmental analysis could potentially proceed with limited or no addRional enironmental analysis, saving 9 to 12 months In processing time. DelNerable: • Tippecanoe Baseline Infrastructure Plan • Expanded Ern'uonmental Analysts of the Tippecanoe Baseline Infrastructure Plan in the General Plan Program E1R UnNerar~r ~striet We propose a two-tiered approach to the University District Area SpeaiHe Plan and and Verdemont area. These areas are combined due to the tact that Verdemont Ares Plan then; their boundaries ovedap and a unified approach will help these areas grow in a coordinated manner. The twp tiers would consist of setting the policy level guidance snd then providing detailed land use and design guidance In a speciile plan. The fdlowing describes the two-tiered approach in more detail: Tier One - Veroemont/Unlversily Dlstict General Plan Level Policy Guidance. Prepare coordinated policies for inclusion in the General Plan that address the future character and use of the area in terms of land use, design and circulation patterns. The Verdemont Area Plan will provide more detailed policy level direction for the Verdemorrc area and is an expansion of the General Plan to focus upon the specfic needs of this area. The Verdemont Area Plan will include general pan level pdicbs focusing on the Issues of residential density and patterns of deveopment; methods to address the settlement agreement limiting/establishing minimum lot sizes for the 90-acre Bice parcel; connections with the University; potential freeway connections north of Palm Avenue; the impact of the City's Hillside Ordinance on the Verdertant area and recommendations for desirable modifications; open space preservation and linkages; possible adaptations to the Alquist-Priolo earthquake zone; the retention of unique physical or gedogical features; the level of existing assessment district fees and the potential for a fee structure that ~ unique to the Verdemont area; options for land uses such as an equestrian center and hails; methods to stimulate development; end the direction for the types of standards necessary to maintain and enhance the quality of housing in the area. Tfal Two -University district Specific Plan. This speck plan vvGl '•.; Gana! Plan Update And Err Page 21 JN• c. cw~ ~. ~a 3. Work Program focus on the interaction of the Unversity end Ute surrounding community. This specific plan will address land use and design opportunities and constrairris wtth the goal of unifying Tulare development in the district and capitalhdng upon the presence of the University. The specific plan is not intended to address detailed infrastructure, social programs, economic, or phasing issues, but instead to focus on the methods to improve the physical relationship between the Universtty and the City of San 8errrardino. To this end, the Specific Plan will focus on the design rtretlroda that create a civio•cutturel nucleus thffi capital¢es upon the regiorrd economic opportunities presented by the University. This may include campusgriented residential neighborhoods for studarrts and tacility/sta}f, which also has a direct elect on ttte viabaiQr of the University's academic and research programs, and methods to connector orient surrounding reaidendal, commercial, educetlonal and recreational uses toward ttre University. Community policy expressed through land use controls, buNding and code enforcement, community services such as pdice protection, recreation programs and facaities, and nephbortrcod linkages such as bicycle and pedestrian troik, should be relpOnsive to the needs of the Universily corrununiffes. It is critical that the boundaries for these efforts be clearly defined and that the consultant efforts be focused within these boundaries in order to control cosffi. Speeilk Plan EIR The Planning Center wilt expand ib analysis of the University and Verdemont areas within the General Plan Program EIR. Our approach would be to supplement the Generel Plan Program EIR with more detailed analysis for the Specific Plan arxi Vardemorrt Area Plan. Deliverable: • Verdemont Area Plan • University District Speciic Plan •, Padr 22 ®Tbe P/asaiag Grua w~rwvrwrl.,Is •..nFwn u ~wr.,~,i. 3. Work Program Specific Plan Deliverable: Screencheck Draft and Final Specific Plan Area Plan EIR If this option is selected, The Planning Center will expand its analysis of the University area within the General Plan EIR. Our approach would be to supplement the General Plan EIR with more detailed analysis for the Area Plan. The General Plan EIR would still be a "program EIR," meaning that it would serve as a "Tier 1" document, but it would also include "Tier 2" level analysis where it addresses the University Area Plan. Specific Plan EIR If the Specific Plan option is selected, then the CEQA documentation will take the form of a separate "project EIR." We suggest that the Specific Plan and EIR be prepared concurrently with the General Plan to take advantage of efficiencies gained through the combined effort. Master EIR vs. Program EIR Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15175, a Master EIR may be prepared as part of a general plan update. The Master EIR concept was developed several years ago as part of an effort to "streamline" and "frontload" the CEQA process so that once a Master EIR is completed, further review of individual projects would be unnecessary or at least very limited. In practice, the Master EIR approach has been used in only limited circumstances. Frontloading the process often requires additional technical studies, which may increase the cost and complexity of the document. Cities that have used this approach have also found that circumstances and projects change so rapidly that the additional cost and effort to prepare the MEIR is not justified. The investment in the program is lost and future development projects require detailed project-level EIRs despite the earlier preparation of a MEIR. ~~ General Plan Update And Eir Page 23 mnr,ovnevon /s.. s,,.,.e,.a~vy qs.. e,....,a.. v.y.,.re,. 3 • Work Program This page intentionally left blank. Page 24 ~ The Planning Center ' I M:IGUVIIGFlG~y JSe. hn.,rdi~mlcny./Se.Wm~.d~.,, p.,ip,W(Jv ~. Referencef THE PLANNING CENTER Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Riverside County Integrated Plan La Palma General Plan Update Temecula General Plan Update Chino Sub Area 2 Plan Mr. Brad Buller Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 10600 Civic Center Drive P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 93612 909.477.2700 Mr. Bill Warkentin General Plan Advisory Committee 2950 Fairmount Boulevard Riverside, CA 92501 909.788.5422 Ms. Joan Hoesterey Planning Manager City Of La Palma 7822 Walker Street La Palma, CA 90623-1771 714.523.7700 Gary Thornhill Community Development Director City of Temecula City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92589-9033 909.694.6400 Chuck Coe Director of Community Development City Of Chino P.O. Box 667 Chino, CA 91708-0667 909.591.9812 City of Clovis General Plan John Wright Update Director of Planning & Development Services. City of Clovis 1033 Fifth Street Clovis, CA 93612 559.297.2340 ~~ General Plan Update And Eir Page 25 M:IGOVf1GFlGry a/L~ 6.1.e.Ai.ol~iry q/5<n Or.wxLn~ R~pml Ar 4. References PSOMAS ASSOCIATES City of Huntington Beach - Financing/Funding Strategy for Integrated Infrastructure Management Program (IIMP) City of Placentia, Storm Drain Master Plan Update City of Compton -Water Master Plan Update and Capital Improvement Program STANLEY R HOFFMAN ASSOCIATES Burbank Empire Center David Webb City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (714) 536-5431 Brian Powell Daniel Boyle Engineering (City of Placentia work) 23231 South Point Drive, Suite 103 Laguna Hills, CA 92653 (949) 769-2600 John D. Johnson City of Compton 205 S. Willowbrook Compton, CA 90220 (310) 605-5585 Roger Baker Development Director/City Planner City of Burbank (818) 238-5278 rbaker@ci. burbank.ca. us County of Riverside Fiscal Jerry Jolliffe Model and Program Principal Planner Riverside County Planning Dept. (909) 275-3161 jjolliff@co. riverside.ca. us Citrus Village 11 Market Study for the City of Corona Terri Manuel Associate Planner City of Corona (909) 736-2262 terri. manuel@ci.corona.ca. us Page 26 M:IGONIGVIGry ~/Sa~ B...e.de..l~q fb~ &..e~/i.o Pmn.u(Ar ~ The Planning Center 1 1 1 1 4. References TRANSTECH ENGINEERS Jon Gillespie, City Traffic Engineer City of Rancho Cucamonga 909-477-2740, Ext. 4051 Ed Wright, Traffic Engineering Supervisor City of Alhambra 626-570-5062 John Ballas, City Engineer City of Industry (626) 333-2211 John Hill, Project Manager County of Los Angeles, Traffic and Lighting Division 626-300-4737 ~ Genera! Plan Update And Eir Page 27 M~1GO1?1C.P1(iry a~.Ge 9..uMi..1(+ry./5.. fl...eMi+e Pryxvlda 4. References This page intentionally left blank. Page 28 ~ The Planning Center ' M:IGOVIIGRGry o/Sen WnwMiu1G/) •/~'• l4nuMin. Prp.~.LAi. Appendices ~'~ General Plan Update AndEir m:~~-oVncnoo~ssa...,.e,.•~ca~~a•a...s~.~rrvv„c^~ Appendix A Component Two, Tippecanoe Special Study and EIR Su6bort ~~ ' General Plan Update And Eir MgLON1G%ury/LR&.+o.Ai~oNliry M.S,. BmnA•.a V.op~..(Av 1 1 1 Appendix A Component Two, Tippecanoe Special Study and EIR Sui~bort COMPONENT TWO, TIPPECANOE SPECIAL STUDY AND EIR SUPPORT The City of San Bernardino anticipates redevelopment in ten target areas, including the Tippecanoe Light Industrial Area. The remainder of the City is not anticipated to be impacted by the General Plan Update, and therefore it is assumed that no analyses will be conducted outside of the target areas. This task specifically addresses the Tippecanoe Light Industrial Area. As previously discussed, the City of San Bernardino reportedly has a Storm Drain Master Plan that can serve as a foundation in evaluating the alternative land use plans and the eventual General Plan Land Use Plan. The County of San Bernardino, Department of Public Works (Planning), however, does not have a current Comprehensive Storm Drain Plan that can address regional flooding and drainage issues. With respect to water quality, it is anticipated that a new municipal stormwater permit will be drafted and released in 2001, however, the draft public permit is not anticipated until July 2001. The City of San Bernardino's Water Master /Distribution Plan can serve as the initial foundation in evaluating the alternative land use plans, however, relatively accurate GIS information is not apparently available for the water system. It is assumed that the existing water master plan is sufficiently comprehensive and up-to-date for use as baseline information ~~ about the City's water supply, demands and system for the development of the baseline information. A baseline description of public infrastructure facilities, i.e., sewers, water, drainage/flood control, and the backbone traffic circulation system will be compiled based on an analysis of the adequacy and conditions of the existing facilities. The methodology used to compile the information will generally consist of: • Review and analysis of current City master plans, studies, reports, previous EIR documents if applicable, regional plans, studies, and appropriate reports. • Field observations. • Interviews of key maintenance and operations staff as well as engineering department staff. Abroad cross section of staff from these functional areas will be interviewed. The following tasks will be conducted as part of Component 2. It is assumed that General Plan land usage will have been developed by the time this task is initiated. General Plan Update And Eir Page AI ' M:1GOV(\C%Ciµ uj1onMw.Ai...1Cev /Se.6mmdim PrnpuelA.r Appendix A 1 Component Two, Tippecanoe Special Study ' and EIR Subbort Collect and Synthesize Data Purpose: The purpose of this task is leverage work previously , done by others and as part of Component One. Approach: Some relevant data are available from the City (previous Storm Drain Master Plan, General Plan, Vision 2020 Concept Plan, and various specific plans), the County of San Bernardino, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. These data will be collected and reviewed, and where appropriate ' synthesized for application on this project. Existing information and data may include topographic data, information on site specific drainage areas, larger watersheds and watershed management, ' recorded pollutant loadings and concentrations, and Best Management Practice (BMP) performance studies. The information and data will be analyzed to identify key issues, opportunities and ' constraints. Relevant water data are potentially available from the County, City ' Water Department, and the Department of Health Services. These data will be collected and reviewed, and where appropriate synthesized for application on this project. Existing information and data may include topographic data, information on water delivery ' sub areas. Relevant sewer data are potentially available from the County, County Sanitation District, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the City. These data will be collected and reviewed, and where appropriate synthesized for application on this project. ' ' The City s existing Master Plan of Streets and Highways and existing improvement plans will be collected and reviewed. Additionally, applicable traffic studies for a specific and or region- wide will be collected and reviewed. ' Deliverable: The product for this task is a summary of existing baseline conditions and an analysis of significant opportunities and , constraints. Develop Baseline Conditions Purpose: The purpose of this task is to characterize existing ' conditions to be used in developing both baseline conditions and impact assessments.. Approach: Areas where previous drainage studies have been ' conducted will be identified and mapped. Areas not previously studied, but needing study will be identified. In areas where additional study is required (but has not been conducted), a ' hydrologic model will be developed. Baseline hydrologic conditions will be established based on two different storm frequency analyses, 10-and 25-yrear return events, in accordance ' with the County Hydrology Manual and the City's regulatory policies. It is anticipated that simplified rational or modified rational method calculations will be sufficient. ' Page A2 ~ The Planning Center M:1l:OV/~GRt+h q' Ste. lL..+dw1Giy ~/.f'a~ h.~erdre A.yau(dM ' «p~~,rusx n Component Two, Tippecanoe Special Study and EIR Subbort Cn a macro-scak, existing water transmission mains will be delineated. Areas where previousy studies have bean conducted will be identified and mapped. Areas not prevloualy studied, twt needing study will be identified. In areas where additional study is required (but has not been conducted), a backbone modei (transmission facilities) will be developed. Baseline demand condftions will be established wing aveage day, metdnxtm day and fire flows (to be provided by City) in accordance with the City's regulatory polkties and design criteria Depending on the sae and complexly of the areas, we may use H2O net, as appropriate, to model potential impacts from proposed land use scenarios. k is assumed that the Tippecarae area has been previous studied and annyzed as part of the sanitary sewer master plan scope of work and the trunk lines delineated. @esellne conditions will be compiled and established using average day and peak flows (determined from previous effort) in accordance with the City's regulatory policies and design criteria. It is assumed that a traffic study wll have bean prepared for Tippecanoe Avenue, which identified existing and projected traffx: volumes as welt as system capacities based on the proposed land use plan for the area. Deliverable: The product for this task b a baseina assessment report secflan with a summary of the methodologlas used, analyses results, and identified key issues and t:onstrairtts. h will also serve as the baseline for the ttverrtual General Plan, Baseline Analys's, and EIR. Appropriate maps and exhlbita will be included to supplement the text and data Oetennine pa/Rlane/es lawn Purpose: The purpose of this task is to determine the InfrasWcture Proposed Lend Uses deficiencies associated with the General Plan's proposed land use in accordance with CEQA guidelines. Deficiencies will be determined relative to baseline condiflons developed In previous task. Approach: Deficiencies can be characterized by responding to the questions, '1MI1 the proposed land use.... _ • Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing stormwatar drainage systems or provltle substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? • Place housing or commercial buldings within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Fbod Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? • Place within a t 00-year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect }food flows? Violate any water quality standards requirements? ~ J ,F. ~:' '' .~ a ~. Y l.: ',~ .=; ,' .:~ Gnrsral Platy UpdareArrd Fas Page A3 .l~GpylQi{y /L b.~illl •wW I1yw~1f, JM~ GI GWL ~.-~. ..~ .r. r. ~... ... ~~... ~.. Appendix A Component TiUO, Tippecanoe Special Study and EIR Sublyort • Otherwise substarrtislly degrade wader qualitl/? • Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, ktjury or death irrvoMng fkiodirg, including Aocding ~ a resuh of the failure of a levee or clam? • Create water demands, which would exceed the capacity of the exising or planned water system or water treatment facility. • violate waste discharge requirements? • Substantially degrade groundwater quality m inledere substantially with groundwater discharge or alter the ability of pre-existing nearby wells to produce at cunent or planned levels? • Expose people to conditions less then elktwed by the State Deparlmerrt of health Services, and federal agencies wdh health jurisd'~ction? • Create or contritwte sewer flow that would exceed the capacity bl existing or planned sewer Systems or wastewater treatment facfli6es. Provide substanFutl add8ional sources of polluted rUnpf}? OetivereWe: The product for this task is a primarrly quaff''dative assessment of potential deticlencies which vn71 be sumnterized and krcluded'm the beselins irdrestrrrolure plan and arnrlronmental analysis. Appropriate maps and exhibits will be included with the - - accompanying text. Task ~ Prepare Purpose: The purpose of this task is to document the analyses Doenrnerrlai!ion /w described above, for the environmental analysis in a technical EirWronmental Malrs/s append'uc Approach: Psomas will prepare documentation for use in the overall Tippecanoe Area environmental doeumersation. OelNerable: An infrastructure report wdh accompanying tables, exhibits and maps wilt be provided es hard copies and in electronic fonrrat (Word or Adobe Acrobat). Task 5 8asel/ne Purpose: The purpose of this task is to develop a Baseline Inlrashucture Pla» InfrasWCture Plan for the Tippecanoe Area, which identifies the backbone sewer, water, storm drainage, and traffic circulation systems to support the proposed larxf use plan for the area. Approach: Psomas wiA develop a Baseline Inlrestructtrre Pion that will include dYelnage/fload carrtrol, water, sewer, and street components. 1t is assumed that one new street vnll be added for truck traffic to improve the overall area traffic circulation. Fbwever, this Baseline IMrestructure Plan will not Include dry utildies such as telephone or cable. Deliverable: A Baseline Intrastrur:hue Plan report with :' Page A4 ~ Tbs P/aaairrg Genrai 28-2001 15:56 THE PLHFNIhY"i CC:NTER 714 70B 8467-~ P.02 Appendix A Component Two, Tippecanoe Special Study and EIR Subbort accompanying exhibits and maps will be provided as hard copies and electronic format Task 6 Meetings Purpose: The purpose of this task is to provide for the attendance of required project meetings (exclusive of project kick-0ff and Component One meetings), speatkally for this task Approach: The Psomss Technical Task Manager or designate will prepare for and attend no more than 1 addittanal project team meeting and public presentation Deliverable: Attendance at meetings and meeting notes, ff required. AssumptIons It is assumed a pollutant loads assesamertt will not be required in the evaluation of water quality. ~<~ y Genaal Plan Updateit>1d Eir nrlcom4~r I ~ r..,~r..ua a.,.1 rw,...n~. Pagr AS ~.k ~! i'.•':, ::: , .~ •'~ ~' a ~.: .~ ,'~ a` °; <'.; ~e ;+ s' .e , 1 J ;. i ,'.I TOTRL P.02 Appendix B Schedule ~'~ Appendix B Schedule SCHEDULE A 14 month schedule for Component One is illustrated in Figure 1 based on Tasks 1 through 7 identified in the Scope of Work. A conceptual 18 month schedule for Component One and Two is illustrated in Figure 2, should the City decide to prepare each of the tasks identified in the Request for Proposals. The schedule, scope, and budget are interrelated and we are open to negotiating changes to them as necessary to achieve an optimal program for the City of San Bernardino. ~ Genera! Plan U~dateAnd Eir Page Bl M1C,~Vl~(:P,G~vW to+9mvMi+al~y JL+h.nndina Prygmm(Aa Appendix B Schedule This page intentionally left blank. Page B2 ~j The Planning Center MgG0VI1GPIGry a/.6.9nvrdinolGq ~Se. &.nmdi.. P•y>we4Ar • ^ • • • t ~ 1• ~~~ 4 ,` r 1 • T i~ _, -O O. ; ~. Q ~ c~ "1'? ~ C a L?= ~- o ~ ~ ~ ~+ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~'~ a ` ~,I~ • l ~ • ~ ~ Q ~~ ~~ O m ~. ~ ~ ~ 4 ~~° ~~ o p ~~ O ~ ~: 1' a 3 ~ rt ~ fl Q ro ~~ ~Z ~ d ~ (~ ' ~ ~ ~O- y ' ~ ~ ~ ~~Q ~ ~ h '~ Q 4 m ~? - m ~ ' n b `° ~ , `, ' ~ m ~ p, ' `~° Q ~~~- N '~ n ~ ~ ~ ~ro x n ~ ~ 0 ~~Q ~ ~ ~-~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ o~ ~~~ ~ © ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ' ~ O N Q ~ ~~~~ -~ fl 1~'C?~a '' ~ Z ~ ~m ~ < O G ~ ~~ Q cn ~ ~ ''~ ~ rt I + ~ 't ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z , ~ o ~ C r~~ w t~ s~ ~ Q' 1 4 ~~ 11. i I i~ Y M I y. Y r I I _ i~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 Appendix C Budget ' General Plan Update And Eir Micovncnc~n ~~.. s,..•.e•~~~~, a'~,. e~,~e•.•r n,,,ce. 1 1 1 ' Genera! Plan Update And Eir Appendix C Bridget The Planning Center's proposed budget to complete the Component One General Plan update for the City of San Bernardino is not to exceed $354,305, inclusive of labor and reimbursable expenses. Should the City elect to complete the Component Two Tasks identified in the attached Scope of Work, the additional budget would not exceed $553,853, inclusive of labor and reimbursable expenses. The following pages outlines in detail the number of hours and costs required to perform each task identified in the Scope of Work. An hourly rate schedule is included for use in invoicing extra work incurred that is not part of this proposal. The Planning Center believes that the most important step towards a productive project is the mutual refinement of the work program and budget based on insights the City has gained during the selection process. As such, the Budget Proposal and related Scope of Work are completely negotiable in order to arrive at the best fit with your needs. AI iGOY'(1GP1CnY../f~n 9rrvrAinal! ~M1 e/ivn hnerA,n.. Prv~m,ul Aa ~~ Proposed Budget City of San Bernardino General Plan Update and EIR TEAM SUMMARY Task Description The Planning Center Psomas SRHA Transtech BUDGET AMOUNT COMPDNENT ONE TASKS tea' ~a ~a~,. v~~"~~ ',tytt" ~: R,x tnyyt 4)yG„ `' a``;its, ~gSg ~ , ~ a'r ~r~ s~^ k < ,. ~tr`~kl*~i YC {i7X~ ~#~?~'~x P i2^~v ~ n~ '~. ..,: k k, , isy:.^ r . F' TASK 1 -GENERAL PLAN"UPDATE PRODRA ;INITIATION r.~~z ws ..fir; .. , 1 ? :.'si r ~!*~+xt ~~'°;~ Via... ka; ... ~., ~ ~~ ~ t .,a,: ~_ 1.1 Project Initiation Meeting $2,600 $390 $2,990 1.2 Data Gathering and Review $6,400 $9,050 $15,450 1.3 Base Map Preparation $860 $2,900 $3,750 Task -Subtotal TASK 2 - COMMUNITYiSSUES REPORT ~ ~- ~ 4 22,200 ~. ° r , .r" 2.1 Community Issues Report Preparation $6,640 $6,640 2.2 Public Participation Process 2.2.1 Focus Groups (7) $10,435 $10,435 2.2.2 Workshops (7) $10,435 $10,435 Task 2 - Subtota 7,510 0 7,5 :., ?TASK3-ALTERNATIVES ~ , ' ~ ~.3.x; .,r, ,...~~, t'', r : ~„y/ F. '. ;rr a} k.- ~ , ">~~~ 3.1 Target Areas and Land Use Scenarios 10) $14,320 $14,320 3.2 Alternatives Presentation Workshop $3,240 $3,240 Task -Subtotal 7,5 0 7,56 TASK4-GENERALPLANPREPARATION ..,.r` '-,<<« •: z ; .~r`,~ r , ~ :. , :.. „?. ; . ~ ;, .3 ~ ', 4.1 Land Use Map $1,600 $4,800 $6,400 4.2 General Plan Elements $5,800 $5,800 4.2.1 General Plan Structure and Format $2,310 $2,310 4.2.2 Land Use Element $7,220 $7,220 4.2.3 Circulation Element $4,600 $74,300 $78,900 4.2.4 Open Space and Conservation Element $4,000 $4,000 4.2.5 Noise Element $10,400 $10,400 4.2.6 Safety Element $2,960 $2,960 4.3 Implementation $6,060 $6,060 Task 4 - ubtotal TASK5=ENV/RONMENTAL'ANALYSIS'kciG"`~ e..*.* ~3~ -~t,G„R~~ .,M:;~iap~~`,±Tr. ,,°~~ s<~= 74,300 s~ ,, i~,~,.~~. .» ,. 5.1 NOP/Initial Study $6,8D0 $6,800 5.2 DRAFT EIR/NOC $51,250 $7,400 $58,650 5.3 Response to Comments/Final EIR/NOD $10,630 $10,630 5.4 Statement of Overriding Considerations $4,630 $4,630 Task 5 - ubtotal TASKS=GENERAL'PLANADOPTIONPROCESSi. •. ~ 73,310 7,400 zw.~~~=`a,r* ~..~i":,„u+,,.~ 4sx„ .- 0 ~ 80,7 0 .T~.~~.~ 6.1 Public Hearings $9,420 $9,420 6.2 Findings for GP and EIR $3,760 $3,760 6.3 Final General Plan $5,240 $2,900 $8,140 Task - ubtotal TASK7dPROGRAMAMINISTRATION .~e~-[ +~,r.~"~ 8, 00 ' ~?~^~~~~)3»*~'*.r_" :~~ ,~.:'.+, 0 zu3n.x,.3,v~. _;. ,. .. 2 ,32 i' ,~,zs:, ='I 7.1 Program Management $8,000 $5,200 $13,200 7.2 Meetings (8) $10,310 $10,310 7.3 GIS Data/Mapping $2,160 $2,160 Task7- ubtotal 'COMPONENTONEiTOTALS. a,,,.~ -r ,~..~,~ ~*.x.X`>r~i~~~~ ~-s,»r"`r,=~f;.n 0 ~4;; .x.r~ .9- 2 , 7 . a.. ~,~ ~° .~~~r:'t~,"xrs. LABOR TOTAL $206,280 $38,440 $0 $74,300 $319,020 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES $25,785 $5,000 $4,500 $35,285 COMPONENT ONE GRAND TOTAL $232,065 $43,440 $0 $78,800 $354,305 ~,~y z r" + n~' ""x CQMPOAffNTTWOTASK$ ~s +=~- ~ ~ `~~ m* n~"vr'7',,+?~s-;e^i k,.Vn .t.., rw ,},{, C3' f 1 u d " { itt ~'4' t ,r~,+~.",'b~ .k£w ~, H gf d k. s ~ t ~ ~ : pm}~t:'. ,n?e, ,;;a } % , u ' ~e are !, *,'~+ ~`. a?.>s (~ }: -#~ d' i t , ;aa ~',~ro., City Tour $3,160 $3,180 Urban Design Element (Update) $6,300 $6,300 Historic Resources Element (Update) $5,720 $5,720 Public Services Element (Update) $5,180 $5,180 Parks and Recreation Element (Update) $4,580 $4,580 Expanded Circulation Element $90,000 $90,000 Economic Development Element (Update) $2,470 $8,250 $10,720 Economic and Market Analysis $0 $11,850 $11,850 Fiscal Analysis $0 $17,550 $17,550 Tippecanoe Infrastructure Master Plan $52,750 $61,098 $14,950 $128,798 University District Plan Area Plan $13,800 $13,800 Specific Plan r'COMPONENT,TWO-..TOTALS,aa~„s'^.. ".`Y,,~.~tE~":+:hnn&a7dwX "»3~. :, "a^`~4 ,3~,..~t~''.~«+4..4rpy` race`~.m~2~~,Y^;-'<~ 50 Zy,°M.tt.,~,~ ,.~ -'~;,.,i.~,dx`s+t<z~,..'?.r LABOR TOTAL $293,980 $81,098 $37,850 $119,900 $512,608 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES $36,745 $3,700 $300 $500 $41,245 COMPONENT TWO GRAND TOTAL $330,705 $64,798 $37,950 $120,400 $553,853 yr Task 3.1 Infrastructure Analysis will be billed at $12,000 per target area. The number of target areas receiving an analysis of infrastructure will be at the City's discretion. ** The number of Traffic Counts will be al the City's discretion. Traffic Counts will be billed at the following rates: AM and PM 2 hr manual turning counts at selected intersections (if necessary) $175/Count AM, noon, and PM 2 hr manual turning counts at 10 selected intersections (if necessary) $250/Count 24 hr machine counts at 100 selected roadway segments $100/Count *** Estimate only. The cost for a Specific Plan may range between $150,000 and $350,000 depending upon the desired outcome and depth of analysis. ** *~* The Planning Center May 18, 2001 Proposed Budget City of San Bernardino General Plan Update and EIR THE PLANNING CENTER Task RATE: Oescripfion $150 RR 5125 MG $110 BJ $135 AB $150 DM $75 Planner S70 $50 Graphics WP $45 Intern $100 TOTAL TB HOURS TOTAL BUDGET COMPONENT ONE:TASKS y~«,~Y~5 if ".aJ X , , v,c g sgq Vn"'S. LY lx ~~;., ~x.: t.e..{uq]' t~~ TASKf-GENERAL PIAN..UPBATEPROGRAM..INIT1ATlON ~~.' ~rr#~t * 5 r ~ r3.+,-`~"~~, ~tnT. }S'..#x~ +~ ,~,f ~ ~ t~~k,, .. S1t!~~„ ~ .. r .....,. +'rj W ;~&re:at'cs,*.?i4xi~fsg;: £~tiy •¢.r~t.~;"r.s.;zt,~± ~ ~ ~ - - ~,' ,.. . „Lis ': R - - ~- ,y °t~~ 1n °h"E.*~k~;Sr..tr;-.«, ~~i~~.. -~.t.... .. ft i -e ~fi~SA ~Et ~'i#~?{~`,?''$~ xti~%~,z~:.*{f' ,,,-~w,rdi^~.,, , ~+ 4# N .t., . ? . :t;*.-} d F.:- .. 1.1 Protect Initiation Meeting 5 5 5 5 20 $2,600 1.2 Data Gathering and Review 16 40 8 24 88 $6,400 1.3 Base Map Preparation 4 8 72 $860 ask 1- u total 5 5 44 2 ,860 TASK2-.COMMUNIIyISSUESREPORT -:+ •a -.;e~.,,,~,e s.~+ ^v rn, wxnr,l *. f a11.ti~4 , t+~' ^r~:€a3!. ~ n x~.7.:: r.~>Nak,H~r" s'i '~wr., ,; ..~n:~ ~' ~ s `~. ,. ;. h..,r.. , ;. ,~:., = ;;. • . ' 2.1 Community Issues Report Preparation 16 40 tfi 8 8 88 $6,640 2.2 Public Padicipation Process 2.2.1 Focus Groups (7) 10 40 25 8 8 91 $10,435 2.2.2 Workshops (7) 10 40 25 8 8 91 $10,435 Task 2 - ubtofal 20 0 96 50 0 56 31 8 8 0 270 27,510 TASK3~ALTERNATIVES ,a t "'? ~ ~ 1: ,.+~.A P ^'n 4 ;~ ,k x: «~;~e. .,C, = ,r?-^s. h, r' ,°-. +x. .~.=. ,ar ..~,$ ... ~ '' a . -} a, . 3.1 Target Areas and Land Use Scenarios (10) 24 32 8 40 24 32 160 $14,320 3.2 Alternatives Presentation Workshop 8 8 8 8 32 $3,240 Tas 3- u fofa 2 0 40 8 0 4 2 32 0 192 17,560 TASK 4 • GENERAL PLAN PREPARATION ~ t,«- e~~ v,;(:" ~ , - ~. n,.~ ~ gx ~:~~ . ~ -.,i ,, . _ + ye , 'rvc „ .~ ~%,a, „ r ,~;n „ , :itF.@i,.a, CL , e,:,.:., „-pia ,! , .. .~Y ~~, , ,~ f r~.~ . JR.. ~i ,. ..' t..:':'. .. .. 4.1 Land Use Map 4 8 8 20 $1,600 4.2 General Plan Elements 4.2.1 General Plan Structure and Format 4 4 2 8 8 26 $2,310 4.2.2 Land Use Element 8 16 4 32 8 8 8 84 $7,220 4.2.3 Circulation Element 4 8 24 8 8 8 60 $4,600 4.2.4 Open Space and Conservation Element 4 8 16 8 8 B 52 $4,000 4.2.5 Noise Element 4 16 8 B BO 116 $10,400 4.2.6 Safety Element 4 16 8 6 8 44 $2,960 4.3 Implementation 4 16 4 32 8 8 72 $6,060 as 4• u fofa TASK S. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS .. .~. '~ -- 24 azt-~c ,.AZus i-'„ . ,..X, ,.. ~ 4 f0 , ,.~+.~).a .Fns'•=4 0 ,!-2,-~3~'-d y"'E ;"'~~iirf ., x 40 ~a zk~a,.4 a 56 4 80 y ,, ,~ ~', ,..~ i~.ls ~~ ~ 474 ~. ~ . , .,.+ ~. 39,150 r., , . 5.1 NOP/Initial Study B 4 2 60 8 81 $6,800 5.2 GRAFT EIR/NOC 80 16 40 310 32 80 558 $51,250 5.3 Response to CommertsiFinal EIR;NOD 30 8 60 118 $1 O,fi30 5.4 Statement of Overriding Consitlerations 6 8 40 54 $4,630 Tas 5- ubtota IASKB-GENERAL PLAN ADOPTIONPflOCES3' '~ • a 0 4o-:v:r s.e 124 a,.,t; z 6 x.=~,.. <~ r„,~w~' 4 _,.,xr,,„v<-.. 490 <''.~ r~~t:asa.W 40 0 0 '3 ,???.3 ~„, :~,..: ,. '. ~,..~s~;,,< 811 .. .. _ ~ 73, 1 .•- _, 6.1 Public Hearings (6) 3D 32 16 4 82 $9,420 6.2 Findings for GP antl EIR 4 16 16 4 40 $3,760 6.3 Final General Plan 4 16 24 4 16 64 $5,240 Task6- u6tofa TASK7-PflOGRAM AMINISTRATION a~ ..<i+ t.si' -e-.,t 0 4 .~, ., wv.s $?P. +~, 0 a. rs=+1 ,A 0 4.4 =,.. ,' ,.1 5 •-,XTPCd4k ant, 4 , .+~, ,}:.~ 4 0 t..~l $~ ... ~. <; '~ ,.; .-;: s 186 ~ -~, a..:; < 8,420 , , 7 1 Program Management 24 40 64 $8.000 7.2 Meetings (8) 20 40 16 10 86 $10,310 7.3 GIS Data/Mapping 4 8 16 28 $2,160 Tas 7- ubtofal COMPONENT ONE TOTALS :: :-,:,,-. .~ 44 !a;r~,k.u 0 B4 -,~,P,e a. 6 ,,eti,~:.>, 0 8 16 =.tzr "i~ ,.~a-x,$ti4~T. ..ate..>,,;.~>. ,..> 0 0 • ~~.. ~.-;,:-- 0 178 ',,..•'..., a ,.t",,, 20,470 i. ~~ -,. COMPONENT ONE TOTAL HOURS 163 129 405 89 42 864 180 88 112 160 2,232 N/A BILLI COMPONENT ONE LABOR TOTAL $24,450 576,125 $44,550 5 $12,015 56,300 $64,800 $12,600 5 $4,400 5 $5,040 $16,000 N/A N/A N/A $206,280 REIMBURSAB LE EXPENSES $25,785 COMPONENT ONE TOTAL $232,065 COMPONENTTWOTASXS t~ ,, ,: a tvv. _fl.!. s ..'4i'Y~k ~ ° %Jtrya.dt. ;~# '~ ri „zr, i1~.dYU x/s rxk# : n~X'"-,. V_~~iM1T'f. ~~"b1~~1?.'y tS?tt ~.,raS:; aa~ „`v ..+R ,ai~~ ~sy! •, _ a~n x`~^ .d. $ f ^~~4v[ra~ 25 , ~~p i-~'~},.Y1 *L.,F.~ r~ r, .. h,. .>4} .,.,. ' ti.74 r, ~...ii ~. t~~~-~~ City Tour 8 8 6 24 $3,160 Urhan Design Element (Update) 8 8 4 24 24 4 72 $6,300 Historic Resources Element (Update) 6 8 8 24 B 4 60 $5,720 Public Services Element (Update) 8 8 4 24 8 4 56 $5,160 Parks and Recreation Element (Update) 4 B 4 24 B 4 52 $4,580 Espantled Circulation Element Economic Development Element (Update) 4 8 4 6 22 $2,470 Economic and Market Analysis 0 $0 Fiscal Analysis 0 $D Tippecanoe Infrastructure Master Plan 8 EIR 4 100 6 12 326 36 24 86 598 $52,750 University District Plan Area Plan 4 24 8 4 4 76 4 4 20 148 $13.800 Specific Plan and EIR COMPONENT.TWO TOTALS ^~s. :r, tar .; , . ? •rri '."1 ...~ - .i<•rn as „.r, rr"dla, ,; ~~. ,r.a .,~ , ,. t ..~ mri ,... ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ $200.000 . ~ COMPONENT TWO TOTAL HOURS 48 124 64 36 16 504 68 44 0 106 1,032 N/A A $7200 $15500 57040 84860 $2400 $37800 $6160 $2200 $0 $10,800 N/A A $293,960 REIMBURSAB LE EXPENSES $36,745 COMPONENT TWO TOTAL $330,705 # Estimate only. The cost for a Specific Plan may range between $150,000 and $350,000 depending upon the desired outcome and depth of analysis. The Planning Center Mnv 1R 7nm Proposed Budget City of San Bernardino General Plan Update and ElR PSOMAS Task RATE: $130 $80 i $160 $140 GIS Project Sr. Project Description Manager GIS Technician Sr. Consultant Eng/Mngr $110 $54 Project Engineer Assistant TOTAL NOURS TOTAL BUDGET ~~## COMPONENT ONE TASKS '~} .r; ~ A :,*s nfi;~sY~",aQ~,~~i~ ~a ~_ S .i(~!',. viS S.lb ~{.a"~,a \3y { { ~~ 3Y %1 k n *~, ~ ~, t~~ r ;~"1~k.tf~S's~'L~.°E~J~~~s,t~4.f;t.` TASK1-GENERAL PLAN-0POATEPAOGRAM INITIATION-k,3s,'.~+.t~,,;a~~^,i~.,,zd'a+,}s',,,?#~~;>+'~~.tgi'cgy~t$+W°,y1C;lry~. '^ ~er~yr,~;.,+o,~,,=,a~±.,~s~.~s?v~:r~~'yn~e,~,~}nt.~'..t~.J,.x, r;, .~.-.' 1.1 Project Initiation Meeting 3 3 $390 1.2 Data Gathering and Review 45 40 85 $9,050 1.3 Base Map Preparation 10 20 30 $2,900 as - u fofa 58 TASK4-GENERAL PLAN PREPARATION ~N..~ „,a,,.=„a; •~<,a<°. 5sz:~,- ~~ xN9 ss,Sva.v.~eC9s'~r 4"9a~7f~",%3k•xx 8 2,34 t eyyst.d>„h ~„,v T.;~~ +~: ~^,•.~. ~ ,.s-.y ~t ~_, 4.1 Land Use Map 20 60 80 $1,400 4.2 General Plan Elements 40 40 $3,200 as - u fofa TASKb-EVIRONMENTALANALYSIS ,t.r' r s, ,r'1r~t .,..~ ,<,r3~*x.~^;~+'.+,. M. M v. ., .+ i~rYT.r„ y-".,~tT.d?, *3-€ r ,~. , i~a~~+c~?'" .' -:.~' ~ ~ 5.2 Draft EIR/NOC 20 60 80 $7,400 as u fofa TASKB-GENERAL ADOPTION PROCESS - ,.<=~4. 94zvTs+~ks~..,r=;Ma..,`ti.'s3'r } er. "d~G'~E,t~ir#tTtirak~rv~i% '.'....1km.~~(. ., 8 .. - ~~ v;... C, 9 7,4 0 , . 6.3 Final General Plan 10 20 30 $2,900 ask 8 - u (o(a 0 0 2,900 TASKLPROGRAMAMINISTRATION r'~'w* ,~s~rrz`~,._^~,*a.ee'! r:s~+., ~<, m+~t°?.*1+ 4~.^. .<<y=<."'~ ~s xe"`s '.~~+ tvs-. ~ s,=. ter.°+ e. 7.1 Program Management 40 40 $5,200 as 7- u fofa COMPONENT ONETOTALS ~ -~`-.: r}. -„th,..,n.m.Y¢xa' 4 °s}•`~ §tn'~r, 3~ "x x-s3Ts3~..~rro~&T.t~„~x,..-~' ~~'.-a,~.~;-~rv.~,z,,"4.tti~#^'+sa~+ h0'~~ur 4s,~ m,~J, . ~~ P ~.~:f„ 7i t~.~,,:~-_ .;t :~e~~, ,200 .,~a~ ............. COMPONENT ONE TOTAL NOURS 148 240 0 0 0 0 388 WA REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES $5,000 COMPONENT ONE TOTAL $43,440 Note: Task 3.1 Infrastructure Analysis will be billed at $12,000 per target area. The number of target areas receiving an analysis of infrastructure will be at the City's discretion. COMPONENT TWO TOTAL TRANSTECH RATE: $135 $125 $95 $70 $50 $50 TOTAL TOTAL Task Description Principal Senior Engineer Transp. Analyst CADD Engineer Tech Admin NOURS BUDGET 4.2.3jCirculation Element ~ 30 ~ 175 ~ 325 ~ 50 ~ 150 ~ 100 830 $74,300 COMPONENT ONE LABOR TOTAL $4,050 $21.875 530.875 53.500 59.000 55.000 N/A S7d.30n COMPONENT ONE TOTAL COMPONENTTWOTASKS "ca'. ',grr :xpps:c:~,?, i' 3, ".~ . y. a 5., ,~HrE'<'2 L Ay1m;s`f t~Y~Prx~r.+~'~"~.'i'i.~}~"A4'^n. ~ 1 r, `^, }(s #.p,: ."'~"t3.~+ ~.. ~~"~" ~: ~1C-0 x'att:~.} Xa~ ~.w. ta..~"~;4~ ~}9 ~`2"++,'' f5~y,, 'ie ..~,~,x"`' '.45~"E ,..`(,rv.'~,+Fk~ k d :Sf~.4Y°f tr3ik~..! h1 r,~ ~ ~: ;:tks ~{f;w~S~i,,..~5 3 .. } > ~y~~: .. Expanded Circulation Element 40 200 370 80 210 125 1025 $90,000 Tippacanee Infrastructure Master Plan and EIR 10 16 80 16 48 170 $14,950 University District Specific Plan 10 16 80 16 48 170 $14,950 COMPONENT TWO LABOR TOTAL $8,100 $29,000 550,350 $7,840 $18,380 55,250 N/A 5119,900 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES 5500 COMPONENT TWO TOTAL $120,400 * The number of Traffic Counts will be at the City's discretion. Traffic Counts wilt be billed at the following rates: AM and PM 2 hr manual turning counts at selected intersections (if necessary) AM, noon, and PM 2 hr manual turning counts at 10 selected intersections (if necessary) 24 hr machine counts at 100 selected roadway segments $175/Count $250/Count $100/Count STAN LEY R. HOFF MAN ASSOCIATES Task RATE: Oescri plion $150 S. No/lman $100 M. Osborn $90 D. Lawrence TOTAL HOU R S TOTAL BUDGET y +~, COMPONENT TW01'ASKS,~~.;d~u"~,g; .aaL*,s=~r°"a~"O~ Economic Development Element U date t~t r'~~.. .t;i.~ ~ 40 d'a'~~~~'3' „# 25 ~I ~ ~'»,~t"s~ 55 "~x".'i.~x:~."t4.':2 $8,250 Economic and Market Anal sis 40 65 105 $11,850 Fiscal Anal sis COMPONENT TWOTOTALS,r ,.~i,a,z. ',,:!~;~+ k«t sa.-~k~ti~.~1 y, ~' n~'z~r, tYnv.,11~,,~r,'*.+«~;a'.~it.~,~w~ aak.*.~:r~r~ ~'~. COMPONENT TWO TOTAL HOURS 130 60 135 325 WA REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES 5300 COMPONENT TWO TOTAL 537,950 Appendix C Budget FEE SCHEDULE Standard Fee Schedule (as of January 1, 2001) THE PLANNING CENTER Staff Level Hourly Rate Principal $135 - $150 Computer Specialist $100 Senior Project Manager $85 - $135 Project Manager $65 - $125 Senior Planner $75 - $95 Assistant Planner $50 - $75 Technical Writer $50 - $75 Graphic Artist $45 - $75 Research Analyst $45 - $65 Technical Support Staff $45 - $55 Clerical Support $35 - $50 Note: The Planning Center's fees are adjusted annually. Expert Witness Fees $300.00/hour For Depositions, Testimony TRANSTECH Staff Level Hourly Rate Principal $135 Senior Engineer $125 Transportation Analyst $95 CADD $70 Engineering Technician $60 Administrative $50 STANLEY R. HOFFMAN ASSOCIATES Staff Level Hourly Rate Principal $150 Associates $90 - 110 Senior Staff $70 - 90 Support Staff $50 - 60 General Plan UpdateAnd Eir M:I40V114PIfwry o/SOn 9erv.Ai~\Gp fL. hr~+rdiiro P.q>w+LA~r Appendix C Bridget PSOMAS ASSOCIATES Staff Level Hourly Rate Principal/Project Director $160 - 150 Project Manager $140 - 130 Project Engineer $116 Design Engineer $108 Staff Engineer $95 CADD/GIS Technician $80 Project Assistant $50 ~ ' General Plan U~dateAnd Eir m.~covncr~o~.~is=.~•..~.n~•~~o~~,~s~•n.•-,~e~.••vm~cev 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 Appendix D Team Qualifications ' General Plan Update And Eir M:~~o~w~on~~•~..~~+,.~~~„~s=.w,~~MP.ro~r,e, 1 1 Appendix D Team Qualifications THE PLANNING CENTER "( wanted to ray how much I enjoyed working with The Planning Center an the revi3ion 7580 METRO DRNE of the Yarba Linda General Plan. I found {them to be} extremely Cooperative and COSTA MESA, CA 92626 retpontive to the CityS >'egnein, ar+d all :uork wat dw:e rn a trme[y manner... Everyw+e TEL• 714.966.9220 FAx 714.966.9221 hat expressed talitfaetion with the final prafeet. www.planningcenter.com -pat Haley Community Development Director City of Yorba Linda General Plan Uptlate completed 1993 Firm Background The Planning Center is a private consulting firm providing multi- disciplinary services to both goovernmental agencies and the private sector. Sd`fn'iJ- ; l'Fe Wing Center has beery devoted to the development of viable planning solutions to the physical, social and environmental problems that arise from urbanization. Full Range of Professional Service Most clients, like you, who use planning and research services in today's highly charged governmental decision-making environment need a diverse team of highly trained and experienced professionals. The firm embodies a full complement of professional disciplines, including environmental analysis; EIR and EIS preparation; policy and regulatory specific plan preparation; policy and general plan preparation; housing elements; air quality planning; air quality assessments; congestion management planning; land use planning; landscape architecture; site planning; ~~ design guidelines; redevelopment and rehabilitation plans; assessments; economic and fiscal impact analysis, and computerized planning system applications. Recognized Excellence The Planning Center is recognized as one of the top west coast planning firms and is noted for the quality of its work. The firm's reputation for excellence in land use planning and design is its trademark. Your need for excellence and quality is well served by our established reputation, earned through the firm's consistent production of effective, achievable plans and programs. Our Firm's Status is Solid The controlling interests of The Planning Center are held by three principals of notable planning experience: Richard E. Ramella, Randal W. Jackson, and Dwayne S. Mears. The Planning Center has never refused to complete a contract and will not accept other projects that may represent a conflict of interest. Depth of Staff The experience of The Planning Center's key personnel at the different levels of government results in an ideal team to address the critical challenges posed by emerging planning requirements. You can call upon us to assemble the multiple disciplines for your project into an integrated framework under the direction of our Principals. ' Genera! Plan Update And Eir Page DI M.1e01?1GFlCq {S>, 9errerAi..14ry y.teu Hnw..Awa P..y.vLlm Appendix D Team Qzlalification.r Principal and Senior Project The Principals' involvement in each project ensures efficient Management Involvement management and critical attention to detail. We can assure you that we will be directly involved in all aspects of planning on your projects. We take pride in the fact that when we are involved in a project, the principals and senior project managers have direct "hands-on" involvement with the project from start to completion. Responsiveness to Client Needs We understand the importance of project timing and adherence to project schedules. We are frequently required to work within tight project schedules. With a staff of over 40 people, we have the ability to arrange staffing assignments and resources to meet our clients' needs. If we ever fail to return one of your phone calls or e- mails within 24 hours, we will reduce our contract amount by $100 (on each occurrence) Our Work is Consistent Our management and products are consistently of the quality we can be proud of. We use an in-house quality control system to ensure that our products are accurate, technically sound and presentable. Creative and Workable Solutions We take a creative approach to our projects and look at each project as a new challenge that requires unique solutions. In this manner, we are able to evaluate each project objectively and formulate a plan and programs that are workable. Creativity in Master Planning The Planning Center is noted for its special skills in preparing large- scale community plans. Public and private aspirations for enduring communities and neighborhoods are reflected in industry applauded case studies of effective leadership by The Planning Center in this complex field. We believe our creative and innovative solutions can enhance your project's marketability. Specific Plans For this tool to be effective on your behalf, it must rely on modern technologies to assemble and illustrate the myriad of potential futures that you may wish to explore for the project. You must also have confidence that this technology is backed up by good old- fashioned common sense and insight. Our expertise and reputation regarding the use of this effective planning tool in California is unequaled. Environmental Impact Reports Your challenge is to create a more healthy, livable and thriving community that makes sense. Our job is to help you position yourself where you need to be. If your preferred approach combines creative problem solving, integrity, accuracy and "The Plannnnb Center's professions[ attention to detail, then we can help. Environmental analysis is an performance resulted to the approva, integral part of our services to you because we believe it belongs in of a $1.36 million General Plan the arsenal of tools that may make the difference between your and EIR wirhouc challenQe." project's success or failure. You may need to confront a variety of difficult environmental issues; we can respond with the appropriate - Barry Hand, FOCUS. Community Development Director City of Tracy General Plan Update completed 1993 Page DZ ~ The Planning Center MiGO V/1GP1Gnr.~ fan NmenLnnlcnY ~~Jnn Nrnardi~o Pngnu(Au 1 1 1 lJ II u 1 Appendix D Team Qualifications Governmental Services If your project requires uniting public and private sector interests in dynamic urban development settings, you need consultants who can confront complex challenges. Within this formidable environment, The Planning Center is acknowledged as an accomplished facilitator of coordinated public planning strategies and an implementer of practical solutions. We make available to you a team of experienced professionals who are technically proficient in the areas of public policy, large scale development, implementation techniques, neighborhood planning, multi- jurisdictional coordination and public participation processes. You can be assured of experienced support. Recognition All of us enjoy being told that we have done our job well. Formal recognition for professional quality work is a gratifying acknowledgement of ongoing excellence. By meeting the "The Planning Center has fulfilled their challenge to do quality work for you, The Planning Center has ronrrartual obligation, .rucre.rcjullyond succeeded in being recognized by local governments, the land timely. Bared on theirperformanre forrhe development industry and professional associations. City oj8rentwood, [would recommend The Planning Center. They have been retpamive to our needs and have worked rlocely with As rewarding as this type of recognition of planning achievement is, our srajj" our greatest satisfaction comes from ongoing relationships with those we serve. You are the ultimate judges of our firm's service. -Eddie Peabody, Jr., AICP Community Development Director City of Brentwood LEADERSHIP General Plan Update completed 1993 When your project requires a discipline that we don't have in-house, we team with only those expert firms that meet the high standards of quality and professionalism we would provide for you. We are known for putting together specialized teams to accomplish our clients' goals, and for successfully leading those teams to an effective conclusion. Our goal is to not only provide you with the best consultants available, but to provide these services with a seamless approach for you. We are especially proud of the following effort. Representative Projects The Planning Center has prepared over 25 General Plans, many including Environmental Analyses and Housing Elements. Listed below are a few examples that fulfill your request. CURRENT PROJECTS "Thu it the oppa~[unity [ha[ will delermrne what kind of legary we will leave our grandchildren. " Supervisor Tom Mullen, 5th District, Riverside County The Planning Center is currently updating the General Plans for Riverside County and the Cities of Rancho Cucamonga and Anaheim. We are also updating the Housing elements for San Bernardino and Orange Counties and the Cities of Upland, Westminster, Santa Ana, La Quinta, Stanton, Tustin, Fountain Valley, San Marino, Perris, Palm Springs, and Lake Elsinore. ~~ ' Genera! Plan U~dateAnd Eir Page D3 M marncNC,ry.~s+. M..+~d,i..dcnr,9 se. lL...,.,l;... e..(M.+l A.. Appendix D 1 Team Qualifications ' ~~ General Plan/EIR The Planning Center is currently updating and modernizing the City , Rancho Cucamonga of Rancho Cucamonga's General Plan, leading a team of nine Sr consultants for the City. We are approximately 90% completed with the Update. The City's current plan is nearly 20 years old. Periodic , technical updates to the Plan have been made to respond to the ever-growing population and employment base of the City. This project focuses on economic development and land planning , for key opportunity areas throughout the City. The team has examined a range of land use options, in light of regional development trends, population growth, and service/facility needs , of the community. One of the main objectives of the update process is to re-position the City so that it may maximize its future development potential with the right amount, type, and location of commercial, recreation, and office development. The team is , currently identifying the many issues that need to be addressed in the project. Response to these issues may involve a land use change, policy change, revision to an implementation program, or ' some combination thereof. The team is also identifying the key opportunity areas within the community, and the range of options or choices regarding future development or improvement. General Plan Update/EIR The Planning Center recently completed a comprehensive update La Palma to the City of La Palma's General Plan. The project included all state-mandated elements, optional components covering public ' facilities and parks and recreation, and an environmental impact report. The project resulted in the first Housing Element for the City to be certified by the Housing and Community Development Department. ' The intimate size and social and economic stability of the City allowed for an uncommon approach in writing and structuring the , General Plan. The final document is a concise, focused, and highly personal plan for the community. The goals, policies, and implementing actions flow directly from the vision and values of the ' community -family, pride of ownership, opportunity, and security. As part of the comprehensive General Plan update, The Planning Center completed the preparation of the Housing Element. This is , the first accredited Housing Element for the City. The plan was shaped by the City's history and development pattern. The City is nearly fully built-out; only one vacant site remains which is appropriate for housing. The majority of the housing in the City is , owner-occupied single family. Since the housing stock is a source of pride in the community, the housing programs identified in the element focused on maintaining the high quality of the existing stock, rather than adding to it dramatically. Programs have been identified to identify and correct minor maintenance conditions before they escalate, and to assist elderly residents with home ' maintenance they might not be able to undertake on their own. Attention is also being paid to augmenting and preserving the City's stock of low-income multifamily housing, and very low-income senior housing. , Page D4 ~ The Planning Center MncovncM<..q ys,. e,,,,,.e,..n<m „~s„ a....nnr.~ rnp~.„re,. 1 1 1 1 Appendix D Team Qualifications Riverside County Integrated Over the last two years, The Planning Center has been working on Planning Process: the General Plan Update as part of the historic Riverside County Riverside County General Plan Integrated Planning Process (RCIP). The RCIP is a comprehensive, Update three-part program to determine planning, transportation, and conservation needs for Riverside County residents and future generations. The three parts include: "I would like to thank you ana your ttajjjor a fine ~retentatior. to the Planning Commitson. The PowerPoint on community centerr war excellent. I thank The Planning Center jnr tieing the true partner in thu of on that it is." Dan Silver, Coordinator Endangered Habitats League • Updating the County's General Plan • Identifying transportation corridors to meet Western Riverside County's future transportation needs through the Community & Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP) • Creating a Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) to ensure the preservation of open space and endangered species and habitats for Western Riverside County. The RCIP process is truly a momentous task, considering the County spans over 7,200 square miles, nearly the size of New Jersey. While the CETAP and MSHCP cover the Western Riverside County area, the General Plan Update covers the unincorporated areas of the entire county. To create a meaningful vision for the County and to ensure successful implementation of the plan, the process was one of a "bottom-up° nature. The Planning Center and the RCIP team solicited input from the residents of Riverside County and various stakeholders, including environmental organizations, building associations, and property owners, as well as the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) and state and federal agencies. General Plan UpdateJEIR The Planning Center prepared a complete update of the City of Yorba Linda Yorba Linda's General Plan. This project also involved extensive environmental analysis and an integrated EIR. The General Plan update program included developing a list of important issues that were then utilized to define the most critical items to address in the general plan. An important component of this work was the interviews with City officials that were conducted at the initial stages of the planning process. Key issues to be addressed in the process were identified and formed the basis for five subsequent issue papers. These Key issues were maintenance of the quality of life, hazardous waste disposal, annexation, the superstreet proposal, growth management and circulation. The City of Yorba Linda is almost "built out," and as such, the General Plan and EIR addressed infill development, redevelopment, annexations and development within the City's sphere of influence. Other issues addressed included fiscal, economic development, specific plan areas, traffic, noise and safety. ' General Plan UlydateAnd Eir mv.nvncAUn ./se. x...en,.~u.~r ~~ _w, io-.,.,.m.~ ro,~~cm. Page D5 ~~ Appendix D 1 Team Qasalification.r , A council appointed steering committee representing varied ' community interests reviewed every element of the General Plan in initial draft and final draft form. Two members of the Planning Commission and City Council participated actively. Several potentially disruptive issues were satisfactorily resolved in this ' process, marking the public hearings substantially more positive than they would otherwise have been. , SPECIFIC PLANS ey my nbierzarion, The Plannnrg Center'e approach to iperrfrr plan preparation bar atu~ayi been creative and relponirre to the rtienn' and juritdirtimtal needy." -Mike McDougall, Project Manager ' Palisades Properties, Inc Highland 2010 Strategic Plan Faced with increasing budget pressures citywide, and deteriorating ' Highland conditions in certain portions of the city, the Highland City Council directed the preparation of a unique combination of strategic plan and associated physical plans. This combination enabled the , testing of certain strategies in actual physical case situations and, at the same time, made it possible to generate ideas from the physical planning that contributed to the City's strategic thinking. ' Awdtd winrer Strategic direction was developed in several key subject areas: l995APA, Califarnia chapter 1995. APA. !n(and Empire Public safet and securi ublic facilities and services; economic y ~~ p development and revitalization; neighborhood preservation and ' revitalization; cost effective governance; and historic preservation. A comprehensive vision of the City integrating all of these topics was developed reinforced by a computerized array of actions to , implement the vision through a system of multi-year work programs hammered out by the City Council. This system enables the City to frequently assess priorities for implementing the Strategic Plan and allocate resources to the selected actions. A random sample citizen ' survey reinforced the establishment of current priorities. In terms of associated physical planning, there were two areas of , focus; the Historic Old Town, representing the original townsite; and Southwest Highland, and area of residential, industrial and commercial development with varying degrees of stability and ' deterioration. A set of design guidelines provides direction for revitalizing and preserving the character of Old Town. The key physical design concepts which emerged for Southwest Highland included: 1) the creation of a new downtown with design themes , and transportation connections linking it functionally and visually with the original town center; 2) the expansion of Base Line into a varied commercial spine serving the western part of the City; 3) ' establishment of a central residential arterial highway as the Ninth Street Pedestrian Promenade, linking neighborhoods and schools in a pedestrian dominated safe route system; and 4) establishment of an International Parkway connecting the Route 30 Freeway to the , San Bernardino International Airport. In all cases, unique design guidance concepts were developed to reinforce the special functions each area provides for the community. ' Page D6 ~ The Planntng Center ' niacin.-new, ;,r /s„ A..,..,r..n<,n qs.,, ~,..,.n,.., e~:,p.,wre.. 1 Appendix D Team Qualifications ' ' Tustin MCAS Reuse/Specific The Planning Center was part of a team of consultants hired by the Plan City to prepare the Reuse/Specific Plan and EIR/EIS for the 1,574- Tustin acre Marine helicopter base in the City of Tustin. Our role was to manage tasks involving issue identification, reuse alternatives, and ' community participation. The Planning Center was also responsible for preparing the Specific Plan, particularly in the development of the land use plan and design guidelines. The Plan included ' adaptive reuse of some existing buildings; redevelopment of others; and new use of currently vacant lands. ' The community outreach program involved a Community Opinion Survey, a series of Community Workshops, public newsletters, and meetings with key community groups, public agencies, and other stakeholders. The Community Workshops were structured as small group working sessions to focus on clarification and resolution of issues regarding disposal, environmental clean-up, and re-use of "[ wanted ro take this opportunity to the base. Our approach was to anticipate, understand, and ' commend you on the significant efforU effectively address community concerns from the beginning of the that The Planning Cenrer put into the planning process, which was key to the successful approval of the {MCAS Tustzn} Reuse Plan. As you Reuse Plan by the Reuse Task Force. know, military bare closure it a much ' more complex planning process than While the reuse plan/specific plan in this case did not involve either of us have ever experienced. continuation of an active airport component, it did include a strong However, The Planning Cenrer was emphasis on transit connection, effective reuse of existing military ' always open, responsive and flexible in improvements, preservation of historic aviation structures, and ti t i t d d ~~ light ojthe cumberrome federal ng jacen ex s uses o a extensive adaptation of propose ' requirements that inflrrenred the plannzng process. The tzmelineu of all development. your deliverables alto allowed us to meet The Plan provides for 450 acres of residential uses, 802 acres of critical time schedule needs." commercial/business uses and 348 acres of institutional and recreational uses. The Plan has been divided into 8 distinct ' -Christine sningieton neighborhoods and can accommodate a total of 4,601 dwelling Assistant City Manager Units. City of Tustin ' • Uses with the best revenue generation potential are located in areas positioned for early development in order to fund the infrastructure needed to make other areas of the site developable in the future. • The core area of the Plan will permit a variety of future development opportunities when market conditions are suitable ' for high value use of the property. Approximately 20 percent of the Plan area will be dedicated to recreation and open space uses, including an 84-acre Urban ' Regional Park, a 25-acre Community Park, neighborhood parks dispersed within the residential enclaves, and an 18-hole publicly accessible golf course. • The extension of Tustin Ranch Road and Warner Avenue through the site will complete significant segments of the regional arterial system. ' General Plan UpdateAnd Eir Page D7 n icrn~nc~c,v,gs,, x...,.e,..vcur M m. n..rm,.. e~y.,et. e~. Appendix D Team Qualifications Garland Village Neighborhood The Village Specific Plan was recently adopted by the Inglewood Specific Plan City Council, and calls for the revitalization of a neighborhood of Inglewood nearly 900 apartments located southwest of Century Boulevard and Crenshaw Boulevard. The Planning Center was hired to create a new vision of the neighborhood. The Plan is about moving away from the image and reality award winner reviousl known as "the bottoms" to the com ellin new vision of 1999WestsiAe Prize, Westsule P Y P 9 Urban Forum The Village. It is far more than a name change; it is a distinct shift in how the neighborhood is perceived, how it works, and how it looks. The Plan is based on a challenging vision in which property owners prosper, residents feel safe and enjoy neighborhood amenities that have never before existed, and business prospers in a newly expanded commercial center. "/ want to extend our congratulations and appreciation to you and your team at The Planning Center far a job well done. It was a long road but with the recent adoption of The Village Specific Plan by the City Council, I am ronJdent that real change will occur in the Village neighborhood. On this very afternoon, we have a meeting with Senator Dianne Feinstein who hat expressed her support of the project and is preparing to aunt us in the implementation of the plan and its components which were so carefully prepared by The Planning Center. Your personal dedication ro this project and your concern jor the residents was evident at every rtage of the development of the plan. I very much enjoyed our dote working relationship and I am hopeful that thlr will continue in the future. It would be my great pleasure to offer my reromntendation to others who may reek your expertise. " -Mike Randall, AICP Associate Planner Ciry of Inglewood The Village Specific Plan consists of three strategies: t) a physical overhaul of both public and private spaces; 2) a new organizational structure within the neighborhood and the City committed to the process; and 3) a broad ranging, yet focused implementation plan. The Plan addresses and overcomes several major constraints. The greatest of these is that the neighborhood is directly beneath the path of low flying jet aircraft on their way to LAX. In addition, while the housing stock is only 50 years old, it has been severely neglected. The City, in concert with the Plan, is committed to the mitigation and revitalization of a significant portion of the area through appropriate insulating and architectural improvements. Extremely high densities are not in balance with appropriate community resources such as open space, play equipment and courts, meeting and gathering spaces, of which there are exactly none. Already a small park has been created, and larger facilities are soon to become a reality. To those who know "the bottoms", this vision seemed impossible, yet already there has been a dramatic drop in crime, the resources of a wide variety of community development agencies are being focused on the area, and interest by residential and commercial developers is very high. Community Development Block Grant funds is committed, approved and ready to fuel the implementation of many of the plan's objectives. The Village is in the process of reinventing itself. The Village Specific Plan is the blueprint for making it happen. "I was partiarlarly impressed by the way they were able to diplanratirally resoh~e the differenres that periodically emerged among a proposal team roraisting of seven different organizations. They deserve to be commended as murk for their statesmanship as for their award-winning grant writing skilb." Alan Burks EV Media 1 1 1 LJ Page DS ~ The Planning Center ' M:IGOV(1(.TCnY o/ Sup 6m.rALolcuY n/Se~ M.nAim P..yw~efAm Appendix D Te~z~ra Qat~tlification.r Personnel Richard E. Ramella Dick Ramella will be responsible for the performance of The Consulting Principal Planning Center team on the San Bernardino General Plan project. rramella(~planningcenter com He will ensure that the City's needs are being met in a responsive 90 of Project Effort: 49a manner, that work efforts are fully coordinated and schedules met, and will be responsible for quality control. He has been a professional planner for over 40 years and, as founding principal of The Planning Center and Principal-in-Charge over the last 26 years, he has been associated with a wide range of very large projects. His participation includes strategic and physical planning, as well as contract administration and project management. The following are a few of the more significant planning programs with which he has been involved: the 18,000-acre Chino Hills Specific Plan in San Bernardino County; the 25,000-acre South Sutter County General Plan Amendment for Sutter County; the 105,000-acre urban growth management plan/general plan for the City of Tracy; the 47,000- acre General Plan Update for the City of Clovis, the General Plan Update for the County of Riverside, the Reuse Plan for MCAS EI Toro, Orange County, and the 10,000-acre community plan for Castle & Cooke in Madera County. Mr. Ramella's experience is not limited to large-scale projects. In addition, he has managed contracts for a variety of planning projects, including the Highway 111 Specific Plan and the Eagle at Rancho Mirage Specific Plan, both for the City of Rancho Mirage; ~. 1 the Harbor Corridor Specific Plan in Garden Grove; the Parks, • V Recreation and Open Space Plan for the City of Newport Beach; and the Big Horn Resort Community in Palm Desert. Prior to the formation of The Planning Center, Mr. Ramella served as general planning program administrator for the County of Orange, California. In this capacity, he was responsible for the development, management and coordination of the County's long-range planning programs. He oversaw the development of all elements of the County's General Plan. In addition, he was responsible for the preparation of eight new community plans totaling over eighty- thousand acres of land and two community redevelopment projects. Mr. Ramella has served throughout the State of California as a guest lecturer for the University of Califomia extension services on the subject of specific plans. He has long been an advocate of improved relationships between the public and private sectors in the planning process. He is widely recognized for his abilities to work with citizen's organizations, special interest groups and decision-makers. General Plan UpdateAnd Eir page D9 M'1GON14%cery uJ.L. Mn<rcfiirv\Cq e/Se~ &..nAim P..p.uLAr Appendix D ' Team Qualifications Brian James Brian James will serve as the Project Manager. His role will consist ' Project Manager of directing and participating in the technical aspects of the project biamesCn~olanningcenter.com including the Research and Analysis Tasks, directing staff and of Project Efiort: 11 % consultant activities, workshop participation, and coordination with ' City staff. Brian has nine years of public and private sector planning experience with an extensive background in policy planning and ' land use planning. He has expertise in the areas of General Plans, Specific Plans, coastal plans and permit processing, environmental review and project entitlement. , Prior to joining The Planning Center several years ago, Brian worked for the Cities of Huntington Beach and Santa Barbara where he worked on long range policy documents, assisted citizen ' participation efforts and performed design, environmental and coastal reviews. At The Planning Center, Brian has managed or participated in the preparation of General Plan and local Coastal , Program Amendments, Zoning Code Amendments, Specific Plans, Initial Studies and Environmental Impact Reports. ' AI Bell Mr. Bell has been a professional planner for over 40 years, bringing Strategist to The Planning Center extensive public and private sector _•~ ~~ > '"'~ - - "' experience in land use policy and strategic planning. He will serve as Senior Planner for the project. Mr. Bell is well known for his of Project Effort 3% ' innovative approaches and brainstorming techniques. As a principal of The Planning Center, he has played a key role in a number of general plans, specific plans, regional and subregional ' planning programs, strategic plans, congestion management programs and air quality programs with an emphasis in Orange, Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties. Mr. Bell has played a prime role on the following General Plan programs: Cathedral City ' General Plan, Paramount General Plan, Las Vegas General Plan, Los Angeles County General Plan Streamlining, Stanton General Plan, Laguna Niguel General Plan, South Sutter County General , Plan Amendment, Yorba Linda General Plan, Temecula General Plan, Fullerton General Plan, La Palma General Plan and Clovis General Plan. , Page DIO ~j The Panning Center ' m.~°nvn<.no,r Jsn io,.,.d~.,ncer,,, ~~. >k.,..~m„~ v,,,p.,vht. 1 Appendix D ' Team Qualifications ' Dwayne S. Mears, AICP Principal d mearsC~p Ian ni ngcenteccom of Project Effort: 1 "Showang a high level of expesrise and profetsioualirm, The Planning Center hat ' provided the City wrth timely and anurate envaronnental dorumentt. I highly recommend The Planning Center for any ' environmental roarulting needs o(tbe private ar public tenor. There have been to many tuwessful itoriet -the projetsionalism, expertise, perJittenre and bard work of Dwayne and hit staff have contributed greatly to there tuaerser. Overall, it should be said that much ojtbe tercets and growth of the City of Industry during the part several ' 1 1 t years it the recess ofhard work performed by The Planning Center and Dwayne Meart" Mike Kissell, Planning Director City of Industry Dwayne Mears will serve as the Principal-in-Charge for the preparation of the environmental documentation. Mr. Mears has 21 years of private and public planning experience and has an extensive background in environmental planning and processing. He is the author of three educational pamphlets on the California Environmental Quality Act: "A Practical Guide to the Environmental Process in California," "A Practical Guide to Mitigation Monitoring," and his latest, "The New Practical Guide to the Environmental Process in California." His booklets have received awards from the Association of Environmental Professionals and the American Planning Association, Orange Section. He has managed or directed numerous highly complex EIRs. These have involved a full range of projects, including land development, infrastructure, hazardous materials, planning policy, and public facilities. Some notable examples of his work include the 24,000-acre South Sutter County "New Town", the 4.1 million sq. ft. MacArthur Place "urban village" in Santa Ana, the City Center Mills Entertainment/Outlet Center in Orange, and the controversial 592-acre Ball Ranch recreation-oriented residential development in Fresno County, California. Marie Gilliam Marie Gilliam will serve as the Senior Planner for the Environmental Environmental Planner Analysis portion of the Project. Marie brings to The Planning Center mgilliam(aolanninocenter.com over 26 years of experience in land use and policy planning, ~~ environmental assessment and land development planning, in both or Project Effort: 3% the public and private sectors. Marie has worked with both municipal and county agencies, where she gained valuable experience in a variety of policy planning programs, including all major elements of the general plan; coastal and hillside land use policy planning; growth management programs; community plans; urban services and development capacity issues; and comprehensive environmental impact assessments. Omar Dadabhoy Omar Dadabhoy will serve as Project Planner for the General Plan Project Planner Program. He will have primary responsibility for research and odadabhovC°~olanningcenter.com analysis of the plan, strategies and incentives we will consider as we develop this program. His background in both the planning and of Project Effort: 20% political arenas will be an asset to the team as we analyze policy options related to this program Governmental Team Staff Support "When working with The Planning Center, xer know that we are getting the latest and most sophisticated information available from a friendly and helpful staff. " -Arlene Andrew, Senior Planner City of La Verne The remainder of The Planning Center's governmental team will be available to assist the project team. This team of highly trained, experienced and motivated planners specializes in governmental projects, mainly consisting of General Plan and Environmental Documentation preparation for cities and counties. The team's areas of expertise includes the visionary process, environmental analysis, developing community goals, objectives and policies, the creation of General Plan Elements, strategic plans and action programs, implementation plans, economic and fiscal analysis, consistency analysis, GIS mapping, public outreach programs and conducting public workshops. The resumes of the entire team are included for your review. ' General Plan Update And Eir M:IG°V/IC.Pltny.~/Ce. My+.Au~4t ny.J3vv Mv+.dl.o Prvp.vlAu Page Dl l Appendix D ' Team Qualifications ' This page intentionally left blank. Page D12 ~ The Planning Center ' M:1LOVl1GFlCiry ••/Av lyv.A•v.1Cq yrAv &nrAivo P.•q••m(Am ~~~~ ' • La Palma, California -General Plan and EIR, (1999) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ • Truckee, California -General Plan and EIR (1996) ~ ~ ~ ~;, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ' • Brentwood, California -General Plan and EIR (1993) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • Clovis, California -General Plan Update and EIR (1993) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ +• ' • Temecula, California -General Plan Update and EIR (1993) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • Yorba Linda, California -General Plan Update and EIR, (1993) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~; ~ ~ ~ • Tracy, California -Urban Growth Mgmt. Plan, General Plan, EIR ( 1993) ~ ~ ~ • Bishop, California -General Plan Update and EIR (1992) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' • Laguna Niguel -General Plan (1992) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~`_, • Nogales, Arizona -General Plan Update (1992) ' • S. Sutter County, California -General Plan Amendment and EIR (1992) • Stanton, California -General Plan Update and EIR (1992) ~ ' • Paramount, California -General Plan Update (1991) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • Upland, California -General Plan/EIR for S.E. Quadrant (1991) ' • Los Angeles Co., California -General Plan Streamlining Program (1987) • Adelanto, California -General Plan/Strategic Services (1985) The Planning Center ' (Partial list of General Plan experience) General Plan Experience w U a C O1 ~ W I- C ;? a W C Q f6 N N W E _ p o~, ~ Q m~ _N Ll1 =~ ~ O ~ U ~ ~~ C ~ ? ~ 01 C O ~ O ~ ^ C a N a, Q ~ D . z a~ w _ ~ c ~ ~ E E ~ O ~ C v __ m v . ~ ~' ~ , E c ~ O C Q ') L ~ m tC Q < C ~ PROJECTS V ~ ,. ~ .~ ~ - .. • Safford, Arizona -Comprehensive Plan (2000} 1 Appendix D Team Qualifications ' PSOMAS ASSOC/AYES 3187 RED HILL AVE #250 COSTA MESA, CA 92626 TEL_ (714) 751-7373 FAX: (714) 545-8883 Firm Background Psomas is a leading engineering and surveying consulting firm ranked nationally in ENR's Top 200 Engineering Firms. Psomas' ' multi-disciplined staff offers services in public works, engineering, survey and mapping, GIS and information services and water and natural resources. Founded in f 946 by George Psomas, Psomas is organized as a California corporation. Psomas has grown to afull-service consulting firm with over 400 employees. The firm offers services in the western United States with offices in California and Utah. Psomas has a long history of providing technological innovation and creative approaches to solving challenging issues for its clients. The cornerstone of the firm's business approach is to exceed, not just meet client expectations with regard to quality and timely completion of projects. ' Representative Pr%ects ~~ , V ' Glen Helen Specific Plan San Bernardino County, CA The County of San Bernardino needed to develop a Specific Plan for the Glen Helen Area that is approximately 3,000 acres. The Planning Center, the County's prime consultant, retained Psomas as a subconsultant to provide the following services for the Specific Plan: ' i GIS ng mapp Infrastructure study ' • Infrastructure recommendations Psomas' overall objectives for the project include the following: ' Collect overall mapping, aerial photos, and GIS data from County sources for the project site including Glen Helen Regional Park, the County Sheriff's Training Facility, and Glen ' Helen Rehabilitation Center • Develop project GIS base map utilizing the County's GIS system and data • Obtain County GIS data files for physical conditions, infrastructure systems, and public facilities • Assess the strengths and weaknesses of the existing infrastructure systems ' Provide concept level infrastructure improvement plan to support conceptual land plan ' General Plan Update And Eir Page D15 M:IIXrv]1C.%Ciry a/Se. O..w.,l:.o1Grv •{Se. &.u.Ai.. V.y.~+(Ar Appendix D Team Qualifications • Recommend the public improvements required to support the Specific Plan • Develop a broad strategy and plans for developing improvements and facilities to address deficiencies and to support land use proposals • Prepare information summaries for use as a basis for cost estimates • Prepare preliminary cost estimates • Prepare the infrastructure and utilities section of the Specific Plan • Update GIS map and data files City of Huntington Beach - Psomas was the prime consultant for a consultant team retained by Financing/Funding Strategy for the City of Huntington Beach to develop afinancing/funding strategy Integrated Infrastructure to overcome a projected $S00-million shortfall in funding needed for Management Program (IIMP) infrastructure improvements over the next 20 years. As part of this assignment, Psomas staff members served as an extension of the City Staff in managing and providing for support services fora 35- member Citizens Infrastructure Advisory Committee appointed by the City Council. The Advisory Committee developed its recommendations for financing/funding of the City's needed infrastructure improvements over the 20-year period. Psomas is continuing to work with a specially appointed committee of council members, citizens, and city staff in developing an implementation strategy for the recommendations developed by the Citizen's Advisory Committee. City of Placentia, Storm Drain Psomas' review of the 1992 Storm Drain Master Plan (SDMP) will Master Plan Update include land use changes, pending tentative tract maps, new development and conditions that have changed since 1992. They will determine which watershed, sub-watersheds or drain systems require revision and re-evaluation. This will require revising the drainage areas and node diagram. Also, using the data from the 1992 SDMP, revised hydrologic and hydraulic models will be developed for those areas identified. This analysis will lead to recommendations for improvements as they are warranted. Psomas will review with the City staff the identified "hot spots" where during storm conditions flooding or other maintenance issues may develop. These areas will be reviewed in light of hydrologic and hydraulic studies in the 1992 SDMP and provide recommendations regarding a course of action for the City to use to resolve the issues at these locations. The findings will be included in a Storm Drain Master Plan Update report, which will also include an updated Capital Improvement Program and prioritized recommended capital improvements. LJ LJ Page D16 ~j The Planning Center ' mscnmcAUry./se. w,.+"Ln~Gry.¢t<, ~.,",d;,o v, p..,,rno i~ Ll 0 1' C 1 1 L _J Appendix D Team Qualifications City of Compton -Water Master Psomas prepared a Water Master Plan Update and Capital Plan Update and Capital Improvement Program for the City of Compton. The plan included a Improvement Program skeletal system model to determine the ability to meet fire flow demands. The plan also includes an inventory of all water infrastructure including water mains, wells, storage reservoirs, pumping facilities, meters and service connections and interconnections. Inventory includes length, size, materials, year installed, atlas location, age and other appropriate comments. A system condition assessment was made from visual inspections, interviews with key City staff and documentation. The resulting Capital Improvement Program established a list if priority improvements based upon accepted criteria. Personnel Gary P. Dysart, P.E. Mr. Dysart has over 35 years experience in working for public Vice President agencies with over 20 years in the position of City Engineer for odvsartraPsomas.com Southern California cities. His experience includes major infrastructure planning and design, project management, program of Project Effort: 2% management and municipal engineering consulting. He has also been responsible for preparation and implementation of numerous long range Capital Improvement Programs, Facilities Master Plan, Public Facilities Financing Strategies and Assessment Engineering for cities. Ken J. Susilo, P.E. Mr. Susilo has ten years experience in engineering design, hydraulics, hydrology, computer modeling, and storm water of Project Effort: 7% management. This experience included project management and utilizing statistical and surface water models for hydraulic and hydrologic analyses. John R. Thornton, P.E. Mr. Thornton has over 30 years experience in the development and management of water resource projects ranging in scope and of Project Effort: 4% magnitude. He has been in charge of the preparation of feasibility studies and facilities master plans; preliminary and final design documents (construction drawings, specifications, and cost estimates); and construction supervision of canals, pipelines, wells, pump stations, reservoirs, reclaimed water use systems, and agricultural crop and landscaping irrigation facilities. Daniel McCroskey Mr. McCroskey has worked in the field of surveying and mapping for the past nine years with the emphasis on digital mapping, CAD of Project Effort: 4% design and GIS integration of surveying and engineering projects. Mr. McCroskey's responsibilities are in the areas of managing survey data and its integration into digital mapping and GIS systems. He has specialized in the incorporation of survey techniques involving electronic data collection, GPS surveying, digital orthophotography, and digital terrain modeling ~~ General Plan Update And Eir Page D17 AL140 VnC,NCnr+/.T+• 6ned•..1GO aJs.. M.e..//we P.,,pwlA~ Appendix D Team Qualifications STANLEY HOFFMAN ASSOCIATES 11661 SAN VICENTE BOULEVARD SUITE 306 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90049 TEL• (310) 820-2680 FAX: (310) 820-8341 www.stanleyrhoffman.com Firm Background Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, SRHA, is a professional consulting corporation established in 1981. We provide fiscal and financial analysis, economic analysis and real estate market research for public agencies and private firms. Services are designed to meet a variety of client needs, ranging from overall market assessments to the details of site-specific development analysis. SRHA provides innovative solutions for the client's specific requirements. Services are provided individually and in cooperation with project teams in a variety of planning situations including: preparation of specific plans, redevelopment plans, general plans and amendments, annexation and incorporation studies, development agreements, impact fee analyses and environmental impact reports. There are two offices in California: Los Angeles and Alameda. Fiscal and Financial Analysis Information is provided on cost and benefit consequences of land use and infrastructure changes to cities and counties. Means are determined for funding public infrastructure improvements required for development. Areas of concentration include: • Fiscal Impact Studies • Development Impact Fee Studies • Capital Financing Analysis Annexations and Incorporations Fiscal impact and plan of services studies are prepared for proposed jurisdictional boundary changes including: • Annexation Studies • Incorporation Studies • Growth Management Phasing Plans Economic Analysis Consulting services are provided in the formulation of economic development policies and strategies. Specific areas of emphasis include: • General Plan Economic Policies and Programs • Economic Development Strategies • Downtown Revitalization Studies 1 1 1 CI C C' Page D18 ~ The Planning Center ' mACmmcgcy ~/sn. n...,..o.~~cur /s,. w.,,.e;.. v..,po~ce. C 1 Appendix D Team Qualifications Real Estate Market Research Decision-relevant information on development opportunities is provided for overall market evaluations and site-specific assessments. Techniques include: • Land Use Market Absorption Studies • Financial Pro Formas • Market Feasibility Assessments Representative Projects County of Riverside, In preparation of a new Riverside County General Plan led by Transportation and Land Sverdrup Engineering and The Planning Center, we are preparing Management Agency, General the fiscal and economic analysis portions of the Plan. Our work Plan Update includes testing the impacts of the General Plan land uses at the Countywide level plus six subregions. We have also prepared socioeconomic data, market profiles and economic analysis for the twenty proposed Area Plans. City of Rancho Cucamonga On a project team led by The Planning Center for the City of Rancho General Plan Update and EIR. Cucamonga, we are preparing an economic development analysis and fiscal study for the General Plan update. We have analyzed the various revenue sources and city services for General Plan land uses based on market and fiscal assumptions. These include ////^''''~~~~~~,~, potential changes in retail or industrial zoning which would influence ~~ retail sales and job projections and residential policy issues !V~ influencing growth projections. Fiscal Model Development and A fiscal analysis was prepared for the City of Fontana's General Plan Fiscal Analysis of the General Update. After developing a fiscal model for the City, we projected Plan for the City of Fontana the City's general fund revenues and costs and redevelopment tax increments for major subareas, including North Fontana and the rest of the existing corporate city, as well as large potential future annexations. We updated the fiscal model with current budget conditions for the City's ongoing use. General Plan and Fiscal Model SRHA set up a fiscal model and analyzed the economic and fiscal Analysis for the City of Upland components of the City of Upland's General Plan. The project's innovative approach was in evaluating retail and employment opportunities with a fiscal analysis of alternative land use patterns using their geographic information system. The approach included: 1) identification of development opportunity areas in this largely built-out City, 2) estimation of overall growth in revenues, 3) the linkage of the fiscal model to the City's countywide parcel database through a geographic information system (GIS). As part of a General Plan Update team, a fiscal analysis of General Plan alternatives was prepared. An issue paper discussed relationships between land use mix and revenue and cost generation; local revenue generation effort; alternative means of funding ongoing public services; and local and state fiscal relationships to maintain fiscal viability. Fullerton General Plan Fiscal ' Analysis in the City of Fullerton ' General Plan UpdateAnd Eir M 1G0Vl1LP1Gn o/Sn~ &rwMi.~ICtiy gSee 9ernaMivo P~oy.nLAa Page D19 Appendix D Tectrn Qualifications General Plan Update Economic Along with a project team led by Robert Bein, William Frost and Analysis for the City of Cypress Associates, SRHA is preparing Economic Development Goals and Policies for the City of Cypress General Plan Update. The analysis built upon existing surveys and documents, including policies developed from previous studies. This work has been supplemented by additional economic research. General Plan Update for the City On a project team led by Cotton/Beland/Associates, SRHA prepared of Baldwin Park an economic and fiscal analysis for the City of Baldwin Park's General Plan Update. The economic portion analyzed the labor pool and retail consumer base for the City and surrounding markets. An economic element was prepared which gave the City an opportunity to establish goals and policies for its long-term fiscal health. Personnel Stanley Hoffman Stanley R. Hoffman has thirty years of experience in urban planning, srha(°~stanlevrhoffman.com specializing in the areas of fiscal and financial analysis; real estate of Project Effort: 4% economics; economic development and economic policy studies; and the application of computer-based fiscal modeling in urban planning. His work has ranged from general plans and specific plans to individual projects where he has utilized fiscal and economic impact techniques and market feasibility evaluations to help the public and decision-makers understand project and policy implications. He has managed major projects in both the public and private sectors, involving numerous presentations before political and academic bodies and professional audiences. TRANSTECH ENGINEERS INC. 198 N ARROWHEAD AVE, STE 1 SAN BERNARD/NO, CA 92408 TEL: (909) 383-8579 FAX: (909) 595-8863 walnut@transteche.co m Firm Background Transtech is a consulting engineering firm that provides a broad range of planning, engineering and construction management services to local, state and federal agencies. Transtech's technical and managerial staff is supported by experienced support staff using a state of the art networked computer system. Computer aided design and drafting (CADD) capabilities include AutoCAD and Intergraph systems. Transtech has made a sincere commitment to Quality Control, Time Management and Cost Effectiveness to ensure compliance with applicable agency policies, standards and regulations as well as the City's scope of services. This commitment is what allows Transtech to provide services unequaled in the industry at the least cost to the Client. Transtech is also recognized as one of the foremost expert firms in local, regional, state and federal funding programs and procedures. Our staff provides this expertise to our clients to obtain funding for 1 I^-I LJ i i~ i^1 Page D20 ~ The Planning Center ' M1LIGOVIIG/rycnv •/Sun lkmwAu~lcn, .l \'en &nwrcLn~ I'rmpnw/J.. 1 Appendix D Team Qucllification.r ' their projects from various available funding sources. Just during the last three years, Transtech staff obtained over $15 million in state and federal funds for various public works improvement projects and feasibility/planning studies for various local municipalities. ' Our key staff members are former City employees who have served public agencies in various capacities as Director of Public Works, City Engineer, City Traffic Engineer, Planning Director, Building ' Official, Construction Inspectors and Project Managers. We are accustomed to working with governmental agencies in every facet of public works and planning, including city engineering, traffic engineering, capital improvement project design and construction ' management. We have an excellent understanding of public agency procedures, policies and issues. Representative Pr%ects The staff of Transtech has been responsible for completing over 300 transportation planning and EIR/traffic impact studies addressing all types of residential, commercial, industrial, office and mixed used projects. City of Rancho Cucamonga - 3 Transtech prepared TIA in conformance with San Bernardino EIR TIA Studies per San County CMP guidelines for 3 major development projects, including ' Bernardino County CMP residential, warehouse and office developments. Traffic condition Requirements scenarios were developed using state-of-the-art PC based transportation planning modeling software. Detailed mitigation ' measures were developed for each scenario, including roadway and intersection capacity improvements in conformance with the City and County's General Plan policies. A condensed version of the study was prepared and included as the Traffic and Circulation section of the EIR. The studies included LOS analysis at more than 60 intersections and roadway segments. The studies also included an evaluation of cumulative impacts associated with over 20 ' planned projects located within the sphere of influence of the study area. County of San Bernardino-Mid- Transtech prepared TIA in conformance with San Bernardino Valley Landfill EIR-TIA Study County CMP guidelines for the Mid-Valley Landfill Project. The per San Bernardino County study involved LOS analysis at over 60 intersections and 20 CMP Requirements roadway segments. Tranplan out-put provided by the City of San ' Bernardino was used as the base modal for the study area. Specific Traffic condition scenarios were developed using state-of-the-art PC based transportation planning modeling software. Detailed ' mitigation measures were developed for each scenario, including roadway and intersection capacity improvements in conformance with the County's policies. A condensed version of the study was prepared and included as the Traffic and Circulation section of the ' EIR. The study also included an evaluation of cumulative impacts associated with over 15 planned projects located within the sphere of influence of the study area. ' General Plan UpdateAnd Eir Page D21 m iruvnoncnr./~. ~+~.*.~.n;.mr„r,9s+. w~.,.n,.,. vn~.,,,t,rv ~~ Appendix D Team Qualifications City of Industry-Materials Transtech provides traffic and transportation engineering services to Recovery Facility EIR/Traffic the City of Industry Redevelopment Agency since 1995. These Study, Majestic Realty major development projects required complete EIR and TIA in Development, and Kohl conformance with CMP guidelines. The study areas in general Development, 3 separate encompassed over 80 intersections, roadway segments, and projects several freeways such as SR 60 and SR 57, and extended from 60/57 interchanges to 605 Freeway and from the 60 Freeway to the 10 Freeway. Traffic condition scenarios were developed using state-of-the-art PC based transportation planning modeling software. Detailed mitigation measures were developed for each scenario, including roadway and intersection capacity improvements in conformance with the City and County's General Plan policies. A condensed version of the study was prepared and included as the Traffic and Circulation section of the EIR. The studies also included an evaluation of cumulative impacts associated with over 40 planned projects located within the sphere of influence of the study area. Mammoth Lakes-North Village Transtech performed a comprehensive area-wide assessment to Specific Plan Circulation evaluate traffic impacts associated with build-out of a resort oriented Element master planned development in the Town of Mammoth Lakes consisting of 2,000 hotel rooms, 400 condominium units and 227,000 square feet of commercial development. The effects of significant non-vehicular transportation modes, including ski-lifts, extensive pedestrian and ski oriented facilities, and public transit were considered in the development of project trip generation. Detailed mitigation measures were developed in conformance with the Town's General Plan policies. City of Compton- Transtech prepared the Traffic Study for the City of Compton Redevelopment Plan EIR(Traffic Redevelopment Plan. The traffic impacts associated with two City- Study wide alternative redevelopment plans of intensive commercial, industrial and residential uses (generating up to 117,000 vehicle trips) were analyzed. The effects of the redevelopment traffic impacts on the City's arterial highway network were identified, and necessary roadway improvements were determined to mitigate unacceptable impacts. A traffic simulation model was used to project traffic and develop future classifications of roadways in the project area. The effects of the completed Century Freeway (I-105) on traffic circulation in the City were considered in developing traffic projections for the redevelopment alternative scenarios. City of San Marcos-San Elijo Transtech prepared an EIR/traffic impact study for the 3,200-unit Ranch Development EIR/Traffic San Elijo Ranch Development Project. The proposed development Study and its impacts were analyzed for 6 different phases. Each phase scenario was based on anticipated completion of portions of development on a staggered schedule, and base traffic distribution patterns were adjusted as off-site improvements were completed during the previous phases. The study area encompassed a 5-mile radius from the center of the development and included 50 intersections, 5 freeway interchanges and freeway links. The study also included an evaluation of cumulative impacts associated with 1 !~ J 1 LJ i 1 Page D22 8(hj The Planning Center , M~IGOVI1GAGry.JSe. hmerdiml(v~ jSo~&.,urdm Pryx..f dr 1 1 1 LJ 1 1 LJ Appendix D Tea~ra Qualification other 50 planned projects located within the sphere of influence of the study area. Future traffic condition scenarios were developed using state-of-the-art PC based transportation planning modeling software. Detailed mitigation measures were developed for each scenario, including roadway and intersection capacity improvements in conformance with the City of San Marcos General Plan policies. City of Glendale-Central Transtech staff participated in this study which consisted of a Business District Intersection comprehensive operational assessment of 40 intersections in the Evaluation City of Glendale Central Business District. Existing and future traffic growth scenarios were evaluated to determine the operational LOS of each intersection. The HCM Operations Methodology was used for the LOS evaluation in order to determine the potential benefits of signal phasing upgrades and other TSM type improvements. The mitigation improvements were prioritized based on safety and capacity benefits and cost effectiveness of improvements. City of Buena Park-Faire Transtech performed a comprehensive analysis of traffic impacts Redevelopment EIR/Traffic associated with redevelopment of a 30-acre site into 450,000 square Study feet of commercial property along Interstate 5. The traffic analysis incorporated both project-related and programmed improvements, including closure of a portion of Manchester Boulevard and construction of new freeway ramps for I-5. Analysis of various development phases and cumulative impacts were performed, and detailed mitigation measures developed to address unacceptable impacts. "Project" and "No Project" traffic conditions were quantitatively evaluated to determine the incremental impacts and required mitigation directly attributable to development of the project. Geometric concept plans were provided to assess the feasibility and subsequent impacts of implementation of the project and cumulative mitigations. City of Burbank/Redevelopment Transtech completed a detailed roadway alignment and lane Agency-Gateway Center configuration study for the Burbank Redevelopment Agency. Using Roadway Alignment and Lane previous traffic studies, conceptual designs for the arterial roadway Configuration Study system to accommodate the 1,500,000 square foot Gateway Center and other ongoing redevelopment projects in the downtown area were developed. The overall plan took into consideration the need for improved access to the Golden State Freeway, widening of four arterial as well as feasibility and phasing of the improvements to ensure acceptable levels of service. ~~ ' Pa e D23 Genera! Plan U~dateAnd Eir 8 nr~envncrv nr / c.,. x,....e;.,n<nr ~/.c,. N....,,d;.~ r.,y,.~tn,. Appendix D Teen Qualifications Personnel We are confident our team's technical and administrative talents, local familiarity, and unsurpassed commitment to excellence will enable Transtech to provide your community with the desired level of service to your complete satisfaction in an efficient and cost effective manner. Ali Cayir, P.E. Mr. Cayir has more than 20 years of experience in design and Project Principal management of a variety of public works engineering projects, and ali(atransteche.com in municipal engineering. He has participated on numerous multi- of Project Effort:2% disciplinary teams dealing with the planning and engineering for urban and rural development, and infrastructure and public works projects. His diversified experience includes traffic and transportation engineering (he served as project manager for many TIA's involving major development projects) and civil engineering (he served as project manager for various major roadway design projects) and construction management (he served as project manager for various public works Type A and Type B projects). Pat Lang, T.E. Mr. Lang has 30 years experience in the areas of traffic engineering, Project Traffic Engineer transportation planning, transportation engineering as well as municipal engineering. He has served in the public sector as the of Project Effort: 5% Director of Public Works for the Cities of South Pasadena and San Marino. In the private sector, he has worked with a number of traffic engineering consulting firms. As Director of Public Works for South Pasadena, CA, Mr. Lang had overall responsibility for all engineering functions including planning, building and safety, street, park and water departments. As Director of Public Works for San Marino, CA, Mr. Lang conducted and coordinated all city traffic operations, transportation planning activities and traffic safety programs involving recommendations for zoning changes, subdivision and city ordinances. Jana Robbins Ms. Robbins has more than 12 years of experience in the field of Lead Transportation Analyst traffic and transportation engineering. Experience representative of Jana@transteche.com her technical talent includes but is not limited to engineering and planning activities such as traffic impact and parking studies; feasibility and operational studies for traffic control measures, of Project Effort: 9% bikeways and street improvements; traffic signal and timing projects; and speed surveys. Ms. Robbins has completed numerous TIA's of similar nature, including projects in San Bernardino County per the CMP guidelines. A few representative major TIA projects completed by Ms. Robbins include: City of Rancho Cucamonga - 3 EIR TIA Studies per San Bernardino County CMP Requirements: Ms. Robbins was the lead transportation analyst for 3 separate TIAs, which were prepared in conformance with San Bernardino County CMP guidelines. The studies included LOS analysis at more than 60 intersections and roadway segments. The studies also included an evaluation of cumulative impacts associated with over 20 planned projects 1 1 1 1 L CI Page D24 ~ The Planning Center ' n19G° VI1G VV ~q „I ~+A [Va vr.LvA~~q „r 4. l4.vn.Lm. l'n~nvl d. i 1 r ~l Appendix D Team Qualifications located within the sphere of influence of the study area. County of San Bernardino-Midvalley Landfill EIR TIA Study per San Bernardino County CMP Requirements: Ms. Robbins was the lead transportation analyst for this TIA, which was prepared in conformance with San Bernardino County CMP guidelines. The study involved LOS analysis at over 60 intersections and 20 roadway segments. Tranplan out-put provided by the City of San Bernardino was used as the base modal for the study area. Specific The study also included an evaluation of cumulative impacts associated with over 15 planned projects located within the sphere of influence of the study area. City of Industry-Materials Recovery Facility EIR/Traffic Study, Majestic Realty Development, and Kohl Development, 3 separate projects: Ms. Robbins was the lead transportation analyst for 3 separate TIAs. These major development projects required complete EIR and TIA in conformance with CMP guidelines. The study areas in general encompassed over 80 intersections, roadway segments, and several freeways such as SR 60 and SR 57, and extended from 60/57 interchanges to 605 Freeway and from the 60 Freeway to the 10 Freeway. The studies also included an evaluation of cumulative impacts associated with over 40 planned projects located within the sphere of influence of the study area. City of San Marcos-San Elijo Ranch Development EIR/Traffic Study: Ms. Robbins was the lead transportation analyst for this TIA. The project involved preparation of an EIR/traffic impact study for the 3,200-unit San Elijo Ranch Development Project. The proposed development and its impacts were analyzed for 6 different phases. The study area encompassed a 5-mile radius from the center of the development and included 50 intersections, 5 freeway interchanges and freeway links. The study also included an evaluation of cumulative impacts associated with other 50 planned projects located within the sphere of influence of the study area. ~~ ' General Plan UpdateAnd Eir Page D25 M: K.OVIIC.PIGry.~Sa~ flmadi..ICVy Nb. &..+rAi~. Pryx,+(Am Appendix D Team Qalalification.r This page intentionally left blank. i 1 1 1 1 C 1 1 1 1 Page D26 ~ The Planning Center ' MdGOVf1G%Ci~YWSen hrnadiwl6ay a/Se~ flm.u.Aiae Vro~cvl.dr ' Appendix E Resumes The Planning Center ~~ GCIIPYQI P~Qtt (~~1LjQlP l~77C1 HZY ,~i:u,uvncnc:~r yrs,.a..,.,.d,..Aamgs,,, n,.,,,r,.~r.,q„Wrm~ t 1 LJ 1 THE ~~V CE TER G RICHARD E. RAMELLA Director of Governmental Services Principal, Chief Executive Officer Qualifications Dick Ramella has been a professional planner for over 39 years and, as the founding partner of The Planning Center, has been involved in a wide range of significant projects over the last 25 years. Prior to forming The Planning Center, Dick served as General Planning Program Administrator for the County of Orange, California. In this capacity he developed, managed and coordinated the County's long-range planning programs. He oversaw the development of all elements of the County's General Plan. Dick also helped to develop Orange County's first Master Plan of Regional Parks. This plan led to the acquisition and development of thousands of acres of park land. It is recognized as one of the most successful regional parks ' systems in the State of California. Dick has long been an advocate of improved relationships between the public and private sectors in the planning process. He is widely recognized for his abilities to work with citizen's advisory committees, special interest groups and decisionmakers. ' Highlights of Dick has been involved with over: Experience 15 General Plans 23 Specific Plans 27 Master Planned Communities 7 Parks, Recreation and Open Space Planning Programs Some highlights of his experience include: ~ Riverside County Integrated Planning Process ' Los Angeles County General Plan Streamlining Program, Los Angeles County, CA ~ South Sutter County General Plan Amendment, Sutter County, CA ' Cathedral City General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, Cathedral City, CA Yorba Linda General Plan, Yorba Linda, CA ' ~, Chino Hills Specific Plan, County of San Bernardino, CA Harbor Boulevard Specific Plan, City of Garden Grove, CA Clovis General Plan, City of Clovis, CA Highway 111 Specific Plan, City of Rancho Mirage, CA ' ~ Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan, City of Newport Beach, CA Village One Specific Plan Analysis, City of Modesto, CA Tracy Urban Growth Management Plan, Tracy, CA Education B A Universit of California Los An eles ~ . ., y , g Professional ~ Urban Land Institute ' Affiliations ' Governmental Service) • Planning fi Urban Ue.rign • Environmental Strrdie.r • Landrrape Arrbiaectrrre 1 LJ 1 LJ 1 1 LJ ~^ THE (/PLANNING IV CENTER BRAN D. JAMES Project Manager Qualifications Brian James has over eight years of public and private sector planning experience with an extensive background in policy planning, land use planning and project entitlement. He has expertise in the areas of general plans, specific plans, coastal permit processing, environmental review and project entitlement. Prior to joining The Planning Center, Brian worked for the Cities of Huntington Beach and Santa Barbara where he focused on crafting or amending long range policy documents, assisting citizen participation efforts, processing entitlements, and performing design, environmental and coastal reviews. Highlights of Brian has been involved in the processing of over 40 project entitlements, eleven Experience general plan/zoning/coastal amendments, the preparation of four specific plans and two general plans as well as the preparation of over 15 Initial Studies and four Environmental Impact Reports. Brian managed a zoning amendment for the City of Indian Wells that was completed on time and 30% under budget. Education Awards Professional Affiliations Some highlights of Brian's experience include: Riverside County Integrated Planning Process Comprehensive General Plan Update, City of Huntington Beach which received the Excellence in Planning award from the Orange County Section of the American Planning Association Zoning and Design Guidelines for Antenna, City of Indian Wells Liberty Specific Plan Amendment Two, City of Lake Elsinore North Peak Specific Plan, City of Lake Elsinore Comprehensive Circulation Element Update, City of Santa Barbara Design Review Board Staff, City of Huntington Beach Community Profile, City of Huntington Beach Dana Point Headlands Specific Plan, Design Guidelines, City of Dana Point Walnut Avenue Realignment, General Plan, Zoning and Local Coastal Plan Amendments, City of Huntington Beach Knott's Berry Farm Attraction, Environmental Impact Report, City of Buena Park Initial Study and Zoning/Local Coastal Program Amendments for the rezoning of 15 parks, City of Santa Barbara Mitigated Negative Declaration, Edinger Avenue Widening, City of Huntington Beach Bachelor of Science, City and Regional Planning, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, 1991 Excellence in Design, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, 1991 American Planning Association ' Governmental Services • Planning fi Urban Design • Environmental Studies • Landuape Arrbitertrrre 1 l t~ THE ~~ClCETERG =~' ~, % ALFRED C. BELL ~ 'fi` Senior Advisor and Technical Editor Qualifications When you have been in the planning field for almost 40 years, you are bound to have built a reputation among peers and clients. AI Bell's reputation is one that reflects an unusual personal commitment to his assignments and the clients for whom they are being done. His approach to planning projects is born out of a rich diversity of projects and the fact that his professional career has been equally divided between public sector and private sector employment. Al's focused team 6uild{ng and effective guidance led to completion of the lttstin First Street Specific Plan ahead of schedule and under budget. Highlights of Experience After 20 years with the County of Orange Planning Department and Environmental Management Agency, AI joined The Planning Center as the firm was in the early stages of preparing the largest specific plan in the State: the 18,000-acre Chino Hills Specific Plan. One of his first assignments was to devise a means of converting the unique density concepts in the Plan into a workable regulatory system. This is typical of the problem solving mentality that has characterized his life as a planner. Whether it is figuring out how to capture the vision of a community in simple-to- understand terms, guiding the collaborative efforts of a large team of public planners and their consultants on a comprehensive general plan, devising a means of providing incentives for preferred land uses in a specific plan, or communicating with elected and appointed officials on a challenging issue, AI is known for his creative and effective approach. This attitude of "let's solve the problem and get on with life" comes from a mix of time spent in the public counter trenches; functional management responsibilities in public agency and private sector organizations; extensive, diversified project leadership; and several stints as a lecturer in planning at California State University at Fullerton and the University of California at Irvine. AI has been involved in a wide variety of planning projects, including: ' Over 20 general plans; Over 10 regional or sub-regional planning programs; Over 10 specific plans; 1 ~ Several strategic plans (public and private); and Innumerable public participation programs and events. ' A few highlights will illustrate the linkage between AI's capabilities and extensive project experience: AI's focused team building and effective guidance led to completion of the Tustin First Street Specific Plan ahead of schedule and under budget. Out of ten specific plans in the City, the Tustin First Street Specific Plan was the first to be adopted unanimously by the Planning Commission and City Council in one hearing by each body. He led several APA award-winning projects, including the Harbor Corridor t Specific Plan in Garden Grove, the Beach Boulevard Entertainment Corridor in Buena Park, and the Highland 2010 Strategic Plan in Highland. In each case, ' Governmental Servire.r • Planning fi Urban De,rigra • Environmental Studies • Landscape Arcbitectnre ' ~~ ALFRED C. BELL ~'~ Senior Advisor and Technical Editor 1 "Of particular importance to me as a Department Head is The Planning Center's demonstrated ability to communicate effectively with the Planning Commission, C{ty Council and the public, an obviously critical ingredient in bringing credibility to the technical products." creative solutions were developed that became breakthroughs in successful plan completion and implementation. Creative use of opportunity area identification and analysis contributed significantly to the effectiveness of general plan work in Paramount, Stanton, Yorba Linda (all in California) and in Las Vegas, Nevada. AI's people-oriented, compassionate approach to individuals and groups with conflicting agendas has smoothed the way toward plan acceptance in such diverse places as Las Vegas, Yorba Linda, Inglewood, La Palma, Rancho Cucamonga, and Stanton; and in subregions such as Gateway Cities and South Bay Cities in Los Angeles County, and the Urban Rail City Technical Advisory Group in Orange County. i 1 r -Mark D. Lloyd Development Services Director City of Stanton Education Professional Affiliations The combination of active listening, depth and breadth of experience, sensitivity to people's legitimate concerns, and creative problem-solving accounts for AI's involvement in The Planning Center's most challenging projects. B.A. University of California, Los Angeles, Geography American Planning Association Charter Member, California Planning Roundtable Governmental Servirer • Planning fi Urban Derign • Environmental Studier • 1 andlrape Arcbitectnre ' ~^THE ~~ ~(~/ CE TER G DWAYNE MEARS, A/CP, Principal r ' Director of Environmental Services { ~' ' Qualifications Dwayne Mears has over 21 years of private and public planning experience and an extensive background in environmental planning and processing. As The Planning Center's Principal-in-Charge of Environmental Services, Dwayne manages the ' Environmental Services staff, coordinates multi-disciplinary project teams, has expert knowledge in CEQA compliance and litigation support and works to maintain quality control. Dwayne's extensive experience includes environmental compliance documents for a wide variety of projects, including major entertainment complexes, industrial facilities, regional shopping centers, residential communities, mixed-use, bus and ' rail transit, schools and colleges, child care facilities, roadway and freeway improvements, hazardous waste facilities, major storm drains, reclaimed water facilities and wastewater treatment projects. ' Highlights of ~ Over Ten General Plan Update EIRs, throughout California Experience Knott's Berry Farm "Ghost Rider" and "Supreme Scream" Project EIRs "T& Planning Center's hrnfuiiono! pes/ rmanre resulted en t& u/~/rro¢~at a/'a $Z 96 million General Ptars and 51R wi[hou[ challenee." - Barry Hand, Community Development Director City of Tracy The Block at Orange, Entertainment and Retail Center Over 100 New and Expanded Public Schools, throughout California Easterly Industrial Facility, City of Industry MacArthur Place "Urban Village" EIR, Santa Ana Cerritos Town Center/Performing Arts Center, Cerritos Wal-Mart Gateway Center EIR, Westminster South Sutter County "New Town" EIR Materials Recovery Facility, City of Industry Gothard-Hoover Transportation Corridor EIR, Huntington Beach, Westminster Education ' Professional Affiliations 1 B.S., California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, City and Regional Planning, 1978 M.R.P., University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, City and Regional Planning, 1980. Certificate, Project Development and Environmental Documentation, National Highway Institute, Federal Highway Administration Coursework towards Certificate in Educational Facilities Planning, University of California Extension. Riverside American Institute of Certified Planners, 1982 American Planning Association Association of Environmental Professionals ' Governmental Services • Planning fi Urban Detrgn • Environmental Stttrliet • Lanrltcape Arcbitedure 1 ~J CJ CJ 1 THE ~~V CE TER G KAREN GULLEY Project Manager Qualifications Karen Gulley is a creative thinker and provides innovative approaches to projects. She is always looking to expand the range of options and opportunities associated with a task or job. Karen has over twelve years of experience with an extensive background in policy planning, land use planning, and entitlement services. Her expertise is in the areas of specific plans, general plans, strategic plans, military base reuse planning and project entitlement. Karen is responsible for developing community participation programs and facilitating public meetings and workshops. She relates well to her audience, and is capable of communicating complex and often controversial issues in a manner that is understandable and competent. She provides expertise in project processing and developing a strategy for obtaining entitlements. Highlights of Karen's strengths include handling the day-to-day management of large project Experience teams where information sharing, problem-solving and policy development requires extensive coordination. She is responsive to client needs and desires on a project, and is dedicated to ensuring that the project stays on track and within budget. Some highlights of Karen's work are as follows: Over six General Plans, including the Cities of La Palma, Rancho Cucamonga, and Temecula More than 8 Specific Plans, including the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Numerous special studies, including master plans, open space study and park plans Several subregional planning programs Others projects include: San Bernardino Economic Development Strategic Plan, San Bernardino County, CA Heritage Springs Master Plan, Santa Fe Springs, CA Pacific Bell Mobile Services. Wireless Communications Entitlement Services. Winchester Hills Specific Plan / EIR, Temecula, CA Temecula General Plan, Temecula, CA South Pasadena General Plan, South Pasadena, CA Valley/Ardmore Open Space Study, Manhattan Beach, CA Education ~ B.A., University of California, Santa Cruz, Economics Masters Program, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, Urban and Regional Planning (all but thesis) Professional ~ American Planning Association Affiliations Governmental Services • Planning fi Urban Design • Environmental Studies • Landscape Arcbitectttre i r ~^ THE (~ PLANNING ~~ CENTER OMAR DADABHOY Project Planner Qualifications Omar's experience in working closely with various Assembly members, and his academic background in planning makes him a unique addition to the project teams at The Planning Center He is technically able to perform planning exercises, but adds the additional quality of knowing how to successfully communicate and coordinate with large community groups. A key to being successful in this arena is proactive communication with constituents. Omar is well experienced at organizing programs and events to maintain a positive rapport with stakeholders. His ability to discern issues of concern within a community and develop a communications strategy is a valuable proactive catalyst for each project he is assigned to at The Planning Center. Experience Omar has been involved as: • Communications Aide for the Honorable Robert Pacheco, Assemblyman, 60'h District • Field Representative for the Honorable Ken Maddox, Assemblyman, 68'" District • Program Specialist for the Honorable Jim Morrissey, Assemblyman 69'" District • Deputy Campaign Manager, Morrissey for Assembly So me highlights of his experience include: zed and drafted legislation to and anal Smart Growth Task Force d th C t • y , rea e e advance smart growth principles • Responsible for programs and events including townhall meetings and a 1 monthly newsletter tracking significant legislation and community activities • Organized informational workshops and worked to resolve issues referred by ' • community and governmental agencies. Developed campaign brochure and Door Hanger for the Get-Out-The-Vote (GON) effort Current activities at The Planning Center include: • General Plan Update -Community Visioning, City of Anaheim • Changing the Face of Orange County, CA 2020: M Ideas and Design Competition, Orange County Council of Governments • Housing Element Updates for the County of Riverside, and the cities of Perris, Westminster and Upland Education B.A., Psychology & Social Behavior and Political Science, University of California, Irvine 1 M A ,Urban and Regional Planning, University of California, Irvine Volunteer Serves on the Board of Directors of Housing Opportunities Made Easy (HOME Activities Inc.), anon-profit housing organization Governmental Serviret • Planning fi Urban Dettgn • Environmental Stttdiet • Landtrape Arrhitecdt r'e Appendix E Resumes Psoyn~.s A.rsoci~ttes ~~ CiCRZYCt[ PLQYr U11(jQLf f~ ACl B1Y ,W~~cnviu.w<;n /~~, w~.,,,a,.m .,r.i ti.,. w„e,e,.. r.,q,,,ma Gary P. Dysart, P. E., P S O M A S Vice President Specialized Professional period, which are now being Education Competence considered by the City Council for 1 1961/BS/Civil Mr. Dysart has over 35 years implementation. Engineering/ Oregon State experience in working for public agencies with over 20 years in the City Engineer, City of Dana University position of City Engineer for Point, CA: As contract City 1973/MPA/Pnblic Southern Califomia cities. His Engineer and Deputy City Engineer Administration, experience includes major over afour-year period, responsible f i h f California State infrastructure planning and design, or overs g t o major University project management, program infrastructure projects. He was also , Fullerton management and municipal responsible for the management , Califomia engineering consulting. He has and repair of existing public facilities also been responsible for . Registration preparation and implementation of City Engineer and 1966/Civil numerous long range Capital F iliti I P Redevelopment Agency Engineer/California rograms, ac es mprovement Engineer, City of Bell Gardens, /#16528 Master Plan, Public Facilities CA: Served as contract engineer Financing Strategies and and Redevelopment Agency Affiliations Assessment Engineering for cities. Engineer over a 20-year period. American Society of Relevant Project Experience Responsible for oversight of major Civi[ Engineers infrastmcture projects. Also American Pablic City of Anaheim Redevelopment responsible for establishing an Works Association Agency: Principal In Charge for ongoing pavement management planning and design of Downtown program for the maintenance and Experience Redevelopment Program Project repair of the City's streets and With Psomos for 3 Area Improvements. Also highways and an annual program . years; with other provided oversight for annual on- for repair of curb, gutter and firms for 35 years call engineering services to Agency sidewalks. Also provided all for asix-year period. engineering oversight for numerous commercial, industrial and Infrastructure Improvement residential neighborhood Program, City of Huntington redevelopment projects. Beach, CA: Currently serving as Project Manager and Principal Burbank Redevelopment Agency, ' Consultant for a consultant team City of Burbank, CA: Special retained by the City to develop a consultant as part of a multi- financing/funding strategy [o discipline team assisting the 1 overcome a projected $800 million Agency staff on various planned shortfall in funding needed for redevelopment projects including a infrastmcture improvements in the next 20 years. As part of the downtown mall development. assignment, Mr. DysaR and Psomas Irvine Center, City of Irvine, CA: staff served as an extension of City Principal-In-Charge for planning staff in managing and providing and design of backbone streets, support services fora 35-member interchanges, storm drains and " Citizens Infrastructure Advisory utilities for the "Golden Triangle Committee appoint by the City commercial development area Council. The Advisory Committee bounded by the I-5, I-405 and has developed recommendations Route 33 Freeways. Also, served for financing/funding of the City's as an Assessment Engineer for I needed infrastructure Assessment District to finance the improvements over the 20-year public improvements. PSOMAS Pagel Ken J. Susilo, PE Project Engineer 1 Education MS/1991/Civil Engineering/University of California, Berkeley BS/1990/Civil Engineering/University of Califomia, Berkeley University of California, Berkeley: Extension 1 Registration 1993/Professional Engineer/ CA (Civil) #C51194 Affiliations American Society of Civil Engineers 1 American Water Resources Association International Erosion Control Association Floodplain Management Association Experience With Psomas for 1 year; with other firms for 8 years Mr. Ken Susilo, a Project Manager for Psomas, has experience in engineering design, hydraulics, hydrology, computer modeling, and storm water management. This experience includes project management and utilizing statistical and surface water models for hydraulic and hydrologic analyses. Relevant Project Experience Comprehensive Stot~tt Drain System Inventory and Assessment, Oakland, CA: Project Engineer responsible for developing an assessment criteria and database; managing field inspections, funding analyses and GIS operations; reviewing City review procedures and design criteria; developing feasibility-level designs of capital improvements, as well as the framework for the City' Capital Improvement Program. ' Alameda County Urban Runoff Clean Water Program, Alameda County, CA: Assistant Project Manager for the Alameda County Urban Runoff Clean Water Program, addressing the hydrology of Alameda County and the impacts of pollutant loads. As a Task Leader for the Management of Storm Water Facilities, he inventoried facilities and operations; developed, ' implemented, and evaluated potential sttvc[ural or operational modifications to reduce pollutants [o the San Francisco Bay. For Illicit Discharge Identification and Elimination, Mr. Susilo was Task Leader responsible for defining, prioritizing, and identifying major outfalls; Developing an approach for eliminating illicit discharges and model enforcement procedure; developing training manuals, programs and workshops; and pilot-scale implementation. ' Caltrans Litter Management Pilot Project, Statewide, CA: Project (Task Order) Manager responsible for the initial phases of the project, including baseline data collection, project scoping and conceptual study design, and coordination with the Technical Advisory Group West Creek, Valencia, CA: Project Manager for three elements of the West Creek Development Master Plan design for the Valencia Company: Water Quality Basin Design, Hydrology and Buried Streambank Stabilization. Projects are subject to approval by Los Angeles County. Stabilization design includes design of an energy dissipating impact structure. r ~~ Newhall Side Drains, Newhall , CA: Manager for development of avoidance and hybrid (naturalized-channelized) alternatives for major tributaries to the Santa Clara River. Studies included altematives analyses, hydraulic analyses, and data management using GIS. SUSMP Consultation, Los Angeles County, CA: Provided consultation servicesto Valencia Company to address financial and project impacts of Regional Water Quality Control Board Standard Ud~an Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP). Consultation included assessment application of current Best Management Practice (BMP) altematives. Brantas Watershed, Indonesia: Pilot Project Manager for development and implementation of a pilot scale Integrated Water Resource Management System in the Brantas Watershed, Indonesia. Tasks included development of system architecture and process design; design of the graphical user interface (GUI); development of detailed work plans and technical approaches for each component and reviewing each deliverable; and integration of staff from WC-Indonesia, the national ministry for applied technology (BPPT), the Institute of Technology in Surabaya, and the Jasa Tirta water company. The system, programmed using Visual Basic, MapInfo, and Access, is designed integrate and balance multiple water uses and system operations in the watershed, utilizing the existing system infrastructure, and addressing climate forecasting, flood prediction, emergency planning, and agricultural water demand. Centex Homes, Castro Valley, CA: Project Manager and Principal Design Engineer for a pipeline-energy dissipator gabion structure for storm water flows down a steep slope. The work included plans, specifications and constmction observations. Off-site Drainage Remediation at Hewlett-Packard's Guadalajara, Mexico, Facilities: Project Engineer. The design (plans, specifications, and construction phase services) included a reinforced concrete drop swcture, 72-inch reinfotred cotxxete pipe, and a vegetated open channel. Developed/Evaluated Drainage Plans: • Western Farm Service, Madera County, CA • Johnson Canyon Landfill, Monterey County, CA • Burlingame Landfill, San Mateo County, CA Design of Pond/Basins: • Johnson Canyon Landfill (habitat mitigation) • Granite Rock (flow retention and check dams) • South Napa Marketplace (water quality wet ponds) • ADT Automotive (water quality facilities) Benner Creek Relocation Downstream of Butte Valley Dam: Design Engineer for creek realignment to protect the dam against PMF flows and was designed to encourage red-legged frog habitat. Analyses included HEC-1 and HEC-2 computer modeling and review of outside consultant calculations and analyses. San Joaquin Valley Floods: Designed remedial repairs for damaged levees in the San Joaquin Valley following the floods of January 1997. Tasks included preparing a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Project Information Report and developing design specifications. Developed/Evaluated Drainage Plans for the following: • Western Farm Service, Madera County, CA • Johnson Canyon Landfill, Monterey County, CA • Burlingame Landfill, San Mateo County, CA • Johnson Canyon Landfill (habitat mitigation) • Granite Rock (flow retention and check dams) • South Napa Marketplace (water yuality wet ponds) • ADT Automotive (water quality facilities) Probabilistic Hydrology, Boulder Valley, NV: Managed a surface and groundwater probabilistic modeling study as a third party, independent consultant to the State of Nevada. Technical aspects of [he project included infrared imagery, probabilistic modeling study as a third party, independent consultant. ' John R. Thornton, PE Water Resource ' Education MS/1978/Civil and Environmental Engineering/California State University Long Beach BS/1969/Civil Engineering/California State Polytechnic University, Pomona Registration Civil Engineer/California, #24251 Agricultural Engineer/California/ #145 Civil Engineer/Nevada/#6160 Civil Engineer/Idaho/#5379 Civil Engineer/Arizona/#29954 Affiliations Water Environment Federation American Water Works Association of Water Reuse Orange County Water Association Water Reuse Association of Ground Water Agencies -Groundwater Guazdian Experience With Psomas for 4 years; with other firms for 26 yeazs. Background Mr. Thornton has over 30 years experience in the development and management of water resource projects ranging in scope and magnitude. He has been in responsible chazge of the prepazation of feasibility studies and facilities master plans; preliminary and final design documents (construction drawings, specifications, and cost estimates); and construction supervision of canals, pipelines, wells, pump stations, reservoirs, reclaimed water use systems, and agricultural crop and landscaping irrigation facilities. Project Examples San Juan Basin Groundwater Management Plan, CA: Project Manager for the San Juan Basin Authority in developing a groundwater management plan. The goal of the Plan was to develop a groundwater management plan maximizing the use of the Basin's storage capacity in conjunction with artificial and natural recharge. A mathematical model of the groundwater basin was developed incorporation basin hydraulics as well as water quality. Various groundwater management scenarios were simulated. Water production facilities were identified including 16 wells and an 8-MGD desalting plant. The project included developing a financial plan and the securing of water rights within the basin. ' Olancha Water Project, CA: Project Manager for developing facilities and evaluating the feasibility of a water transfer project from the Southern Owens Valley area. The 1 project includes the evaluation of groundwater hydrogeology, location and preliminary P S O M A S ' design of facilities, including wells, pipelines and connection to the Los Angeles Aqueducts and overall project feasibility. Water Supply and Distribution ' NPDES Permits, Irvine Ranch, Orange County, CA: Applied for and administered agricultural NPDES permits for agricultural return flows on the hvine Ranch in Orange County. The permits required monthly monitoring of agricultural tailwater discharges and water quality. The results were summarized in an annual report along with an explanation and recommendations on methods to reduce discharges and improve water quality. Flood Control Facilities, Irvine Ranch, Orange County, CA: Project manager in the management, including design, operation and maintenance of over 100 miles of regional ' and local agricultural land flood control facilities on the Irvine Ranch in Orange County. Responsibilities included coordination with local city and county agencies of regional facilities as agricultural land and drainage facilities were absorbed into agency facilities. Issues of concern included facIlities capacities, erosion, retention facilities, silt control and water quality. Applied for and obtained PL 566 funds for channel improvements and retention basins. City of Bellflower, Water Master Plan, CA: Project Manager for the development of overall water master plan for the City of Bellflower. The City of Bellflower, with a ' population of approximately 64,000 people, is served by six water companies. A comprehensive hydraulic computer model was developed combining all six systems. The adequacy of each system was evaluated along with recommendations for combining the 1 systems. Recommendations were provided regazding the facilities and financing alternatives. ~l ' P S O M A S ' Daniel J. McCroskey, PLS GIS Project Manager/CADD Base Maps Education BS/1989/Surveying and Photogrammetry/California State University, Fresno, CA Registration Professional Land Surveyor/California/#7098 ' Affiliations California Land Surveyor's Association ' Experience With Psomas for 10 years t Background Mr. McCroskey has worked in the field of surveying and mapping for the past ten years with an emphasis on digital mapping, CAD design and GIS integration of surveying and engineering projects. Mr. McCroskey's experience covers the use of Microstation CAD products, Intergraph's InRoads engineering software and GIS platforms consisting of ESRI Arc/Info, ArcView and Intergraph MGE. Mr. McCroskey's responsibilities with Psomas have been in the area of managing survey data and its integration into digital mapping and GIS systems. He has specialized in the incorporation of survey techniques involving electronic data collection, GPS surveying, digital orthophotography, and digital terrain modeling. Mr. McCroskey has been a member of Psomas' in-house technical advisory committee and participated in the supervision and training of fellow staff members and as a support role to many of Psomas' clients. Projects Glen Helen Specific Plan, County of San Bernardino, CA: Development of a Specific ' Plan for the Glen Helen Regional Park, County Sheriffls Training Facility, and Glen Helen Rehabiliation Center. Responsibilities included collecting overall mapping, aerial photos, and GIS data from County sources; development of project GIS base map; and incorporating data files for physical conditions, infrastructure systems, and public facilities. Water Replenishment District of Southern California (1998): Project Manager, working with WRD staff of GIS specialists, assisting with integration of the water model, technical and staffing support services, and on-call assignments. MCAS EI Toro Reuse Planning Project (1998-1999), CA: Project Manager for the development of a GIS system and related mapping services for the Coun[y of Orange and consultant teams in the base re-use planning efforts. Responsibilities include needs analysis, data acquisition and conversion, database design and creation, and the final incorporation and support for the completed GIS system. ' P S O M A S The Alameda Corridor (1996-1998), CA: Project Surveyor providing right-of-way surveying services to support the Port's of Los Angeles and Long Beach in their efforts to acquire land from Southern Pacific Transportation Company for this 26-mile Corridor 1 Project. These services included the production of electronic mapping for all right-of- way, topographic and utility features.Extensive 3-dimensional data was incorporated for the production of digital elevation modeling and contour mapping. Southern California Gas Company Pipeline 6902 (1996): Responsible for the mapping services provided on this project and the incorporation into a custom GIS facility management interface. Il feature data relating to the pipeline was collected using ' electronic data collection software and GPS technology. All cadastral, pipeline, utility, and right-of-way data was featured and attributed for use in the GIS. Custom model ' applications were written to access project data and viewed through astand-alone, remote system interface. All training and documentation was provided by Psomas and transferred to the client at the conclusion of the project. 1 Mobil Oil's M-70 Pipeline (1994-1995): Responsible for the development of a detailed land net database in digital GIS format over which pipeline vector data, aerial photography, pipeline attribute, facility crossing and right-of-way and other parcel data would be maintained. All survey data was collected electronically and converted into digital format and managed within a GIS environment. ' OCTA/Caltrans, Interstate 5, Segment "D" Widening: Project Surveyor for planning, reseazch, boundary and right-of-way calculations, easement plots, mapping and prepazation of Intergraph digital files. Deliverables included hazdcopy and digital base 1 maps, digital coordinate lists, text and figure files for each of the 102 parcels. Caltrans District 7, 105/405 Century Freeway 6-Level Interchange: Project Surveyor for construction survey services for overhead structures, tunnels, ramps and connectors, ten-lane paving; utility relocations, drainage structures, and city street widenings and modifications. Caltrans District 7, "On-Call" Survey Contract #07F601: Project Surveyor for this project which included construction surveys; grid and grade profiles; pavement design and topographic surveys; bridge and structure surveys; horizontal and vertical control; ' staging and detour staking; pavement grade and alignment surveys; quality assurance surveys; project management; and overhead HOV lane surveys. This was the first contract in California awarded to a surveying firm outside Caltrans. ' Coastal Highway Management Plan (1998): GIS manager for coordination between Caltrans and internal environmental staff fora 75-mile stretch of Northern California Coastal highway. Also involved in the acquisition and integration of high-resolution aerial photography, sensitive species habitat data, geological data and numerous existing hazdcopy reports and electronic databases. A GIS interface was developed to provide ' graphical exhibits pertaining to sensititive species habitat, slide disposal site analysis, and hot-linked references to existing databases and reports. Newport/SR55 Northbound Ramp Modification & Street Extension: This project ' included highway and railroad bridge crossings. The design survey work included GPS surveys and conventional surveys for monument location, aerial target placement, cross sections and profiles. ' P S O M A S 2 Appendix E Re.rlsme.r Stanley Hoffman A.rrociater ~~ Genera! Plan Update And Ezr ~,,~;r~~,<:~~<,,, ar e,, ea~w,.,r,. v~,..r ~.. ~+~~~.~~~~ rry~wrnm STANLEY R. HOFFMAN, A.I.C.P. i President Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 1981-present Stanley R. Hoffman has thirty years of experience in urban planning, specializing in the areas of fiscal and financial analysis; real estate economics; economic development and economic policy studies; and the application of computer-based fiscal modeling in urban planning. His work has ranged from general plans and specific plans to individual projects where he has utilized ' fiscal and economic impact techniques and market feasibility evaluations to help the public and decision-makers understand project and policy implications. He has managed major projects in both the public and private sectors, involving numerous presentations before political and academic bodies and professional audiences. Since establishing Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Mr. Hoffman has worked in many jurisdictions throughout California, including cities, counties and special ' districts. Projects have encompassed a wide variety of land uses, including: residential, office, retail and office/hotel mixed use projects. Mr. Hoffman is experienced in preparing development impact fee programs as well as special ' tax and benefit assessments. These programs have helped finance capital facilities for transportation, sewer and water systems, fire equipment and stations, parks and other public infrastructure. Mr. Hoffman has also participated in the preparation of Regional Comprehensive Plans for the South Bay Cities, Southeast Los Angeles County Cities and North Los Angeles County under the aegis of the Southern California Associations of Governments. This work has assisted these subregions in developing long range growth forecasts and associated economic and fiscal policy plans. EDUCATION University of California, Los Angeles Master of Arts in Urban Planning, 1972 University of Michigan Master of Science in Electrical Engineering, 1967 University of California, Los Angeles Bachelor of Science in Engineering, 1966 TEACHING EXPERIENCE Instructor, UCLA Graduate School of Public Policy and Social Research class entitled Urban Public Finance, Spring Quarters, 1996, 1997 and 2000. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Resume and Experience Instructor: Economic Fundamentals for Planning and Development, University ' Extension Program, University of California, Irvine in 1984, 1986 and 1988. Guest Lecturer: Professor Donald Shoup's Class entitled Urban Public Finance, University of California, Los Angeles. MEMBERSHIP AND PUBLIC SERVICE AFFILIATIONS Member, American Planning Association and American Institute of Certified Planners Treasurer and Member: California Planning Foundation Member and President in 1989: California Planning Roundtable Member and Past Co-President: Graduate School of Architecture and Urban Planning (G.S.A.U.P.) University of California, Los Angeles Alumni Board Associate Member: Urban Land Institute LI II II II ~~ II Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Resume and Experience 1 1 1 it 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i f Appendix E Re.rllmer Tr~znstech Engineering Inc. General Plan Update And E:r mncomori~.ur „~ s~• ~~.~.Jl..unr /s.. rk.,,,.,e,,,, r,,,pW,m,. ~~ ' Ali Cayir, PE Project Principal ' Education: BSME, Istanbul Technical University MBA, University of Phoenix Project Management, UCI Registration: California Registered Civil Engineer ' Mr. Cayir has more than 20 years of experience in design and management of a variety of public works engineering projects, and in municipal engineering. He has participated on numerous multi-disciplinary teams dealing with the planning and engineering for urban and rural development, and infrastructure and public works projects. Mr. Cayir also has extensive experience in federal funding programs for public works projects. He has successfully prepared feasibility studies and funding applications, and obtained funding for more than $15 million worth public works projects in the past two years alone. Mr. Cayir also has extensive experience in Caltrans encroachment permit and approval process, and Caltrans Project Development Procedures. His diversified design experience, includes: ' Traffic Engineering Experience Design and management of a variety of traffic and transportation engineering projects, including traffic signals (more than 1000 locations), traffic signal interconnect system, street lighting, traffic control, signing and striping design; signal timing and coordination studies; traffic signal management studies; traffic safety projects (OTS) including traffic control device inventories and speed surveys; traffic impact and parking studies for more than 100 projects; and feasibility studies for traffic control measures, freeway access, bikeways and street improvements. Mr. Cayir has also served as consultant Traffic Engineer for various 1 agencies in Southern California. Project Manager/Engineer for the preparation of ramp metering, count station, traffic signal, highway ' lighting, sign lighting, construction signing, pavement delineation, communication, and other traffic related plans for several state highways and freeway improvement projects involving Caltrans Districts 7, 8 and 12. Project Manager for the preparation of traffic signal modifications and installation, interconnect and radio corrected time base system installation plans and estimates in conjunction with traffic signal synchronization projects for various arterials in Los Angeles County including Garvey Avenue, EI Segundo ' Boulevard, Crenshaw Boulevard, Slauson Avenue, Rosecrans Avenue, Arrow Highway and Huntington Drive/Alosta Avenue/Foothill Boulevard. Signal modification improvements included equipment upgrades, signal phasing upgrades and installation of radio correct time base units (W W V) for signal coordination as well as physical intersection improvements. Project Manager for the preparation of signal timing and coordination plans for multiple locations on major arterials in Los Angeles County including Main Street, Garvey Avenue, Crenshaw Boulevard and Slauson Avenue utilizing state-of-the-art computer software. Project Traffic Engineer for the proposed Materials Recovery Facility in the City of Industry. This project involved the preparation of a comprehensive area wide traffic impact study to identify the potential impacts associated with development of a proposed Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) in the City of Industry. The study area encompassed 32 intersections and several freeways such as SR 60 and SR 57. The study Transtech Engineers, Inc. Staff Resumes ~~ ~~ also included an evaluation of cumulative impacts associated with 22 planned projects located within the sphere of influence of the study area. In addition, separate analyses were conducted to determine the potential impacts of developing the MRF at alternative sites. Civil Engineering Experience City of Alhambra's project manager/adviser for the 710 Freeway extension and four freeway interchanges within the City. Project Manager for design of City of San Clemente's annual street rehabilitation program. The project involved roadway rehabilitation and reconstruction, storm drain, water and sewer design on various streets. Construction cost $1,000,000. Project Manager for design of reconstruction and rehabilitation of Crenshaw Boulevard and Skypark Avenue (two separate projects) in the City of Torrance. Construction cost $3,000,000. Project Manager for Fremont widening project which is funded by ISTEA funds and required complete project and environmental report, including Right-of-Way, Relocation, SHPO, NEPA, SEQA, Noise, Parking, Economic, Hazardous Materials technical studies, and being processed through Caltrans and FHWA. Construction cost $6,000,000. Principal-in-Charge for $20 m Carlsbad to San Diego Rail Trail Project Report, which is funded by Federal Funds and is in the final approval stage through Caltrans and FHWA. Principal-in-Charge for I-5/Colorado off-ramp realignment and reconstruction project in Glendale. Currently realignment and draft construction plans have been submitted to Caltrans for review and approval. Project Manager for design of Valley Boulevard street medians, striping, landscape, and irrigation improvements, Alhambra, Construction cost $600,000. Project Manager for design of I-10 Freeway Ramps at Garfield and Atlantic median landscaping and irrigation Improvements Project, Alhambra, Construction cost $300,000. Project Manager for design of Polo Club Parking Lot grading, pavement, landscape, irrigation, lighting, planters, brick gazebo and roman arches, decorative sidewalks, and riverrock trash enclosures, Alhambra, Construction cost $600,000. Construction Management Experience City of Alhambra-Various Projects Mr. Cayir served as project manager in the design and construction management of several public works projects for the City of Alhambra totaling several million dollars in construction cost including $2,100,000 in federally funded projects. Construction management, labor compliance and inspection services were provided to the City for street improvements on Main Street from Almansor to the east City limit. Street improvements included removal and replacement of curb and gutter, sidewalk, curb drain outlets, drive approaches, decorative crosswalks, installation of storm drain and catch basins, traffic signals, street lighting and pavement reconstruction. City of West Hollywood-Sunset Boulevard FAU Street Reconstruction and Signalization Project, and Santa Monica Median Electrical Service Project Mr. Cayir was the project manager providing construction administration, construction inspection and labor compliance services for a FAU funded project along Sunset Boulevard, and electrical service installation project on Santa Monica Boulevard. The Transtech Engineers, Inc. Staff Resumes 1 LJ C_l projects involved roadway widening and reconstruction, signal upgrades at 15 intersections, signal interconnect, striping, landscape improvements and other miscellaneous work. Extensive intertace and coordination with local businesses have been imperative to maintain a positive image for the City as construction took place in a very busy commercial district. Total construction cost for the projects was more than $2,000,000. Signature Group/City of Los Angeles-Sepulveda at Victory and Van Owen Roadway Improvements Mr. Cayir served as Project Manager for the design and construction of off-site improvements for a major shopping center in the City of Los Angeles. The project involved demolition of existing improvements, street widening, storm drain, sewer, water, electrical underground, signal, lighting and striping improvements. Total project cost was more than $2 million. City of Commerce Rosewood Community Center Transtech was retained by the City of Commerce as an extension of staff to assist the City in overall CIP management. One of the major projects Mr. Cayir worked as an extension of staff was the $15 million Rosewood Community Center and Sports Complex Project. Mr. Cayir was asked by the City to assist them on this 'troubled" project which was two years behind schedule with potential claims around $10 million. With Mr. Cayir's involvement, the project was brought to substantial completion with three months, and opened to public use one a month after. City of Alhambra Redevelopment Agency a 26,000 sf building project with a construction cost of approximately $2 million for the Alhambra Redevelopment Agency. The project is funded by HUD-CDBG Funds, and is located on Agency owned land. Mr. Cayir's responsibilities include initial scope development for architectural design, complete plan check of design plans, constructability and bidability review, preparation of specifications, cost estimates and bid packages, coordination of bidding, construction management, inspection, contract administration and final project close-out. Other significant projects where Mr. Cayir was involved in various capacities ranging from plan reviews, inspection, construction coordination, contract administration as the owner's representative, include a $5 million six- story Senior Housing project funded by HUD-CDBG, a $2 million ToysRus as building funded by HUD- CDBG, $1.8 million Granada Swim Complex, two fire stations, $10 million police facility, and three parking structures with a cost of $12 million. ' City of Culver City-Jefferson/Sepulveda Connector Road Mr. Cayir provided construction management for the Jefferson/Sepulveda Connector Road construction project with a construction cost of $2,000,000. The project involved street, storm drain, sewer, water, electrical underground, signal, lighting ' and striping improvements. Transtech also provided soils and materials testing services. Extensive intertace and coordination with local businesses and residents have been imperative to maintain a positive image for the City as construction took place in a very busy commercial district. ' Transtech Engineers, Inc. Staff Resumes n u ' Pat Lang, TE Independent Consultant for Quality Control ' Education: USC, BS in Civil Eng Registration: California Registered Traffic Engineer ' Former Director of Public Works, San Marino Contract City Traffic Engineer, La Canada Flintridge ' Contract City Traffic Engineer, Temple City Contract City Traffic Engineer, San Marcos Supporting Contract City Traffic Engineer, Alhambra Former Director of Public Works, South Pasadena Mr. Lang has 30 years experience in the areas of traffic engineering, transportation planning, transportation engineering as well as municipal engineering. He has served in the public sector as the Director of Public Works for the Cities of South Pasadena and San Marino. In the private sector, he has worked with a number of traffic engineering consulting firms. ' As Director of Public Works for South Pasadena, CA, Mr. Lang had overall responsibility for all engineering functions including planning, building and safety, street, park and water departments. As Director of Public Works for San Marino, CA, Mr. Lang conducted and coordinated all city traffic operations, transportation planning activities and traffic safety programs involving recommendations for zoning changes, subdivision and city ordinances. Transportation Planning. Project Engineer on numerous traffic planning and parking studies for retail, commercial and residential developments. He also prepared the traffic portion of environmental impact study. Projects have included the Sunset Ranch Specific Plan, a 446-acre parcel located in Lancaster. This project consists of residential, commercial and industrial uses plus recreational and educational facilities. Other projects have included Granada Hills Community Hospital expansion in Los Angeles, Garfield Medical Center in San Gabriel, Home Savings Bank in Sherman Oaks, the Los Angeles International Golf Club in Sunland-Tujunga, Little Tokyo Professional Building, and SunseWermont Towers Office Building in Los Angeles, the Ontario/Airport Plaza Mixed-Use Development in Ontario, Krikorian Theaters Mixed-Use Development, the Walnut Mixed-Use Development in Pasadena, and the 6100 Canoga Avenue Development in Warner Center. Traffic Engineering. Provided construction area work plans for the Mobil Oil Pipeline Project involving 98 miles of pipeline traversing major streets in Los Angeles County, dealing with seven jurisdictions. Provided traffic signal designs for the cities of Monrovia, Baldwin Park, Los Angeles (seven traffic signals), Corona ' (10 traffic signals) and Palmdale (13 traffic signals). Provided interconnect plans for the City of Pomona involving 13 intersections. The following are various similar projects completed under Mr. Lang's supervision: ' Reconstruction of Fair Oaks Roadway Supervised the design and reconstruction of Fair Oaks Roadway, involving concrete roadway, sidewalks, ' parking, lighting, trees, and the Arroyo Park Development Project consisting of four baseball fields, soccer field and field lighting. Transtech Engineers, Inc. Staff Resumes i Reconstruction of Huntington Drive Supervised the design and reconstruction of Huntington Drive, including modernization of traffic signals along the Huntington Drive Project which involved coordinating with other municipalities and the Santa Anita Race Track. San Gabriel Countv Water District Reservoir and Pipeline EIR Traffic Impact Studv Preparation of a traffic impact report for incorporation into EIR, analysis of existing and future traffic conditions, construction impact, identification of mitigation measures, attendance to public hearings and response to comments. Served as subconsultant to Sapphos Environmental. Countv Sanitation Districts Joint Seweraoe System 2015 Plan EIR Preparation of an EIR traffic impact study for the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County 2015 plan involving Valencia Water Reclamation Plant. Mobil Oil M70 Pipeline Replacement Proiect. Preparation of more than 98 miles of traffic control detour plans for use in the project per Caltrans, Los Angeles County, City of Los Angeles and various municipalities guidelines. Arrovo Verdugo Traffic Forum Technical Study ' Preparation of signal, traffic and roadway inventory, traffic volume reports, accident data analysis, transit service evaluation, signal inventory, area maps, and developing GIS database for the project. Served as subconsultant to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. J ~, ~~ Ir~ ~i Citv of Sierra Madre City-wide STOP Sign Replacement Plan Preparation of plans and specifications for the removal and replacement of City-wide STOP signs, stop bars, and stop legend/markings on pavement. Preparation of Bid documents and Engineer's Cost Estimate. Pomona Valley Traffic Signal Synchronization Study Assembling existing database, preparation of signal, traffic and roadway inventory, traffic volume reports, accident data analysis, transit evaluation, signal inventory, and developing GIS database for the project. City of Monrovia General Plan Update Preparation of circulation and parking element for the City. Preparation of traffic studies, including response to public review and comments on the Environmental Impact Report. Rosemead Boulevard/Las Tunas Drive Median Desion/Signal Improvement Plan Design and preparation of plans for one-mile long section of State highway and major arterial, design of signal modification plans and pavement restriping plans in compliance with County and Caltrans standards Providing construction management and supervision services including bid-package preparation and final walk through. Transtech Engineers, Inc. Staff Resumes ' Jana Robbins Transportation Analysts ' Education: California State Polytechnic University, BS in Business Administration ' Ms. Robbins has more than 12 years of experience in the field of traffic and transportation engineering. Experience representative of her technical talent includes but is not limited to ' engineering and planning activities such as traffic impact and parking studies; feasibility and operational studies for traffic control measures, bikeways and street improvements; traffic signal and timing projects; and speed surveys. ' Some of the projects Ms. Robbins has been involved recently include: Traffic Impact Studies Traffic impact studies for developers and government agencies including various commercial and residential development projects in the County of Riverside, Materials Recovery Facility in the City of Industry, McDonald's Corporation sites in Moorpark, Oxnard and Van Nuys, Signature Group of ' Van Nuys Supermarket, and the City of Industry and City of Montebello Metro Rail Stations. Her responsibilities in these projects included initial field review and data collection through engineering analysis and evaluation to preparation of the study report, and presentation of ' recommendations. She has developed traffic models and performed impact analyses utilizing state-of-the-art software such as TRAFFIX and ASSIGN 9. ' Ms. Robbins was also involved in the preparation of a comprehensive area wide traffic impact study to identify the potential impacts associated with development of a proposed Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) in the City of Industry. The study area encompassed 32 intersections ' and several freeways such as SR 60 and SR 57. The study evaluation also included an evaluation of cumulative impacts associated with 22 planned projects located within the sphere of influence of the study area. In addition, separate analyses were conducted to determine the potential impacts of developing the MRF at alternative sites. Ms. Robbins assisted the project ' team in developing future traffic condition scenarios using state-of-the-art PC based transportation planning modeling software and detailed mitigation measures for each scenario, including roadway and intersection capacity improvements in conformance with the City and County's ' General Plan policies. Traffic Operations As staff designer/analyst involved in the field surveys/data collection and CAD design/drafting of traffic signal and highway safety lighting system, traffic signal interconnect system, street lighting, and signing and striping improvement projects. The following are a few of the traffic signal design ' projects that she was involved recently: Traffic Signal and Interconnect Design at Various Locations in the City of Glendale as a part of the Colorado Road Reconstruction Project As staff CAD designer assisted in field surveys to assess condition of the existing signal and interconnect equipment, and in the preparation of traffic signal, safety lighting, ' Transtech Engineers, Inc. Staff Resumes u CI interconnect and signing and striping plans on AutoCAD. Traffic Signal and Street Widening Design at 10th and Lacey, and Lacey and Greenfield in the City of Hanford As staff CAD designer/analyst assisted in the preparation of traffic signal, safety lighting, and striping plans on AutoCAD. Synchronization projects for Los Angeles County As staff CAD designer/analyst assisted infield surveys to assess condition of the existing signal equipment, and in the preparation of traffic signal plans on AutoCAD. The projects involved over 200 signalized intersections on various arterials in Los Angeles County including Garvey Avenue, EI Segundo Boulevard, Crenshaw Boulevard, Slauson Avenue, Rosecrans Avenue, Arrow Highway and Huntington Drive/Alosta Avenue/Foothill Boulevard utilizing customized AutoCAD software. Signal modification improvements included equipment upgrades, signal phasing upgrades and installation of radio correct time base units (WWV) for signal coordination as well as physical intersection improvements. 1 As staff technician assisted infield data collection and in the preparation of time space diagrams for multiple locations on major arterials in Los Angeles County including Garvey Avenue, Crenshaw Boulevard and Slauson Avenue. ' Other projects where Ms. Robbins was involved as staff technician and AutoCAD designer/analyst include Fuel Efficient Traffic Signal Management (FETSIM) projects for the Cities of Glendale, Alhambra and Montebello; traffic signal projects for the Cities of Alhambra, Glendale and Hanford; and radar speed studies for the Cities of Alhambra, Baldwin Park and Long Beach. ' Professional Development Education Fundamentals of Traffic Engineering Highway and Intersection Capacity and Microcomputer Applications ' Highway Capacity Analysis Workshop AutoCAD Operation Fuel Efficient Traffic Signal 1 Transtech Engineers, Inc. Staff Resumes