HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-Development Services
,-
'.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Date: July 5, 2001
OR I C ;j'v'~L
Subject: Resolution authorizing execution
of an Agreement with The Planning Center
for providing professional services to
update the City's General Plan.
From: James Funk, Director
Dept: Development Services
File: MCC Date: 7/09/01
Synopsis of Previous Council Action:
March 1999 Legislative Review Committee directed Development Services staff to prepare
recommendations on updating the General Plan.
May 2001 Update to Legislative Review Committee on Request for Proposals for the General
Plan Update.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt Resolution
~~
James Funk
Contact person: James Funk
Phone:
5357
Supporting data attached: Staff Report. Reso.. Agreement &
Proposal
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: $530.000.00
Ward: All
Source: (Acct. No.) 001-190-5502
Acct. Description: Professional/Contractual
Finance:
Council Notes:
Agenda Item No. 1)
1 / ~ /01
"
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Staff Report
SUBJECT:
Resolution authorizing execution of an Agreement with The Planning Center for providing
professional services to update the City's General Plan,
BACKGROUND:
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 the
Housing Element and the Economic Survey,
The City desires to comprehensively update its General Plan so that:
. 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.
The City requires consultants with the vision to appreciate the possibilities, The consultants
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 consultants who will listen and incorporate what they hear into action.
The City requires consultants who can lead the comprehensive update of the General Plan,
perform the necessary traffic impact analysis, environmental analysis and background studies.
SELECTION:
Eleven consulting firrns believed to be qualified to prepare State required general plans (and
environmental impact reports) were requested to submit qualifications on or prior to April 6,
2001. Three firms responded (The Planning Center, EIP, and CBA Associates) and were
judged qualified. These firms were then requested to respond to a Request for Proposal to
-2-
.'"
Staff Reoort - continued
update the San Bernardino General Plan, prepare the required Environmental Impact Report,
and prepare other optional items.
Development Services Director James Funk, City Plauner Valerie Ross and Planning
Consultant William Woolard met with each of the three fIrms individually to discuss the scope
of work and other relevant issues. The three fIrms were requested to present proposals on or
prior to May 21, 2001.
Two fIrms responded to the request for proposal:
The Planning Center, Costa Mesa, CA
EIP Associates, Los Angeles, CA
Staff reviewed the proposals, qualifIcations, experiences, capabilities, references, resources,
approach, and demonstrated competence in performing the work required. Both fIrms were
considered excellent candidates. Development Services Director James Funk, City Planner
Valerie Ross, City Engineer Ray Casey, Planning Consultant William Woolard, Housing and
Community Development Director Maggie Pacheco, and Councilman Frank Schuetz conducted
interviews with the two fIrms. Consideration was given to the proposed fees and the selection
was discussed with the City Administrator. It is recommended that The Planning Center be
selected for the work.
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. 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; landscape
architecture; site planning; design guidelines; redevelopment and rehabilitation plans;
assessments; economic and fIscal impact analysis, and computerized planning system
applications. Three principals of notable planning experience hold the controlling interests of
The Planning Center: Richard E. Ramella, Randal W. Jackson, and Dwayne S. Mears. The
Planning Center has prepared over 25 General Plans, many including the Environmental
Analyses and Housing Elements. Currently, The Plauning Center is updating the General
Plans for Riverside County and the Cities of Rancho Cucamonga, San Buenaventura, and
Anaheim. The Planning Center is 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.
- 3 -
Staff Reoort - continued
The Planning Center would be the lead consultant, acting as the prime contact coordinating
schedules, budget and products. 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
A sub-consultant to The Planning Center is Psomas Associates. A benefit to selecting The
Planning Center is that Psomas was recently selected by the City to prepare the City's
Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Master Plan for a fee not to exceed $250,040. Psomas is also
part of the Ehrenkrantz Eckstut & Kuhn Architects group selected to prepare the Lakes and
Streams Specific Plan. Thus, important components of development and infrastructure will be
better assured of successful integration.
SCOPE OF WORK:
In brief, the scope of work includes the following:
Comoonent I (Mandatory items necessary to be updated)
,( Land Use Element
,( Circulation Element
,( Open Spaces Element
,( Conservation Element
,( Noise Element
,( Safety Element
,( Traffic Impact Analysis
,( Environmental Impact Report
Comoonent II (Optional Items)
,( Economic Development Element
,( Historic Resources Element
,( Parks and Resources Element
,( University District Specific Plan (EIR to be completed as part of General Plan EIR)
,( Verdemont District Area Plan (EIR to be completed as part of General Plan EIR)
,( Tippecanoe/Baseline Infrastructure Plan and Program EIR (to be included in the
GPEIR)
-4-
Staff Reoort - continued
GENERAL PLAN PROCESS:
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:
. Due Diligence - The General Plan update should be initiated by data collection
necessary to conduct the update. Environmental, geotechnical, and transportation
conditions should be documented. Existing policy and implementation programs will
be reviewed and assessed to determine what is necessary, fundable, completed or
politically infeasible. Out of this effort, an environmental setting can be established
and baseline information for future technical studies documented.
. Community Outreach - In order to find out what the issues are and where the
community desires to go in the future, a series of outreach or visioning sessions will
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.
. Implementation Program - 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. The 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.
. General Plan Preparation - Each element would be updated based upon issues raised
in the first three steps, knowledge of the Government Code, case law, and
contemporary experience.
. Public Hearings through Adoption - The public hearing process is the most critical
phase of the project; however, if the legwork is completed in the first phases, it
should be a 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.
- 5 -
Staff Report - continued
COMPARISON OF PROPOSED FEES
Comoonent I
Land Use Element
Circulation Element
Open Space Element
Conservation Element
Noise Element
Safety Element
Subtotal (excluding reimbursables)
Reimbursables - Component I
Total for Component I
Comoonent II
Economic Development Element
Economic and Market Analysis/Synthesis
Historic Resources Element
Parks and Recreation Element
University District Specific Plan (including EIR)
University District Specific Plan (excluding EIR
Tippecanoe/Baseline Infrastructure Plan and Program
EIR
Tippecanoe Infrastructure Master Plan and Master EIR
Reimbursables - Component II
Total for Components I and II (excluding Verdemont)
Verdemont District Area Plan
EIP
$370,916.00
$ 62,765.00
$433,681.00
$10,000.00
Not part of Proposal
$10,850.00
$10,580.00
$45,000.00
$62,880.00
Not Specified
$572,991.00
Not part of Proposal
The Planninl! Center
*These plans are combined for a total of $95,000.00 in the Planning Center Proposal
- 6 -
$319,020.00
$ 35,285.00
$354,305.00
$ 10,720.00
$ 11,850.00
$ 9,720.00
$45,000.00*
$ 36,000.00
$ 12,903.00
$485,078.00
$50,000.00*
$535,078.00
SCHEDULE:
Staff Reoort - continued
The General Plan (including option items) and Environmental Impact Reports are scheduled for
adoption by the City Council in December 2002.
Task Number
Task 1
Task 2
Task 3
Task 4
Task 6
Task 7
Task 8
Descriotion
Project Kick-off
Community Issues Report
Alternatives Report
General Plan Preparation
Environmental Analysis
General Plan Adoption
Comoonent Two Soecial Studies
Tippecanoe Infrastructure
University District Area Plan
Verdemont Specific Plan
Comoletion Date
Early September 2001
Mid-November 2001
Mid-December 2001
Mid-December 2002
End of October 2002
Mid-December 2002
Mid-May 2002
Mid-December 2002
Mid-December 2002
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
This Agreement for Services, not to exceed $530,000 for both Component I and II, will be
charged to Account No. 001-190-5502 (Professional/Contractual Services). This amount was
budgeted in the 2001/02 budget.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Resolution.
- 7 -
Citv of San Bernardino General Plan Uodate RFP
BACKGROUND
The City of San Bernardino was incorporated in 1854 with an area of about one square mile and
a population of about 1,200. The City has grown significantly, to where it currently
encompasses an incorporated area of over 55 square miles with a population of 190,000 and a
planning area of 65 square miles and a population of over 200,000. The City's last major
General Plan revision was in 1989.
The City has an at-large elected Mayor and seven Common Council members representing the
different wards of the City. An appointed City Administrator carries out the day-to-day
administration of the City. An elected City Attorney, Treasurer, and City Clerk also serve the
City.
PROJECT OBJECTIVE
The project objective is to engage the services of a qualified consulting firm to develop a
comprehensive and legally defensible General Plan consistent with state law including the
necessary EIR.
TIME LINE
The City desires to have a completed General Plan Update and EIR within fourteen (14) months
from the date that the Consultant is selected by the Mayor and Common Council and a contract
has been executed for the services.
ANTICIPATED SCOPE OF WORK
ComDonent I - General Plan Update and Environmental Impact Report
The General Plan Update and preparation of the EIR shall include the following:
PART 1 - General Plan Update Program Initiation
1.1 Project Initiation Meeting - An initiation (or "kickoff') meeting with staff will be held to
accomplish the following:
. Provide an overview of community issues
. Provide an overview of the environmental setting
. Identify available resources
. Define key player roles
. Identify contact agencies, organizations, and individuals
. Refine the Work Program, Scope of Work, and schedules
. Establish product review procedures
. Establish strategy for General Plan Update consistency with ongoing development
app lications/proj ects
06/21/0 J
Otv of San Bernardino General Plan Update RFP
. Determine optimum scale and format for General Plan maps in coordination with the
City's Development Services and MIS Departments
. Provide base maps
. Provide examples of and/or discuss suggested General Plan formats for text and
graphics
. Define the public participation process
1.2 Review Existing Planning Documents & Other Resource Materials
. The Consultant will be expected to consult and coordinate with all appropriate
governmental agencies at the federal, state, regional, and local levels as deemed
pertinent to the preparation of the General Plan Update and EIR.
. Existing Planning and Engineering resources are identified in Attachment A
1.3 Base Map Preparation
Base maps are available from the City of San Bernardino Information Services (IS)
Department. The City will provide the following Arc/Info GIS data and ArcView
electronic mapping (contact Ruth Parish, OAlGIS Coordinator at 909-384-5947 with any
questions):
. Existing General Plan & Zoning
. Existing school district boundaries
. Public facilities including police, fire, joint response areas (but not parks and
recreation sites and facilities or trails)
. Water service areas
. Sewer service areas
. Storm drain sub-areas
1.4 Data Gathering - The Consultant shall conduct studies and perform analysis of land use,
physical features, infrastructure, and the necessary environmental evaluation for
preparation of the General Plan Update and accompanying EIR, with utilization of, but
not limited to, the documents listed under Information Resources.
1.5 The City will provide the following:
. Duplication and distribution of the community questionnaire/survey, if any
. Duplication and distribution of meeting and workshop memos
. Arc/Info GIS data and ArcView electronic mapping from existing available
resources. Contact Ruth Parish, OAlGIS Coordinator at 909-384-5947 with any
questions. (See Attachment B for available mapping resources)
. Copies or access to existing resources (see Attachment A), as requested by the
Consultant
2
06/2 lIO I
CiN of San Bernardino General Plan UTJdate RFP
PART 2 - Community Issues Summary - Prepare, review, and finalize draft reports
2.1 Data Resource Analysis - A concise analysis of previously identified issues and new
issues identified during the public participation process.
. Summary of present conditions
. Analysis of key changes and constraints to set the stage for alternatives and policy
formulation
. Evaluation of important inter-relationships among various planning issues and
tradeoffs between solutions
2.2 Public Participation Process - Define the future of the community through the following
actions:
. Community and Business Leaders - Interviews
. Community Workshops - The City desires seven (7) community workshops. These
workshops may be held during the weekday evenings and/or on Saturdays.
. Community Service Providers - Interviews and/or workshop
2.3 Final Community Issues Report Preparation - The results of all of the previous work will
be compiled into a General Plan Update Issues Report
PART 3 - Alternatives Report
3.1 Alternatives - Target Areas Land Use Scenarios
3.2 Alternatives Presentation Workshops
. Community workshop to review and comment on community issues and update the
General Plan Alternatives Report
. Joint Planning Commission and Mayor and Common Council workshop to solicit
comments on the Community Issues and Alternatives Reports and select a preferred
alternative
PART 4 - General Plan Preparation
4.1 Vision Statement, General Plan Profile, and Land Use Map
4.2 General Plan Profile Presentation Workshops
. Community workshop to review and comment on the General Plan Update
. Joint Planning Commission and Mayor and Common Council workshop to solicit
comments on the Vision Statement, General Plan Profile, and Land Use Map
3
06/21/01
City orSon Bernardino General Plan Uodate RFP
4.3 Updated General Plan Elements - The selected consulting firm shall update the following
mandatory elements:
. Land Use (including Hillside Management Overlay District)
. Circulation - including:
. A determination of the total net change in traffic volume for the sum of all
proposed changes in land use, and provide a Traffic Impact Analysis as necessary
to satisfy the CEQA and the San Bernardino County Congestion Management
Program (CMP), requirements.
. Recalculate the total employment, housing, and population for each Traffic
Analysis Zone (TAZ) within the City Limits and Sphere ofInfluence. The City
will provide a map of SANBAG's Comprehensive Transportation Plan Traffic
Analysis Zones (CTP TAZ).
. A transportation/circulation study that will evaluate the existing street system,
public transit, bike laneslpaths and pedestrian paths and determine future
circulation needs.
. Open Space
. Conservation (including archeological, biological, energy, water and natural
resources components from the existing General Plan)
. Noise
. Safety (including geology, seismic, flooding, fire wind, hazardous materials and use
components from the existing General Plan)
Parsons Harland Bartholomew, Associates, Inc. has prepared a draft of an updated
Housing Element; this element will be adopted within a few months. The General Plan
Consultant will be responsible for incorporating and ensuring consistency with the
Housing Element.
Existing General Plan components of Urban Design, Historical Resources, Economic
Development, Parks and Recreation, Utilities/Services, and Public Facilities/Services are
not included. The Consultant is requested to address these components as options later in
this RFP.
Also, a related Economic Survey is being prepared by Economic Research Associates
and will provide data valuable for the general plan update.
4.4 Implementation
. Measures
. Funding Sources
. The Consultant shall be responsible for coordinating and recommending amendments
to the existing Development Code necessitated by the General Plan Update and EIR.
The City shall be responsible for processing the amendments. This product of this
task should be in a document separate from the General Plan.
4
06/2 I/O 1
Gitv of San Bernardino General Plan Uodale RFP
4.5 Document Preparation
. The Consultant may consider flexibility in organizational format (including
consolidation or combination of elements reorganized along functional lines that
recognize the relationship ofthe issues or components).
. All resources for necessary data collection
. There shall be an emphasis on providing information visually through the use of
pictures, tables, matrixes and maps.
. The product is expected to be user friendly, accurate, concise and written in a manner
easily understood by the public.
. Appendices must be well organized and formatted for ease in reference. The
document text must clearly indicate where supporting documentation and/or evidence
for conclusions, policies or synopsis of data is found. The relationship must be clear,
concise and consistent between the General Plan Update, technical appendices, and
the EIR.
. All elements, whether in combined format or individually prepared, shall meet the
requirements set forth in the Government Code of the State of California for such
elements, as modified by the most current legislation affecting such element, at date
of adoption.
4.5 Deliverables shall include the following:
. Twenty- five slant three ring clear view cover binders to serve as workbooks for the
elected, appointed and staff workbooks
. Monthly feature articles for inclusion in subsequent issues of the City's newsletter
. One (1) photo ready meeting and/or workshop follow-up memo
. One (1) photo ready copy of the screen check draft of the general plan and EIR
. One (1) photo ready copy of the of the draft general plan with colored land use maps
and EIR
. One (1) photo ready copy of the of the draft general plan with black and white land use
maps and EIR
. One (1) photo ready copy of the draft general plan and EIR for black and white
reproductions
. One (1) photo ready copy of the copy of the final general plan and EIR for black and
white reproductions
. Two (2) Mylar, black line, base maps of the 1 "=1,000' general plan maps depicting
general plan land use and circulation
. Photo ready copies of meeting notices, announcement, advertisements, etc.
. All notices for the distribution of environmental documents (City will make copies of
the DEIRlFinal ErR and General Plan and distribute the documents)
5
06/21/01
ON orSon Bernardino General Plan Update RFP
PART 5 - Environmental Impact Report
. The EIR shall be prepared for the General Plan Update in accordance with the latest
procedural and substantive requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA).
. The Consultant shall be responsible for all the procedural steps including but not
limited to the following:
5.1 Scoping meeting - The Consultant shall be responsible for the scheduling and noticing of
the scoping meeting
5.2 Initial Study and Notice of Preparation
5.3 Screen Check Draft EIR
5.4 Draft EIR and Notice of Completion and Availability
5.5 Facts and Findings and Response to Comments
5.6 Statement of Overriding Considerations (if applicable) Final EIR
5.7 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
. The Consultant shall develop recommendations for a mitigation monitoring system
designed to ensure accomplishment ofthe goals contained in the General Plan.
Recommended implementation measures shall be appropriate for each element. The
implementation program should also include an estimated time frame for completion.
shall be developed Mitigation Monitoring requirements of AB3l80 shall be
demonstrated. The Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) shall be provided as a
portion of the EIR.
. A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) is required to be included in the EIR. The City will
perform the modeling for the TIA.
. The Consultant shall develop recommended levels of significance that can be used by
the City as part of its environmental evaluation offuture development projects. The
levels of significance are intended to facilitate the identification of development
projects that may generate adverse environmental impacts as defined by the CEQA
and the City of San Bernardino. The standardized levels of significance shall be
provided as a portion of the EIR.
. A technical appendix shall be a part of the EIR and shall include all supporting
documents.
6
06/21101
Citv or San Bernardino General Plan Undate RFP
PART 6 - General Plan Adoption Process
6.1 Public Hearings
. The Consultant shall be responsible for the presentation of all documents to the
approval bodies (Development/Environmental Review Committee, Planning
Commission, and Mayor and Common Council) and the public through a series of
public workshops and hearings.
. The City has identified a minimum of two (2) D/ERC, two (2) Planning Commission,
and two (2) City Council meetings at which Consultant's attendance will be required.
Typically, the Planning Commission meetings are held during the week at 7:00 p.m.
on the Tuesday following Mayor and Common Council meetings. Mayor and
Common Council meetings are routinely held on the first and third Mondays of each
month commencing at 9:00 a.m.
6.2 Findings for General Plan Adoption and EIR Certification
6.3 Final General Plan
PART 7 - Program Administration
7.1 The Consultant shall be responsible for the management and supervision of the
Consultant's team, including monitoring of the project budget.
. 7.2 Meetings and Graphics
. Consultant shall be responsible for coordinating with staff; conducting all meetings;
preparing agendas, draft public notices, and mailing lists; postage; and, related
activities
. Consultant shall be responsible for providing the City with one (I) camera-ready copy
of each document for in-house review and/or public review
. The General Plan update shall encompass the existing city boundaries and current
Sphere ofInfluence
. Consultant and Planning staff shall develop the project schedule (with milestone
dates) based on a one-year time frame to commence upon approval ofthe Agreement
for Professional Services by the City Council
7.3 GIS DatalMapping and Related Requirements
. Consultant shall provide computerized map data in Arclnfo/ArcView Version 8 (to be
released shortly), GeoDataBase, and NAD 83 State Plane, Zone 5. (See Attachment
C for a listing of the mapping products)
. Consultant shall provide CD-ROM of all documents (draft and final general plans and
other reports and environmental documents) in the latest versions of Microsoft Word
and Excel. The Final General Plan will be posted on the City's web site by the City.
The CD version should therefore include all text and integrated graphics.
7
06/21101
Citv orSon Bernardino General Plan Update RFP
7.4 General Plan Update Project Team Meetings - Conducted by Development Services Staff
and the Consultant at least once a month throughout the update process.
7.5 Progress Reports - The Consultant shall submit a monthly progress report to
Development Services Department staff in conjunction with billing/invoices.
7.6 Intergovemmental Coordination
. The Consultant will review the existing City of San Bernardino General Plan,
Development Code and other pertinent materials on file with the City and other
agencies such as the County of San Bernardino, the Cities of Highland, Colton, Lorna
Linda, Redlands and Rialto, and various other agencies which may have an impact
upon the General Plan Update.
7.7 Project Schedule
. The Consultant shall develop a project schedule for the completion of the scope of
work within the specified time frame. The schedule shall include the timing for
significant required work tasks, public participation meetings and public hearings by
the approval bodies.
Comoonent II - Special Studies
Please identify and describe options and suggestions for additional work beyond the basic
General Plan Update and EIR identified as Component I above. Please include, at a minimum,
the following options:
. Consultants suggestions for additional work as part of the General Plan (not identified in
Component I) not identified above
. Urban Design Element (update)
. Economic Development Element (update)
. Infrastructure/Utilities Element (new)
. Historic Resources Element (update)
. Public Services Element (update)
. Parks and Recreation Element, including a trails network (update)
. Infrastructure Master Plan and Master EIR for Tippecanoe Light Industrial Area (see
Attachment D)
. A Specific Plan (or other approach to be suggested by Consultant) for the area abutting
California State University. A village meets campus concept is envisioned (see attachment
8
06/2110 J
Citv or San Bernardino General Plan UDdate RFP
. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS
The City of San Bernardino desires a work product that is reflective of the needs and
expectations of the residents, not just a restatement of the existing General Plan goals, policies,
and objectives. This planning process will provide for the correction of past defects and
exploration of new solutions. The Consultant should demonstrate not only an ability to be a
problem solver, but also capable of presenting innovative approaches with new and workable
solutions.
A favorable response from references regarding timeliness, meeting deadlines and creative
problem solving will be important factors. The intent is to gauge the general skills of the firm,
the specific talents of key personnel, and the quality of products previously produced.
Content of ProDosal ResDonse
Your proposal shall include the following in summary form using the same sequence, not to
exceed thirty (30) pages (excluding company information and staff qualifications):
Proposal order
. Letter of transmittal signed by an individual authorized to bind the proposing entity to
the proposal for a period of 90 days
. Executive Summary
. Description of the Consultant's understanding of the City's need and a detailed plan
demonstrating how the Consultant will satisfy these needs.
. List of five (5) or more references for General Plan work for the firm and staff
proposed for the project
Company information and staff qualifications (provide separately)
. General information about the Consultant and any subcontractors (i.e., company size,
location of offices, years in business, organization chart, number of classifications of
staff)
Areas of reSDonse
A. Key Personnel
The proposal shall include the names of all key personnel who are employed by the
proposed and/or proposed subcontractor(s) and who will be assigned to perform services
pursuant to the contract, and their e-mail addresses. The proposal shall also indicate the
percentage of project effort to be spent by each key personnel member. In addition, the
proposal shall identify a designated project manager with full authority to administer the
contract. Any proposed substitutions of personnel are discouraged and must be approved
in advance by the City.
9
06/21101
Citv or San Bernardino General Plan UDdate RFP
For each person identified, the following information must be provided:
A brief, complete statement of each key person's work and educational
background, giving the number of years of experience, title or function while
gaining the experience; the dates of the projects cited for relevant experience; and
the relationship of that key person to the major goals of the project cited. In
addition, the proposal should cite any related projects that have been legally
challenged, information on the nature of the challenge, and the determination of
those cases.
The City reserves the right to verify each key person's experience and/or education and
call upon references.
B. Description of the Issues
The proposal shall include a summary of the firm's understanding of the issues
confronting the City, including potential issues that may arise, based upon the
Consultant's work and experience in other jurisdictions.
C. Methodology
The proposal shall specifically indicate what procedures and methodologies the
Consultant intends to utilize in undertaking each phase of work and how such work will
be incorporated into the Genera Plan Update. The description shall be in sufficient detail
to permit evaluation of the relative merits of the analysis and procedures.
D. Project Schedule
Provide a proposed time schedule for the project that demonstrates how the update will
be completed within the fourteen (14) month time frame. The schedule shall indicate all
milestones and the critical path necessary for the project.
E. Subcontractors
The identification of each proposed subcontractor, if any, its tasks, schedule, costs, etc.,
shall be included. The form and content of all subcontractor-provided products shall be
described in detail. Subcontractors must also meet all requirements requested of the
selected Consultant and be approved by the City.
F. Project Costs
Component I. This Component is the completion of the General Plan Update and EIR,
and related tasks, including required meetings.
. Please identify the activities and work products to be completed by the Consultant for
a fixed fee of $350,000.
10
06/21101
Citv or San Bernardino General Plan Undate RFP
. Consultants are requested to submit Proposed Costs in a "menu" format to permit
item by item cost identifications for Component 1. The costs shall be presented in a
format that allows identification of total costs for the General Plan Update and EIR.
Proposal Cost shall include printing and production, equipment costs, transportation
costs and other direct costs.
. A project budget that includes an itemized list of the costs associated with each task
identified in the Scope of Services. The itemized list shall include the cost per task,
hours required to complete each task, and the associated hourly rate(s) for all
Consultant and sub-consultant costs. The Not-to- Exceed costs must include all fees
and expenses that the Consultant expects to be compensated or reimbursed for,
including all costs for reproduction of materials, and attendance at meetings, public
meetings and/or hearings.
. The anticipated public workshops (II) and hearings (6) total seventeen (17) meetings.
The Consultant shall specify the fixed cost, per meeting, to be charged for public
meetings and workshops required by the City in addition to the seventeen (17)
currently desired by the City.
. A copy of the Consultant's hourly rate schedule with direct costs broken out
separately from overhead rates, and a written statement that said hourly rate schedule
is part of the Consultant's quote for use in invoicing for extra work incurred that is
not part ofthis RFP.
. A statement that all charges for services will be a "not to exceed fee", as submitted
with and made a part of said Consultant's quote.
. A statement that this RFP shall be incorporated in its entirety as a part of the
Consultant's quote.
The RFP does not commit the City to pay for any costs incurred in the preparation of a
response.
Component II. Please include a proposed fee for each additional option identified in
Component II above and any additional studies and/or options recommended by the
Consultant.
G. Proposal Fee and Payment Schedule
H. Describe your firm's philosophy regarding the role of the Consultant versus the role of
the City throughout the update process.
1. Describe the general steps that can be taken to reduce overall costs.
J. Provide any other information that you feel is relevant to this General Plan Update
process and that will assist the City in selecting the Consultant.
11
06/21101
Proposed Budget
City of San Bernardino General Pian Update and EIR
u .
TASK ',.IJEIlE1W.ADDnJDN1'IIOCfU'Fw,;((~;,':':,. .
6.3 Anal PIIn
Tilt
TASKS_ ;U,ANAL
S raltElR!
Notll: Task 3.1 InlraslruClull1 Anal~ls will be bltlecl II $12,000 pet target arll. The number 01 large'.reas receiving an analysis of in"lslruclure will be
allheCily'sdlSCfetlon.
Nt.
RElMB SABUEXI' 'N
COMI'ONENTlWD rOTAL
p~-'(""
~CirculJlionEIomenI
r PacanoelnlfaslruCllr.MaslerPlanIlldElR
UnlvertilyOillrlct cillePlln
COMPONENT TWO LABOR TOTAL
Tu'
"20,10
* The number 01 Trlllic Counls wig be Itlhe Cl!y's discretion. TraUlc Counta wlM be bllledlllhe !ollowlng ratas:
AM and PM 2 hf mlnuallumlng counlS alselectad intersections (iI necessary)
AM, noon, and PM 2 hr manulllumlng counts al10 seleclad Intersections (iI necessary)
24 hr machine counlS al100 satecled roaOway segments
S175/Counl
S2501Counl
S1001Count
Tft'
V
/
RElMBURWLE EXI'fIISES
COMI'OIIEItT 1WO roTAL
.
..,
. ;"'~\'>; :~~::"~
:'"
Proposed Budget
City of San Bernardino General Plan Update and EIR
THE PLANNING CENTER
~,
,
,i?4fj~,'t.
"
,
JJ $10..35
" $10.435
'f!11
""i$~<!!lliil'.li;(,~i
S14,32O
13,240
40
,
"
~i<ff,
'40
"
..
.
",,)I;i,,"m~~'(i; . '~~,,,:4;f.',f;i;',,.;~:.,'fl~';'
20 $1.600
.
"
"
,
"
28
II
..
"
III
"
"
,10
7,22
II.
.000
10.400
80
i.O\iR,
~~~ ~Y'.Jf.l"'1,::;:)I:;W,'~>
II SMOO
80 651 1.250
IT, 11,6
II .630
31
"
J
"
.
~};! ,1)';:0\:1>';'-;'.,
B2 $9,420
49 3.760
f.f 15.240
.
.
"
~ J..&i
'li:;':;~"W11i~t!t<l)\",,~,.~,*'':~'~ )~i.;,v.;j1ij~'*'~\'
II
" 10.31
28 ,J
10
.
"
.1tIt8l:M
II<
"
"~'*;ti">:if:rM~'" :~,i"Y~1iiJ?t'
112 160 2.232 tfJA
'80
nUN
,Jt,1tNJ
IUOO
'UNO "',/HID NlA
UR LE ENSES
COMfOIIEN1ONlTOTAL
'201,280
125,745
un,OII!
l2
" S2,4~C
D so
D
.. .0 552,SO
" '" $\3.800
'200. *
J,D32 WA
.. 110100 . m,N'
Rf OR . ,"
COMI'ONEKrTWOTOTAL 330,10$
'"
"
..
..
'''''9Y''$'II,,;l.''':;?~''~-,~~'a,';J;I:~IV'!;'''l}~''::'''I<:\4\ANwl1;'li<f~i~';#i"~\~-.I!i\t'1"'.'i'l!~:~;,;t;~~l?,i!;. il.'
ENTTWO TAL S 48 124 1 44
"'"
115111 S1.04O
.",,,
SUN
UJ"
",oo
"..
* ESlimatt only. The eo'llo, I Spedlic Plan may range betw..n $150,000 and $350,000 depending upotl 'h,
delltedoulcom.8r\dd8p1holall8lytls.
r.
:....,:...~ r:;;~i
"~i
Proposed Budget
City of San Bernardino General Plan Update and EIR
TEAM SUMMARY
_TA8K-3."'ALTERNA,TIVE , ~.~:
3.1 Ta etAreasancllandUseScenarios 10
3.2 AllemaUvel Presentalion Workshop
.
:TASK 4~ OENERAH'fAlU'REPARATION~
4.1 land Use Map
4.2 General Plan Elemenls
4.2.1 General Plan Slructure and Fonnal
4.2.2 land Use Elemenl
4.2.3 CifClIIationElemenl
4.2.4 n S und Conservation Element
4.2.5 NoiseElemenl
4.2.6 Sale Element
4.3 1m lememaliOll
or
" .
TASK 2 " COMMUNlTY'I88UES-'REIWRT.';;"
2.1 ComlTul" IssllIsRe Pre .,aOOn
.2 PubllcPaI1icipalionProcess
2.2.1 FocusGroups
2.2.2 Workiho
l~',~"
'8,640
110,435
,rO,435
.
!it"1"
114,320 *
13,240
",'"
,800
$5,800
~'f<I-d. iIJj;ij.;' ~;;'.
",4DtJ
'5,800
'2,3rO
'7,220
$74,300 171,900 **
'4,000
110,400
'2,960
IB.060
$2,310
$7,220
1<,600
4,000
$10,400
2,960
$6,060
10 ,143DtJ
'4,600
'0 '11.100
,,,'
. ."
TASK6,~~ENVIRQNMENTAUNALY8IS~'-;'~
5.1 NOP/lnllialSlud
5.2 DRAFT EIR/NOC
5.3 Res ID CommenlS/Final EIRlNOO
5.-4 SlalemenlofDveni' Considerations
7,400
." .
,TASK fl~OENERAU'iAN,ADDPTION'
6.1 Public Hearl S
6.2 FJndlrlgsforGPandEIR
6.3 Final General Plan
OCEI.'
~TASK:;l~ I'RDOIIAMAMINlI111A
7.1 P ramMa men!
.2 Ueeti 8
7.3 GISOaliJMa
iCDMI'ONENTONE1'D1ALS ,..
'F,~rJl!'.
~Tour '3.10
UrbanOes' n Element (Upc\IIe 11,3011
HislDricResourcesElemef'll Updale) '5,1211
PublicServlcesE1ement "". '5,110
Parks and Recttalion Element UpGale '4,5BD
Expanded Clrculalion Element $90,000 '90,000
Economic Development Element (Upda1e $2,470 $8,250 'UI,720
Economic and Market Ana r. 10 $11,850 '11,150
fiscal Ana sis 10 $17,550 '17,550
ippecaooe InlrastrucltJre MaSlel Plan $52,750 $61,098 $14.950 "lB,l98
UniversityOlslric1 "
Area Plan 13,800 113,100
"" , ***
COMI'ONE"UWO.TOTAL8~~,~,k~t :~~\. I$"'-i'
$2 ... "',09B '31,650 '119,900 '511,SD8
'31745 13,100 '300 ".. 141,245
1330,105 164,198 '31,950 '120,400 '553,153
* Task 3.1 Infrastruclure Analysis wiD be billed at $12,000 per larget area. The number 011alg'81 areas recsiving an analysis of
infrastructure will be althe City's discrelion.
** The number or Trame Countl will be allhe City's disctelion. Trafllc Counls will be billed allhe following rales:
AM and PM 2 hr manuatlurning counts al selected Intef&ecllons (if necessary) $1751Counl
AM, noon. and PM 2 hr manualtumlng counts all0 ",Iectsd intersections (if necessary) $2501Count
24 hr machine counts al100 selected roadway segmantl $lOO1Count
**.* Estimate only. The cosllor a SpecifiC Plan may range between $150,000 and $350,000 depending upon Ihe desired oulcome
and depth 01 analysis.
,.".'.. i
II I ! I II
' ,
, I
Ii - ,
Ii -,
i
I Ii .~ I IJ
-1 , . II i
I I
I
,
,
U
i .
I
,
".----j
, !
h1~
,s ~
<," F<,:
,;: 8
I
i
-!
I
I
I I
ir-1
f I
"1
~!
I~
0;;; i~
E-C :t
0"- ill
~ E ..
DO", :t
13~~O
~ ~ ~ Ei ~
"E a ~I:t
uts & _~ _5w
H~HI.'~
V> 0 0 0 t: 'II)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'lCI:
C Q) Q) 0 g_....
s(!)(!)~ _I
I- ~
Q: ,,:
I '.~
III 'I-
'Ill: Ill:
· :f3 :'2
------" i:l II!
I~ ' !II
3: ~ ~ ~
L I~ i I'~
~,g::e e:: z:
a 2 I'" . 8! i5
- 0\& 0" ~:;::I'"
o ~ ~ i,' ~ g ....
~ Q,la. to ~{iI'ilC
~Bg..'N .cE:C'1
-0~5 ~ 'E"i~
~ 0 QJ>-II) .QIU)
oo8.? ~ ~:Ol~
ItOc:lU U6:!
i
I
i
.1
IJ
i
I
!:
1i
I
':t
10
it:
~
III
ll:
o G.
o g.~
~~l
~ 3 ..
~ c c
"2 ll:
5 Q III
~ C :t
-g 9l ....
~ &: "
gill 't
",;; ~
1D ~ U)
g$ ~
~"
______J_
I
1:1:
to
:i:
'G.
8~ I!
~a; '::I
"'RIG.
~S I;
"",Ill:
c _~ ~ au
~~I:t
fi B8!~
~~.20 i,~
"-~ill~
H&~ ~
o 0 ~ 0 I,.....
zO~c;) .
!
.
,
II
I
,
,
I
.
.
Ij
I
I
I
l~
Ii:
I~
i!2
- nn':I:
i',S!
IQ
~ illlll: '"
~ ::& :?
g il I
o !_(5
~ !O
~2 15:1t
g, a:: le,a.
._ -0 I "'"
~ f,j I ~
~~-o!~
~&& :
.
,
C I .g
olE
o:! ~
o 0
~ Ii
~ ~ 1J,
~, ~~
j:; ~~
Ct) 0-0;
.... ~-~
S ~5
~ 6~
~ ~o;
U) go
~U
c .iJ?
~ g>:lj
&"3
~ g.~
~~a
-8- is
if Q
o!aQ
","'u
~,
,
I
I I
I
I
'.-j
,
I
I
I'
...:
I
'~
i
I
I
,
'I
'I
,
-"I
Ii
~
~I
I
i
'~
I
I
!
1
,
,
i
~
~
,J ~ I~
~ .,~ ~ ~
· __m!~ m__ i~ mmll __m.___ i ~
I ~ I~Q I Q. -I 0 " I 'l
· I~ 1 !~ ~~i'..~ i ~ ~il~
,~ It: t: Ii: QJ ~<Il. s:. ~ 0 ~ _4:
~5i.~ g i~ ~'~I'~ t ~ ~81~
5211 ~-~Im g~~ ~~~! ~~r~'
,,0>&'0 ,"j,ol -gffi'Ilj ". ~ qllll
o.~ !!! 1,(,) !!! ,Q.I' CC 0 ~ ie" Q e; w _5 II; ~ 80 IC!I
..>t.Qla..I. ~()" .,,0-1, _ oc +::.... ~u _I'
.rdfj o.'_N "ct;r, g UlI'" ~.Q~~ II) ~O.Q;:ca
~ (9 ~ I,~ E ~ I':~ ~;g i ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ I ~ ~ i~
~~ffili! ~j)'i! ~]jli! -g~~o. i! oBa~!i!
,to~1 ' ()~ I Q<ti S0l!l!; zo&t51
, I I I
I
L
I
h
j
,
,
L~
o
Ii:
I~
-------If:!
I!:
~ I ~
~ I~
~ r0
gel Q
'" ~.Q Ill:
g> ~ Q.
o <1; ~ ..
~~&!~
~ ~ ~ It!
~u::u::1
,
I
I '
I
,+,'
I i
.rr
i i
1cD
I I
-t1
I j
11
. I I
11
-U
. I
.
.
.
'"
g,
%
'"
"E g
tu
8>0..
c ~_~
~Q'Q
D8ll
. Q
~C58
I
I'
Citv or San Bernardino General Plan Uodate RFP
K. Professional Services Agreement
Attached to this RFP and marked "Attachment E" (to be sent under separate cover), is the
City's standard Professional Services Agreement. The Consultant proposal, this RFP,
and all subsequent modifications to either document will be included as appendices to the
Agreement. It is recommended that the Consultant have legal counsel review the '
Agreement prior to submittal. Any exceptions to the language and content of the
Agreement must be noted and explained in the Consultant proposal. If no exceptions are
made, then the Consultant agrees to be bound by, and thereby represents its ability to
satisfy all terms of the Agreement, if selected.
SELECTION PROCESS AND EVALUATION CRITERIA
A. Selection Process
The City of San Bernardino Selection Committee will evaluate all eligible responses in
accordance with the criteria listed below. Upon completion of the evaluation phase, the
committee shall interview the consultants to select the firm for recommendation to the
Mayor and Common Council. The Director of Development Services shall forward the
recommendation of the committee to the Mayor and Common Council for final
consideration.
B. Evaluation Criteria
The City's Selection Committee shall evaluate eligible responses based on the following
criteria:
I. Adequate technical resources for performance prior to award of this contract.
2. Professional experience and organizational, technical and editorial skills, prior to
award of this contract.
3. Demonstrated qualifications of the project manager and assurance of her or his
principal involvement in the project until its completion.
4. Ability to conform to the proposed or required performance and time schedule.
5. A satisfactory record of ability and performance in other similar projects,
including specific experience in urban, fiscal and environmental issues.
6. Demonstrated familiarity with and concern for the general planning issues of the
City.
7. Ability and experience to work closely with City staff, Council, advisory bodies
and community.
8, Availability to City stafffor day and evening meetings as required.
9. An equal opportunity employer qualified and eligible to receive and fulfill an
award of this contract under all applicable laws and regulations.
10. Completeness of entire proposal.
11. Information provided by references,
12. Interviews of the Consultants and evaluation of presentations.
12
06/21/01
Citv orSan Bernardino General Plan Update RFP
C. Acceptance of Terms and Conditions
Submission of a proposal pursuant to the RFP shall constitute acknowledgement and
acceptance of all the terms and conditions set forth in this RFP, unless otherwise
expressly stated in the proposal. Unless otherwise expressly stated, the consultants agree
to the contents and scope of the General Plan Update and EIR contained in this RFP and
the content, scope and format of the City's Standard Professional Services Agreement.
D, Financial Responsibility
The Consultant understands and agrees that the City shall have no financial responsibility
for costs incurred by the Consultant in responding to this RFP.
E. Disposition of Proposals
All proposals submitted in response to this RFP will become the property of the City.
The Consultant must identify, in writing, all copyrighted material, trade secrets or other
proprietary information that it claims is exempt from disclosure under the Public Records
Act (California Government Code Sections 6250 et seq.),
SUBMISSION
Ten (10) complete copies of the proposal must be received by the City of San Bernardino no
later than 1:30 p.m. Monday, May 21, 2001. Late proposals will not be accepted. All
proposals and documents submitted become the property of the City of San Bernardino.
Information considered proprietary must be identified as such when the proposal is submitted.
Proposals may be submitted by mail or in person to the address shown below:
James G. Funk, Director
Development Services Department
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 9241S
SCHEDULE OF EVENTS (TENTATIVE)
The City intends to follow, but will not be bound by, the schedule of events that appears below:
Selection Committee Review:
1 :30p.m. Monday May 21, 2001
The week of May 21-25
The week of May 29-June I
Receipt of Proposals:
Consultant Interviews:
Anticipated Consultant Selection and
Contract Award:
Anticipated Consultant Start Date:
Monday June IS, 2001
Tuesday July 2,2001
13
06/21/01
r-
'-
c
1
2
3
4
5
6
CG(Q)~W
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO APPROVING AN
AGREEMENT WITH THE PLANNING CENTER FOR PROVIDING PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES TO UPDATE THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the Mayor is authorized to execute the Agreement with The Planning
7
8
9
10 to exceed $530,000.00, but such agreement shall be effective only upon being fully executed by
Center for providing Professional Services to update the City's Plan (attached and incorporated
herein as Exhibit "A"). A contract is entered into with said firm for the actual costs incurred, not
11
12
13
14
both parties, The Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement on behalf
of the City.
SECTION 2. 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 auth.orized and shall not be implied from any act or
18
19
course of conduct of any party.
SECTION 3. This resolution is rescinded if the parties to the contract fail to execute it
20
within sixty (60) days of passage of the resolution.
21
22 III
23 III
24
25
26
"""-,,
i 27
---
28 ~ (\
- I - 1/0,/01
c
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this _ day of 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
c: 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 (Di~ector) 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
'-"
I
c
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
r
, \,.... 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
c
c
-
'-"
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.
10. 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 ofInterest
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
__ 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 payor 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
r 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 anyone 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.
,-
~
4
,-.
',-
c
,-
~
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 charge, 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. Comorehensive General Liability Insurance. The Consultant shall maintain
comprehensive general liability insurance with a combined single limit of not less
than One Million Dollars ($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 all vehicles leased or owned by
the Consultant and which are used or which may be used to perform any services
under this Agreement.
C. Worker's Comoensation 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.
5
...-.....
'-
.......
'-
-
'-'
24. Notice
Notices, herein shall be presented in person or by certified or registered U.S. mail, as
follows:
To Consultant:
Richard Ramella
Consulting Principal
1580 Metro Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
To City:
James Funk, Director
Development Services Department
300 N. "D" Street, 3rd 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:
Judith Valles, Mayor
Approved as to form
and legal content:
THE PLANNING CENTER
By:
(Signature)
Name:
Title:
6
THE PLANNING CENH:I<
REVISED
PROPOSAL:
.r
\""".-
CITY OF SAN
BERNARDINO
GENERAL PLAN
UPDATE AND EIR
%l
...;
-,
j
rei "
..
~
<:...~
.,
. !
I1lbmimd to:
CITY OF SAN
BERNARDINO
r1
Contact: James G. Funk,
Director
submimd by:
THE PLANNING
CENTER
,#.l""""""
Contact: Richard
Ramella. Consulting
Principal
;'-"
JUNE 22, 2001
....'~-" -
r
\.-
c
/..-..
'--",
~~~ PlANNING
\"'''v CENTER
(,'"rP'/r"f'/I,tI SrntlrJ
1'1.;/lP/P!,:;' 6 (',,-h'-llf f)t'll.~"
1:'nl'''WlmOl1aIStllditJ
l.anJJ' ,'/lr' .-In-htfru"'t
1580 Metro Drive
June 22, 2001
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Mr, James G, Funk
Director of Development Services
City of San Bernardino
300 North "0" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418-5080
Phone: 714,966,9220
FIJ)(,714,966,9227
Email.costamesa@planningcenter.com
Subject:
General Plan Update and Environmental Analysis
Dear Mr, Funk:
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 A. Hoffman Associates, San Buenaventura
Research 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 RFP. We suggest combining Task 4.1 and 4.2 from the RFP with Task 2.1 and 2.2 from
the RFP, 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 to expand our analysis of the UniversityNerdemont area and Tippecanoe area within the
General Plan EIA. This allows a streamlined and unified environmental analysis for the City and targeted
areas.
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
$535,078.
M:\GOYT'IGPICilv of s.. BetrwdinO\COV.. --.~
.-
-
.,.,-....
'-
--
{
'-
,.".-.
"-'
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 revised 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,
~ZJ;t{:'.Jt,
Richard E. Ramella
Consulting Principal
M:~ily cis... .1!:"'-4io41pa......doc
-"",..-
-
r"
\..-
r
L
REVISED
PROPOSAL:
crrv OF SAN
BERNARDINO
GENERAL PLAN
UPDATE AND EIR
~
Jllbmimd'IO:
crrv OF SAN
BERNARDINO
Development Services Department Contact: James G. Funk,
300 North "0" Street Director
San Bemardino, CA 92418
:<i
1580 Metro Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Tel: 714.966.9220 . Fax: 714.966.9221
E-mail: costamesa@planningcenter.com
Website: www.planningcenter.com
j~.
1,,-,
Jllbmimd bv:
THE PLANNING
CENTER
Contact: Richard
Ramella, Consulting
Principal
JUNE 22, 2001
-
c
--.,
; :~
c
~~
-
\.-.
Table of Contents
~
Section
Page
1. EXEC. SUMMARY AND PROJECT UNDERSTANDING......... 1
2. TEAM ORGANIZATION .......................................................... 3
3. WORK PROGRAM ............:..................................................... 5
4. REFERENCES....................................................................... 23
APPENDIX A.. COMPONENT TWO, TIPPECANOE SPECIAL
STUDY AND EIR SUPPORT
APPENDIX B.. SCHEDULE
APPENDIX C.. BUDGET
APPENDIX D.. TEAM QUAUFICATIONS
APPENDIX E .. RESUMES
General Plan Update And Eir
,'I:'.c.:(Jvn(;I".:;.I"".'>J.~,...,.,"..,'"'.H.......J....,."1"'..J_.J..
Page i
~
-
r
~
c
--
,
\.-'
Table of Contents
This page intentionally left blank.
,-
,."
~,.,
:::4
..-:!:
-i
,.~
<to-:'
)i
~.:~
',:.";
.:cor
'-'-:
~
83 Tht Planning unItY-
. -....~- -
Page ii
.~r.,(.nvJ',(./'I(_". ../_..... ~;_f."J .fj:.,.&......J._ 1''"'#-......1..
c
c
,,-
.,-,
1. Exemtive Summary and Project
Understanding
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND
PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
-
General Plan Updau And Eir
w ,(,IIV/I(,,..,'_,,..., ....... r-.Jftb_ll;", '" .~. ",,.....,/,,,.. ,....,.....1./..
.Pride in Progress," as the logo of the existing General Plan states,
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
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
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 Hospitality Lane, the Cal-State University area,
Downtown. and the Inland Center Mall, 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.
Page L
-.....~-
-
r
'-
r
'-'
/"""""
'-
1. Executive Summary and Project
Understanding_
,-
Prepare environmental analyses to support the update of the
General Plan. Our goal is to integrate the consideration of
important environmental issues into the General Plan process
ijself 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 a two-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 fij based
upon budget and schedule,
q
~~
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 benefijs.
{
.-;
;.j
..~.;;
"
."
'"
. .
;:;:~
~ .'
l:B The Planning em''''
-, -~-~- -
....
Page 2
\nC,',vr,(,P't.,,, ."....... H.~..._.(Jl, o/'''''.~~h_ ,....,.......J..
r
\..,j
c
,.-
"'-
2. Team Organization
OVERVIEW
"I rMII\' appreczated rhar The
Plannmg Cenrer had Ollr intertJlJ
joremQII m Ihelr mind! and Ihey
did Ibe beu pOJJible Job Ihat could
be done in our behalf II madt
Ihem Jland om/rom other
fonmlranl! in their field. .,
~nWright
Director of Planning & Oev. Services
City of Clovis
General Plan Update completed
19!J3
"E'lUJont il '''ry l.u/wi abolll JOIIr plan
and exhibits. Pitast paIS OIIr thanh /0
hard worlmrg luff at Tht Planning
Centtr. We kntnv tINy art wor.jng tarl}
and fau 10 gll IbiJ roll-om rratly. ..
- Bryan Speegle
County of Orange EI TOI'O Program
Office
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:
.
The Planning Center - Project Management. Visioning, Public
Outreach, General Plan, Area Plan. and Environmental Analysis
Psomas - GIS, Infrastructure Analysis
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates - Economic Analysis,
Economic Development Element
Transtech - Traffic Analysis, Circulation Element
.
.
.
.
San BuenaventuraResearch Associates - Historic Analysis,
Historic Resources Element
As shown on the following organizational chart, The Planning
Center will be the lead consultant, acting as the prime contact.
coordinating schedules, budget and products. We will be
responsible for the update of the General Plan and Environmental
Impact Report, and the management of the consultant team.
Richard Ramella will serve as the Consulting Principal of the project.
Brian James wifl 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 Planning Center enjoys a long and successful working
relationship with each of the subconsultants on a variety of public
and private sector projects. We are currently working with Psomas.
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 CucarnOnga 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 Updare And Eir
"'.\(.fIVI~(.I~1 If, .,.\J.~_C.", ~.\,o.,c"..."',..~.J..
"Co
Page 3.
-"".-
-
!it
IUt .!1G
~ 1: 'i.Q.
(!J CIl: E g
~ c;, ~ if
:i!: c:' . '"
C....-1W c
:I~!~~
::s;.! I.=!5
~1I.1.!!u
(!J CIlia::
ofl
It '
II.
1ii
='0,
II OJ
aim
C.::.
en
~
..OJ
II'"
Ell!
II"
..,::;:
cu
II '"
";:.-
ale
a.
a:
w
E'
IIi;;
=",
=..
Clc:
..
.!::;:
~-
"0
:I,9!.
o
Q:
..
a.
f'g
.-0:::
II a.
:I..
~!,:
>o~
; 6
Q.~
c:
w
I
i
Iz
i~
';
15
~
! a;,21
'Z, E~
!C! .9! t'O
;&,! ... c:
~,.,--: _ "c:t
."-': i Q;
,0 E~
~: Q. to
, I o:e
cc'l-g
~: '" to
::I Q 0
z:, .~~
!C' 8 c:
I"...",,' c: 0
,'u" 8~
' ...
~".'
,~
~
s
~
..
t!
I~
II
,II)
'"
'"
e
"
o
l3
a:
o
"s
);;
1:
",",_::
:t:!
u,
l!!1
"Mj
I:
>",-j
I
c:
o
i
'3
e
C3
It ,21 :5 ~
j"1!! ~l3"'~lii
Case _-.
..',.,~.c: c: ,Q c:" ~.!:!~
- 0 "'0 m<og-c:
,u11ll1illh '" ~E ~ ;! a: 5 ~
iiS=>enn~~lii~-g~.I!
:;:;o-gcU)Z(J)Q)E't::a:se~
~'O""'c: CiC:O"'''1I
~'=..Ja.o EO);;'!!::>:>
i.g Ou -'~:X:~'c:
10.. c a.:.::;)
G.:! w
IU-I
;1::
...!
L...;." .
lei)
IIU
... ,
is':
'U,
10
ill)
III)
'cc
..
II)
i
o
11),
'II.
L__
'"
5
C>> ~
.E (/)
a. ~
g.~ .s:
::;:Cl",
'" 0
~ ~
~
Q.
;.::
~:
---,-
-
,...
c
\-'-."
r
\..-
r
\
.........,
3. Work Program
COMPONENT ONE
TASK 1.0
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
PROGRAM INmATION
Task 1.1
Project Initiation Meeting
"Exptritnct with many ormr projtflJ
mggtSII that investing ,hi proper rtJOl/rcll
ana alllnrion allhis itagt (JIlIN projtrr
wi" yitld Jllbsl4mial dividtnth laler ?n. ..
Task 1.2
Data Gathering and Review
of Existing Documents and
Resource Materials
This section of the proposal describes the work to be done and the
products to resuit 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 lit wrth 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.
This portion of the update process is designed to set the stage for
effective collaboration between the City and rts consultants by
clarifying what is to be accomplished, who is to do it, and when they
must get it done.
The City staff and consultant team must work in close collaboration
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
environmental setting
. Introduce and deline roles of key participants
. Identify contact agencies, organizations and individuals
. Reline Work Program, Scope and Schedule
. Share expectations and develop a strategy for the project
. Gather documents, data and base map
. Discuss formatting information
Task 1.1 Deliverables
. Kick-off meeting
~
The Planning Center will collect and analyze the necessary
elements involved in the General Plan Update and accompanying
EJR, including information from the City and Federal, State, regional
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,
General Plan Update And fir
,W:\("('Vn(;",(:",,,,_\,,.~,,,,,,,c,,,,-!,,,,,,,'I.,...mJ,..,.~.,;..
Page ~.
-"",..-
-
c
c
r
\.....
3. Work Program
Task 1.3
Base Map Preparation
TASK 2.0
COMMUNITY ISSUES
REPORT
Task 2.1
Community Issues Report
Preparation
~ Cost Savings Opportunity
Task 2.2
Public Participation Process
--
Task 1.2 Deliverables
. General Plan Evaluation Matrix
Psomas will oversee the integration of existing GIS coverages and
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. dig~al 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 Rles in City's GIS Files
1
~'-i
,.
<
~C5
This task will be devoted to ensuring a solid understanding of the
cond~ions, trends, issues, and potentials to be addressed in the
updated General Plan. It will also begin the serious exploration of
policy options City leaders should consider.
Based on the "getting smart" tasks described in Task 1.0 and our
meetings with City Staff and community members described in Task
2.2, we will compile an inventory of issues relevant to the
preparation of the General Plan and EIA. The inventory will include
a summary of present cond~ions. 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.
To save time and budget, we propose combining the General Plan
Profile into Tasks 2.1 and 3.2.
.~
'c-"~
'.:if
: }
<
rt~
;.:'"
. :i
Task 2.1 Deliverables:
. General Plan Update Issues Report and Vision Statement
The purpose of this task is centered on gaining an understanding of
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.
EB Tht Pla1l1ling ernltrC
'- +...-~.- -
Pagt 6
."'I{.m.~"'(,f"I.:,...~ .\..... ~J_.f_'.. .,.....11........."... ,.,......1"'"
(,
c
--
r
'-
3, Work Program
TASK 3.0
ALTERNATIVES
Task 3.1
Target Areas and Land Use
Scenarios
Establish and Prepare
Land Use Alternatives
,-
Gentred Plan Update And Eir
,11:1(.01 -/'(,f~/ ",.oI};.,..n.n.....Ji_;UJ. uI:...../'-.....,j,.f'..,.....IJ..
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 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 workshop'S
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.
Widespread changes in land use patterns are not anticipated.
However, selective focus areas require detailed policy direction and
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, and the Rail Road Depot.
~
Based on the preceding input and issues evaluation, focused
Community Plan alternatives will be formulated for the target areas,
Research to be conducted on economic development
opportunities, the appropriateness of current land use patterns and
regulations will be utilized in structuring practical concepts where
particular problems andlor 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,
Pal{~:7
-
...
c
c
r
'-
3. Work Program,
Target Area Infrastructure
Analysis
.-
The Public Infrastructure System phase involves developing a
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 identffication of key issues. data collection and
synthesis. development of baseline condnions. 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.
,"1
..:.-.-
l>>.'.
~
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 andlor study
reports.
i
, ;
. -..;
<.:J!
:t
Develop baseline conditions
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,
n 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,
~',""
...:.1
;-1
In regards to water, it is assumed that the existing water masterl
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 masterl
distribution plan.
EB Tbe Pla""ing Ctnl~:
". --~- -
Page 8
,\I(.('I-"I.I~.,.",,,,,-,.~,,,,,...(.,,,.,\"./Wo..,..I,..,.~_.l.o-
c
c
~-~
r
"-
3. lVork Program
The purpose of this task is to characterize existing conditions to be
used in developing both baseline condrtions and impact
assessments, The conditions developed in this task w,II 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 rt 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 \,JU
The purpose of this task is to assess the potential impacts
associated with the proposed updated General Plan land use plan
in accordance with CEOA 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 CEOA guidelines,
Task 3.1 Deliverables
. Up to ten target area alternatives with a brief summary of
key issues
. Infrastructure Analysis
General pf,m Update And fir
M.\(,O""".I'1(.." ..1 I... Hn_.".....c..n. ..t\".~"',...,.~_.'"
Page ~
-....~-<
-
..-
c
c
r
\.-
3. Work Program
Task 3.2
Alternatives Presentation
Workshop
~ Cost Savings Opportunity
TASK 4.0
GENERAL PLAN
PREPARATION
Task 4.1
Land Use Plan
~ Cost Savings Opportunity
Task 4.2
General Plan Elements
The Planning Center will participate in a public workshop to review
and receive comment on the Plan Alternatives, Vision Statement
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
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
~
~;l
".
..
This Task includes the preparation of a new General Plan based
upon work completed in previous tasks, environmental analysis.
knowledge of the Government Code, case law, and contempol'lllY
experience
J
'~
The Planning Center, working with Psomas, will create a Draft
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.
,;
"J1
~~...
~. ~
3
From this point, environmental, traffic and fiscal analysis of the
General Plan will be based upon this plan, In order to reduce
consultant costs, it is important that signfficant 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 Dellverables
. Draft Preferred Land Use Plan
. Final Preferred Land Use Plan
......-
..."
,:'?
This task involves development of the General Plan, including Land
Use, Circulation, Open Space, Conservation, Noise and Safety
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
,w.,(.IJI..r.(.".','I."'.\...H-.......,...\(:"..,-\.,.~..I,_f".,...,M,Io.
III The Pla,mirrg em'",
- --~- -
r-
"-
.c
..sz:
r
\..-
3. Work Program
Task 4,2.1
General Plan Structure & Format
Task 4.2.2
Land Use Element
Task 4.2.3
Circulation Element
.-
The purpose of this phase of the task is to agree upon a structure
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.
Land use designations, definitions and patterns will be reviewed
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
identdied in Task 3.1.
Transtech will prepare the General Plan Circulation Element Update.
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 Mure roadway >>.4(
transportation network will be prepared. The network will include '-V
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 classdication 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,
Page ] ~~
General Plan Updal< And Eir
11..';(;fJJ"f'.(.I"(.'" ",).o.~l""'I.",o<I v-/w.....,i'_I',.".....I.f..
r-
'-
r
\-
",.-
\-
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 tor 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
wijhin existing right-of-way, and improvements requiring addijional
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.
;0.;"""
:<~
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
Conservatifln 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 crijeria 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,HW.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.
;~
~ The P~<!1JlIillg Ct1lt"~
Pag~ 12
\,.,(;o~~r('-;.L"" ..,..-....~"'"...\(..,. .,.\...~,...f',,+,...l,'..
c
r
""-'
~.~~
r
'-
3. Work Program
Task 4.2.6
Safety Element
Task 4.3
Implementation
. Vehicle noise modeling using build-out vehicle projections
and the F.HW.A. Noise Prediction model to determine
future projected noise contours.
. A discussion of applicable techniques that may effectively
be used to reduce excessive noise wrthin the City,
The Planning Center will utilize existing studies provided by the City
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 wrth color maps and one (1) copy with black
and white maps)
. Noise Element Contour Map
This portion of the General Plan Update is part plan and part
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)
.-
Page I J
Gentra1 Plan Updau And Eir
,lll(.fIlT,f.I"':,,, ..,.\..."~._~_,,, "/_\oo.lI.nwnl....,...,....i../..
-
c
c
r-
~
3. Work Program
TASK 5.0
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT
Program ElR
Task 5.1
NOP Initial Study
Task 5.2
Draft EIRINOC
.-
The Planning Center will be responsible for preparing CEOA
documentation for the General Plan update, The purpose of this
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,
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 CEOA process.
The Planning Center will prepare a Notice of Preparation and Initial
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.
,~,
~:.'.;j
:.'"
'-j:
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.
. :;
. '.
-..-j
Task 5.1 Deliverables
. Screencheck NOP/lnitial Study
. NOPllnitial Study
. M ailing List
;
;
,
The Planning Center will prepare a 'Screencheck" Draft EJR based
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 wnhout additional processes or details.
Task 5.2 DeliverabJes
. Screencheck Draft EIR
. Mnigation Monnoring Program
. Draft EIR
. Notice of Completion/Mailing
. Notice of AvailabllitylNewspaper Notice
. SCH Transmittal Form
ffi Tht Plarming unt",
. -~~- -
Pag. 14
II \c.OV/1.(;I~{'m..r \...I!,.r.....~.'....l.'" ." \... 11.._..1,.. ,....,......1."'"'
c
c
r--
\......
3. Work Program
Task 5.3
Response to Commentsl
Final EIRINOD
Task 5.4
Statement of Overriding
Considerations
TASK 6.0
GENERAL PLAN ADOPTION
PROCESS
Task 6. 1
Public Hearings
Task 6.2
Findings for General Plan
Adoption and EIR
Certification
The EIR team will prepare written responses to Draft EIR comments
received during the public review period. The Responses to
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
The Planning Center will prepare a Statement of Overriding
Considerations where significant environmental effects have not
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
e8
The Planning Center and consultants, as necessary, will attend up
to two DIERC 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) DIERC meetings
. Two (2) Planning Commission meetings
. Two (2) City Council meetings
Prior to certification of the Final EIR, The Planning Center will
prepare the Statement of Facts and Findings for the significant
environmental effects identified in the EIR. The Findings will
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 fir
.1'. \1.fJI'~1'.(;/~{.", of \.... I~......""_,,_,,, 'of \~.,,,,,,,,,,J,_ /'.-f-JJ.I..
Page 15.
--~-
-
c
r-
L
,,-.
\-
3. Work Program
Task 6.3
Final General Plan
TASK 7.0
PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION
Task 7.1
Program Management
Task 7.2
Meetings
Task 7.3
GIS DatalMapping
,-
The Planning Center will revise the Draft General Plan to reflect final
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 (1) photo ready copy of the Final General Plan
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
CommissionlCity Council workshops. The Planning Center, will also
prepare monthly Progress Reports describing meetings attended.
major milestones. adherence to the schedule and budget.
r-:J
0","'10
........
.--'1}
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.
,.
"_r
. .~
Task 7.1 Deliverables
. Monthly Status Reports
. Follow-up memo
. Project Collaboration Website
We propose scheduling stafflconsultant coordination meetings at
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.
t-j
Task 7.2 Deliverables
. 8 (eight) meetings with City Staff
Psomas will oversee the integration of existing GIS coverages and
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/lnfo Version 8 format and provided to the
city accordingly. Exhibits and GIS coverage as specified in the RFP
eB Tht PJflllizing unl';-;"
Page 16
M. K.OVr.f./I'.Lt> -4 .\..1. .........lJ,.....I....') .., .",. /I,.......j,... '...,.....1.1..
c
:'C'
.-,." .
-'.iI
r-
'-
3. Work Program
will be produced based upon the efforts and analysis of the prOject
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 ESRl'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 Oeliverables
. Arcllnfo Version 8 coverages and or shapefiles of all data
created in support of the General Plan update and EtR
. Documentation of GIS coverages
. Exhibits required supporting the General Plan and EIR
~~
.-
Gentral Plan Update And Eir
'I \f.II..-".'''...I......,................._f:...~.w.n.r..,.J,_~J..
Pag. J.Z
-
..,.-
c
:.c
r"
\..-
3, Work Program
At the discretion of the City, !he IolIowIng opllonlf Tela WlIUId be
performed concurrently with the tIIIc8 IisWd abcMI. 1bBse IIIkI
would alAlCtly contribulll to !he quallIy and SUCC818 gf a.
Component One tasks dUB 10 !he type iII1d quality of infI.,nllllo.,
they wll produoe.
Each of these tasks would be fully integlllled into thelCOp8 end
schedule of CompoItent One T..a... order to lId1I_1uI1
COnllstency and time and budget lIlIIc:Ienc:ie6.
Historic lIeSOUl'Oell Element A Historic Resources Element JlI'CIVldes !he framewoIk for
(updatel identilying, presenring Md enNncing elgnlllcent...1IICI ,
Itructu,.. wiIhln the City. The PIennIng c.ntIr'e work Iftort..
foc:l.w on fine.tunlng and updetlng poIic:ieillD be COfIIiItInt ....
Vilion and lancl Uee EIemer4, .. ClPf)Q8ed to peIfonnjng ...
technicallltudles IIld major NOrganizdln of the ...dl6", 4.._1l.
San BuenaventIn RIlUII dl.&wocIItes wiI1 pe.ro.m a a.Ic I""''''
anaIyeillhat Includes alit8rature and rac:otd5 search, OllITIf6ojJ .
list of knownIdlIsIgneted historic propaItiee, preparing allialDly cI
the City, establishing InI8I of the CIty whIcIIarelikely ID be GrID
become hlltorlc precervation iIsuas within !he plan'. time haItIlao..
.. well 8& lIisIIIIng In the prep&r8tion of the HislDric R88ClUfll8I
Element.
COIIPONENT1WO
Dellftreble:
. SClHncheck Craft and Final Craft Histcrlc R8IOURl8I
Element
,,,,,18
... ~4~"""'""""""~-""",,,
.TMP~c..
.-
"
"
>
,
;
;'
\
r.
"
,
,
;j
H
"
.',
, ,
.'
.'
.'
..
",
, .
-
c
c
r-
'-'
J. wor~ rrogram
PeIfrs MIl RectHIIon
sem.nt (update)
/EoMoIrIIc DeNlopmMt
Element (upd.'"
A Parks and Recreation Element II a popular optional eJernent for
jurisdictions to preserve and enhance the qU81ity of life 1I1rough
rlcreationlll opportunities. The update of thia element will focus on
verifying existing de and pollcles and lCClOIMIOCIating the need
for additional rlcrlNltionll faclIities.
The Planning Center wDl review available plIIlcs and trIiIs dsta,
I1IView parkland acquisition and dlweIopmInt ItIIndards and
analyze \he effectiveness of 1mpIeme. .ll6.iI and fundIng measures.
The need for additionll fadIilieI W11l be 1Iddl.lSllld as a result of 11111
analysis and In conjunction with the preperaIIon of the land use and
open space elements.
DellvetM1e:
· Screencheck Draft and Final Draft Parks lII1d Recr8lIlion
Element
Stan Hollman and Associates will closely coordinate with the City's
Planning and Economic Development IllIIf to pI'O'Iide guldanc:e in
the preperation of economic goals end pone" for the Economic
Development Element The work wiD buBd upon 81' of lhe ongoing
KOllomic end demographic trencI anaIylIiI. We will_1st The
Planning Center in Identifying the key target 1ndus1rie& and
economic policies that willleed to . strong 1ocaI8COI1OITl)' and
generate suffioient pubrlll rewnU81 COl11ldensUllle with a high
qu8l11y of public 1enIices.
A key component of the econorric development e1l1l'lll1flt will be to
idenllfy possible impleme.,bdIon ectiona. In many easel this will
irMllve continuing to UlI8 exlItIng techniques, luch ..
rldlMtlopmenl powens and community dMopment block QIW1t$.
In other cases. It may IrwoMIIII_menta. community faclI..
lflltrle1B. development impact fMs. end Dlher tatgeteclloans and
grants. Also, it may invoIw the ~ dIfic8Ilon of rwN tIlchnIque$,
such 81 business ~ment dlllrlote, UIll of lhe Stale's
inlrutruclure financing bank lIl' publ/c:-Jllfvm pIIItll8llhlps. EIoh 01
the economic IIPProachea will be prioritized In eootdinllion wllh the
Cily SI8ft in llIrm5 01 ill avaIiabIlty, elfectiveness end poItlc:II
IICCIIptabHiIy.
Del""able:
. Screencheck Draft and FiI1ll/ Draft Economic Development
Element
c-.J PIMr U,** A.N Ew
"~I~~..r I'l ~......,,,,..,...
P." 19
-.....~.. -
,
,
,
. -.
QD "
aD ..;
.'
".
..
, ,
, .
1'"
. .
..:.
"
"
. ,
'.
, '
r
~
Ie
or"
,.......
'"-
:J. W UTI(. rTrJ1,1Um-
"I,
".~
;.~
.'
ECOI--"ric and Mill'hf
5rnfhe.ls
n".,..,oe ....Ilne
".A ItnICfWW""" ami
~AIt"""
Working closely with City stall. SlIn Hoffman and Aslocia18S wi!
assemble exisllng population. housing and emptoyment d_ lor ...
City of San BernardIno. This work would draw from ulstlna
documents, Including the City'lIlCOnomic analysis CUlNntIy blInD
prepaNd by ERA, PeR Kotln 8IlG otlIeII. AddlltonaUy, inIolllllllon
would be complied from the COunty of San Bemardino, SANBAG.
and the Southern Califomia AssocIlItion of Go\IImlTl8nt's s0cio-
economic databaseS as they apply to City.
Working CIOlllly with thl City's Planning ancl Economic
Development statl. projected economic po18nllal would be
assembled from existing data 1OUfC8I. again ihCluding the
economic study being prepared by ERA. This task would IdenIIy
key target Induwtes that the City would Iikllly be ......,~ In
attracting. It would tocus on the nwlcat condiliOnl.1r1cludlnlI nort-
residenlllll ebsorptIon rateSlnd product valualionS. as well ..
taxable sales performance 01 retail shopping altablis/Unel1tl.
D81iveratll.:
. Economic O8v1IIopmenl Existing COndltlons and "frends
Report
The TIppecanoe Bas.line InfrulnIlllunl Plan is intsnded to M8lId
development in the TIppecanoe ...... which is lacking adequate
inlrIstruC\UlI. by prspming a baMllnI 8Mlys1s of the exilItillll
systems and future infraa1rUcture needI besId upon gen8I8I pl8n
land uses. Thelntllnt is to rMDCe or ellninete the need for
individual property owners to haW to IUlIIyD \erge ... In order to
plan and design inh&lruc:tUre for thIlr property. Pllper;ng.
bas.una ir1fnIstnIl;tUr plan rrrNI. before construction the
constTuCtion and impaCt 01 YNeIloUllI diltribullOn faclIltIeIln the
abutting _ wi. help lIU'elIITllln. the clevfIIopIrent I" uC ~1~. IIMI
as an Incentive to dMOP, and be c:cm eIIectM1 for the IndivIdUII
owners of lIIT1IIl propetti... This lIIllk auumes . reaonable
maximum lot ClMflIlle for light Industrill and busi~ perk
development in the TIppecanoe"" and includlls an
lICCCll'I1I)InY traIllc anelysis, performed by Transt8Ch. as ... ..
the preparation of the anvironmental analysis. deI;CribId below.
Due to the Ilq)andlld nature of this wI<. _ have provided ..
IItlI1lmary here and a more d8lIlllld scapi of work for ttllIllMllIne
infrastructure analysis IS an lItlachI'n8nt. I" summary. the ~ of
seNlees wiU be similar to thosa for the target area wiSh \hi
additional requirement for preparation 01 8 basetine Wr8IlIUCIUII
plan encompassing _, water. drainage and traIl1c cIrC'~"llI1
system. It i& auumed howeII.r. that the Tl~ ,.,.. wi! tl8
I8rgtr and requinlllighUy more analyses than thl aforemI/1IIDnIC
target areas. The boundlll'Y of Tippecanoe Area ill generally
described IS being bounded on the south by the santa AnI RMw.
Warm Creek on the wllllt, TIppecanoe on the East and NlnlII8tnlet
to the north. The buic tasks lNIIl be 1) task stIIt-llP. 2) ooIl1Ct end
synthesize data. 3) develop baSeline condItIonS, 4) d8blm1nallon of
"
0,
r
,
,.,,20
__I ~A.."...,.......,."..,..".".....
II TIN ''-';"r c.-.
TOTA.. P.II3
~..,,~-, -
c
:C
,,-..
\-'
3. Work Program
UnIYerdy DIstrict
Specillc ,.,." _lid
Verrlemont ,.,.. Plan
~ic sizes requil'lld 10 support general plen land use. and 5) attend
mletings.
The Planning Center Will expand III ani!ysll of the TIppecanoe area
within the General Plan ProgI8m EIR. Our approach would be to
supplement the General Plan Program EIR with more detailed
anafysl8 for the Tlppecll1lOe area. Preparing, Program ElR in
advance of a apecific project proposed in the Tippecanoe 1IrI' will
help to slrllamlinl the development process. Projecls found
consistent with lhls emIlronmental analysis could potentially
proceed with 6miled or no lIddilfonal environmental analysis, saving
9 to 12 months In processing time.
DelIVer11b1.:
· Tippecanoe Basellnl InIrastructIn Plan
· Expanded Environmental AnaJyaIl of the TIppeeItI08
Bas,rll1e Infrastructure Plan in the General Plan ProgI8m
E1R
W. proposl . two-tIarad approach 10 the University District Area
and Verdlmont 1IrIa. These lIrII& WI combined due to the fact that
there their boundaries OYIrIap and ,unil"l8d IIpproach wDl help
~ area grow in a coorcIirIlIlId 1IIlIIVIII'. 'The two allll would
consist of sitting the policy leftl guldancl and than providing
detalled land use and design guldllnce In ,speciflc pIlII1. Thl
IoUowing describes 1he two-tiered approaGh in more detail:
T.., Onl - Verdlmont/UnIYllrsity DIstriGl Genet8I PIen level PoIlcy
Guidance. Prepare coon:Ilnal8d poIk:ie1 for inclusion in the General
Plan that Idclresa the futufe characl1lr and 11M of 1he .,.. in IlIrmlI
of Ianclus8, design and circulation patterns.
The Verdemont Nwa Plan will providl more detailed policy lwei
direction for the Verdemont ... and Is an llIpanIion 01.. a-raI
Plan to focus upon the apeclic needs oflhls __ The Vetdemont
Iwa Plan wBllnolude g_,.' pan IIwI poIIcIeI focusing on tIw
fasues of resldlnti81 delllily and PIIIemI of cIeveIopment; methods
to address the settlement agrMmeIll hmilingl.tabIlshing m1ninum
lot sizes for the tIO-acnI BIee parcel; connections with tIw UnivWslty;
PD*l6a1 fr8e-v connections north of Pllm Avenue; thllmpact of
the Clty's HUlside Ordinance on the Verdlmont .... and
recommendations for desirable madiIlcations; open spece
preaervatlon and linkages; DOS&lbIe IdllptalionB to the Alquist-Priolo
earthquake zone: the retention of unique physical or geological
features; the level of existing 1SlI-.rnent dis1rIct fees and the
potant;al for I fee structure that is uniqllll to the Vlrdemont area;
optlona for land uses such as an 8qUIItrian center iII1CI trails:
methods to stimulate development; and the direction for the types
01 standards neC8Sscuy to rnainllln and enhance the quBlIty 01
housing in the area.
Tier Two - Univelsity District SpBcific Plan. This Spec:lf1C plan Will
~ Pi- UJt/tlu Nul Eir
"taUT ~ -=.<tz...........,............
P.21
...,-..-
~
.,
.
,
"
:'
"
"
.
..
.
~,.,
'.
. .:~
: ~
.,
"
;
.
..j
.;,
.
;
"
',':
..
.
"
;" ~
.
: .,
;"
. ,
"
. .~
':
, .
.'
, ,
',.
-
r
'-
r
'-
..0',
,-
\.-
3. Work,Program
focus on the intwraction at the Unlver5ity IIld thl surrounding
COITVTlUnity. This $PlCilic plan wilIllldruslar1d use lIl'Id deIIgn
opportunities and constrain\$ with the goal at unifying future
development In the district and capitalizing upoI1 thl P' III lei tA
the University, The specific plan II not LIb ded to 8dd.... ..."".d
infrIstructure, socl8l progll/lll, economic, or phasing lIeu..1d
in,1ead to IocuI on the I!lIIhods to imprawt the physic-'
relationship behv8en the UniYer1lty and the (:Ily of San s...cIrlo.
To this end. the Speclfic Plan will fac:uI on the design 111IIhodI,..
CI88I8 a civio-ouIIurII nucl_ !hit capit8lizel upon .. NOkAlII
economic opportunitlel p__ by" University. lhIa mey
include CIIIT1pUIKlriInIllcl residentlll neighborhoocls for IIudInII
and fac:iIity/$tall. which also hala dire elrect on the YiIbDy d 1hI
University's ecademlc end I8M8ICh prognunI. end nwItoads lD
connec:t 01' orient s&mlUl1dlng NlIdenlIII, commerciII, ...... III
and flICII!iIIional usee lDwIRllhe UnIwrIity.
Community policy expressed through land use ........10.6, bUIdIIIg
and code elllorcement, community slllVioes auch .. police
proIection, I'ICnllIIion programs IIlCl facJlIlI8. n nelghborhood
Unkages ,uch lIS bicycle end pedestrian hitII, should be ,.......,.
to the I1lH!ds at the University communities.
It is critical that the boundaries for U- IIIolts be cleq oWollId
and that the consultant elIortII be b:uIed vrithin theM boundIrIee
in order to conlral costI.
SpecifIC ,.,." E1R The Planning Center wID IllplII1d ill _1yI1s at the UnIvIt8lly IIld
VII'demont II'llaS within the Genlral PIen Program EIR. our
IpplO8Ch would be to supplement the GenetaI PlIItl Progrwn EIR
with mcIr1I detailed analysis for the Specific Plan and VIId8mort
Area Plan.
I
,
.'
DelIverlIIIIe:
. VlIIdemont Area Plan
. University Distriot Specific PI."
,"
j"
'.
,....
.'
"
."
..
, .
.
;"
.
"
r.,.22
A_.o a .m."............~~.-
II Tht P,-"-, CMtr
-
--'- -
r
'-'
c
r-
'-
4. References
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
City of Clovis General Plan
Update
Mr. Brad Buller
Planner
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10600 Civic Center Drive
P,Q. 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,Q. Box 667
Chino. CA 91708-0667
909.591.9812
John Wright
Director of Planning & Development Services.
City of Clovis
1033 Fifth Street
Clovis, CA 93612
559,297.2340
~~~~~~~(~/:~.I~!.~;"~:al~~~!}.:"""'~_./~ Page 24:
....,,- -
c
c
---
i
'-
4. References
PSOMAS ASSOCIATES
City of Huntington Beach -
FinancinglFunding Strategy
for Integrated Infrastructure
Management Program (liMP)
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
County of Riverside Fiscal
Model and Program
Citrus Village II Market Study
for the City of Corona
.-
David Webb
City of Huntington Beach
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
(714) 536-5431
'1;
Brian Powell
Daniel Boyle Engineering (City of Placentia work)
23231 South Point Drive, Suite 103
Laguna Hills, CA 92653
(949) 769-2600
v.
'-'11
~<~
John D. Johnson
City of Compton
205 S. Willowbrook
Compton. CA 90220
(310) 605-5585
;
',-
Roger Baker
Development DirectorlCity Planner
City of Burbank
(818) 238-5278
rbaker@cLburbank,ca.us
~
"
;....~
_,:1
._~
-~
?
Jerry Jolliffe
Principal Planner
Riverside County Planning Dept.
(909) 275-3161
ilo11iff@co.riverside.ca.us
Terri Manuel
Associate Planner
City of Corona
(909) 736-2262
lerri.manuel@ci.corona,ca.us
~~
~ The PIg.rtning C.nltr;..
Page 24
II '(.nVr(,rl~" .,\",. ~---W_\l:U'~'v.lw..uni,..~J,.
,f""""'
\-
c
{~
''"-
4, References
TRANSTECH ENGINEERS
SAN BUENA VENTURA
RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
Jon Gillespie, City Traffic Engineer
City of Rancho Cucamonga
(909) 477-2740, Ex!. 4051
Ed Wright, Traffic Engineering Supervisor
City of Alhambra
(626) 570-5062
John Ballas, City Engineer
City of Industry
(626) 333-2211
John Hili, Project Manager
County of Los Angeles, Traffic and Ughting Division
(626) 300-4737
Kim Hocking
Ventura County Planning Division
Resource Management Agency
(805) 654-2414
Lucinda Woodward
Senior HistorianlSection 106 Coordinator
State Office of Historic Preservation
(916) 635-9116
DeAnn Johnson, Environmental Officer
Community Development Commission
County of Los Angeles
(323) 890-7186
Unda Christianson, Senior Planner
City of La Verne Planning Division
(909) 596-8706
~6
Gtntr'll Plan Update And Eir
.\1. 'C.O~ T.(.I'<.m "'..,,, n.........I.r..,I.". 'f-.I... /W,.,....,I._ ,...,....J.J-
P"gt 2 5-
- ",--
-""~-
-
r""'''''"
"-
r
'-
r-
'-
4. References
This page intentionally left blank.
,-
:.'1
(~
.....
,<
:;...,:,
<
-
......~
>.'
Ell, T he P7~7J}lillg Cente;:;..
Page 26
.\1 \(.(jI""r.I~' ," ., U~ /;"...."i......f II> oJ ...~If,o-.....J..."'-...l.,""
c
::::.
,-....
~.;~":
'r'
..~ .
..
'-
~<-...
.-.-
.-:,
,.....-
,
\.-
Appendim
-
Gmeral Plan UP'hU< And Eir
,H\(.OVI1(.,..(:,,'..,\J.&......i,....''''..,'..../''''"'''..;,_,.~...''-
~
-
c
-r
\-
!Jt
'.
r
\.-
Appendix A
Component Two, Tippecanoe Special5wdy
and EIR Slt/J/Jort -
General Plan 'Dpdale And Eir
AP(;OV'T\C.I",t.n.. ..1_"". '".....".-.\1,.. wi...." ~"'._ f>t.,..J"-
~
-.....- -
~
c
r
,,"-
,....
,
,
""-'
COMPONENT TWO,
TIPPECANOE SPECIAL
STUDY AND EIR SUPPORT
Appendix A
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 I 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.
&8
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. A broad 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-tipdate And Ei;
\1 \('''VI'(;J''.CJ'''''.W.~'_'L''.><f.\,I.&.....,.J_,...,..",I_,J,.
PugeAI
-"""..
-
....
Appendix A
Component Two, Tippecanoe Special Study
C and EIR Stt/J/Jort
Collect and Synthesize Data Purpose: 'Fhe 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
synthE!5ized 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
deficiency assessment.
,-
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 limited
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
\.I ;1.flI'T\(;P'C.:, '.1 .\:".. a..-,,J,..\I.." .r...... lWrowoJ,. Prwf-w/.k
83 The Planning Ctnw
-'O<f,.-
.~.='.
....~
:,,~
'~;
j
"
0.::;:,'
,'J
W
~.
,.""
,~
"
'.
~4
-
r
'-
,
..
,;.,~_. ..:".. .
c
r
"-
De"""""~ "-
Proposed Land Un.
Component Two, Tippecanoe Speria/ Study
~lR SUIIIJp"
On a macro-seall, exIIting WlIIer tansmiuion ITI8inB will be
dIllneal8d. Areas where pmlously lluclieS have bHn conducl8d
wi! be id.ntifild and mapped. Are8s not preI/kKJIly studied. but
I'IIlding Iludy will be identiilcl. In IIlNS where lIdditionallltudy is
required (but hu not been conducted), . bf("kbone model
(lJansmlslion facilities) will be cIevIIoped. Ba..r1l1ll demand
conditions will be establiShecI using average day, muln1m dllY
and fire tIows (1D be P/OYidId by City) In ICCOI'd8IlC8 wl\t1lhe City's
regullllOry policies and design cril8tla. Depending on the size Bnd
CClIl'Iplexlly of the lIAIU, _ may .- H2O I1It, u apprapriate. 10
model potentiallmpacls from propoHd Iancl use scenerioa.
It iIIl1SSUII1lId that the Tippecanoe .,... hu been preyIous stuclied
and analyzed IS part of the SIIlitary __ rnatW plan scope 01
work and the trunk IIneI dllineahld. B...,. conditions will III
compiled and established U5ing _ge clay and pnk tlows
(d8terrnlllld from previous eIIort) in ICCClnfanoe with till City'.
regulatory policies and design criteria.
It is assumed that a traffic study wll have been rnparld for
TIPPeC8/108 Avenue, which idIntifI8d 8IClsting and projecl8d trItIIc
volumes as well as I)'SI8m capacities baaIcl on the ... QpOMd land
use plan tor the area.
Dellv8l'8ble: ThI product lor \his task II . baseline ..-ment
report aectIon wIlh a summ;uy of the Il'I8lhocIoIogIII UIId, III1lIIyses
results, IIlc:I ic:lenlifJed Illy iIIUIS and oonetrU1lL It wiI also s.rve
as the baseline for the ~ GIIIlIf8I Plan, Baseline An8IylIis.
and EIR. ApIll'Clllriate maps and exhlblta wiI be included to
supplemlnt thII text and data.
PlIfpDSe: The PUf1)OlI of this task ill to dll......... the \t1frastruQlu11l
ddciencies associated with the a-ral PI.,,'. proposed land use
in IlCCOIdance with CEQA guicI.Iine&. 0tIIlci1rlCie& will be
dltermlned rela1iYe 10 baseline oonclillons develoPld In previous
task.
Approach: Dlficiencies c:an III chlrBoteltZld by RlSpIlflCIing 10 the
questions. "Will the proposlClland use....
· Cl'IIale or contribute runoII W1dIr which wouJd exceed the
capacity of IXIsting stonnwaf8r drainagtsystems or provlcle
substanIiaJ additional sources 01 poIIuIId runotr?
. Place housing or cotnnlefl:ial bulding5 within s 1 QO.year IIood
hazard area IS mapped on a fIdmII Flood Hulll'd BouncIaIy or
Aoocllnsurance Rate Map or othIr lIood hazard delineation
map?
· Place within a , OQ-year lIDOd hazard I/'M structures that would
impede or redirect flood l\ow$?
. VIOlate any water quality standardlll'8Cluirements?
G-' pJ.. UpUI,A"" I!ir
.1lAl~~ . ._~,.....
Pill' A3
,-
:.
"
,
",
.I
,
..
,
.'
.
,.
';
'"
'-
..
;
,.'
(fe'
."
.,
"
'.
J
. ,
,
'"
.'
.;
~~.
'.
~. i
"')
:(
"
..~
:- .~
; .~
."
..:.{
. ~
,;
l",-
!..\
. .
., ,
"
:.~
1
..
"
.~. .
"
:'.'"
--,,- -
-
r
.........
"'!'
~:'C'"
.~
,'. ~:-.'
c
Tnt of ,.,."..
Dllecr_....""", fDI
&M.WMIft""" ...".,.
AppenJix A
Component Two, Tippecanoe SPecial Study
alJlLBlR Sutmot't
. Otherwise IUbstanIiaIlly degrllde water quality?
. Expose people or ItruCIur8s In. signlicant risk o/Ian, ~uty at
death Involving Iioodlng. Inc:ludlng fIoadlng IS a IUUll of the
falure 0/ a Ievw or dam?
. Crult water delT*llfs. which would l!llCeed the capecity at the
8Xld IQ or pilnned water system or watIr trwatment facility.
. VIOlate W8III discharge l8qulremenls7
. Subllantially degrade groundwater quellty ,or int8Ifere
lubstantlally with groundwater dilchmge or lIIIer 1he ability of
J)I'Hldsting neWy weill 10 produce lit cummt or planned
fewll?
· Expose people In conditions _than IIlowId by the Slate
eep.tJnent of health SeMces. and t.d8IBIl(Jlll.clsa with health
juriBdigtjon?
. Create or contribull __ flow lhat wcuId IXC88d the oapIICity
o/8Xilting or planned _ systImI or WlISI8Wld8r tr8almInt
faclllles. PIoYide lubstanlial8ddilianal1IOUIC8S of palIulId
runall?
Deliverable: The pmduct lor this IIIk is . primanly quelilative
lIIIe8$ment of polentilli d81iciencill which Will be sUl11ll18llzad and
included in lhe baselina inIrutruature plan and envlrom1Bntill
lIIIlIIyM. Appraprlal& lTIlIpS llIld exhIlltI will be inCluded with the
IICCClrTlp8IIyi text.
Purpose: The Purpalll 011his task is to document the analyses
described above, for the environmenlal 8/1IIylIis In a tKt."'1ical
appenclx.
App"*lh: Paamas wiU prepere documentation lor use In the
0WIIa/I Tippecanoe Area environmenlal documentation.
Dellverlble: An InIrulruc:tuAII8pOfl with lICCOITIplInying tables,
exhibits and ITl8pI will be pIOIrided IS Iwd copies and In elec:trDnic
format (Ward or Adobe AcrobII).
T....' ...."". Purpo-=: Th81lUl'JlOH 01 this task Is to dft8Iop a Baseline
Infrastrucfure ,.,." Inlrastrueture Plan for the Tippecanoe AIu, whIoh Identilies the
beckbane sewer. water, storm drainage, and lnIIIic circulation
systems to support the prapoNd land UN plan for the area.
Approach: Psomas will develop a BaselIne InIruIrucnn PIIIn that
wll include dralnagl/llaad cantroI, wetlIr. _, and strHI
COI11pOr\eIltI. It is usumed thlIt one n_1lIeet will bIIldded for
truck traffic to Improve the ovnII area tnIIIic c:In:ulation. Hclwwer,
this BaseUne InIrssttucture Plan will not Include dry utilities such as
telephone or cable.
c.tiYerllble: A Baseline InIrasIruc::lu'e Plan repolt WIth
rllp .44
-at. a ".~"" - .~"".,,~.
fB TN Pt",,'""I c-.,.
.-
,
.'
"
,
"
,
'1
,
'!
,
,
'.
"
.'
,;
,
"
,.
,
,
"
"
,.
'.'
"
.'
:
.. :1
'.
"
.'
.'
,
"
'j
'..
.'
;,
"
"
'..
..,
.
.
"
"
:. ~
~..,,-~- -
...
c
r
\.-
r
\......
Appendix A
Component Two, Tippecanoe Special Study
an aIR SIfiipq
accompanying exhibits and maps will be provided lIS hard copies
and electronic format.
PUrpoR: The IlUrpoee oIlhia task 1$ to pl'llVide for the attandance
01 raqulllld pl'llject meetings (lIlCCIUliYe of project kiok-df end
Component One meetings), speciflcally lor this task
Approech: The PSClll\llS T8CIlnicIIl Tuk Maneger or clesignate will
prepare lor II1d attend nD more than 1 sddlllonaJ project teem
meeting and public PJ_1lIdion
DelIver1b1e: All8ndence at meetings and -.ting notes, if
requll'lld.
Anumpt/OllS It is lI58umed . pollutant loads _ment will not be required in
the waluatfon 01 water qUlllity.
r... S lleefJllg$
Ga".'" PI._ UptI4II./t"" Hi,
MAQd~~ '11 . "s-.........~.........
P.".It.S
.-
-~<~ ..
"
:,'
.
'"
~ '
, ~
"
....
,
:,.:
"
,
, I
:..:
~...
::~
,:
'-
,
,.:'
:.:
..
.'
II
~~.
I.
':1
.
,
"
1j
. t<
~.:J
,.1
:}
'"
I, ,
!~
~ .i
~.:
,;
','I
,
"
~ 'I
. ,
, i
~
.,
.....
""
:;.'
, ;
'j
,
: ~ ..
~': I
. .~
.'
, .
I .'
,
::
,
" .
. '.
, '
, .
,-
.:
,
. ,
'.'j
:' \
.;0....
;.\ : ~
TOTFl.. P.liI2
c
r
'-
,....
"'.....
r
"'-'
Appendix B
Schedule
-
-""'~-
~
-
-.0:
-
c
:1"""'"
'-
f~
'-'
Appendix B
Schedule
SCHEDULE
A 18 month schedule for Components One and Two is illustrated in
Figure 1. 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.
General Plan TJpdate And Eir
""\(,"IIVnC;I'\<.#, .,.w.. o,-...Ji,."l,u.,.f $.. ~ '-I-J.J.
Page 81
-...,;.-
~
-
'-'
r
'-
r-
'-
Appendix B
Schedule
This page intentionally left blank.
-
. Page 82
,,,:\c;t)VT\G,..,(;'tr-t.w.~,.l,':iI,.fs...~_~J.
"'.;::
;J
~".~~
';.;.
:.";
;.~
- ~1
....;:
~i
!il The Planning Cmler~
+-'~-
-
r
'"-,
jr
'-
~~
:-};
.-.
'-
Appendix C
Budget
-
M:\Ci()V7iG~(.., o(s... ~._\(:", ..,s... "'-..t,..~-.
General Plan Update And Eir
&8
.-
-
.,...
.r
\.-
t
f
t
!
.
!
l
.
'-
I,
I I
, I
J
-
,
I
i
I
c
;"
"'.",t' ...",.,'-."
' c.
I .
,
T'
i i
~ I
I' t
f
8
5
.
r
\.-
CT
,'-1-
, Il
1
~ '-t
0.. ~ JJ'"
r: ... :t 0 I...
__iii - ~ -~ 0 ,I:"~
. 0: ~! ~ f fa !;
'" = 0 iii ~ 0.. 'oj i
9 ----- = --- ~ un! ----:--- ~ ----r: ------1------- ~ ----- f
. ~ I ~ 1 ~ h ~!~ ~ h ~ 5 ~ ! ill
~ ~~ H i ~i oj ~U i ~8 ~ i I i ~ I
a_5! Ih~dl HI~'~ iN ~ g I H t
firl gju ~I ~ ~H~l!~ ~ I!~ ti~ f if ~ H
i mi lillli miJilll ilil: hill Ii I
t
u
,
,
t
!
r
~
~
\,....,
r-'
'-
Appendix C
Budget
The Planning Center's proposed budget to complete the
Component One General Plan update for the City of San Bernardino
is not to exceed S354,305, 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 $180,773, inclusive of labor and
reimbursable expenses.
The following pages outlines in detail the number of hours and
costs required to perform each task identdied 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 wrth your needs,
~6
-
Gener,:! Plan Updatr And Eir
,II \c.rwrc.",t..., '" ........ Ht-.,,"',........, '" I...lw..-I..... I...,....'."
~-
/'".".
"-'
c
r
'-
Proposed Budget
City of San Bernardino General Plan Update and EIR
TEAM SUMMARY
I I T"PI"...I I I T~_I I ,...."
r.. -- Center .-. so.. SORA AMQUIIT
COIIPONBIT.TASIl- _ ' ,', . .,.'"
rur.l.GElEJW.Pl.MlJIDlTE.......lllnAlJlItiI
11 ~- 51:'-0 S390 I "...
" DUI _II""" ;Sfi ~Co(l SI,O!O S15..
" BIS4IMaoPnDlraIllll 5afO 52"" 13,710
T..I.S....... SU50 $12.3. TO TO sn...
~ ........... .
:?l IlIscm"""" S6SJO ..,...
22 PuoIic PIottu
22.1 """ '" SlOJ15 StO,a5
Z2.Z _m $10 ~j.5 StD."
'...2.'...... SlHtO TO TO TO 121.510
TASIJ .ALTEJaIll,IMS > " -c ~" ,. '.-- , . ',"
11 T Mas IIldl...UIISCIIIIMI 1101 $'4.320 St....
" -- $J.Z.ao $3,1.
'''3.SlII6III1 $17.560 TO TO TO I StT
TAIl.. GEIlIEMl PI.M PllEPMA1III" ".', .. ".~..~_..,.r.;; i ':,~~_,a.;~"""'.-'~":r_ .. .":,o(",~;.<
." lIndlheMl' $1_600 ,<.0" SO,_
., GlnlfllPlanE...... 'U.. ,.....
421 GnraIPlIn SIruCIIn aIllI F.u $1.310 sz.31.
42.2 lallcIUStE...... $;,220 ST....
H.3 CicuIIllonEIImn ,.... $14.300 S7UCID
4.24 SOlCtlndc-erwlllOltE....... ..".. ..,...
.&2.5 NDiltE.......1 $10..1(10 StD....
4.2.6 ,- 52,... "..
" - ,&.0,. SO,...
r...... S31.1~ $tUllCl SO 514,_ 5n....
TAlKI-EIMftIJIIIIEtfIM.:AML1III ",',,';'~::':". . . ....',-;.u.....,.,;,....-,.::i.::.~:.,,-~:..~, ..-.... ',"<>; .:..".~;~-.-..:,'~..
l,' - ,6.0" .....
" DRAFTEIR/NOC $51.250 ST,... ...,..
5,J RISDlIllSIID~fRlNOD SID&:lO Stl,"
.. ,-~ - ..... ......
T..5. '" .... SO I IIG,110
TAllf',;GBEJIIl:PtAlUDO"..'-OS. ~ '*,''"'" '';'.i','-M,\::'r^-' ;~~'P''"<' -. ,"~',.; -',,.,,',-,:,;,' .;.~,~~< "' -.";~~:'--.
" ~~lDrGPIIllIEJl SU20 I ...
." 13.160 13.'"
'.J FNl GInerII PWI 15.2"0 52,... D,'"
TalIl. - 111.420 52,100 II SO SZ1,J2I
~_T""" " , . ..~,. .:~:.h~ .L ~. ..,y' - .....",...;.
" II,'" SO,200 ".....
72 IIJ $10_]10 11011
7.3 G1SDIII,Uaa 12,160 "'10
"7.s..a.. szo,'70 ...... .. TO ,.U
COIII"UHENI'ONETOTALS ",,' " ';:-.,..',- , .,-,-
",",ZOO S31,... TO "..,.. I S3tUZll
..~::, RUU ..... ..,... SZ5,ZIO
COMPO ONE GRAND TOTAl. m2.1l1S SS3,... TO $'1.100 ........
COIl'.""''''' ,....' ,',' , , , " ','. ,,,,... ,,',' , < ',',' ' ;'.. '~. , ".
-.. ""lJDdIlIl SO,'" ..,.,. SUZI
lb'IIdRtClUlIDII......j~1 ...... '''10
COIlOlIIC .,..... ....... Il.lDUllt Sl.'1O SO"" SlU2D
EClII'IOIIIc~nd......~ $11.150 r $11.1511
rppea.-11IIl'IsUucluf1 ~ $25.000 SIl,OllO lJ6,...
- " SIO.OSO " ...,...
COMIIDNfJQ' TWO TOTALS
HZ,'" "',.,. "'''. ...... ..,... $167.171
lWIIIl.IISUI..EEJPfHSES 111.103 _ "" .... $12.103
COIIPONEIfT TWO GAMD mAL $111'."23 ...... S21,... m.... S11O,m
GRANO TOTAL (Compoaents One ilnd Two) 5336,488 56U40 520.400 5105.250 5535,078
* TaSll J l1nlraSUUCIUnIAl~_De llllledaISl;;:.OOOw~.get ate.. The number 01 laf'gel.areas receMnl) ananalyso5ofonlfaSInK:ture.....Mbeal11\e
C,lv"SOlsc::re1lOl'l
** The numbel'!)f TraifiC CounIS..... be al the City's ~bon T~IC CounlS..... be tilled at "'e froIoI,oong rain
AM ancl ~ 2 n, manuall....-.g counlS al selKt<<lll!tlll'HCbOl'lS llf neeesu..."
AM. noon. aM PM 2 nr manuall\lmlllO COUnlS.11 to Sllleded "'~edIOnS lif NCeSsatyl
24h'rnacn"'ecounlSallOOseteCled~\/segmenlS
S;75;Counl
5:5i)iCounl
5~OO!Counl
-
The Planning Cenle,
*
**
May 18. fOOl
'':--
-
.,..
Proposed Budget
City of San Bernardmo General Plan Update and EIR
r
\.-
THE PLANNING CENTER
T".I RATE: usa "25 $111 $135 "51 $15 570 55lI 5015 "DO
TOTAl TOTAL
Oacri9tioll "" M' OJ AI OM ~.- ""- W, 1- TI HOURS IUDGET
C:OMI'OHUT lHIE TASKS '" '". ..~' ,'.,. ,'" ,. , . " " ,
"
TASll . GPtDW. PUll ftAll PIIOSRAM INI11ATIOI . , - -,
" PrGleCllMllhan . . . . II 52.&10
" 0.0, .. ..... 16 ., . ,. II ,,'"
13 8IseMao~..". . . 12 ....
Tlslll.S.111ata1 . . " . I .. " . . I 12. SI.I5I
TAlIIZ.l:OMJIUIIITYISIUf:SREPOfIT ,',. t'.. .',.....,~
" c ..... " - " ., 16 I I II $6.640
" Pld:PdtINl1DnPrGcISS
HI Fotu$Gfouos!1l " .. 2S . . " $10.435
22.2 Work5llllOSlTl " .. 25 . . " 510.435
". 2. SdIllIal " I II . .. . I . ,511
TASI3. AllBUlAlWO . .. .,..",," _,">'c,', ;.-", ,,' ,,' ";i;:-" :':'.1\1;, c;....]....,>., - '..- ;',.', c...... ~ '_<r.'X~:_'<,: -;'--' ".''>, ..
',1 T AIUs and land UStScenarios 11ln " 32 . .. ,. 32 '" $14.320
" AlefIlllMS PmtlQIian WotlIslloD . . . I " $3.240
... -.- " . .. . . .. " I . , 17.510
TAII..lHJIEIW. P\AII rMf'WTJOII ", ",~~::.,-. ..:$"; ~ '., ". ,"". ';:'''-.1;,;:':;;<;-' <":~~"~l'~".o.- . ' ,-;"'.-<: ,- .....'-
" ....... . . . ZI 51.600
., --....-
42_1 GIlIIAlPllnSlluClln.lIIFotm11 . . , . . II 52.310
HZ ............. . 16 . 32 . . . .. $,,220
4Z,JCirNIliDnElemenl . . " . . . II "',600
01.24 5 and Conun~ilJn ElemenI . . " . . . 52 "',000
U.SNIliSIEIemIn . 16 . . 10 ". $10.400
( 2.65 ...... . 16 . . . .. S2.!60
!~ . " . J2 . . " ",060
TlSk4. S.lItaIal . . .. " I " .. .. .. II n. "
II ~Ell'MlMHKTAl.uw:ms .:..:,,-.,.... " " .. ... ",-, ^~,:,,'''r~;:; . "- '-.' ",. " " .... .',
',1 NCIP."'" . . , 10 . " '1.100
" 1lIWT"""'" OJ " .. ,,, 32 10 ... $51.250
" flllOQllSllOCIImIllIlft"FIRIIElR/NCIO OJ . OJ 111 $10.630
" -. "'"""""'" . . .. .. ",,""
T... ,..." . ". .. . .. .H .. I I II , 173.31D
T........~...._ """'.. "" ,'~.:. ."",-'-::,. ,", .,
61 NlIic &1 OJ 32 " . " SU:.'O
5.2 Fi far GP and EIR . " II . .. SJ.i50
63 FillIlGetlelJlPlan . 16 ,. . " I< 55.240
rl....bMllla .. I . .. . .. . . '" I1U2t
TASlll. f'IIDBRAII AMIIlSTRAllON ~..- .. ,.. ,.,
71 .. .. .. sa,ooo
72 "' 20 .. " 10 II $10.310
U .".... . . " ZI $2,160
... .1l1liII1II .. . I< 11 . , 11 I . . 1 121.'11
COllll'ONElITlNII TOTALS -'~T..' ... -
COMPONENT ONE TOTAl. HOURS 16' 121 .... .. q "' '10 .. ", ,,. '''' ...
8ILLlHGiU.TES lISO 51 110 I . ... " '" ... . ... ...
OMPON N ONltAtOR 1AS RUse 1!I.1Z5 ....... I1U15 ..,- liUH 112.1" St.... I 15.14. 11.... HI. SZIUH
Il(~EXPUlSEI sa71$
COMf'OIIEIITONETOTAl SZ32.tIS
COMI'OIOIT TWO TASKS " , ',',',' '. , ',.,,' , , ,,' ,-,.,,"
HiSlOfIC Resources EIImeII jUpdat) , , . " . . II 55.720
P~k1and lUblIn IenlII'll (~'l . . . " . . 52 ",,'"
EcO/lOlTlC OmloDmInl lemtnlllhlcbl'l . . . . 22 S2..1;o
conomic:MlUI/UIAna/y1IS . so
rippeco1llOllmBlfuttwtAN/ysllard . .00 . " '" " .. II 51. S52.7&l
IIWI!fSIly C1 ... 1
ctIMI'OIWIT TWO lOTAlS
COUPQNENT TWO iOUl 'lOURS " '" 132 31 11 '" 10' " ". '" 132 ...
81UlJ'~~'\TES 'SO "25 SliD .5135 ISO ., '" "'. 1 ... ...
, SlUoa SZ7.m STU2I SUM ..,... $.I1.m 51.1. 53.1ft ",,725 111.1" HI' Ut5.57D
IllI.UftSAIlEEXPEICSES 511.111
COIIPO.NTlWOlOTAl UI3.711
,-
'-'
-
The PlannIng Cenler
May 18~~'
-
-
'-'
r
'-'
(
'-
J
-
COIIPlI81'_WIS
Tas..'.&lfIEIAlP\.lll...... .......n"'..
11 PtlMCI-...-
12 0.1 ___
1 J .....,..,..._
.~,.~..
1ASll~.__PUl""""_
11 ~U'd"
12 '-."""'e~
'....4.,......
TAU5.-.ul_YIa
52 o...elllr'flOC
,..s.........
.......IIIEMlIlOPTlOll,... '_',0''''"...-''';_'''-
63 FWIlIIG..."..
bu.........
lMlT....-
"
i-_~- -"!"",..::..~?""",',
...1........
~_lMIlI"..;-\ ..-h'>':,.~-. -;.5'=,""!1Wn..'..'.
~''101''''_
..... .
"
Proposed Budget
Cjty of San Bernardino General Plan Update ana EIR
lUrE:
"..
SI.JIfIjId
.......
;j
.u.
...-
-
...
Gl$ ,.....
sna
-
-
...
..-
I
..
"
..
..
"
..
I
e
..
n.
.-...."':-'"
..
..
..
". .""'~-" ,',- 'A'-.'" '\c,.;,...;.~
.
.
~1
~.,.
"
..
"
,.
....:..:,,;..~. ~" .:or.: '; .... .~,'."'~~,.~>.;;.,.,..;, :;:-. .."._",..:<;:"".........F
"
.
,
.
"
.
..
..
",,,",,-, ;;...:",,~ ~:;..,.. . :..-:..-",
. ,,,,"-:-:,__,.-.,,'1'" .i"..-:.....,....,.t<.
.
.,;t".,~ .-.....' .,-,::;',~;.,t(!;='"";,ji
. ..
..
"ty t.,.
"
"
"
..
..
.
n
..
..
-.......
-......
""-.~~--
. .:N'
."....
~.~._:..},.:,:,ft;~:~i;:.':i:;;:~:.f:~;;:;:~:~0;~;:~~~-:::~i:':._:;:;;~~:~,-~.':<.~~:\:J:f~",:;,;;':- .*.,'t~:"t~~:-:;~.~lt%'%-;~~~r:(~/~':'~'~~tX'.~~s:fl
;__~Mul..,... II liD U 2. 1ft
COMl"OHEHTTWOuaOltTOTAL SlI SlI SU" 11.4.. n.1. .... NtA
--
_lWO...
..
..
..~ .,.~,,;,~
,..
,
....
,..
.
,..
,;
~: T_3.1 '""~~"bebilld.Stt.OllO"'''''_iI T.._llefoflafgeC...~..~oI~..be.h
Cly's~.
".....
,...
-
~-~"
TW..' ftAI.....~..
~.Z3~e......
COMPOHI!N1' ONIlMC111 TOTAL
_lWO.....
E......~&1IIIotnl
TiIlOtc_....UfMf...MuIe'f'I._Elll
~~So.CIlIC~
COMPO"'INT TWO LA80R TCTAl.
RATE:
"
..,...
".
m.Ils
'2l
"un
..
I
"
IUfIS
..
"
"
121.115
In
"
..
......"
.. The.-oIT.illflceo......be.._c.rs~. r..JfficCouNs_beblllldillllle~'_
......_PM2.._......._iII..-c.d_"~1
"t,f._.andPUZ"'........-....*"I.fOtellClld_l.necesuryl
~4 .._C:O_.1GO-'fdedrOldW.,......
... ...
-,... .....
l,.;.."
.. '50 ,.. ... .
.... .... ..... HI.
--........
~_ItIAl
< .:t.,~._,~..
.. '" '" ""
" " 'D
" .. no
n.... $17.221 ,,'" I HI. ".
........1 ~u ..~
COWQIIUT 1WO mil l
$175tCoun1
..""""""
$100fC0un1
...1
ClIWMlII'ftIITMII
--
STANLEY R. HOFFMAN ASSOCIATES
"''',1 "" I ".. I ... I T
I s......... ..0'" D.u_ TOrAlIlOURS I TOTAllUDCET
e_o.-E'-'-rUllllaf
ec_.................
_lWOTOUU
CCUPlJIIIITlWOrtlTAl.1OJlS
k II'TES
tOWVlll!I'TWOl..IIlIOIffll'l
The PI;JlIOIOnQCerller
..
..
"
"
..
....
$fU"
.
....
..
90 'ill
..
A.I" NI
.-.......u DPOIES
~1II1Wf1"1M
..
..
ut.l"
....
..,...
..
,.
S8.Z!rO
tlUSD
'"":
Mayll,~
c
c
I~
'-
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 lees are adjusted annually.
Expert Witness Fees
For Depositions, Testimony
$300.00/hour
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
$150
$90-110
$70 - 90
$50 - 60
Principal
Associates
Senior Staff
Support Staff
General Plan Update And Eir
"'(.I'nl(.,..V.I.{.s...&.-J.....UO"'.w.~rJ,...,....,....I_ .
- "'-":
--"., -
r
\-'
~>
,-.
:.::~:
,....-
"'I
"-
:'!!"",
.-...~:
-....
r--
'-
Appendix D
Team Qualifications
General Plan Update And Eir
M:\(;m~nC.I",I~d'''I.\.t.rH-u",;..\I-",of,\''.~'''~''''
'\.~-
-
c
c
r
~
General Plan E'(per~ence
-
~ ,
;z ;; ci: -
... E U '"
.
;z u; ,
0 ~ ~
Q. . ~ <5 ~
~ ,
:::e ::0 ~ .i! v ,~
" ~
0 c '" "
PROJECTS U ~ 0: .s ,
... .. u
'"
-
~ !
-
- "
0; .;
> -
- .
0
~ -
-
s Z
- c ~
0 ~
-:; v
W W ~
'E
. -
E
. -
u;
,..
'$ ';
ii :
'" z
THE PLANNING CENTER EXPERIENCE (Date of Completion)
. Anaheim, California - General Plan and EIR (expected 2003)
. County of Riverside, California - General Plan Update (2001)
. Rancho Cucamonga, Camornia - General Plan and EIR (2001)
. Safford, Arizona - Comprehensive Plan (2000)
. La Palma. California - General Plan and EIR, (1999)
. Truckee, California - General Plan and EIR (1996)
. Brentwood, Califomia - General Plan and EIR (1993)
. Clovis, California - General Plan Update and EIR (1993)
. Temecula, Califomia - 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 PlanfEIR for S,E, Quadrant (1991)
. Los Angeles Co,. California - General Plan Streamlining Program (1987)
. Adelanto, California - General Pian/StrategIc ServIces (1985)
.... .........
........
........... .
.. ... ....
........ ..
.. ..... .
.. ...... . .
... .... ..
.... ....... .
........ ..
.... ........
... .......
.... .........
.. . .......
. . .......
.... .... ....
.... .......
..... ..
..
......... .
cr
e~
Th~ Planning c.ent~r
(Partial list of General Plan experience)
00::
-
c
r-
l
"'-'
0;>.,
,-..
'-
Appendix D
Team Qttalificatioru
THE PLANNING CENTER
15'0 METRO ORNE
COSTA MESA, CA 92626
TEL; 714.966.9220
'FAX; 714.966.9221
www.planningcenter.com
Firm Background
Full Range of Professionaf Service
Recognized Excellence
Our Firm's Status is Solid
Depth of Staff
~I u,'anud 11) fa.''1 how mllt"h I tnjoJ"td lllOrkJ1lg lI/llh Tht Planning emur on rbe rtt'!I:'ln
oj lht Ynrha Ulfda Gtntrtll PLm, I jirJlmd (Ihtm {(J oe) tx/rtmt~r ~'of}per.:lin't :mJ
rtJp1mm'l' !tJ the CIIJ'! rrqllts/i. and JII u':f)rlt U'dJ dOl" ;n a wnt/y mam'tr . . El'U"fJl1t
IJaJ txpTtHed iallJj'"aaion ttI/lh the /inal p,.o}(a
- Pat Haley
Community Development Director
City of Vorba Unda
General Plan Update completecl 1993
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,
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 Q~
planning; land use planning: landscape architecture; site planning; ~.4(
design guidelines; redevelopment and rehabilitation plans: \.."v'
assessments: economic and fiscal impact analysis, and
computerized planning system applications.
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,
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.
The experience of The Planning Center's key personnel at the
different levels of govemment 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,
Gmeral Plan Update And Eir
\1.,(;"VI'(.".(.I":.,.;.....I~......I;_,(."."'.......~"",..I'....,....'.f..
Page D!
-
r-
'-
,r-.'
'-
;,.,.,........
''-"
Appendix D
Team Qualificatio_ns
Principal and Senior Project
Management Involvement
Responsiveness to Client Needs
Our Work is Consistent
The Principals' involvement in each project ensures efficient
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.
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 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,
-.
.~A
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
Environmental Impact Reports
"The Planning Center's pro/mional
performance reI"lud in lhe apprf)llal
a/a 51,36 million General Plan
and fIR without challene:e."
- Barry Hand.
Community Development Director
City of Tracy
General Plan Update completed 1993
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,
-,.
'~-i
i
Your challenge is to create a more heaithy, 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 D2
\I. ',(.tIF/',t.'"I.'" .~ \.... H.><.'W..I,_f:n, wI.\..o.IJ,no..~,II'" P..,..""'..I,.
liB The Planning Genu,,;
- -
...
Appendix D
Team QttalificationJ
""-'
Governmental Services
Recognition
. ,,/""^"""
"Tb, Planning c.n"r haJ j/lljill,d tINir
comraallal obligations J/I((fW!IIJ1y and
limely. Billed 011 /ht;r prrfonnana lor (be
City oj Brtnlu'noJ. I U/fJ/1/J rrcOf1lmtnd The
Planning Center. Tlxy haw bu" rtJpomivt
10 Ollr "eeth and M'f! worktd dOJe(y willJ
OilY staff M
-Eddie Peabody, Jr.. A1CP
Community Development Director
City of Brentwood
Genera' Plan Update completed 1993
'..~
Representative Projects
CURRENT PROJECTS
"ThiJ IJ tIN oppOrlllnll)' Ibal will determine
what kind f}llt.~aq UIt will /eaz't om
grand,.hi/Jrtn. ..
- Supervisor Tom Mullen, 5th District.
Riverside County
"~
'-
-
" 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.
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.
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. We are especially proud of the
following effort.
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.
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,
Gen.,.,,! Plan Update And Eir
"".(.fJl'TC,I~."", ..:v. ~",._.f", .~'\... &......1..... /....,-w/...
Page I) 3
.....~
-
/~
I~
Appendix D
Team QualificatiorlS
...
~'St
General Plan/EIR
Rancho Cucamonga
r
1,,-
General Plan Update/EIR
La Palma
-
''"-''
-
The Planning Center is currently updating and modernizing the City
of Rancho Cucamonga's General Plan, leading a team of nine
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 servicelfacility 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 Mure
development potential with the right amount, type, and location of f'~
commercial, recreation, and office development. The team is "1
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 Mure development or improvement.
The Planning Center recently completed a comprehensive update
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.
.._.oj
~
. ~
-
Page D4
\1.\(.I}~'n(;,...':':, .i.\'..~ ~".....,l~'" ~..... 1!......nI... ,._t.,,"
83 The Plarrning Ctnttl<~
r~
\
'-
I"""'"
''-"
r-
"-'
Appendix D
Team Qualifications
Riverside County Integrated
Planning Process:
Riverside County General Plan
Update
"I would like to thank you and
YOllr staff for a fine presentation
to the Planning Comminion.
The PrnuerPoint on community
centers was excellent. I thank
The Planning Center for being
the trJ/e partner in this effort
that it is. "
Dan Silver, Coordinator
Endangered Habitats League
General Plan Update/EIR
Y orba Linda
Overthe last two years, The Planning Center has been working on
the General Plan Update as part of the historic Riverside CountY
Integrated Planning Process (RCIP). The RCIP is a comprehensive,
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
Identifying transportation corridors to' meet Western Riverside
County's future transportation needs through the Community &
Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP)
Creating a Multiple Species Hab~at Conservation Plan (MSHCP)
to ensure the preservation of open space and endangered
species and hab~ats 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 a~Dn
'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,
The Planning Center prepared a complete update of the City of
Yorba Linda's General Plan. This project also involved extensive
environmental analysis and an integrated EIA. The General Plan
upoate program included developing a list of important issues that
were then utilized to define the most critical ~ems to address in the
general plan
An important component of this work was the interviews w~h 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 Updtlle And fir
\1 .t,"~1'(;POI."'''' \.../......."'..-.'1t.."...~. ""..-I,.. """"'/./<0
-
Page D.J
-
l,.,
I""""
'--.'
-
!
'---
Appendix D
Team Qualificatio,!s
SPECIFIC PLANS
Highland 2010 Strategic Plan
Highland
Award wnner""
1995APA, Califi>rniaChapter' '
1995. APA. Inland Empire
-
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 posnive
than they would otherwise have been,
"8)' my f)hun'allfJn, The Planning emUr'! uppr!)afh /0 iptfijic plan prrpara/irJII haJ.
tJ/wa)J bttn "ream? and rtlPOnJWt /0 (hi c/ienu' and jnrilJirrio1lal flUdJ. W
-Mike McDougall, Project Manager
Palisades Properties, Inc
~
:"y
Faced with increasing budget pressures citywide, and deteriorating
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 snuations and, at
the same time, made n possible to generate ideas from the physical
planning that contributed to the City's strategic thinking.
Strategic direction was developed in several key subject areas:
Public safety and security; public faciJijies and services; economic
development ana 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 priornies.
..-:~
In terms of associated physical planning, there were two areas of
focus: the Historic Old Town. representing the original townsne: and
Southwest Highland, and area of residential, industrial and
commercial development wnh 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 Intemational 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
'l. ~(.rn.7'('-{".(:"""},,~ IJ;....."'/i~\(j" .(.\.0. &nw"j,... ,...,.....1....
83 The P/aT/[/ing Ctnttt<~
,,-
1",-,
Appendix D
Team Qtta/ificationJ
Tustin MCAS Reuse/Specific
Plan
Tustin
r-
I
........
"I wanted to tak, this opportliniry to
commend YOII on tm significant ,[forts
thaI Th, Planning Centtr pm into th,
(MCAS TlIStin) Rum Plan. As YOII
know, military base dosll" is a much
mort complex planning procw than
either of us have Mr exptri,n<~d.
Howe,yr. The Planning Centtr was
always open. mponsiw and flexible in
light of tm cll1nbmorn, ftrkral
rtqllinments that influtnad th,
planning process. Tm timtlinw of all
YOllr rkli,.,ables also allOWld US to mitt
criticaltirne scmdllle nurU, "
-Christine Shingleton
Assistant City Manager
City aITu.tin
J..........
'-'
.-
The Planning Center was part of a team of consultants hired by the
City to prepare the Reuse/Specific Plan and EIR/EIS for the 1 ,5-74-
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 gUidelin,es, 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
the base. Our approach was to anticipate, understand, and
effectively address community concerns from the beginning of the
planning process, which was key to the successful approval of the
Reuse Plan by the Reuse Task Force.
While the reuse plan/specific plan in this case did not involve
continuation of an active airport component. it did include a strong
emphasis on transit connection, effective reuse of existing military ~
improvements. preservation of historic aviation structures, and ~..~
extensive adaptation of proposed uses to adjacent existing ~
development.
The Plan provides for 450 acres of residential uses. 802 acres of
commercial/business uses and 348 acres of institutional and
recreational uses. The Plan has been divided into 8 distinct
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 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 l8-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.
Page D7
....-:
Gtnmll Plan Update And Eir
\1 '(;m TI.I"..",...Is.... ~..l(;",.(.W.""_"'."~...J_J..
-
....-
r
"-
c
r-
'-'
Appendix D
Team Qualificati{}ns
Garland Village Neighborhood
Specific Plan
Inglewood
AMid wnl8r~,
f999Westside Pri". Weslside ,~
Urban Forum
"'I wan! 10 {XlmJ O/l( (ongrallllal;oR1 and
apprtt:iation /0 ]011 and JfJur /tam al Tht
Planning C'nltr for a joh Ultll ""n" II wa,
a long road bill with the rtr:ml adoption ()J
The VIllage Sp<<ific Plan by lhe City
COIInd/. I am confuttnr thai "al,hangtwil/
Of(tl' in IIJt Village ntighWhooJ. On Ihis
"'try afternoon. UIt hdvt a flltlring with
Sma/or Dianne FeinIllin who haJ txprrsJld
her ",pporl of lhe projm and u prrparing 10
aJJil/ I/J in 1m implmml4lion (JIliN plan
und ilJ' "011lPOllI1l11 which Ultrr so carrfllll}
preparrd by The Planning un"r,
YOllr pmona! dedicdtion /0 Ihis projeer and
YOIIr conam for tIN rtsimnu WaJ lI'idtnl al
m:ry llage of lhe dMlopmtnl of the plan. I
l'try mllfh lnjoytd OIl' clOSt working
relalion,lJip and I am hopeftll thaI IlJi, will
COmi1ll11 in rht filllln. 1/ UIOII/J bt my gnat
pit4f11rt /0 offir I1tJ rtCommmdat;on to others
who may Iuk YOllr IXptrliJt. "
-Mike Randall, AICP
Associate Planner
City of Inglewood
.-
The Village Specific Plan was recently adopted by the InglewoOd
City Council, and calls for the revrtalization of a neighborhood of
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
previously known as "the bottoms"to the compelling new vision of
The Village. It is far more than a name change: it is a distinct shift in
how the neighborhood is perceived, how rt works, and how rt 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.
1"~
~.
.. --1'
The Village Specific Plan consists of three strategies: 1) a physical
overhaul of both public and private spaces: 2) a new organizational
structure wrthin 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 addrtion, while
the housing stock is only 50 years old, it has been severely
neglected. The City, in concert wrth the Plan, is committed to the
mitigation and revitalization of a significant portion of the area
through appropriate insulating and arcMectural improvements.
Extremely high densities are not in balance wrth 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 facilrties 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.
[;~
. .:.~.
_e',
The Village is in the process of reinventing itself. The Village
Specific Plan is the blueprint for making it happen,
"/ was partimwrly imprrsJtlJ by rbt way they U1trr ahl, 10 diplomatically rtlolflt lht
difftrrnw thai J1triodi(d/~r imtr,~ed d1n(Jng a propoJaI /tam consisting (Jf lt1It1I Ji/ftmtl
organizutions. TINy dtstn't 10 bt commtndtd aJ milch for their Jltlltsma1lship as for IINi,
award.winn;ng grant writing ski/Is. ..
. Alan Burks
EV Media
83 The Pl4Mil1g Ce11l';~
Page D8
.11. (.fJ~Tf.~. ,,,.J ....JW._..J_,f.,..,J.....R........,J,_I_uJ.'-
r
"'-'
c
-:..;
-
'-'
Appendix D
Team Qualifications
Personnel
Richard E. Ramella
Consulting Principaf
rramella@)olanninacenter.com
% of Project Effort: 10%
Dick Ramella will be responsible for the performance of The
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 la.ODD-acre Chino Hills Specific Plan in San
Bernardino County: the 2S.00D-acre South Sutter County General
Plan Amendment for Sutter County; the 1 OS. ODD-acre urban growth
management planlgeneral 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:
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 for his abilities to
work with citizen's organizations. special interest groups and
decision-makers.
General Plan Update And Eir
,11'i(,OVt1t".p'(.". 01 'I.t.n..-..."i'"'l.''' '" \...,."..,..,,_~..,",
Page D'{:..
-
c
r
\......
,-
"-
Appendix D
Team Qttalificatiom
Brian James
Project Manager
biames(ci)olanninacenter .com
% of Project Effort: 25%
AI Bell
Strategist
abel!i@Dlanmnocent~.;com
% of Project Effort: 5%
Brian James wiil serve as the Project Manager, His role will consist
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 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.
ri
"J.
".
Mr. Bell has been a professional planner for over 40 years, bringing
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
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 Sutler County General
Plan Amendment, Vorba Unda General Plan. Temecula General
Plan, Fullerton General Plan, La Palma General Plan and Clovis
General Plan.
!1
" ,-~
Pagt DIO
M;'c:.:OV/\('''''.m >of ...... ~&#M_.I,'1T 01..... H.r.w..J... P..,...f.,b.
~ The Pl~?,,,i,,g emit"':.
-
--
I
~
Appendix D
Team Qltalificatiotzs
Dwayne S. Mears, AICP
Principal
dmears(a)olanninacenter .com
c
% of Project Effort: 1%
"Sbrnl.:;ng" high /nlt! of t."Cptrmt and
prolmiona/i1m. TIN Plannmg emUT haJ
pro1/ided tin eil)' with ,imely and "mIra"
tnt-'ironmrnlal dtx'lImt71li. I bighty
rtfolntntnd Tilt Planning C,nter for ,zn:r
(7tt'ironmental f07l1/liling n,eds of rbt P,.itlille
or plio/if 1,(/or. TIHTt haw In,n 10 mll"Y
IlICftJsfi,I JlOT;t! - liN pro/tssionaJism.
expertist. ptrJiJ/t1tct and hard work oj
Dwayne and his staff havt con/Tiollltd
greatly /0 thtse meaJJts. O~.,ra/l. il sholl/d
be Jaid thaI mtlch of 1m !11C1:m and gr()U/lh oj
the Cil)' oll71dllJI'7 aflring tm past mitral
year., is Ih, rw,l, of hara work ]m"fonn,a by
The Planning emltT and DUlaynt ,\tItan"
. Mike Klssell. Planning Director
City of Indus1ry
Marie Gilliam
Environmental Planner
mailHam(ci)olanninocenter.com
% or Project Effort: 3%
Omar Dadabhoy
Project Planner
odadabhov(Q)olanninacenter .com
% of Project Effor7: 45%
Governmental Team
Staff Support
"......
M\trhtn working with Tht Planning (tnltr.
wt know /bal Ult art gtuing 1m laml and
/fIOi/ JopbiJlicaltd informal;on iII'ailahlt from
a frimal) una btlpfiil Haff.-
- Arlene Andrew. Senior Planner
City of La Velne
'-",
-
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,OOO-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 Sail Ranch recreation-oriented residential development in
Fresno County, California.
Marie Gilliam will serve as the Senior Planner for the Environmental
Analysis portion of the Project Marie brings to The Planning Center a"
over 26 years of experience in land use and policy planning, W.4(
environmental assessment and land development planning, in both ~
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; Qfowth management programs; community plans:
urban services and development capacity issues: and
comprehensive environmental impact assessments.
Omar Dadabhoy will serve as Project Planner for the General Plan
Program. He will have primary responsibility for research and
analysis of the plan, strategies and incentives we will consider as
we develop this program. His background in both the planning and
political arenas will be an asset to the team as we analyze policy
options related to this program
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.
-
Gtntral Plan Update And Eir
1I.'(.lIvr.(;I"_(.", ., .\... ~,,;,_,(.... ..(\".I,""-,,,...I'_wl.J.,
_ Page Dll:::
.,.-
,r
,
.~
.r-
'-
~
'-
Appendix D
Team Qttalification.s
INSERT GP MATRIX HERE
-
~"l
t;~
,
-.-;.:
>
.J
Z~
.'
-
Page 012
II .{.f)n1(./~f:...",i...~Ut,.,!)"."",-.II"'I'.."...J_""
83 Tht Pl4nnjng Unter.:.c
Appendix D
Team Qttalification,s
'- This page intentionally left blank.
c ~
:~~;
,A"""-
"-'
-
General Plan Update And Eir
1"'(,111 r(,I"I","',\I.H-~'_I,"'''''.'i.n~'_I'...,...J.J,~
Page DU.
.~
Appendix D
Team Qualifications
'-
PSOMAS ASSOCIATES
3187 RED HILL AVE #250
COSTA MESA, CA 92626
TEL: (714) 751-7373
FAX: (714) 545-8883
Firm Background
~
'-
Representative Projects
Glen Helen Specific Plan
San Bernardino County, CA
, ~='--
i
'-'
Psomas is a leading engineering and surveying consulting lirm
ranked nationally in ENR's Top 200 Engineering Firms, Psomas'
mu~i-disciplined staff offers services in public works, engineering,
survey and mapping, GIS and information services and water and
natural resources,
l?~
Founded in 1946 by George Psomas, Psomas is organized as a fi
California corporation. Psomas has grown to a full-service
consulting lirm with over 400 employees. The lirm 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.
. .,~~
:':'1
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:
. GIS mapping
. 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
Page D14
.1I-'C.f1ITr.;",,,,.,, "'''~'';l_Vl''''J...s.....,,,,;....,...,....J.,J..
lJj, The pZ,!'illi1lg Center -.~
r
\..-
(.-
'-
,..-...
"-
Appendix D
Team Qttalifications
City of Huntington Beach -
Financing/Funding Strategy for
Integrated Infrastructure
Management Program (liMP)
City of Placentia, Storm Drain
Master Plan Update
.-
. 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
Psomas was the prime consultant for a consultant team retained by
the City of Huntington Beach to develop a financing/funding strategy
to overcome a projected $80D-million shortfall in funding needed for
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 for a 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 2O-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.
Psomas' review of the 1992 Storm Drain Master Plan (SDMP) will
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.
-
General Plan Update And fir
,\I"(,I,.-"(.P':t.tI, ."\....I~_'C.",~''-'.,'''-....h_,....,....,i_'..
Page DI~
r
'--
,-
'-
c
Appendix D
Team Qttalifications
City of Compton -Water Master
Plan Update and Capital
Improvement Program
Personnel
Gary P. Dysart, P.E.
Vice President
odvsart(Q)Psomas.com
% 01 Project Effort: 2%
Ken J. Susilo, P.E.
% of Project Effort: 7%
John R. Thornton, P.E.
% of Project Effort: 4%
Daniel McCroskey
% of Project Effort: 4%
,-
Psomas prepared a Water Master Plan Update and Capital
Improvement Program for the City of Compton. The plan included a
skeletal system model to determine the ability to meet fire flow
demands. The plan also includes an inventory of all waler
infrastructure including water mains, wells. storage reservoirs,
pumping facilities, meters and service connections and
interconnections, Inventory includes length, size. malerials. 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
improvemenis based upon accepted criteria.
:;~1
. ,
Mr, Dysart has over 35 years experience in working for public
agencies with over 20 years in the pos~ion of City Engineer for
Southern California c~ies. His experience includes major
infrastructure planning and design, project management, program
management and municipal engineering consulting. He has also
been responsible for preparation and implementation of numerous
long range Cap~allmprovement Programs. Facil~ies Master Plan,
Public Facilities Financing Strategies and Assessment Engineering
for cities.
:-~.:
Mr. Susilo has ten years experience in engineering design.
hydraulics. hydrology. computer modeling, and storm water
management. This experience included project management and
utilizing statistical and surface water models for hydraulic and
hydrologic analyses.
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 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,
~.
~:4
Mr, McCroskey has worked in the field of surveying and mapping for
the past nine years w~h the emphasis on digital mapping, CAD
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
\iBJht p.Ja.i"ing Cmm:;"_
-- . . ,
Pagt D16
..M..'''....'', ,......... ",_ ':__.~J._.... .."._ 'L-.~ . ,._I',~,.J_'-
/,",,""'.'
'-
,~
'-,
p.
-.
,.
\..,...
Appendix D
Team Qttalificatiom
STANLEY HOFFMAN
ASSOCIATES
11661 SAN VICENTE BOULEVARD
SUITE 306
LOS ANGELES, CAUFORNIA 90049
TEL: (310) 820-2680
FAX: (310) 820-8341
www_stanleyrhoffman.com
Firm Background
Fiscal and Financiaf Anafysis
Annexations and Incorporations
Economic Analysis
-
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 clienfs specific requirements.
Services are provided individually and in cooperation w~h 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.
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:
Q~
~
. Fiscal Impact Studies
. Developmenr Impact Fee Studies
. Capital Financing Analysis
Fiscal impact and plan of services studies are prepared for
proposed jurisdictional boundary changes including:
. Annexation Studies
. Incorporation Studies
. Growth Management Phasing Plans
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
Page DI~
General Plan Update And Eir
.\t. \(;"1"1'\(.,..,;", -/SJ. 14._.-...,_-1;,,, ~~w ""~"JrJ,_I'...,.....(.j..
-
.--,-,..
Appendix D
Team Qua/ificatio!,s
Reaf Estate Market Research
"-
Representative Projects
County of Riverside,
Transportation and Land
Management Agency, General
Plan Update
City of Rancho Cucamonga
General Plan Update and EIR.
,,....-'
"-
Fiscal Model Development and
Fiscal Analysis of the General
Plan for the City of Fontana
General Plan and Fiscal Model
Analysis for the City of Upland
Fullerton General Plan Fiscal
Analysis in the City of Fullerton
..'~
(
'-
-
Decision-relevant information on development opportunnies is
provided for overall market evaluations and site-specific
assessments. Techniques include:
. Land Use Market Absorption Studies
. Financial Pro Formas
. Market Feasibility Assessments
In preparation of a new Riverside County General Plan led by
Sverdrup Engineering and The Planning Center. we are preparing
the fiscal and economic analysis portions of the Plan. Our work
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,
~-,'=
:'.4
,t~~
On a project team led by The Planning Center for the City of Rancho
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
influencing growth projections.
'.
A fiscal analysis was prepared for the City of Fontana's General Plan
Update, After developing a fiscal model for the City, we projected
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,
.
SRHA set up a fiscal model and analyzed the economic and fiscal
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 altematives 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,
Eil The P./an!ling Ctnlt"'~
Page DI8
,\.I. \(.fJI7',(d~.l_"1 '" .\J.. &~..I'_'("I .,f.'>.... tv...ml.... ,..."....J.J.o
-
Appendix D
Team Qttalificatiory
r
'-
r'
\.-
,--
"-
Appendix D
Team Qualifications
Representative Projects
City of Rancho Cucamonga - 3
EIR TIA Studies per San
Bernardino County CMP
Requirements
County of San Bernardlno-Mld-
Valley Landfill EIR-TIA Study
per San Bernardino County
CMP Requirements
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, trallic
engineering, capital improvement project design and construction
management. We have an excellent understanding of public agency
procedures, policies and issues,
~:~
.'-'!
The staff of Transtech has been responsible for completing over 300
transportation planning and EIR/trallic impact studies addressing all
types of residential, commercial, industrial, office and mixed used
projects.
Transtech prepared TIA in conformance with San Bernardino
County CMP guidelines for 3 major development projects, including
residential, warehouse and office developments. 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 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,
Transtech prepared TIA in conformance with San Bernardino
County CMP guidelines for the Mid-Valley Landfill Project. 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
Trallic 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.
;-J
Pac~e 020
.\1 ,(.fll-ne,I".." ., '..../f"n..,,"_'(,If...,.\.o..H.....,./,_I....,-.JJ..
ffi TIJ< Plann,ing UnitT."::
-
~
c
c
r
'-
Appendix D
Team QttalificatioTlJ
City of Industry-Materials
Recovery Facility EIRlTraffic
Study, Majestic Realty
Development, and Kohl
Development, 3 separate
projects
Mammoth Lakes-North Village
Specific Plan Circulation
Element
City of Compton-
Redevelopment Plan EIRlTraffic
Study
City of San Marcos-San Elijo
Ranch Development EIRlTraffic
Study
-
Transtech pr<lvides traffic and transportation engineering services to
the City of Industry Redevelopment Agency since 1995, 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
60157 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.
Transtech performed a comprehensive area-wide assessment to
evaluate traffic impacts associated with build-out of a resort oriented
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, Q~
extensive pedestrian and ski oriented facilities, and public transit W.~
were considered in the development of project trip generation. ~
Detailed mitigation measures were developed in conformance with
the Town's General Plan policies,
Transtech prepared the Traffic Study for the City of Compton
Redevelopment Plan. The traffic impacts associated with two City-
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 (1-105)
on traffic circulation in the City were considered in developing traffic
projections for the redevelopment alternative scenarios.
Transtech prepared an EIA/traffic impact study for the 3,20Q-unit
San Elijo Ranch Development Project. The proposed development
and its impacts were analyzed for 6 dillerent 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 as-mile
radius from the center of the development and included 50
intersections,S freeway interchanges and freeway links. The study
also included an evaluation of cumulative impacts associated with
Page 011
Genmtl Plan Update And fir
.._,,,.r,.,..... ,.._"-...;_"...-'...._-.....n/._I'~.,..
t"""--
"'-'
,-""
,
,
'-
..I'~
~
Appendix D
Team QlIalifi,-atiorJs
City of Glendale-Central
Business District Intersection
Evaluation
City of Buena Park-Faire
Redevelopment EIRfTraffic
Study
City of Burbank/Redevelopment
Agency-Gateway Center
Roadway Alignment and Lane
Configuration Study
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,
Transtech staff participated in this study which consisted of a
comprehensive operational assessment of 40 intersections in the
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.
~:~
'. .l
~
T ranstech performed a comprehensive analysis of traffic impacts
associated with redevelopment of a 30-acre site into 450,000 square
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 1-5, Analysis of various
development phases and cumulative impacts were performed, and
detailed mitigation measures developed to address unacceptable
impacts. 'Projecr 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.
~
- .
.
Transtech completed a detailed roadway alignment and lane
configuration study for the Burbank Redevelopment Agency. Using
previous traffic studies, conceptual designs for the arterial roadway
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 Slate Freeway, widening of four
arterial as well as feasibility and phasing of the improvements to
ensure acceptable levels of service.
:'-1
'.':~
Page D22
M;',C.'flI7'.(,"'" If' "".I...~._,(_,...."....~,.,._...._I._i..t..
-
EB The P-Ianping Cenl"'-~
...
c
-,' /~
'-
/-
,
'-
Appendix D
Team Qttalificatiofts
Personnel
AIi Cayir, P.E.
Project Principal
alila>transteche.com
% of Project Effort:2%
Pat Lang, T.E.
Project Traffic Engineer
% of Project Effort: 5%
Jana Robbins
Lead Transportation Analyst
jana@transteche.com
% of Project Effort: 9%
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.
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, 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),
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 aH city traffic operations, transportation planning
activities and traffic safety programs involving recommendations for
zoning changes. subdivision and city ordinances.
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. 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
Gmeral Plan Update And Eir
\I ',(.I1~-nl.p<(:;".o/......~",_,(Jry -!.I:.r.~""_I'....,..,..I....
- . Page D2y
.-.,.- -
-
r
'-
,.-
'-
/~
""-,
Appendix D
Team Ql/alificationJ
-
located within the sphere of influence of the study area.
County of San Bernardino-Midvalley LandfHl EtR 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 wrth 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.
f~~
:~.~
City of San Marcos-San Elijo Ranch Development EIR/Trafflc
Study: Ms. Robbins was the lead transportation analyst for this TIA.
The project involved preparation of an EIRJtraffic impact study for
the 3.20o-unrt San Elijo Ranch Development Project. The proposed
development and its impacts were analyzed for 6 different phases.
The study area encompassed a 5-mite radius from the center of the
development and included 50 intersections,S 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
~.l
:'~
j
.
Page D24
\l.(.(jI-"(.,..._",-I.......I~""'...,LIt,..,.\,o.It.n.uJ"...I'..,....{.J,.
~ The Planning Center .~
...
1-
'-
1'-
;
'-
,-
I
'-
.
Appendix D
Team Qualificatio?zs
NaaonalReg~terofH~toric
Places Nominations
Historic Preservation Planning
Historic Resources Evaluations
Representative Projects
Los Angeles County Community
Development Commission
Federal General Services
Administration
Richmond Shipyard No.3
Section 106 Evaluation
Western Santa Clara Valley
Survey (Ventura County
.-
SBRA has completed numerous National Register nominations,
including nominations accepted by the Keeper for tisting at the
national level of significance.
San Buenaventura Research Associates provides qualified planning
support services to public agencies. SBRA staff has the ability to
apply in-depth, direct experience with planning agency issues and
programs to the development of solutions to historic preservation-
related problems, including the production of ordinances, plans,
and permit processing and environmental review procedures.
San Buenaventura Research Associates conducts historic
resources investigations for private clients, and federal, state and
local agencies. These reports include the development of historic
context statements, architectural descriptions. site-specific
developmental histories, land-use histories, evaluations of
significance according to National Register and locat criteria,
determinations of project impacts. production of mitigation
programs and historic sites documentation. SBRA specializes in the
production of creative, community-based and negotiated historic
resources mitigation and project alternative programs.
":.Ii
~1
~:::~
SBRA provides complete architectural and historic Section 106
evaluations for all properties effected by CDBG projects undertaken
by the Los Angeles County Community Development Commission
(LACDC). Over the past ten years, the firm has been responsible for
National Register of Historic Places evaluations for over 5,000
properties under. a Programmatic Agreement issued by the National
Advisory Council to complete direct properly evaluations related to
LACDC-funded projects.
.'
-:....
,
:.
Under contract to Fugro West, Inc., SBRA completed Section 106
evaluations in connection with Environmental Impact Statements
prepared for federal office building projects located in Camornia.
Arizona and Nevada. These projects required the establishment of
Areas of Potential Effect, field surveys, historic properly
documentation, effects determinations, project alternatives
discussion, and the development of mitigation measures,
J
....,....
~);.~
This project, completed under contract to Science Applications
International Corporation, involved the documentation and
determinations of eligibility for World War II era graving docks and
shipyard buildings at the Port of Richmond (Contra Costa County).
This survey involved the documentation of a full range of historic
features within a rural historic landscape covering over 25 square
miles. The survey process employed extensive GIS mapping and
evaluation techniques, A result of the survey was a determination of
eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places.
--.' .
-
Page D26
.Il.-'.(.I/"'/'.(./~,( H. <~.....~ ~_(...?"' ."". ~...,..,.;,..I'_"".'~
EB The Planping Ctnle,..~.
(-
"-
c
c
Appendix D
Team QttalificatiotZS
SAN BUENA VENTURA
RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
Background & Qualifications
Historic Resources SUNeys
"-
Founded in 1980, San Buenaventura Research Associates (SBRA)
is an historic resources consulting firm specializing in the
production of historic resources evaluations for compliance with
state and federal environmental requirements, and the production of
historic property surveys and documents to support historic
preservation planning efforts,
. SBRA provides qualRied Historian and Architectural Historian
services, in accordance with National Park Service guidelines"
. SBRA is listed in the Register of Professional Historians,
. SBRA is a registered woman owned business (Caltrans WBE
file no, 91 H012368),
Over the past twenty-one years. SBRA has completed hundreds of
historic resources investigations in connection with a wide variety of
public and private sector projects within California, Nevada and
Arizona. These reports include the development of historic context
statements, architectural descriptions. site-specific developmental
histories, evaluations of significance according to National Register
of Historic Places and local criteria, determinations of project ~
impacts, production of mitigation programs and historic sites >>:~
documentation. One such historic resources mitigation project was \,;U
honored with a merit award from the Southern California Chapter of
the American Planning Association.
San Buenaventura Research Associates has conducted thirteen
large-scale historic resources surveys and limited-scope surveys
throughout California. The majority of the comprehensive surveys
were funded by the California State Historic Preservation Office and
conducted according to state guidelines,
San Buenaventura Research Associates has developed a unique
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) approach to conducting
complex and unusually large-scale historic resources inventories.
This method supplies a well-grounded basis for the development of
historic resources planning goals, policies and objectives in long-
range planning efforts: establishes the complete historic structures
database required to streamline the CEQA review and development
permit process; furnishes the data needed to formulate a strategy
for the implementation of future intensive-level surveys; locates the
boundaries of potential historic districts: provides the ability to
quickly and accurately assess the environmental impacts of both
permit-level and long-range planning activities; completes the
update of older surveys required for their inclusion on the CalHornia
Register of Historic Resources: and results in high-quality mapping
suitable for public presentations and planning documents.
~_ ,- Page D2}...
Gentral Plan Update And Eir
\l",(;tIlT(.I~.I~" "'\..~ ~..i''''''.I''"-1 'I.t.~,..I....,....I.J,.
,r-
Appendix D
Team Qtta/ificationJ
'-
City of Pasadena City-wide
Survey
City of Napa City-wide Survey
Historic Resources Evaluation of
the La Verne Citrus Cooperative
Association Packing House
Resources Evaluation, Santa
Barbara Municipal Airport EIRIS
1"-
"-
Ventura County Historic
Preservation Plan
Personnel
Judith P. Triem
Historian
/-
''-"
Over 25.000 residential and commercial parcels were evaluated in
this GIS-assisted urban survey conducted for the City of Pasadena,
A GIS-assisted urban survey conducted for the City of Napa (Napa
County) involved the evaluation of over 6,000 residential and
commercial parcels. The results of the survey were integrated into
the city's land use management database in order to augment the
city's long range and development perm~ processes,
This project was conducted for the City of La Verne (Los Angeles
County) and involved local and National Register determinations of
significance for a circa 1920 orange and lemon packing house, The
project involved reconciling city, developer and local interests in a
negotiated impact m~igation program. This innovative project was
honored with an award of merit from the American Planning
Association in 1994
This extensive historic resources survey and evaluation project was
conducted in association w~h Science Applications International
Corporation, and was prepared in conjunction with the Santa
Barbara Airport Master Plan effort. The project involved
determinations of National Register and local landmark and point of
interest eligibility for early aviation and World War II associated
properties.
In conjunction with the Ventura County Planning Department, SBRA
authored a comprehensive historic preservation plan and policy
document covering the unincorporated sections of the County and
cities participating in the County's cultural heritage preservation
program, This plan included a detailed evaluation of current policy,
and a thorough examination of current programs and procedures.
Chapters in the plan included: goals, policies and programs,
preservation education, historic context, an administrative history of
the County's preservation program, state and federal regulatory
settings, future survey prior~ies, and a future action agenda. The
plan established a set of new programs ,intended to promote the
implementation of preservation goals. including the creation of
incentives for preservation w~hin the zoning ordinance,
strengthening of the County's cultural heritage regulations, and the
refinement of environmental review procedures,
~
Judith p, Triem, Historian, founded San Buenaventura Research
Associates in 1980, and has served for the past twenty-one years as
the firm's Principal. Ms. Triem received her MA from the Univers~y
of California, Santa Barbara in 1980 in the field of Public History.
Her BA was completed in 1962 at the University of Arizona,
Tucson, with a major in Spanish and a minor in history. She
specializes in conducting Historic Resources Surveys, National
Register of Historic Places nominations, historic context statements,
land-use histories, Section 106 and CEOA evaluations, For the past
ten years, her firm has maintained a contract with Los Angeles
County Community Development Commission to complete Section
General PI,m Update And Eir
.\1 -(.0\,1'.(./".:,,, 0/ ",../;._,J_.'(-IlJ '" .1'".. Hn.."I,_I'_"';.I..
',..,- Pag. D2T~
',,-
/_...,
"-
/.....-
'-'
Appendix D
Team Qualificatiom
Mitchel R. Stone
Preservation Planner
.-
106 compliance for the Community Development Block Grant
Program. She has been granted an individual programmatic
agreement from the National Advisory Council authorizing her to
complete direct evaluations of properties to satisfy Section 106
requirements. Ms. Triem is accredited as a Registered Professional
Historian and has completed the Sec1ion 106 Training Course
sponsored by the GSA Training Center and the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation.
Mitchel A. Stone, Preservation Planner, has over twenty years of
experience researching historic properties, preparing architec1ural
and historical evaluation reports, including CEOA and Sec1ion 106
analyses, National Register of Historic Places nominations and
State Historic Landmarks nominations. Mr. Stone received his B.S.
in Urban Planning from the Califomia State Polytechnic University,
Pomona, in 1979 and has completed M.A. level studies in
Geography at the University of California, Santa Barbara and has
studied Geography in Oxford, England. He specializes in the
production of maps, graphics and computer databases and
geographic information systems, and has developed GIS-assisted
historic resources survey techniques. He has participated in various
capacities in designing and conducting of urban and rural historic
resources surveys. As a practicing city planner, with over ten years
of experience, Mr. Stone has served local agencies within Ventura,
Orange and Los Angeles counties, specializing in architectural and
site plan design review.
,,<1
)~
"
.~
,
. .,~
.....
. ,
...,.
~~~
~ The Plan,!ing unr";'
Page D28
.\t.'(,I/...nc.,....'" .~-.\...&no..~'_(411"'.I:".~,_I~./..
/_.
f
'-
:~:~
'--
/..--..,
l
----
Appendix E
Resumes
-
Gentral Plan U pdart And Eir
1l.'(.(...T,(;P\c..,.,"'t....~,_C,,-'.,v.~._~/.J,..
~
.r"'""
!
'--
r--.
"~
/~'
'-'
Appendix E
Resumes
The Planning Center
General Plan Update And Eir
-
ell \',"VI'\('.'I'\<J.,,,,u.~<.:,,-,,,,).,.IltnwtJ_P~/,,",
~,
'"
-
""". .
""~f.THE
.. PLANNING
U CENTER
--
Qualifications
r-
i
'-
Highlights of
Experience
.r""
Education
~.
Professional
Affiliations
RICHARD E. RAMELLA
Consulting Principal
. 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 acquis~ion 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 Califomia.
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.
Dick has been involved with over:
. 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 Unda 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
. B.A., University of California, Los Angeles
. Urban Land Institute
Governmental Strvitts . Planning {; Urban Dtsiin . EnlJironmental SfluJitJ . LanJICapt Ar(hiltClNre
"-':
-
~THE
>>:~ PLANNING
UVCENTER
"'-;10"
Qualifications
Highlights of
Experience
'-'
,
\
"-
Brian managed a
zoning amendment
for the City of Indian
Wells thai was
completed on lime
and 30% under
budge..
Education
Awards
.-
Professional
Affiliations
.~
BRIAN D. JAMES
Governmental Team Leader
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.
Brian has been involved in the processing of over 40 project entitlements, eleven
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.
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 Serf/iets . Planning & Urhan Duign . E1IVironmtntal SI/lditJ . La1uJlCapt ArchiuClllrt
....'"':
-
.-
""~f. THE
.. PLANNING
U CENTER
'--
Qualifications
AI'sfocused team building and
effecti.e guidance led to
completion of the Tustin First
Street Specifil: Plan
ahead of schedule and
under budget.
_.
,.
~
Highlights of
Experience
~
,
~
.-
ALFRED C. BELL
Senior Advisor and Technical Editor
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.
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 18,00Q-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;
. 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
Specific Plan in Garden Grove, the Beach Boulevard Entertainment Corridor in
Buena Park, and the Highland 2010 Strategic Plan in Highland. In each case,
Gotltrllmtnlal ServiceJ . Planning & Urban Design . Environmental SUU/itl . Landscape Ar(hiuClOTt .
- '"~
-
00 ALFRED C. BELL
00 Senior Advisor and Technical Editor
'--
"Of particular importanu to
me as a Department Head is
The Planning CenUr's
demonstrated ability to
communicate effectively with
tile Planning Commission,
City Council and th. public,
all obviously critical
ingredient in bringing
credibility 10 the technical
products. .,
- Mark O. Uoyd
Development Services Director
City of Stanton
Education
f
"-
Professional
Affiliations
,-
"'-
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.
The combination of active listening, depth and breadth of experience, sensitivity to
people's legitimate concems, and creative problem-solving accounts for AI's
involvement in The Planning Center's most challenging projects.
. BA University of California, Los Angeles, Geography
. American Planning Association
. Charter Member, California Planning Roundtable
.-
Gov,,"nmtntal Serv;Cts . Planning & Urban Design . Environmental SUIJies . LandS(dpt ~r(hittClllrt
-
""~f.THE
.. PLANNING
U CENTER
.",""
',-
QuaiN/cations
Experience
r~
'\..-
\.
Education
,...-
,
Volunteer
Activities
"-
OMAR DADABHOY
Project Planner
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.
Omar has been involved as:
. Communications Aide for the Honorable Robert Pacheco. Assemblyman, 60'"
District
. Field Representative for the Honorable Ken Maddox, Assemblyman, 68'h
District
. Program Specialist for the Honorable Jim Morrissey, Assemblyman 69'h
District
. Deputy Campaign Manager, Morrissey for Assembly
Some highlights of his experience include:
. Created the Smart Growth Task Force, and analyzed and drafted legislation to
advance smart growth principles
. Responsible for programs and events including townhall meetings and a
monthly newsletter tracking sigoificant 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
(GOTV) effort
Current activities at The Planning Center include:
. General Plan Update - Community Visioning, City of Anaheim
. Changing the Face of Orange County, CA 2020: An 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
B.A., Psychology & Social Behavior and Political Science, University of California,
Irvine
M.A., Urban and Regional Planning, University of California, Irvine
Serves on the Board of Directors of Housing Opportunities Made Easy (HOME
Inc.), a non-profit housing organization
Government,,1 Services . Planning & Urban Dtlign . Environmental SIJiJitl . Landscape A rchiuClllrt .
- ....-:.
,~
"-
-..""
'-
,-...
'-
Appendix E
Resumes
Psomas Associates
General Plan Update And Eir
-
,\l:\(,OV'nC,"\C.UJ -riot. &nw.J...lu., vi J"../fmwoJ... ",.,.wI_
~
...:-
-
-
Gary P. Dysart, P. E., P S 0 MAS
Vice President
Registration
19661Civil
Engineer/California
1#16528
Specialized Professional
Competence
Mr. Dysart has over 35 years
experience in working for public
agencies with over 20 years in the
position of City Engineer for
Southern California cities. His
experience includes major
infrastructure planning and design.
project management, program
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.
Relevant Project Experience
City of Anaheim Redevelopment
Agency: Principal In Charge for
planning and design of Downtown
Redevelopment Program Project
Area Improvements. Also
provided oversight for annual on-
call engineering services to Agency
for a six-year period.
/""'..
L Education
1961lBS/Civil
Engineering/
Oregon State
Universiry
19731MPAlPublic
Administration,
California State
Universiry,
F ulle non,
California
,,--"
(
'-
1'-
'-
Affiliations
American Sociery of
Civil Engineers
American Public
Works Association
Experience
With Psornas for 3
years; with other
firms for 35 years
Infrastructure Improvement
Program, City of Huntington
Beach, CA: Currently serving as
Project Manager and Principal
Consultant for a consultant team
retained by the City to develop a
financing/funding strategy to
overcome a projected $800 million
shortfall in funding needed for
infrastructure improvements in the
next 20 years. As part of the
assignment. Mr. Dysart and Psomas
staff served as an extension of City
staff in managing and providing
support services for a 35-member
Citizens Infrastructure Advisory
Committee appoint by the City
Council. The Advisory Committee
has developed recommendations
for financing/funding of the City's
needed infrastructure
illJProvements over the 20-year
PSOMAS
period. which are now being
considered by the City Council for
implementation.
City Engineer, City of Dana
Point, CA: As contract City
Engineer and Deputy City Engineer
over a four-year period, responsible
for oversight of major
infrastructure projects. He was also
responsible for the management
and repair of existing public
facilities.
City Engineer and
Redevelopment Agency
Engineer, City of Bell Gardens,
CA: Served as contract engineer
and Redevelopment Agency
Engineer over a 20-year period.
Responsible for oversight of major
infrastructure projects. Also
responsible for establishing an
ongoing pavement management
program for the maintenance and
repair of the City's streets and
highways and an annual program
for repair of curb, gutter and
sidewalks. Also provided all
engineering oversight for numerous
commercial, industrial and
residential neighborhood
redevelopment projects.
Burbank Redevelopment Agency,
City of Burbank, CA: Special
consultant as part of a multi-
discipline team assisting the
Agency staff on various planned
redevelopment projects including a
downtown mall development.
Irvine Center, City of Irvine, CA:
Principal-In-Charge for planning
and design of backbone streets,
interchanges, storm drains and
utilities for the "Golden Triangle"
commercial development area
bounded by the 1-5, 1-405 and
Route 33 Freeways. Also. served
as an Assessment Engineer for
Assessment District to finance the
public improvements.
Page 1
-
....
/
,
\...-
Ken J. SusUo;- PE
Project Engineer
Education
MS/19911Civil EngineeringlUniversity of California, Berkeley
BSII 9901Civil EngineeringlUniversity of California, Berkeley
University of California, Berkeley: Extension
Registration
I 993/Professional Engineerl
CA (Civil) #C5Il94
Affiliations
American Society of Civil Engineers
American Water Resources Association
International Erosion Control Association
Floodplain Management Association
r"
I
'-
Experience
With Psomas for I 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 Storm 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 structural or operational modifications to reduce pollutants
to 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 ofthe 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.
'-
-
-
('
'--
_...,,,,,,.,
f
'--..
'--
Newhall Side Drains,.Newhall , CA: Manager for developmenrof avoidance and hybrid
(naturalized-chamli:lized) alternatives for major tributaries to the Santa Clara River. Studies
included alternatives analyses, hydraulic analyses, and data management using GIS.
SUSMP Consultation, Los Angeles County, CA.: Provided consultation services to Valencia
Cortlmy to address finarrial and 1XO.iea iIqlacts of Regional WaJ1:X Quality Coolrol Board Standard Urlm
Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP). Consultation included assessment application of current
Best Management Practice (BMP) alternatives.
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 (GUl); 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, Maplnfo, 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 construction 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 stnJclUre, 72-inch reinfoo:ed ccncrele pipe, and a ~ open chameI.
DevelopedlEvaluated Drainage Plans:
. Western Farm Service, Madera County, CA
. Johnson Canyon Landfill, Monterey County, CA
. Burlingame Landfill, San Mateo County, CA
Design ofPondlBasins:
. 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-I 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.
DevelopedlEvaluated Drainage Plans for the following:
. Western Farm Service, Madera County, CA
. Johnson Canyon Landfill, Monterey County, CA
. Burlingame Landfill, San Mateo County, CA
-
J-""""'"
r
i
'---
.",.'
(-
,
'---
,.
~..;;
---
,
,
~
. Johnson Cany~ Landfill (habitat mitigation)
. Granite Rock (flow retention and check dams)
. South Napa Marketplace (water quality wet ponds)
. ADT Automotive (water quality facilities)
Probabilistic Hydrology, Boulder Valley, NY: Managed a surface and groundwater
probabilistic modeling study as a third party, independent consultant to the State of Nevada.
Technical aspects of the project included infrared imagery, probabilistic modeling study as a third
party, independent consultant.
.-
-
!""'."-
i'
'--
c
-
'--
John R. Thornton, PE
Water Resource
Education
MS1l978/Civil and Environmental Engineering/Califomia State University Long
Beach
BS1l969/Civil Engineering/California State Polytechnic University, Pomona
Registration
Civil Engineer/California, #24251
Agricultural Engineer/California! #145
Civil Engineer/Nevada!#6160
Civil EngineerlIdaho/#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 Guardian
Experience
With Psomas for 4 years; with other firms for 26 years.
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 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.
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
project includes the evaluation of groundwater hydrogeology, location and preliminary
-
PSOMAS
1
,,~
-
'--
,-
'--
)"...-,
'-
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 Irvine 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
systems. Recommendations were provided regarding the facilities and financing
alternatives.
PSOMAS
2
Daniel J. McCroskey, PLS
GlS Project Manager/CADD Base Maps
Education
~
.--
BS/1989/Surveying and Photogrammetry/Califomia State University, Fresno, CA
Registration
Professional Land Surveyor/Califomia/#7098
Affiliations
California Land Surveyor's Association
Experience
With Psomas for 10 years
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 ArclInfo, Arc View
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
t~
Glen Helen Specific Plan, County of San Bernardino, CA: Development of a Specific
Plan for the Glen Helen Regional Park, County Sheriffs 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 County 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 0 M AS
1
'"
/'~
The Alameda Corridor (1996-1998), CA: Project Surveyor providing right-of-way
surveying services to support the Port's of Los Ang~Ies and Long Beach in their efforts to
acquire land from Southern Pacific Transportation Company for this 26-mile Corridor
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 providt'd on this project and the incorporation into a custom GIS facility
management interface. II 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 a stand-alone, remote
system interface. All training and documentation was provided by Psomas and transferred
to the client at the conclusion of the project.
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.
OCT AlCaltrans, Interstate 5, Segment "D" Widening: Project Surveyor for planning,
research, boundary and right-of-way calculations, easement plots, mapping and
preparation of Intergraph digital files. Oeliverables included hardcopy and digital base
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 ROV 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 for a 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
hardcopy 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.
NewportlSR55 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 0 M AS
2
-
-'~
/
!
--
"'-"'
~
:'~f::
."....-
'-'
Appendix E
Resumes
Stanley Hoffman Associates
General Plan Up~te And Eir -
,U\c;(JV7',{.l'\f_"t.,.\J.~'_l(.H'",~.'''''",''''_~'''''
~
.-
-
r-
C
'-
r
\...-
,r--
\.....-
S1'ANLEY R. HOFFMAN, A.I.C.P.
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 fmance capital
facilities for transportation, sewer and water systems, frre 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 Associales, 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.
r-
'-
r
'-'
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
-
Stanley R. Hoffm1tn Associates, Inc.
Resume and Experience
-
I~
'~
,r"-'
'--
,~.
--
Appendix E
Resumes
Transtech Engineering Inc.
General Plan Update And Eir
-
M.-IC.'OVT'\l,l'Iu" ~ ,"'. "'--'_\(.11, ..f\... &o-rJ_ P."f'-IIti-
~
..:--
-
r
"'--
AIi Caylr, 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 numilrous 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
(_ agencies in Southern Califomia.
'--- 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 eyvWV) 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
<,......-.
'-'
-
..-
'-
c
(-
"-
also included an evaluation of cumulative impacts associated with 22 jJlanned projects located within the
sphere of influence of tbJ'! 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$l ,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, SEOA, Noise,
Parking, Economic, Hazardous Materials technical studies, and being processed through Caitrans and
FHWA. Construc1ion 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 1-5/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 1-10 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 F AU 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
.-
-:
-
.-
c
r
'-
--
~
projects involved roadway widening and reconstruction, signal upgraqes at 15 intersections, signal
interconnect, striping, landSl:ape improvements and other miscellaneous work. Extensive interface 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 projec1s 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" projec1 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 projec1 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
interface 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
"'"
Pat Lang, TE
/.c Independent Consultant for Quality Control
"- Education:
c
r-
L
USC, BS in Civil Eng
Registration: Cal~ornia 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 Direc10r 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
func1ions 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 activ"ies 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 SunseUVermont 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 61 00
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 Roadwav
Supervised the design and reconstruc1ion 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
.-
-
/'.
(
"-..'
r
'-
,.J1'...."....
'----
Reconstruction of Huntillatcm 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 Pioeline EIR. Traffic Imoact 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 subconsu~ant to Sapphos Environmental.
Countv Sanitation Districts Joint Seweraae Svstem 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 Pioeline Reolacement 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 Verduao Traffic Forum Technical Studv
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
subconsultanf to Kim/ey-Hom and Associates. Inc.
Citv of Sierra Madre Citv-wide STOP Sian Reolacement 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 Vallev Traffic Sianal Svnchronization Studv
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.
Citv of Monrovia General Plan Uodate
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 BoulevardlLas Tunas Drive Median Desian/Sianallmorovement 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
"--
c
..--......
'-
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 projec1s 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 interconnec1 system, street lighting,
and signing and striping improvement projec1s. 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
-
..,---
/"""
'--
c
J,-....
'-
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 in field 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 correc1
time base units 0NWV) for signal coordination as well as physical intersection
improvements.
As staff technician assisted in field 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
Transtech Engineers. Inc.
Staff Resumes
.-
-
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Interoffice Memorandum
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
Records and Information Management (RIM) Program
DATE:
July 13,2001
TO:
Mary Freiberg, Admin. Operations Supervisor II
FROM:
Michelle Taylor, Senior Secretary
RE:
Transmitting Documents for Signature - Resolution 2001-218
At the Mayor and Common Council meeting of July 9, 2001, the City of San Bernardino adopted
Resolution 2001-218 - Resolution authorizing execution of an agreement with The Planning
Center for providing professional services to update the City's General Plan.
Attached is one (1) original agreement. Please obtain signatures in the appropriate location and
return the original agreement to the City Clerk's Office as soon as possible, to my attention.
Please retain a copy of the agreementfor your files.
Please be advised that the resolution and agreement will be null and void if not executed
within 60 days, or by September 7, 2001.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at ext. 3206. Thank you.
Michelle Taylor
Senior Secretary
I hereby acknowledge receipt of the above mentioned documents.
Signed:
~~'i.-.~~
\-\~-C\
Please sign and return
Date:
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Interoffice Memorandum
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
Records and Information Management (RIM) Program
DATE:
July 26,2001
TO:
Veronica Martinez, Senior Secretary
FROM:
Michelle Taylor, Senior Secretary
RE:
Resolution 2001-218 - Planning Center Agreement
CC:
Attached is an executed copy of the agreement between the City of San Bernardino and The
Planning Center for providing professional services to update the City's General Plan. The
original agreement is on file in the City Clerk's Office.
If you have any questions, please call me at ext. 3206.
j
** FOR OFFICE USE ONLY - NOT A PUBLIC DOCUMENT **
RESOLUTION AGENDA ITEM TRACKING FORM
Meeting Date (Date Adopted): 0- Cj -0\ Item #
Vote: Ayes 1 ~ f") Nays-e
Change to motion to amend original documents:
II
Resolution # 2m I - 2 \8
Abstain -G- Absent -A-
Reso. # On Attachments: ~ Contract term: -
Note on Resolution of Attachment stored separately: -=-
Direct City Clerk to (circle I): PUBLISH, POST, RECORD W/COUNTY By:
NulVVoid After: (PO OA 7 S
I qJ)-O I
I
Date Sent to Mayor: q -10 - 01
Date of Mayor's Signature: :,- l~-ol
Date of Clerk/CDC Signature: '1- \ ~ -<> \
Reso. Log Updated:
Seal Impressed:
./
./
Date Memo/Letter Sent for Signature: 1- \ ~ -C,j I
60 Day Reminder Letter Sent on 30th day:
90 Day Reminder Letter Sent on 45th day:
See Attached: ,/ Date Returned: 'l-d 5-0 ,
See Attached:
See Attached:
Request for Council Action & Staff Report Attached:
Updated Prior Resolutions (Other Than Below):
Updated CITY Personnel Folders (6413, 6429, 6433,10584,10585,12634):
Updated CDC Personnel Folders (5557):
Updated Traffic Folders (3985, 8234, 655, 92-389):
Yes v No By
-
Yes No~ By
Yes No -L By
Yes No v By
Yes No ,/ By_
Copies Distributed to:
City Attorney ,/
Parks & Rec.
Code Compliance
Dev. Services v
EDA
Finance v"
MIS
Police
Public Services
Water
Others:
Notes:
BEFORE FILING, REVIEW FORM TO ENSURE ANY NOTATIONS MADE HERE ARE TRANSFERRED TO THE
YEARLY RESOLUTION CHRONOLOGICAL LOG FOR FUTURE REFERENCE (Contract Term, etc.)
Ready to File: ~
Date: I-dbcfll
Revised 0 I 1 I 2/0 1