Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05 EIR DISPOSAL MCAS 09-07-99DATE' AGENDa, SEPTEMBER 7, 1999 NO. 5 9-7-99 TO: FROM' SUBJECT: 'WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY STAFF AUTHORIZATION OF A CHANGE ORDER FOR PREPARATION OF THE JOINT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/EI~WIRONMIgNTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIS/EIR) FOR THE DISPOSAL AND REUSE OF THE FORMER MCAS-TUSTIN SUMMARY: Revision and recirculation of the Draft Joint EIS/EIR for the Disposal attd Reuse of the former Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin is required, necessitating a change order for additional services with the firm of HNTB. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Tustin City Council authorize the City Manager to execute an amendment to the Consultant Services A~eement with the firm of HNTB for preparation of the Reuse Plan/Specific Plan and Joint EIS/EIR for the Disposal and Reuse of the former MCAS Tustin, subject to approval of the City Attorney. FISCAL IMPACT Additional services required for the project will be funded through cost sharing between the Marine Corps and City of Tustin. The City of Tustin's cost share will be in an amount of $16,586. There are funds in account No. 55-6010 to cover the expense in the FY 1999-2000 budget so no additional appropriation is needed. BACKGROUND As the Tustin City COuncil is aware, City of Tustm and Navy/Marine Corps' staffs have been working to complete the EIS/EIR for the Disposal and Reuse of the former MCAS Tustin. The City .is the project manager for preparation of the joint document based on an executed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Marine Corps. On November 16, 1998, the Tustin City Council authorized the execution of a change order with HNTB, the City's prime contractor, for the preparation of a revised draft EIS/EIR with costs to be shared with the Navy. As part of this action, the City Council also appropriated an additional $204,830 toward the City's fair-share contribution for completion of the draft EIS/EIR revisions. Since that time, the Consultant team has vigorously pursued completion of the required revisions and has completed a revised screen review draft that was released on July 8, 1999 for public review and comment. The public comment-period for the document officially closed on August 23, 1999. During the preparation of the revised draft EIS/EIR, it was recognized that certain sub-consultant roles and responsibilities needed to be slightly modified to increase work efficiency and quality assurance. The City Council Report Change Order for Joint EIS/EIR September 7, 1999 Page 2 reassignment of responsibilities resulted in additional costs that need to be covered by an additional change order related to: · An expanded need for Quality Assurance/Quality Control. · New California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines requiring additional rewrite of the cumulative analysis and modification of the thresholds of significance. Organizational revision of the document format required at the direction of the Navy. · Additional coordination on traffic issues and modification of the format of the project's traffic studies. · Additional and more technical analysis of technical issues and rewrites of EIS/EIR sections concerning air quality, noise, land use, agriculture, biology, etc. to ensure that the document was legally defensible. The change order for the additional services is an amount not-to-exceed $204,200 (Exhibit A). The City of Tustin's share of this new change order will be $16,586. The Navy/2Vlarine Corps' share is $187,614. A proposed schedule for completion of the project is also attached as Exhibit B. Christine A. Shin~ Assistant City Manager CAS:do\ccreporfihntbchngorder999.doc Dana Ogdon(~ Senior Project Manager Attachment TO CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT TO PREPARE A RE-USE/SPECIFIC PLAN AND EIR/EIS FOR THE DISPOSAL AND RE-USE OF TUSTIN MCAS THIS AMENDMENT VIII TO CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the City of Tustin (herein "City"), a municipal corporation and HNTB (herein "Consultant"), pursuant to Section 2.3 "Changes", of the Consultant Services Agreement. WHEREAS, on September 22, 1992, the Consultant Services Agreement was entered into between the two parties identified above to prepare a Reuse/Specific Plan, required environmental documents and other products related to the closure of Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin (herein "base"); and WHEREAS, various .Amendments herein ("Amendments") to the original Consultant Services Agreement were subsequently executed as follows: Amendment I on May 20, 1993, Amendment II on March 3, 1994, Amendment 1II on January 5, 1996, Amendment IV on April 29, 1996, Amendment V on May 20, 1996, Amendment VI on November 26, 1996, and Amendment VII on October 26, 1998, respectively; and WHEREAS, the need for supplemental work effort has necessitated that the City request additional work items in addition to the original scope of work and previously approved Amendments to the .Scope of Work; and WHEREAS, the project Consultant, Howard Needles Tammen and Bergendoff (HNTB) has responded to the need to perform these tasks with a contract amendment request dated August 12, 1999 which identifies the tasks and costs associated with the performance or completion of certain new or additional tasks. THEREFORE, it is agreed that the Consultant Services Agreement be amended to include and complete certain tasks in accordance with the following additional Scope of Services: 1.0. ADDITIONAL- SERVICES OF CONSULTANT 1.1. Pertaining to Section 1.0: Overall Project Management · In addition to all tasks identified in Section 1.0 of Exhibit A of the Agreement and all provisions in previous Amendments, Consultant and their sub-consultants Cotton Beland and KEA shall provide project management services and all additional tasks identified in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 1.2 Pertaining to Section 10: EIS/EIR In addition to all tasks and products identified in Section 10 of Exhibit A of the Agreement and all provisions in previous Amendments as it applies to the preparation of the EIS/EIR, Consultant and their sub-consultants Cotton Beland and KEA shall provide all additional tasks required in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 2.0 COMPENSATION 1) For the additional services to be rendered pursuant to this Amendment to the Agreement, modifications to the consultant's compensation shall be made as shown below and the Consultant shall be compensated an additional compensation amount not to exceed a maximum of $204,200 and as subject to requirements contained in Subsection 2) below. Project Management (Task 1) HNTB KEA CBA $ <8,650> $ 26,366 $ <6,156> Subtotal $ 11,560 EIR/EIR (Task 10) HNTB $ ~4,750> KEA $167,760 CBA $ 29,630 Subtotal $192,640 Grand Total $204,200 2) All Consultant payment requests shall be submitted to the City within 60 days of the service provided or expense incurred provided that the City may request a more timely submittal of payment request by Consultant in order to close out the project or a federal grant award for the project. Under such circumstances, Consultant shall respond to any specific billing request with 15 days of a written request. SCHEDI~E Consultant shall complete the Additional Scope of Work under the Agreement, all subsequent Amendments and this Amendment within the Revised Schedule dated March 17, 1999 (attached as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference and any subsequent revisions to the schedule as approved by the City). All major bolded tasks shall also be completed incrementally as shown in the Revised Schedule. 4.0 GENERAL/SPECIAL REQUIREME~S 1) In addition to the additional services, compensation and Revised Schedule and special requirements identified in this Amendment, all other provisions contained in the original Agreement and all subsequent Amendments shall continue to apply. 2) Consultant shall be responsible for quality assurance on all required product deliverables including proofing, necessary editing and composing. The Consultant shall be responsible for all expenses incurred in correcting documents to comply with the Agreement and all subsequent Amendment requirements. 3) · Since the Scope of Work will be partially funded by. federal Community Development Block Grant funds, Consultant shall comply with all applicable federal Community Development Block Grant programs regulations and requirements, as included but not limited to those shown in Exhibit "A". Consultant shall also comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws and guidelines applicable to its activities including but not limited to 32 CFR 278 -"Administrative' Requirements for Assistance to State and Local Governments", Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circulars: A-87 - "Cost Principles for State and Local Governments," A-128 - "Audit Requirements for State and Local Governments," and "Drug-Free Workplace Requirements; Notice and Final Rule". IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have executed this Amendment as of the dates stated below. CITY City of Tusfin, A municipal corporation DATED By: CONSULTANT: DATED: By: APPROVED AS TO FORM: William A. Huston City Manager Executive Vice President HNTB Lois Jeffrey City Attorney Exhibit A August 12, 1999 Christine Shingleton City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PLANNERS RECEIVED AUG 1 O 1999 ADMINISTRATION Re: Contract Amendment No. 8 Dear Ms. Shingleton: This cost submittal represents the resultant Contract Amendment No. 8 for our existing contract agreement related to the subject project. The allocation for the revised Amendment No. 8: Total Fee increase: $204,200 By Firm: HNTB ($13,400) Cotton Belland Associates $23,474 KEA $194,126 Please call me at (949) 752-6940 if you have any questions. Sincerely, HNTB Corporation Associate Vice-President Attaclunents: Proposed Amendment #8 Amedment No. 8 to City ofTustin HNTB Corp. Agreement for MCAS Tustin reuse Study and Enviro Document August 12, 1999 Page 1 of 4 INTRODUCTION ' The following tables and discussion address the proposed reallocation scope and fees for two tasks (Task 1-Project Management and Task 10-EIS/EIR) from previously executed Amendment No. 7 (October t 998). This is followed by a scope and fee for new tasks not currently scoped to be addressed in Amendment No. 8. REVISIONS TO AMENDMENT NO. 7 Task 1-Proiect Management Task 1 assumed HNTB and CBA would continue in the role of overall project management; KEA was not originally proposed for this task. Since that time, hoWever, KEA has been designated the primary role of management of EIS/EIR preparation and replaced HNTB. The Task 1 budget has therefore been reallocated, with $16,406 budgeted for KEA and the reallocated budget coming from CBA and HNTB. Task 1 Reallocation Table ORIGiNAL PROPOSED FIRM BUDGET REALLOCATION NET CHANGE AMOUNT HNTB $17,720 $7,470 <$10,250> CBA $14,400 $8,244 <$6,156> KEA $0 $16,406 $16,406 TOTAL $32,i20 $32,120 $0 Task 10-EIS/EIR Preparation Task 10 of Amendment No. 7 was budgeted for the preparation of the revised EIS/EIR based on three scopes of work (Exhibit A, May 7, 1998; Exhibit B, June 8, 1998; Exhibit C, July 9, 1998). The majority of the work was to be completed by CBA, the principal author of the environmental document. KEA was added to the team in November 1998 to provide oversight on NEPA issues and to provide QA/QC review of the document at the preliminary draft submittal only ($24,000). Since that time, KEA waqs designated to take on a more active role in the document'preparation. Certain EIS/EIR sections have been reassigned to KEA, including: traffic, cultural/historic resources, aesthetics, environmental justice and effects on children, 'and Amedment No. 8 to City ofTustin HNTB Corp. Agreement for MCAS Tustin reuse Study and Enviro Document August 12, 1999 Page 2 of 4 other CEQA/NEPA sections. Budgets for these tasks have been reallocated to KEA from CBA. Furthermore, graphics have been reallocated from HNTB to CBA and KEA. While HNTB's role has been reduced, they remain tasked with providing technical support for Alternative 2 and 3 at a level of detail' more comparable to Alternative 1. Finally, CBA's budget to prepare the Record Of Decision has been eliminated, since that task will be completed bY the BRAC office. All of these changes are reflected in the following table. Task 10 Reallocation Table ORIGINAL PROPOSED FIRM BUDGET REALLOCATED NET CHANGE BUDGET HNTB $14,640 $5,750 <$8,890> CB A $148,370 $105,000 <$43,370> KEA $24,000 $76,260 $52,260 TOTAL $187,010 $187,010 $0 NOTE: The $5,720 budget for Task 9, the $131,520 budget for Austin-Foust in Task 10, and the $119,045 budget for "Additional Expenses" remains unchanged in this reallocation. Thus, the total budget for Amendment No. 7 remains $475,395. ADDITIONAL SCOPE ITEMS Additional Funds for Project Management and EIS/EIR Preparation In addition to reallocation'of the budget for Amendment No. 7 (discussed above), additional work is required in this Amendment No. 8 for project management and to complete the EIS/EIR, including: . Expanded QA/QC role for KEA (all submittals of draft and final EIS/EIR) to ensure that the environmental documents are well received by all DoN and City reviewers; . New CEQA guidelines requiring CBA/KEA to rewrite the cumulative analyses and modify the thresholds of significance; 3. Creation of new Chapter 7 to address the Specific Plan in a separate CEQA-only chapter. Amedment No. 8 to City ofTustin HNTB Corp. A~eement for MCAS Tustin reuse Study and Enviro Document August 12, 1999 Page 3 of 4 The analysis of the Specific Plan and other implementing actions is a new chapter that requires substantial analysis and revisions to ensure adequate documentation and compliance with City direction; . KEA to rewrite Chapters 1 and 2 based on client team comments in December 1998 and March 1999; o HNTB to make revisions to the Infrastructure Report and continue to provide administrative contract management of the extended contract through March 1999. HNTB also assisted in preparation of the alternatives analysis for the environmental document; o Inability of consultant team to determine the complexity of the project or to adequately define the scope of changes required to produce an adequate environmental document. Since KEA joined the team in November 1998, it has become apparent to the consultant team and the City that more extensive analysis and document changes are required to address the public comments on the original draft EIS/EIR and the three scopes of work which were the basis for Amendment No. 7, as well as to provide adequate NEPA analysis acceptable to all DON reviewers. o KEA to provide direct coordination with AFA in finalizing the traffic report to meet City requirements and to ensure the report's suitability for Navy base closure purposes. This work included several meetings with Terry Austin and his staff, review of'several screencheck documents, extensive assistance in preparation of the threSholds for implementation of circulation improvements, revisions to the technical report, coordination with City staff regarding impact conclusions and mitigation requirements, and preparation of the EIS/EIR text. o KEA staff to provide'additional analysis of technical issues and re-writes of EIS/EIR sections, including the air quality, noise, land use, agriculture, socioeconomics, soils and geolo~, public services and facilities, utilities and biological sections, requiring revisions to Chapters 3, 4 and 5 of the EIS/EIR. A soils analysis was added, the biological section was updated by KEA several times to reflect changing wetlands information, the public facilities and utilities sections were subStantially edited for clarity and in response to comments on the significance criteria. , KEA will assume the primary role in document preparation and management throughout the remainder of the environmental review process, assigning Tom Larkin, Teri Fenner, Jim Kurtz, Karen Sievert, and support staff, until project completion. Amedment No. 8 to City ofTustin HNTB Corp. Agreement for MCAS Tustin reuse Study and Enviro Document August 12, 1999 Page 4 of 4 Additional Funds for Tasks 1 and 10 (Aug. 99) FIRM TASK 1 PROJECT TASK 10 EIS/EIR TOTAL MAN A GEMENT P RE P ARA TI ON HNTB $1,600 $4,140 $5,740 CBA ' $0 $73,000 $73,000 KEA $9,960 $115,500 $125,460 TOTAL $11,560 $192,640 $204,200 OVERALL CHANGE The following table summarizes the proposed reallocation of funds and new work necessary to complete the process. TASK REALLOCATION ADDITIONAL TASKS TOTAL FIRM TASK 1 TASK 10 TASK 1 TASK 10 NET PM EIS/EIR PM EIS/EIR CHANGE HNTB- <$10,250> <$8,890> $1,600 $4,140 <$13,400> CBA <$6,156> <$43,370> $0 '$73,000 $23,474 KEA $16,406 $52,260 $9,960 $115,500 $194,126 TOTAL $0 $0 $11,560 $192,640 $204,200 Exhibit B MAR-17-99 14:38 FROM:KEA ENVIRONMENTAL ID:619 233 09S2 PAGE 2/5 MAR-I?-9~ 14:3~ FROM:K~A ~NVIRONM~NTA~ ID:G19 233 0~S2 3/5 MAR-17-S9 14:39 FROM:KEA ENVIRONMENTAL .. ID:~lS 233 0~S2 MAR-I?-~9 14:3~ FROM:KEA ~NVIRONM~NTAL ID:~19 ~33 0~S2 PAO~ S/S