CC SR 20201104 D - Altamira Canyon Drainage Project Study Report
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 11/04/2020
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Calendar
AGENDA TITLE:
Consideration and possible action to award a professional services agreement to Harris
& Associates, Inc. to revise the Altamira Canyon Drainage Project Study Report.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
(1) Award a Professional Services Agreement to Harris & Associates, Inc. for a not-
to-exceed amount of $254,967 to revise the Altamira Canyon Drainage Project
Study Report including expanding the study area.
(2) Authorize the City Manager or Director of Finance to execute needed change
orders up to an additional 10% of the value of Harris & Associates, Inc.
agreement (not to exceed $25,000) as contingency funds for potential
unforeseen conditions;
(3) Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the agreement, in a form
approved by the City Attorney.
FISCAL IMPACT: The amount of $350,000 is budgeted for FY 2020-21.
Amount Budgeted: $350,000
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): 330-400-8708-8001 (CIP Fund – Altamira Canyon/Professional Services)
ORIGINATED BY: Ron Dragoo, PE, Principal Engineer
REVIEWED BY: Ramzi Awwad, PE, Deputy Director Public Works
APPROVED BY: Ara Mihranian, AICP, City Manager
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
A. Professional Services Agreement with Harris & Associates, Inc. (page A-1)
B. Harris & Associates, Inc. Proposal (page B-1)
C. November 4, 2015 Staff Report for award of Altamira Project Study Report
(page C-1)
1
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
On November 4, 2015, City Council awarded a Professional Services Agreement to
Harris & Associates to develop a Project Study Report (PSR) for the Altamira Canyon
Drainage Project (Attachment C). This project was identified to provide additional
safeguards to the Abalone Cove Landslide area. Reduction/minimization of
groundwater infiltration is a primary target when considering methods to slow movement
in landslides. The Ancient Altamira Landslide includes the Abalone Cove and
Portuguese Bend Landslides. These two landslides are adjacent to each other and
move at differing speeds. The Abalone Cove landslide steadily creeps along, moving
approximately a tenth of a foot annually, while the Portuguese Bend landslide is
experiencing significantly more movement.
Many studies have been performed to determine how the land moves and various
means and methods employed to reduce this movement and minimize groundwater
infiltration. The PSR performed a detailed analysis and evaluation of the
recommendations from those studies and considered information and improvements
that have been received by the City from the adjoining property owners. The PSR that
was being developed back in 2016 did not include any analysis for the watershed
upstream or downstream of the Abalone Cove neighborhood. The PSR was
approximately 90% complete in December 2016. Work was stopped on the PSR when
it was determined that additional funding would be needed and was not available to
modify the scope of work to include the entire undeveloped runoff area.
The PSR identified alternatives to consider and environmental considerations to
establish the best solution for the project taking all variables into account. It also
contained a feasibility spreadsheet for all alternatives, with a detailed Decision/Risk
Analysis chart that included:
- Estimated Project Cost
- Project Schedule
- Constructability Issues
- Availability of Materials
- Contractor’s Expertise Required
- Right-of-Way and Easement Requirements
- Environmental impacts associated with the proposed alternatives.
- Geotechnical issues.
- Flood Protection
- Susceptibility to Debris Flow and Land Movement Damage
- Aesthetics of Improvements from Residences
- Impacts to Water Quality
- Impacts to Abalone Cove Beach
- Impacts to Private Residents and Adjacent Dwellings
- Impacts to Traffic
- Impacts to Utilities
- Resulting Service Life
- Future Maintenance Issues
2
The PSR provided a viable set of design alternatives, supported by geological and
environmental investigations that would be required for each alternative. Since the
conclusion of the original PSR, staff was asked to expand the study limits to include the
drainage area to the north and south and include possible improvements. There have
been natural and manmade changes since the last published PSR, which will require
resurveying some of the land and modifying some of the originally proposed alternative
solutions proposed to manage runoff.
The work product associated with this Agreement corresponds and augments the
previous 90% PSR that was developed for the Altamira Canyon Improvements CIP
Project. It will review the previous study of a portion of the water shed, perform an
engineering analysis of the entire Altamira Canyon and its tributaries, and establish a
priority for identified improvements. The Professional Services Agreement is attached
for reference (Attachment A).
Staff negotiated the scope of work and the final cost of work in the final proposal from
Harris and Associates and is satisfied that all known issues have been covered at a
reasonable cost.
A summary of the project budget and cost is presented below:
It should be noted that proceeding with this project supports City Council Goal No. 11,
Phase 1, which states “Develop a mitigation plan to address land movement at Altamira
Canyon based on the following phases: Phase One – perform the drainage/erosion
analysis for the entire [emphasis added] canyon and its tributaries and establish a
priority list based on current erosion.”
ALTERNATIVES:
In addition to the Staff recommendation, the following alternative action s are available
for the City Council’s consideration:
1. Identify modifications to the scope of work or project limits.
2. Take other action, as deemed appropriate by the City Council.
8004 - Project Cost Summary
Budget Actual Balance Notes
Project Budget 350,000.00 - 350,000.00
Total Project Budget 350,000.00 - 350,000.00
Proposed Expenses Balance
8001 Professional/Techinical Services 254,967.00 - 254,967.00 Pending approval CC 11/4/2020
Total Project Costs 254,967.00 - 254,967.00
Project Balance 95,033.00$ -$ 95,033.00$
Description
Project Costs:
3
01203.0006/669599.3
CONTRACT SERVICES AGREEMENT
By and Between
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
and
HARRIS & ASSOCIATES, INC
A-1
01203.0006/669599.3 1
AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT SERVICES
BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AND
HARRIS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
THIS AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT SERVICES (herein “Agreement”) is made and
entered into on November 4, 2020, by and between the CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES,
a California municipal corporation (“City”) and HARRIS & ASSOCIATES, INC., a California
corporation (“Consultant”). City and Consultant may be referred to, individually or collectively,
as “Party” or “Parties.”
RECITALS
A. City has sought, by issuance of a Request for Proposals or Invitation for Bids, the
performance of the services defined and described particularly in Article 1 of this Agreement.
B. Consultant, following submission of a proposal or bid for the performance of the
services defined and described particularly in Article 1 of this Agreement, was selected by the City
to perform those services.
C. Pursuant to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code, City has authority to
enter into and execute this Agreement.
D. The Parties desire to formalize the selection of Consultant for performance of those
services defined and described particularly in Article 1 of this Agreement and desire that the terms
of that performance be as particularly defined and described herein.
OPERATIVE PROVISIONS
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants made by the
Parties and contained herein and other consideration, the value and adequacy of which are hereby
acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1. SERVICES OF CONSULTANT
1.1 Scope of Services.
In compliance with all terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Consultant shall provide
those services specified in the “Scope of Services” attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated
herein by this reference, which may be referred to herein as the “services” or “work” hereunder.
As a material inducement to the City entering into this Agreement, Consultant represents and
warrants that it has the qualifications, experience, and facilities necessary to properly perform the
services required under this Agreement in a thorough, competent, and professional manner, and is
experienced in performing the work and services contemplated herein. Consultant shall at all times
faithfully, competently and to the best of its ability, experience and talent, perform all services
described herein. Consultant covenants that it shall follow the highest professional standards in
performing the work and services required hereunder and that all materials will be both of good
quality as well as fit for the purpose intended. For purposes of this Agreement, the phrase “highest
A-2
01203.0006/669599.3 2
professional standards” shall mean those standards of practice recognized by one or more first-
class firms performing similar work under similar circumstances.
1.2 Consultant’s Proposal.
The Scope of Service shall include the Consultant’s scope of work or bid which shall be
incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth herein. In the event of any
inconsistency between the terms of such proposal and this Agreement, the terms of this Agreement
shall govern.
1.3 Compliance with Law.
Consultant shall keep itself informed concerning, and shall render all services hereunder in
accordance with, all ordinances, resolutions, statutes, rules, and regulations of the City and any
Federal, State or local governmental entity having jurisdiction in effect at the time service is
rendered.
1.4 California Labor Law.
If the Scope of Services includes any “public work” or “maintenance work,” as those terms
are defined in California Labor Code section 1720 et seq. and California Code of Regulations,
Title 8, Section 16000 et seq., and if the total compensation is $1,000 or more, Consultant shall
pay prevailing wages for such work and comply with the requirements in California Labor Code
section 1770 et seq. and 1810 et seq., and all other applicable laws, including the following
requirements:
(a) Public Work. The Parties acknowledge that some or all of the work to be
performed under this Agreement is a “public work” as defined in Labor Code Section 1720 and
that this Agreement is therefore subject to the requirements of Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1
(commencing with Section 1720) of the California Labor Code relating to public works contracts
and the rules and regulations established by the Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”)
implementing such statutes. The work performed under this Agreement is subject to compliance
monitoring and enforcement by the DIR. Consultant shall post job site notices, as prescribed by
regulation.
(b) Prevailing Wages. Consultant shall pay prevailing wages to the extent
required by Labor Code Section 1771. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1773.2, copies of the
prevailing rate of per diem wages are on file at City Hall and will be made available to any
interested party on request. By initiating any work under this Agreement, Consultant
acknowledges receipt of a copy of the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) determination of
the prevailing rate of per diem wages, and Consultant shall post a copy of the same at each job site
where work is performed under this Agreement.
(c) Penalty for Failure to Pay Prevailing Wages. Consultant shall comply with
and be bound by the provisions of Labor Code Sections 1774 and 1775 concerning the payment
of prevailing rates of wages to workers and the penalties for failure to pay prevailing wages. The
Consultant shall, as a penalty to the City, forfeit two hundred dollars ($200) for each calendar day,
or portion thereof, for each worker paid less than the prevailing rates as determined by the DIR for
A-3
01203.0006/669599.3 3
the work or craft in which the worker is employed for any public work done pursuant to this
Agreement by Consultant or by any subcontractor.
(d) Payroll Records. Consultant shall comply with and be bound by the
provisions of Labor Code Section 1776, which requires Consultant and each subconsultant to: keep
accurate payroll records and verify such records in writing under penalty of perjury, as specified
in Section 1776; certify and make such payroll records available for inspection as provided by
Section 1776; and inform the City of the location of the records.
(e) Apprentices. Consultant shall comply with and be bound by the provisions
of Labor Code Sections 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1777.7 and California Code of Regulations Title 8,
Section 200 et seq. concerning the employment of apprentices on public works projects. Consultant
shall be responsible for compliance with these aforementioned Sections for all apprenticeable
occupations. Prior to commencing work under this Agreement, Consultant shall provide City with
a copy of the information submitted to any applicable apprenticeship program. Within sixty (60)
days after concluding work pursuant to this Agreement, Consultant and each of its subconsultants
shall submit to the City a verified statement of the journeyman and apprentice hours performed
under this Agreement.
(f) Eight-Hour Work Day. Consultant acknowledges that eight (8) hours labor
constitutes a legal day's work. Consultant shall comply with and be bound by Labor Code Section
1810.
(g) Penalties for Excess Hours. Consultant shall comply with and be bound by
the provisions of Labor Code Section 1813 concerning penalties for workers who work excess
hours. The Consultant shall, as a penalty to the City, forfeit twenty -five dollars ($25) for each
worker employed in the performance of this Agreement by the Consultant or by any subcontractor
for each calendar day during which such worker is required or permitted to work more than eight
(8) hours in any one calendar day and forty (40) hours in any one calendar week in violation of the
provisions of Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to Labor Code
section 1815, work performed by employees of Consultant in excess of eight (8) hours per day,
and forty (40) hours during any one week shall be permitted upon public work upon compensation
for all hours worked in excess of 8 hours per day at not less than one and one-half (1½) times the
basic rate of pay.
(h) Workers’ Compensation. California Labor Code Sections 1860 and 3700
provide that every employer will be required to secure the payment of compensation to its
employees if it has employees. In accordance with the provisions of California Labor Code Section
1861, Consultant certifies as follows:
“I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require
every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to
undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and I will
comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of
this contract.”
Consultant’s Authorized Initials ________
A-4
01203.0006/669599.3 4
(i) Consultant’s Responsibility for Subcontractors. For every subcontractor
who will perform work under this Agreement, Consultant shall be responsible for such
subcontractor's compliance with Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 1720) of
the California Labor Code, and shall make such compliance a requirement in any contract with
any subcontractor for work under this Agreement. Consultant shall be required to take all actions
necessary to enforce such contractual provisions and ensure subcontractor's compliance, including
without limitation, conducting a review of the certified payroll records of the subcontractor on a
periodic basis or upon becoming aware of the failure of the subcontractor to pay his or her workers
the specified prevailing rate of wages. Consultant shall diligently take corrective action to halt or
rectify any such failure by any subcontractor.
1.5 Licenses, Permits, Fees and Assessments.
Consultant shall obtain at its sole cost and expense such licenses, permits and approvals as
may be required by law for the performance of the services required by this Agreement. Consultant
shall have the sole obligation to pay for any fees, assessments and taxes, plus applicable penalties
and interest, which may be imposed by law and arise from or are necessary for the Consultant’s
performance of the services required by this Agreement, and shall indemnify, defend and hold
harmless City, its officers, employees or agents of City, against any such fees, assessments, taxes,
penalties or interest levied, assessed or imposed against City hereunder.
1.6 Familiarity with Work.
By executing this Agreement, Consultant warrants that Consultant (i) has thoroughly
investigated and considered the scope of services to be performed, (ii) has carefully considered
how the services should be performed, and (iii) fully understands the facilities, difficulties and
restrictions attending performance of the services under this Agreement. If the services involve
work upon any site, Consultant warrants that Consultant has or will investigate the site and is or
will be fully acquainted with the conditions there existing, prior to commencement of services
hereunder. Should the Consultant discover any latent or unknown conditions, which will materially
affect the performance of the services hereunder, Consultant shall immediately inform the City of
such fact and shall not proceed except at Consultant’s risk until written instructions are received
from the Contract Officer.
1.7 Care of Work.
The Consultant shall adopt reasonable methods during the life of the Agreement to furnish
continuous protection to the work, and the equipment, materials, papers, documents, plans, studies
and/or other components thereof to prevent losses or damages, and shall be responsible for all such
damages, to persons or property, until acceptance of the work by City, except such losses or
damages as may be caused by City’s own negligence.
1.8 Further Responsibilities of Parties.
Both parties agree to use reasonable care and diligence to perform their respective
obligations under this Agreement. Both parties agree to act in good faith to execute all instruments,
prepare all documents and take all actions as may be reasonably necessary to carry out the purposes
A-5
01203.0006/669599.3 5
of this Agreement. Unless hereafter specified, neither party shall be responsible for the service of
the other.
1.9 Additional Services.
City shall have the right at any time during the performance of the services, without
invalidating this Agreement, to order extra work beyond that specified in the Scope of Services or
make changes by altering, adding to or deducting from said work. No such extra work may be
undertaken unless a written order is first given by the Contract Officer to the Consultant,
incorporating therein any adjustment in (i) the Contract Sum for the actual costs of the extra work,
and/or (ii) the time to perform this Agreement, which said adjustments are subject to the written
approval of the Consultant. Any increase in compensation of up to ten percent (10%) of the
Contract Sum or $25,000, whichever is less; or, in the time to perform of up to one hundred eighty
(180) days, may be approved by the Contract Officer. Any greater increases, taken either separately
or cumulatively, must be approved by the City Council. It is expressly understood by Consultant
that the provisions of this Section shall not apply to services specifically set forth in the Scope of
Services. Consultant hereby acknowledges that it accepts the risk that the services to be provided
pursuant to the Scope of Services may be more costly or time consuming than Consultant
anticipates and that Consultant shall not be entitled to additional compensation therefor. City may
in its sole and absolute discretion have similar work done by other Consultants. No claims for an
increase in the Contract Sum or time for performance shall be valid unless the procedures
established in this Section are followed.
1.10 Special Requirements.
Additional terms and conditions of this Agreement, if any, which are made a part hereof
are set forth in the “Special Requirements” attached hereto as Exhibit “B” and incorporated herein
by this reference. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of Exhibit “B” and any other
provisions of this Agreement, the provisions of Exhibit “B” shall govern.
ARTICLE 2. COMPENSATION AND METHOD OF PAYMENT
2.1 Contract Sum.
Subject to any limitations set forth in this Agreement, City agrees to pay Consultant the
amounts specified in the “Schedule of Compensation” attached hereto as Exhibit “C” and
incorporated herein by this reference. The total compensation, including reimbursement for actual
expenses, shall not exceed $254,967 (Two Hundred Fifty-Four Thousand Nine Hundred Sixty-
Seven Dollars) (the “Contract Sum”), unless additional compensation is approved pursuant to
Section 1.9.
2.2 Method of Compensation.
The method of compensation may include: (i) a lump sum payment upon completion; (ii)
payment in accordance with specified tasks or the percentage of completion of the services, less
contract retention; (iii) payment for time and materials based upon the Consultant’s rates as
specified in the Schedule of Compensation, provided that (a) time estimates are provided for the
A-6
01203.0006/669599.3 6
performance of sub tasks, (b) contract retention is maintained, and (c) the Contract Sum is not
exceeded; or (iv) such other methods as may be specified in the Schedule of Compensation.
2.3 Reimbursable Expenses.
Compensation may include reimbursement for actual and necessary expenditures for
reproduction costs, telephone expenses, and travel expenses approved by the Contract Officer in
advance, or actual subcontractor expenses of an approved subcontractor pursuant to Section 4.4,
and only if specified in the Schedule of Compensation. The Contract Sum shall include the
attendance of Consultant at all project meetings reasonably deemed necessary by the City.
Coordination of the performance of the work with City is a critical component of the services. If
Consultant is required to attend additional meetings to facilitate such coordination, Consultant
shall not be entitled to any additional compensation for attending said meetings.
2.4 Invoices.
Each month Consultant shall furnish to City an original invoice for all work performed and
expenses incurred during the preceding month in a form approved by City’s Director of Finance.
By submitting an invoice for payment under this Agreement, Consultant is certifying compliance
with all provisions of the Agreement. The invoice shall contain all information specified in Exhibit
“C”, and shall detail charges for all necessary and actual expenses by the following categories:
labor (by sub-category), travel, materials, equipment, supplies, and sub-contractor contracts. Sub-
contractor charges shall also be detailed by such categories. Consultant shall not invoice City for
any duplicate services performed by more than one person.
City shall independently review each invoice submitted by the Consultant to determine
whether the work performed and expenses incurred are in compliance with the provisions of this
Agreement. Except as to any charges for work performed or expenses incurred by Consultant
which are disputed by City, or as provided in Section 7.3, City will use its best efforts to cause
Consultant to be paid within forty-five (45) days of receipt of Consultant’s correct and undisputed
invoice; however, Consultant acknowledges and agrees that due to City warrant run procedures,
the City cannot guarantee that payment will occur within this time period. In the event any charges
or expenses are disputed by City, the original invoice shall be returned by City to Consultant for
correction and resubmission. Review and payment by City for any invoice provided by the
Consultant shall not constitute a waiver of any rights or remedies provided herein or any applicable
law.
2.5 Waiver.
Payment to Consultant for work performed pursuant to this Agreement shall not be deemed
to waive any defects in work performed by Consultant.
ARTICLE 3. PERFORMANCE SCHEDULE
3.1 Time of Essence.
Time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement.
A-7
01203.0006/669599.3 7
3.2 Schedule of Performance.
Consultant shall commence the services pursuant to this Agreement upon receipt of a
written notice to proceed and shall perform all services within the time period(s) established in the
“Schedule of Performance” attached hereto as Exhibit “D” and incorporated herein by this
reference. When requested by the Consultant, extensions to the time period(s) specified in the
Schedule of Performance may be approved in writing by the Contract Officer but not exceeding
one hundred eighty (180) days cumulatively.
3.3 Force Majeure.
The time period(s) specified in the Schedule of Performance for performance of the
services rendered pursuant to this Agreement shall be extended because of any delays due to
unforeseeable causes beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of the Consultant,
including, but not restricted to, acts of God or of the public enemy, unusually severe weather, fires,
earthquakes, floods, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, riots, strikes, freight embargoes, wars,
litigation, and/or acts of any governmental agency, including the City, if the Consultant shall
within ten (10) days of the commencement of such delay notify the Contract Officer in writing of
the causes of the delay. The Contract Officer shall ascertain the facts and the extent of delay, and
extend the time for performing the services for the period of the enforced delay when and if in the
judgment of the Contract Officer such delay is justified. The Contract Officer’s determination shall
be final and conclusive upon the parties to this Agreement. In no event shall Consultant be entitled
to recover damages against the City for any delay in the performance of this Agreement, however
caused, Consultant’s sole remedy being extension of the Agreement pursuant to this Section.
3.4 Term.
Unless earlier terminated in accordance with Article 7 of this Agreement, this Agreement
shall continue in full force and effect until completion of the services but not exceeding one (1)
year from the date hereof, except as otherwise provided in the Schedule of Performance (Exhibit
“D”). The City may, in its discretion, extend the Term by one additional one-year term.
ARTICLE 4. COORDINATION OF WORK
4.1 Representatives and Personnel of Consultant.
The following principals of Consultant (“Principals”) are hereby designated as being the
principals and representatives of Consultant authorized to act in its behalf with respect to the work
specified herein and make all decisions in connection therewith:
Gary H. Yagede, PE Vice President
Name Title
Randall G. Berry, PE Director, Engineering Services
Name Title
It is expressly understood that the experience, knowledge, capability and reputation of the
foregoing principals were a substantial inducement for City to enter into this Agreement.
A-8
01203.0006/669599.3 8
Therefore, the foregoing principals shall be responsible during the term of this Agreement for
directing all activities of Consultant and devoting sufficient time to personally supervise the
services hereunder. All personnel of Consultant, and any authorized agents, shall at all times be
under the exclusive direction and control of the Principals. For purposes of this Agreement, the
foregoing Principals may not be replaced nor may their responsibilities be substantially reduced
by Consultant without the express written approval of City. Additionally, Consultant shall utilize
only competent personnel to perform services pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall make
every reasonable effort to maintain the stability and continuity of Consultant’s staff and
subcontractors, if any, assigned to perform the services required under this Agreement. Consultant
shall notify City of any changes in Consultant’s staff and subcontractors, if any, assigned to
perform the services required under this Agreement, prior to and during any such performance.
4.2 Status of Consultant.
Consultant shall have no authority to bind City in any manner, or to incur any obligation,
debt or liability of any kind on behalf of or against City, whether by contract or otherwise, unless
such authority is expressly conferred under this Agreement or is otherwise expressly conferred in
writing by City. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that Consultant or any
of Consultant’s officers, employees, or agents are in any manner officials, officers, employees or
agents of City. Neither Consultant, nor any of Consultant’s officers, employees or agents, shall
obtain any rights to retirement, health care or any other benefits which may otherwise accrue to
City’s employees. Consultant expressly waives any claim Consultant may have to any such rights.
4.3 Contract Officer.
The Contract Officer shall be Ron Dragoo, City Engineer, or such person as may be
designated by the City Manager. It shall be the Consultant’s responsibility to assure that the
Contract Officer is kept informed of the progress of the performance of the services and the
Consultant shall refer any decisions which must be made by City to the Contract Officer. Unless
otherwise specified herein, any approval of City required hereunder shall mean the approval of the
Contract Officer. The Contract Officer shall have authority, if specified in writing by the City
Manager, to sign all documents on behalf of the City required hereunder to carry out the terms of
this Agreement.
4.4 Independent Consultant.
Neither the City nor any of its employees shall have any control over the manner, mode or
means by which Consultant, its agents or employees, perform the services required herein, except
as otherwise set forth herein. City shall have no voice in the selection, discharge, supervision or
control of Consultant’s employees, servants, representatives or agents, or in fixing their number,
compensation or hours of service. Consultant shall perform all services required herein as an
independent contractor of City and shall remain at all times as to City a wholly independent
contractor with only such obligations as are consistent with that role. Consultant shall not at any
time or in any manner represent that it or any of its agents or employees are agents or employees
of City. City shall not in any way or for any purpose become or be deemed to be a partner of
Consultant in its business or otherwise or a joint venturer or a member of any joint enterprise with
Consultant.
A-9
01203.0006/669599.3 9
4.5 Prohibition Against Subcontracting or Assignment.
The experience, knowledge, capability and reputation of Consultant, its principals and
employees were a substantial inducement for the City to enter into this Agreement. Therefore,
Consultant shall not contract with any other entity to perform in whole or in part the services
required hereunder without the express written approval of the City. In addition, neither this
Agreement nor any interest herein may be transferred, assigned, conveyed, hypothecated or
encumbered voluntarily or by operation of law, whether for the benefit of creditors or otherwise,
without the prior written approval of City. Transfers restricted hereunder shall include the transfer
to any person or group of persons acting in concert of more than twenty five percent (25%) of the
present ownership and/or control of Consultant, taking all transfers into account on a cumulative
basis. In the event of any such unapproved transfer, including any bankruptcy proceeding, this
Agreement shall be void. No approved transfer shall release the Consultant or any surety of
Consultant of any liability hereunder without the express consent of City.
ARTICLE 5. INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION
5.1 Insurance Coverages.
Without limiting Consultant’s indemnification of City, and prior to commencement of any
services under this Agreement, Consultant shall obtain, provide and maintain at its own expense
during the term of this Agreement, policies of insurance of the type and amounts described below
and in a form satisfactory to City.
(a) General liability insurance. Consultant shall maintain commercial general
liability insurance with coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CG 00 01, in
an amount not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate, for bodily
injury, personal injury, and property damage. The policy must include contractual liability that has
not been amended. Any endorsement restricting standard ISO “insured contract” language will not
be accepted.
(b) Automobile liability insurance. Consultant shall maintain automobile
insurance at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CA 00 01 covering bodily injury and
property damage for all activities of the Consultant arising out of or in connection with Services
to be performed under this Agreement, including coverage for any owned, hired, non-owned or
rented vehicles, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 combined single limit for each accident.
(c) Professional liability (errors & omissions) insurance. Consultant shall
maintain professional liability insurance that covers the Services to be performed in connection
with this Agreement, in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per claim and in the aggregate. Any
policy inception date, continuity date, or retroactive date must be before the effective date of this
Agreement and Consultant agrees to maintain continuous coverage through a period no less than
three (3) years after completion of the services required by this Agreement.
(d) compensation insurance. Consultant shall maintain Workers’
Compensation Insurance (Statutory Limits) and Employer’s Liability Insurance (with limits of at
least $1,000,000).
A-10
01203.0006/669599.3 10
(e) Subcontractors. Consultant shall include all subcontractors as insureds
under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates and certified endorsements for each
subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall include all of the requirements stated herein.
(f) Additional Insurance. Policies of such other insurance, as may be required
in the Special Requirements in Exhibit “B”.
5.2 General Insurance Requirements.
(a) Proof of insurance. Consultant shall provide certificates of insurance to City
as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein, along with a waiver of subrogation
endorsement for workers’ compensation. Insurance certificates and endorsements must be
approved by City’s Risk Manager prior to commencement of performance. Current certification
of insurance shall be kept on file with City at all times during the term of this Agreement. City
reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any
time.
(b) Duration of coverage. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the
duration of this Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property,
which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the Services hereund er by
Consultant, its agents, representatives, employees or subconsultants.
(c) Primary/noncontributing. Coverage provided by Consultant shall be
primary and any insurance or self-insurance procured or maintained by City shall not be required
to contribute with it. The limits of insurance required herein may be satisfied by a combination of
primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be
endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non-
contributory basis for the benefit of City before the City’s own insurance or self -insurance shall
be called upon to protect it as a named insured.
(d) City’s rights of enforcement. In the event any policy of insurance required
under this Agreement does not comply with these specifications or is canceled and not replaced,
City has the right but not the duty to obtain the insurance it deems necessary and any premium
paid by City will be promptly reimbursed by Consultant or City will withhold amounts sufficient
to pay premium from Consultant payments. In the alternative, City may cancel this Agreement.
(e) Acceptable insurers. All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance
company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact business of insurance or
that is on the List of Approved Surplus Line Insurers in the State of California, with an assigned
policyholders’ Rating of A- (or higher) and Financial Size Category Class VI (or larger) in
accordance with the latest edition of Best’s Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by the
City’s Risk Manager.
(f) Waiver of subrogation. All insurance coverage maintained or procured
pursuant to this agreement shall be endorsed to waive subrogation against City, its elected or
appointed officers, agents, officials, employees and volunteers or shall specifically allow
Consultant or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these specifications to
waive their right of recovery prior to a loss. Consultant hereby waives its o wn right of recovery
A-11
01203.0006/669599.3 11
against City, and shall require similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of
its subconsultants.
(g) Enforcement of contract provisions (non-estoppel). Consultant
acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of the City to inform
Consultant of non-compliance with any requirement imposes no additional obligations on the City
nor does it waive any rights hereunder.
(h) Requirements not limiting. Requirements of specific coverage features or
limits contained in this section are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits or other
requirements, or a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance. Specific reference
to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue and
is not intended by any party or insured to be all inclusive, or to the exclusion of other coverage, or
a waiver of any type. If the Consultant maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above,
the City requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by the
Consultant. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of
insurance and coverage shall be available to the City.
(i) Notice of cancellation. Consultant agrees to oblige its insurance agent or
broker and insurers to provide to City with a thirty (30) day notice of cancellation (except for
nonpayment for which a ten (10) day notice is required) or nonrenewal of coverage for each
required coverage.
(j) Additional insured status. General liability policies shall provide or be
endorsed to provide that City and its officers, officials, employees, and agents, and volunteers shall
be additional insureds under such policies. This provision shall also apply to any excess/umbrella
liability policies.
(k) Prohibition of undisclosed coverage limitations. None of the coverages
required herein will be in compliance with these requirements if they include any limiting
endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted to City and approved of in writing.
(l) Separation of insureds. A severability of interests provision must apply for
all additional insureds ensuring that Consultant’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured
against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the insurer’s limits of
liability. The policy(ies) shall not contain any cross-liability exclusions.
(m) Pass through clause. Consultant agrees to ensure that its subconsultants,
subcontractors, and any other party involved with the project who is brought onto or involved in
the project by Consultant, provide the same minimum insurance coverage and endorsements
required of Consultant. Consultant agrees to monitor and review all such coverage and assumes
all responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is provided in conformity with the requirements
of this section. Consultant agrees that upon request, all agreements with consultants,
subcontractors, and others engaged in the project will be submitted to City for review.
(n) Agency’s right to revise specifications. The City reserves the right at any
time during the term of the contract to change the amounts and types of insurance required by
giving the Consultant ninety (90) days advance written notice of such change. If such change
A-12
01203.0006/669599.3 12
results in substantial additional cost to the Consultant, the City and Consultant may renegotiate
Consultant’s compensation.
(o) Self-insured retentions. Any self-insured retentions must be declared to and
approved by City. City reserves the right to require that self-insured retentions be eliminated,
lowered, or replaced by a deductible. Self-insurance will not be considered to comply with these
specifications unless approved by City.
(p) Timely notice of claims. Consultant shall give City prompt and timely
notice of claims made or suits instituted that arise out of or result from Consultant’s performance
under this Agreement, and that involve or may involve coverage under any of the required liability
policies.
(q) Additional insurance. Consultant shall also procure and maintain, at its own
cost and expense, any additional kinds of insurance, which in its own judgment may be necessary
for its proper protection and prosecution of the work.
5.3 Indemnification.
To the full extent permitted by law, Consultant agrees to indemnify, defend and hold
harmless the City, its officers, employees and agents (“Indemnified Parties”) against, and will hold
and save them and each of them harmless from, any and all actions, either judicial, administrative,
arbitration or regulatory claims, damages to persons or property, losses, costs, penalties,
obligations, errors, omissions or liabilities whether actual or threatened (herein “claims or
liabilities”) that may be asserted or claimed by any person, firm or entity arising out of or in
connection with the negligent performance of the work, operations or activities provided herein of
Consultant, its officers, employees, agents, subcontractors, or invitees, or any individual or entity
for which Consultant is legally liable (“indemnitors”), or arising from Consultant’s or indemnitors’
reckless or willful misconduct, or arising from Consultant’s or indemnitors’ negligent performance
of or failure to perform any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement, and in
connection therewith:
Consultant will defend any action or actions filed in connection with any of said claims or
liabilities and will pay all costs and expenses, including legal costs and attorneys’ fees incurred in
connection therewith;
Consultant will promptly pay any judgment rendered against the City, its officers, agents
or employees for any such claims or liabilities arising out of or in connection with the negligent
performance of or failure to perform such work, operations or activities of Consultant hereunder;
and Consultant agrees to save and hold the City, its officers, agents, and employees harmless
therefrom;
In the event the City, its officers, agents or employees is made a party to any action or
proceeding filed or prosecuted against Consultant for such damages or other claims arising out of
or in connection with the negligent performance of or failure to perform the work, operation or
activities of Consultant hereunder, Consultant agrees to pay to the City, its officers, agents or
employees, any and all costs and expenses incurred by the City, its officers, agents or employees
in such action or proceeding, including but not limited to, legal costs and attorneys’ fees.
A-13
01203.0006/669599.3 13
Consultant shall incorporate similar indemnity agreements with its subcontractors and if it
fails to do so Consultant shall be fully responsible to indemnify City hereunder therefore, and
failure of City to monitor compliance with these provisions shall not be a waiver hereof. This
indemnification includes claims or liabilities arising from any negligent or wrongful act, error or
omission, or reckless or willful misconduct of Consultant in the performance of professional
services hereunder. The provisions of this Section do not apply to claims or liabilities occurring as
a result of City’s sole negligence or willful acts or omissions, but, to the fullest extent permitted
by law, shall apply to claims and liabilities resulting in part from City’s negligence, except that
design professionals’ indemnity hereunder shall be limited to claims and liabilities arising out of
the negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of the design professional. The indemnity
obligation shall be binding on successors and assigns of Consultant and shall survive termination
of this Agreement.
ARTICLE 6. RECORDS, REPORTS, AND RELEASE OF INFORMATION
6.1 Records.
Consultant shall keep, and require subcontractors to keep, such ledgers, books of accounts,
invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, reports, studies or other documents relating to the
disbursements charged to City and services performed hereunder (the “books and records”), as
shall be necessary to perform the services required by this Agreement and enable the Contract
Officer to evaluate the performance of such services. Any and all such documents shall be
maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be complete and
detailed. The Contract Officer shall have full and free access to such books and records at all times
during normal business hours of City, including the right to inspect, copy, audit and make records
and transcripts from such records. Such records shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years
following completion of the services hereunder, and the City shall have access to such records in
the event any audit is required. In the event of dissolution of Consultant’s business, custody of the
books and records may be given to City, and access shall be provided by Consultant’s successor
in interest. Notwithstanding the above, the Consultant shall fully cooperate with the City in
providing access to the books and records if a public records request is made and disclosure is
required by law including but not limited to the California Public Records Act.
6.2 Reports.
Consultant shall periodically prepare and submit to the Contract Officer such reports
concerning the performance of the services required by this Agreement as the Contract Officer
shall require. Consultant hereby acknowledges that the City is greatly concerned about the cost of
work and services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement. For this reason, Consultant agrees
that if Consultant becomes aware of any facts, circumstances, techniques, or events that may or
will materially increase or decrease the cost of the work or services contemplated herein or, if
Consultant is providing design services, the cost of the project being designed, Consultant shall
promptly notify the Contract Officer of said fact, circumstance, technique or event and the
estimated increased or decreased cost related thereto and, if Consultant is providing design
services, the estimated increased or decreased cost estimate for the project being designed.
A-14
01203.0006/669599.3 14
6.3 Ownership of Documents.
All drawings, specifications, maps, designs, photographs, studies, surveys, data, notes,
computer files, reports, records, documents and other materials (the “documents and materials”)
prepared by Consultant, its employees, subcontractors and agents in the performance of this
Agreement shall be the property of City and shall be delivered to City upon request of the Contract
Officer or upon the termination of this Agreement, and Consultant shall have no claim for further
employment or additional compensation as a result of the exercise by City of its full rights of
ownership use, reuse, or assignment of the documents and materials hereunder. Any use, reuse or
assignment of such completed documents for other projects and/or use of uncompleted documents
without specific written authorization by the Consultant will be at the City’s sole risk and without
liability to Consultant, and Consultant’s guarantee and warranties shall not extend to such use,
reuse or assignment. Consultant may retain copies of such documents for its own use. Consultant
shall have the right to use the concepts embodied therein. All subcontractors shall provide for
assignment to City of any documents or materials prepared by them, and in the event Consultant
fails to secure such assignment, Consultant shall indemnify City for all damages resulting
therefrom. Moreover, Consultant with respect to any documents and materials that may qualify as
“works made for hire” as defined in 17 U.S.C. § 101, such documents and materials are hereby
deemed “works made for hire” for the City.
6.4 Confidentiality and Release of Information.
(a) All information gained or work product produced by Consultant in
performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential, unless such information is in the
public domain or already known to Consultant. Consultant shall not release or disclose any such
information or work product to persons or entities other than City without prior written
authorization from the Contract Officer.
(b) Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not,
without prior written authorization from the Contract Officer or unless requested by the City
Attorney, voluntarily provide documents, declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions,
response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this
Agreement. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered “voluntary” provided
Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena.
(c) If Consultant, or any officer, employee, agent or subcontractor of
Consultant, provides any information or work product in violation of this Agreement, then City
shall have the right to reimbursement and indemnity from Consultant for any damages, costs and
fees, including attorney’s fees, caused by or incurred as a result of Consultant’s conduct.
(d) Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers,
employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of
deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery
request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed
there under. City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant or be present at
any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and
to provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by
A-15
01203.0006/669599.3 15
Consultant. However, this right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by
City to control, direct, or rewrite said response.
ARTICLE 7. ENFORCEMENT OF AGREEMENT AND TERMINATION
7.1 California Law.
This Agreement shall be interpreted, construed and governed both as to validity and to
performance of the parties in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Legal actions
concerning any dispute, claim or matter arising out of or in relation to this Agreement shall be
instituted in the Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles, State of California, or any other
appropriate court in such county, and Consultant covenants and agrees to submit to the personal
jurisdiction of such court in the event of such action. In the event of litigation in a U.S. District
Court, venue shall lie exclusively in the Central District of California, in the County of Los
Angeles, State of California.
7.2 Disputes; Default.
In the event that Consultant is in default under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall
not have any obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after
the date of default. Instead, the City may give notice to Consultant of the default and the reasons
for the default. The notice shall include the timeframe in which Consultant may cure the default.
This timeframe is presumptively thirty (30) days, but may be extended, though not reduced, if
circumstances warrant. During the period of time that Consultant is in default, the City shall hold
all invoices and shall, when the default is cured, proceed with payment on the invoices. In the
alternative, the City may, in its sole discretion, elect to pay some or all of the outstanding invoices
during the period of default. If Consultant does not cure the default, the City may take necessary
steps to terminate this Agreement under this Article. Any failure on the part of the City to give
notice of the Consultant’s default shall not be deemed to result in a waiver of the City’s legal rights
or any rights arising out of any provision of this Agreement.
7.3 Retention of Funds.
Consultant hereby authorizes City to deduct from any amount payable to Consultant
(whether or not arising out of this Agreement) (i) any amounts the payment of which may be in
dispute hereunder or which are necessary to compensate City for any losses, costs, liabilities, or
damages suffered by City, and (ii) all amounts for which City may be liable to third parties, by
reason of Consultant’s acts or omissions in performing or failing to perform Consultant’s
obligation under this Agreement. In the event that any claim is made by a third party, the amount
or validity of which is disputed by Consultant, or any indebtedness shall exist which shall appear
to be the basis for a claim of lien, City may withhold from any payment due, without liability for
interest because of such withholding, an amount sufficient to cover such claim. The failure of City
to exercise such right to deduct or to withhold shall not, however, affect the obligation s of the
Consultant to insure, indemnify, and protect City as elsewhere provided herein.
A-16
01203.0006/669599.3 16
7.4 Waiver.
Waiver by any party to this Agreement of any term, condition, or covenant of this
Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any other term, condition, or covenant. Waiver by any
party of any breach of the provisions of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any other
provision or a waiver of any subsequent breach or violation of any provision of this Agreement.
Acceptance by City of any work or services by Consultant shall not constitute a waiver of any of
the provisions of this Agreement. No delay or omission in the exercise of any right or remedy by
a non-defaulting party on any default shall impair such right or remedy or be construed as a waiver.
Any waiver by either party of any default must be in writing and shall not be a waiver of any other
default concerning the same or any other provision of this Agreement.
7.5 Rights and Remedies are Cumulative.
Except with respect to rights and remedies expressly declared to be exclusive in this
Agreement, the rights and remedies of the parties are cumulative and the exercise by either party
of one or more of such rights or remedies shall not preclude the exercise by it, at the same or
different times, of any other rights or remedies for the same default or any other default by the
other party.
7.6 Legal Action.
In addition to any other rights or remedies, either party may take legal action, in law or in
equity, to cure, correct or remedy any default, to recover damages for any default, to compel
specific performance of this Agreement, to obtain declaratory or injunctive relief, or to obtain any
other remedy consistent with the purposes of this Agreement. Notwithstanding any contrary
provision herein, Consultant shall file a statutory claim pursuant to Government Code Sections
905 et seq. and 910 et seq., in order to pursue a legal action under this Agreement.
7.7 Liquidated Damages.
Since the determination of actual damages for any delay in performance of this Agreement
would be extremely difficult or impractical to determine in the event of a breach of this Agreement,
the Consultant and its sureties shall be liable for and shall pay to the City the sum of $0.00 (No
Dollars) as liquidated damages for each working day of delay in the performance of any service
required hereunder. The City may withhold from any monies payable on account of services
performed by the Contractor any accrued liquidated damages.
7.8 Termination Prior to Expiration of Term.
This Section shall govern any termination of this Contract except as specifically provided
in the following Section for termination for cause. The City reserves the right to terminate this
Contract at any time, with or without cause, upon thirty (30) days’ written notice to C onsultant,
except that where termination is due to the fault of the Consultant, the period of notice may be
such shorter time as may be determined by the Contract Officer. In addition, the Consultant
reserves the right to terminate this Contract at any time, with or without cause, upon sixty (60)
days’ written notice to City, except that where termination is due to the fault of the City, the period
of notice may be such shorter time as the Consultant may determine. Upon receipt of any notice
A-17
01203.0006/669599.3 17
of termination, Consultant shall immediately cease all services hereunder except such as may be
specifically approved by the Contract Officer. Except where the Consultant has initiated
termination, the Consultant shall be entitled to compensation for all services rendered prior to the
effective date of the notice of termination and for any services authorized by the Contract Officer
thereafter in accordance with the Schedule of Compensation or such as may be approved by the
Contract Officer, except as provided in Section 7.3. In the event the Consultant has initiated
termination, the Consultant shall be entitled to compensation only for the reasonable value of the
work product actually produced hereunder. In the event of termination without cause pursuant to
this Section, the terminating party need not provide the non-terminating party with the opportunity
to cure pursuant to Section 7.2.
7.9 Termination for Default of Consultant.
If termination is due to the failure of the Consultant to fulfill its obligations under this
Agreement, City may, after compliance with the provisions of Section 7.2, take over the work and
prosecute the same to completion by contract or otherwise, and the Consultant shall be liable to
the extent that the total cost for completion of the services required hereunder exceeds the
compensation herein stipulated (provided that the City shall use reasonable efforts to mitigate such
damages), and City may withhold any payments to the Consultant for the purpose of set-off or
partial payment of the amounts owed the City as previously stated.
7.10 Attorneys’ Fees.
If either party to this Agreement is required to initiate or defend or made a party to any
action or proceeding in any way connected with this Agreement, the prevailing party in such action
or proceeding, in addition to any other relief which may be granted, whether legal or equitable,
shall be entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees. Attorney’s fees shall include attorney’s fees on any
appeal, and in addition a party entitled to attorney’s fees shall be entitl ed to all other reasonable
costs for investigating such action, taking depositions and discovery and all other necessary costs
the court allows which are incurred in such litigation. All such fees shall be deemed to have accrued
on commencement of such action and shall be enforceable whether or not such action is prosecuted
to judgment.
ARTICLE 8. CITY OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES: NON-DISCRIMINATION
8.1 Non-liability of City Officers and Employees.
No officer or employee of the City shall be personally liable to the Consultant, or any
successor in interest, in the event of any default or breach by the City or for any amount which
may become due to the Consultant or to its successor, or for breach of any obligation of the terms
of this Agreement.
8.2 Conflict of Interest.
Consultant covenants that neither it, nor any officer or principal of its firm, has or shall
acquire any interest, directly or indirectly, which would conflict in any manner with the interests
of City or which would in any way hinder Consultant’s performance of services under this
Agreement. Consultant further covenants that in the performance of this Agreement, no person
A-18
01203.0006/669599.3 18
having any such interest shall be employed by it as an officer, employee, agent or subcontractor
without the express written consent of the Contract Officer. Consultant agrees to at all times avoid
conflicts of interest or the appearance of any conflicts of interest with the interests of City in the
performance of this Agreement.
No officer or employee of the City shall have any financial interest, direct or indirect, in
this Agreement nor shall any such officer or employee participate in any decision relating to the
Agreement which affects her/his financial interest or the financial interest of any corporation,
partnership or association in which (s)he is, directly or indirectly, interested, in violation of any
State statute or regulation. The Consultant warrants that it has not paid or given and will not pay
or give any third party any money or other consideration for obtaining this Agreement.
8.3 Covenant Against Discrimination.
Consultant covenants that, by and for itself, its heirs, executors, assigns, and all persons
claiming under or through them, that there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of,
any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, gender, sexual
orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry or other protected class in the performance of
this Agreement. Consultant shall take affirmative action to insure that applicants are employed and
that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, color, creed, religion,
sex, gender, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry or other protected class.
8.4 Unauthorized Aliens.
Consultant hereby promises and agrees to comply with all of the provisions of the Federal
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101 et seq., as amended, and in connection
therewith, shall not employ unauthorized aliens as defined therein. Should Consultant so employ
such unauthorized aliens for the performance of work and/or services covered by this Agreement,
and should any liability or sanctions be imposed against City for such use of unauthorized aliens,
Consultant hereby agrees to and shall reimburse City for the cost of all such liabilities or sanctions
imposed, together with any and all costs, including attorneys’ fees, incurred by City.
ARTICLE 9. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
9.1 Notices.
Any notice, demand, request, document, consent, approval, or communication either party
desires or is required to give to the other party or any other person shall be in writing and either
served personally or sent by prepaid, first-class mail, in the case of the City, to the City Manager
and to the attention of the Contract Officer (with her/his name and City title), City of Rancho Palos
Verdes, 30940 Hawthorne Blvd., Rancho Palos Verdes, California 90275 and in the case of the
Consultant, to the person(s) at the address designated on the execution page of this Agreement.
Either party may change its address by notifying the other party of the change of address in writing.
Notice shall be deemed communicated at the time personally delivered or in seventy -two (72)
hours from the time of mailing if mailed as provided in this Section.
A-19
01203.0006/669599.3 19
9.2 Interpretation.
The terms of this Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the meaning of the
language used and shall not be construed for or against either party by reason of the authorship of
this Agreement or any other rule of construction which might otherwise apply.
9.3 Counterparts.
This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an
original, and such counterparts shall constitute one and the same instrument.
9.4 Integration; Amendment.
This Agreement including the attachments hereto is the entire, complete and exclusive
expression of the understanding of the parties. It is understood that there are no oral agreements
between the parties hereto affecting this Agreement and this Agreement supersedes and cancels
any and all previous negotiations, arrangements, agreements and understandings, if any, between
the parties, and none shall be used to interpret this Agreement. No amendment to or modification
of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and approved by the Consultant and by
the City Council. The parties agree that this requirement for written modifications cannot be
waived and that any attempted waiver shall be void.
9.5 Severability.
In the event that any one or more of the phrases, sentences, clauses, paragraphs, or sections
contained in this Agreement shall be declared invalid or unenforceable by a valid judgment or
decree of a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect any
of the remaining phrases, sentences, clauses, paragraphs, or sections of this Agreement which are
hereby declared as severable and shall be interpreted to carry out the intent of the parties hereunder
unless the invalid provision is so material that its invalidity deprives either party of the basic benefit
of their bargain or renders this Agreement meaningless.
9.6 Warranty & Representation of Non-Collusion.
No official, officer, or employee of City has any financial interest, direct or indirect, in this
Agreement, nor shall any official, officer, or employee of City participate in any decision relating
to this Agreement which may affect his/her financial interest or the financial interest of any
corporation, partnership, or association in which (s)he is directly or indirectly interested, or in
violation of any corporation, partnership, or association in which (s)he is directly or indirectly
interested, or in violation of any State or municipal statute or regulation. The determination of
“financial interest” shall be consistent with State law and shall not include interests found to be
“remote” or “noninterests” pursuant to Government Code Sections 1091 or 1091.5. Consultant
warrants and represents that it has not paid or given, and will not pay or give, to any third party
including, but not limited to, any City official, officer, or employee, any money, consideration, or
other thing of value as a result or consequence of obtaining or being awarded any agreement.
Consultant further warrants and represents that (s)he/it has not engaged in any act(s), omission(s),
or other conduct or collusion that would result in the payment of any money, consideration, or
other thing of value to any third party including, but not limited to, any City official, officer, or
A-20
01203.0006/669599.3 20
employee, as a result of consequence of obtaining or being awarded any agreement. Consultant is
aware of and understands that any such act(s), omission(s) or other conduct resulting in such
payment of money, consideration, or other thing of value will render this Agreement void and of
no force or effect.
Consultant’s Authorized Initials _______
9.7 Corporate Authority.
The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the parties hereto warrant that (i) such
party is duly organized and existing, (ii) they are duly authorized to execute and deliver this
Agreement on behalf of said party, (iii) by so executing this Agreement, such party is formally
bound to the provisions of this Agreement, and (iv) that entering into this Agreement does not
violate any provision of any other Agreement to which said party is bound. This Agreement shall
be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the parties.
[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
A-21
01203.0006/669599.3 21
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date
and year first-above written.
CITY:
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES, a
municipal corporation
John Cruikshank, Mayor
ATTEST:
Emily Colborn, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ALESHIRE & WYNDER, LLP
William W. Wynder, City Attorney
CONSULTANT:
HARRIS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
By: ________________________________
Gary H. Yagade, PE
Vice President
By:_________________________________
Randall G. Berry, PE
Director, Engineering Services
Address: 22 Executive Park, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92314
Two corporate officer signatures required when Consultant is a corporation, with one
signature required from each of the following groups: 1) Chairman of the Board, President
or any Vice President; and 2) Secretary, any Assistant Secretary, Chief Financial Officer or
any Assistant Treasurer. CONSULTANT’S SIGNATURES SHALL BE DULY
NOTARIZED, AND APPROPRIATE ATTESTATIONS SHALL BE INCLUDED AS MAY
BE REQUIRED BY THE BYLAWS, ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION, OR OTHER
RULES OR REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO CONSULTANT’S BUSINESS ENTITY.
A-22
01203.0006/669599.3 22
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
On __________, 2020 before me, ________________, personally appeared ________________, proved to me on the
basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose names(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted,
executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true
and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature: _____________________________________
OPTIONAL
Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the d ocument and could
prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form
CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT
INDIVIDUAL
CORPORATE OFFICER
_______________________________
TITLE(S)
PARTNER(S) LIMITED
GENERAL
ATTORNEY-IN-FACT
TRUSTEE(S)
GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR
OTHER_______________________________
______________________________________
SIGNER IS REPRESENTING:
(NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITY(IES))
_____________________________________________
_____________________________________________
___________________________________
TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT
___________________________________
NUMBER OF PAGES
___________________________________
DATE OF DOCUMENT
___________________________________
SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the
document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accurac y or validity of that document.
A-23
01203.0006/669599.3 23
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
On __________, 2020 before me, ________________, personally appeared ________________, proved to me on the
basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose names(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted,
executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true
and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature: _____________________________________
OPTIONAL
Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could
prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form
CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT
INDIVIDUAL
CORPORATE OFFICER
_______________________________
TITLE(S)
PARTNER(S) LIMITED
GENERAL
ATTORNEY-IN-FACT
TRUSTEE(S)
GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR
OTHER_______________________________
______________________________________
SIGNER IS REPRESENTING:
(NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITY(IES))
_____________________________________________
_____________________________________________
___________________________________
TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT
___________________________________
NUMBER OF PAGES
___________________________________
DATE OF DOCUMENT
___________________________________
SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed
the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy or validity of that document.
A-24
01203.0006/669599.3 A-1
EXHIBIT “A”
SCOPE OF SERVICES
I. Consultant will perform the following work to revisit and extend the Altamira
Canyon Drainage Study (“Services”):
A. Orientation/Data Collection/Base Sheets
1. Data Collection and Review
(a) Hold a teleconference meet with City staff and hold “kickoff”
meeting. The Altamira Canyon Drainage Study (“Project”)
approach and site access protocol will be confirmed. Direction from
the City staff will be obtained and any new development information
from City records pertaining to the Project will be collected. The
original Altamira Canyon Drainage and Erosion Control Study
was 90% complete in December 2016. Consultant will partially
revisit the original study, provide updates to the topographic
survey and provide similar services included in the original
study scope for the expanded study limits upstream. Utility
information collected previously will be relied upon until the point
in the PS&E preparation phase when the design plans are far enough
along to share with the owners to coordinate future action on impacts
based on a proposed construction schedule. Due to COVID-19, it is
assumed that the kick-off meeting will likely be a teleconference call
with file sharing capabilities on computer screens.
(b) Prepare a Project schedule and meeting minutes for the kick -off
meeting/call.
2. Topographic Aerial Survey
(a) The same level of information obtained from the City for right-of-
way (R/W) and property lines will be sufficient for the Project study
level of effort. The new topographic survey will be tied to the
previously collected R/W line work. In addition to previous study
parcel/property lines, boundary lines, street center line, and right-of-
way (R/W) are not included, with the exception of these same lines
as depicted within the City GIS base data. Thus, the City’s GIS will
be the source of all property lines and roadway R/W.
(b) Aerial mapping at a 1-inch to 40-foot scale with 1-foot interval
contours will be compiled together with a color ortho-corrected
image file that is geo-referenced. Field survey will be performed to
set aerial targets, collect quality control points, and to set various
control points needed for the augmentation surveys.
A-25
01203.0006/669599.3 A-2
(c) Five days of topographic augmentation field surveys will be
provided based on Consultant’s requests for information. They will
be completed and invoiced in daily increments, to include the time
necessary to generate the point file and noted deliverables. Sketches
and photos prepared as part of the topographic augmentation will be
digitized and provided as well as ASCII point files of collected
points.
(i) Parcel and Right-of-Way Information
(A) Coordinate GIS information retrieval from the City.
(B) Control Datum
1) Horizontal: CCS83, Zone V (NA2011
2011.00) [To be confirmed]
2) Vertical: Los Angeles County benchmark
(NAVD88, 2005 Adj.)
(C) Control Survey
1) Set aerial targets (15)
2) Collect QA/QC points
3) Set control points for topographic
augmentation
(D) Field Topographic Survey
1) Collect topographic detail (e.g. sections,
structure detail, dips) as requested by
Consultant
3. Topographic Base Sheets for Conceptual Plans
(a) Utilizing the previously discussed aerial and supplemental ground
surveys, updated construction plan, and profile base sheets will be
prepared in AutoCAD for each of the mainline creek alternative
design solutions that are proposed. The base sheets would be
prepared using the City’s standard format at a scale of 1” = 40’
horizontally and 1” = 8’ or 16’ vertically. Existing improvements
would be screened so that the full toned proposed improvements will
stand out. The digested base sheets will include the following:
(i) Surface and subsurface utility locations;
A-26
01203.0006/669599.3 A-3
(ii) One foot contour intervals tied to appropriate coordinate
system;
(iii) Dimensions, labels, and match lines;
(iv) Existing storm drain culverts from survey and record
drawings;
(v) Existing P/L’s and R/W locations from City’s GIS files;
(vi) Existing stationing and street name labels, as appropriate;
(vii) Existing topography to the limits described in the survey
section;
(viii) Existing Creek invert or surface profile over CL of proposed
pipe; and
(ix) Supplemental survey topography and elevation information
at key proposed improvement locations, as needed.
B. Conceptual Design & Project Study Report (PSR)
1. Field Review. Consultant will perform a field review of the latest existing
site conditions to determine the following:
(a) Review completeness/accuracy of the computerized survey base
maps and essential topographic features.
(b) Note any new potential utility conflicts.
(c) Note any new potential issues where new storm drain and canyon
channel alignments are anticipated.
(d) Note other existing conditions that may affect the design and
alternatives.
NOTE: The Project site will be inspected by hiking and recording the
features of interest and any new potential challenges for the full extent of
the Project site within the limits of work. Consultant will identify changes
to the existing drainage components.
2. Hydrology & Hydraulics Study
(a) The previously prepared main channel hydraulic modeling will not
be revisited because it is assumed that the anticipated changed
conditions since the last study was conducted will not be significant
enough to affect the proposed hydraulic calculations. However,
Consultant will survey, photo document, and map the changed
A-27
01203.0006/669599.3 A-4
conditions and revise the recommended impacts. For example, if
riprap rock was placed where it did not existing previously,
Consultant might recommend protecting it or replacing it to make
sure the proposed channel solution is continuous and does not have
breaches in the proposed impermeable liner and sub-drain system.
(b) Between the previous study and now extended study, Hydrology and
Hydraulics sub-consultant CWE, Inc.’s (“CWE”) evaluation of the
hydraulics of Altamira Creek will span from the Pacific Ocean to
Santa Barbara Drive and Crenshaw Boulevard at the top of the West
Fork. The Hydrologic Engineering Center – River Analysis System
(HEC-RAS) software will be used for modeling the hydraulics of
the system. Previous investigations will be compared to current
conditions to determine the impacts of wet winters on the channel
and erosion of banks. Previous models of the main stem of the creek
will be used for analysis. Previously developed hydrology will be
used to determine flow rates in the watershed at specific creek bed
points of interest.
3. Field Investigation:
(a) The Altamira Canyon watershed is an approximately 860 acre
watershed located on the southern side of the Palos Verdes
Peninsula that drains into Abalone Cove. CWE will conduct field
reconnaissance and prepare a photo log of the existing conditions at
key locations along the stream channel. Sediment grain size samples
will be collected for key locations using the Wolman Pebble Count
method to estimate bed material sediment size for evaluation of
transport potential at various flow rates. Relevant existing literature
will be compiled and analyzed to describe the environmental setting.
Locations of scour and deposition will be noted. Roughness will be
estimated based on site conditions, vegetation, and bed gradation.
The bed and banks will be photographed at erosional areas and key
locations for evaluation of bank stability. Key locations will include
bridges due to accessibility, the need to understand bridge sizing
constraints, and existing conditions at the channel crossings. The
data provided by the City will be reviewed and verified during the
field investigation. The information gathered during the site visit
will be detailed in an appendix of the drainage report.
(b) A field investigation report will be prepared to document the
findings of the field investigation and will include a photo log of
photographs taken for later use in concept development and
evaluation. The field investigation report will be an appendix in the
Hydraulic Model Technical Memorandum.
4. Existing Conditions Hydraulic Model Development:
A-28
01203.0006/669599.3 A-5
(a) A HEC-RAS model will be developed for the one-dimensional (1-
D) channel sections analysis for the entire Altamira Creek drainage
system. The model will be used to evaluate channel hydraulics for
stabilization measures based on the outputs from the hydrology
model. CWE will utilize the hydrology study and topographic
survey data to evaluate existing conditions. The model will add
cross-sections and flow data for the West Fork to the existing
conditions hydraulic model of the canyon.
(b) Develop a HEC-RAS hydraulic model to evaluate the natural stream
hydraulics of the existing drainage system, specifically in the West
Fork above the reaches in the previously conducted study area. The
model will evaluate the flow depths, velocities, and water surface
elevations. The output from the model will be used to evaluate the
incipient motion of bed materials and the ability of the banks to
resist scour.
(c) The impacts of culverts and pipes on the velocities, the need for
energy dissipation, and the channel capacity will be evaluated for
the existing conditions for the flow rates from the hydrologic
analysis. The larger corrugated metal pipe (CMP) culverts in the
system may be too steep and long to be evaluated effectively using
the culvert hydraulics routine in HEC-RAS. If this appears to be the
case, the CMP will be evaluated using the Water Surface Profile
Gradient (WSPG) model developed by Los Angeles County Flood
Control District (LACFCD) and the water elevations will be used as
boundary conditions for the HEC-RAS model. The hydraulic
analysis will also evaluate scour using the 2006 LACDPW
Sedimentation Manual to evaluate potential long-term channel
changes associated with existing conditions.
(d) Each of the concepts will be modeled with three outlet works
configurations to evaluate how sensitive the system is to this design
parameter in modifying flow characteristics in the downstream
system in terms of channel velocities and shear stresses. The output
from these models will be used to evaluate stream stabilization
concepts and plans.
5. Proposed Conditions Hydraulic Analyses:
(a) Based on preliminary design section alternatives for the drainage
system, CWE will develop up to four (4) models of proposed
conditions and evaluate proposed alternatives for channel
improvements. The alternatives will potentially include culverts, rip
rap, piping, energy dissipation structures, controlled water flow,
revetments, retaining walls, gabions, retention basins, inlet and
outlet structures, and bypass systems. HEC-RAS or WSPG models
A-29
01203.0006/669599.3 A-6
will be used to evaluate these hydraulic system modifications as
appropriate. HEC-RAS is best for open channel hydraulic systems.
WSPG is best for evaluating closed conduit and pressurized flow
systems. The models will evaluate the flow depths, velocities, and
water surface elevations. The output from the models will be used
to evaluate the incipient motion of bed materials and the ability of
the banks to resist scour. The impacts of culverts and pipes on the
velocities, the need for energy dissipation, and the channel capacity
will be evaluated for the proposed alternative conditions for the flow
rates from the hydrologic analysis.
6. Hydraulic Model Technical Memorandum:
(a) A technical memorandum will be developed for the hydraulic
modeling. The memorandum will detail the data sources,
methodologies, and model results at each specified location. The
field investigation report and photo log will also be added, along
with Wolman Pebble Count data. A draft memorandum will be
prepared for internal Project team review and comments. A draft
final report will be developed based on the internal comments and
submitted to City for review and comment. The comments received
will be incorporated into the final technical memorandum. The
model will be submitted to the City for review and comment. A final
model will be prepared which incorporates City comments.
Note: Since originally proposed debris basin study was never
performed and is seen as an unlikely solution due to the lack of level
land, ease of access and inability to easily maintain, there will be no
detailed debris basin sizing analysis. However, debris basins will be
discussed within the body of the report to discuss the pros and cons
of these systems. This lack of a 10% conceptual design for the debris
basins originally proposed will not prevent debris basins from being
considered in the future during the PS&E phase.
(b) Once the existing conditions and proposed conditions alternatives
hydraulic analyses are completed, CWE will provide the results of
their study in a hydraulics report that will be combined with
Consultant’s portion of the Hydrology & Hydraulics (H&H) study.
These findings will be presented in the H&H section of the PSR and
presented at the various feedback meetings with City staff. The write
up will be straightforward and summarize the results of the
hydrology refinements and hydraulics analyses, including all
supporting calculations and hydrology drainage area map.
7. Meetings: The CWE team will attend up to six (6) one hour teleconferences
meetings, in addition to one (1) City Council meeting and one (1)
community outreach meeting. All meetings may be substituted with
A-30
01203.0006/669599.3 A-7
teleconference meetings, such as Skype or Google Hangouts, given the
COVID-19 conditions.
8. Added Value / Team Facilitator: Consultant will be supported by a proven
project facilitator, Alan Braatvedt from Sunbeam Consulting (“Value/Team
Facilitator”), who has worked consistently well with Consultant and City
staff to help make the recent McCarrell Canyon and San Ramon Canyon
projects successful. The Value/Team Facilitator has been instrumental in
coordinating the many parties involved on said previous projects and is
intimately familiar with the City, neighborhoods, groups, and agencies that
will be involved in this study phase outreach and preliminary design.
The Value/Team Facilitator’s role throughout the duration of the Project
would be as follows:
(a) Coordination with City staff and departments, including Public
Works, Parks, Engineering, Open Space Committee, and the City
Council
(b) Coordination and outreach with public groups including local
neighborhoods, the Palos Verdes Heritage Castle Museum, local
hiking and equestrian groups
(c) Assistance with public outreach efforts including presentations at
public meetings, and one-on-one interaction with residents and
group representatives
(d) Assist Consultant and City staff in identifying and dealing with
potential or realized constraints and opportunities
(e) Assist Consultant and City staff in investigation of existing canyon
conditions, including hiking the entire reach of the project area
(f) Brainstorm with Consultant and City staff on various feasible
project alternatives, and assessment of the proposed strategies /
alternatives
9. Develop Preliminary Conceptual Designs & Project Study Report (PSR)
(a) The Project Study Report (PSR) will include the development of up
to four (4) design alternatives (with the possibility of several sub-
options that can be mixed and matched with various alternatives)
that will aid in managing both stormwater flow and nuisance
water/low flows through the Altamira Canyon. The options will
include one or a combination of various mitigation measures, such
as canyon fill with armament (rip rap, Armor Flex, etc.),
culverts/pipe lines (extend existing culverts, energy dissipation
systems (controlled water flow), walls (soil-nail walls, gabions,
A-31
01203.0006/669599.3 A-8
retaining walls, caisson revetment, etc.), retention basins/debris
basins, and inlet and outlet structures related to any pipeline system.
The study will evaluate expanded area of Altamira Canyon above
the west fork (see map on first page) and the original limits between
upper Narcissa Drive (East of Sweetbay Road) to the inlet of the
120” CMP at lower Narcissa Drive (north of PVDS) and the
downstream section located south of PVDS where the 120” CMP
outlets down to the canyon to the Pacific Ocean.
(b) The PSR will be developed in accordance with Los Angeles County
(LAC) design standards. As discussed in detail in the project
approach section of this proposal the designs will be innovative and
as such some may not be covered by conventional LAC standards.
However, wherever practical, the designs will meet or exceed LAC
standards.
(c) Each of the alternate designs must include its own analysis of the
cost, schedule and difficulty associated with the easement
acquisition, geological and environmental conditions for that
particular design alternative. Each design alternative will be
evaluated against one another and summarized in a “Comparison of
Alternatives” matrix chart, similar to what was prepared for the San
Ramon Canyon Drainage design project, to assess cost,
constructability, and effectiveness of the concept in dealing with all
of the various conditions, the environmental impacts and the period
of time required for approvals, compliance and construction, etc.
(d) Ultimately a final PSR will address, at a minimum, the following:
(i) Estimate of cost to produce PS&E bid documentation based
on percentage of construction;
(ii) Documentation of survey, geological exploration,
environmental approval process;
(iii) Identification of all approvals required from
permitting/regulatory agencies;
(iv) Estimate of the cost to obtain permits from each agency;
(v) Schedule for each phase of the process, through
construction;
(vi) Possible obstructions, impacts and the required mitigation
measures;
(vii) Recommended prioritization of improvement reaches, such
as completing portions of the mid-reach channel
A-32
01203.0006/669599.3 A-9
improvements that most impact adjacent dwellings, versus
improvements that will simply limit future erosion in the
upper and lower canyons;
Preliminary conceptual design plans will be prepared indicating the
recommended project elements for each alternative solution and
would include the following items:
(i) Existing and proposed mainline Altamira Canyon design
layout plans and profiles (complete with utility crossings at
various culvert/street crossing, where applicable);
(ii) Details for conceptual structures, debris basin, and detention
basin (if any);
(iii) Trenchless and open trench installation details and typical
sections;
(iv) Other pertinent details;
(v) Utility impacts (relocations, adjustments and/or
modifications);
(vi) Canyon lining alternatives, including over-excavation
key/benches, grading, fill, impermeable membranes, sub-
drains, and side slope grading/stabilization details;
(vii) Temporary construction easement and permanent easement
acquisition needs;
(viii) Preliminary opinion of construction cost estimates for
comparison; and
(ix) A list of items requiring City feedback, along with the
Consultant’s associated recommendations;
10. Environmental Study
(a) Consultant will utilize their in-house environmental compliance
staff to revisit the previously prepared preliminary environmental
research and analysis related to the preparation of the PSR. It is
anticipated that the drainage improvements will likely be funded
with local funds, and the project would need environmental
clearance under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
However, assuming the City might like to preserve the option of
obtaining/using federal funds, the future improvement project would
also need environmental clearance under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Consultant will revisit the
A-33
01203.0006/669599.3 A-10
previously prepared scope and budget that identifies the appropriate
environmental documents for environmental clearance of the project
under CEQA and NEPA and any preparation of applications for
regulatory permits that will be required. The various regulatory
agencies will also be contacted to confirm requirements and
permitting costs.
(b) The sub-tasks identified below outline the effort of revisiting the
previously prepared work program for conducting preliminary
environmental research and analysis related to the preparation of a
PSR for the proposed project and preparing a scope and budget for
the technical studies and the environmental document to
environmentally clear the project under CEQA and NEPA.
Consultant will revisit the previously prepared following tasks:
(i) Task E1: Project Initiation;
(ii) Task E2: CEQA Environmental Checklist;
(iii) Task E3: CEQA Environmental Proposal/City’s
environmental checklist form;
(iv) Task E4: NEPA Environmental Proposal; and
(v) Task E5: Meeting Attendance and Project Management.
(A) This task represents an active project management
role and includes attendance at various project
meetings and coordination with regulatory agencies
and interested parties. The project management role
provides a mechanism to make sure that there is an
adequate exchange of information. The
environmental team will attend up to four (4) 30-
minute teleconference calls, such as Skype or Google
Meets, given the COVID-19 conditions.
11. Temporary Construction Easement & Drainage Easement Evaluation
(a) All existing improvements and private property within limits of
work will be included per City’s electronic GIS map files so that
requirements to acquire any additional land for the proposed
improvements can be easily identified and appraised. This will be
the case for Temporary Construction Easements (TCE) and
permanent drainage easements and/or the need for acquisitions as
appropriate.
(b) A composite TCE and permanent drainage easement map will be
prepared showing the entire canyon on one or more large scale maps
A-34
01203.0006/669599.3 A-11
and their overlap with private property (showed shaded – one shade
type for TCE’s and one for permanent drainage easements) and will
include approximate square footage TCE area and permanent
drainage easement area. Consultant will work with City staff to
establish the likely costs per square foot, if any, to obtain said
easements.
(c) Because the property lines may have shifted due to past landslide
movement, any TCE or drainage easement document that will
ultimately be generated is recommended to be an independent
cohesive overarching document that is a stand-alone combined
easement not directly dependent upon the location of the existing
properties. It will be tied to controls not dependent upon the existing
properties, which could have shifted. However the overlap of each
affected property will be approximated, shown and eventually even
mapped with a legal description and map during the PS&E phase.
During this study phase the overlap acreage of each affected
property will be approximated and illustrated on a clear easy to read
exhibit for use in evaluating the various related alternatives.
NOTE: Preliminary Title Reports (PTR’s) can be obtained at an
approximate cost of $660 each, but the value of getting a PTR for
every property may not be warranted at this study phase level.
(d) There are twelve (12) properties in the expanded canyon study limits
(see map at right) and there are twenty eight (28) properties along
the original study limits of Altamira Canyon. This bring the total
number of potentially affected properties to forty (40), however
Consultant recommends earmarking a budget of up to ten (10)
PTR’s as an optional additional service in the fee schedule. The
logic is that during this study phase, the City will not likely need a
PTR for most properties but might want to get a few properties, such
as ones with SCE power poles and/or SCE manholes, to look for
utility easements and/or at the proposed basin locations and there
access roads where expanded easement areas would be required to
look for ownership issues. Regardless, the scope and fee does not
include digesting and mapping the property lines from the PTR’s
because that task would be a significant effort and defeats the
purpose of using the GIS generated P/L’s and R/W lines.
12. City Staff Feedback Meetings
(a) Consultant will attend up to four (4) progress meetings with City
staff (supplemented or replaced with teleconferences), with key
players from the City and Consultant present, to present and discuss
the results of the previously detailed tasks and reach preliminary
concurrence on the various elements and alternatives. These
feedback meetings will help solidify the various alternative
A-35
01203.0006/669599.3 A-12
solutions prior to refining the previously prepared draft PSR and
environmental study, to allow efficient progress and confirmation
that the solutions remain within the City’s preferences. At each
meeting, Consultant will confirm Project schedule is on track and
prepare meeting minutes shortly thereafter.
13. Refine Project Study Report & Concept Designs per City Staff Feedback
(a) As necessary, refinements would be made to the PSR and alternative
conceptual designs, plans and exhibits per the feedback received
from City staff in order to develop a presentable PSR that meets all
of the City’s goals, budgets and concerns prior to proceeding to
meetings with the community and City Council.
14. Community Outreach, City Council & Outside Agency Meetings
(a) Consistent with the previous study experience, there will be
substantial interaction and collaboration between the Consultant and
City staff in developing the concept design, so specific milestones
will be developed between the designer and the City for review,
comment and contribution. In addition to the previously mentioned
four (4) design progress meetings, there will be up to two (2)
community outreach meetings and an additional up to two (2) City
Council meetings, as required (during the startup, if needed, mid-
study, and to present the final PSR for approval). All meetings may
be substituted with teleconference meetings, such as Skype or
Google Hangouts, given the COVID-19 conditions.
(b) It is essential that the Project receives the support of the community
and thus the community outreach meetings will provide an avenue
for the transfer of the local community’s ideas and concerns, which
will be noted and incorporated into the design alternatives. City staff
will be responsible for organizing the public outreach meetings if
they are to be held in person.
NOTE: Several photo simulations will be prepared to illustrate the
“before” and “after” conditions proposed in the canyon, which is
helpful for the public to visualize what the typical cross sections will
really look like.
II. As part of the Services, Consultant will prepare and deliver the following tangible
work products to the City:
A. Phase 1, Task B:
1. Base mapping in AutoCAD at 1” to 40 foot scale with 1-foot interval
contours will be compiled together with a color ortho-corrected image file
that is georeferenced.
A-36
01203.0006/669599.3 A-13
2. Sketches and photos prepared as part of the topographic augmentation will
be digitized and provided as well as ASCII point files of collected points.
B. Phase 2, Task B:
1. Draft Hydraulic Technical Memorandum detailing development of the
model and findings of the existing and proposed conditions (PDF Format)
2. Draft Final Hydraulic Technical Memorandum detailing development of the
model and findings of the existing and proposed conditions (PDF Format)
3. Final Hydraulic Technical Memorandum detailing development of the
model and findings of the existing and proposed conditions (PDF Format)
III. In addition to the requirements of Section 6.2, during performance of the Services,
Consultant will keep the City appraised of the status of performance by delivering
the following status reports:
1. Monthly project status reporting in the form of a conference call including
a task completion schedule and obstacles/challenges;
2. Minutes from any community outreach meeting; and
3. Memos summarizing discussions with sub-consultants specific to all
deliverables.
IV. Consultant will utilize the following personnel to accomplish the Services:
1. Project Team Manager: Randal Berry, P.E.
2. Project Manager: Elizabeth Reyes, P.E.
3. Survey: KDM Meridian
4. Hydraulic Studies: CWE, Inc.
5. Geotechnical Services: Ninyo & Moore, Inc.
6. Public Outreach: Sunbeam Consulting, Inc. - Alan Braatvedt
A-37
01203.0006/669599.3 B-1
EXHIBIT “B”
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
(Superseding Contract Boilerplate)
[INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
A-38
01203.0006/669599.3 C-1
EXHIBIT “C”
SCHEDULE OF COMPENSATION
I. Consultant shall perform the following tasks at the following rates:
TASK
SUB-
BUDGET
A. PHASE I: Orientation/Data
Collection/Base Sheets
$77,140
B. PHASE II: Conceptual
Design & Project Study
Report
$177,827
Total $254,967
II. A retention of ten percent (10%) shall be held from each payment as a contract
retention to be paid as part of the final payment upon satisfactory completion of
services.
Not Applicable.
III. Within the budgeted amounts for each Task, and with the approval of the Contract
Officer, funds may be shifted from one Task subbudget to another so long as the
Contract Sum is not exceeded per Section 2.1, unless Additional Services are
approved per Section 1.9.
IV. The City will compensate Consultant for the Services performed upon submission of
a valid invoice. Each invoice is to include:
A. Line items for all personnel describing the work performed, the number of hours
worked, and the hourly rate.
B. Line items for all materials and equipment properly charged to the Services.
C. Line items for all other approved reimbursable expenses claimed, with supporting
documentation.
D. Line items for all approved subcontractor labor, supplies, equipment, materials, and
travel properly charged to the Services.
V. The total compensation for the Services shall not exceed the Contract Sum as
provided in Section 2.1 of this Agreement.
VI. The Consultant’s billing rates for all personnel are attached as Exhibit C-1.
A-39
01203.0006/669599.3 C-2
Not Applicable
A-40
01203.0006/669599.3 D-1
EXHIBIT “D”
SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
I. Consultant shall perform all services timely in accordance with the following
schedule. Timeline to begin with issuance of Notice to Proceed by City.
Days/Weeks to
Perform
Deadline Following
Notice to Proceed
(NTP)
PHASE 1: DATA COLLECTION/ BASE SHEETS
A. Data Collection 3.5 Weeks 3.5 Weeks
B. Base Aerial & Ground Survey 7 Weeks 7 Weeks
C. Concept Plan Sheets (Base PRJ) 2 Weeks 10 Weeks
D. Geotechnical Feasibility Study 14 Weeks 16 Weeks
PHASE II: DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT & PSR
A. Field Review (Base Project) 2 Weeks 16 Weeks
B. Hydrology & Hydraulics Study 15 Weeks 16 Weeks
C. Refine Conceptual Designs & Draft
Project Study Report
15 Weeks 24 Weeks
D. City Feedback Meetings 4 Days 24 Weeks
E. Environmental Study 14 Weeks 26 Weeks
F. Refine Easement & TCE Needs 5 Weeks 26 Weeks
G. Community Outreach Meetings 2 Days 24 Weeks
H. Refine Conceptual Design / Project
Study Report per City Feedback &
Community Feedback
14 Weeks 32 Weeks
I. Begin Funding Pursuit & Easement
Acquisition
TBD 32 Weeks
II. Consultant shall deliver the following tangible work products to the City by the
following dates.
A. Phase 1, Task B – Due to City 7 Weeks after Notice to Proceed:
1. Base mapping in AutoCAD at 1” to 40 foot scale with 1-foot interval
contours will be compiled together with a color ortho-corrected image file
that is georeferenced.
2. Sketches and photos prepared as part of the topographic augmentation will
be digitized and provided as well as ASCII point files of collected points.
A-41
01203.0006/669599.3 D-2
B. Phase 2, Task F – Due to City 16 Weeks after NTP:
1. Draft Hydraulic Technical Memorandum detailing development of the
model and findings of the existing and proposed conditions (PDF Format)
2. Draft Final Hydraulic Technical Memorandum detailing development of the
model and findings of the existing and proposed conditions (PDF Format)
3. Final Hydraulic Technical Memorandum detailing development of the
model and findings of the existing and proposed conditions (PDF Format)
C. Phase 2, Task L – Due to City 32 Weeks after NTP:
1. Draft Hydraulic Technical Memorandum detailing development of the
model and findings of the existing and proposed conditions (PDF Format)
III. The Contract Officer may approve extensions for performance of the services in
accordance with Section 3.2.
A-42
22 Executive Park, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 949.536.250 3 Randall.Berry@WeAreHarris.com
August 6, 2020
Ron Dragoo, PE
City Engineer
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Subject: Proposal to Revisit & Extend Altamira Canyon Drainage Study
Dear Ron,
This will present the Harris & Associates (Harris) team’s proposal to partially revisit the original
Altamira Canyon Drainage and Erosion Control Study (which was dated December 13, 2016 and
completed to approximately the 90% level) and to extend the study limits upstream, as illustrated
in the blue outlined area shown below. The Harris Team proposes to partially revisit the original
study, provide updates to the topographic survey and to provide the same services included in
the original study scope for the expanded study limits. Because this wil l be a new standalone
scope, not an amendment to the previous study contract, we will repeat the applicable portion of
the original scope herein. Per
discussions with City staff there are at
known changes (natural and manmade)
that make resurveying the mainline
canyon from the ocean outlet to the new
extended upstream limits. Further, given
the shortage of construction funds, it will
be important to prioritize the proposed
improvements to protect the developed
properties as a first priority.
It should be noted that the expanded
limits follow the tributary canyons that
feed the west fork of Altamira Creek,
where the worst erosion is occurring,
and do NOT extend the study limits any
further upstream of the east fork of
Altamira Creek, where the original study
ended, because no erosion has been
noted to have occurred above upper
Narcissa Drive along the east fork
canyon. However, the east fork will be
re-walked and its present condition will
be an item discussed in the updated
report. Note: the expanded limit length
essentially matches (doubles) the length
of deliverables of the original study,
resulting in the addition of (doubling of)
the number of plan and profile sheets =
East Fork
West Fork
fork
Expanded
Study
Limits
B-1
Ron Dragoo, PE Page 2 of 14
Altamira Canyon Drainage Study Revisit & Extension Proposal August 6, 2020
6 or 7.
The most upstream portion of this extended study will focus on the concentr ated flow outlet
points that are being fed by street flows and/or storm drain outlet points into the natural canyon.
Energy dissipation features will be proposed to be added and/or existing energy dissipation
features will be evaluated for improvement, as needed, as part of the study recommendations.
The mid-canyon portion of this extended study will focus on the erosion and sediment transport
characteristics within the natural canyon. It is anticipated we will be recommending canyon liners
and drop structure improvements similar to those proposed as part of the downstream study that
has already been completed, however, the study will need to confirm the approach .
Due to the passage of time since the previous draft drainage study was issued, it has been
assumed that the resulting deliverables will be a reissuance of the original study report and
exhibits. All appendix sections will also be re-issued.
The extended study area consists of two sub -canyons with the westerly sub-canyon being
approximately 3,600-feet in length and the easterly sub-canyon being approximately 2,500-feet
in length, which requires the addition of approximately seven (7) plan and profile sheets (at 1” =
40’ scale) to cover the new study area. Also one (1) additional typical section and details sheet
will be required beyond the original study plan sheets.
SCOPE
The following will present an outline of our proposed scope of services. It is our intent that this
outline provides enough detail so our approach is clearly defined. It should be noted that this
scope is based at least in part on the original Request for Proposal (RFP) dated August 17,
2015, site visits, a subsequent request to extend the study area upstream to the edge of
housing developments and our understanding of the project. We would welcome the opportunity
to discuss additions, deletions or revisions.
PHASE I: ORIENTATION/DATA COLLECTION/BASE SHEETS
Task A. Data Collection and Review
1. Hold a teleconference meet with City staff and hold "kickoff” meeting with key Harris
team members. The project approach and site access protocol would be confirmed.
Direction from the City staff would be obtained and any new development information
from City records pertaining to the project would be collected. Utility information
collected previously will be relied upon until the point in the PS&E preparation phase
when the design plans are far enough along to share with the owners to coordinate
future action on impacts based on a proposed construction schedule. Due to COVID-19
it is assumed that the kick-off meeting will likely be a teleconference call with file sharing
capabilities on computer screens.
2. Prepare a project schedule and meeting minutes for the kick-off meeting/call.
B-2
Ron Dragoo, PE Page 3 of 14
Altamira Canyon Drainage Study Revisit & Extension Proposal August 6, 2020
Task B. Topographic Aerial Survey (Performed by KDM Meridian)
It is understood that the same level of information obtained from the City for right -of- way (R/W)
and property lines will be sufficient for the project study level of effort. The new topographic
survey will be tied to the previously collected R/W line work. Same as with the previous study
parcel/property lines, boundary lines, street center line and right-of-way (R/W) are not included,
with the exception of these same lines as depicted within the City of Rancho Palos Verdes GIS
base data. Thus, the City’s GIS will be the source of all property lines and roadway R/W.
Aerial mapping at a 1” to 40 foot scale with 1 -foot interval contours will be compiled together with
a color ortho-corrected image file that is geo-referenced. Field survey will be performed to set
aerial targets, collect quality control points, and to set various control points needed for the
augmentation surveys.
Five (5) days of topographic augmentation field surveys will be provided based on Harris team
requests for information. They will be completed and invoiced in daily increments, to include the
time necessary to generate the point file and noted deliverables. Sketches and photos prepared
as part of the topographic augmentation will be digitized and provided as well as ASCII point files
of collected points.
1. Parcel and Right-of-Way Information
Coordinate GIS information retrieval from the City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
2. Control Datum:
a. Horizontal: CCS83, Zone V (NA2011 2011.00) [To be confirmed]
b. Vertical: Los Angeles County benchmark (NAVD88, 2005 Adj.)
3. Control Survey
a. Set aerial targets (15)
b. Collect QA/QC points to validate the aerial mapping collection.
c. Set control points for topographic augmentation.
4. Field Topographic Survey
Collect topographic detail (e.g. sections, structure det ail, dips) as
requested by Harris & Associates. [6 days provided in this
proposal]
5. Deliverables
a. Base mapping in AutoCAD at 1” to 40 foot scale with 1-foot
interval contours will be compiled together with a color ortho-
corrected image file that is georeferenced.
b. Sketches and photos prepared as part of the topographic
augmentation will be digitized and provided as well as ASCII
point files of collected points.
Task C. Topographic Base Sheets for Conceptual Plans
Utilizing the previously discussed aerial and supplemental ground surveys, updated construction
B-3
Ron Dragoo, PE Page 4 of 14
Altamira Canyon Drainage Study Revisit & Extension Proposal August 6, 2020
plan and profile base sheets would be prepared in AutoCAD for each of the mainline creek
alternative design solutions that are proposed. The base sheets would be prepared using the
City’s standard format at a scale of 1” = 40’ horizontally and 1” = 8’ or 16’ vertically. Existing
improvements would be screened so that the full toned proposed improvements will stand out.
The digested base sheets will include the following:
1. Surface and subsurface utility locations
2. One foot contour intervals tied to appropriate coordinate system
3. Dimensions, labels and match lines
4. Existing storm drain culverts from survey and record drawings
5. Existing P/L’s and R/W locations from City’s GIS files
6. Existing stationing and street name labels, as appropriate
7. Existing topography to the limits described in the survey section
8. Existing Creek invert or surface profile over CL of proposed pipe
9. Eventually, supplemental survey topography and elevation information at key
proposed improvement locations, as needed
Task D. Geotechnical Feasibility Study (Performed by Ninyo & Moore)
The purpose of this updated preliminary geotechnical evaluation will be to further evaluate the existing
soil, geologic, and groundwater conditions compared to our observations from 2016 with respect to the
revised preliminary design for managing the drainage flow along Altamira Canyon. As per the original
RFP, this study phase of the project will NOT include any field soil sample collection or borings, but
instead will consist of record data collection and fact finding to support the development of preliminary
design alternatives for various aspects of the project. The scope of services includes the following:
Review the existing report and other readily available background information including
geotechnical reports, geologic and geologic hazard maps, landslide maps, and historical
aerial photographs.
Perform a geologic reconnaissance of the canyon and vicinity by our engineering geologists
who will observe, photograph, and document the existing site conditions and observed
physical changes since 2016.
Compile data and analyze the resulting background and field data. The faulting and seismicity
section of our 2016 report will be updated to current building cod e standards.
Attend up to two (2) meetings with the City and the design team and/or public meetings.
Prepare an update report to the 2016 preliminary report summarizing additional findings,
conclusions, and recommendations regarding the alternative designs for the project.
ASSUMPTIONS:
Permission to access site will be obtained by others for one site reconnaissance.
No subsurface exploration will be performed.
The canyon is accessible to pedestrian access.
Scope of work will not include an evaluation of the stability of the active landslides in the
vicinity of the project.
B-4
Ron Dragoo, PE Page 5 of 14
Altamira Canyon Drainage Study Revisit & Extension Proposal August 6, 2020
Evaluation will not include any sampling, testing, or chemical analysis of soil,
groundwater, surface water, or other materials for the purpose of evaluating possible
hazards or risks.
PHASE II: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN & PROJECT STUDY REPORT (PSR)
Task A. Field Review
The entire Harris team will perform a field review of the latest existing site conditions to
determine the following:
1. Review completeness/accuracy of the computerized survey base maps and essential
topographic features.
2. Note any new potential utility conflicts.
3. Note any new potential issues where new storm drain and canyon channel alignments
are anticipated.
4. Note other existing conditions that may affect the design and altern atives.
NOTE: The canyon will be inspected by hiking and recording the features of interest and any
new potential challenges for the full extent of the canyon within the limits of work. We will identify
changes to the existing drainage components.
Task B. Hydrology and Hydraulics (H&H) Study (Assistance by CWE)
The main H&H focus will be on the extended study areas. The previously prepared main channel
hydraulic modeling will not be revisited because it is assumed that the anticipated changed
conditions since the last study was conducted will not be significant enough to affect the
proposed hydraulic calculations. However, we will survey, photo document and map the changed
conditions and revise the recommended impacts, such as if riprap rock was plac ed where it did
not existing previously, we might recommend protecting it or replacing it to make sure our
proposed channel solution is continuous and does not have breaches in the proposed
impermeable liner and sub-drain system.
Between the previous study and now extended study, CWE’s evaluation of the hydraulics of
Altamira Creek, will span from the Pacific Ocean to Santa Barbara Drive and Crenshaw
Boulevard at the top of the West Fork. The HEC-RAS software will be used for modeling the
hydraulics of the system. Previous investigations will be compared to current conditions to
determine the impacts of wet winters on the channel and erosion of ban ks. Previous models of
the main stem of the creek will be used for analysis. The tasks associated with the hydraulic
modeling are provided below. Previously developed hydrology will be used to determine flow
rates in the watershed at specific creek bed points of interest.
B1. Field Investigation
The Altamira Canyon watershed is an approximately 860 acre waters hed located on the
southern side of the Palos Verdes Peninsula that drains into Abalone Cove. CWE will conduct
B-5
Ron Dragoo, PE Page 6 of 14
Altamira Canyon Drainage Study Revisit & Extension Proposal August 6, 2020
field reconnaissance and prepare a photo log of the existing conditions at key locations along the
stream channel. Sediment grain size samples will be collected for key locations using the
Wolman Pebble Count method to estimate bed material sediment size for evaluation of transport
potential at various flow rates. Relevant existing literature will be compiled and analyzed to
describe the environmental setting. Locations of scour and deposition will be noted. Roughness
will be estimated based on site conditions, vegetation, and bed gradation. The bed and banks
will be photographed at erosional areas and key locations for evaluation of bank stability . Key
locations will include bridges due to accessibility, the need to understand bridge sizing
constraints, and existing conditions at the channel crossings. The data provided by the City will
be reviewed and verified during the field investigation. The information gathered during the site
visit will be detailed in an appendix of the drainage report.
A field investigation report will be prepared to document the findings of the field investigation and
will include a photo log of photographs taken for later use in concept development and
evaluation. The field investigation report will be an appendix in the Hydraulic Model Technical
Memorandum.
B2. Existing Conditions Hydraulic Model Development
A HEC-RAS model will be developed for the one -dimensional (1-D) channel sections analysis
for the entire Altamira Creek drainage system. The model will be used to evaluate channel
hydraulics for stabilization measures based on the outputs from the hydrology model. CWE will
utilize the hydrology study and topographic s urvey data to evaluate existing conditions. The
model will add cross-sections and flow data for the West Fork to the existing conditions hydraulic
model of the canyon.
CWE will develop a HEC-RAS hydraulic model to evaluate the natural stream hydraulics of the
existing drainage system, specifically in the West Fork above the reaches in the previously
conducted study area. The model will evaluate the flow depths, velocities, and water surface
elevations. The output from the model will be used to evaluate th e incipient motion of bed
materials and the ability of the banks to resist scour.
The impacts of culverts and pipes on the velocities, the need for energy dissipation, and the
channel capacity will be evaluated for the existing conditions for the flow rat es from the
hydrologic analysis. The larger corrugated metal pipe (CMP) culverts in the system may be too
steep and long to be evaluated effectively using the culvert hydraulics routine in HEC -RAS. If
this appears to be the case, the CMP will be evaluated using the Water Surface Profile Gradient
(WSPG) model developed by Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) and the
water elevations will be used as boundary conditions for the HEC -RAS model. The hydraulic
analysis will also evaluate scour using the 2006 LACDPW Sedimentation Manual to evaluate
potential long-term channel changes associated with existing conditions.
Each of the concepts will be modeled with three outlet works configurations to evaluate how
B-6
Ron Dragoo, PE Page 7 of 14
Altamira Canyon Drainage Study Revisit & Extension Proposal August 6, 2020
sensitive the system is to this design parameter in modifying flow characteristics in the
downstream system in terms of channel velocities and shear stresses. The output from these
models will be used to evaluate stream stabilization concepts and plans.
B3. Proposed Conditions Hydraulic Analyses
Based on preliminary design section alternatives for the drainage system, CWE will develop up
to four (4) models of proposed conditions and evaluate proposed alternatives for channel
improvements. The alternatives will potentially include culverts, rip ra p, piping, energy
dissipation structures, controlled water flow, revetments, retaining walls, gabions, retention
basins, inlet and outlet structures, and bypass systems. HEC-RAS or WSPG models will be
used to evaluate these hydraulic system modifications a s appropriate. HEC-RAS is best for
open channel hydraulic systems. WSPG is best for evaluating closed conduit and pressurized
flow systems. The models will evaluate the flow depths, velocities, and water surface elevations.
The output from the models will be used to evaluate the incipient motion of bed materials and
the ability of the banks to resist scour. The impacts of culverts and pipes on the velocities, the
need for energy dissipation, and the channel capacity will be evaluated for the proposed
alternative conditions for the flow rates from the hydrologic analysis.
B4. Hydraulic Model Technical Memorandum
A technical memorandum will be developed for the hydraulic modeling. The memorandum will
detail the data sources, methodologies, and model results at each specified location. The field
investigation report and photo log will also be added, along with Wolman Pebble Count data. A
draft memorandum will be prepared for internal project team review and comments. A draft final
report will be developed based on the internal comments and submitted to City for review and
comment. The comments received will be incorporated into the final technical memorandum.
The model will be submitted to the City for review and comment. A final model will be prepared
which incorporates City comments.
Deliverables:
Draft Hydraulic Technical Memorandum detailing development of the model and
findings of the existing and proposed conditions (PDF Format)
Draft Final Hydraulic Technical Memorandum detailing development of the model
and findings of the existing and proposed conditions (PDF Format)
Final Hydraulic Technical Memorandum detailing development of the model and
findings of the existing and proposed conditions (PDF Format)
Note: Since originally proposed debris basin study was never performed and is seen as an
unlikely solution due to the lack of level land, ease of access and inability to easily maintain,
there will be no detailed debris basin sizing analysis. However, debris basins will be discussed
within the body of the report to discuss the pros and cons of these systems. This lack of a 10%
B-7
Ron Dragoo, PE Page 8 of 14
Altamira Canyon Drainage Study Revisit & Extension Proposal August 6, 2020
conceptual design for the debris basins originally proposed will not prevent debris basins from
being considered in the future during the PS&E phase.
Once the existing conditions and proposed conditions alternatives hydraulic analyses are
completed, CWE will provide the results of their study in a hydraulics report that will be
combined with Harris’ portion of the Hydrology & Hydraulics (H&H) study. These findings will be
presented in the H&H section of the PSR and presented at the various feedback meetings with
City staff. The write up will be straightforward and summarize the results of the hydrology
refinements and hydraulics analyses, including all supporting calculations and hyd rology
drainage area map.
B5. Meetings
The CWE team will attend up to six (6) one hour teleconferences meetings, one (1) City Council
meeting and one (1) community outreach meeting. All meetings may be substituted with
teleconference meetings, such as Skype or Google Hangouts, given the COVID-19 conditions.
Task C. Added Value / Team Facilitator (Performed by Sunbeam Consulting)
The Harris Team will be supported by a proven project facilitator, Alan Braatvedt from Sunbeam
Consulting, who has worked consistently well with Harris and City staff to help make the recent
McCarrell Canyon and San Ramon Canyon projects successful. Alan has been instrumental in
coordinating the many parties involved on said previous projects and is intimately familiar with
the City, neighborhoods, groups, and agencies that will be involved in this study phase outreach
and preliminary design. Alan has developed a unique working relation with Harris and City staff,
having worked with the City of Rancho Palos Verdes on many projects over the past 15 years.
Alan has been involved in various canyon and erosion control projects, one with Harris for
Canyon Acres Drive in the City of Laguna Beach, two in Rancho Palos Verdes, and elsewhere in
La Cañada Flintridge and South Africa. He is fa miliar with erosion control products including
gabions, revetment protection, dams, and pipelines.
Alan’s role throughout the duration of the project would be as follows:
Coordination with City staff and departments, including Public Works, Parks, Engineering,
Open Space Committee, and the City Council
Coordination and outreach with public groups including local neighborhoods, the Palos
Verdes Heritage Castle Museum, local hiking and equestrian groups
Assistance with public outreach efforts including presentations at public meetings, and
one-on-one interaction with residents and group representatives
Assist Harris team and City staff in identifying and dealing with potential or realized
constraints and opportunities
Assist Harris team and City staff in investigation of existing canyon conditions, including
hiking the entire reach of the project area
Brainstorm with Harris team and City staff on various feasible project alternatives, and
assessment of the proposed strategies / alternatives
B-8
Ron Dragoo, PE Page 9 of 14
Altamira Canyon Drainage Study Revisit & Extension Proposal August 6, 2020
Task D. Develop Preliminary Conceptual Designs & Project Study Report (PSR)
The Project Study Report (PSR) will include the development of up to four (4) design alternatives
(with the possibility of several sub-options that can be mixed and matched with various
alternatives) that will aid in managing both stormwater flow and nuisance water/low flows through
the Altamira Canyon. The options will include one or a combination of various mitigation
measures, such as canyon fill with armament (rip rap, Armor Flex, etc.), culve rts/pipe lines
(extend existing culverts, energy dissipation systems (controlled water flow), walls (soil-nail walls,
gabions, retaining walls, caisson revetment, etc.), retention basins/debris basins, and inlet and
outlet structures related to any pipeline system. The study will evaluate expanded area of
Altamira Canyon above the west fork (see map on first page) and the original limits between
upper Narcissa Drive (East of Sweetbay Road) to the inlet of the 120” CMP at lower Narcissa
Drive (north of PVDS) and the downstream section located south of PVDS where the 120” CMP
outlets down to the canyon to the Pacific Ocean.
The PSR will be developed in accordance with Los Angeles County (LAC) design standards. As
discussed in detail in the project approach section of this proposal the designs will be innovative
and as such some may not be covered by conventional County Standards. However, wherever
practical, the designs will meet or exceed LAC standards.
Each of the alternate designs must include its own ana lysis of the cost, schedule and difficulty
associated with the easement acquisition, geological and environmental conditions for that
particular design alternative. Each design alternative will be evaluated against one another and
summarized in a “Comparison of Alternatives” matrix chart, similar to what was prepared for the
San Ramon Canyon Drainage design project, to assess cost, constructability, and effectiveness
of the concept in dealing with all of the various conditions, the environmental impacts and the
period of time required for approvals, compliance and construction, etc.
See the Tasks that follow regarding various meetings required to present the draft and final PSR
and conceptual design alternatives to City staff. Ultimately a final PSR will ad dress, at a
minimum, the following:
Estimate of cost to produce PS&E bid documentation based on percentage of
construction
Documentation of survey, geological exploration, environmental approval process
Identification of all approvals required from permitting/regulatory agencies
Estimate of the cost to obtain permits from each agency
Schedule for each phase of the process, through construction.
Possible obstructions, impacts and the required mitigation measures
Recommended prioritization of improvement reaches, such as completing portions
of the mid-reach channel improvements that most impact adjacent dwellings,
versus improvements that will simply limit future erosion in the upper and lower
canyons.
Preliminary conceptual design plans will be prepared indicating the recommended
project elements for each alternative solution and would include the following items:
B-9
Ron Dragoo, PE Page 10 of 14
Altamira Canyon Drainage Study Revisit & Extension Proposal August 6, 2020
Existing and proposed mainline Altamira Canyon design layout plans and profiles
(complete with utility crossings at various culvert/street crossing, where applicable)
Details for conceptual structures, debris basin and detention basin (if any)
Trenchless and open trench installation details and typical sections
Other pertinent details
Utility impacts (relocations, adjustments and/or modifications)
Canyon lining alternatives, including over-excavation key/benches, grading, fill,
impermeable membranes, sub-drains, and side slope grading/stabilization details
TCE and permanent easement acquisition needs
Preliminary opinion of construction cost estimates for comparison
A list of items requiring City feedback, along with the Harris team’s associated
recommendations
Task E. Environmental Study
Harris will utilize their in-house environmental compliance staff to revisit the previously
prepared preliminary environmental research and analysis related to the preparation of
the PSR. It is anticipated that the drainage improvements will likely be funded with local
funds, and the project would need environmental clearance under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). However, assuming the City might like to preserve
the option of obtaining/using federal funds, the future improvement project would also
need environmental clearance under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
We will revisit the previously prepared scope and budget that identifies the appropriate
environmental documents for environmental clearance of the project under CEQA and
NEPA and any preparation of applications for regulatory permits that will be required.
The various regulatory agencies will also be contacted to confirm requirements and
permitting costs.
The sub-tasks identified below outline the effort of revisiting the previously prepared
work program for conducting preliminary environmental research and analysis r elated
to the preparation of a PSR for the proposed project and preparing a scope and budget
for the technical studies and the environmental document to environmentally clear the
project under CEQA and NEPA. Harris will revisit the previously prepared following
tasks:
Task E1: Project Initiation
Task E2: CEQA Environmental Checklist
Task E3: CEQA Environmental Proposal/City’s environmental checklist form
Task E4: NEPA Environmental Proposal
Task E5: Meeting Attendance and Project Management:
This task represents an active project management role and includes attendance at
various project meetings and coordination with regulatory agencies and interested
parties. The project management role provides a mechanism to make sure that there
is an adequate exchange of information. The environmental team will attend up to four
B-10
Ron Dragoo, PE Page 11 of 14
Altamira Canyon Drainage Study Revisit & Extension Proposal August 6, 2020
(4) 30-minute teleconference calls, such as Skype or Google Meets, given the COVID-
19 conditions.
Task F. Temporary Construction Easement & Drainage Easement Evaluation
All existing improvements and private property within limits of work will be included per
City’s electronic GIS map files so that requirements to acquire any additional land for
the proposed improvements can be easily identified and appraised. This will be the
case for Temporary Construction Easements (TCE) and permanent drainage
easements and/or the need for acquisitions as appropriate.
A composite TCE and permanent drainage easement map will be prepared showing
the entire canyon on one or more large scale maps and their over lap with private
property (showed shaded – one shade type for TCE’s and one for permanent
drainage easements) and will include approximate square footage TCE area and
permanent drainage easement area. Harris will work with City staff to establish the
likely costs per square foot, if any, to obtain said easements.
Because the property lines may have shifted due to past land slide movement any
TCE or drainage easement document that will ultimately be generated is
recommended to be an independent cohesive over arching document that is a stand-
alone combined easement not directly dependent upon the location of the existing
properties. It will be tied to controls not dependent upon the existing properties, which
could have shifted. However the overlap of each affe cted property will be
approximated, shown and eventually even mapped with a legal description and map
during the PS&E phase. During this study phase the overlap acreage of each affected
property will be approximated and illustrated on a clear easy to read exhibit for use in
evaluating the various related alternatives.
NOTE:
Preliminary Title
Reports (PTR’s)
can be obtained at
an approximate
cost of $660 each,
but the value of
getting a PTR for
every property
may not be
warranted at this
study phase level.
There are twelve
(12) properties in
the expanded
canyon study
limits (see map at
right) and there
Expanded
Study
Limits
B-11
Ron Dragoo, PE Page 12 of 14
Altamira Canyon Drainage Study Revisit & Extension Proposal August 6, 2020
are twenty eight (28) properties along the original study limits of Altamira Canyon.
This bring the total number of potentially affected properties to forty (40), however
Harris recommends earmarking a budget of up to ten (10) PTR’s as an optional
additional service in the fee schedule. The logic is that during this study phase we will
not likely need a PTR for most properties but might want to get a few properties, such
as ones with SCE power poles and/or SCE manholes, to look for utility easements
and/or at the proposed basin locations and there access roads where expanded
easement areas would be required to look for ownership issues. Regardless , the
scope and fee does not include digesting and mapping the property lines from the
PTR’s because that task would be a significant effort and defeats the purpose of using
the GIS generated P/L’s and R/W lines.
Task G. City Staff Feedback Meetings
We will attend up to four (4) progress meetings with City staff (supplemented or
replaced with teleconferences), with key players from the City and the Harris team
present, to present and discuss the results of the previously detailed tasks and reach
preliminary concurrence on the various elements and alternatives. These feedback
meetings will help solidify the various alternative solutions prior to refining the
previously prepared draft PSR and environmental study, to allow efficient progress
and confirmation that the solutions remain within the City’s preferences. At each
meeting we will confirm project schedule is on track and prepare meeting minutes
shortly thereafter.
Task H. Refine Project Study Report & Concept Designs per City Staff Feedback
As necessary, refinements would be made to the PSR and alternative conceptual
designs, plans and exhibits per the feedback received from City staff in order to
develop a presentable PSR that meets all of the City’s goals, budgets and co ncerns
prior to proceeding to meetings with the community and City Council.
Task I. Community Outreach, City Council & Outside Agency Meetings
Consistent with the previous study experience, there will be substantial interaction and
collaboration between the Harris team and City staff in developing the concept design,
so specific milestones will be developed between the designer and the City for review,
comment and contribution. In addition to the previously mentioned four (4) design
progress meetings, there will be up to two (2) community outreach meetings and an
additional up to two (2) City Council meetings, as required (during the startup if
needed, mid-study and to present the final PSR for approval). All meetings may be
substituted with teleconference meetings, such as Skype or Google Hangouts, given
the COVID-19 conditions.
It is essential that the project receives the support of the community and thus the
community outreach meetings will provide an avenue for the transfer of the local
community’s ideas and concerns, which will be noted and incorporated into the design
alternatives. City staff will be responsible for organizing the public outreach meetings if
they are to be held in person.
B-12
Ron Dragoo, PE Page 13 of 14
Altamira Canyon Drainage Study Revisit & Extension Proposal August 6, 2020
NOTE: Several photo simulations will be prepared to illustrate the “before” and “after”
conditions proposed in the canyon, which is helpful for the public to visualize what the
typical cross sections will really look like.
CITY RESPONSIBILITIES
The City would assume the following responsibilities:
A. Provide all existing data and information relevant to the proposed project.
B. Provide a copy of existing record drawings and complete drainage study reports, master
plan of drainage documents and related calculations.
C. Pay all outside agency fees.
D. Perform other identified City responsibilities as detailed in the original RFP.
PROJECT SCHEDULE
Harris proposes to provide the services outlined in accordance with the following project study schedule.
The schedule would commence upon receipt of a written Notice to Proceed (NTP), w hich complete the
study within thirty two (32) weeks. At that point, depending on the alternative recommended, the City
would either be able to commence with the pursuit of funding and easements. We would be happy to
discuss the schedule further and it wou ld also be discussed at the initial meeting and is subject to
revisions based on mutual agreement.
TASKS CALENDAR WEEKS
NTP 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44
PHASE I: DATA COLLECTION /
BASE SHEETS
• KICK OFF MEETING X
• DATA COLLECTION
• BASE AERIAL & GROUND SURVEY
• CONCEPT PLAN BASE SHTS (BASE PRJ)
• GEOTECHNICAL FEASIBILITY STUDY
PHASE II: DESIGN
DEVELOPMENT & PSR
• FIELD REVIEW (BASE PROJECT)
• HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULICS STUDY
• REFINE CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS & DRAFT
PROJECT STUDY REPORT
• CITY FEEDBACK MEETINGS (4) X X X X
• ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
• REFINE EASEMENT & TCE NEEDS
• COMMUNITY OUTREACH MEETINGS –
NOTE 2 CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS TBD X X
• REFINE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN / PROJECT
STUDY REPORT PER CITY FEEDBACK &
COMMUNITY FEEDBACK
• BEGIN FUNDING PURSUIT & EASEMENT
ACQUISITION X
B-13
Ron Dragoo, PE Page 14 of 14
Altamira Canyon Drainage Study Revisit & Extension Proposal August 6, 2020
FEE
A detailed breakdown of the proposed fees is attached for the City’s information and use in
evaluating this fee proposal. The following is a summary of the attached detailed fee breakdown:
TASK FEE
PHASE I: Orientation/Data Collection/Base Sheets .............................. $ 77,140
PHASE II: Conceptual Design & Project Study Report ......................... $177,827
GRAND TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED FEE = $254,967*
*Note: The following additional fee would apply if the City opts to include :
An additional fee to obtain up to ten (10) PTR’s = 10 x $660 = $6,600 (Title Company fee + 10%
markup) if city opts for them – otherwise we will simply use the City’s GIS mapping to show property
lines. These PTR’s could prove valuable to identify utility easements, such for SCE, and in areas of
large easements such as for the potential debris basins.
The fees above include all printing costs and would be invoiced monthly, based on the actual hours
spent. Outside Agency fees are not included. We appreciate the opportunity to be of continued
service to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and look forward to the successful delivery of the
partially revisited and extended study that meets the needs of the Altamira Canyon community.
Sincerely,
HARRIS & ASSOCIATES
Randall G. Berry, PE
Director, Engineering Services
B-14
Harris & Associates
Table of Tasks/Personnel/Time per Task August 6, 2020
TASKS (SUB's)QA/QC PD
PROJ.
MGR
SR. PROJ.
ENGR
DESIGN.
ENGR
ENVIRON
PLANNING
(AVG / HR)
B & C
REVIEW KDMM
Ninyo &
Moore CWE SUNBEAM
MARK-UP
ON COSTS
10%TOTAL COST
$ PER HOUR $260 $260 $190 $130 $177 $160 Survey Geotech
Special
Hydraulic Facilitator
PHASE I: DATA COLLECTION/BASE SHEETS
A. Kick-Off Meeting, Data Collection and Review 2 2 4 4 $0 $2,320
B. Base Project Aerial & 5-days Ground Survey (KDM Meridian) $42,155 $4,216 $46,371
C. Base Project Base Sheets (6+/- NEW Plan & Profile Sheets at 40' scale)4 20 40 $0 $10,040
D. Geotechncial Feasibility Study (N&M)$16,736 $1,674 $18,410
Phase I Subtotal 2 6 24 44 0 0 $42,155 $16,736 $0 $0 $5,889 $77,140
PHASE II: DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
A. Field Review 16 16 16 $0 $9,280
B. H&H Study (CWE)2 8 8 8 4 $74,806 $7,481 $88,087
C. Study & Outreach Facilitator (SUNBEAM) $4,000 $400 $4,400
D. Develop Preliminary Conceptual Designs & Project Study Report (PSR) - Base Project 16 32 32 8 $0 $15,680
QA/QC Review and Bidability/Constructability Review of Concepts & PSR 12 14 $0 $5,360
E. Environmental Study - CEQA & NEPA 1 1 1 32 $0 $6,244
F. Temporary Construction Easement & Drainage Easement Evaluation / Composite Exhibit 2 8 16 16 $0 $7,720
G. City FeedBack Meetings /Progress Meetings (4) and Teleconferences 20 24 Incl Above $0 $9,760
H. Refine Project Study Report & Concept Designs per City Staff Feedback & Outreach Mtgs 4 16 24 24 4 $0 $13,520
I. Community Outreach (2) , City Council (2) (SUNBEAM + Photo Sim)16 24 8 8 Incl Above $6,000 $600 $17,776
Phase II Subtotal 20 101 145 105 40 30 $0 $0 $74,806 $10,000 $8,481 $177,827
GRAND TOTAL HOURS 22 107 169 149 40 30
GRAND TOTAL COSTS $5,720 $27,820 $32,110 $19,370 $7,080 $4,800 $42,155 $16,736 $74,806 $10,000 $14,370 $254,967
Approximate Percent of Budget $2%11%13%8%3%2%17%7%29%4%6%100%
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Altamira Canyon Drainage - Extend Project Study Report
B-15
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
REVIEWED:
HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
MICHAEL THRONE, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS ti1)
NOVEMBER 4, 2015
AWARD A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT
FOR THE AL TAMIRA CANYON DRAINAGE PROJECT
STUDY REPORT
DOUG WILLMORE, CITY MANAGER ~
Staff Coordinator: Ron Dragoo, Principal Engin ~r --&5)
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Award a Professional Services Contract to Harris and Associates in the amount
of $439,989 to produce a Project Study Report for the Altamira Canyon Drainage
Project.
2. Authorize a project contingency in the not to exceed amount of $60,000 to be
used in addressing unforeseen conditions and or to investigate issues beyond
the identified scope of work.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Budgeted Amount:
Encumbered to Date:
PSR PSA
Design Contingency
Fund Balance
$ 500,000
$
$ 439,989
$ 60,000
$ 11
Account Number(s): 501-3052-431-32-00
The recommended action of awarding a Professional Services Contract to Harris and
Associates will be completed at the not to exceed cost of $439,989. Any additional
work that may be necessary could be accomplished with the recommended design
contingency.
The required funds are currently budgeted in the FY 15-16 Water Quality/Flood
Protection program for this project. C-1
BACKGROUND
The Altamira Canyon Drainage Project has been identified as a project that will provide
additional safeguards to the Abalone Cove Landslide area. Reduction/minimization of
groundwater infiltration is a primary target when considering methods to slow movement
in landslides. The Ancient Portuguese Bend Landslide includes the Abalone Cove and
Portuguese Bend Landslides which continue to move at differing speeds. The Abalone
Cove landslide steadily creeps along, moving approximately a tenth of a foot annually,
while the Portuguese Bend landslide is moving at an average of two to three feet
annually. When the rain returns to southern California greater movement is anticipated.
Many studies have been performed to determine how the land moves and various
means and methods to reduce groundwater infiltration. The project Study Report will
perform a detailed analysis and evaluation of the recommendations from those studies
including suggestions that have been received by the City from the adjoining property
owners.
Staff issued a Request for Proposals to several design firms in August of this year and
received two responses, one from Harris and Associates, Inc. and from Michael Baker
International, Inc. Both firms presented their anticipated Project Study Report
methodology, and following interviews by staff, Harris and Associates, Inc. was chosen
as the best fit. Harris' sealed cost proposal was opened, and the scope of the project
and fees to perform services were negotiated and are being presented for your
consideration in awarding a Professional Services Contract (Attachment A) to develop
the Altamira Canyon Project Study Report.
ANALYSIS
Several design alternatives will need to be developed and community input regarding
the alternatives is necessary to obtain a project document that presents well developed
alternatives from which the City Council can chose a preferred alternative from. To that
end, the Project Study Report (PSR) for the Altamira Canyon Drainage Project will
provide a minimum of four alternative designs addressing the issues associated with
groundwater infiltration and associated storm water related soil erosion within the
project boundaries in Altamira Canyon. The objective of this phase of the project is to
identify alternatives that will be considered along with environmental considerations in
establishing the best solution for the project taking all variables into account. The PSR
will contain a feasibility spreadsheet for all alternatives, including details pertaining to
the following issues:
-Geotechnical conditions and canyon slope erosion issues.
-Environmental impacts associated with the proposed alternatives.
-Environmental mitigation requirements.
-Minimizing infiltration and erosion and achievement of cleaner-water run-off.
Identifying the land acquisition and easement requirements associated with each
alternative.
-Evaluating the constructability of each alternative.
-Evaluating the long term maintenance feasibility and cost of the system
-Planning level costs associated with each alternative.
-Schedule including preferred alternative design, environmental approvals and
construction.
-Community involvement meetings and early consultation with resource agencies. C-2
-Property right issues including drainage and access easements.
The study will provide a viable set of design alternatives, supported by geological and
environmental investigations. Accurate cost estimates for each alternative will be
developed as will projected construction time schedules. The PSR can be used as a
project proposal summary to decision makers determine the preferred alternative that is
appropriate for the City and to help grant and other funding sources better understand
project specifics.
The Professional Services Agreement is attached for reference (Attachment A). It must
be pointed out that the work product associated with this Agreement is a Project Study
Report. Selection of a preferred alternative is required prior to proceeding with the
design solution which would include the development of plans, specifications and
estimates. The project would need to be advertised and contractor's proposals
received and an award made before any construction work could begin.
Staff has included a community outreach requirement in the development of the PSR.
At a minimum three meetings will be conducted where residents and interested citizens
will be asked to provide input prior to and during alternatives development.
Additionally, the PSR will develop a strategy to block access through the 120 inch
culvert under Palos Verdes Drive South, which will help minimize trespassers into the
private community.
CONCLUSION
It is the City's intention to be very involved with the development of the project
alternatives/conceptual designs and to keep interested residents/citizens involved as
well. Work on the PSR is expected to be complete in the third quarter of 2016. At that
stage, the City will have a tangible project initiation document. It is Staff's desire to
allow all stakeholders the opportunity to provide input, and to thoroughly examine and
comment on the document and design alternatives. Likewise Resource Agencies will
be involved early on and afforded the same opportunity. The PSR will define specific
design alternatives and identify impacts to the environment which is a precursor of the
Environmental Document; however the Environmental Document will bring additional
opportunities for public comment from citizens and agencies alike. The PSR will be
used to identify a preferred alternative, to apply for available grant funding, to solicit
support, and pursue other funding opportunities. Additionally, it will be used as the
basis of the final design.
Staff reviewed the scope of work and cost in the final proposal from Harris and
Associates and is satisfied that all known issues have been covered. A break-down of
the price is as follows:
Harris & Associates
Data Collection $ 6,180
TopoQraphic Survey (Aerial and Ground) $49,088
Produce Base maps for conceptual desiQns $16,360
Geotechnical Feasibility Study $30,906
Field Review and Hydrologic studies $110,019
C-3
Develop strateqies to block access to the pipe $5,360
Study Outreach facilitator $17,936
Alternative desiqns, Preliminary PSR and recommendations $82,440
Environmental Study CEQA and NEPA $27,609
Easements $23,200
Meetinqs $9,480
Produce final Project Study Report and recommendations $28,300
Outreach Meetinqs, Aqency Meetinqs and presentations $33, 112
Total Project Cost $439,989
Staff is recommending the approval of a design contingency to address issues that may
arise that are outside the detailed scope for this project, but pertinent to successful
completion of a meaningful planning document. This contingency would only be used
in the event of unforeseen conditions, to further develop apparently feasible ideas
presented at community outreach meetings and or for the required investigation of
issues beyond the identified scope of work. The approved appropriation for this project
is $500,000. Staff has successfully negotiated the overall cost of the PSR down to
$439,989, accordingly staff is asking for a contingency budget of $60,000 to address
unknown project requirements that may be discovered during the development of the
PSR or through public outreach meetings or through environmental analysis or other
creative processes.
Attachment A: Contract for Professional Services (page 5)
C-4
ATTACHMENT A
Professional Services Agreement
C-5
01203.0006/273153.1
CONTRACT SERVICES AGREEMENT
By and Between
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
and
HARRIS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
for
PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF THE ALTA MIRA CANYON
DRAINAGE/EROSION CONTROL PROJECT
- 1 -C-6
AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT SERVICES
BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AND HARRIS AND
ASSOCIATES, INC.
THIS AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT SERVICES (herein "Agreement") is made and
entered into this 4th day of November, 2015 by and between the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, a
California municipal corporation ("City") and Harris and Associates, Inc. ("Consultant"). City
and Consultant are sometimes hereinafter individually referred to as "Party" and hereinafter
collectively referred to as the "Parties".
RECITALS
A. City has sought, by issuance of a Request for Proposals or Invitation for Bids, the
performance of the services defined and described particularly in Article 1 of this Agreement.
B. Consultant, following submission of a proposal or bid for the performance of the
services defined and described particularly in Article 1 of this Agreement, was selected by the
City to perform those services.
C. Pursuant to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes' Municipal Code, City has authority
to enter into and execute this Agreement.
D. The Parties desire to formalize the selection of Consultant for performance of
those services defined and described particularly in Article 1 of this Agreement and desire that
the terms of that performance be as particularly defined and described herein.
OPERATIVE PROVISIONS
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants made by
the Parties and contained herein and other consideration, the value and adequacy of which are
hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1. SERVICES OF CONSULTANT
1.1 Scope of Services.
In compliance with all terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Consultant shall
provide those services specified in the "Scope of Services" attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and
incorporated herein by this reference, which may be referred to herein as the "services" or
"work" hereunder. As a material inducement to the City entering into this Agreement,
Consultant represents and warrants that it has the qualifications, experience, and facilities
necessary to properly perform the services required under this Agreement in a thorough,
competent, and professional manner, and is experienced in performing the work and services
contemplated herein. Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of its
ability, experience and talent, perform all services described herein. Consultant covenants that it
shall follow the highest professional standards in performing the work and services required
hereunder and that all materials will be both of good quality as well as fit for the purpose
intended. For purposes of this Agreement, the phrase "highest professional standards" shall
- 2 -
01203.0006/273153.1
C-7
mean those standards of practice recognized by one or more first-class firms performing similar
work under similar circumstances.
1.2 Consultant's Proposal.
The Scope of Service shall include the Consultant's scope of work or bid which shall be
incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth herein. In the event of any
inconsistency between the terms of such proposal and this Agreement, the terms of this
Agreement shall govern.
1.3 Compliance with Law.
Consultant shall keep itself informed concerning, and shall render all services hereunder
in accordance with, all ordinances, resolutions, statutes, rules, and regulations of the City and any
Federal, State or local governmental entity having jurisdiction in effect at the time service is
rendered.
1.4 Licenses, Permits, Fees and Assessments.
Consultant shall obtain at its sole cost and expense such licenses, permits and approvals
as may be required by law for the performance of the services required by this Agreement.
Consultant shall have the sole obligation to pay for any fees, assessments and taxes, plus
applicable penalties and interest, which may be imposed by law and arise from or are necessary
for the Consultant's performance of the services required by this Agreement, and shall
indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its officers, employees or agents of City, against any
such fees, assessments, taxes, penalties or interest levied, assessed or imposed against City
hereunder.
1.5 Familiarity with Work.
By executing this Agreement, Consultant warrants that Consultant (i) has thoroughly
investigated and considered the scope of services to be performed, (ii) has carefully considered
how the services should be performed, and (iii) fully understands the facilities, difficulties and
restrictions attending performance of the services under this Agreement. If the services involve
work upon any site, Consultant warrants that Consultant has or will investigate the site and is or
will be fully acquainted with the conditions there existing, prior to commencement of services
hereunder. Should the Consultant discover any latent or unknown conditions, which will
materially affect the performance of the services hereunder, Consultant shall immediately inform
the City of such fact and shall not proceed except at Consultant's risk until written instructions
are received from the Contract Officer.
1.6 Care of Work.
The Consultant shall adopt reasonable methods during the life of the Agreement to
furnish continuous protection to the work, and the equipment, materials, papers, documents,
plans, studies and/or other components thereof to prevent losses or damages, and shall be
responsible for all such damages, to persons or property, until acceptance of the work by City,
except such losses or damages as may be caused by City's own negligence.
- 3 -
01203.0006/273153.1
C-8
1. 7 Further Responsibilities of Parties.
Both parties agree to use reasonable care and diligence to perform their respective
obligations under this Agreement. Both parties agree to act in good faith to execute all
instruments, prepare all documents and take all actions as may be reasonably necessary to carry
out the purposes of this Agreement. Unless hereafter specified, neither party shall be responsible
for the service of the other.
1.8 Additional Services.
City shall have the right at any time during the performance of the services, without
invalidating this Agreement, to order extra work beyond that specified in the Scope of Services
or make changes by altering, adding to or deducting from said work. No such extra work may be
undertaken unless a written order is first given by the Contract Officer to the Consultant,
incorporating therein any adjustment in (i) the Contract Sum for the actual costs of the extra
work, and/or (ii) the time to perform this Agreement, which said adjustments are subject to the
written approval of the Consultant. Any increase in compensation of up to ten percent (10%) of
the Contract Sum or $25,000, whichever is less; or, in the time to perform of up to one hundred
eighty (180) days, may be approved by the Contract Officer. Any greater increases, taken either
separately or cumulatively, must be approved by the City Council. It is expressly understood by
Consultant that the provisions of this Section shall not apply to services specifically set forth in
the Scope of Services. Consultant hereby acknowledges that it accepts the risk that the services
to be provided pursuant to the Scope of Services may be more costly or time consuming than
Consultant anticipates and that Consultant shall not be entitled to additional compensation
therefor. City may in its sole and absolute discretion have similar work done by other
contractors. No claims for an increase in the Contract Sum or time for performance shall be
valid unless the procedures established in this Section are followed.
1.9 Special Requirements.
Additional terms and conditions of this Agreement, if any, which are made a part hereof
are set forth in the "Special Requirements" attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and incorporated
herein by this reference. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of Exhibit "B" and any
other provisions of this Agreement, the provisions of Exhibit "B" shall govern.
ARTICLE 2. COMPENSATION AND METHOD OF PAYMENT.
2.1 Contract Sum.
Subject to any limitations set forth in this Agreement, City agrees to pay Consultant the
amounts specified in the "Schedule of Compensation" attached hereto as Exhibit "C" and
incorporated herein by this reference. The total compensation, including reimbursement for
actual expenses, shall not exceed Four Hundred Thirty-nine Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty
Nine Dollars ($439,989) (the "Contract Sum"), unless additional compensation is approved
pursuant to Section 1.8.
2.2 Method of Compensation.
The method of compensation may include: (i) a lump sum payment upon completion; (ii)
payment in accordance with specified tasks or the percentage of completion of the services, less
- 4 -
01203.0006/273 I 53. I
C-9
contract retention; (iii) payment for time and materials based upon the Consultant's rates as
specified in the Schedule of Compensation, provided that (a) time estimates are provided for the
performance of sub tasks, (b) contract retention is maintained, and ( c) the Contract Sum is not
exceeded; or (iv) such other methods as may be specified in the Schedule of Compensation.
2.3 Reimbursable Expenses.
Compensation may include reimbursement for actual and necessary expenditures for
reproduction costs, telephone expenses, and travel expenses approved by the Contract Officer in
advance, or actual subcontractor expenses of an approved subcontractor pursuant to Section 4.5,
and only if specified in the Schedule of Compensation. The Contract Sum shall include the
attendance of Consultant at all project meetings reasonably deemed necessary by the City.
Coordination of the performance of the work with City is a critical component of the services. If
Consultant is required to attend additional meetings to facilitate such coordination, Consultant
shall not be entitled to any additional compensation for attending said meetings.
2.4 Invoices.
Each month Consultant shall furnish to City an original invoice for all work performed
and expenses incurred during the preceding month in a form approved by City's Director of
Finance. By submitting an invoice for payment under this Agreement, Consultant is certifying
compliance with all provisions of the Agreement. The invoice shall detail charges for all
necessary and actual expenses by the following categories: labor (by sub-category), travel,
materials, equipment, supplies, and sub-contractor contracts. Sub-contractor charges shall also
be detailed by such categories. Consultant shall not invoice City for any duplicate services
performed by more than one person.
City shall independently review each invoice submitted by the Consultant to determine
whether the work performed and expenses incurred are in compliance with the provisions of this
Agreement. Except as to any charges for work performed or expenses incurred by Consultant
which are disputed by City, or as provided in Section 7.3, City will use its best efforts to cause
Consultant to be paid within forty-five (45) days of receipt of Consultant's correct and
undisputed invoice; however, Consultant acknowledges and agrees that due to City warrant run
procedures, the City cannot guarantee that payment will occur within this time period. In the
event any charges or expenses are disputed by City, the original invoice shall be returned by City
to Consultant for correction and resubmission. Review and payment by City for any invoice
provided by the Consultant shall not constitute a waiver of any rights or remedies provided
herein or any applicable law.
2.5 Waiver.
Payment to Consultant for work performed pursuant to this Agreement shall not be
deemed to waive any defects in work performed by Consultant.
ARTICLE 3. PERFORMANCE SCHEDULE
3 .1 Time of Essence.
Time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement.
- 5 -
01203.0006/273153.1
C-10
3 .2 Schedule of Performance.
Consultant shall commence the services pursuant to this Agreement upon receipt of a
written notice to proceed and shall perform all services within the time period(s) established in
the "Schedule of Performance" attached hereto as Exhibit "D" and incorporated herein by this
reference. When requested by the Consultant, extensions to the time period(s) specified in the
Schedule of Performance may be approved in writing by the Contract Officer but not exceeding
one hundred eighty (180) days cumulatively.
3.3 Force Majeure.
The time period(s) specified in the Schedule of Performance for performance of the
services rendered pursuant to this Agreement shall be extended because of any delays due to
unforeseeable causes beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of the Consultant,
including, but not restricted to, acts of God or of the public enemy, unusually severe weather,
fires, earthquakes, floods, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, riots, strikes, freight embargoes,
wars, litigation, and/or acts of any governmental agency, including the City, if the Consultant
shall within ten (10) days of the commencement of such delay notify the Contract Officer in
writing of the causes of the delay. The Contract Officer shall ascertain the facts and the extent of
delay, and extend the time for performing the services for the period of the enforced delay when
and if in the judgment of the Contract Officer such delay is justified. The Contract Officer's
determination shall be final and conclusive upon the parties to this Agreement. In no event shall
Consultant be entitled to recover damages against the City for any delay in the performance of
this Agreement, however caused, Consultant's sole remedy being extension of the Agreement
pursuant to this Section.
3.4 Term.
Unless earlier terminated in accordance with Article 7 of this Agreement, this Agreement
shall continue in full force and effect until completion of the services but not exceeding one (1)
years from the date hereof, except as otherwise provided in the Schedule of Performance (Exhibit
"D").
ARTICLE 4. COORDINATION OF WORK
4.1 Representatives and Personnel of Consultant.
The following principals of Consultant ("Principals") are hereby designated as being the
principals and representatives of Consultant authorized to act in its behalf with respect to the
work specified herein and make all decisions in connection therewith:
Randall Berry, P .E. Principal-in-Charge
(Name) (Title)
(Name) (Title)
- 6 -
01203.0006/273153.1
C-11
(Name) (Title)
It is expressly understood that the experience, knowledge, capability and reputation of the
foregoing principals were a substantial inducement for City to enter into this Agreement.
Therefore, the foregoing principals shall be responsible during the term of this Agreement for
directing all activities of Consultant and devoting sufficient time to personally supervise the
services hereunder. All personnel of Consultant, and any authorized agents, shall at all times be
under the exclusive direction and control of the Principals. For purposes of this Agreement, the
foregoing Principals may not be replaced nor may their responsibilities be substantially reduced
by Consultant without the express written approval of City. Additionally, Consultant shall utilize
only competent personnel to perform services pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall make
every reasonable effort to maintain the stability and continuity of Consultant's staff and
subcontractors, if any, assigned to perform the services required under this Agreement.
Consultant shall notify City of any changes in Consultant's staff and subcontractors, if any,
assigned to perform the services required under this Agreement, prior to and during any such
performance.
4.2 Status of Consultant.
Consultant shall have no authority to bind City in any manner, or to incur any obligation,
debt or liability of any kind on behalf of or against City, whether by contract or otherwise, unless
such authority is expressly conferred under this Agreement or is otherwise expressly conferred in
writing by City. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that Consultant or
any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents are in any manner officials, officers,
employees or agents of City. Neither Consultant, nor any of Consultant's officers, employees or
agents, shall obtain any rights to retirement, health care or any other benefits which may
otherwise accrue to City's employees. Consultant expressly waives any claim Consultant may
have to any such rights.
4.3 Contract Officer.
The Contract Officer shall be Michael Throne, Director of Public Works or such person
as may be designated by the City Manager. It shall be the Consultant's responsibility to assure
that the Contract Officer is kept informed of the progress of the performance of the services and
the Consultant shall refer any decisions which must be made by City to the Contract Officer.
Unless otherwise specified herein, any approval of City required hereunder shall mean the
approval of the Contract Officer. The Contract Officer shall have authority, if specified in
writing by the City Manager, to sign all documents on behalf of the City required hereunder to
carry out the terms of this Agreement.
4.4 Independent Consultant.
Neither the City nor any of its employees shall have any control over the manner, mode or
means by which Consultant, its agents or employees, perform the services required herein, except
as otherwise set forth herein. City shall have no voice in the selection, discharge, supervision or
control of Consultant's employees, servants, representatives or agents, or in fixing their number,
compensation or hours of service. Consultant shall perform all services required herein as an
independent contractor of City and shall remain at all times as to City a wholly independent
- 7 -
01203.0006/273153.1
C-12
contractor with only such obligations as are consistent with that role. Consultant shall not at any
time or in any manner represent that it or any of its agents or employees are agents or employees
of City. City shall not in any way or for any purpose become or be deemed to be a partner of
Consultant in its business or otherwise or a joint venturer or a member of any joint enterprise
with Consultant.
4.5 Prohibition Against Subcontracting or Assignment.
The experience, knowledge, capability and reputation of Consultant, its principals and
employees were a substantial inducement for the City to enter into this Agreement. Therefore,
Consultant shall not contract with any other entity to perform in whole or in part the services
required hereunder without the express written approval of the City. In addition, neither this
Agreement nor any interest herein may be transferred, assigned, conveyed, hypothecated or
encumbered voluntarily or by operation of law, whether for the benefit of creditors or otherwise,
without the prior written approval of City. Transfers restricted hereunder shall include the
transfer to any person or group of persons acting in concert of more than twenty five percent
(25%) of the present ownership and/or control of Consultant, taking all transfers into account on
a cumulative basis. In the event of any such unapproved transfer, including any bankruptcy
proceeding, this Agreement shall be void. No approved transfer shall release the Consultant or
any surety of Consultant of any liability hereunder without the express consent of City.
ARTICLE 5. INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION
5 .1 Insurance Coverages.
The Consultant shall procure and maintain, at its sole cost and expense, in a form and
content satisfactory to City, during the entire term of this Agreement including any extension
thereof, the following policies of insurance which shall cover all elected and appointed officers,
employees and agents of City:
(a) Commercial General Liability Insurance (Occurrence Form CGOOOl or
equivalent). A policy of comprehensive general liability insurance written on a per occurrence
basis for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. The policy of insurance shall be in
an amount not less than $1,000,000.00 per occurrence or if a general aggregate limit is used, then
the general aggregate limit shall be twice the occurrence limit.
(b) Worker's Compensation Insurance. A policy of worker's compensation
insurance in such amount as will fully comply with the laws of the State of California and which
shall indemnify, insure and provide legal defense for the Consultant against any loss, claim or
damage arising from any injuries or occupational diseases occurring to any worker employed by
or any persons retained by the Consultant in the course of carrying out the work or services
contemplated in this Agreement.
(c) Automotive Insurance (Form CA 0001 (Ed 1/87) including "any auto" and
endorsement CA 0025 or equivalent). A policy of comprehensive automobile liability insurance
written on a per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage in an amount not less than
$1,000,000. Said policy shall include coverage for owned, non-owned, leased, hired cars and any
automobile.
- 8 -
01203.0006/273153.1
C-13
( d) Professional Liability. Professional liability insurance appropriate to the
Consultant's profession. This coverage may be written on a "claims made" basis, and must
include coverage for contractual liability. The professional liability insurance required by this
Agreement must be endorsed to be applicable to claims based upon, arising out of or related to
services performed under this Agreement. The insurance must be maintained for at least 5
consecutive years following the completion of Consultant's services or the termination of this
Agreement. During this additional 5-year period, Consultant shall annually and upon request of
the City submit written evidence of this continuous coverage.
( e) Subcontractors. Consultant shall include all subcontractors as insureds
under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates and certified endorsements for each
subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall include all of the requirements stated
herein.
(f) Additional Insurance. Policies of such other insurance, as may be required
in the Special Requirements in Exhibit "B".
5 .2 General Insurance Requirements.
All of the above policies of insurance shall be primary insurance and shall name the City,
its elected and appointed officers, employees and agents as additional insureds and any insurance
maintained by City or its officers, employees or agents may apply in excess of, and not
contribute with Consultant's insurance. The insurer is deemed hereof to waive all rights of
subrogation and contribution it may have against the City, its officers, employees and agents and
their respective insurers. Moreover, the insurance policy must specify that where the primary
insured does not satisfy the self-insured retention, any additional insured may satisfy the self-
insured retention.
All of said policies of insurance shall provide that said insurance may not be amended or
cancelled by the insurer or any party hereto without providing thirty (30) days prior written notice
by certified mail return receipt requested to the City. In the event any of said policies of
insurance are cancelled, the Consultant shall, prior to the cancellation date, submit new evidence
of insurance in conformance with Section 5 .1 to the Contract Officer.
No work or services under this Agreement shall commence until the Consultant has
provided the City with Certificates of Insurance, additional insured endorsement forms or
appropriate insurance binders evidencing the above insurance coverages and said Certificates of
Insurance or binders are approved by the City. City reserves the right to inspect complete,
certified copies of and endorsements to all required insurance policies at any time. Any failure to
comply with the reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches or warranties
shall not affect coverage provided to City.
All certificates shall name the City as additional insured (providing the appropriate
endorsement) and shall conform to the following "cancellation" notice:
CANCELLATION:
SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE
THE EXPIRATION DATED THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL MAIL
- 9 -
01203.0006/273153.1
C-14
THIRTY (30)-DA Y ADVANCE WRITTEN NOTICE TO CERTIFICATE HOLDER
NAMED HEREIN.
[to be initialed]
Consultant Initials
City, its respective elected and appointed officers, directors, officials, employees, agents
and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds as respects: liability arising out of
activities Consultant performs; products and completed operations of Consultant; premises
owned, occupied or used by Consultant; or any automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by
Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded
to City, and their respective elected and appointed officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit
is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by City. At
the option of City, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured
retentions as respects City or its respective elected or appointed officers, officials, employees and
volunteers or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related
investigations, claim administration, defense expenses and claims. The Consultant agrees that
the requirement to provide insurance shall not be construed as limiting in any way the extent to
which the Consultant may be held responsible for the payment of damages to any persons or
property resulting from the Consultant's activities or the activities of any person or persons for
which the Consultant is otherwise responsible nor shall it limit the Consultant's indemnification
liabilities as provided in Section 5.3.
In the event the Consultant subcontracts any portion of the work in compliance with
Section 4.5 of this Agreement, the contract between the Consultant and such subcontractor shall
require the subcontractor to maintain the same policies of insurance that the Consultant is
required to maintain pursuant to Section 5 .1, and such certificates and endorsements shall be
provided to City.
5.3 Indemnification.
To the full extent permitted by law, Consultant agrees to indemnify, defend and hold
harmless the City, its officers, employees and agents ("Indemnified Parties") against, and will
hold and save them and each of them harmless from, any and all actions, either judicial,
administrative, arbitration or regulatory claims, damages to persons or property, losses, costs,
penalties, obligations, errors, omissions or liabilities whether actual or threatened (herein "claims
or liabilities") that may be asserted or claimed by any person, firm or entity arising out of or in
connection with the negligent performance of the work, operations or activities provided herein
of Consultant, its officers, employees, agents, subcontractors, or invitees, or any individual or
entity for which Consultant is legally liable ("indemnitors"), or arising from Consultant's or
indemnitors' reckless or willful misconduct, or arising from Consultant's or indemnitors'
negligent performance of or failure to perform any term, provision, covenant or condition of this
Agreement, and in connection therewith:
-10 -
01203.0006/273153.1
C-15
(a) Consultant will defend any action or actions filed in connection with any
of said claims or liabilities and will pay all costs and expenses, including legal costs and
attorneys' fees incurred in connection therewith;
(b) Consultant will promptly pay any judgment rendered against the City, its
officers, agents or employees for any such claims or liabilities arising out of or in connection
with the negligent performance of or failure to perform such work, operations or activities of
Consultant hereunder; and Consultant agrees to save and hold the City, its officers, agents, and
employees harmless therefrom;
(c) In the event the City, its officers, agents or employees is made a party to
any action or proceeding filed or prosecuted against Consultant for such damages or other claims
arising out of or in connection with the negligent performance of or failure to perform the work,
operation or activities of Consultant hereunder, Consultant agrees to pay to the City, its officers,
agents or employees, any and all costs and expenses incurred by the City, its officers, agents or
employees in such action or proceeding, including but not limited to, legal costs and attorneys'
fees.
Consultant shall incorporate similar indemnity agreements with its subcontractors and if
it fails to do so Consultant shall be fully responsible to indemnify City hereunder therefore, and
failure of City to monitor compliance with these provisions shall not be a waiver hereof. This
indemnification includes claims or liabilities arising from any negligent or wrongful act, error or
omission, or reckless or willful misconduct of Consultant in the performance of professional
services hereunder. The provisions of this Section do not apply to claims or liabilities occurring
as a result of City's sole negligence or willful acts or omissions, but, to the fullest extent
permitted by law, shall apply to claims and liabilities resulting in part from City's negligence,
except that design professionals' indemnity hereunder shall be limited to claims and liabilities
arising out of the negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of the design professional. The
indemnity obligation shall be binding on successors and assigns of Consultant and shall survive
termination of this Agreement.
5.4 Sufficiency oflnsurer.
Insurance required by this Agreement shall be satisfactory only if issued by companies
qualified to do business in California, rated "A" or better in the most recent edition of Best
Rating Guide, The Key Rating Guide or in the Federal Register, and only if they are of a financial
category Class VII or better, unless such requirements are waived by the Risk Manager of the
City ("Risk Manager") due to unique circumstances. If this Agreement continues for more than 3
years duration, or in the event the risk manager determines that the work or services to be
performed under this Agreement creates an increased or decreased risk of loss to the City, the
Consultant agrees that the minimum limits of the insurance policies may be changed accordingly
upon receipt of written notice from the Risk Manager.
ARTICLE 6. RECORDS, REPORTS, AND RELEASE OF INFORMATION
6.1 Records.
Consultant shall keep, and require subcontractors to keep, such ledgers, books of
accounts, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, reports, studies or other documents relating to the
disbursements charged to City and services performed hereunder (the "books and records"), as
-11 -
01203.0006/273153.1
C-16
shall be necessary to perform the services required by this Agreement and enable the Contract
Officer to evaluate the performance of such services. Any and all such documents shall be
maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be complete
and detailed. The Contract Officer shall have full and free access to such books and records at all
times during normal business hours of City, including the right to inspect, copy, audit and make
records and transcripts from such records. Such records shall be maintained for a period of three
(3) years following completion of the services hereunder, and the City shall have access to such
records in the event any audit is required. In the event of dissolution of Consultant's business,
custody of the books and records may be given to City, and access shall be provided by
Consultant's successor in interest. Notwithstanding the above, the Consultant shall fully
cooperate with the City in providing access to the books and records if a public records request is
made and disclosure is required by law including but not limited to the California Public Records
Act.
6.2 Reports.
Consultant shall periodically prepare and submit to the Contract Officer such reports
concerning the performance of the services required by this Agreement as the Contract Officer
shall require. Consultant hereby acknowledges that the City is greatly concerned about the cost
of work and services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement. For this reason, Consultant
agrees that if Consultant becomes aware of any facts, circumstances, techniques, or events that
may or will materially increase or decrease the cost of the work or services contemplated herein
or, if Consultant is providing design services, the cost of the project being designed, Consultant
shall promptly notify the Contract Officer of said fact, circumstance, technique or event and the
estimated increased or decreased cost related thereto and, if Consultant is providing design
services, the estimated increased or decreased cost estimate for the project being designed.
6.3 Ownership of Documents.
All drawings, specifications, maps, designs, photographs, studies, surveys, data, notes,
computer files, reports, records, documents and other materials (the "documents and materials")
prepared by Consultant, its employees, subcontractors and agents in the performance of this
Agreement shall be the property of City and shall be delivered to City upon request of the
Contract Officer or upon the termination of this Agreement, and Consultant shall have no claim
for further employment or additional compensation as a result of the exercise by City of its full
rights of ownership use, reuse, or assignment of the documents and materials hereunder. Any
use, reuse or assignment of such completed documents for other projects and/or use of
uncompleted documents without specific written authorization by the Consultant will be at the
City's sole risk and without liability to Consultant, and Consultant's guarantee and warranties
shall not extend to such use, reuse or assignment. Consultant may retain copies of such
documents for its own use. Consultant shall have the right to use the concepts embodied therein.
All subcontractors shall provide for assignment to City of any documents or materials prepared
by them, and in the event Consultant fails to secure such assignment, Consultant shall indemnify
City for all damages resulting therefrom. Moreover, Consultant with respect to any documents
and materials that may qualify as "works made for hire" as defined in 17 U.S.C. § 101, such
documents and materials are hereby deemed "works made for hire" for the City.
-12 -
01203.0006/273153.1
C-17
6.4 Confidentiality and Release oflnformation.
(a) All information gained or work product produced by Consultant
in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential, unless such information is in
the public domain or already known to Consultant. Consultant shall not release or disclose any
such information or work product to persons or entities other than City without prior written
authorization from the Contract Officer.
(b) Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors,
shall not, without prior written authorization from the Contract Officer or unless requested by the
City Attorney, voluntarily provide documents, declarations, letters of support, testimony at
depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed
under this Agreement. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary"
provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena.
( c) If Consultant, or any officer, employee, agent or subcontractor of
Consultant, provides any information or work product in violation of this Agreement, then City
shall have the right to reimbursement and indemnity from Consultant for any damages, costs and
fees, including attorneys fees, caused by or incurred as a result of Consultant's conduct.
( d) Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its
officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena,
notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other
discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work
performed there under. City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant or be
present at any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully
with City and to provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests
provided by Consultant. However, this right to review any such response does not imply or mean
the right by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response.
ARTICLE 7. ENFORCEMENT OF AGREEMENT AND TERMINATION
7.1 California Law.
This Agreement shall be interpreted, construed and governed both as to validity and to
performance of the parties in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Legal actions
concerning any dispute, claim or matter arising out of or in relation to this Agreement shall be
instituted in the Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles, State of California, or any other
appropriate court in such county, and Consultant covenants and agrees to submit to the personal
jurisdiction of such court in the event of such action. In the event of litigation in a U.S. District
Court, venue shall lie exclusively in the Central District of California, in the County of Los
Angeles, State of California.
7 .2 Disputes; Default.
In the event that Consultant is in default under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall
not have any obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed
after the date of default. Instead, the City may give notice to Consultant of the default and the
reasons for the default. The notice shall include the timeframe in which Consultant may cure the
default. This timeframe is presumptively thirty (30) days, but may be extended, though not
-13 -
01203.0006/273153.1
C-18
reduced, if circumstances warrant. During the period of time that Consultant is in default, the
City shall hold all invoices and shall, when the default is cured, proceed with payment on the
invoices. In the alternative, the City may, in its sole discretion, elect to pay some or all of the
outstanding invoices during the period of default. If Consultant does not cure the default, the
City may take necessary steps to terminate this Agreement under this Article. Any failure on the
part of the City to give notice of the Consultant's default shall not be deemed to result in a waiver
of the City's legal rights or any rights arising out of any provision of this Agreement.
7.3 Retention of Funds.
Consultant hereby authorizes City to deduct from any amount payable to Consultant
(whether or not arising out of this Agreement) (i) any amounts the payment of which may be in
dispute hereunder or which are necessary to compensate City for any losses, costs, liabilities, or
damages suffered by City, and (ii) all amounts for which City may be liable to third parties, by
reason of Consultant's acts or omissions in performing or failing to perform Consultant's
obligation under this Agreement. In the event that any claim is made by a third party, the amount
or validity of which is disputed by Consultant, or any indebtedness shall exist which shall appear
to be the basis for a claim of lien, City may withhold from any payment due, without liability for
interest because of such withholding, an amount sufficient to cover such claim. The failure of
City to exercise such right to deduct or to withhold shall not, however, affect the obligations of
the Consultant to insure, indemnify, and protect City as elsewhere provided herein.
7.4 Waiver.
Waiver by any party to this Agreement of any term, condition, or covenant of this
Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any other term, condition, or covenant. Waiver by
any party of any breach of the provisions of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any
other provision or a waiver of any subsequent breach or violation of any provision of this
Agreement. Acceptance by City of any work or services by Consultant shall not constitute a
waiver of any of the provisions of this Agreement. No delay or omission in the exercise of any
right or remedy by a non-defaulting party on any default shall impair such right or remedy or be
construed as a waiver. Any waiver by either party of any default must be in writing and shall not
be a waiver of any other default concerning the same or any other provision of this Agreement.
7.5 Rights and Remedies are Cumulative.
Except with respect to rights and remedies expressly declared to be exclusive in this
Agreement, the rights and remedies of the parties are cumulative and the exercise by either party
of one or more of such rights or remedies shall not preclude the exercise by it, at the same or
different times, of any other rights or remedies for the same default or any other default by the
other party.
7.6 Legal Action.
In addition to any other rights or remedies, either party may take legal action, in law or in
equity, to cure, correct or remedy any default, to recover damages for any default, to compel
specific performance of this Agreement, to obtain declaratory or injunctive relief, or to obtain
any other remedy consistent with the purposes of this Agreement. Notwithstanding any contrary
provision herein, Consultant shall file a statutory claim pursuant to Government Code Sections
905 et. seq. and 910 et. seq., in order to pursue a legal action under this Agreement.
-14 -
01203.0006/273153.1
C-19
7.7 Termination Prior to Expiration of Term.
This Section shall govern any termination of this Contract except as specifically provided
in the following Section for termination for cause. The City reserves the right to terminate this
Contract at any time, with or without cause, upon thirty (30) days' written notice to Consultant,
except that where termination is due to the fault of the Consultant, the period of notice may be
such shorter time as may be determined by the Contract Officer. In addition, the Consultant
reserves the right to terminate this Contract at any time, with or without cause, upon sixty ( 60)
days' written notice to City, except that where termination is due to the fault of the City, the
period of notice may be such shorter time as the Consultant may determine. Upon receipt of any
notice of termination, Consultant shall immediately cease all services hereunder except such as
may be specifically approved by the Contract Officer. Except where the Consultant has initiated
termination, the Consultant shall be entitled to compensation for all services rendered prior to the
effective date of the notice of termination and for any services authorized by the Contract Officer
thereafter in accordance with the Schedule of Compensation or such as may be approved by the
Contract Officer, except as provided in Section 7.3. In the event the Consultant has initiated
termination, the Consultant shall be entitled to compensation only for the reasonable value of the
work product actually produced hereunder. In the event of termination without cause pursuant to
this Section, the terminating party need not provide the non-terminating party with the
opportunity to cure pursuant to Section 7.2.
7.8 Termination for Default of Consultant.
If termination is due to the failure of the Consultant to fulfill its obligations under this
Agreement, City may, after compliance with the provisions of Section 7.2, take over the work
and prosecute the same to completion by contract or otherwise, and the Consultant shall be liable
to the extent that the total cost for completion of the services required hereunder exceeds the
compensation herein stipulated (provided that the City shall use reasonable efforts to mitigate
such damages), and City may withhold any payments to the Consultant for the purpose of set-off
or partial payment of the amounts owed the City as previously stated.
7.9 Attorneys' Fees.
If either party to this Agreement is required to initiate or defend or made a party to any
action or proceeding in any way connected with this Agreement, the prevailing party in such
action or proceeding, in addition to any other relief which may be granted, whether legal or
equitable, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees. Attorney's fees shall include attorney's
fees on any appeal, and in addition a party entitled to attorney's fees shall be entitled to all other
reasonable costs for investigating such action, taking depositions and discovery and all other
necessary costs the court allows which are incurred in such litigation. All such fees shall be
deemed to have accrued on commencement of such action and shall be enforceable whether or
not such action is prosecuted to judgment.
ARTICLE 8. CITY OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES: NON-DISCRIMINATION
8.1 Non-liability of City Officers and Employees.
No officer or employee of the City shall be personally liable to the Consultant, or any
successor in interest, in the event of any default or breach by the City or for any amount which
-15 -
01203.0006/273153. l
C-20
may become due to the Consultant or to its successor, or for breach of any obligation of the terms
of this Agreement.
8.2 Conflict of Interest.
Consultant covenants that neither it, nor any officer or principal of its firm, has or shall
acquire any interest, directly or indirectly, which would conflict in any manner with the interests
of City or which would in any way hinder Consultant's performance of services under this
Agreement. Consultant further covenants that in the performance of this Agreement, no person
having any such interest shall be employed by it as an officer, employee, agent or subcontractor
without the express written consent of the Contract Officer. Consultant agrees to at all times
avoid conflicts of interest or the appearance of any conflicts of interest with the interests of City
in the performance of this Agreement.
No officer or employee of the City shall have any financial interest, direct or indirect, in
this Agreement nor shall any such officer or employee participate in any decision relating to the
Agreement which affects her/his financial interest or the financial interest of any corporation,
partnership or association in which (s)he is, directly or indirectly, interested, in violation of any
State statute or regulation. The Consultant warrants that it has not paid or given and will not pay
or give any third party any money or other consideration for obtaining this Agreement.
8.3 Covenant Against Discrimination.
Consultant covenants that, by and for itself, its heirs, executors, assigns, and all persons
claiming under or through them, that there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of,
any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, gender, sexual
orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry or other protected class in the performance of
this Agreement. Consultant shall take affirmative action to insure that applicants are employed
and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, color, creed,
religion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry or other
protected class.
8.4 Unauthorized Aliens.
Consultant hereby promises and agrees to comply with all of the provisions of the Federal
Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C.A. §§ 1101, et seq., as amended, and in connection
therewith, shall not employ unauthorized aliens as defined therein. Should Consultant so employ
such unauthorized aliens for the performance of work and/or services covered by this Agreement,
and should any liability or sanctions be imposed against City for such use of unauthorized aliens,
Consultant hereby agrees to and shall reimburse City for the cost of all such liabilities or
sanctions imposed, together with any and all costs, including attorneys' fees, incurred by City.
ARTICLE 9. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
9.1 Notices.
Any notice, demand, request, document, consent, approval, or communication either party
desires or is required to give to the other party or any other person shall be in writing and either
served personally or sent by prepaid, first-class mail, in the case of the City, to the City Manager
and to the attention of the Contract Officer (with her/his name and City title), City of Rancho
-16 -
01203.0006/273153.1
C-21
Palos Verdes, 30940 Hawthorne Blvd., California 90275 and in the case of the Consultant, to the
person(s) at the address designated on the execution page of this Agreement. Either party may
change its address by notifying the other party of the change of address in writing. Notice shall
be deemed communicated at the time personally delivered or in seventy-two (72) hours from the
time of mailing if mailed as provided in this Section.
9 .2 Interpretation.
The terms of this Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the meaning of the
language used and shall not be construed for or against either party by reason of the authorship of
this Agreement or any other rule of construction which might otherwise apply.
9. 3 Counterparts.
This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an
original, and such counterparts shall constitute one and the same instrument.
9 .4 Integration; Amendment.
This Agreement including the attachments hereto is the entire, complete and exclusive
expression of the understanding of the parties. It is understood that there are no oral agreements
between the parties hereto affecting this Agreement and this Agreement supersedes and cancels
any and all previous negotiations, arrangements, agreements and understandings, if any, between
the parties, and none shall be used to interpret this Agreement. No amendment to or
modification of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and approved by the
Consultant and by the City Council. The parties agree that this requirement for written
modifications cannot be waived and that any attempted waiver shall be void.
9.5 Severability.
In the event that any one or more of the phrases, sentences, clauses, paragraphs, or
sections contained in this Agreement shall be declared invalid or unenforceable by a valid
judgment or decree of a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unenforceability shall
not affect any of the remaining phrases, sentences, clauses, paragraphs, or sections of this
Agreement which are hereby declared as severable and shall be interpreted to carry out the intent
of the parties hereunder unless the invalid provision is so material that its invalidity deprives
either party of the basic benefit of their bargain or renders this Agreement meaningless.
9.6 Warranty & Representation of Non-Collusion.
No official, officer, or employee of City has any financial interest, direct or indirect, in
this Agreement, nor shall any official, officer, or employee of City participate in any decision
relating to this Agreement which may affect his/her financial interest or the financial interest of
any corporation, partnership, or association in which (s)he is directly or indirectly interested, or
in violation of any corporation, partnership, or association in which (s)he is directly or indirectly
interested, or in violation of any State or municipal statute or regulation. The determination of
"financial interest" shall be consistent with State law and shall not include interests found to be
"remote" or "noninterests" pursuant to Government Code Sections 1091 or 1091.5. Consultant
warrants and represents that it has not paid or given, and will not pay or give, to any third party
including, but not limited to, any City official, officer, or employee, any money, consideration, or
-17 -
01203.0006/273153. l
C-22
other thing of value as a result or consequence of obtaining or being awarded any agreement.
Consultant further warrants and represents that (s)he/it has not engaged in any act(s),
omission(s), or other conduct or collusion that would result in the payment of any money,
consideration, or other thing of value to any third party including, but not limited to, any City
official, officer, or employee, as a result of consequence of obtaining or being awarded any
agreement. Consultant is aware of and understands that any such act(s), omission(s) or other
conduct resulting in such payment of money, consideration, or other thing of value will render
this Agreement void and of no force or effect.
Consultant's Authorized Initials ---
9. 7 Corporate Authority.
The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the parties hereto warrant that (i) such
party is duly organized and existing, (ii) they are duly authorized to execute and deliver this
Agreement on behalf of said party, (iii) by so executing this Agreement, such party is formally
bound to the provisions of this Agreement, and (iv) the entering into this Agreement does not
violate any provision of any other Agreement to which said party is bound. This Agreement shall
be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the parties.
[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
-18 -
01203.0006/273153.l
C-23
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on
the date and year first-above written.
ATTEST:
Carla Morreale, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ALESHIRE & WYNDER, LLP
David J. Aleshire, City Attorney
CITY:
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES, a
municipal corporation
, Mayor
CONSULTANT:
Harris and Associates, Inc.
By: ______________ _
Name:
Title:
By: ______________ _
Name:
Title:
Two corporate officer signatures required when Consultant is a corporation, with one signature required
from each of the following groups: 1) Chairman of the Board, President or any Vice President; and 2)
Secretary, any Assistant Secretary, Chief Financial Officer or any Assistant Treasurer. CONSULTANT'S
SIGNATURES SHALL BE DULY NOTARIZED, AND APPROPRIATE ATTESTATIONS SHALL BE
INCLUDED AS MAY BE REQUIRED BY THE BYLAWS, ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION, OR
OTHER RULES OR REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO CONSULTANT'S BUSINESS ENTITY.
-19 -
01203.0006/273153.1
C-24
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the
document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy or validity of that document.
ST A TE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
On , 2015 before me, , personally appeared , proved to me on
the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose names(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted,
executed the instrument.
I certify under PENAL TY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is
true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature: _______________ _
OPTIONAL
Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could
prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form
CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER
D INDIVIDUAL
0 CORPORA TE OFFICER
D
D
D
D
D
TITLE(S)
PARTNER(S) D
D
LIMITED
GENERAL
ATTORNEY-IN-FACT
TRUSTEE(S)
GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR
OTHER
------------~
SIGNER IS REPRESENTING:
(NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITY(IES))
01203.0006/273153. l
DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT
TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT
NUMBER OF PAGES
DATE OF DOCUMENT
SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE
C-25
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the
document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy or validity of that document.
ST ATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
On , 2015 before me, , personally appeared , proved to me on
the basis of satisfacto1y evidence to be the person(s) whose names(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted,
executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is
true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature: _______________ _
OPTIONAL
Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could
prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form.
CAP A CITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER
D INDIVIDUAL
0 CORPORATE OFFICER
D
D
D
D
D
TITLE(S)
PARTNER(S) D
D
LIMITED
GENERAL
ATTORNEY-IN-FACT
TRUSTEE(S)
GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR
OTHER
------------~
SIGNER IS REPRESENTING:
(NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITY(IES))
01203.0006/273153.1
DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT
TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT
NUMBER OF PAGES
DATE OF DOCUMENT
SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE
C-26
EXHIBIT "A"
SCOPE OF SERVICES
I. Consultant will perform the following Services in developing the Preliminary Design
of the Alta Mira Canyon Drainage/Erosion Control Project:
A. Provide additional survey to more fully develop area topography of the Alta Mira
Canyon project area,
B. Develop four design alternatives to manage runoff through the lower reaches of
Altamira canyon,
C. Provide Geotechnical feasibility study for the design alternatives,
D. Perform Drainage Study of the Alta Mira Canyon,
E. Conduct four Public Outreach meetings
F. Develop access restriction plan for existing 120" pipe
G. Perform initial Studies and determine environmental impacts for the project
design alternatives,
H. Perform construction easement and drainage easement evaluations
I. Develop Project Study Report
II. As part of the Services, Consultant will prepare and deliver the following tangible
work products to the City:
A. Survey sheets and electronic survey information consisting of data points in a
format that is acceptable to the City and readable by the City's GIS system,
B. Four distinct design alternatives to manage the drainage within and adjacent to
Altamira canyon,
C. Preliminary geotechnical report indicating the feasibility of performing the
identified alternatives,
D. Drainage study results including inlet nodes quantities and total volume of runoff
for the 50 and 100 year probable storms,
E. PowerPoint presentations and minutes of each meeting,
01203.0006/273153.1
C-27
F. Design Plan sheet illustrating restricted access into the 120" pipe and
specifications for same,
G. Report containing initial studies for each proposed alternative,
H. Map sheets along with meets and bounds descriptions of temporary construction
easements and storm drain easements,
I. Six hard copies of the Project Study Report and an electronic copy of the Project
Study Report in the 2003 version of Microsoft Word.
III. In addition to the requirements of Section 6.2, during performance of the Services,
Consultant will keep the City appraised of the status of performance by delivering
the following status reports:
A. Monthly project status reporting in the form of a conference call including a task
completion schedule and obstacles/challenges,
B. Minutes from any community outreach meetings,
C. Memos summarizing discussions with sub-consultants specific to all deliverables.
IV. All work product is subject to review and acceptance by the City, and must be
revised by the Consultant without additional charge to the City until found
satisfactory and accepted by City.
V. Consultant will utilize the following personnel to accomplish the Services:
A. Project Team Manager: Randal Berry, P.E., Principal-in-Charge
B. Elizabeth Reyes, P.E. Project Manager, P.E.
C. Project Engineers: Marc Gallardo, EIT, Ashley Lee, EIT, Gabby Gonzalez, EIT
D. Senior Geologist: Jim Barton
E. Surveyor: Rich Maher
F. Hydraulic Studies: Vik Bapna
G. Environmental Studies and Reporting: King Thomas
H. Public Outreach: Alan Braatvedt
01203.0006/273153.1
C-28
EXHIBIT "B"
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
(Superseding Contract Boilerplate)
A. City's Request for Proposals is incorporated herein, made part of this agreement
and attached as Exhibit B -1.
B. Consultant's response is incorporated herein, made part of this agreement and
attached as Exhibit B -2.
C. Consultant's Fee Letter is incorporated herein, made part of this agreement and
attached as Exhibit B-3.
01203.0006/273153.l
C-29
EXHIBIT B-1
Request for Proposals
C-30
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF THE ALTA MIRA CANYON DRAINAGE/EROS/ON CONTROL PROJECT
MAYOR, JIM KNIGHT
MAYORPROTEM,SUSANBROOKS
COUNCILMEMBER, ANTHONY MISETICH
COUNCILMEMBER, JERRY V. DUHOVIC
COUNCILMEMBER, BRIAN CAMPBELL
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes invites proposals from selected qualified consulting
engineering firms to provide professional services related to developing a Project Study
Report which will include the development of alternative designs that will minimize ground
water penetration, manage storm water runoff and aid in controlling erosion within Alta
Mira Canyon and identify Environmental issues and develop a scope of work to obtain
environmental clearance on the alternatives on behalf of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
The successful firm will provide complete professional services to accomplish the scope
of work presented in this Request for Proposals.
To be considered for this project, three (3) hardcopies and one (1) PDF copy of your
proposal must be received by the Public Works Department, 30940 Hawthorne
Boulevard, Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275, attention: Ron Dragoo, Project Manager,
no later than September 2, 2015.
1. Project Background and Description
Erosion in the Alta Mira Canyon has become a major problem which requires
investigating various design ideas for the most appropriate solution. The canyon is
located on private land, does not have easements and conveys high velocity water
runoff generated from the large watershed, fed from numerous tributaries. In the
Alta Mira Canyon Storm Drainage and Erosion Control
Request for Proposal for Professional Engineering Services
Page 1of8
C-31
down-stream section, the water is conveyed in a large diameter CMP for several
hundred feet and discharges into a deeply eroded canyon downstream of Palos
Verdes Drive South (PVDS). Several isolated storm drain improvements have
been implemented at various locations in the canyon, which include culverts and
catch basins. Many of these independent components may not function effectively
when considering erosion prevention and the desire to minimize changes to the
watercourse from storm water flows. This exercise will concentrate on the sections
of the Canyon between Narcissa Drive (East of Sweetbay Rd) to the inlet to the
large diameter CMP at Narcissa Drive (north of PVDS) and the section located to
the south of the outlet of the large diameter CMP to the ocean.
2. Scope of Services
The scope of this study is to use existing information, supplemented with some additional
survey topography and develop four (4) design options that will aid in managing storm
water flow through the Alta Mira Canyon. These alternative designs will be thoroughly
evaluated based on a wide variety of factors, including cost and suitability of each option.
The factors that will be considered for each design will include: environmental;
geotechnical; right-of-way; and other construction related elements. A detailed summary
of design options including scheduling; potential challenges; and construction budget
including soft costs will be presented for each alternative in the report. The most
appropriate design alternatives will be organized in a format that can be evaluated by the
City of Rancho Palos Verdes and be used for Community Outreach and as the Project
Study Report is developed as the base document for project design and the required
permitting from the resource agencies.
Data Collection
a) Survey and Topography
Contract with a survey firm to undertake a topographical survey to create a scaled
base map with all existing features including contours and the limits of the erosion.
The map will also indicate property boundaries. This survey information will also
allow the calculation of potential quantities. Property information obtained through
the survey will be used to identify easement needs for design options ·and to
develop cost estimates associated with obtaining the easements.
b) Hydrology Report
Existing hydrology information will be reviewed and a new hydrology study will be
performed to quantify the volume and velocity of storm water in the canyon at
various locations in storms of various intensities.
c) Geotechnical Information
All available existing geotechnical information will be used to evaluate the various
alternatives. No additional geotechnical investigations will be undertaken as part
of this study. The intent is to tap into local knowledge of the geotechnical conditions
by interviewing experts to get their take on the area.
Alta Mira Canyon Storm Drainage and Erosion Control
Request for Proposal for Professional Engineering Services
Page 2 of 8
C-32
d) Right of Way
All existing improvements and private property within limits of work will be included
so that requirements to acquire any additional land for the proposed improvements
can be easily identified and appraised. This will be the case for construction, or
permanent easements, or the need for acquisitions as appropriate.
e) Investigation of Existing Canyon Conditions
The canyon will be thoroughly inspected by hiking and recording all features of
interest and potential challenges for the full extent of the canyon within the limits
of work and for a few hundred feet beyond if authorized my property owners.
Identify existing drainage components and evaluate the efficiency of each,
determining feasibility of incorporating into any proposed design alternative to
control the flows through the canyon system. In addition, an evaluation will be
made of the long term challenges of the existing drainage system and current rate
of erosion in the event that a "do-nothing" alternative is selected.
f) Existing outlet
Investigate options to prevent the existing CMP drainage pipe under PVDS from
being used as an access point into the gated neighborhood and for other
undesirable uses. Evaluate the need to provide ongoing maintenance to the outlet
structure and to improve the existing canyon down-stream of PVDS, minimizing
erosion, and the examine nature of the outlet of the canyon onto the beach and
make recommendations.
g) Investigate Existing Utilities
Research the existing underground and overhead utilities (including easements)
within the proposed area of work area to establish whether they may be affected
by proposed construction activities or permanent work.
Preliminary Designs Ideas
There are a number of ideas that will be explored either individually or in combination
with one another. These include some of the following:
• Canyon Fill with armament • Culverts
• Rip Rap • Retaining walls
• Piping with a wide variety of • Soil nail walls
alternatives • Gabions
• Energy dissipation
• Controlled Water Flow
• Armor Flex
• Caisson revetment
Alta Mira Canyon Storm Drainage and Erosion Control
Request for Proposal for Professional Engineering Services
Page 3 of 8
• Retention Basins
• Inlet Structures
• Outlet Structures
• Bypass Systems
C-33
Environmental Impacts & Permit Requirements
Using the services of an environmental consultant, the permit requirements
and resource agencies will be identified. Once conceptual designs have
been developed, each of the resource agencies will be contacted for
discussions to establish the viability of the designs and the probable
mitigation requirements.
Summary of Costs and Scheduling
Each of the preliminary designs will be reviewed for constructability and long
term operation expense to understand the practicality of each of the ideas.
The designs will then be evaluated based on environmental impact &
permitting requirements, probable cost and likely design and approval and
construction schedule.
Community Outreach
It is essential that the project receives the support of the community and so
outreach meetings will be held and the ideas and concerns will be noted
and incorporated into the design alternatives.
Presentation to City Council
A presentation of the Project Study Report and the proposal with a
recommendation will be made to the Cit Council for their action.
Alta Mira Canyon Storm Drainage and Erosion Control
Request for Proposal for Professional Engineering Services
Page 4 of 8
C-34
3. Deliverables
Plans shall be presented as hard copy for each of the phases of the work. The final
plans shall be submitted on CD or other acceptable electronic media in a format
acceptable to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, such as AutoCAD 2013. Although
no specifications are required for this preliminary design, Technical
specifications/explanations should accompany the plans. The Project Study
Report and cost estimate for alternatives shall be prepared and delivered in both
printed format and on CD. All documents shall be prepared in Microsoft Word
format. Spreadsheets shall be prepared in Microsoft Excel.
There will be substantial interaction and collaboration with the City in developing
the concept design, so specific milestones will be developed between the designer
and the City for review, comment and contribution. It is envisioned that there will
be at least 3 design-meetings, 3 community outreach meetings and an additional
2 with the other agencies as described above.
4. Consultant's Representative
The Consultant shall assign a primary representative and an alternate to
perform the services described in the scope of work. Both shall be identified
in the proposal. The Consultant's representative shall remain in responsible
charge of all duties from contract negotiations through project completion.
If the primary representative is unable to continue with the project, then the
alternate representative shall become the primary representative.
5. Additional Consultant Responsibilities
The successful Consultant shall be required to enter into a written contract
with the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and shall be responsible for
completing the specified services in Accordance with the City's standard
"Design Professional Services Agreement" which shall be prepared by the
City. A copy of this standard agreement is attached. This Request for
Proposal and the proposal, or any part thereof, may be incorporated into
and made a part of the final contract; however, the City reserves the right
to further negotiate the terms and conditions of the agreement with the
successful consultant. At a minimum, the agreement shall include a
maximum "not to exceed" cost to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. The
primary components and provisions of the agreement shall include errors
and omissions insurance coverage in the minimum amount of five million
dollars ($5,000,000).
6. City Responsibilities
The City shall provide the following to assist the Consultant with the project
and its completion:
Alta Mira Canyon Storm Drainage and Erosion Control
Request for Proposal for Professional Engineering Services
Page 5 of 8
C-35
-Existing record information as available.
-Sample Professional Services Contract.
In addition, the City shall be responsible for organizing all public outreach
meetings. For scheduling purposes, it may be assumed that City staff
turnaround time for review items will be five working days.
7. Submission of Proposal
The proposal shall be in letter format, and include at a minimum the
following information:
-Introduction and understanding of the project.
-Identification of any sub consultants.
-Consultants experience with at least three projects of similar
scope, including references with contact person and telephone
numbers.
-Identification of the project team, including organizational chart
and resumes of each team member. The Consultant's primary
representative shall be available on all occasions for discussion
with City staff. Specific responsibilities of each team member
shall be detailed along with anticipated total effort, expressed in
percentages of work hours, to be provided by each member of
the team.
Project schedule, including task start and completion dates. For
purposes of the proposal, it shall be assumed that the Consultant
will receive a Notice to Proceed no later than October 26, 2015,
and that three public outreach meetings will be conducted.
-Scope of work.
-A not-to-exceed amount for the services to be provided and
current fee schedule for each job classification submitted in a
separate, sealed envelope. The fee shall be broken down by
tasks and sub-tasks as appropriate and shall include
miscellaneous costs such as travel, duplication, etc. The City
reserves the right to eliminate any tasks from the scope of work,
and reduce the not-to-exceed amount by the cost of the task
eliminated and to negotiate costs as appropriate.
8. Selection Procedure
A review committee comprised of City staff will review the technical
proposals. Proposals will be evaluated based on the following criteria:
-Experience of the firm in providing similar services.
Alta Mira Canyon Storm Drainage and Erosion Control
Request for Proposal for Professional Engineering Services
Page6 of 8
C-36
-Relevant experience of individual team members assigned to the
project.
-Understanding of the project.
-References from clients for whom similar services were provided.
Previous services provided to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
by the firm and/or team members assigned to the project.
-Previous services provided to other clients on the Palos Verdes
Peninsula.
-Appropriateness of project schedule.
Any questions regarding this proposal shall be submitted in writing to the
Public Works Department, 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard, Rancho Palos
Verdes, CA 90275, attention: Ron Dragoo, Principal Engineer. Questions
may be submitted via fax to 310/544-5292. All questions must be received
no later than 5 p.m., August 25, 2015. Responses to all questions received
will be faxed to all prospective proposers on or before August 28, 2015.
9. General Information
-This Request for Proposal does not commit the City of Rancho
Palos Verdes to pay costs incurred in the preparation of a
response to this request. No work may begin until a "Professional
Services Agreement" is approved by the City Council, the
Agreement is fully executed, and the City issues a Notice to
Proceed on the project.
-Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Request for
Proposal, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes reserves the right to
reject any and all proposals and to waive any informality in a
proposal.
-Submission of a proposal shall constitute acknowledgement of all
terms and conditions set forth in the Request for Proposal unless
otherwise expressly stated in the proposal.
-All data, documents, and other products used or developed for
this project shall remain in the public domain upon completion of
the project. Similarly, all responses to this Request for Proposal
shall become the property of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
-The method of payment upon negotiation of a contract shall be
monthly payments based upon satisfactory progress and the
submission of invoices for payment.
5. Attachments
The following information is provided as reference:
o RPV Standard Professional Services Agreement
o Geological Map -Alta Mira Ancient Landslide Map 2007
o Alta Mira Canyon Map
Alta Mira Canyon Storm Drainage and Erosion Control
Request for Proposal for Professional Engineering Services
Page 7 of 8
C-37
o Alta Mira Canyon Drainage Basin Map
o 1983 Report "Recommendations and analysis for Drainage
Improvements"
o Final Environmental Impact Report "Abalone Cove Landslide
Stabilization Project"
o June 1990 report " Altamira Canyon Drainage Study"
o May 1993 "Alta Mira Canyon Pre-Design Report"
Alta Mira Canyon Storm Drainage and Erosion Control
Request for Proposal for Professional Engineering Services
Page 8 of 8
C-38
EXHIBIT .B - 2
Consultants Response to RFP
C-39
C-40
September 9, 2015
Attention: Ron Dragoo, Principal Engineer
Public Works Department
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Harris & Associates®
Subject: Harris Team Tames the Floodwaters of Alta Mira Canyon
Dear Mr. Dragoo:
The Harris & Associates (Harris) team has a clear vision of what is needed to address all of the Alta Mira Canyon
drainage and erosion challenges, as well as a proven track record of developing innovative solutions that reduce
costs while adding value. One example is a low flow diversion alternative that could be used for farming purposes
and implemented on a fast-track basis. This could reduce necessary canyon improvements, while meeting the
latest water quality enhancement requirements and new state guidelines for water conservation. As partners in
improving your drainage infrastructure, we offer the City of Rancho Palos Verdes (City) the following additional
advantages:
An Experienced Project Team. Project Team Manager, Randall Berry, PE has specialized in drainage designs
during his 30 year career, and recently completed the award winning Mccarrell Canyon and San Ramon Canyon
Drainage Improvements. Randall will be supported every step of the way by Elizabeth Reyes, PE who has prior
experience with your drainage projects. Harris handpicked a "Dream Team" group of sub-consultants, each chosen
for their specific expertise and local knowledge to match the needs and demands of your project.
Ninyo & Moore I Geotechnical Study Jim Barton, PG, CEG provided the design and construction geotechnical
services for the San Ramon Canyon project and has project specific knowledge regarding Abalone Cove and
Portuguese Bend Landslides.
KDM Meridian I Topographic Survey Rich Maher, PLS provided the aerial and ground surveys for Mccarrell
Canyon and San Ramon Canyon Drainage projects. He has successfully worked with Harris for over 25 years.
CWE I Specialized Hydraulic Studies Vik Bapna, PE, CPSWQ, QSD has served on the Harris team on 15 recent
drainage projects. He has over 25 years of natural canyon hydraulic analysis and design experience, including
the retention/ detention/ debris basins.
LSAI Environmental Clearance Study King Thomas has successfully overseen many similar environmental
clearances for sensitive drainage and grading projects.
KOA I Team & Outreach Facilitation Alan Braatvedt played a key role in the success of both the McCarrell
Canyon and San Ramon Canyon Drainage projects from the initial study phase and through design and
construction. His input design input and community outreach assistance will add value to your project.
Innovative Solutions. The Alta Mira Canyon project must strike a balance between delivering lasting drainage
and erosion control solutions while enhancing the local creek environment and aesthetics to the satisfaction of the
local community. To bring this to fruition, we have developed several innovative alternatives to efficiently meet the
City's objectives. Some of the major elements include:
Decision/ Risk Analysis Matrix. There will be four different, complex alternatives with a long list of variables to
compare. The Decision/Risk Analysis Matrix will facilitate the decision process, identifying which alternative
is best. The matrix assigns a weighting factor to each analysis category and a raw score value to exhibit how
alternatives match up on individual issues. The raw scores are multiplied by the weighting factor to generate a
weighted score, then added for each alternative to determine the highest ranking alternative factoring in all of
the complex issues.
700 Irvine, CA '!26~4 WcArel-larris.com
C-41
Effective Canyon Lining Alternative. As the Alta Mira Canyon Lining Detail will illustrate, we have developed
a cost effective solution that will eliminate seepage into the Abalone Cove Landslide, while providing an
aesthetic, self-healing, ungrouted riprap rock invert that will efficiently convey the 100-Year storm to the ocean
and stabilize canyon slopes. The proposed canyon lining could be just one part of several alternative solutions.
Low Flow Diversion Pipe Alternative along upper Narcissa Drive. This innovative sub-alternative (as illustrated
in the Low Flow Bypass Pipe Alternative Exhibit) would divert, via gravity, all low flows tributary to the west and
east forks of Alta Mira Canyon and convey them westerly along upper Narcissa Drive. These flows can be used
for farming purposes, with any overflow proceeding down a natural canyon bio-swale. One option would be to
implement this diversion independently of the other improvements on a fast-track basis. This could reduce the
need for impermeable improvements in the Alta Mira Canyon below, while meeting the latest water quality
enhancement requirements and new state guidelines for water conservation.
Diversion Tunnel Alternative to Portuguese Point Bedrock. Another idea would be to divert low flows (or
even larger storm flows, if costs are not substantial) that are tributary to Alta Mira Canyon, intercepting them
upstream of the Abalone Cove Landslide (see Bypass Tunnel Alternative Exhibit) and diverting them to the
ocean below via the most stable bedrock path to the east side of Portuguese Point. This alternative is bold, but
may prove too costly and have too many risks associated with navigating under/adjacent to the landslide.
Composite Easement Map Tied to Controls beyond the Private Property Lines. The private property lines in
Alta Mira Canyon may have shifted due to past land movement. Any drainage easement document that will
ultimately be generated needs to be an independent, cohesive, overarching document that defines a stand-
alone combined easement not directly dependent upon the location of the existing properties. It will be tied
to controls, not dependent upon the existing property lines, which could have shifted. However, the overlap of
each affected property will be approximated, shown, and mapped during this study phase. The study will detail
the acreage of each affected property overlapping with the larger easement, allowing drainage easement needs,
costs, and impacts to be approximated for each alternative.
Community Outreach. Alan Braatvedt will facilitate community outreach. He has assisted with similar outreach
processes for the McCarrell Canyon and San Ramon Canyon Drainage projects, including one-on-one and
small group meetings. Alan will support the Harris team, who has had a long list of past successful community
outreach efforts, including the two City projects mentioned, as well as Thornton Brady Storm Drain (Anaheim),
Sunset Strip Beautification (West Hollywood), Esplanade Streetscape Improvements (Redondo Beach),
and Imperial Highway Medians/Street Improvements (South Gate). We will work closely with the City to
develop a communication plan that includes meetings, graphic displays, informative photo simulations, and
questionnaires, and additional methods so the team is fully prepared for all community outreach and City
Council meetings.
Committed to Your Project's Success. The level of detail in this proposal is indicative of the level of care we
will maintain until the project is successfully completed. We look forward to the challenge of developing another
award winning project that serves your community for years to come!
Sincerely,
Harris & Associates
Randall Berry, PE
Principal-in-Charge
Randy.Berry@WeAreHarris.com
(949) 655-3900 x 2314
H I Harris & Associates.
C-42
UNDERSTANDING & APPROACH
This section matches the evaluation criteria in the demonstration of our understanding of the project.
ULTIMATE PROJECT GOALS
@Mini grou intrusion
., Man stormwater and nuisance water ru
ntrol erosion within Mira nyon
Project Goals
The City requires comprehensive, professional design services to prepare a Project Study Report (PSR) and
complete preliminary designs, including alternatives and costs. The goal of the preliminary designs will be to
minimize groundwater intrusion, more effectively manage stormwater and nuisance water runoff, and aid in
controlling erosion within Alta Mira Canyon. The Alta Mira Canyon study limits begin just upstream of Upper
Narcissa Drive (east of Sweetbay Road) down to the canyon outlet at the beach below Palos Verdes Drive South
(PVDS). The project area trends roughly north-south for approximately 5,000 linear feet (LF). The study will also
identify the environmental issues related to the proposed alternatives and develop the scope required to obtain the
required environmental clearances for each alternative.
The PSR will include a complete hydrology and hydraulic analysis and the preparation of preliminary design plans,
including alternative solutions, establishing the pros and cons associated with the various alternatives, the related
outside agency approvals, related construction costs, land
acquisition/easement needs and costs (if any), environmental
impact mitigation costs and realistic time frames for
implementation associated with each alternative.
The Harris team is poised to solicit public support via
community outreach meetings, similar to our efforts for the
Mccarrell Canyon and San Ramon Canyon projects. This
will be especially important given the need for several private
property owners to buy into the proposed improvement
concepts where their property may be affected.
In summary, Harris has assembled an unparalleled project
team that is qualified to perform the required study and
comprehensive preliminary design alternatives. Every
member of the Harris team has worked successfully together
on previous similar projects, including the Mccarrell Canyon
and San Ramon Canyon drainage projects. Some of these
working relationships extend back as far as 25 years. City staff
will directly benefit from the Harris team's recent successful
Mccarrell Canyon and San Ramon Canyon drainage projects,
which included many similar elements that will also likely
be required for the Alta Mira Canyon Drainage and Erosion
Control project. The Harris team's enthusiasm to participate
K A'..,SOCidf(''·' l lJnd~·r~,[,]llfilng [..,,
3
R Check List
~ Hydrology and hydraulic analysis
~ Preliminary design plans
~ Evaluation of alternative solutions
~ Outside agency approvals
~ Construction and soft costs
~ Land acquisition/easement needs
and costs
~ Environmental impact mitigation
costs
~Schedule
C-43
in this unique project should be readily apparent as we present several innovative alternatives, including exhibits
and cross sections, detailing our preliminary concepts.
Project Background/ Existing Conditions
Alta Mira Canyon is a mostly natural drainage course with a tributary area of approximately 860 acres (figure
1). According to previous studies performed for the City, the existing culvert crossings appear to have adequate
capacity to convey the 100-Year storm flows, namely upper Narcissa Drive (120-inch CMP west fork and 42-inch
CMP east fork), Sweetbay Drive (120-inch CMP west fork and 54-inch CMP east fork), lower Narcissa Drive (120-
inch CMP), and PVDS (120-inch CMP), where the bulked and burned flow flows peak at 2,290 CFS. Thus, lack of
drainage capacity in the existing canyon and/ or culvert deficiencies are not driving the project like they were for
both the Mccarrell Canyon and San Ramon Canyon drainage projects.
Instead, the project is being driven by the erosive damage (photos 1 and 2) that the fast moving, high volume flood
waters are capable of generating. It is also driven by the considerable sediment transport characteristics fed by the
unstable canyon walls loaded with cobbles and boulders of all sizes (photo 3), which have sheared off debris barrier
posts (photo 3), eroded the canyon floor into waterfall type sudden drop offs (photo 4), and carved overhanging
canyon walls (photos 2 and 5) in the lower canyon, downstream of PVDS.
Typical erosive damage upstream of PVDS/Lower Narcissa Drive Typical canyon boulders, note sheared off debris posts
Typical erosive damage downstream of PVDS Typical waterfall type drop off downstream of
PVDS
Typical carved overhanging canyon walls
downstream of PVDS
C-44
HYDROLOGY MAP
Altamira Canyon
Rancho Palos Verdes
-Flow
Figure 1
C-45
The project is also being driven by the reoccurring surface waters from Alta Mira Canyon that have been entering
into fissures leading to the lower bentonite slip planes below the Abalone Cove Landslide, which is thought to have
first started moving back in 197 4. Movement has been sporadic over the years, with a resurgence of movement
typically following heavy rainfall years and a slowing of movement after dry/low rainfall years and upon the
introduction of dewatering wells. Although there appears to be no significant movement in the immediate area,
the Abalone Cove Landslide has not been stabilized. Several years of drought have likely contributed to the relative
stability of the Abalone Cove Landslide; however, with the coming El Nino season, continued movement is likely.
Several other factors have also contributed to the extreme conditions in the canyon, such as residential
development in the watershed upstream. This has increased the amount of runoff from what was historically
encountered before development. Additionally, the physical characteristics of the steep narrow canyon, which
decreases the time of concentration (Tc), results in higher peak runoff and concentrates the flows into a very
narrow flow path that is highly conducive to erosion.
Project Study Report (PSR) Focus
The PSR will include the development of four design alternatives (with the likely possibility of several sub-options
that can be mixed and matched with various alternatives) that will aid in managing both stormwater flow and
nuisance water/low flows through the Alta Mira Canyon. The options will include one or a combination of various
mitigation measures, such as:
Canyon fill with armament (rip rap, Armor Flex,
etc.)
Culverts/pipe lines (extend existing culverts,
new parallel low flow pipe lines either buried or
anchored to the surface)
Walls (soil nail walls, gabions, retaining walls,
caisson revetment, etc.)
Other out of canyon low flow diversion pipe
lines/bypass systems, energy dissipation systems
(controlled water flow)
Retention basins/debris basins, tunneling
opportunities, and inlet and outlet structures related
to any pipeline system
The study will evaluate sections of Alta Mira Canyon between upper Narcissa Drive (East ofSweetbay Road) to the
inlet of the 120-inch CMP (photo 6} at lower Narcissa Drive (north of PVDS) and the downstream section located
south of PVDS where the 120-inch CMP outlets (photo 7} down to the canyon outlet to the Pacific Ocean (photo 8).
', '',>f'!;t
120-inch CMP inlet upstream of lower Narcissa 120-inch CMP outlet downstream of PVDS Alta Mira Canyon outlet to the Pacific Ocean
Drive/PVDS
Preparation of the PSR is an important first deliverable to developing a solution. The PSR must be of high quality,
concise, accurate, and include clear graphics as it will be an important tool for City staff to use for budgeting and
gaining support from the City Council and local community. Randall Berry, PE will oversee the production of
the report to the satisfaction of City staff. In addition to the detailed requirements established in the City's RFP
(which will be adhered to) our initial thoughts regarding the PSR include the development of a detailed matrix that
will also serve as an executive summary, concisely summarizing all of the findings. This will also be supported by
detailed back up calculations and thoroughly written supporting explanations elsewhere in the report.
f :ar1i5, & .i\~;s;.JCiare~, j Undt~rstzmd!ng K. 1\;:ip1onch
(~
C-46
Some of the elements that will be included in the Project Study Report summary matrix are as follows:
Total Estimated Construction Cost
Total Estimated Easement Cost (if any)
Total Estimated Environmental Cost
·-·---·--~-~~·~---~~ ~----~_, ____ ,,~---·---·+---------+------
Total Estimated PS&E Design Cost __ ·-·---~·-···--·--
Total Estimated PML£M A_d_m_i_n_C_o_st _______ _
Tota!_~ted Pr~jectco_s_t ______ .
Total Project Schedule
(with supporting Detailed __ t.,'li~~~.!l~L ____________ _
Constructability Issues ·---· . -----1------+------·--·+·-·--··-······-··----··
Environment Clearance Obstacles
Environment Mitigation Measures
.!\l!:;t_he_!!cs of lmpr~yements from Re:;_idence_s --·-· .. ·--··-·-.. --·t--··--··--··-····------.. ····-+-------··-·-··· ....... 1. _______ ... ____ 1_·~---·-----·
Geotechnlcal Issues/feasibility .
_ Su_sceptibility to Debris Flow Damage ____________ .. ________
1
________ ,, ..........
1
_ ... _. _____
1
_______
1
____ _
Susceptibility to Land Movement_~,!'_11.~-----··--·-----+---·----------·--·+·--·-----·-------t-------i-----·
.£!.~od Protection Level (Upstream of PVDS) ·-----·
. Flood .~rotection Level (DoW.!!~-~r~c!I.!" of PVDS) ------·-+---------•-·--·--·------r-------f---·----
to Abalone Cove Beach
Impacts to Private Resi!!_!_n_t_s __ _
Impacts to stability of adjacent dwellings
Impacts to Traffic
Impacts to Water Q~-~l~---
_ lmpac~t~~tate Water Conservation Goals
Impacts to Existing Utilities. .. .. -.... ---~~-----·~--t·----------r-----·-l--·----.. --·-·l-----·-------
Resulting Level of Flood Protection
_Resulting Service _Life ........... .
Future Maintenance & Access Issues
Note: The above Comparison Matrix will be prepared in a "Decision/Risk Analysis" matrix format (see sample
Decision/Risk Analysis Matrix sample on the following page) that assigns a weighting factor to each
category (for example "Cost" might have a weighting factor of 1.5 because it is considered more important,
than "Impacts to Traffic" which might have a weighting factor of 0.5 because it is considered less important).
The matrix will also assign raw score value from a chart of predetermined values (see scoring legend -for
example, if a particular alternative is the best among the options, its raw score would be highest in that
category). Then the raw score in each category is multiplied by the weighting factor to generate a weighted
score and added up to determine the highest ranking alternative.
C-47
SAMPLE DECISION/RISK ANALYSIS
San Ramon Canyon
Raw Score=
Construct
·ability
Weighted Score= Sum of Weighting factor x Raw Score
Scoring Legend
21 = IAlt. Is best solution among alternatives
1.S! = !Alt Is a very good solution
11 = !Alt. is an acceptable solution
0.51 = !Alt. Is a marginal solution
01 = I Not Acceptable
-11 = !Alt Is an inferior solution with problems
Availability Contracto<'s
Expertise
Weigting Legend
5
4
3
2
1
R/Wand
Easement
=
=
=
=
=
Geotechnical
Most Important/ Sensitive Issue
More Important/ Sensitive Issue
Average Important/ Sensitive Issue
Less Important I Sensitive Issue
Least Important I Sensitive Issue
Rood Impacts
to the City of
LA
Impacts to I Impacts I Resulting
to
Future
2
0.5
C-48
Primary Project Elements
The primary project elements have been divided into ten categories and further detailed with individual bullet
point sub-elements and issues below. The following observations and suggestions are just that: suggestions.
The Harris team is open to input and modifications. Working as a team, we can progress toward a detailed,
comprehensive list of alternatives and solutions that satisfy the concerns of the various stakeholders.
1 I Canyon Lining Cross Section
----\
\
\
\
\
\
IW~U~El!
MIN. 10"
OR WID!:liP'i1f
IMJIW!UC
CAUMAllONS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I~
Alta Mirn Canyon lining Detail
Figure2
One potential idea is to line the Alta Mira Canyon bottom where culvert pipes do not already exist along the
project limits beginning from upper Narcissa Drive or a bit downstream at Sweetbay Road (if lining the canyon
reaches between upper Narcissa Drive and Sweetbay Road is determined to be too impactful) and extended
throughout the canyon all the way to the outlet at the beach.
Harris' initial thoughts as to how the individual canyon lining elements might be "layered" (figure 2) are detailed as
follows:
1. Clear and grub the canyon bottom.
2. Perform only minor, if any, excavation grading so that a small amount of fill is placed to smooth out the
canyon bottom. This ensures the fill material is less permeable.
3. Place an impermeable barrier. Consider thickness of a flexible, plastic impermeable material such as 60-
Mil thick linear low-density polyethylene geo-membrane. This is suggested because some plastic or fabric
impermeable liners may be subject to tearing due to future canyon movement whereas this material is typically
"self-healing/sealing" after movement occurs. Provisions should also include things like terraced steps in the
profile and non-slip/friction type impermeable material to keep fill on top of impermeable membrane from
slipping downstream.
4. Place a sub-drain system with perforated pipe so the rock galley around the pipe can stand alone and function
as intended with or without perforated pipe. The rock galley should be wrapped in fabric to keep fine soil out.
The sub-drain system should be considered a temporary feature in the event that future land movement should
occur, which would result in shearing, crimping, or clogging the pipe.
C-49
5. Place a thin layer of permeable fill and/or rock base on top
of the rock galley to help level and separate the subsequent
riprap rock layer from the sub-drain layer
6. Place a riprap rock trapezoidal cross-section (as shown on
figure 2).
7. Place smaller rocks along the riprap rock invert to make it
drivable for maintenance vehicles, similar to San Ramon
Canyon (photo 9).
Additional considerations related to the canyon lining include:
Grading back steep sided slopes to make them more stable
as part of the lining solution.
Strategically locate the required access roads into the canyon San Hamon Canyon -Example of smaller rock placed along
h f S b R d d h . l ' riprap rock invert to make it drivable for maintenance vehicles sue as rom weet ay oa , own to w ere a potentia
debris basin might be located, as has been suggested in
previous studies. Note: The entire lined creek bottom could
also serve as a maintenance access road (figure 2 and photo 9).
Straightening the creek increases velocity and is not desired
by the residents; however, it does reduce side slope erosion
in the canyon that typically occurs at bends.
Potential Solution: Straighten the canyon when it makes
sense and add extra super-elevated (raised) rip rap lining
on the outside of all unavoidable curves (photo 10).
Although a concrete swale with welded wire mesh was
recommended as a canyon liner in previous studies, this
would not be a preferred alternative because it will be
prone to cracking and become ineffective if/when future
land movement occurs. Further, per the previous EIR, it was
specifically rejected by the local community due to its poor
aesthetics. Ungrouted riprap is being recommended due to
its more natural look.
This existing canyon bank is on the outside of a sizeable curve
upstream of the lowest 120-inch CMP at lower Narcissa Drive.
This could warrant super-elevated rip rap rock as well as a rock
gab ion wall or other retaining system
The previously prepared Charles Abbott study mentions keeping the canyon
in its natural state between the debris basin and main head-scarp of the
Abalone Cove Landslide. TI1is is not recommended because it will encourage
infiltration. This reach should receive the same impermeable lining the rest
of the canyon.
The City's RFP mentioned the consideration of various channel lining
materials, such as "Armor Flex" (photo 11). Armor Flex is expensive, requires Armor Flex prefabricated liner being
a uniformly prepared subgrade, and is prone to failure during land movement. placed in a controlled, uniform channel
. . . . . cross section. Likely not suitable for Alta It will not be self-compactmg and self-adJUStmg to land movement like Mira canyon
ungrouted riprap rock will, so it is not recommended. However, it can be
detailed as such as part of the vetting process in the PSR.
C-50
2 J Diversion of Low Flow Via Pipe above/along Upper Narcissa Drive
low Flow Bypass Pipe Alternative
Figure 3
1
D
~~-N;~;·,~~",;'~,:c/
SeePVDS I
Photol2
One of the Harris team's innovative
ideas would be to divert all of the low
flows tributary to upper Narcissa
Drive and away from Alta Mira
Canyon by intercepting them in both
the west fork and east fork creeks
before they can flow south and
infiltrate into the Abalone Cove
Landslide (figure 3).
Larger storm flows would still
continue downstream. The collected
low flow runoff would be conveyed via
gravity in a pipe along upper Narcissa
Drive. Shutoff valves would be
installed to stop flows, when required,
like when a storm is predicted. TI1e
pipe would outlet into the closest
natural canyon west and outside of the
active Abalone Cove Landslide area.
The natural canyon would function as
a bio-swale to treat low flow runoff,
irrigating the trees and shrubs along
this canyon (photo 12), as well as the canyon below and adjacent to Abalone Cove Beach. Ideally, these flows would
be absorbed into the ground before they reach the ocean at the bottom of the canyon. The likelihood of the low
flow runoff ever making it to the ocean could be considerably reduced if the existing farming operation, adjacent
to the westerly canyon, (photo 13) was open to be irrigated in both the large open field area and along both sides of
the long tree lined entrance and the tree grouping visible at the PVDS entrance in both {photos 12 and 13). Given
the price of water and penalties for overuse of irrigation, it seems likely this new source of free water would not be
refused.
This existing canyon, west of the project area, could become an
ideal natural bio-swale for a gravity fed low-flow diversion from
Alta Mira Canyon
This aerial view of the westerly canyon shows an active farming operation (circled
and lining the entrance) giving hope that the private property owner might be open
to receiving the free, low-flow diversion water from Alta Mira Canyon
Additional considerations related to this potential low flow via pipe alternative include:
The proposed pipe diversion could be so successful in reducing flow to Alta Mira Canyon that it reduces the
amount of effort and cost associated with otherwise improving Alta Mira Canyon downstream. At the very
least, this diversion could be implemented as a Phase I improvement well ahead of any of the more costly and
disruptive canyon lining/grading improvements.
larri::1 & /\ssociatl~s) LnclC'rstJr-.ding f~ f\pproach
li
C-51
The proposed pipe diversion should be welcomed by the approving regulatory agencies, water quality board,
and the local community, who expressed concern that the low flow water should not be wasted in the ocean.
Thus, the environmental clearance process should be simplified and streamlined. This is consistent with new,
state-mandated water recycling and conservation goals, and could even position the City to receive state grant
money for water conservation.
Harris has previously designed and constructed a similar low flow diversion to allow a natural creek to serve as
a bio-swale on the City of Laguna Beach's Canyon Acres Storm Drain project (photos 14and15).
Harris' Canyon Acres Drive Drainage improvement project diverted
low flows via gravity using a small concrete dam upstream of the inlet
headwall
The natural bio-swale along Canyon Acres Drive benefited from the
diverted low flows keeping trees and shrubs healthy and providing a low
maintenance water quality enhancement solution
Refer to the dewatering well discussion that follows, whereby
the diversion pipe in upper Narcissa Drive could also be used to
divert the dewatering well water for use as farmland irrigation
water.
This also bucks the recent trend where many cities are forcing
the construction of expensive, unnatural (often concrete
lined) bio-swales to achieve improved water quality. Thus, it
is encouraging when an existing natural canyon and adjacent
farmland can be utilized at a significantly reduced cost.
Several reports, as well as the EIR, noted that there is a natural
spring in Kelvin Canyon (also known as the east branch of
Alta Mira Canyon, upstream of upper Narcissa Drive). This
continuous water source, which has been feeding water into the
subgrade, makes a pipe diversion to the westerly canyon all the
The Canyon Acres neighborhood was so thankful for the
storm drain and repaving project they sent the city of
Laguna Beach a Hi!ppy New Year's card!
more important, and should receive support from the local community that expressed concerned about the
loss of this resource.
Additional community concerns about the loss of the Kelvin Canyon spring, which was noted to serve as
a birdbath and drinking hole for other native animals, could be overcome by installing several permanent
birdbaths and drinking holes upstream of the proposed low flow diversion at upper Narcissa Drive that are fed
by the spring and are fortified against washing away during larger storm flows.
The majority of the proposed diversion pipe line will be within upper Narcissa Drive. This should simplify
construction and long term maintenance/access, as opposed to putting a diversion pipe within Alta Mira
Canyon, putting the solution well outside the limits of the active Abalone Cove Landslide. This eliminates the
risk of damage due to future storms and land movement.
Some potential downsides to diverting the low flows to the westerly natural canyon as proposed, which will
have to be studied and vetted, include:
! (JndersLH1dinf:, P.v. App(otit.::h
I I
C-52
1. Trenchless Installation Required: The existing profile grade along
upper Narcissa Drive averages 0.60% flowing towards the east, thus
a low flow pipe flowing west would be "bucking" grade. With a
roadway finished surface elevation of approximately 409 feet at the
west fork of Alta Mira Canyon, a pipe five feet deep would have an
invert elevation of 404 feet The highest point along the proposed
low flow pipe alignment is a natural ridge point, half way between
the cul-de-sac end of upper Narcissa Drive and the farmland/
natural canyon, and has a ground elevation of approximately 428 feet. Assuming a 0.30% pipe slope and
given the distance of 2,380 feet from the west fork of Alta Mira Canyon to the natural ridge point, the pipe
invert would be approximately 396.9 feet at the natural ridge point, resulting in a pipe depth of 31.1 feet.
The canyon and farmland are compatible with this grade, with the average field grade at approximately
3 71.5 feet. Unfortunately, the maximum depth of pipe at 31.1 feet is a bit too deep for open trenching, thus,
trenchless pipe installation is recommended for at least a portion oflow flow pipe installation. Regardless,
a trenchless pipe installation is likely the best way to cross under the natural ridge from the cul-de-sac end
of upper Narcissa Drive to the farmland/natural canyon. The bottom line is that a gravity flow installation
oflow flow pipe installation in upper Narcissa Drive is feasible.
2. Excessive Flows Possible: These low flows could be excessive, such that they eventually make it to the
ocean, which is not preferred. However, the farmland's high irrigation needs and the installation of a
gravity-fed water tank could remedy this issue.
3. Destabilizing of Dormant Landslide Possible: The low flows could be considered destabilizing to the old
dormant landslide upon which this canyon lies on its very edge; however, the adjacent farmland is being
irrigated with no apparent land movement, so this may not be an issue.
4. Property Owners May Be Opposed: Property owners along the alignment of the diversion pipe and
westerly canyon may object to the easement and water diversion. Given the benefits to the farmland, trees,
environment, and strict irrigation restrictions, it would seem shortsighted to refuse free irrigation water.
3 I Diversion Tunnel to Portuguese Point Bedrock
Bypass Tunnel Alternative
rigure <I
Another option would
be to divert the low
flows (or 100-Year
flows) tributary to Alta
Mira Canyon by
intercepting them
upstream of the Abalone
Cove Landslide before
they can flow south and
infiltrate (figure 4).
While many of the same
benefits to Alta Mira
Canyon and the
Abalone Cove Landslide
noted previously would
also apply to this
solution, there are
perhaps just as many
downsides. In fact,
although this alternative
will still be considered
C-53
and fully vetted as part of the PSR investigation, it might be dismissed early due to the tunnel's relative complexity,
prohibitively excessive costs, and risks associated with attempting to tunnel under, and adjacent to, the slip planes
of an active landslide.
During the vetting process, we would consider both a small tunnel to divert low flows and a larger tunnel to
divert the 100-Year storm, because it may be that the larger bypass tunnel could be built for a fraction more than
a low flow bypass tunnel. Since lack of flow capacity in Alta Mira Canyon is not an issue, the need for a 100-Year
diversion tunnel is greatly diminished as an effective alternative and would make it hard to compete cost-wise
compared to a canyon lining alternative.
41 Diversion Pipe within/along Alta Mira Canyon
..._ ..._
\
\
\
\
\
\
\/EXfl.
I
I
I
I
I
\
I
I
I
I 1--·
---
.Alta Mira Canyon lining Detail with Bypass Pipe
Figures
Previous studies have suggested the diversion oflow flows (and even the 100-Year flows) tributary to Alta Mira
Canyon can be achieved by intercepting them upstream of the Abalone Cove Landslide and conveying them in a
buried or above ground pipe along Alta Mira Canyon (figure 5). Any pipe in the canyon would also likely require
a canyon lining treatment: an added expense above the lining cost. Many of the previously discussed diversion
benefits to Alta Mira Canyon and the Abalone Cove Landslide would apply; however, there are just as many
downsides.
Although these in-canyon pipe alternatives will be considered and vetted as part of the PSR investigation, they
may be dismissed due to the pipe's vulnerability, both from flood damage and land movement. Buried pipe is hard
to inspect for damage and a damaged pipe could inject concentrated flows in the landslide, defeating its purpose.
Pipe anchored above ground can be more easily inspected, but is in serious danger of damage by flooding and
land movement. Also, the local community and EIR were adamantly against a large buried pipe that would render
the canyon a linear park where birds and animals could find no refuge and the creek aesthetic would be lost.
During the vetting process, we would consider both a small low flow parallel pipe in the canyon and a larger pipe
to convey the 100-Year storm, but for reasons previously mentioned, the associated risks of failure combined with
relatively high costs may lead one to conclude that these alternatives are likely not to rise to the top. Additionally,
preliminary field research revealed that the existing 120-inch CMP is being used as an illegal access point into the
gated community and a loitering place. Consideration will be given to preventing these activities without adversely
affecting the flood protection level.
Harris & Associates I Understanding & Approach
!4
C-54
5 I Dewatering Wells
Dewatering wells have proven effective in slowly the Abalone Cove Landslide and will continue to be part of the
solution as a part of any alternative. The following are related observations:
According to past studies, there needs to be more dewatering wells added in the project area. Existing
dewatering wells are likely undersized and prone to shearing and failure because they are so small. Strategically
placed larger wells with steel casings would be more effective and less prone to damage by land movement.
Wherever the present dewatering well spoil-water is dispersed, it may not continue to be adequate in the future
if the amount of water pumped is increased. This will be addressed as part of the PSR.
The previous EIR recommends reusing dewatering well spoil-water, which leads to another Harris innovation:
where feasible, pumping the water up/down to the diversion pipe in upper Narcissa Drive and using it as
irrigation water in the adjacent farmland. This would give dual use from the low flow diversion pipe.
Additional consideration might be given for using the dewatering well water to irrigate plants and trees at
Abalone Cove Beach and/or the beach bluff parking lot where the bluff seems more stable.
The previous EIR noted dewatering wells might be good near the Ginger Root/Narcissa/Cinnamon
intersection, along Thyme Place and close to Alta Mira Canyon on the ridge about 300 feet west of the former
Warner house and perhaps in Wayfarer's Chapel parking lot, and near the tennis courts near PVDS.
Harris team member, Ninyo & Moore, will assist with locating the existing and new dewatering wells and
pump station design experts CWE will help provide dewatering well cost estimate information.
6 I Survey and Drainage Easement Issues
One of the first orders of work will be to get an
accurate aerial survey and supplemental ground survey
at all culvert undercrossings, key areas covered by tree
canopies, and other critical areas. The Harris team
includes KDM Meridian (KDMM), who is a trusted
resource in providing high quality survey and right-of-
way engineering. We have developed a base aerial
survey zone (figure 6) (shown in white with a red
border) and two alternative (optional) expanded aerial
survey zones: namely a low flow diversion aerial survey
zone (shown in white with an orange border) and a
tunnel aerial survey zone (shown in yellow with a
yellow border).
Additional considerations related to survey and
easements include:
KDMM will utilize the City's GIS mapping to show the existing property lines, which is deemed the most
practical method given that this is a study-level document and showing firm property lines would require a
record of survey since they have moved over time.
Approximately 28 properties straddle Alta Mira Canyon in the study area.
Preliminary Title Reports (PTRs) can be obtained at an approximate cost of $500 each. Their value may or may
not be warranted at this level. Additional properties along the potential low flow pipe diversion alignment and
tunnel alignment may also warrant obtaining PTRs. As such, obtaining up to 35 PTRs will be offered as an
optional additional service in the separate fee schedule.
C-55
Because the property lines may have shifted due to past land movement, any drainage easement document that
will be generated should be an independent, cohesive, overarching document that is a stand-alone, combined
easement, not directly dependent upon the location of the existing properties. It will be tied to controls not
dependent upon the existing properties which could have shifted. However, the overlap of each affected
property can be approximated, shown, and eventually mapped with a legal description and map during the
PS&E phase. During this study phase the overlap acreage of each affected property will be approximated and
illustrated on a clear, easy to read exhibit for use in evaluating the various related alternatives.
7 I Geotechnical Issues
A critical part of the PSR preparation will involve a
geotechnical opinion as to the feasibility and risks
associated with each of the alternatives. The Harris team
includes Ninyo & Moore, who is a trusted geotechnical
expert with local knowledge of the Abalone Cover
and Portuguese Bend slide areas. Although the RFP
states no additional sub-surface exploration is to occur
during this study phase, we believe the previous studies
(figure 7) will provide enough data to guide the design
recommendations, decisions and related risks for the
proposed alternatives. Part ofNinyo & Moore's input
will include locating and quantifying the number of
dewatering walls and where future borings should be
obtained in the subsequent design phase, as required, for
each alternative.
Additional considerations related to geotechnical
investigation include:
One important aspect of the study will be to
determine which homes are in danger from
movements and significant damage immediately
adjacent to Alta Mira Canyon and whether they are Figure 7
already damaged. This should be one of the elements in the risk matrix about impacts to adjacent properties.
There may be no feasible way to stop the Abalone Cove Landslide; however, we may be able to slow it down
to near zero movement for a long period of time. Both the City and its consultants should take a collaborative
approach to protect each other from related liabilities.
The City has an on-staff geologist, Jim Lancaster, who should be tapped as a resource for past studies, borings
and general knowledge of the area.
There may be only one boring available from a 1978 study, which could present some challenges.
Reportedly, above upper Narcissa Drive, the buried bedrock planes tilt favorably into the slope, which is why
there has not been the same movement as below upper Narcissa Drive.
The toe berm recommended in previous reports will be vetted and likely not advanced as a viable solution.
Reportedly, there are existing inclinometers and survey monuments that can be studied. The addition of
more inclinometers and survey monuments can be recommended to be installed prior to and/or during
construction.
As part of the PSR we will evaluate the value for debris barriers, debris basins and retention basins. (Note: the
existing debris barriers shown previously (photo 3) were sheared off by boulders.) The initial thought on debris
basins and retention basins is that they have the potential to increase groundwater infiltration, which is not
good. There also does not appear to be enough flat area for their installation, according to previous studies,
g,_ ;\(·!pro<.lc·h
C-56
which could only find room for 22% of the total
volume of potential debris that can be generated by
the canyon. Both debris basins and retention basins
require a lot of maintenance. Finally, the existing
canyon bottom (as it exists and if a rip rap liner is
added) and CMP culverts appear not to warrant a
debris basin. The existing/proposed canyon system
appears to be able to pass cobbles and boulders as
necessary and the existing CMP pipes appear to pass
the debris without sustaining damage. The 120-inch
CMP under PVDS and lower Narcissa Drive, which
has a concrete liner along the bottom, was inspected
and showed no noticeable damage due to cobble
(photo 17).
8 I Environmental Clearance Issues
Existing 120-inch CMP at lower Narcissa Drive/PVDS appears not to be
worn from passing cobbles and boulders
Some of the environmental clearance considerations
related to any alternative will include:
As part of the environmental analysis Harris will utilize LSA to complete a California Environmental Quality
Act ( CEQA) checklist and develop an environmental scope for each alternative. Also if City staff would like to
preserve the option of using federal funds in the future, the project would also need environmental clearance
under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). With City staff concurrence, this would be included in
the environmental scope for each alternative.
A new EIR will likely be recommended; however, the San Ramon Canyon drainage project only required the
use of a simpler Mitigated Negative Declaration via an Army Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit 13 -bank
stabilization, Nationwide Permit 27 -habitat restoration, and Nationwide Permit 43, stormwater management
facilities. The San Ramon Canyon project included considerable canyon fill, similar riprap canyon liner and
a complete diversion of the flows from the canyon. The Mccarrell Canyon drainage project also utilized this
same Nationwide Permit. Thus, the feasibility of using this nationwide permit to obtain the required clearances
will definitely be pursued.
The recently completed San Ramon Canyon drainage project relied upon offsetting mitigation land (for
riparian habitat lost) that the City had banked in reserve when it set aside the Palos Verdes Shoreline Park,
which is a natural coastal preserve near the San Ramon Canyon project. This existing preserve land could
still have excess acreage credits that could be used as offsetting mitigation for any lost habitat as a part of this
project.
Future bird surveys need to be performed during peak
use periods since past complaints were made that
surveys were done at wrong time of year.
The previously prepared EIR mentions that 500 new
homes are slated in the future. 1bis seems unlikely to
still be the case given the instability of the land in this
area.
A canyon lining solution that includes ungrouted riprap
rock in the canyon invert is considered a "soft bottom"
that does not contribute to a loss of habitat that a
concrete lined canyon invert would.
Continuous beach access for recreational use by the
public must be maintained via a detour trail during
construction (photo 18 and photo 8).
&
17
The existing trail marker where the creek meets the beach is a sign of
the extensive trails that serve the entire Palos Verdes Peninsula and
access must be maintained at all times
C-57
Various regulatory I resource agencies will be contacted and/ or met with in order to get input on the various
alternatives and related permitting and mitigation requirements.
Previous studies gave consideration to the placement of a toe berm on the beach to help stabilize the Abalone
Cove Landslide; however, from an environmental perspective, the placement of fill on the beach would be
unacceptable. From a geotechnical perspective, a toe berm might not even be effective given the landslide
plane's apparent depth that is thought to extend 20 feet below sea level. Finally, a toe berm would also likely be
unfeasible due to the inevitable wear and tear of the incessant wave action on the beach.
The previous EIR noted there were no previous Native American cultural resources found.
9 I Community Outreach and City Council Meetings
Some of the community outreach considerations will include:
Alan Braatvedt from KOA will assist in the outreach process, including one-on-one and small group meetings
as needed.
We will build upon the Harris team's past successful community outreach meetings, including Mccarrell
Canyon Drainage project (RPV), San Ramon Canyon Drainage project (RPV), Thornton Brady Storm Drain
(Anaheim), Sunset Strip Beautification (West Hollywood), Esplanade Streetscape Improvements (Redondo
Beach), and Imperial Highway Medians/Street Improvements (South Gate).
The Harris team will work closely with City staff to develop graphic displays, a communication plan,
questionnaires, etc. so the team is fully prepared in advance of all community outreach and City Council
meetings.
City of Redondo Beach, Esplanade community outreach meeting West Hollywood Sunset Strip Beatification community outreach meeting
C-58
10 I Existing Utility Issues
Los Angeles County Sanitation District will not allow any low flow runoff to be diverted to their sewer system.
If they have not done so recently, LA County should CCTV inspect all of their lines within the project area and
line or rehabilitate these sewer mains to make sure they are not contributing to the groundwater.
There are dual 14-inch force sewers above ground that must be protected against land movement (photo 21).
There is an above ground gas main that runs through the project.
Removing private septic systems and adding roof drains, although recommended in some previous studies,
will not provide a commensurate benefit, nor affect the amount of water getting into the subgrade (basically
too little amount of flow and/or it never makes it that deep). Thus, it is not recommended going forward.
Consideration should be given to relocating SCE manholes in the bottom of the creek (photo 22).
Harris will inspect the CMP pipes along Alta Mira Canyon, evaluate their condition, and make
recommendations as to their rehabilitation (such as lining or replacing). 'This will increase their useful life
and decrease their potential for infiltrating into the subgrade. These costs will be reflected in the project
alternatives.
The dual 14-inch force sewers above ground pass through our project
zone and must be protected at all times
19
SCE has manholes in the bottom of the Alta Mira Canyon that should be
relocated out of the creek bed
C-59
I SUBCONSULTANTS
Ninyo & Moore I Geotechnical
Ninyo & Moore has been providing geotechnical engineering, environmental engineering, and materials testing
and inspection services to public agencies, including the City of Rancho Palos Verdes for the San Ramon Canyon
Storm Drain Improvements project. The experience ofNinyo & Moore's geotechnical staff encompasses projects
throughout the southwestern United States, including design and construction of pipelines, landslide repairs,
and other public and private works. They have expertise in soil and foundation analysis, underground structures,
erosion, shoring, tunneling, seismicity, liquefaction analysis, and geologic hazards. Similar projects include
Asilomar Boulevard Landslide Evaluation for Pacific Palisades, and the Santa Ana-Delhi Channel (FOl) Mitigation,
Rehabilitation, and Coastal Access Improvement Project for Newport Beach.
KDM Meridian I Aerial and Ground Topographic Survey
KDM Meridian (KDMM) is a professional land surveying consulting firm, specializing in GPS, conventional land
surveying, and project mapping. They where chosen for their direct experience with City agencies, providing
topographic and mapping services for the purpose of public works design improvements. KD MM was part of the
Harris team for both the Mccarrell Canyon and San Ramon Canyon Storm Drain Improvements. They are also the
City's on-call surveyor. Richard C. Maher, PLS, a principal of the firm, has extensive experience with public works
surveying. For the past 14 years, he and the survey personnel at KDMM have proven their expertise in surveying
for public works design improvement projects by operating as the survey department or an extension of the survey
department for a number of local prominent public works design engineering firms. At least three-quarters of the
projects performed by the firm are directly related to public works improvement and the staff at KDM Meridian is
well versed in the requirements and understanding of these objectives and needs.
California Watershed Engineering I Specialty Hydraulics
California Watershed Engineering (CWE) is a dynamic, award-winning firm that has provided similar hydraulics
and debris basin feasibility analysis services on various similar projects, including the San Bernardino County Lake
Gregory Sediment Management and Bio-Retention Design, Orange County Water District (OCWD) Caltrans
District 7 North Pork Matilija Creek Geomorphology, Fish Passage, and Engineering; City of Burbank Johnny
Carson Park Improvement and Stream Restoration; City of Temecula Flood Control Channel Reconstruction and
Repair; and many others. CWE has previously provided services for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and a number
of local clients, including, but not limited to the Cities of Palos Verdes Estates, Lomita, Torrance, Carson, and Long
Beach.
LSA Associates, Inc. I Environmental
LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) has provided services in environmental analysis, biology, wetlands, habitat restoration,
natural resource management, and water quality and has prepared several thousand environmental documents for
both public agencies and private applicants. The Biology/Natural Resources staff has a strong history of successfully
processing authorizations from the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), the California Coastal Commission (CCC) (including local agencies that issue Coastal
Development Permits [CDPs] through approved Local Coastal Plans), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS). Additionally, LSA is currently overseeing the implementation and monitoring of plans for a wide variety
of habitat restoration and enhancement projects throughout California for public and private entities. LS.A's staff
has a broad base of "hands-on" experience that enables its experts to efficiently address and remediate problems
encountered in the implementation of environmental restoration projects. Perhaps more importantly, this
experience enables LSA to advise its clients on the practicality of various permit conditions. LSA has experience
with projects similar to the proposed Alta Mira Canyon Drainage project, including the Newport Coast/Crystal
)0
C-60
Cove Developments (Newport Beach), the Parkside Estates project (Huntington Beach), and the Jamboree Road
Bridges Seismic Retrofit project (Newport Beach).
KOA Corporation I Team and Outreach Facilitation
Founded in 1987, KOA Corporation (KOA) is one of the leading traffic engineering and transportation planning
and design firms in California. KOA provides consulting services to both public and private sectors. KOA was also
an essential part of the Mccarrell Canyon and San Ramon Canyon Storm Drain Improvement projects.
21
C-61
I CONSULTANT EXPERIENCE
Projects of Similar Scope
This section highlights your evaluation criteria in relation to the experience of the firm providing similar services,
relevant experience of individual team members assigned to the project, references, and previous services provided
both to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and the Palos Verdes Peninsula.
City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Study for San Ramon
Canyon Stormwater Flood Reduction
Team: Randall Berry, Elizabeth Reyes, Jim Barton, Rich Maher, Alan
Braatvedt
The adjacent, active Tarapaca Landslide was feeding debris into the
San Ramon Canyon, which large rain events transported to 25th Street
below. More than 250 homes and a nearby sewer line were in harm's way,
and access was threatened to both 25th Street and Palos Verdes Drive
East (PVDE) Switchbacks. In 2009, Harris provided a project study
report and preliminary design for six alternatives for improvements to
the canyon. The designs carefully balanced the dual needs of a lasting
drainage and slope stabilizing solution, including the Palos Verdes
Drive East (PVDE) "switchbacks': with the enhancement of the local
creek environment that met outside agency approval requirements.
KDM Meridian was also part of the study team, providing topographic
surveys, and right-of-way engineering.
Public Outreach. Harris' project study report was an essential tool
,,,-~~~~911"'~--~~~~~ ....
utilized by the City for public outreach events to educate, inform,
and get input from the local community.
City of Rancho Palos Verdes, PS&E for San Ramon
Canyon Stormwater Flood Reduction
Team: Randall Berry, Elizabeth Reyes, Jim Barton, Rich Maher, Alan
Braatvedt
Based upon the Harris team's successful preliminary designs completed
in 2009, Harris was selected to complete the PS&E construction
documents for this $17.7 million project; the largest single project
undertaken by the City. The project became all the more urgent after the
flooding that was experienced during the winter of 2010. Critical project
elements included:
Lower Tunnel
300' long, 80" hand-mined tunnel in solid bedrock
at 38% grade atop a 150' high Pacific Ocean coastal
bluff
Upper Tunnel
2,000 foot long 80-inch rib & lagging tunnel though
a dormant landslide at 13% grade that was as much
as 90-feet deep below PVDE
Custom
Inlet &
Outlet Structures
Requiring CIDH piles with grade beams and
tieback anchors
Access Road & Gravity Buttress Fill
Restoring the natural canyon while maintaining
access
C-62
The project included a complete hydrology and hydraulic analysis, the preparation of easements, and design
plans. Environmental impact clearances and mitigation measures included planting all affected areas with native
species, geotechnical investigations and recommendations, an opinion of construction costs, and complete project
specifications. The Harris team included KDM Meridian, who provided supplemental ground surveying and right-
of-way and easement engineering, as well as Ninyo & Moore, who provided geotechnical engineering.
The final solution re-routed floodwaters and stabilized eroding canyon walls, which were encroaching on the
roadway about five feet every year. Additionally, a storm drain inlet structure and two tunnels diverted water
under roads and through dormant landslide for more than three-quarters of a mile to a new outlet at the base
of a 150-foot-high coastal bluff. Ultimately, we were able to provide 100-year flood protection to downstream
neighbors. The project also improved access from Palos Verdes Drive South (PVDS) via a maintenance access road
down a steep slope that was landscaped with drought tolerant plants.
Public Outreach. Harris partnered with the City to deliver successful community outreach to the community from
preliminary design through the ribbon cutting. We attended community meetings and even provided graphic
support for the development of print and emailed invitations for the ribbon cutting ceremony.
Environment. The environmental clearances for the project included:
US Army Corps of Engineers (Section 404 of the California Coastal Commission-federal consistency
Clean Water Act) determination
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (1602 -
Streambed Alteration Agreement)
City of Rancho Palos Verdes -CEQA Lead agency
Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board
-40 I certification
The environmentally conscious design also included provisions for protecting the beach during construction via
extensive Best Management Practices (BMPs) to avoid contamination.
Innovation. This project received the 2014 "Innovative Project of the Year" award (and National APWA Winner
2015), which is a testament to the unique and creative trenchless technology solutions that Harris generated to
solve this reoccurring threat to life, property, and emergency access to the entire Palos Verdes Peninsula.
City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Mccarrell Canyon Storm Drain
Team: Randall Berry, Elizabeth Reyes, Rich Maher, Alan Braatvedt
Harris provided professional design services for the preparation of
PS&E construction documents for this $6 million, APWA 2009, "Project
of the Year''. The 66-inch diameter pipe was designed to convey a 100-
year storm and collect runoff from the steep natural Mccarrell Canyon,
which totals to 340 acres. The primary goal was to better protect Palos
Verdes Drive, the affected residences downstream, and the existing 150
foot vertical coastal bluff. 1bere was a repetitious cycle of dangerous,
high-velocity flooding and regular maintenance to remove sediment
deposits at the upstream debris catcher where McCarrell Canyon meets
Palos Verdes Drive.
Harris' services included preparing a detailed hydrology and hydraulics
study report, undertaking geotechnical studies, survey, environmental
clearances, coordinating/consulting with all governing authorities and
full PS&E design of the proposed storm drain system. Unique design
elements included:
C-63
Upsizing the pipe to account for additional "bulk and burn" flow volumes, which allowed the storm drain to
convey small cobble and sand to replenish the beach below
Special velocity reducer rings to dissipate energy from the flows as they are conveyed to the bottom of a 150
foot high coastal bluff
Use of a tunnel operation to install the proposed storm drain pipe to the bottom of the 150 foot high coastal
bluff
City of Irvine, Orange County Great Park (OCGP) -Basin# 1 Slope Repairs
Team: Randall Berry, Elizabeth Reyes
In anticipation of the potential El Nino storms in the coming
winter, the City required repairs to failing existing slopes and the
improvement of an existing headwall outlet at the OCGP flood water
quality Basin # 1. Harris prepared PS&E for the reconstruction of
approximately 450 feet of slope along the south side of the basin, of
which 200 feet has been covered by plastic for the last several years.
The sloughing occurred early after the basin's original construction
and was suspected to be due to the placement of a thin layer of
fill on the slope without any benching keys. Work in this area also
required dewatering at the toe of slope during construction since
there was typically standing water in the basin. Design consideration
was given to include permanent enhanced toe revetment and/or
deepened toe key to help stabilize the slope in these continuously wet
conditions. Slope repair area one required a localized gully erosion
area. Slope repair area 2 required the repair oflocalized gully erosion.
Additionally, the outlet headwall reconstruction required an upgrade
to the outlet pipe headwall to a full wing wall type outlet headwall
structure with reinforced concrete invert.
City of Fullerton, Bastanchury Creek Slope Stabilization
Team: Randall Berry, Elizabeth Reyes
The slope stabilization improvements included repairs to the steeply
eroded creek banks. The solution included over-excavation of the
existing creek bank, placement of keyed bench fills, riprap rock
placement, reconstruction of a reinforced concrete storm drain outlet
headwall into the creek, and adjacent sidewalk and fence reconstruction.
City of Fullerton, Brea Boulevard Slope & Acacia Water Reservoir Slope Stabilization
Team: Randall Berry, Elizabeth Reyes
The slope stabilization improvements included retrofitting terraced
retaining walls along an overly steep existing slope. Cast-in-drilled
hole piles connected together with a reinforce concrete grade beam
to stabilize the slope and protect the existing houses along the top of
slope. The Upper Acacia Water Reservoir slope stabilization improvements included adding terrace drains and
addressing several localized erosion repairs along the existing slopes surrounding the Acacia Drive water reservoir.
KDM Meridian provided surveying.
C-64
Services Provided to the Palos Verdes Peninsula
Harris has a successful 16 year history, partnering with the City of Rancho Palos Verdes to enhance the livability
and safety for your community. We've noted our success with both your San Ramon Canyon and McCarrell
projects above. These projects allowed us to demonstrate a thorough understanding of your unique location and
landscape, while prioritizing the maintained operation of primary City corridors. However, our support for these
projects started well before they became studies. In 2002, we provided construction management and inspection
services for the abandonment of an existing storm drain and the installation of new storm drain (HDPE and RCP)
for the Tarapaca Landslide. Additionally, Harris' public finance team helped the City implement a Storm Drain
User Fee to fund your water quality and flood protection program in 2004, which helped the City to fund an array
of these drainage projects.
As you can see, Harris has unmatched knowledge of the City's goals, processes and procedures, as well as the Palos
Verdes Peninsula. A selection of other services we have provided for the City, as well as Palos Verdes Estates, are
included below.
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Storm Drain User Fee Update and Annual
Administration
San Ramon Canyon Stormwater Study & PS&E
Mccarrell Drainage System Design
Ocean Terrace Pedestrian Trail Realignment
SMP Storm Drain and Culvert Program
Point Vicente Interpretive Center Expansion
Rule 20A Undergrounding
Sewer System Improvements
Annual Administration for Various Sewer Fees
City of Palos Verdes Estates
Establishment of Sewer Fee and Annual
Administration
Various Annual Admin Citywide Landscaping &
Lighting Maintenance Districts
Refuse Collection Fee
Arterial Roads Rehabilitation
Annual Street Overlay and Slurry Seal
Companion Animal Center
Pavement Management
Annual Updating and Levying Services
City Hall Elevator B/C Review
Utility Undergrounding Assessment
Pavement Management System Update
C-65
I PROJECT TEAM
Th is section highlights your evaluation criteria in
relation to the relevant experience of individual team
members assigned to the project.
VrnDES
Randall Berry, PE will be the firm 1s primary
representative, supported by Elizabeth Reyes, PE,
QSD as his alternate.
Project Team Manager
Randall Berry, PE*
I
Specific Responsibilities
Project Manager
Elizabeth Reyes, PE, QSD*
Project Team Manager I Randall Berry, PE
ANTICIPATED 30l Randall Berry will be your
TOTAL EFFORT 70 primary representative,
providing project team oversight and QA/QC. He will
attend every meeting and be responsible or every
deliverable. Randy brings more than 30 years of
experience designing innovative and successful
Project Engineers
Marc Gallardo, Ell
Ashley Lee, EIT
Gabby Gonzalez, Ell
drainage solutions for some of the industry's most complex and challenging
projects.
Project Manager I Elizabeth Reyes, PE, QSD
ANTICIPATED 160l Elizabet~ Reyes will be the face of th~ ~esig~ team,
TOTAL EFFORT 70 completmg many of the day-to-day ClVll design
tasks. She has exhibited an exceptional ability to interface with your community
and implement design strategies that help protect the City's interests, and played
a critical role in the success of the San Ramon Canyon and Mccarrell Canyon
drainage projects.
Ninyo & Moore
Geotechnical Engineering
Jim Barton, PG, CEG*
KDM Meridian
Aerial & Topography
Richard Maher, PLS*
CWE
Specialty Hydraulics
Vik Bapna, PE, CPSWQ, QSD*
LSA Associates, Inc.
Specialty Hydraulics
King Thomas*
KOACorp.
Public Outreach
Alan Braatvedt*
Project Engineers I Marc Gallardo, EIT, Ashley Lee, EIT, and Gabby Gonzalez, EIT
ANTICIPATED 290l The project engineers will be responsible for providing CADD support, calculations,
TOTAL EFFORT 10 hydrology, and drafting. They have experience in the preparation of project plans,
specifications, and estimates for public works, including storm drain projects, as well as the development of traffic
control plans.
Senior Geologist I Jim Barton, PG, CEG
ANTICIPATED 60l As Senior Geologist for Ninyo & Moore, Jim Barton manages projects including design
TOTAL EFFORT 70 investigations, construction observation and testing, and forensic evaluations. Jim will
review relevant background project information and perform a geologic reconnaissance of the canyon to map and
document existing site conditions. He will lead the preparation of a preliminary geotechnical report that
summarizes the findings, conclusions, and recommendations to be considered for the final PSR.
Surveyor I Rich Maher, PLS
ANTICIPATED 1 SOL Richard Maher will lead the KDM Meridian survey team. He will be responsible for
TOTAL EFFORT 10 the control survey, including the location and survey of existing centerline
monumentation, aerial targeting, and supplementing control points. He will also be responsible for augmenting
the topographic field survey and providing base sheets in AutoCAD.
C-66
Hydraulic Studies I Vik Bapna, PE, CPSWQ, QSD
ANTICIPATED 140l Vik Bapna will lead the CWE team in the development of specialized hydraulic
TOTAL EFFORT 70 studies. His team will perform field investigation and review data to determine survey
needs, the accuracy of storm drain information, channel characteristics, erosional channel features, and areas of
potential concern for the design process. He will utilize the hydrology study and topographic survey data to
evaluate existing conditions. CWE will develop a HEC-RAS hydraulic model to evaluate the natural stream
hydraulics of the existing drainage system.
Environmental I King Thomas
ANTICIPATED 40l King ·111omas will lead the LSA Associates, Inc. team in conducting preliminary
TOTAL EFFORT 70 environmental research and analysis. The results of the preliminary environmental
research and analysis will be documented in a completed California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) checklist
and an environmental scope and budget proposal for environmental clearance of the project alternatives.
Public Outreach I Alan Braatvedt
ANTICIPATED SOL Alan Braatvedt has been instrumental in coordinating the many parties involved in the
TOTAL EFFORT 70 Mccarrell Canyon and San Ramon Canyon Storm Drain Improvement projects for the
City. Alan will work with the Harris team, providing coordination with City staff and departments, public groups,
and public agencies. He will assist with public outreach efforts, including presentations at public meetings and
one-on-one interaction with residents and group representatives. Alan will assist the project manager in
identifying and handling permit issues, as well as the investigation of existing canyon conditions. He will also
brainstorm with the design engineers to develop project alternatives and assess proposed strategies.
Resumes
Resumes demonstrating the relevant experience of our key project team members are included in the following
pages.
C-67
Randall Berry, PE
Project Team Manager (Harris)
Randall Berry has 30 years of professional engineering experience in public works
design with an emphasis in storm drainage and flood control. Over the course of
the last eight years, starting with the Mccarrell Canyon Storm Drain project, he has
developed a thorough understanding of the complex nature of the Palos Verdes
Peninsula landscape and community. He has proven the ability to deliver cost-
efficient, innovative solutions that both enhance and protect. His leadership was
instrumental to the successful design of the San Ramon Canyon project, which
ultimately led to national recognition at the American Public Works Association's
National Conference.
Relevant Experience
City of Rancho Palos Verdes, San Ramon Canyon Stormwater Improvements.
Project Manager.
Harris provided a project study and PS&E documents for this $17.7 million,
APWA award winning storm drain project.
The primary goal was to develop a replacement for a deficient storm drain
system via two different tunneling methods that delivers storm water
flows without further causing erosion to the existing canyon slopes. The
design also provided slope stabilization for the Tarapaca landslide and the
"switchbacks" along Palos Verdes Drive East (PVDE).
Provides trail improvements from Palos Verdes Drive South (PVDS)
connecting to the existing California Coastal Trail.
City of Rancho Palos Verdes, McCarrell Canyon Storm Drain. Project Manager.
Preparation of PS&E construction documents for the $6 million, APWA
award winning project.
The 66-inch diameter storm drain pipe was designed to convey a 100-year
storm and collects runoff from the steep natural McCarrell Canyon, which
total to 340 acres.
An existing bottleneck in Palos Verdes Drive South was also removed
bringing the roadway to ultimate width.
Services included preparing a detailed hydrology and hydraulics study,
a geotechnical study, topographic and utility detection surveys, full
environmental clearances, public outreach meetings and city council
presentations.
City of Fullerton, Bastanchury Creek Slope Stabilization. Project Manager.
Slope stabilization improvements inclqded repairs to the steeply eroded
creek banks. The solution included over-excavation of the existing creek
bank, placement of keyed bench fills, rip rap rock placement, reconstruction
of a reinforced concrete storm drain outlet headwall into the creek, and
adjacent sidewalk and fence reconstruction.
City of Fullerton, Brea Boulevard Slope and Acacia Water Reservoir Slope
Stabilization. Project Manager.
Preparation of PS&E construction documents for slope repairs.
EDUCATION
BS, Civil Engineering
REGISTRATION
Professional Civil Engineer, CA
AFFILIATIONS
American Public Works
Association (APWA)
American Society of Civil
Engineers (ASCE)
North American Society
for Trench less Technology
(NASH)
C-68
Berry, Continued
New slope repairs included clearing and
grubbing, grading, repairing perimeter fencing
and constructing a wood board I post terraced
retaining walls per the direction of City Staff. Cast-
in-drilled-hole (CIDH) piles were also used and
were tied together with a grade beam mid-slope.
City of Irvine, Orange County Great Park -Basin # 1
Slope Repairs. Project Manager.
Approximately 450 feet of slope stabilization
along the south side of the basin, of which 200
feet was covered by plastic for several years. The
sloughing occurred early after the basin's original
construction and is suspected to be due to the
placement of a thin layer of fill on the slope
without any benching keys.
Work in this area required dewatering at the toe of
slope during construction since there is typically
standing water in the basin. Consideration was
given to the inclusion of a permanent enhanced
toe revetment and/ or deepened toe key to help
stabilization.
City of Cypress, Various Storm Drains. Project
Director.
Replacement/upsizing of existing storm drains for
four separate projects.
The projects included several innovative design
elements, including parallel relief drainage systems
to save costs and minimize impacts, emergency
overflow connections to existing drainage systems,
and the use of an electronic utility detection
survey, which was performed in advance of the
design, to horizontally and vertically locate all of
the existing utilities so that the first storm drain
design could also be the last.
The project included hydrology studies, hydraulic
analyses, multiple Orange County Flood Control
connection permits to connect into Carbon Creek
Channel (BOI), a storm drain license agreement
from OCTA -in the abandoned Pacific Electric
Railroad corridor and the preparation of complete
PS&E documents.
& /\ssoci(::tc:> 1
29
City of Laguna Beach, Canyon Acres Area Storm
Drain. Project Manager.
Harris completed a hydrology study, hydraulic
analysis and PS&E documents for a $2 million
storm drain project.
A 54-inch RCP mainline storm drain was required
to convey the ten year storm flows and the project
represents the culmination of almost 40 years of
drainage studies by the City/County for the area.
The project included several innovative design
elements, including the use of an electronic utility
detection survey, which was performed in advance
of the design, to horizontally and vertically
locate all of the existing utilities so that the first
storm drain design could also be the last. The
upstream diversion junction pioneered several
unique functions in that it intercepted a natural
canyon creek, bypassed low-flows and replenished
sediment to the natural creek that runs through
the neighborhood, while conveying the 10-year
storm flows into the new storm drain system.
The project also included community outreach,
aerial and ground survey, environmental
clearances, and coordination with the County.
City of Fullerton, Pioneer Avenue and Malvern Avenue
Storm Drain. QA/QC Manager.
Harris prepared PS&E for storm drainage
improvements that included extending an existing
storm drain to outlet into an eight-by three-feet
deep PCC trapezoidal channel. Further drainage
analysis included evaluation of the capacity of
existing catch basins and 18-inch RCP storm
drain to determine if upsizing was required by
performing a localized hydrology and hydraulics
study to determine the tributary Qs for a ten year
storm event.
Storm drain improvements at Malvern Avenue
1!1cluded rehabilitation of an existing 84-inch
CMP storm drain with a CCFRPM pipe liner
along the street crossing portion of Malvern
Avenue since the 84-inch CMP was deficient
and causing a sinkhole in the earthen parkway,
exposing buried utility lines. The work also
included obtaining a full topographic survey and
geotechnical investigation.
C-69
Elizabeth Reyes, PE, QS
Project Manager (Harris)
Elizabeth Reyes has nearly 15 years of civil design experience, including storm drain
and flood protection projects on the Palos Verdes Peninsula. She has proven to be
a valuable asset to the City during community outreach events. Elizabeth is able to
boil down complex design processes into easy to grasp concepts, focusing on the key
components of what the City, and your community, can expect during construction.
This transparency during the design stage will set your project off on the right now,
alleviating community concerns and garnering the support of your constituents.
Relevant Experience
City of Rancho Palos Verdes, San Ramon Canyon Stormwater Improvements.
Deputy Project Manager.
Harris provided a project study and PS&E documents for this $17.7 million,
APWA award winning storm drain project.
The primary goal was to develop a replacement for a deficient storm drain
system via two different tunneling methods that delivers storm water
flows without further causing erosion to the existing canyon slopes. The
design also provided slope stabilization for the Tarapaca landslide and the
"switchbacks" along Palos Verdes Drive East (PVDE).
Provides trail improvements from Palos Verdes Drive South (PVDS)
connecting to the existing California Coastal Trail.
City of Rancho Palos Verdes, McCarrell Canyon Storm Drain. Senior Project
Engineer.
Preparation of PS&E construction documents for the $6 million, APWA
award winning project.
The 66-inch diameter storm drain pipe was designed to convey a 100-year
storm and collects runoff from the steep natural Mccarrell Canyon, which
total to 340 acres.
An existing bottleneck in Palos Verdes Drive South was also removed
bringing the roadway to ultimate width.
Services included preparing a detailed hydrology and hydraulics study,
a geotechnical study, topographic and utility detection surveys, full
environmental clearances, public outreach meetings and city council
presentations.
City of Laguna Beach, Canyon Acres Area Storm Drain. Project Engineer.
Harris completed a hydrology study, hydraulic analysis and PS&E
documents for a $2 million storm drain project.
A 54-inch RCP mainline storm drain was required to convey the ten year
storm flows and the project represents the culmination of almost 40 years of
drainage studies by the City/County for the area.
The project included several innovative design elements, including the use
of an electronic utility detection survey, which was performed in advance
of the design, to horizontally and vertically locate all of the existing utilities
so that the first storm drain design could also be the last. The upstream
EDUCATION
BS, Civil Engineering
REGISTRATION
Professional Civil Engineer, CA
AFFILIATIONS
American Society of Civil
Engineers (ASCE)
Women's Transportation
Seminar {WTS)
C-70
Reyes. Continued
diversion junction pioneered several unique
functions in that it intercepted a natural canyon
creek, bypassed low-flows and replenished
sediment to the natural creek that runs through
the neighborhood, while conveying the 10-year
storm flows into the new storm drain system.
The project also included community outreach,
aerial and ground survey, environmental
clearances, and coordination with the County.
City of Cypress, Various Storm Drains. Design
Engineer.
Replacement/upsizing of existing storm drains for
four separate projects.
The projects included several innovative design
elements, including parallel relief drainage systems
to save costs and minimize impacts, emergency
overflow connections to existing drainage systems,
and the use of an electronic utility detection
survey, which was performed in advance of the
design, to horizontally and vertically locate all of
the existing utilities so that the first storm drain
design could also be the last.
The project included hydrology studies, hydraulic
analyses, multiple Orange County Flood Control
connection permits to connect into Carbon Creek
Channel (BOl), a storm drain license agreement
from OCTA -in the abandoned Pacific Electric
Railroad corridor and the preparation of complete
PS&E documents.
City of Irvine, Orange County Great Park -Basin # 1
Slope Repairs. Project Engineer.
Approximately 450 feet of slope stabilization
along the south side of the basin, of which 200
feet was covered by plastic for several years. The
sloughing occurred early after the basin's original
construction and is suspected to be due to the
placement of a thin layer of fill on the slope
without any benching keys.
Work in this area required dewatering at the toe of
slope during construction since there is typically
standing water in the basin. Consideration was
given to the inclusion of a permanent enhanced
toe revetment and/or deepened toe key to help
stabilization.
C-71
Jim Barton, PG, CEG
Senior Geologist (Ninyo & Moore)
Jim Barton has extensive experience in engineering geology in Southern California
involving public works improvements. His experience includes exploration of varied
geologic environments to evaluate geologic and seismic hazards. He is well versed
in exploration techniques including aerial photo interpretation, down hole logging,
hollow stem and mud rotary drilling, air percussion, cone penetrometer, monitoring
wells, fault trenching, and geophysical surveys. He has field construction experience
with grading, blasting, landslide buttresses, subsurface drainage systems, ground
modification techniques, shoring systems, tie-back anchors, drilled foundations, and
as-graded geologic evaluation/mapping.
Relevant Experience
City of Rancho Palos Verdes, San Ramon Canyon Stormwater Improvements.
Senior Geologist.
Worked with geotechnical and civil engineers as well as representatives of
the City to evaluate storm drain improvements to the San Ramon Canyon.
Involved in an extensive background review of geotechnical data regarding
the South Shores Landslide, as well as supervising the mapping of the
canyon and continuous coring of two borings up to a depth of approximately
130 feet.
Coordinated with the design team and provided geologic parameters for
the tunneling, geologic models for slope stability analysis, and aided in
preparation of the project specifications.
City of Los Angeles, Asilomar Landslide. Senior Geologist.
Worked with geotechnical engineers and representatives of the City in
evaluating a relatively large landslide complex adjacent to Pacific Coast
Highway in Pacific Palisades.
Responsible for the interpretation of the geologic conditions within the
landslide complex.
Performed down-hole logging in 8 large diameter borings and supervised
the mapping of the geologic conditions exposed at the site and prepared
geologic models.
City of San Diego, Soledad Reservoir Rehabilitation. Senior Geologist.
Responsible for the evaluation of the geologic conditions with respect to
faulting and mass stability of the site during a major seismic event at an
existing above ground steel-lined reservoir
City of Los Angeles, Stone Canyon Pumping and Filtration Plant. Project
Manager and Senior Geologist.
The project consisted of a partially below grade facility with structural floor
slabs situated in an environmentally sensitive canyon area. Construction
included temporary cuts and shored excavations up to approximately 28 feet
deep. The structure was supported on ninety-five, 30 to 60-inch diameter,
cast-in-drill-hole (CIDH) piles bearing on Santa Monica Slate bedrock.
Managed and supervised the testing and inspection services which included
mapping geologic features, inspection of temporary excavations and tie-
backs, and the inspection of the CIDH piles.
Harris & Associates I Project Team
32.
EDUCATION
BA, Geology
Post Graduate Studies,
Geology
REGISTRATION
PG 3952 (California)
CEG 1301 (California)
Special Inspector of Deep
Foundations,
City of San Diego, No. 276
Radiological Safety and Gauge
Use
Certification, No. 3288-59
AFFILIATIONS
Association of Engineering
Geologists
South Coast Geological
Society
C-72
Rich Maher, PLS
Surveyor (KDM Meridian)
Rich Maher is a professional land surveyor registered in the state of California,
with twenty-four years of experience in the land surveying and civil engineering
industries. He has extensive experience in all facets of land surveying, participating
on a consulting basis, as part of a project team, or in the management of projects
with over 100 different local, county, and state agencies and utilities districts. In that
capacity, he has been responsible in whole or in part for project development, right-
of-way engineering, annexations, heavy and light construction, design topographic
surveys, environmental surveys, aerial control networks, legal descriptions,
boundary surveys, records of survey, and parcel and tract map preparation. His
persistent involvement in the details of daily survey department operations has
provided him with extensive knowledge of state-of-the-art technology, hardware,
and software used industry-wide. In doing so, Mr. Maher continues to be successful
in providing services tailored to each client, acting as an extension of their staff,
understanding their needs, anticipating issues, and providing solutions.
Relevant Experience
City of Rancho Palos Verdes, San Ramon Canyon Stormwater Improvements.
Surveyor.
The primary goal was to develop a replacement for a deficient storm drain
system via two different tunneling methods that delivers storm water
flows without further causing erosion to the existing canyon slopes. The
design also provided slope stabilization for the Tarapaca landslide and the
"switchbacks" along Palos Verdes Drive East (PVDE).
Provides trail improvements from Palos Verdes Drive South (PVDS)
connecting to the existing California Coastal Trail.
Services included topographic and utility detection surveys.
City of Rancho Palos Verdes, McCarrell Canyon Storm Drain. Surveyor.
The 66-inch diameter storm drain pipe was designed to convey a 100-year
storm and collects runoff from the steep natural Mccarrell Canyon, which
total to 340 acres.
An existing bottleneck in Palos Verdes Drive South was also removed
bringing the roadway to ultimate width.
Services included topographic and utility detection surveys.
City of Laguna Beach, Canyon Acres Area Storm Drain. Surveyor.
A 54-inch RCP mainline storm drain was required to convey the ten year
storm flows and the project represents the culmination of almost 40 years of
drainage studies by the City/County for the area.
EDUCATION
Civil Engineering/ University
Curriculum
Land Surveying Continuing
Education
GPS Technology Continuing
Education
REGISTRATION
2000/PLS/CA #7564
AFFILIATIONS
CLSA {Treasurer OC Chapter)
CSRC {Chairman of Exec.
Comm.)
OC-JPPC {Secretary)
American Congress on Survey
& Mapping
C-73
Vik Bapna, PE, CPSWQ, QSD
Hydraulic Studies (CWE)
Vik Bapna has 24 years of professional experience. He has served as a project
manager, project engineer, and design engineer on drainage design and multi use
projects, water supply, treatment, and storage, and flood control projects.
Responsibilities have included planning and designing storm drain and flood control
infrastructure, performing hydrologic and hydraulic studies, conducting studies
for unmet drainage needs, and performing water resources investigations. The
majority of his career has focused on planning and designing solutions to address
difficult engineering challenges related to water infrastructure. He has managed
large multi-disciplinary technical teams on multi-purpose design projects from
conceptualization through design and construction. While employed as a Watershed
Manager for the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, Vik managed projects that
assessed existing flood channels conditions to alleviate severe overflow potential
by increasing the flood carrying capacity and implemented stormwater compliance
programs to meet the NPDES Permit and TMDL requirements.
Relevant Experience
City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Machado Lake Trash Screen Catch Basin Retrofit.
Project Manager.
Full-capture trash screen project that involved the implementation of 41
LACFCD-owned catch basins to assist the City with Machado Lake Trash
TMDL compliance.
City of Palos Verdes Estates, Machado Lake Trash Screen Catch Basin Retrofit.
Project Manager.
Full-capture trash screen project that involved the retrofit of 52 catch basins
to assist the City with Machado Lake Trash TMDL compliance.
Los Angeles County Flood Control District, Debris Basin Design and
Regulatory Permitting. Project Manager.
Prepared plans and specifications for the construction of retaining walls,
grading, and spillways for the Chandler Debris Basin and enlargement of the
Kinneloa and Carter Debris Basins.
City of Torrance, Stormwater Basin Treatment Wetlands Enhancement Design
and Construction Management. Project Manager.
Design of two treatment wetlands and two infiltration basins to retain, treat,
and infiltrate stormwater runoff.
Managed the design of two IO-inch and one 14-inch pressured lines.
Performed a wetlands sustainability analysis to evaluate dry-weather inflows,
evaporation, and infiltration and ensure the long-term functionality of the
wetlands system.
Conducted a hydrologic analysis using MODRAT in WMS to evaluate the
reservoir routing and pumping from the interconnected wetlands/detention
basin system under Capital Flood and SUSMP conditions.
EDUCATION
BS, Civil Engineering
REGISTRATION
Civil Engineer, CA, 52060
Certified Professional in
Storm Water Quality, 543
Qualified SWPPP Developer/
Practitioner, No. 368
AFFILIATIONS
American Society of Civil
Engineers
California Stormwater Quality
Association
Chi Epsilon
C-74
King Thomas
Environmental (LSA Associates, Inc.)
King Thomas has over 27 years of environmental experience. He is responsible
for the coordination and preparation of environmental documents and securing
environmental permits for a myriad of transportation and development projects.
King's projects involve extensive coordination with local, state, and federal
agencies, as well as consultants, landowners/developers, and the general public.
His technical environmental and planning expertise includes environmental
assessment, preparation of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents, and impacts to park lands and
recreational uses.
Relevant Experience
City of Santa Clarita, Newhall Ranch Road Bridge Widening Project. Project
Manager.
The proposed project would widen the existing Newhall Ranch Road Bridge
over San Francisquito Creek from six to eight lanes.
Managed the preparation of the Preliminary Environmental Study,
environmental technical studies, and environmental documents.
Currently managing preparation of the resource agency jurisdictional
authorizations for this project.
City of Newport Beach, Jamboree Road Bridges. Project Manager.
The purpose of this project was to seismically retrofit the northbound and
southbound Jamboree Road bridges over San Diego Creek to meet current
seismic structural standards.
Preparation of environmental technical studies in support of a Categorical
Exemption for CEQA and a Categorical Exclusion for NEPA (CE/CE).
City of Anaheim, Ball Road Drainage Project. Project Manager.
The project replaces existing storm drain and sewer facilities.
Managed the preparation of technical studies, the environmental document
(IS/MND), and jurisdictional permits.
Carbon Creek improvements include upgrading 115 feet of channel to its
ultimate 100-year flood capacity, replacing and upsizing the existing outlet
into the creek and constructing a concrete channel wall to connect to the
new storm drain outlet.
Caltrans, Lower State Route 74 Environmental Impact Report. Project Manager.
Prepared an EIR to address widening State Route 74 (SR-74) through the
City of San Juan Capistrano from Calle Entradero to the City/County line, a
distance of 0.9 mile, from two to four lanes.
1he EIR addresses the comments received by Caltrans during public review
of the previous MND prepared by Caltrans in addition to comments
received during public review of the Draft EIR.
EDUCATION
Diploma in Civil Engineering,
KwaZulu Natal Technicon,
South Africa
REGISTRATION
Professional Civil Engineer, CA
AFFILIATIONS
American Public Works
Association (APWA)
C-75
Alan Braatvedt
Public Outreach (KOA Corp)
Alan Braatvedt is intimately familiar with the City, neighborhoods, groups, and
agencies that will be involved in this initial outreach and preliminary design project.
He has worked with the City on many projects over the past 15 years. Alan has been
involved in various canyon and erosion control projects, two in Rancho Palos Verdes,
La Canada Flintridge, and several in South Africa. He is familiar with erosion control
products including gabions, revetment protection, dams, pipelines, and tunnels. His
experience includes design, project management and construction management,
as well as, acting as liaison between development teams, planning/design teams,
community groups and governing agencies to forge public/private partnerships. Alan
is the main interface for community outreach and public relations on most of KOA's
construction management projects.
Relevant Experience
City of Rancho Palos Verdes, McCarrell Canyon Storm Drain. Project Manager.
Involved in the development of the concept design, selection of the design
engineering firm, and managing the project through the design phase,
including project bid and evaluation, scheduling and subconsultant
management.
City of Rancho Palos Verdes, San Ramon Canyon Stormwater Improvements.
Project Manager.
KOA was involved with the construction of a large PCC access road,
significant filling and grading within the canyon with the installation of sub-
drains and rip rap lining, and installation of native landscaping to satisfy the
permitting agencies' requirements.
City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Public Works Staff Assistance. Project Manager.
KOA provides staff assistance to the Public Works Director for various
public works projects throughout the City.
Duties and responsibilities include preparing RFPs for multiple projects,
receiving and evaluating proposals for design, managing and inspecting
public works projects, preparing specifications and receiving bids for various
construction projects, tracking construction schedules, and inspecting
contractor work. Responsibilities also include receiving, reviewing, and
processing invoices for payment and preparing staff reports for the City
Council regarding Public Works projects and issues.
Served as a community liaison for projects in neighborhoods with a very
vocal and active homeowners group.
City of Laguna Beach, Canyon Acres Area Storm Drain. Project Manager.
A 54-inch RCP mainline storm drain was required to convey the ten year
storm flows and the project represents the culmination of almost 40 years of
drainage studies by the City/County for the area.
The project also included community outreach, aerial and ground survey,
environmental clearances, and coordination with the County.
EDUCATION
Diploma in Civil Engineering,
KwaZulu Natal Technicon,
South Africa
REGISTRATION
Professional Civil Engineer, CA
AFFILIATIONS
American Public Works
Association (APWA)
C-76
5 I PROJECT SCHEDULE
This section highlights your evaluation criteria in relation to the appropriateness of the schedule.
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
PROJECT STUDY OF Al TA MIRA CANYON DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL
-askl"J2me Duratior.
15 days
-----'-··---------,---------------------·-------·
W·l vn W2 W3 W4 ws WG W7 WB W9 WlO Wll W12 W13 W14 WJS Wl6 W17 W18 Wl9 W/O W21 W22 W?3 W']4 W25 W26 W27 W'l8 W29 W30 W31 W3?; W33 W34 ~
10
II
12
13
"
IS
,;
17
18
19
PHAS£ I: DATA COUECTION /BASE
SHEm
•KICK OH MEETING 1 day
• DATA COLLECTION 3 wks
• BASE AERIAL & GROUND SURVEY 7 wks
•OPTIONAL AERIAL & GROUND 6 wks
SURVEY
• CONCEPT PLAN BASE SHTS (BASE 2 wks
PRJ)
., CONCEPT PLAI\ BASE SHTS 2 wks
(OPTIONAL)
• GEOTECHNICAL FEAS!BIUTY STUDY 13 wks
PHASE II: DESIGN DEVELOPMENT & PSR 147 dar;
• FIELD REVIEW (BASE PROJECT) 2wks
• FIELD REVIEW !OPTIONAL AREAS) 2wKs
•HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULICS STUDY 13 wks
• CONCEPTIJAL DESIGNS/ DRAFT 13wks
PROJECT STUDY REPORT
"CITY FEEDBACK MEETINGS (4) 4 days.
• ENVIRONMENTALSTUOY 12 wks
•REFINE EASEMENT & TCE NEEDS Swl\s
.,, COMMUNITY OUTREACH MEfllNGS3 days
• REFINE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN /
PROJECT STUDY REPORT PER CITY
FEEDBACK & COMMUNITY FEEDBACK
• PREPARE PS&E ANO/ OR BEGIN
EASEMENT ACQU1SITION
12wks
lday
, .....
cw·
'T -~ ~:
::tf acw ct ~:.u
L~.~""·""'"j.~
h('" ''l/ i
"'
•.• i;i •••••• '.' ..• ' ' .• ' •.• ~ •• ' ..• ' ..• '. ·1· ..•••.• '. -~
,..._ '., ;;,· -mm r T"
...... . • w '&"
r-..1. •.•.....•••..•.. , .•..•.
c..,..---,,., ....
Ta$k ·gf=ri Split • , .•••. , . , • • Milestone + Sumrmry -----
-; -----
C-77
I SCOPE OF WORK
The following will present an outline of our proposed scope of services. It is our intent that this outline provides
enough detail so our approach is clearly defined. It should be noted that this scope is based on the Request for
Proposal (RFP) dated August 17, 2015, site visits, and our concept of the project. We welcome the opportunity to
discuss additions, deletions or revisions.
PHASE I: ORIENTATION/DATA
COLLECTION/BASE SHEETS
Task A I Data Collection and Review
1. Meet with City staff and hold kick-off meeting
with the complete Harris team. The approach, as
well as latest input from City, would be discussed,
in addition to design criteria, requirements,
procedures, and site access protocol. Direction
from the City staff would be obtained and
any remaining information from City records
pertaining to the project would be collected.
2. Contact the utility companies to obtain the latest
utility location information. USA will also be
contacted to confirm that Harris' utility list is
complete. This opportunity would also be used to
give early notification of the project and start the
coordination efforts.
3. Prepare a firm schedule, the first monthly status
report and meeting minutes for the kick-off
meeting.
Task BI Topographic Aerial Survey
(Performed by KDM Meridian)
1. Meet with Harris staff, to review and discuss
project objectives, site access protocol, project
schedule, scope of work, method of approach and
coordination.
2. Research of Record Information:
A. Obtain benchmarks, centerline ties, and other
available survey data from City of Rancho
Palos Verdes/LA County.
B. Obtain information and mapping for record
centerline and right-of-way information from
LA County Surveyor's office.
3. Field Surveying:
A. Aerial Survey:
i. Base Aerial Mapping; Set 11 aerial targets,
recover centerline monumentation and
perform control surveys. Optional Aerial_
Map.!llng for Low fk>w diversion along_
llll!l.Gr Narcissa D.LL~: Set eight aerial
targets, recover centerline monumentation
and perform control surveys. Qplimrnl
£)._1;;1i!ll Nl<\Jlping_fpr tunnel diversion to.
the beach: Set eight aerial targets, recover
centerline monumentation and perform
control surveys.
ii. Project Datum to be used
Horizontal: California State Plane
Coordinates, Zone 5 (NAD83)
Vertical: County of Los Angeles
(NAVD 88)
iii. Generate 1-inch = 40 feet scale strip
photogrammetric mapping with a 1 foot
contour interval.
Base A~.rl;J.l limits: white shaded limits
bounded in red (see aerial map in
approach section). QJ,?tional Low Flow
Piversion Additional Aerial limits:
white shaded limits bounded in orange
(see map). Optional T.11.nnel Diversion
Additional Aerial limits: yellow shaded
limits bounded in yellow (see map).
B. Ground Survey: Augmenting topographic
field survey:
of
Hlli'i~ Survey: Two weeks of supplemental
survey to augment the aerial topography
within areas designated by engineer (following
review of aerial base mapping). Qptional
Aerial Mapping both locations: One week
of supplemental survey to augment the
aerial topography within areas designated by
engineer (following review of optional aerial
base mapping). NOTE: Supplemental data
collection to be presented as points only -not
to be incorporated into aerial base mapping by
KDMM, but Harris will "digest".
C-78
C. Centerline and right-of-way:
Parcel/property lines, boundary lines, street
center line and right-of-way (R/W) are not
included, with the exception of these same
lines as depicted within the City of Rancho
Palos Verdes GIS base data. Thus the City's
GIS will be the source of all property lines and
roadwayR/W
4. Deliverables to consist of:
AutoCAD drawing files at I-inch= 40 feet of
all survey information collected, drafted in base
topographic form with surveyed points and GIS
property lines and roadway R/W Drawn cross
sections are not included in KDMM's scope, but
will be provided as needed by Harris.
Task CI Topographic Base Sheets for
Conceptual Plans
Utilizing the previously discussed aerial and
supplemental ground surveys, construction plan and
profile base sheets would be prepared in AutoCAD for
each of the mainline creek, diversion pipe, diversion
tunnel drainage alternative design solutions that are
proposed. The base sheets would be prepared using
the City's standard format at a scale of I -inch = 40 feet
horizontally and 1-inch = 8 feet or 16 feet vertically.
Existing improvements would be screened so that the
full toned proposed improvements will stand out. The
digested base sheets will include the following:
Surface and
subsurface utility
locations
Two foot contour
intervals tied
to appropriate
coordinate system
Dimensions, labels
and match lines
Existing storm drain
culverts from survey
and record drawings
Existing P /Ls and
R/W locations from
City's GIS files
Existing stationing
and street name
labels, as appropriate
Existing topography
to the limits described
in the survey section
Existing Creek invert
or surface profile over
CL of proposed pipe
Eventually,
supplemental survey
topography and
elevation information
at key proposed
improvement
locations, as needed
Task DI Geotechnical Feasibility Study
(Performed by Ninyo & Moore)
0 1()00
f:.;;i:::t>~ct"~-f rr:o
Ninyo & Moore proposes the following scope of
services to provide preliminary geotechnical/geologic
conclusions for project feasibility studies, conceptual
designs, and cost estimating purposes. As per the
RFP, this study phase of the project will NOT include
any field soil sample collection or borings. Instead, it
will consist of record data collection and fact finding
to support the development of preliminary design
alternatives for various aspects of the project.
As per the RFP, Ninyo & Moore is not currently
proposing any intrusive geotechnical field explorations
(such as borings, rock cores, etc.) because a field
exploration program will depend on selection
of the alternate design solutions for the drainage
modifications, stabilization of the Abalone Cove
Landslide, and various alternatives. This will allow
the clearest possible understanding and interpretation
of geologic and geotechnical conditions without
expending dollars on intrusive investigations that may
not be necessary for an alternative that is not pursued
or even technically required during this preliminary
design and study report process to select the optimal
solution. Once the preferred design approach is
established during the PS&E phase, Ninyo & Moore
would then obtain the necessary field boring/coring
data at the precise locations required.
of \,t.Jurk
C-79
The Geotechnical Feasibility Study scope of services
will consist of the following tasks:
Review of readily available background
information including geotechnical reports,
geologic and geologic hazard maps, landslide
maps, and historical aerial photographs. We will
also attempt to contact and interview people who
have experience with the development and the
engineering issues in the canyon area.
Perform a geologic reconnaissance of the canyon
and vicinity by our engineering geologists
who will map and document the existing site
conditions. The geologic conditions will be
mapped on a scaled topographic map provided to
us.
Data compilation and analysis of the resulting
background and field data.
Attendance at three meetings with the City and/or
design team.
Prepare a Preliminary Geotechnical Report
summarizing findings, conclusions, and
recommendations regarding the alternative
designs for the project. The report will also
include a discussion regarding the geologic and
seismic hazards, anticipated soil conditions ,and
potential impacts to the design and construction
of proposed improvements.
Assumptions:
Permission to access site will be obtained by
others for one site reconnaissance.
No subsurface exploration will be performed.
The canyon is accessible to pedestrians.
Scope of work will not include an evaluation
of the stability of the active landslides in the
vicinity of the project.
Evaluation will not include any sampling,
testing, or chemical analysis of soil,
groundwater, surface water, or other materials
for the purpose of evaluating possible hazards
or risks.
PHASE II: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN &
PROJECT STUDY REPORT (PSR)
Task A I Field Review
The entire Harris team will perform a comprehensive
field review of the existing site to determine the
following:
Review completeness/accuracy of the
computerized survey base maps and essential
topographic features.
Note all potential utility conflicts.
Note potential issues where new storm drain and
canyon channel alignments are anticipated.
Confirm local existing drainage boundaries
and prevailing surface drainage patterns in the
tributary watershed and using the City's previous
drainage study as a starting point.
Note other existing conditions that may affect the
design and alternatives.
NOTE: The canyon will be thoroughly inspected
by hiking and recording all features of interest and
potential challenges for the full extent of the canyon
within the limits of work and for a few hundred
feet beyond if authorized by property owners.
We will identify existing drainage components,
alternative solutions, and evaluate the efficiency of
each, determining feasibility of incorporating into
any proposed design alternative to control the flows
through the canyon system. In addition, an evaluation
will be made of the long term challenges of the
existing drainage system and current rate of erosion in
the event that a "do-nothing" alternative is selected.
C-80
Task BI Hydrology and Hydraulics (H&H)
Study (Assistance by CWE)
Confirm and refine the previously prepared 100-Year
and 50-Year frequency hydrology study utilizing
a computerized version of the LA County (LAC)
Modified Rational Method to model the tributary
areas. The impacts of meeting LA C's 100-Year
and 50-Year capitol Flood drainage criteria will
be investigated. A colorful hydrology map will be
prepared similar to what was provided on the previous
McCarrell Canyon and San Ramon Canyon projects.
Harris will use WSPG to model the hydraulics of the
any proposed storm drain pipe and/or tunnel systems
in conformance with City and County design criteria.
Model the system hydraulics of each alternate storm
drain system proposed will be utilized to confirm
adequate sizing and related construction costs.
Harris will utilize California Watershed Engineering
(CWE) to perform specialized hydraulics analyses
for the existing and proposed canyon conditions and
related debris basin feasibility analyses. A critical part
of CWE's work will come from visiting the canyon and
assigning key hydraulic factors based on the canyon's
characteristics. CWE's site visit will be conducted
to determine additional ground survey needs, the
accuracy of storm drain culvert information, channel
characteristics, erosional channel features, and areas of
potential concern to be addressed as part of the design
process.
The channel bed composition will be evaluated
using the Wolman Pebble Count method for use in
evaluating channel bed stability. The bed and banks
will be photographed at erosional areas and key
locations for evaluation of bank stability. The data
provided by the City will be reviewed and verified
during the field investigation. The information
gathered during the site visit will be detailed in an
appendix of the drainage report.
CWE will utilize the updated hydrology study
and topographic survey data to evaluate existing
conditions. A HEC-RAS hydraulic model will be
developed to evaluate the natural stream hydraulics
of the existing drainage system. The model will
evaluate the flow depths, velocities, and water surface
elevations. The output from the model will be used
to evaluate the incipient motion of bed materials and
the ability of the banks to resist scour. The impacts
of culverts and pipes on the velocities, the need for
i la.1 ris
energy dissipation, and the channel capacity will
be evaluated for the existing conditions for the flow
rates from the hydrologic analysis. The longer section
of 120-inch CMP may be too steep and long to be
evaluated effectively using the culvert hydraulics
routine in HEC-RAS. If this appears to be the case, the
CMP will be evaluated using the Water Surface Profile
Gradient (WSPG) model developed by LACFCD
and the water elevations will be used as boundary
conditions for the HEC-RAS model. 'D1e hydraulic
analysis will also evaluate scour using the 2006
LACDPW Sedimentation Manual to evaluate potential
long-term channel changes associated with existing
conditions.
Based on preliminary design alternatives, CWE
will develop up to four models of proposed canyon
flow conditions and evaluate proposed alternatives
for channel improvements. The alternatives will
potentially include:
Additional and/or Revetments
extended culverts
Riprap rock liner
Piping
Energy dissipation
structures
Controlled water flow
Retaining walls
Gabions
Retention basins
Inlet and outlet
structures
Bypass systems.
HEC-RAS or WSPG models will be used to evaluate
these hydraulic system modifications as appropriate.
HEC-RAS is best for open channel hydraulic systems.
WSPG is best for evaluating closed conduit and
pressurized flow systems. The models will evaluate the
flow depths, velocities, and water surface elevations.
The output from the models will be used to evaluate
the incipient motion of bed materials and the ability of
the banks to resist scour. The impacts of culverts and
pipes on the velocities, the need for energy dissipation,
and the channel capacity will be evaluated for the
proposed alternative conditions for the flow rates from
the hydrologic analysis.
Debris Basin Feasibility Study: CWE will provide a
conceptualization of a debris basin and the potential
sizing capacity that can be retained based on available
land, slopes, and debris yield.
Once the existing conditions and proposed conditions
alternatives hydraulic analyses are complete, CWE will
provide the results of their study in a hydraulics report
that will be combined with Harris' portion of the
C-81
Hydrology & Hydraulics (H&H) study. These findings
will be presented in the H&H section of the PSR
and presented at the various feedback meetings with
City staff. The write up will be straightforward and
summarize the results of the hydrology refinements
and hydraulics analyses, including all supporting
calculations and hydrology drainage area map.
Task C I Develop Strategy to Block
Pedestrian Access to Existing Outlet
The Harris team will investigate options to prevent the
existing 120-inch CMP drainage pipe under PVDS
from being used as an access point into the gated
neighborhood and for loitering and other undesirable
uses. Any solution will have to be hydraulically
compatible so as not to negatively affect the systems
hydraulic capacity and/or cause erosion, etc.
/1:1socirJ1e~, I
!,)
Task DI Added Value/ Team Facilitator
(Performed by KOA)
As an optional additional service, the Harris team
would be supported by a proven project facilitator,
Alan Braatvedt from KOA. Alan has worked
successfully and consistently with Harris and City
staff to help make the recent Mccarrell Canyon
and San Ramon Canyon projects successful. He has
been instrumental in coordinating the many parties
involved and is intimately familiar with the City,
neighborhoods, groups, and agencies that will be
involved in this study phase outreach and preliminary
design.
Alan has been involved in various canyon and erosion
control projects, one with Harris for Canyon Acres
Drive for the City of Laguna Beach, two in Rancho
Palos Verdes, and elsewhere in La Canada Flintridge
and South Africa. He is familiar with erosion control
products including gabions, revetment protection,
dams, pipelines, diversion systems and tunnels.
Alan's role throughout the duration of the project
would be as follows:
Coordination with City staff and departments,
including Public Works, Parks, Engineering, Open
Space Committee, and the City Council.
Coordination and outreach with public groups
including local neighborhoods, the Palos Verdes
Heritage Castle Museum, local hiking and
equestrian groups.
Coordination (if needed) with public agencies
including the Coastal Commission, Army Corps
of Engineers, and LA County.
Assistance with Public Outreach efforts including
presentations at public meetings, and one-
on-one interaction with residents and group
representatives.
Assist Harris and City staff in identifying and
dealing with potential or realized constraints and
opportunities.
Assist Harris and City staff in identifying and
coordinating permit issues.
Assist Harris and City staff in investigation of
existing canyon conditions, including hiking the
entire reach of the project area.
Brainstorm with Harris and City staff on various
feasible project alternatives, and assessment of the
proposed strategies/ alternatives.
C-82
Task E I Develop Preliminary Conceptual
Designs & Project Study Report (PSR)
The Project Study Report (PSR) will include the
development of four design alternatives (with the
likely possibility of several sub-options that can be
mixed and matched with various alternatives) that will
aid in managing both stormwater flow and nuisance
water/low flows through the Alta Mira Canyon.
The options will include one or a combination of
various mitigation measures, such as canyon fill with
armament (rip rap, Armor Flex, etc.), culverts/pipe
lines (extend existing culverts, new parallel low flow
pipe lines either buried or anchored to the surface),
other out of canyon low flow diversion pipe lines/
bypass systems, energy dissipation systems (controlled
water flow), walls (Soil nail walls, gabions, retaining
walls, caisson revetment, etc.), retention basins/debris
basins, tunneling opportunities, and inlet and outlet
structures related to any pipeline system. The study
will evaluate sections of Alta Mira Canyon between
upper Narcissa Drive (East of Sweetbay Road) to the
inlet of the 120-inch CMP at lower Narcissa Drive
(north of PVDS) and the downstream section located
south of PVDS where the 120-inch CMP outlets down
to the canyon outlet to the Pacific Ocean.
The PSR will be developed in accordance with LA
County design standards. As discussed in detail in
the project approach section of this proposal the
designs will be innovative. As such, some may not be
covered by conventional County Standards. However,
wherever practical, the designs will meet or exceed
LAC standards.
Each of the alternate designs must include its
own analysis of the cost, schedule, and difficulty
associated with the easement acquisition, geological
and environmental conditions for that particular
design alternative. Each design alternative will be
evaluated against one another and summarized in a
"Comparison of Alternatives" matrix chart, similar to
what was presented in the previous discussion section,
to assess cost, constructability, and effectiveness
of the concept in dealing with all conditions, the
environmental impacts and the period of time
required for approvals, compliance and construction,
etc.
Please refer to the following tasks regarding various
meetings required to present the draft and final
PSR and conceptual design alternatives to City staff.
Ultimately a final PSR will address, at a minimum, the
following:
Detail of all additional
effort in all disciplines
to produce final PS&E
bid
Documentation of
survey, geological
exploration,
environmental
approval process
Estimate of cost to
produce PS&E bid
documentation
Detailed engineer's
estimates of the
construction costs
Identification of all
approvals required
from permitting/
regulatory agencies
Estimate of the cost to
obtain permits from
each agency
Schedule for each
phase of the process,
through construction.
Possible obstructions,
impacts and the
required mitigation
measures
Preliminary conceptual design plans will be prepared
indicating the recommended project elements for each
alternate solution and would include the following
items:
Existing and
proposed mainline
Alta Mira Canyon
design layout plans
and profiles (complete
with utility crossings
at various culvert/
street crossing where
applicable)
Proposed low flow
diversion pipe I
tunnel design layout
plans and profiles
(complete with utility
crossings where
applicable)
Details for conceptual
structures, debris
basin and detention
basin (if any)
Trenchless and open
trench installation
details and typical
sections
Other pertinent
details
Utility impacts
(relocations,
adjustments and/or
modifications)
Canyon lining
alternatives, including
over-excavation key/
benches, grading,
fill, impermeable
membranes,sub-
drains, and side slope
grading/ stabilization
details
TCE I easement
acquisition needs
Preliminary opinion
of construction
cost estimates for
comparison
A list of items
requiring City
feed back, along
with the Harris
team's associated
recommendations
C-83
Task FI Environmental Study (Performed
by LSA)
LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) will support Harris by
conducting preliminary environmental research and
analysis related to the preparation of a PSR.
It is anticipated that the drainage improvements will
likely be funded with local funds, and the project
would need environmental clearance under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
However, assuming the City might like to preserve
the option of obtaining/using federal funds, the future
improvement project would also need environmental
clearance under the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA). LSA will develop a scope and budget that
identifies the appropriate environmental documents
for environmental clearance of the project under
CEQA and NEPA and any preparation of applications
for regulatory permits that will be required. The
various regulatory agencies will also be contacted to
confirm requirements and permitting costs.
The sub-tasks identified below outline the work
program for conducting preliminary environmental
research and analysis related to the preparation
of a PSR for the proposed project and preparing a
scope and budget for the technical studies and the
environmental document to environmentally clear the
project under CEQA and NEPA.
Task Fl: Project Initiation:
This task includes research and investigation
activities necessary to develop an understanding of
the proposed project and potential environmental/
biological resource issues associated with the project.
During this task:
A preliminary site survey (the site survey is
included under sub-task FS, below) will be
conducted
Records searches will be conducted for biological
resources (including the most recent versions
of the California Natural Diversity Database
[CNDDB] and the California Native Plant Society
[CNPS] Online Inventory), cultural resources, and
paleontological resources
Other preliminary environmental data will be
gathered
A draft project description will be developed.
Preliminary mapping to define the estimated project
footprint of disturbance will be provided by Harris.
~-.;.ir l
Task F2: CEQA Environmental Checklist:
LSA will complete a standard CEQA Environmental
Checklist form for the proposed project. Records
searches and a brief site survey (included under task
FS, below) will be conducted to gather the necessary
information for completing the CEQA checklist
responses. Brief responses (checking potentially
significant impact, Jess than significant with
mitigation, less than significant impact, or no impact)
for each of the environmental checklist questions will
be provided.
The following environmental issues are included in the
CEQA checklist
Aesthetics Land use and
Agricultural resources planning
Air quality Mineral resources
Biological resources Noise
Cultural resources Population and
Geology and soils
housing
Public services
Greenhouse gas
emissions Recreation
Hazards and Transportation and
hazardous materials traffic
Hydrology and water Utilities and service
quality systems.
Based on the location of the proposed project,
potential impacts to the following resources are
anticipated to be among the most important
environmental issues that will need to be addressed in
the environmental documentation for the project:
Biological resources (potential impacts to plant
and animal species, drainages, and wildlife
movement corridors)
Cultural resources
\-Vork
C-84
Paleontological resources (potential impacts to
geologic formations which are known to yield
scientifically significant fossils)
Drainage/hydrology issues
Scenic resources (e.g., potential impacts to scenic
vistas and natural land areas)
Task F3: CEQA Environmental Proposal:
LSA will use the City's environmental checklist form.
The completed environmental checklist will provide
the basis for determining the specific technical studies
that will need to be prepared in support of the CEQA
environmental document, the appropriate level of
environmental document (Initial Study/[Mitigated]
Negative Declaration [IS/(M)ND]) or Environmental
Impact Report [EIR]) that will need to be prepared
in the next phase of the project, and the regulatory
permits and/or authorizations (e.g., Clean Water
Act Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, Section 401 Regional Water Quality
Control Board Water Quality Certification from the
Regional Water Quality Control Board, and California
Department of Fish and Wildlife Section 1600 Permit).
The project is located partially within the California
Coastal Zone and a Coastal Development Permit
(CDP) will be required. The City has a certified Local
Coastal Program (LCP) and therefore, the City has
jurisdiction over projects within the area covered by
the LCP. LSA's scope and budget proposal will address
the required documentation (City CDP application) to
demonstrate the project's consistency with the City's
certified LCP.
LSA will prepare an environmental scope of services
and budget analysis that identifies the recommended
technical studies, the level of CEQA environmental
document for the project, the need for a Coastal
Permit, and the regulatory permits/authorization
anticipated to be required for the project.
The above information will be provided in an
environmental recommendations memorandum with
the completed CEQA Checklist as an attachment.
Task F4: NEPA Environmental Proposal:
If the City determines that federal funding may be
used for the proposed project construction phase, LSA
will determine the environmental technical studies
and the appropriate level of NEPA environmental
document (Environmental Assessment/Finding of
No Significant Impact [EA/FONSI] or Environmental
Impact Statement [EIS]) that will need to be prepared
in the next phase of the project. LSA will prepare an
environmental scope of services and budget analysis
that identifies the level of NEPA environmental
documentation for the project.
Task FS: Meeting Attendance and Project
Management:
This task represents an active project management
role and includes attendance at various project
meetings and coordination with regulatory agencies
and interested parties. The project management role
provides a mechanism to make sure that there is an
adequate exchange of information. LSA will attend
seven meetings (one kick-off, one site visit, one design
meeting, up to three community outreach meetings,
and one outside agency meeting).
Task GI Temporary Construction
Easement & Drainage Easement
Evaluation
All existing improvements and private property within
limits of work will be included per City's electronic
GIS map files so that requirements to acquire any
additional land for the proposed improvements can
be easily identified and appraised. This will be the case
for Temporary Construction Easements (TCE) and
permanent drainage easements and/or the need for
acquisitions as appropriate.
A composite TCE and permanent drainage easement
map will be prepared showing the entire canyon on
one or more large scale maps and their overlap with
private property (shown shaded -one shade type for
TCE's and one for permanent drainage easements) and
will include approximate square footage TCE area and
permanent drainage easement area. Harris will work
with City staff to establish the likely costs per square
foot, if any, to obtain said easements.
As mentioned in the discussion section, because
the property lines may have shifted due to past land
movement any TCE or drainage easement document
that will ultimately be generated is recommended to
be an independent cohesive overarching document
that is stand-alone combined easement not directly
dependent upon the location of the existing
properties. It will be tied to controls not dependent
upon the existing properties, which could have shifted.
C-85
However the overlap of each affected property will be
approximated, shown and eventually even mapped
with a legal description and map during the PS&E
phase. During this study phase the overlap acreage
of each affected property will be approximated and
illustrated on a clear easy to read exhibit for use in
evaluating the various related alternatives.
NOTE: Preliminary Title Reports (PTRs) can be
obtained at an approximate cost of $500 each, but
their value may or may not warrant obtaining them at
this study phase level. There are 28 properties along
the study portion of Alta Mira Canyon and there are
additional properties along the potential low flow pipe
diversion alignment and tunnel alignment. As such
obtaining up to 35 PTRs will be offered as an optional
additional service in the separate fee schedule.
However, no scope and fee is provided for digesting
and mapping the property lines from the PTRs
because that task would be significant and defeats the
purpose of using the G IS generated P /Ls and R/W
lines. Thus, obtaining PTRs is not considered essential
during this study phase, but can be discussed further
as part of the fee negotiations process.
Task H I City Staff Feedback Meetings
We will hold up to four progress meetings with City
staff (all key players from the City and the Harris
team present) to present and discuss the results of
the previously detailed tasks and reach preliminary
concurrence on the various elements and alternatives.
These feedback meetings will help solidify the
various alternative solutions prior to beginning the
environmental study and preparing the draft PSR,
to allow efficient progress and confirmation that the
solutions remain within the City's preferences. At each
meeting we will confirm project schedule is on track
and prepare meeting minutes shortly thereafter.
Task 1 I Refine Project Study Report &
Concept Designs per City Staff Feedback
As necessary, refinements would be made to the PSR
and alternate conceptual designs, plans and exhibits
per the feedback received from City staff in order to
develop a presentable project approach and PSR that
meets all of the City's goals, budgets and concerns
prior to proceeding with meeting with the community
and City Council.
Task JI Community Outreach, City
Council & Outside Agency Meetings
As noted in the RFP, there will be substantial
interaction and collaboration between the Harris
team and City staff in developing the concept design,
so specific milestones will be developed between
the designer and the City for review, comment and
contribution. In addition to the previously mentioned
four design progress meetings, there will be three
community outreach meetings, and an additional two
meetings with the other agencies, as required.
It is essential that the project receives the support of
the community and thus the community outreach
meetings will provide an avenue for the transfer of the
local community's ideas and concerns, which will be
noted and incorporated into the design alternatives.
City staff will be responsible for organizing the public
outreach meetings.
NOTE: Several photo simulations will be prepared to
illustrate the "before" and "after" conditions proposed
in the canyon, which is helpful for the public to
visualize what the typical cross sections will really look
like.
A presentation of the Project Study Report and the
proposed recommendation will also be made to the
City Council for their action.
CITY RESPONSIBILITIES
The City would assume the following responsibilities:
Provide all existing data and information relevant
to the proposed project.
Provide a copy of existing record drawings and
complete drainage study reports, master plan of
drainage documents and related calculations.
Pay all outside agency fees.
Perform other identified City responsibilities as
detailed in the RFP.
I :a1 & f\ssnciates j Scope
4t)
C-86
-----------------------
7 I FEE
As requested in the RFP, the fee is included in a separately sealed envelope.
Additionally, Harris would like to suggest the following revisions to the City's Standard Professional Services
Agreement:
3.l(a) Indemnity for Design Professional Services
a) 9th line, please delete "in whole or in part"
3.l(b) Other Indemnities
a) 9th line, please delete "sole"
12th line, please change "with counsel of City's choice" to "with counsel reasonably acceptable to the City"
Please delete the last sentence: "Consultant's duty to defend pursuant to this Section 3 .1 (b) shall apply
independent of any prior, concurrent or subsequent misconduct, negligent acts, errors or omissions of
Indemnitees:'
& f\~;sucia1r:s !
r.]-/
C-87
EXHIBIT B-3
Consultants Fee Letter
C-88
September 9, 2015
(Revised 1 0-21-15)
Ron Dragoo, PE
Project Manager
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Harris & Associatess"
Subject: Fee Proposal for Alta Mira Canyon Drainage & Erosion Control Project
Dear Mr. Dragoo,
This will present the Harris Team fee proposal to provide the services presented in our Proposal for
the subject Study and preliminary design for the Alta Mira Canyon Drainage and Erosion Control
Project. Harris proposes to provide the services for the total not-to-exceed fees presented below. A
detailed breakdown of the proposed fees is also attached for your information and use in evaluating
this proposal. These fees should be considered as a negotiable offer. We would also be happy to
discuss the fees and their association to our proposed scope of work and make revisions where
mutually agreeable.
TASK FEE
PHASE I: Orientation/Data Collection/Base Sheets .............................. $102,534
PHASE II: Conceptual Design & Project Study Report ......................... $337.455
GRAND TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED FEE = $439,898*
*Note: The following additional fees would apply if the City opts to include them
Note both the Low Flow Diversion and Tunnel Diversion area will not be surveyed (use available
mapping)
P&P plans for Tunnel Diversion will not be developed Uust a conceptual study only)
An additional fee to obtain thirty-five (35) PTR's = 35 x $550 = $19,250 (Title Co+ 10% markup) if
city opts for them -otherwise we will simply use the City's GIS mapping to show property lines
The fees above include all printing costs and would be invoiced monthly, based on the actual hours
spent. Outside Agency fees are not included.
We welcome the opportunity to discuss additions, deletions and alternatives, as required, with City
staff. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and look
forward to another successful project.
Sincerely,
HARRIS & ASSOCIATES
Randall G. Berry, PE
Director, Engineering Services
22 Executive Park, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 949.655.3900 f.949.655.3995 irvine@harris-assoc.com
C-89
EXHIBIT "C"
SCHEDULE OF COMPENSATION
I. Consultant shall perform the tasks indicated in the Table of Tasks (Exhibit C-1) at
the rates shown therein. The comprehensive list of tasks which includes personnel, time
per task, hourly rates and sub-consultants is presented in the Consultant's attached Table
of Tasks.
II. Within the budgeted amounts for each Task, and with the approval of the Contract
Officer, funds may be shifted from one Task subbudget to another so long as the
Contract Sum is not exceeded per Section 2.1, unless Additional Services are
approved per Section 1.8.
III. The City will compensate Consultant for the Services performed upon submission of
a valid invoice. Each invoice is to include:
A. Line items for all personnel describing the work performed, the number of hours
worked, and the hourly rate.
B. Line items for all materials and equipment properly charged to the Services.
C. Line items for all other approved reimbursable expenses claimed, with supporting
documentation.
D. Line items for all approved subcontractor labor, supplies, equipment, materials, and
travel properly charged to the Services.
IV. The total compensation for the Services shall not exceed $439,989 as provided in
Section 2.1 of this Agreement.
V. The Consultant's billing rates for all personnel are included in the Table of Tasks
and attached as Exhibit C-1.
01203.0006/273153.1
C-90
EXHIBIT C-1
Table of Tasks
C-91
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Alta Mira Canyon Drainage & Erosion Control Project Study Report
Note: Excludes Detailed Tunnel Alternative Aerial/Plans and PTR's Harris & Associates
Table of Tasks/Personnel/Time per Task September 9, 2015
Revised 10-21-15
I
I MARK-UP
QA/QC PROJ SR PROJ DESIGN B&C Ninyo& ON COSTS
TASKS (SUB's) I PD MGR ENGR ENGR REVIEW KOMM Moore CWE LSA KOA 10% I TOTAL COST
Spec
$PER HOUR $220 $220 $175 $125 $155 Survey Geotech Hydraulic Environ I Facilitator
'HASE I: DATA COLLECTION/BASE SHEETS I
Kick-Off Meeting, Oat.a Collection and Review 2 12 12 8 $0
Bese Project Aer.al & 1 -Week Ground Survey (KOM Meridian) 2 2 2 $43.680 $4.368
Low Flov1 Pipe Diversion Aerial & 1/2-Week Ground Survey {KDM Meridian) Omited use other available m8ppmg $0
Base Project Base Sheets (6+/-Plan & Profile Sheets at 40' scale) 4 20 40 $0
Low Flow Pipe Diversion Base Sheets (6+1-Plan & Profile Sheets at 40' scale) 4 12 32 $0
Geotechncial Feasibility Studj (N&M) 2 2 $27,378 $2.738
Phase I Subtotal 2 24 48 82 0 $43,680 $27,378 $0 $0 $0 $7,106
SE 11: DESIGN DEVELOPMENT I I
24 24 24 $0
4 I 24 48 40 4 $70,326 $7,033
8 12 12 so
2 2 2 $15,360 $1,536
Develop Preliminary Conceptual Designs & Project Study Report (PSR} -Base Project 8 100 100 100 8 $0
Concept Design & PSR -Low Flow Diversion Pipe A!ternatWe 24 40 40 so
QA/QC Review and Bidability/Constructability Review of Concepts & PSR 16 8 8 8 16 I so
Envi;onmoo~ Stt.."lfy (LSA) ~CECA S NE?A 8 16 16 $19,135 $1,914
!<;,Temporary Construction Easement & 0"3inage Easement Evaluation! Composite Exhibit 16 24 48 48 $0
tH. City FeedBack Meetings !Progress Meetings (4) 4 20 24 $0
Refine Prefect Study Reoort & Concept Designs per City Staff Feedback & Outreach Mtgs 4 40 60 60 4 $0
Community Outreach (3) , City Council (1) & Outside Agency Meetings (2) (KOA + Photo Sim) 4 40 48 40 $9,1201 $912
Phase II Subtotal 56 322 430 390
C-92
EXHIBIT "D"
SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
I. Consultant shall perform all Services timely in accordance with the schedule to be
developed by Consultant and subject to the written approval of the Contract Officer
and the City Attorney's office. Phase I will be completed by January 14, 2016,
Phase II will be completed by July 19, 2016.
II. Consultant shall deliver the following tangible work products to the City by the
following dates.
A. Survey sheets and electronic survey information consisting of data points in a
format that is acceptable to the City and readable by the City's GIS system, by
January 4, 2016
B. Four distinct design alternatives to manage the drainage within and adjacent to
Altamira canyon, by June 1, 2016.
C. Preliminary geotechnical report indicating the feasibility of performing the
identified alternatives, by June 1, 2016.
D. Drainage study results including inlet nodes quantities and total volume of runoff
for the 50 and 100 year probable storms, by February 8, 2016.
E. PowerPoint presentations and minutes of each meeting, within one week
following each Community Outreach meeting.
F. Design Plan sheet illustrating restricted access into the 120" pipe and
specifications for same, by Julyl 1, 2016.
G. Report containing initial studies for each proposed alternative, by July 11, 2016.
H. Map sheets along with meets and bounds descriptions of temporary construction
easements and storm drain easements, by July 11, 2016.
I. Six hard copies of the Project Study Report and an electronic copy of the Project
Study Report in the 2003 version of Microsoft Word, by July 19, 2016.
III. The Contract Officer may approve extensions for performance of the services in
accordance with Section 3.2.
01203.0006/273153.1
C-93