CC SR 20210907 L - PM and CM services for Ladera Linda)
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 09/07/2021
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Calendar
AGENDA TITLE:
Consideration and possible action to award a contract services agreement to Griffin
Structures for project and construction management services for the Ladera Linda Park
and Community Center Project.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
(1) Award a contract services agreement to Griffin Structures for project management
and construction management services for the Ladera Linda Park and Community
Center Project in the not to exceed amount of $660,000 with a 15% contingency
of $99,000;
(2) Authorize the Mayor to execute the Contract services agreement, in a form
acceptable to the City Attorney; and
(3) Approve an additional appropriation of $759,000 in the American Rescue Plan Act
(ARPA).
FISCAL IMPACT: The action will result in a City expenditure of $660,000 with a 15%
contingency of $99,000. The service agreement will be funded from
the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA).
Amount Budgeted: $0
Additional Appropriation: $759,000
Account Number(s): 333-400-8405-8001 (ARPA Federal Grants – LL Community Center/Professional Services)
ORIGINATED BY: James O'Neill, Project Manager
REVIEWED BY: Ramzi Awwad, Public Works Director
APPROVED BY: Ara Mihranian, AICP, City Manager
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
A. Contract Services Agreement with Griffin Structures (page A-1)
B. Fee proposal from Griffin Structures (page B-1)
C. Original Proposal from Griffin Structures (page C-1)
D. Request for Proposals for Project Management and Construction
Management Services for the Ladera Linda Park and Community Center
Project (page D-1)
E. July 6, 2021, Staff Report (page E-1)
1
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
On July 6, 2021, the City Council received an updated cost estimate for the Ladera Linda
Park and Community Center Project and approved an amendment to the contract
services agreement with the project architecture/engineering firm, Johnson Favaro, to
continue design services toward bid documents. Under “Future Contracts and
Amendments” starting on page 11 of Attachment E, Staff informed the City Council that
additional professional services are needed to support Staff during the design process
and represent the City during the construction phase. One of those professional services
listed was project management and construction management services.
On June 2, 2021, Staff advertised a request for proposals for these services, utilizing the
PlanetBids service.
The scope of services is more thoroughly described in the attached Request for Proposals
(Attachment D), and includes:
▪ General Management: developing a Project Work Plan, preparing reports,
presentations, leading meetings, and submitting weekly project status reports
▪ Schedule Management: preparing an overall project schedule, conducting regular
design progress meetings, and proactively identifying schedule risk and
developing recovery strategies to mitigate impacts
▪ Budget Management: preparing an overall project budget by phase for inclusion in
the Project Work Plan, tracking actual costs by phase, proactively identify budget
risk and developing recovery strategies, preparing change order packages as
necessary, and reviewing invoices and pay requests
▪ Quality Management: performing quality assurance reviews of all design
submittals, constructability reviews and value engineering to improve design and
reduce costs
▪ Construction Management Oversight: serving as the City’s representative during
construction and liaison with the contractor and architect/engineer, overseeing the
construction inspectors, conducting bi-weekly progress and other meetings
▪ Coordination: coordinating with outside agencies to ensure all permits are
procured in a timely manner, assisting with bid solicitations, procuring furniture,
fixtures and equipment, and assisting in coordination of temporary relocation of
staff and operations
Proposals were received from six firms by the July 6 deadline, and an evaluation panel
of four members comprised of the City Manager and three department directors (Public
Works, Community Development and Recreation and Parks) ranked the proposals as
follows:
2
The evaluation panel concluded that the proposals of three firms scored in a tier above
the remaining proposals. Interviews with the top three firms were conducted between
August 6 and August 9.
After interviews were conducted, the evaluation panel re-scored each firm based on the
new information from the interviews and ranked them as follows:
3
It is important to note that, for the second round of scoring, the “Schedule” criteria was
removed and values adjusted to reflect that the firm does not ha ve significant control over
the project schedule.
The Director of Public Works then began negotiations with the top ranked firm, Griffin
Structures, on a time-and-materials, not-to-exceed fee proposal and refined scope (the
original proposal is Attachment C and the revised proposal and fee proposal is
Attachment B). The proposal is based on an hourly rate, which Staff compared to other
companies providing these types of services and concluded is consistent with current
industry rates. The number of hours estimated for each task is used to establish a
baseline plan, which may be adjusted up or down as needed, while remaining within the
total not-to-exceed amount of the agreement.
At this time, the project schedule anticipates breaking ground around March 20 22, and
the time between now and then, will focus on completing the construction drawings, going
through the bid process, and awarding a construction contract. Included in the contract
services agreement is a detailed schedule and supporting information.
As previously report, the City is receiving $9.9 million in the American Rescue Plan Act
(ARPA), and to date, has received $4.9 million (July 2021). At this time and based on past
reports on financing options for this project, staff recommends approving an additional
appropriation of $759,000 from the ARPA.
4
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends awarding a contract services agreement (Attachment A) to Griffin
Structures, based on its proposal, interview, negotiations with Staff, and resulting fee
proposal.
ALTERNATIVES:
In addition to Staff recommendation, the following alternative action s are available for the
City Council’s consideration:
1. Do not award a contract services agreement and give alternative direction to Staff
regarding the project management and construction management services.
2. Take other action, as deemed appropriate.
5
CONTRACT SERVICES AGREEMENT
By and Between
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
and
GRIFFIN STRUCTURES
for Project Management and Construction Management Services
for the Ladera Linda Park and Community Center Project
A-1
AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT SERVICES
BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AND
GRIFFIN STRUCTURES
THIS AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT SERVICES (herein “Agreement”) is made and
entered into on September 7, 2021, by and between the CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES,
a California municipal corporation (“City”) and GRIFFIN STRUCTURES, 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, the performance of the
services defined and described particularly in Article 1 of this Agreement.
B. Consultant, following submission of a proposal 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”, as stated in the Proposal, 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 mean those
A-2
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 Proposal 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 $200 (two hundred dollars) for each calendar day,
or portion thereof, for each worker paid less than the prevailing rates as determined by the DIR for
A-3
the work or craft in which the worker is employed for any public work done pursuant to thi s
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 60 (sixty)
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 8 (eight) 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 $25 (twenty five dollars) 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 8
(eight) hours in any one calendar day and 40 (forty) 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 8 (eight) hours per
day, and 40 (forty) 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 1½ (one and one
half) 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
(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, includi ng
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 in the form of a Change Order.
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 respecti ve
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
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 Change 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 15% of the Contract Sum; or,
in the time to perform of up to 90 (ninety) days, may be approved by the Contract Officer through
a written Change Order. 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.
If in the performance of the contract scope, the Consultant becomes aware of material defects in
the scope, duration or span of the contract or the Consulta nt becomes aware of extenuating
circumstance that will or could prevent the completion of the contract, on time or on budget, the
Consultant shall inform the Contracting Officer of an anticipated Change Order. This proposed
change order will stipulate, the facts surrounding the issue, proposed solutions, proposed costs and
proposed schedule impacts.
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 $660,000 (Six Hundred and Sixty Thousand Dollars) (the “Contract
Sum”), unless additional compensation is approved pursuant to Section 1.9.
A-6
2.2 Method of Compensation.
The method of compensation ma y include: (i) a lump sum payment upon completion; (ii)
payment in accordance with specified tasks or the percentage of completion of the services ; (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, and
(b) 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, using the City template,
or in a format acceptable to the City, 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 45 (forty-five) 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.
A-7
ARTICLE 3. PERFORMANCE SCHEDULE
3.1 Time of Essence.
Time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement.
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 through a Change
Order, but not exceeding 90 (ninety) 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 10 (ten) 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 pe rformance 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 Two Years
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 two additional one-year terms.
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:
John Hughes___________ Executive Vice-President
A-8
Name Title
Dustin Alamo Vice President
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 the personnel included in the Proposal 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 A greement, prior to and during any
such performance. City shall have the right to approve or reject any proposed replacement
personnel, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.
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 Ramzi Awwad, Director of Public Works, or such person
as he may designate. 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
A-9
control of Consultant’s employees, servants, representatives or agents, or in fixing their number,
compensation or hours of s ervice. Consultant shall perform all services required herein as an
independent contractor of City and shall remain at all times as to City a wholly independ ent
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; all subcontractors included in
the Proposal are deemed approved. 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 25% (twenty five percent) 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 coverag e for any owned, hired, non-owned or
rented vehicles, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 combined single limit for each accident.
A-10
(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) Workers’ compensation insurance. Consultant shall maintain Workers’
Compensation Insurance (Statutory Limits) and Employer’s Liability Insurance (with limits of at
least $1,000,000).
(e) Subcontractors. Consultant shall include all subcontractors as insureds
under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates and certified endorsements fo r 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 endorseme nts must be
approved by City’s Risk Manager prior to commencement of performance. Current certifica tion
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 copi es 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 hereunder 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 here in 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 and continuously maintain 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.
A-11
(e) Acceptable insurers. All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance
company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact business of ins urance 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, employee s and volunteers or shall specifically allow
Consultant or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these specifications t o
waive their right of recovery prior to a loss. Consultant hereby waives its own right of recovery
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. Spec ific 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 30 (thirty) day notice of cancellation (except for
nonpayment for which a 10 (ten) 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
A-12
against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except wi th 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 90 (ninety) days advance written notice of such change. If such change
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:
A-13
(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 neglige nt 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 a rising 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
A-14
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.
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,
A-15
response to interrogatories or other information concerning t he 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
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 l aws 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 15 (fifteen) 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 Cit y’s legal rights or any rights arising out
of any provision of this Agreement.
A-16
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 te rm, 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 con strued 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 ot her 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 re medies, 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 Termination Prior to Expiration of Term.
This Section shall govern any termination of th is 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 30 (thirty) days’ written notice to Consultant,
A-17
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. Upon receipt of any notice of
termination, Consultant shall immediately cease all services hereunder except suc h as may be
specifically approved by the Contract Officer. 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
of termination without cause pursuant to this Section, the City need not provide the Consultant
with the opportunity to cure pursuant to Section 7.2.
7.8 Termination for Default of Party.
If termination is due to the failure of the other Party to fulfill its obligations under this
Agreement:
(a) 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.
(b) Consultant may, after compliance with the provisions of Section 7.2, terminate the
Agreement upon written notice to the City‘s Contract Officer. Consultant shall be entitled to
payment for all work performed up to the date of termination.
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
may become due to the Consultant or to its successor, or for breach of any obligation of the terms
of this Agreement.
A-18
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 sub contractor
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 Agreemen t.
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.
A-19
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 inte rests 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
A-20
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) 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
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
Eric Alegria, Mayor
ATTEST:
Teresa Takaoka, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ALESHIRE & WYNDER, LLP
William W. Wynder, City Attorney
CONSULTANT:
GRIFFIN STRUCTURES
By:
Jon Hughes, Executive Vice President
By:
Dustin Alamo, Vice President
Address: 2 Technology Drive
Suite 150
Irvine, California 92618
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 Preside nt; and 2)
Secretary, any Assistant Secretary, Chief Financial Officer or any Assistant Treasurer. CON SULTANT’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
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
On __________, 2021 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 re lying 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 docume nt to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy or validity of that document.
A-23
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
On __________, 2021 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 t he 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 Cal ifornia 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 ce rtificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy or validity of that document.
A-24
EXHIBIT “A”
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Consultant will provide Project Management and Construction Management Services
for the Ladera Linda Park and Community Center Project, as follows.
1. GENERAL MANAGEMENT
a. Develop Project Work Plan (on City form) to map out how project will go
from current status to final completion;
b. Prepare reports, deliver presentations, and lead meetings (p repare
agendas and read-aheads, facilitate discussions, develop and distribute
meeting minutes) to the City Council, City leadership team, and
stakeholder groups;
c. Submit weekly Project Status Report (on City form) to document:
i. Project risks or issues that may impact scope, schedule, or budget
ii. Current status
iii. Prior week’s activities
iv. Upcoming week’s activities
v. Current schedule against baseline schedule
vi. Current budget status against baseline budget
vii. Contract authorization available, expiration date, and needed
action.
2. SCHEDULE MANAGEMENT
a) Prepare overall project schedule using Critical Path Method for inclusion
Project Work Plan;
b) Conduct regular design progress meetings and monitor progress
compared to baseline schedule; update project schedule when needed
and document reason for deviation from baseline;
c) Proactively identify schedule risk and develop recovery strategies to
mitigate impact.
3. BUDGET MANAGEMENT
a) Prepare overall project budget by phase for inclusion in Project Work Plan;
b) Track actual costs by phase and compare to budgeted amount; forecast
ongoing resource needs and assesses sufficiency of remaining budget;
request additional budget when needed and provide justif ication;
c) Proactively identify budget risk and develop recovery strategies to mitigate
impact;
d) Prepare Design Change Order/Contract Amendment packages (on City
form) including narratives explaining circumstances leading to Change
Order, cost analysis, and other supporting documentation;
e) Review Pay Requests/Invoices from the General Contractor, A/E, and any
other associated contractors for accuracy and inclusion of all necessary
information and recommend approval.
A-25
4. QUALITY MANAGEMENT
a) Perform quality assurance review of all design submittals, check-sets, and
bid documents; generally including plans, specifications, cost estimates,
and other contract documents to assure:
i. Plans and specifications meet all applicable standards
ii. No errors, omissions, vague, or conf licting information
iii. Engineering judgment is appropriately used
iv. Assumptions are reasonable and valid
v. Cost estimates are comprehensive, use most applicable units and
prices, and apply suitable contingencies
vi. vi. Critical path method construction schedule provides the
appropriate amount of time to complete construction as quickly as
possible without increasing costs due to excessive schedule
constraints;
b) b) Perform constructability review to ensure that design can be
constructed within the known physical constraints;
c) c) Perform value engineering and identify opportunities to improve design
and reduce costs.
5. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT
a) Serve as City’s representative during construction and act as liaison
between the City, the construction contractor, and the Architect/Engineer;
b) Oversee Construction Inspectors to assure that they are performing
adequate inspection of the construction contractor’s work for compliance
with the construction documents;
c) Conduct bi-weekly progress, and other necessary meetings; including
preparing and distributing agendas, meeting minutes, and other necessary
documentation;
d) Review, comment on, and recommend acceptance of the construction
contractor’s construction schedule. Ensure that the construction contractor
stays on schedule. If the construction contractor is not progressing
according to schedule, document delays and notify the City and the
construction contractor. As directed by the City, develop strategies to
mitigate delays, prepare notices to cure, and calculate liquidated
damages;
e) Review, comment on, and recommend approval of all submittals including
shop drawings, samples, and testing reports; consulting with the
Architect/Engineer when necessary;
f) Review all Requests for Information and prepare responses through
consultations with the Architect/Engineer when necessary;
g) Periodically spot-check field inspection activities to ensure that inspection
work is being done correctly both in terms of the level of inspection for
specific activities as well as the method of inspection;
h) Check that all Construction Inspector Daily Reports are produced in a
timely fashion and include the appropriate amount and type of information;
A-26
i) Collect and file electronic copies of materials tickets, testing reports,
quality assurance checklists, and Daily Reports;
j) Review all Proposed Change Orders, review justification for contract
change, prepare data-driven independent cost estimates, and analyze
schedule impacts. Recommend approval or rejection of Proposed Change
Orders. For approved Change Orders, prepare necessary documentation
(on City forms);
k) Review all Pay Requests for accuracy of work completed and quantity
installed, ensure that all pertinent information is included, and provide
comments and recommendations for payment;
l) Proactively identify and investigate any potential construction problems
and recommend solutions;
m) Immediately document any non-compliance with the construction contract,
unusual occurrences, or accidents occurring within the project limits;
n) Schedule and conduct walk-through inspection. Prepare comprehensive
punch list and coordinate close-out of all punch list items;
o) In consultation with City staff, act as liaison between the City and the
public/stakeholders concerning issues with construction.
6. COORDINATION
a) Coordinate with outside agencies to ensure that all permits are procured in
a timely manner;
b) Assist with bidder solicitation activities;
c) Assist in the procurement of furniture, fixtures, and equipment;
d) Assist in coordinating the temporary relocation of staff and operations prio r
to and during construction.
Consultant shall complete other tasks deemed necessary for the accomplishment of a
complete and comprehensive outcome as described in th e project objective. Consultant
shall expand on the above-noted tasks, where appropriate, and provide suggestions
which might lead to efficiencies and enhance the results or usefulness of the work.
[Continued on next page]
A-27
ii
P R O J E C T M A N A G E R A N D C O N S T R U C T I O N M A N A G E R
Ladera Linda Community
Center & Park
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
AUGUST 25, 2021
A-28
iiii
50+
community center projects with
multi-purpose and discovery
rooms, classrooms, and associated
community spaces
40+
years of public sector
experience
100+
park projects including sport
complexes and competitive outdoor
athletic facilities
350+
publicly bid projects
Dedicated in-house
specialists for cost
estimating, community
outreach, inspection, and
infrastructure
Stellar record of completing projects under budget & ahead of schedule
WHY GRIFFIN STRUCTURES?
100+
Energy efficient, conservation projects with either LEED certified,
Net Zero, WELL certifications, and
other designations
Turn-key approach with a motto of
"No Surprises" along with our Performance Guarantee
A-29
iiiiii
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
Cover Letter
1.: Approach to Scope of Services 1
2.: Organization & Staffing 4
3.: Staff Qualifications & Experience 6
4.: Project Schedule 23
5.: Quality Control Plan 24
6.: Acceptance of Conditions 25
SANTA CLARITA CANYON COUNTRY
COMMUNITY CENTER
QUAIL HILL COMMUNITY CENTER
YORBA LINDA LIBRARY & CULTURAL ARTS CENTER
VERNOLA COMMUNITY CENTER
& PARK EXPANSIONMARINA SAILING RECREATION
CENTER & PARK
A-30
iviv
August 25, 2021
30940 Hawthorne Blvd., Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
RE: Request for Proposals, Ladera Linda Community Center and Park Project Manager and
Construction Manager
Dear Mr. Awwad and Evaluation Team,
As Griffin Structures celebrates our 40th year of providing award-winning, industry-leading public sector
Construction Management services, we are pleased to submit our proposal to the city of Rancho Palos Verdes. Our team has requisite technical expertise and considerable experience with community centers
and parks, and possesses the local and public relations knowledge and communications proficiency
required. We offer our pledge to bring the City's Ladera Linda Community Center and Park project to
successful completion.
[ EXTENSIVE PORTFOLIO WITH OVER 150+ SIMILAR PROJECTS ]
We have drawn upon our considerable staff resources and have selected a uniquely qualified group of construction management experts specializing in community centers and park projects. Our highlights
include the $58M Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center, Vernola Community Center, Quail
Hill Community Center, as well as leading parks such as the $20M Esencia Sports Park, $52M Lake Forest
Complex and a variety of additional, applicable projects. Unlike many of our competitors, Griffin Structures
is a leading community center and parks project and construction management (PMCM) firm. We are the
ongoing preferred PMCM for many of the state's largest community and recreational centers and are the on-call PMCM for nationally recognized non-profit organizations such as the Los Angeles Neighborhood
Land Trust (LANLT), The Trust for Public Land (TPL), and others.
[ SEASONED STAFF WITH APPLICABLE EXPERIENCE ]
For this project, we offer the exceptional services of long-time Griffin Structures PMCM and leader, Robert
Godfrey and Project Inspector, Cody Roth. Together, Robert Godfrey and Cody Roth have overseen the
delivery of several relevant projects, currently serving as the PMCM and Inspector for the $58M Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center slated for completion prior to the start of this project. In
fact, we welcome a tour of this project with the City at its sole discretion. Additionally, our team will be
supported by a wealth of internal resources including programming experts, landscape architects, funding
experts, infrastructure specialists, estimators, and outreach professionals.
[ THE CITY COMES FIRST ]
Unlike many large PMCM firms, we firmly believe in quality over quantity of service, do not perpetually rotate staff, and protect your interests first. Most importantly, we serve the City in a Fiduciary and Risk
Assumptive Capacity, stressing ethics and integrity in all aspects of our service. Unlike our competitors, we
will assume financial risk based on our PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE. We offer the ability for the City to
withhold 10% of our total fee billings, which will be released based solely on your discretionary satisfaction
with our performance.
[ EXCELLENCE IN PROJECT DELIVERY ]
Griffin Structures takes great pride in providing both competitive pricing and highly qualified personnel
and goes to great measures to ask ‘What is our true value added proposition to the city of Rancho Palos
Verdes?’ The answer to this question is our people. We bring a higher caliber of Project and Construction
Manager to our clients - one that is trained as a builder, but thinks as an owner. A Project and Construction
Manager that can at minimum deliver the specified scope of services, and far beyond that. Our people offer
creative delivery options, solutions-based recommendations, and true perspective of ownership that our competitors do not possess. It is for this reason we are able to provide a single point of contact at a senior level that is capable of delivery enhanced services at a competitive rate. This is our differentiator and the
meaning behind the Griffin Structures pledge to provide ‘Excellence in Project Delivery’.
We look forward to serving you,
Roger Torriero, CEO & Owner C: (949) 412-9000 | E: rtorriero@griffinholdings.net
griffinstructures.com949.497.9000Irvine, CA2 Technology Drive, Suite 150 A-31
vv
Firm Contact Information:
2 Technology Drive, Suite 150 Irvine, CA 92618
Primary Contact Information:
Jon Hughes, CCM, DBIA
Executive Vice President & Project Executive
(949) 497-9000 x.208
jhughes@griffinstructures.com
Type of Organization:
Corporation
Officers:
Conflict of Interest:
Griffin Structures has no conflicts of interests to disclose.
Organization Standing:
Roger Torriero, CEO & Owner
(949) 412-9000
rtorriero@griffinholdings.net
Jon Hughes, CCM, DBIA
Executive Vice President & Project Executive
(949) 497-9000 x208
jhughes@griffinstructures.com
Mark Hoglund
COO & CFO
(949) 497-9000 x203
mhoglund@griffinstructures.com
Kelly Boyle
Executive Vice President
(949) 497-9000 x202
kboyle@griffinstructures.com
A-32
vivi
Addendum 1 Acknowledgment
A-33
1-\.BI C WORKS OEPAR IIV!EN f
June 18, 2021
ADDENDUM NO. 1
TO THE LADERA LINDA COMMUNITY CENTER AND PARK PROJECT MANAGER AND
CONSTRUCTION MANAGER REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP)
The following changes (revisions, additions, and/or deletions) as noted below , are hereby
incorporated and made a part of the on-call construction management & inspection services
request for proposals. Portions of the RFP , not specifically mentioned in the Addendum ,
remain the same. All trades affected shall be fully advised of these revis ions , deletions, and
additions.
This Addendum forms a part of the request for proposals for LADERA LINDA COMMUNITY
CENTER AND PARK PROJECT MANAGER AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGER and modifies
the orig inal request for proposals.
Each proposer shall be responsible for ascerta ining , prior to submitting a proposal, that it has
rece ived all issued Addenda and shall ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF THIS ADDENDUM ON
THE PROPOSER'S CERTIFICATION , attached. A proposer's failure to address the
requirements of this addendum or failure to acknowledge the receipt of this addendum may
result in that proposal being rejected .
Note the following changes and/or additions to the on-call construction management &
inspection services request for proposa ls. The proposer shall execute the Cert ification at the
end of this addendum and shall attach all pages of this addendum to the proposal.
Delete:
Replace with:
Page 15
Revised page R15 (Attached) to replace item d under Staff Qualifications and
Experience that states " ... A registered Professional Engineer must be the
Project Manager .. ." with •• •.. A registered Professional Engineer or a
Certified Construction Manager must be the Project Manager ... ".
End of Addendum No. 1
Any questions regarding this Addendum should be directed to the Sean Lopez, at (31 0)
544w5333.
Sean Lopez.
Assistant Engineer
PAGE 1 OF 1
viivii A-34
percentage of the total effort. Specifically show the availab ility of staff to
provide the necessary resource levels to meet the City's needs. Indicate that
the Project Manager and key staff will remain assigned to this project through
completion of the Scope of Services. (No more than two pages)
d) Staff Qualifications and Experience: Describe qualifications of the assigned
staff and sub-contractors including relevant technical exper ience. Staff
assigned to complete the Scope of Services must have previous experience
in providing the necessary services as described under the Scope of
Services. A registered Professional Engineer or a Certified Construction
Manager must be the Project Manager. Description of Consultant's
experience should include:
• Prior Experience: Demonstrate that the firm has significant experience
providing services similar to those described under the Scope of Services.
(No more than two page)
• Staff Qualifications: Provide resumes for the Project Manager and any
other key staff members to be assigned to contribute to the Scope of
Services , with an emphasis on similar services which they provided to
other agencies. (No more than ten pages)
• Reference Projects: Include at least three projects with similar scope of
services performed by the project team within the past three years and
indicate the specific responsibilities of each team member on the
reference proj ect. Provide contact information for each client. (No more
than ten pages}
e) Project Schedule: Provide a resource allocation schedule detailing the
personnel resources and levels that will be applied at each stage of the
project.. (No more than one 11 " x 17w page)
f) Quality Control P lan: Describe the quality control procedures and associated
staff responsibilities which will ensure that the deliverables will meet the City's
needs. (No more than one page)
g) Acceptance of Conditio ns : State the offering firm 's acceptance of all
conditions listed in the Request fo r Proposal (RFP) document and Sample
Professional Services Agreement (Attachment D). Any exceptions or
suggested changes to the RFP or Professional Services Agreement (PSA),
including the suggested change, the reasons therefore and the impact it may
have on cost or other considerations on the firm's behalf must be stated in the
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
RFP· Ladera Linda Commun ity Center and Parle Project Manager and Construction Manager
June 18, 2021
Page RlS of 17
viiiviii A-35
PROPOSER'S CERTIFICATION
I acknowledge receipt of the foregoing Addendum No. 1 and accept all conditions
contained therein.
Roger Torriero , CEO & Owner 716121
By Date
Please sign above and include this signed addendum in the proposal package. Failure to
do so may result in that proposal being rejected.
PAGE 2 OF 2
ixix
Addendum 2 Acknowledgment
A-36
C ITY OF
ADDENDUM NO. 2
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
PLBLC WOR't<S OHAA rMENT
June 28, 2021
TO THE LADERA LINDA COMMUNITY CENTER AND PARK PROJECT MANAGER AND
CONSTRUCTION MANAGER REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP)
The following changes (revisions, additions. and/or deletions) as noted be low. a re hereby
incorporated and made a part of the on-call construction management & i nspection services
request for proposals. Portions of the RFP, not specifically mentioned in the Addendum,
remain the same. All trades affected shall be fu lly advised of these revisions , deletions, and
additions .
Th is Addendum forms a part of the req uest for proposals for LADERA LINDA COMMUN ITY
CENTER AND PARK PROJECT MANAGER AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGER and modifies
the orig inal request f or proposals.
Each proposer shall be responsible for ascertaining, prior to submitting a proposal, that it has
received all issued Addenda and shall ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT O F THIS ADDENDUM ON
THE PROPOSER'S CERTIFICATION , attached . A proposer's failure to address the
requirements of this addendum or failure to acknowledge the receipt of th is addendum may
result in that proposal being rejected .
Note the following changes and/or additions to the on -call construction management &
inspection services request for proposals . T he proposer shall execute the Certification at the
end of this addendum and shall attach all pages of this addendum t o the proposal.
Delete :
Replace with:
Page R15
Revised page R2-15 (Attached) to rep lace item (d) Reference Projects under
Staff Qualifications and Experience that states "Include at least three projects
with similar scope of services performed by the project team within the
past three years and Indicate the specific responsibilities of each team
member on the reference project: with "Include at least three projects with
similar scope of services performed by the project team within the past
th-¥ee five years and indicate the specific responsibilities of each team
member on the reference project".
End of Addendum No. 2
Any questions regarding this Addendum should be directed to the Sean Lopez, at (310)
544-5333.
Sean Lopez.
Assistant Engineer
PAGE 1 OF 1
xx A-37
percentage of the total effort. Specifically show the availability of staff to
provide the necessary resource levels to meet the City's needs . Indicate that
the Project Manager and key staff will remain assigned to this project through
completion of the Scope of Services. (No more than two pages)
d) Staff Qualifications and Experience: Describe qualifications of the assigned
staff and sub-contractors includ ing relevant technica l experience. Staff
assigned to complete the Scope of Services must have previous experience
in providing the necessary services as described under the Scope of
Services. A registered Professional Engineer or a Certified Construction
Manager must be the Project Manager. Description of Consultant's
experience should include:
• Prior Experience: Demonstrate that the firm has significant experience
providing services similar to those described under the Scope of Services.
(No more than two page)
• Staff Qualifications: Provide resumes for the Project Manager and any
other key staff members to be assigned to contribute to the Scope of
Services , with an emphasis on similar services which they provided to
other agencies. (No more than ten pages)
• Reference Projects: Include at least three projects with similar scope of
services performed by the project team within the past tAfee five years
and ind icate the specific responsibilities of each team member on the
reference project. Provide contact information for each client. (No more
than ten pages)
e) Project Schedule: Provide a resource allocation schedule detailing the
personnel resources and levels that will be applied at each stage of the
project. . (No more than one 11" x 17" page)
f) Quality Control Plan: Describe the quality control procedures and associated
staff responsibilities which will ensure that the deliverables will meet the City's
needs. (No more than one page)
g) Acceptance of Conditions: State the offering firm's acceptance of all
conditions listed in the Request fo r Proposal (RFP) document and Sample
Professional Services Agreement (Attachment D). Any exceptions or
suggested changes to the RFP or Professional Services Agreement (PSA),
including the suggested change, the reasons therefore and the impact it may
have on cost or other considerations on the firm's behalf must be stated in the
Oty of Rancho Palos Verdes
RFP -Ladera Unda Community Center and Park Project Manager and Construction
Manager June 28, 2021
Page R2-15 of 17
xixi A-38
PROPOSER'S CERTIFICATION
I acknowledge receipt of the foregoing Addendum No. 2 and accept all conditions
contained therein.
-
Roger Torriero, CEO & Owner 7/6/21
By Date
Please sign above and Include this signed addendum In the proposal package. Failure to
do so may result in that proposal being rejected.
PAGE2 OF 2
1. Approach to Scope of Services“Griffin Structures Construction
Managers do an excellent job
holding the Contractor to the
approved schedule and are able to
anticipate and address issues that
may impact your completion date.”
Wayne Weber, Parks Planning Manager
City of Santa Clarita
Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center A-39
11
Established in 1981, Griffin Structures, Inc. (Griffin) is
a California corporation and is a diversified Program
and Construction Management/Owners Representative
firm serving the public, institutional, non-profit and
private sectors. We have built in excess of $2B in public
sector facilities, the scope of these projects ranging
from $1M to greater than $400M. Our comprehensive
experience includes various projects and building types
inclusive of leading community centers and parks. Our
award-winning portfolio encompasses not only new
construction, but extensive renovations and facility
upgrades as well.
Project Understanding
Griffin Structures recognizes this is a significant
project for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and that
the City has expended considerable effort to bring
this project to fruition. This project site has served
the community for many years as both a public and
Montessori school. Once completed, the delivery of this
project will continue this legacy, offering a synergized
community hub for generations to come.
Specifically we understand this project to consist of
the demolition of the existing school buildings and the
construction of a new 6,790 SF Community Center,
tiered seating, parking lot, naturalistic playground,
renovation of two paddle tennis courts, construction
of a new storage facility, walking paths, and a new lawn
area. The project will also include drought-tolerant
landscaping, grading, underground utilities, mechanical
and refuse storage area, and a new vehicular gate.
A key to the success of this project rests in the proper
execution of subsequent phases of work, specifically
the plan review and contractor bidding phases. Griffin
Structures has extensive experience in performing
in-depth constructability reviews to ensure the
plans and specifications are complete, biddable, and
constructable. Our approach to this effort will be
extensive and utilize multiple individuals who will
review the plans from varying perspectives. We
have seasoned inspectors, licensed contractors, and
landscape architects on staff, all of whom will review
these plans for compilation into a comprehensive
Bluebeam report. This will be critical to ensuring
the project documents are of the highest quality and
produce the most comprehensive bids.
Similar to the plan review, we take great pride in the
preparation of the bid documents and the management
of the bid process to ensure we receive complete,
responsive, and responsible bids. This effort includes a
comprehensive review of the City’s General Provisions,
Special Provisions, Division 01 Specifications, and
the incorporation of Greenbook and City standards
should they apply. Our goal is always to produce the
most defensible set of documents possible for bidding,
which will, in turn, provide the most complete bids and
protect the City from frivolous change orders in the
future to ensure the project unfolds efficiently.
1. Approach to Scope of Services
Pre-Construction
Needs Assessment Program Management Space Planning Site Selection Project Budgeting Design Management Constructability Review Scheduling Value Engineering Total Project Budgeting Contractor Pre-Qualification
and Procurement
Bid Management
Construction
Construction Management Owner’s Representative Budget Management Contractor Oversight Document Control Quality Assurance/Control Sustainability Management Safety Management RFI & CO Management FF&E Procurement &
Coordination Building Commissioning & Closeout
Delivery Method Consultation
Design-Bid-Build Design-Build Integrated Project Delivery Public-Private Partnership
Scope of Services
A-40
22
Approach
Griffin Structures hereby affirms that we will perform the scope of services contained in the
RFP.
Griffin approaches projects with the perspective of an Owner, and the insight of an Architect
and Contractor. Like an Owner, we approach each project as if it is our own money, schedule,
and facility that is being developed. With several licensed Architects and Contractors within
our ranks, we also understand the technical aspects and trade secrets essential to providing
quality services.
Together with these two key components, Griffin provides Inspection and Construction
Management services based on our unique blend of experience as both a public agency
Construction Managers and at-risk fee developers - uniquely enhancing our ability to provide
enhanced services to our clients. With that said, we confirm we will provide all services
listed in the RFP and have included a summary within this section detailing our approach and
available project and construction management services.
Communication / Document Control
Standardized Communication and Document Management Protocols will
be utilized for all project document controls. All RFIs, submittals, ASIs,
CCDs, Deltas, daily reports, project photos, SWPPP reports, schedules,
and closeout documents will be carefully integrated into the City’s third-
party web-based Software-as-a-Service (SaaS).
Schedule Management
A comprehensive master project schedule will be created to include all
aspects of the project, including, but not limited to: design iterations &
review times, permitting phases, pre-qualification, bidding, contracts &
insurance, construction phasing, city installations, utility connections,
IT installations, punchlist, commissioning, & contingency.
Financial Controls
Effective financial controls depend on change management, timely
invoices, claim mitigation & avoidance, commitment to value, clear
documentation and legal comprehension. Our expertise in this category
is best-in-class and includes an estimating team to serve as a reference
point in developing project budgets or negotiating change orders.
Quality Control Observations
Inspections, photography/technology such as recordings, photography,
Bluebeam Technology to facilitate the communication of challenges
in field for quick resolution & documentation, Building Information
Modeling (BIM), and Field Observation Reports will be employed for
Quality Control and Assurance.
A-41
33
Griffin Structures goes to great lengths to research and understand the challenges and opportunities
for every pursuit. As a result of this effort, we have prepared the following strategic considerations to
demonstrate our approach to Construction Management and illustrate the value we bring to a project.
These considerations are prepared in a question-and-answer format for ease of reading. We have utilized
a page from Staff Qualifications to include an additional page for this section.
Question: How might the City be assured that the plans and specifications are of the highest quality
and result in comprehensive bids?
Answer: As mentioned in the project understanding, Griffin Structures takes great pride in the performance of Constructability Reviews. This effort will involve multiple disciplines, ranging from licensed contractors to landscape architects, and will be performed in Bluebeam format. This
format provides a snapshot of the detail in question, clear and concise reference to the issue, and
recommendations for adjustment if necessary. We also will establish an in-depth page turn session with
the Design Team to go through each comment and discuss what revisions may or may not be needed.
This will also involve an inherent value engineering perspective, not to wholesale change the design but to evaluate if the specified detail or material is appropriate for its intended use. By performing such a comprehensive analysis, we are confident the City will benefit from the issuance of bid documents of the
highest quality.
Question: How might the Construction Management team mitigate the impact this project will have
on the surrounding neighborhood?
Answer: Having worked on municipal projects for 40 years, Griffin has become very sensitive to the
importance of maintaining good neighborhood relations during construction. For this reason, we
have a very robust neighborhood relations approach that includes multiple tools of communication.
Those tools include, but are not limited to, weekly reports to staff, monthly reports for senior staff and council, quarterly updates, and all necessary content for website updates. Of particular importance is our recommendation that the City arrange for a dedicated project hotline that is posted on project
signage. This hotline will have a pre-recorded outgoing message that allows any passerby, neighbor, or
constituent to leave a message, question, or concern with the promise of receiving a return call within 24
hours. Our Project and Construction Manager will monitor this inbox and will respond accordingly. We
believe this will help the City demonstrate that it takes the concerns of its constituents seriously and is
responsive to any issues that may arise.
Question: Are there any traffic concerns related to this project?
Answer: Yes. This project is in a very dense residential area. Therefore, all construction traffic will occur
in this residential environment. With this in mind, we will require the Contractor to employ very specific traffic control measures, trucking routes and enforce strict start and finish times for construction.
Additionally, we will require the Contractor to produce detailed and regularly updated site utilization
plans so all traffic is managed in and out as efficiently as possible. Griffin will work closely with the City
and the Design Team to craft exhibits and language to be included in the bid documents to ensure the
City’s needs are clearly communicated with all bidders.
Value-Adding Strategies, Innovations & Strategic Considerations
A-42
2. Organization & Staffing“Griffin Structures helped us build a
strong team and their expert guidance
limited our change orders and allowed
us to complete our project on time and
on budget.”
Steve Didier, Municipal Projects Manager
City of Carlsbad
Carlsbad Pine Ave. Community Center A-43
44
Our proposed team shares a long history of successful partnerships and is comprised of leading Project and
Construction Managers, specializing in the development and construction of new construction, expansion, and
renovation of leading community centers and parks. The project team will be managed by Project Executive, Jon
Hughes, providing oversight to the Project and Construction Manager, Robert Godfrey, who will be responsible
for the day-to-day operations of the project providing his expertise in the delivery of projects of this type. Robert
will oversee the operations of Project Inspector, Cody Roth. The project team will also be supported by our wealth
of internal resources including, Cost Estimator, Jay Helekar, and our Value Engineering Expert, Ryan Craven. The
Project Manager and key staff will remain assigned to this project through completion of the Scope of Services.
With certifications from the Construction Management Association of America (CCM), Design-Build Institute of
America (DBIA), and the U.S. Green Building Council (LEED AP). Griffin Structures employees are professionally
trained as Owner's Representatives, are experienced and highly trained to provide exceptional services to our
Clients.
Roger Torriero
Principal-In-Charge,
Owner & Founder
Jon Hughes
CCM, DBIA
Project Executive,
Executive Vice Pres.
Robert Godfrey
CCM
Sr. Project &
Construction Manager
Jay Helekar
LEED AP
Cost Estimator
Ryan Craven
Value Engineering
Expert
Cody Roth
Construction Manager
- Inspector
2. Organization & Staffing
A-44
55
Involvement & Availability
Employee & Title % of Involvement Availability
Roger Torriero
Principal-In-Charge,
Owner & Founder
>10%Located from our corporate headquarters in Irvine, Roger
provides leadership to all projects as-needed.
Jon Hughes, CCM, DBIA
Project Executive >20%Located from our corporate headquarters in Irvine, Jon
provides leadership to all projects as-needed.
Robert Godfrey, CCM
Project & Construction
Manager
70%
Located from our Irvine office, Robert is currently serving
as the lead for several projects slated for December 31,
2021 completion and the Santa Clarita Canyon Country
Community Center project slated for September 30, 2021
completion.
Cody Roth
Project Inspector 100%Located from our Irvine office, Cody is currently serving
on the Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center
project slated for September 30, 2021 completion.
Jay Helekar, LEED AP
Cost Estimator >15%
Located from our corporate headquarters in Irvine, Jay
is currently serving as the lead estimator for multiple
projects as-needed of which the completion dates are
on-going. Jay's time will be properly allocated to ensure
your needs are properly served.
Ryan Craven
Value Engineering Expert >15%
Located from our corporate headquarters in Irvine, Ryan
is currently serving on multiple projects as-needed of
which the completion dates are on-going. Ryan's time
will be properly allocated to ensure your needs are
properly served.
A-45
3. Staff Qualifications & Experience“Griffin Structures is professional,
responsive, detail oriented and does
what it takes to get the job done.
Staff was regularly briefed on the
project timeline, the status of multiple
budgets within the project, and no
question ever went unanswered.
They were an excellent partner and
brought the project to a successful
completion.”
Carrie Lixey, Library Director
City of Yorba Linda
Yorba Linda Library & Cultural Arts Center A-46
6
The Griffin Structures possesses unparalleled
experience in managing projects containing
identical, key elements to the Ladera Linda
Community Center and Park project. These
have included community centers with flexible
multi-purpose rooms, classrooms, discovery
spaces, and associated supportive staff areas,
as well as California leading park projects with
playgrounds, hard and soft courts, and outdoor
maintenance and storage facilities. Additionally,
our proposed team has led incredibly
ambitious sustainability projects, including
the Environmental Nature Center in Newport
Beach – LEED Platinum, AIA Top 10 COTE
Winner and number one recognized educational
sustainability project in the nation.
With this experience, our project team can
forecast and mitigate unforeseen circumstances
from day one, maintaining exceptional
relationships with industry partners to ensure
quality design and construction oversight. We
have highlighted key projects which perfectly
align with the Ladera Linda Community Center
and Park project in our Reference Projects
section and encourage the City to contact the
references provided.
3. Staff Qualifications & Experience
1. Santa Clarita Canyon Country
Community Center
2. Marina Sailing Recreation Center &
Park
3. Huntington Beach Community Ctr.
4. Burlingame Community Center
5. Northeast Stockton Library &
Community Center
1. Laguna Beach Community & Senior
Center
2. Fullerton Multigenerational
Community Center
3. Lawndale Community Center
4. Frisbie Park Expansion & Renovation
5. Silverlakes Sports Complex
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
Prior Experience
A-47
7
6. Esencia Sports Park
7. Lake Forest Sports Complex & Recreation
Center
8. Bower Kidseum
9. Discovery Cube Science Center
10. Samueli Academy
11. Environmental Nature Center & Preschool
11
13 14
12
16
15
A-48
88
Roger Torriero
Principal-In-Charge
Education
Master of Architecture, Accademia di
Belli Arti di Firenze Italia
Bachelor of Architecture,
Syracuse University, New York
Certification
California Contractor License
#793600, Class B
Affiliations
U.S. Green Building Council, Member
Urban Land Institute, Member
American Public Works Association
Associated General Contractors of
America, Member
Construction Management Association
of America, Member
Design-Build Institute, Member
Years of Experience
42+
QUALIFICATIONS
As our Principal-In-Charge, CEO, and Owner, Roger focuses
on the delivery of complex projects for the private and
public sectors, including newly constructed, expanded, and
renovated community centers and parks. Roger has also led
the pre-design, design, and construction for virtually all public
and private sector projects, including real estate development,
finance, design, and construction. Roger provides Griffin with
specialized expertise in the conceptualization and realization
of challenging projects. He is an expert in forward planning,
finance, entitlements, project delivery methodologies, and
community-based participatory planning.
As Principal-In-Charge, Roger will provide valuable insight
to the project team, ensuring your scheduling and financial
expectations are met throughout the duration of our services.
REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE
• Vernola Community Center & Expansion, Jurupa Valley, CA
• Quail Hill Community Center, Irvine, CA
• Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center, CA
• Rancho Cucamonga Sports Center, CA
• Yorba Linda Library & Cultural Arts Center, CA
• Carlsbad Pine Ave. Community Center & Garden, CA
• Frisbie Park Expansion, Rialto, CA
• Esencia Park, CA
• Lake Forest Sports Complex, CA
• Fullerton Multigenerational Community Center & Aquatic Facilities, CA
• Great Park Ice & Sports Complex, Irvine, CA
• Burlingame Community Center, CA
• Lawndale Community Center, CA
• Rancho Cucamonga Sports Center, CA
• Marina Park & Sailing Recreation Center, Newport Beach, CA
• Rengstorff Park Aquatic Center, Mountain View, CA
• The Trust for Public Land Projects, CA
»Aliso Creek Park
»Bicentennial Park
»South Victoria Park
»Rudolph Park
»Madison Avenue
»Benito Juarez Park
»Patton St. Pocket Park & Garden
»Avalon Green Alleys
»Zamora Park
Staff Qualifications
A-49
99
Jon Hughes
CCM, DBIA
Project Executive
Education
Bachelor of Science, Philosophy and
History, Westmont College
Certification
Certified Construction Manager (CCM)
Design Build of America Institute (DBIA)
Associate
California Contractor License
#793600, Class A
Affiliations
NAVFAC and US Army Corps
Construction Quality Management
(CQM) Program
Construction Management
Association of America, Member
Years of Experience
28
QUALIFICATIONS
Jon Hughes’ career spans some of the region’s most prestigious
properties in Southern California. His experience and skills
with program and construction management tools and
processes have enabled him to deliver winning results on every
project. Jon’s resume highlights include newly constructed,
expanded, or renovated community centers and parks.
Jon’s construction management experience includes pre-
construction services, bid review, contract negotiations, safety
protocols, site evaluation, quality control, budgetary controls,
change order review, materials acquisition and supply chain
management, schedule review and enforcement, site staging,
off-sites and grading, dry utility installation, inter-contractor
coordination, punch list, and turnover.
As Project Executive, Jon is responsible for overseeing the
overall lifecycle of the project.
REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE
• Vernola Community Center & Expansion, Jurupa Valley, CA
• Quail Hill Community Center, Irvine, CA
• Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center, CA
• Rancho Cucamonga Sports Center, CA
• Yorba Linda Library & Cultural Arts Center, CA
• Carlsbad Pine Ave. Community Center & Garden, CA
• Frisbie Park Expansion, Rialto, CA
• Esencia Park, CA
• Lake Forest Sports Complex, CA
• Fullerton Multigenerational Community Center & Aquatic Facilities, CA
• Great Park Ice & Sports Complex, Irvine, CA
• Burlingame Community Center, CA
• Lawndale Community Center, CA
• Rancho Cucamonga Sports Center, CA
• Marina Park & Sailing Recreation Center, Newport Beach, CA
• The Trust for Public Land Projects, CA
»Aliso Creek Park
»Bicentennial Park
»South Victoria Park
»Rudolph Park
»Madison Avenue
»Benito Juarez Park
»Patton St. Pocket Park & Garden
»Avalon Green Alleys
»Zamora Park
A-50
1010
QUALIFICATIONS
Robert Godfrey brings 20 years of combined experience in
construction management and planning. As a construction
manager, he has been involved during all phases of
development and construction. His responsibilities as a
project/construction manager have entailed pre-construction
services, public and stakeholder outreach, managing
entitlement and plan check processes, obtaining building
permits and coordinating inspections, and generating
punch lists and overseeing project closeout. Robert has a
proven record of project management involving effective
communication with design team members, coordinating
consultants, vendors and contractors - all to assure the client’s
goals and objectives are achieved.
As Project and Construction Manager, Robert will be
responsible for the day-to-day management of the project.
REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE
• Vernola Community Center & Expansion, Jurupa Valley, CA
• Quail Hill Community Center, Irvine, CA
• Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center, CA
• Rancho Cucamonga Sports Center, CA
• Lawndale Community & Arts Center, CA
• The Trust for Public Land Projects, CA
»Aliso Creek Park
»Bicentennial Park
»South Victoria Park
»Rudolph Park
»Madison Avenue
»Benito Juarez Park
»Patton St. Pocket Park & Garden
»Avalon Green Alleys
»Zamora Park
• Jordan Downs Housing Redevelopment, Los Angeles, CA
• LINC Housing: Temple View Affordable Housing, Los Angeles, CA
• Buena Park Navigation Center, CA
• Downtown Women's Center, Los Angeles, CA
• Tustin Transitional Homeless Shelter, CA
• La Canada Flintridge Civic Center, CA
Robert Godfrey
CCM
Sr. Project & Construction Manager
Education
Bachelor of Science, Management, The
George Institute of Technology
Registration
Certified Construction Manager
(CCM)
Affiliations
Construction Management
Association of America, Member
Years of Experience
20
A-51
1111
QUALIFICATIONS
Cody has a wealth of knowledge stemming from his experience
as a public works inspector for multiple municipal agencies
throughout his career. He has extensive experience in
conducting field inspections ensuring compliance with
all pertinent codes, regulations, and plans. His project
background include sports park/complex projects and parks,
in addition to many others.
As Project Inspector, Cody will work on-site, coordinating
with the project team daily while monitoring specific details to
avoid impacts and ensure project delivery.
REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE
• Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center, CA
• Esencia Sports Park, Rancho Mission Viejo, CA
• Laguna Beach Village Entrance, CA
• LANLT, Wishing Tree Park, Los Angeles, CA
• Laguna Beach Animal Shelter & Laguna Creek Erosion
Protection, Laguna Beach, CA
• City of Tustin Building Inspector
»Greenwood by Cal Atlantic & Brookfield
»The Village at Tustin Legacy Shopping Center (16 buildings, 22-acre project that included multiple construction types)
»Tustin Council Chambers Renovation
»County of Orange Library Restoration
»Hoag 3-Story Medical Office
• City of Vista Building Inspector
»Serra by Shear Homes
»Avalon Apartments (12 Buildings)
»Belching Beaver Brewery Tavern & Grill
Cody Roth
Construction Manager - Inspector
Education
Santa Ana College, Fire Science Degree
Rio Hondo College, Fire Academy
Graduate
Saddleback College, Building Inspector
Courses
Certification
International Code Council B-1 Building
Inspection
International Code Council E-1 Electrical
Inspection
International Code Council P-1 Plumbing
Inspection
CAL OES Safety Assessment Program
(ID#77558)
Orange County Stormwater Program
Various Certificates from the California
Building Officials Training Institute
Years of Experience
10
A-52
1212
Jay Helekar
LEED AP
Cost Estimator
Education
Construction Management Engineering,
California State University, Long Beach
Certification
Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design Accredited Professional (LEED
AP)
Affiliations
U.S. Green Building Council, Member
Years of Experience
22+
QUALIFICATIONS
Ryan is an expert in value engineering and construction cost
estimating, including master-planning, conceptual, schematic
design development and construction document phases. He is
a skilled mediator, participating in change order preparation,
validation and negotiation. He has reconciliation experience with
general contractors and subcontractors, and communicates well
with all design team members, promoting open door dialogue and
effective project solutions.
REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE
• Vernola Community Center & Expansion, Jurupa Valley, CA
• Quail Hill Community Center, Irvine, CA
• Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center, CA
• Rancho Cucamonga Sports Center, CA
• Yorba Linda Library & Cultural Arts Center, CA
• Carlsbad Pine Ave. Community Center & Garden, CA
• Frisbie Park Expansion, Rialto, CA
• Esencia Park, CA
Ryan Craven
Value Engineering
Expert
Education
Bachelor of Science, Construction
Engineering, National University,
Costa Mesa
Affiliations
CPE
ASPE, Member
CoreNet Global (Young Leaders Group)
Years of Experience
14
QUALIFICATIONSK
Jay has 22 years of cost estimating experience on various
municipal projects, including renovation and new construction.
He has a unique perspective on the industry, as he has a mixed
background of being both a pre-construction manager and a
general contractor. He brings his creative and expert skills to his
work, including cost estimating, LEED analysis, value engineering,
constructability reviews, master planning, and scheduling. He is
also a skilled mediator, participating in change order preparation,
validation, and negotiation. As Cost Estimator, Jay will provide cost
estimating services through each stage of the project to ensure
your fiscal objectives are achieved from inception to completion.
REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE
• Vernola Community Center & Expansion, Jurupa Valley, CA
• Quail Hill Community Center, Irvine, CA
• Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center, CA
• Rancho Cucamonga Sports Center, CA
• Yorba Linda Library & Cultural Arts Center, CA
• Carlsbad Pine Ave. Community Center & Garden, CA
• Frisbie Park Expansion, Rialto, CA
A-53
13
Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center
Santa Clarita, CA
This 27,780 SF community center and outdoor recreational
facilities encompasses a 16.5 acre project site. Outdoor
improvements include open play areas, outdoor market/
mercado, event stage area, basketball half-court, event garden,
shade structures, outdoor restroom building, and perimeter
trail. Indoor spaces include a multi-purpose room, gymnasium,
classrooms, catering and teaching kitchen, fitness room, staff
offices, reception lobby, and supporting uses such as restrooms
and storage areas. In addition, the proposed project will also
include improvements to the Mint Canyon Channel.
Once completed, the new community center’s indoor and
outdoor amenities would be open to the public for recreational
activities, community programs, classes, community events (e.g.
farmers market, music programs, and fundraiser events), and
private functions (e.g., banquet and weddings).
Relevancy
• Community Center with Multi-
Purpose Rooms
• Classrooms• Park Elements and Playground
Completion DatePending 2021 Completion
Value
$58M
Client + Contact
City of Santa Clarita
Wayne Weber, Parks Planning Manager wweber@santa-clarita.com (661) 255-4961
TeamRobert Godfrey, PMCMJon Hughes, PX
Roger Torriero, PIC
Cody Roth, Project Inspector
Jay Helekar, Estimator
Ryan Craven, Value Engineering
Reference Projects
A-54
1414
Vernola Community Center & Park Expansion
Jurupa Valley, CA
The Jurupa Area Recreation & Park District (JARPD) selected
Griffin Structures for the new Vernola Park Expansion and
Community Center project, also known as the Sky View Event
Center.
This new facility encompasses over 17,890 SF of building and
approximately 8.8 acres of land, featuring a new community
center with 360-person multi-purpose room, kitchen, and
supportive offices. Two asphalt paved parking lots, landscaping,
asphalt paving, and bio-retention basin were also included.
This new community center also utilizes a pre-engineered steel
frame supported on a shallow foundation system resulting in
exceptional savings for the JARPD.
Relevancy
• Community Center with Multi-
Purpose Room
• Park Facilities
Completion Date
• Vernola Community Center
Completed in 2021
• Park Phase II commencement TBD
Value
$12.2M
Client + Contact
Jurupa Area Recreation
& Park District
Colby Diguid, General Manager(909) 721-8065
Colby@jard.org
TeamRobert Godfrey, PMCM
Jon Hughes, PX
Roger Torriero, PIC
Jay Helekar, Estimator
Ryan Craven, Value Engineering
A-55
15
Quail Hill Community Center
Irvine, CA
The new 18,943 SF Quail Hill Community Center is one of the
largest community centers in the area, and serves to bring the
region together through education and exploration. Envisioned
as a gateway to nature, the goal was to create connected indoor
and outdoor spaces that offer various activities, programs and
classes—all connected to nature and the local trail system.
Sustainable features include solar panel arrays, high-efficiency
LED lighting, low water use fixtures, and native landscaping.
These strategies resulted in a LEED Gold certification through
the U.S. Green Building Council. The center houses an exercise
room for wellness activities such as dance and yoga classes;
classrooms, fine arts camps, adult art classes; and large multi-
purpose room. Outdoor spaces include gardens, playground, and
adjacent trails.
Awards include LEED Gold, APWA Project of the Year, CPRS
Award of Excellence, and USGBC EcoAward Most Sustainable
Land Plan.
Relevancy
• Community Center with Multi-
Purpose Rooms
• Classrooms
• Park Elements and Playground
Completion Date
2018
Value
$11M
Client + Contact
City of Irvine
Thomas Perez, PE
Former CIP Administrator
(949) 464-6688
tperez@lagunabeachcity.net
Team
Robert Godfrey, PMCM
Jon Hughes, PX Roger Torriero, PIC
Jay Helekar, Estimator
Ryan Craven, Value Engineering
A-56
16
Rancho Cucamonga Sports Center
Rancho Cucamonga, CA
This new 56,000 SF Rancho Cucamonga Sports Center serves
the City’s popular youth and adult basketball and volleyball
leagues. The project included two pre-engineered steel
structures–one enclosed and one open-air pavilion. The project
featured three indoor regulation-sized basketball/volleyball
courts as well as concession and public common areas, a
multipurpose room, restroom facilities, and administrative office
space.
The 21,500 SF open-air structure covered an additional
three full-size outdoor basketball courts, protecting players
and spectators from the sun and heat. The pre-engineered
metal building design resulted in savings of over $900,000,
both in materials and schedule savings during the 14-month
construction phase.
This project received the APWA Project of the Year award.
Relevancy
• Community/Recreational Center
with Multi-Purpose Rooms
• Three Indoor/Outdoor Courts
Completion Date
2018
Value
$14M
Client + Contact
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Jeff Benson
Management Analyst II (CIP Manager)
(909) 774-4137
Jeff.benson@cityofrc.us
Team
Robert Godfrey, PMCM
Jon Hughes, PX Roger Torriero, PIC
Jay Helekar, Estimator
Ryan Craven, Value Engineering
A-57
17
Robert Godfrey, with the Griffin team, has delivered over ten
projects in coordination with The Trust for Public Land, a non-profit
agency dedicated to the implementation of parks in-and-around
neighborhoods. We maintain excellent relationships with The Trust for
Public Land and encourage you to contact Robin Mark.
ALISO CREEK CONFLUENCE PARKCARLTON WAY PARK
• New Construction & Renovation
• Community Structures
• Children's Play Equipment
• Open Space Design
• Natural/Artificial Playfields
• Hardcourts & Softcourts
• Energy Efficient Design
• Park Maintenance Facilities
• ADA & Seismic Upgrades
BICENTENNIAL PARK
MADISON AVENUE BENITO JUAREZ PARK
SOUTH VICTORIA PARK
The Trust for Public Land
Robin Mark
Program Manager
robin.mark@tpl.org
(323) 223-0441
Non-Profit Park Projects
These projects feature:
RUDOLPH PARK
MONITOR AVENUE PARK
PATTON STREET PARK
A-58
18
Yorba Linda Library & Cultural Arts Center
Yorba Linda, CA
Griffin provided PMCM services for the construction of a new
two-story, approximately 45,000 SF library and 13,500 SF arts
center, in the downtown district of Yorba Linda. The library
features include a secure outdoor children’s area, expanded
collections areas, dedicated spaces for story time, teens and
tweens, small group study rooms, a community multi-purpose
room and flexible classroom space, friends of the library book
store, and improved technology features.
The Arts Center features a flexible 250-seat black box theater
with state-of-the-art sound system, art & dance studios, and
gallery high volume exhibit space. The campus-like environment
will feature a central paseo between the two structures,
dedicated outdoor plazas and a great lawn providing space for
additional programming.
This project was delivered $2M under budget and received an
ASCE Outstanding Community Improvement Project award.
Relevancy
• Community/Cultural Center with
Multi-Purpose Rooms
• High Volume Exhibit Spaces (Similar
to Discovery Rooms)• Classrooms
Completion Date
2020
Value
$52M
Client + Contact
City of Yorba Linda
Carrie Lixey Library Director (714) 777-2466
carrie.lixey@ylpl.org
TeamJon Hughes, PX
Roger Torriero, PIC
Jay Helekar, Estimator
Ryan Craven, Value Engineering
A-59
19
Carlsbad Pine Avenue Community Center & Garden
Carlsbad, CA
This new two-story, multi-generational project was comprised
of two primary components: an 18,000 SF two-story community
center with related site improvements and an ornamental
and community garden. The entire project was designed to
strengthen community connectivity, promote health and
wellness, and foster sustainability.
The first floor includes a history wall and the multi-purpose
gymnasium features a hardwood court striped for regulation
high school basketball, volleyball, badminton, and pickleball also
includes a scoreboard. A low climbing wall spans one side of the
gym. The second floor features meeting and activity rooms, a
teen center, homework room, classrooms, computer lab, and
covered terrace.
Outdoor highlights include an “ornamental” garden with a
community plaza, shade structure, drought tolerant plants,
picnic areas, artwork, a water feature, and seating. Each wooden
raised bed has its own watering source and can be leased to
residents for growing flowers and vegetables.
Relevancy
• Community Center with Multi-
Purpose Rooms
• Classrooms
• Gymnasium/Indoor Courts
• Outdoor Spaces/Garden
Completion Date
2018
Value
$12M
Client + Contact
City of Carlsbad
Steven Didier
Municipal Projects Manager
(706) 602-7539 sdidier@carlsbadca.gov
TeamJon Hughes, PX Roger Torriero, PIC
Jay Helekar, Estimator
Ryan Craven, Value Engineering
A-60
20
Frisbie Park Expansion
Rialto, CA
Griffin provided PMCM services for the expansion of Frisbie
Park. The 27.4-acre site is partially developed with six ball
fields, two basketball courts, a playground area, a pavilion, field
lighting, basketball and volleyball courts, and asphalt concrete
paved drive and parking areas.
The project included the renovation of some existing elements
such as an existing restroom; and an 8.5-acre expansion which
feature tennis courts, t-ball fields, two playgrounds, a skate park,
new restroom and concession building, perimeter walking paths,
open turf areas, lighting, shade structures, improved ADA access
and other visitor amenities.
Relevancy
• Significant Sports/Park Facility
• Playground
• Basketball Courts
• Outdoor Maintenace/Storage Facilities
Completion Date
2020
Value
$15M
Client + Contact
City of Rialto
Robert G. Eisenbeisz
Public Works Director (909) 384-5203
Eisenbeisz_Ro@sbcity.org
TeamJon Hughes, PX
Roger Torriero, PIC
Jay Helekar, Estimator
Ryan Craven, Value Engineering
A-61
21
Esencia Sports Park
Rancho Mission Viejo, CA
Designed to fit into a tiered landscape concept, Esencia Sports
Park is a 30-acre multi athletic park site in one of Rancho
Mission Viejo’s newest communities.
The lower park site encompasses two lighted baseball fields and
one lighted softball field with supporting amenities, including
covered dugouts, attached bullpens and soft toss cages, tiered
concrete spectator seating, batting cages and scoreboards. A
lighted multi-use soccer field with tiered concrete spectator
seating and a 1,500 SF concession/restroom building support
the team sports uses. The lower park also includes a children’s
tot lot and play features. The upper park site encompasses
two lighted tennis courts, two lighted pickleball courts, a
swimming pool with three swim lanes, splash pad, and a 1,500
SF pool building. The pool area amenities include community
barbecues and fire pits as well as cabanas surrounding the pool
for comfort.
This sports park was envisioned as a center for sports and family
activities with connections to Esencia’s network of trails.
Relevancy
• Significant Sports/Park Facility
• Playground
• Basketball Courts
• Outdoor Maintenance/Storage
Facilities
Completion Date
2020
Value
$20M
Client + Contact
Rancho Mission Viejo Company
Bill Sadler
Construction Manager
(562) 221-9779 bsadler@ranchomv.com
Team
Jon Hughes, PX Roger Torriero, PIC
Cody Roth, Project Inspector
Jay Helekar, Estimator
Ryan Craven, Value Engineering
A-62
22
The list below is inclusive of additional community
centers and parks completed which we have included
as a supplemental highlight and testament to our
extensive and relevant Project and Construction
Management public works portfolio, encompassing
most of Southern and Northern California.
Aliso Creek Park
Aliso Viejo Boys and Girls Club
Bicentennial Park
Bloomington Branch Library
Brea Sports Park
Buena Park Community Center
Burlingame Community Center
Capistrano Valley Boys and Girls Club Gardens
Carlton Way Pocket Park
Central Jefferson High School Park
College Park Aquatic & Recreation Center
Cypress Community Center
Cypress Mackay Park
Delhi Community Center & Park
Dixon Hall Memorial Park
El Centro Martin Luther King Sports Pavilion
Fullerton Lemon Park & Maple Community Center
Fullerton Multigenerational Community Center
Fullerton Tennis Center
Great Park Ice & Sports Complex
Hesperia Civic Plaza Park
Huntington Beach Senior Center in Central Park
Laguna Beach Community / Senior Center
Laguna Beach Senior Center Needs Assessment
Lake Forest Community Center
Lake Forest Sports Park
Lawndale Community Center
Lexington Sports Park
Lompoc Sports Complex
Long Beach Belmont Pool & Recreation Facilities
Madison Avenue Park
Marguerite Aquatics Complex
Marina Sailing Recreation Center & Park
Maywood Avenue Park
Mountain View Rengstorff Park Aquatic Center
Newport Beach Community Center
Northeast Stockton Library & Community Center
Patton Street Park
Placer Valley Sports Complex
Rancho Santa Margarita Civic Center Central Park
Rancho Santa Margarita Community Center
Roberts Pool Renovation
Rudolph Park
San Bruno Recreation & Aquatics Center
San Dimas Community Center Expansion
San Dimas Swim & Racquet Club Facilities
Santa Ana Parks and Recreation On-Call Park
Upgrades
Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center
Santa Monica On-Call Park Upgrades
Serenity Park
Silverlakes Sports and Equestrian Park
South Victoria Park
Summerwind Sports Park
Terra Lago Community Recreation Center
Tustin Peppertree Park
Vernola Park Expansion & Community Center
West Hollywood Plummer Park Community Ctr.
Westminster Parks Renovation
Wishing Tree Park
Zamora Park
A-63
4. Project Schedule“The Griffin team conducted detailed
review of change orders and ensured
the City got exactly what we paid for
and that the project stayed within
budget. The Griffin Structures team
delivered a very high-quality amenity
that will serve the community for years
to come.”
Thomas Perez, CIP Administrator
City of Irvine
Quail Hill Community Center A-64
4. Project Schedule
OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG
TTOOTTAALLSS
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 9900
10 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 118866
65 65 65 65 65 65 65 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 664477
24 32 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 90 22,,772266
40 40 8800
40 40 40 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 227700
Sr. Program & Construction Manager: Robert Godfrey
Construction Manager - Inspector: Cody Roth
Estimating - Cost Validation: Ryan Craven
Neighborhood Relations Specialist: Susan Harden
Final Inspections and Commissioning
Punch List and Closeout
Principal In Charge: Roger Torriero
Project Executive: Jon Hughes
Building Foundations
Building Core and Shell
Building Interiors
Site Hardscape and Features
Site Softscape Installation
PROJECT PHASE
MONTHLY STAFFING HOURS
22002211 22002222 22002233
PPRREECCOONNSSTTRRUUCCTTIIOONN
Initial Project Analysis and Start Up
Constructability Review of 50% Set
Design Management to 90%
Plan Check & Bid Doc Preparation
Contractor Prequalification
Contractor Bidding
CCOONNSSTTRRUUCCTTIIOONN
Demolition and Abatement
Grading and Underground
A-65
5. Quality Control Plan“Griffin’s construction management
team was instrumental in successfully
tackling the complexities of our public
project, which was ultimately delivered
on time and under budget.”
Laura Detweiler, Director
City of Newport Beach
Marina Sailing Recreation Center & Park A-66
2424
5. Quality Control Plan
Griffin's Project and Construction Managers are
inherently construction inspectors. By utilizing
our keen understanding of all aspects of design
and construction, our PMCM team will perform
the following key areas of focus to deliver quality
controlled, exceptional service:
Constructability Reviews
Griffin will provide a constructability review at key
milestones of the design process. We will review all
plans and reference materials and provide a report
with recommendations. At a minimum, the report
will cover the feasibility of construction methods,
current availability of materials and labor and time
requirements for procurement, and identify long lead
services and materials. Griffin will coordinate the
delivery of the report to City staff and the team. Our
input will be vital in identifying proactive measures of
success.
Construction Inspections
We will review material deliveries, material types,
installation methods, finished installations in
comparison to contract documents, and construction
code adherence. Additionally, we will coordinate the
timely execution of all specialty inspections, including
geotechnical, building dept., special inspections, and
materials testing, to ensure the City receives the
highest level of quality and consistency with the plans
and specifications as well as all standards and practices.
Photography and Technology
Griffin utilizes multiple forms of photography and
technology to enforce the quality of the construction
process. Accordingly, we will perform the following:
Video Tape Existing Conditions
Before a contractor begins construction, we will
perform detailed video surveillance of the entire site
and the surrounding site to ensure there is no damage
to the existing infrastructure and to mitigate against
any potential future claims.
Daily Photography
Griffin will photograph the progress of the job. This will
serve as a record of the project throughout the duration
of the job and serve as a vehicle for resolving issues.
Bluebeam Technology
Our team employs the use of Bluebeam technology
to facilitate communication challenges in the field for
their quick resolution and documentation.
BURLINGAME COMMUNITY CENTER
A-67
6. Acceptance of Conditions“Griffin Structures is a strong partner.
Their staff is highly competent,
efficient and professional. They were
able to complete our project within the
designated time frame and well below
budget.”
Maureen Gebelein, Facilities Director
City of Fullerton
Fullerton Multigenerational Community Center A-68
2626
This page has been left intentionally blank.
CONFIDENTIAL
California Civil Code §3426.1 (d); California Evidence Code § 1040 and § 1060;
California Government Code § 6254 (k); Freedom of Information Act 5 U.S.C. § 552 (b) (4)
Do not release without redactions
A-69
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
OFFICE
2 Technology Drive, Suite 150
Irvine, CA 92618
(949) 497-9000
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
OFFICE
1850 Warburton Avenue, Suite 120
Santa Clara, CA 95050
(408) 955-0431
A-70
Deliverables
As part of the Services, Consultant will prepare and deliver the following tangible work
products to the City.
1. Project Work Plan (on City-provided form)
2. Weekly Project Status Report (on City-provided form)
3. Baseline project schedule
4. Project schedule markups and updates
5. Project schedule deviation memoranda
2. Baseline project budget
3. Design Change Order/Contract Amendment packages (on City-provided
form)
4. Project budget markups and updates
5. Pay Request recommendations
6. 90% Construction Documents comments
7. Constructability Review comments
8. Value Engineering Review comments
9. Permit Documents comments
10. 100% Construction Documents comments
11. Construction Change Order package comments
12. Construction oversight documentation comments
13. Meeting agendas and minutes
14. Correspondence materials
15. Reports, memoranda, and presentation materials to the City Council,
City’s leadership team, Public Works Director, and other stakeholders
City staff may request that check-sets or working versions of documents be submitted
for ongoing routine review. City staff will review all deliverables, including preparatory or
record materials for service deliverables, and provide comments. Consultant is required
to revise draft deliverables to address City staffs’ comments.
A-71
EXHIBIT “B”
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
(Superseding Contract Boilerplate)
Added text indicated in bold italics, deleted text indicated in strikethrough.
I. Section 1.1., Scope of Services, is amended to read:
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”, as stated in the Proposal, 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 mean those
standards of practice recognized by one or more first -class firms performing similar work under
similar circumstances.In providing services under this Agreement, Consultant shall perform in
a manner consistent with, but limited to, that degree of skill and care commonly used by other
reputable members of Consultant’s profession practicing in the same or similar locality and
under similar circumstances.
II. Section 1.6, Familiarity with Work, is amended to read:
1.6 Familiarity with Work.
By executing this Agreement, Consultant warrantsrepresents that Consultant (i) has
thoroughly investigated and considered the scope of services to be performed, (i i) 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 in the form of a Change Orde r.
III. Section 3.1, Time of the Essence, is amended to read:
3.1 Time of Essence.
A-72
Time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement. The Consultant shall not be
responsible for delays from any and all causes beyond its reasonable control.
IV. Subsections (f) and (J) of Section 5.2, General Insurance Requirements, are amended
to read:
5.2 General Insurance Requirements.
…
(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, and 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 own right of recovery against City, and
shall require similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its subconsultants.
…
(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.
V. Section 8.2, Conflict of Interest, is amended to read:
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 fi nancial 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 warrantsrepresents 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.
A-73
EXHIBIT “C”
SCHEDULE OF COMPENSATION
A-74
GRIFFIN STRUCTURES FEE PROPOSAL
LADERA LINDA COMMUNITY CENTER & PARK
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
08/27/2021
Griffin Structures’ Fee Proposal is based on all reasonable costs necessary to perform Construction Management &
Inspection Services for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Ladera Linda Community Center & Park project. For these
requisite services Griffin Structures proposes the following Not-to-Exceed Fee:
Project and Construction Management: $ 647,500
Reimbursable Expenses: $ 12,500
Grand Total $ 660,000
This proposal is offered as a Time & Materials, Not to Exceed fee. As such, all work will be performed on an as-
needed basis and not limited to any specific scope item or work effort. All costs will be billed based on actual time
spent. Any unused savings will be returned to the City or reallocated for another use as it deems appropriate.
All proposed hourly rates are fully burdened and include overhead profit, taxes, and benefits. The hours identified
for each individual employee and task are estimates only and are not to be construed as not to exceed hours for any
individual task, phase, or time period. We reserve the right to reallocate hours between staff members,
subconsultants, and tasks, in consultation with the City, in order to accomplish the overall objectives and
requirements of the project.
Services are based on the attached Fee Proposal and Resource Allocation Schedule, which provides detail on the
allocation of hours for services as they occur over time. Any extension of the schedule may result in additional fee,
in good faith negotiation with the City.
Should the Sr. Project Manager / Construction Manager or the Construction Manager – Inspector be away from the
project due to holidays, vacation, or other such absence, Griffin will provide alternate personnel and/or supplement
that absence with the suitable and appropriate work force to minimize disruption to the project.
APPROACH TO PROJECT SCHEDULE
This proposal assumes the following schedule as described in the RFP and as illustrated in the Resource Allocation
Schedule attached:
1. Pre-Construction: September 2021 thru March 2022 (7 Months)
2. Construction: March 2022 thru April 2023 (14 months)
A-75
3. Project Closeout: May 2023 thru June 2023 (2 Months)
APPROACH TO STAFFING AND PROJECT TEAM
To bring the highest level of efficiency and value to the City, Griffin Structures has assembled following team in
accordance with the scope of work described in the RFP:
Roger Torriero will service as Principal in Charge for the duration of the project and will provide direction and
quality assurance to the project team for a total of 90 hours. To bring value to the City, Roger’s time is offered AT
NO COST for a total VALUE ADDED of $24,750
Jon Hughes will serve as the Project Executive for the duration of the project and will provide as-needed leadership
to the team to ensure a successful delivery. Key to the success of the project will be Jon’s experience with public
safety facilities and his experience in public contracting procedures. For this level of service, we have allocated a
total of 186 hours of Jon’s time.
Robert Godfrey will serve as the Sr. Project & Construction Manager for the duration of the project. Robert will
bring leadership to the team, establish all construction management protocols, maintain all communications, and
bring his considerable experience managing the Pre-Construction phase of the project and then transition to a
supportive role during the Construction phase. For this level of service, we have allocated a total of 647 hours of
Robert’s time.
Cody Roth will serve as the Construction Manager & Inspector for this project. During Pre-Construction Cody will
support Robert Godfrey, performing constructability reviews, site staging analysis, and Contractor bid support.
Once Construction begins, Cody will be deployed full time to the site and serve as the Construction Manager and
quality assurance inspector for the duration of the project. For this level of service, we have allocated a total of
2726 hours of Cody’s time to this project.
Jay Helekar and Ryan Craven will provide cost validation and value engineering services for this project. In this
role they will review the cost estimates being provided by the design team and validate the accuracy of the estimate
for unit pricing and completeness.
QUALIFICATIONS AND EXCLUSIONS
1. Hourly rates are valid through December 2023 and will escalate by CPI annually thereafter.
2. On-site trailer rental, furniture, utilities, and sanitary facilities for our field staff (Project Management team)
are excluded. We assume that offices will be provided as part of the construction site trailer(s) being
provided by the City’s contractor.
3. Costs for all permits required for the project are excluded. It is assumed that the City will pay for all
permitting fees, assessments, easements, school fees, and other agency or governmental fees or costs to
support the design and construction the project. We have not included any permit related fees within our
fee proposal. Permits will be pulled by others.
4. At no cost to the Owner, and subject to Internal Revenue Code 179D, (Deduction for Energy Efficient
Commercial Buildings) Owner agrees to allocate any applicable tax deductions to construction manager
(Griffin Structures) as may be relevant to ‘public entity’ projects.
5. Costs for surveying, construction staking, environmental and hazardous materials surveys, and all
environmental and hazardous materials transportation and remediation costs are excluded
A-76
6. Software licenses or user fees and all software training costs for specific project management software being
required by either the City or their contractor(s) is excluded.
7. Cost of bulk blueprinting for plans and specifications for use by the contractors and subcontractors is
excluded. Funds included in reimbursable expenses are for Griffin printing costs alone.
8. Wage Compliance Program including Certified Payroll auditing, field interviews, or reporting is excluded.
Based on State Law SB 854, it is assumed that the Dept. of Industrial Relations (DIR) will manage this effort
at the State level. Griffin will enforce the Contractor registration requirements stipulated by the DIR.
9. Independent or third-party testing companies such as Roofing, Peer Reviews, LEED, or other specialized
third-party oversight services other than those listed herein are excluded.
10. Commissioning requirements required by Cal Green (Title 24) are excluded. Griffin will manage the
commissioning process, but we have not included a commissioning agent, nor development of
commissioning specifications.
11. Security and 24-hour surveillance is excluded.
12. Construction Manager will review all RFI’s, Submittals, and Substitutions only for completeness, approvals
to be executed by the designer of record. RFI’s that are not design related will be reviewed by the
Construction Manager in coordination with the City as needed.
13. For document tracking control, Griffin has included the use of “Submittal Exchange” for managing
construction documentation, and based the hours allocated in this proposal accordingly. The cost of
“Submittal Exchange” is included here as a reimbursable expense.
14. This proposal does not include a formal independent Inspector of Record (IOR). All City Building Dept.
Permit Inspections are assumed to be performed by the City Building Dept.
15. Cost Validation services include unit pricing confirmation and a general overview of categories and quantities
for completeness. A complete and independent construction cost estimate is excluded.
16. Construction Cost Estimates, when provided, are based on standard industry practice, professional
experience, and knowledge of market conditions. Griffin has no control over material and labor costs,
contractor’s methods of establishing prices or the market and bidding conditions at the time of bid.
Therefore, Griffin does not guarantee that bids received will not vary from the cost estimate provided and
Griffin is not liable for any costs, liabilities, or damages incurred by City arising from Griffin’s opinion of
cost, the actual project cost to City, delays caused by events outside the control of Griffin, or any labor or
material cost increases.
17. Griffin is not responsible for, and City will hold Griffin harmless from, any schedule delays and/or any
losses, damages, or liabilities resulting therefrom that are caused by (1) events or conditions that are outside
of Griffin’s control or (2) the acts or omissions of parties for whom Griffin is not legally liable (collectively,
“Non-Consultant Delays”). The schedule for completion will be extended for any Non-Consultant Delays.
If Griffin incurs additional costs or expenses due to Non-Consultant Delays, then Griffin’s fee compensation
will be equitably adjusted to cover such additional costs or expenses.
A-77
INSPECTIONS RESPONSIBILITY MATRIX
In the interest of clarifying scope items related to inspections, below is an inspections responsibility matrix. This is
provided as a general overview of inspections and is not intended to serve as a comprehensive list of all required
inspections. Griffin Structures will work with the City to modify this list prior to contractor bidding, negotiation
with the design team for construction administration, and procurement of the testing & inspections firm.
NO.INSPECTIONS GRIFFIN
GEOTECHNICAL &
SPECIAL
INSPECTIONS
CITY BUILDING
DEPT.UTILITIES ARCHITECTURE &
ENGINEERING
GENERAL
CONTRACTOR
1 Daily progress inspections X
2 Quality assurance, project wide X
3 Issues investigation & resolution X
4 Site walks with owner and A&E X X X
5 SWPPP monitoring & support X X
6 SWPPP Qualified Stormwater Practitioner X
7 Safety monitoring & support X
8 OSHA safety compliance x
9 All Bldg Dept. required inspections X
10 Wet utilities inspections X
11 Dry utilities inspections X
12 Trench backfill X
13 Footing bottoms X
14 Foundation rebar X
15 Mansonry and masonry grout X
16 Onsite welding X
17 Concrete placement (continuous)X
18 Concrete break test X
19 Concrete slump test X
20 Grading X
21 Building pad acceptance X X X X X
22 Soils compaction X
23 Line & grade survey X X
24 Line & grade certification X X X
25 Any required special inspections X
26 Engineering inspections X
27 Concrete mix design X X
28 Tie backs and pull tests X
29 Driven piles X
30 Final Inspections X X X X X
A-78
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Ladera Linda Community Center and Park
Fee Proposal
PRINCIPAL IN
CHARGE PROJECT EXECUTIVE
SR PROJECT &
CONSTRUCTION
MANAGER
CONSTRUCTION
MANAGER -
INSPECTOR
ESTIMATING - COST
VALIDATION
Roger Torriero Jon Hughes Robert Godfrey Cody Roth Jay Helekar
$275/hr.$210/hr.$185/hr.$175/hr. $165/hr.
1 PRE-CONSTRUCTION 24 62 350 228 80
1.1 General Management Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.1.1 Develop Project Work Plan Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.1.2 Prepare Reports, Deliver Presentations, and Lead Meetings Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.1.3 Submit Weekly Project Status Reports Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.2 Schedule Management Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.2.1 Prepare Overall Project Schedule Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.2.2 Conduct Regular Design Progress Meetings Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.2.3 Proactively Identify and Mitigate Schedule Risk Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.3 Budget Management Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.3.1 Prepare Overall Project Budget Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.3.2 Track Actual Costs by Phase Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.3.3 Proactively Identify and Mitigate Budget Risk Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.3.4 Prepare Design Change Order and Contract Amendment Packages Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.3.5 Review Pay Requests/Invoices from Project Team Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.4 Quality Management Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.4.1 Perform Quality Assurance Review of all Submittals Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.4.2 Perform Constructability Reviews of Design Submittals Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.4.3 Perform Value Engineering Review Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.4.4 Recommend and Negotiate Design Team Scope of Services During Construction Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.5 Coordination Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.5.1 Coordinate with Outside Agencies Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.5.2 Assist with Bidder Solicitation Activities Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.5.3 Assist with FF&E Procurement Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.5.4 Assist with Temporary Relocation of Staff Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2 CONSTRUCTION 56 112 168 2408 0
2.1 Continuation of General Management Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.2 Continuation of Schedule Management Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.3 Continuation of Budget Management Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.4 Continuation of Quality Management Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.5 Continuation of Coordination Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.6 Serve as City's Representative During Construction Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.7 Oversee Construction Inspectors Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.8 Conduct Weekly Progress Meetings Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.9 Review, Comment On and Recommend Acceptance of Contractor's Schedule Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.10 Review and Coordinate Contractor Submittals Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.11 Review and Coordinate Contractor RFI's Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.12 Periodic Spot Check Field Inspections Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.13 Oversee Construction Daily Reports Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.14 Collect and File All Project Documentation Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.15 Review all Change Orders and Make Recommendations Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.16 Review All Pay Requests and Make Recommendations Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.17 Proactively Identify and Investigate Potential Construction Problems Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.18 Document Non-Compliance Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.19 In Consultation with the City, Act as Liaison Between City and Public Stakeholders Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
3 PROJECT CLOSEOUT 4 8 10 212 0
3.1 Coordinate and Schedule Final Punch List Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
3.2 Address Unresolved Contractor Issues Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
3.3 Finalize Record Drawings and Project Documentation Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
3.4 Prepare All Final Reports for Acceptance of Project Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
3.5 Recommend for Final Acceptance of Project Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
3.6 Transmit Approved Red Lines Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
3.7 Provide Electronic Version of All Drawings Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
3.8 Finalize and Deliver all Labor Compliance Files to the City Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
3.9 Finalize and Deliver all Construction Files to the City Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
Total Hours 84 182 528 2848 80
Subtotals $23,100 $38,220 $97,680 $498,400 $13,200
PROJECT / CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT TOTAL NO CHARGE $647,500
4 REIMBURSABLE COSTS $12,500
4.1 Submittal Exchange $10,000
4.2 Misc. Printing and Office Supplies $2,500
GRAND TOTAL $660,000
Item No.PROJECT PHASE
Griffin Structures 08/27/2021A-79
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Ladera Linda Community Center and Park
Resource Allocation Schedule
SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG
PRECONSTRUCTION
Initial Project Analysis and Start Up
Constructability Review of 50% Set
Design Management to 90%
Plan Check & Bid Doc Preparation
Contractor Prequalification
Contractor Bidding & Mobilization
CONSTRUCTION
Demolition and Abatement
Grading and Underground
Building Foundations
Building Core and Shell
Building Interiors
Site Hardscape and Features
Site Softscape Installation
Final Inspections and Commissioning
Punch List and Closeout
TOTALS
Principal In Charge: Roger Torriero 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 0 84
Project Executive: Jon Hughes 20 10 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 0 182
Sr. Program & Construction Manager: Robert Godfrey 25 65 65 65 65 65 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 10 0 528
Construction Manager - Inspector: Cody Roth 24 32 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 40 2,848
Estimating - Cost Validation: Ryan Craven 40 40 80
Principal In Charge: Roger Torriero 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ -$ -$ -$ NO CHARGE
Project Executive: Jon Hughes 4,200$ 2,100$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ -$ -$ -$ 38,220$
Sr. Program & Construction Manager: Robert Godfrey 4,625$ 12,025$ 12,025$ 12,025$ 12,025$ 12,025$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 1,850$ -$ -$ -$ 97,680$
Construction Manager - Inspector: Cody Roth -$ 4,200$ -$ 5,600$ -$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 7,000$ -$ -$ 498,400$
Estimating - Cost Validation: Ryan Craven -$ 6,600$ -$ 6,600$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 13,200$
8,825$ 24,925$ 13,705$ 25,905$ 13,705$ 43,805$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 33,630$ 7,000$ -$ -$ 647,500$
PROJECT PHASE
MONTHLY STAFFING HOURS
2022 20232021
Griffin Structures 08/27/2021A-80
EXHIBIT “D”
SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
A-81
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 07/06/2021
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Regular Business
AGENDA TITLE:
Consideration and possible action to review an updated cost estimate and approve a
fourth amendment to the professional services agreement with Johnson Favaro for the
Ladera Linda Community Center and Park Project.
RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS:
1. Review an updated cost estimate for the Ladera Linda Community Center and
Park Project;
2. Authorize an additional appropriation of $132,334 in support of the ongoing
design effort for the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park Project; and
3. Authorize the Mayor to approve Amendment No. 4 to the Professional Services
Agreement, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with Johnson Favaro for
ongoing architectural and engineering services for the Ladera Linda Community
Center and Park Project, authorizing changes to the scope of work that are
needed to complete the additional necessary services at a new contract sum of
$711,082.
FISCAL IMPACT: Quimby funds will be used to complete this work.
Amount Budgeted: $649,691
Additional Appropriation: $132,334
Account Number(s): 334-400-8405-8004 [Quimby Fund – Ladera Linda/Design Services]
ORIGINATED BY: Ramzi Awwad, Director of Public Works
REVIEWED BY: Trang Nguyen, Director of Finance
APPROVED BY: Ara Mihranian, AICP, City Manager
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
A. Amendment No. 4 to the Professional Services Agreement with Johnson
Favaro (page A-1)
B. Proposal – Security Consulting Services (page B-1)
C. Proposal – Utility Consulting Services (page C-1)
BACKGROUND:
CITYOF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
B-1
On June 1, the City Council was asked to consider Amendment No. 3 to the Professional
Services Agreement (PSA) with Johnson Favaro for ongoing architectural and
engineering design services for the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park Project.
Most of the additional professional services considered were in the form of sub -
consultants to Johnson Favaro, specializing in the following particular aspect of design
and construction document development:
• Preparing a cost estimate update
• Enclosed bathroom revisions
• Security sub-consulting services
That same evening, the Council requested that the costs associated with developing a
security plan for the project be presented in its entirety at a later date.
This evening, Staff is presenting the Council with Amendment No. 4 to the Johnson
Favaro PSA to account for developing a security plan , as well as an update on the
project’s working cost estimate.
DISCUSSION:
Developing a Working Cost Estimate
In response to requests from the community for cost estimate information in a particularly
categorized format, Staff directed the project’s architecture/engineering consultant,
Johnson Favaro, and its sub-consultant cost estimator, MGAC, to update the cost
estimate based on the latest design and revise the format. The following is intended to
explain the process in developing a working cost estimate:
Cost Estimating Limitations:
A cost estimate is an attempt to predict the future cost to build a particular capital
improvement project based on the available information at the time the cost estimate is
created. It is not possible to determine the actual cost to build a project with certainty until
all construction documents are completed, a notice inviting bi ds is issued, bids are
opened, and the lowest bidder is verified to meet the requirements of the project.
However, an approximation of the probable project cost is needed to establish a budget,
which is why a cost estimate is prepared. Cost estimates change over time as the project
becomes more fully developed, which is why they are sometimes called working cost
estimates, engineer’s estimates, or statements of probable cost. Despite the best efforts
of the most highly qualified cost estimators, there always remains uncertainty with cost
estimates due to their inherently predictive nature until construction bids are received.
Quantifying Project Element Costs:
Cost estimates are typically prepared by first quantifying the proposed elements of a
project such as the amount and type of concrete, landscaping, or lighting . Then, the
market rate to build the project components is determined from available data such as
B-2
recently built projects with similar conditions; or by analyzing the cost of labor, materials,
and equipment needed to construct the components.
Contingency:
Early in a project, less is known about the details of what will be needed to build it, and
the future market conditions for labor, materials, and equipment. Accordingly,
contingencies are applied to the costs of the project components. Contingencies account
for the “known unknowns” of a project, i.e. that some elements of a project are not fully
known until they are detailed further, which will add to the cost estimate . They also
account for the “unknown unknowns” of a project, i.e. the things that may come as
surprises which are very difficult to predict, such as issues that come up during the design
process or unexpected field conditions encountered during construction. Contingenci es
are higher during earlier phases and decrease as more becomes known about the project.
Often, the reductions in contingencies are balanced by increases in the estimates of
specific elements as more accurate pictures of their costs emerge. After bids are opened
and the market price is known, a construction contingency remains when a construction
contract is awarded to allow for resolution of unknowns that may come up during
construction.
Escalation:
As noted above, a cost estimate attempts to predict the future market rate for the labor,
materials, and equipment needed to build a project. Accordingly, a factor is applied to
account for inflation. For this project, the escalation factor is 4% per year to account for
inflation between now and construction. To be exact, escalation is applied to the mid -
point, rather than start of construction, because bidders are expected to price their bid on
the basis that they will procure materials, equipment, and labor throughout the expected
construction duration.
April 6, 2021 Working Cost Estimate
On April 6, 2021, the City Council heard an appeal of the Planning Commission-approved
entitlements for the project. During that meeting, a summary of costs to date (as of March
1, 2021) were presented to the City Council. Estimated future project costs based on a
forecast start date of December 2021 were also presented. Tables 1, 2, and 3 below show
that information as of March 1, 2021.
Table 1. YTD Expenditures as of March 1, 2021
YEAR TO DATE EXPENDITURES AMOUNT FUNDING
Anderson Penna – Survey/Geotech $62,883 334 – Quimby
Richard Fisher and Associates – Master Plan $184,045 334 – Quimby
Priority One Environmental – Environmental Review $1,500 334 – Quimby
Willdan – Traffic Study for PC Meeting $10,175 101 – General Fund
Michael Baker – CEQA Analysis for PC Meeting $3,599 101 – General Fund
Johnson Favaro – Design $263,131 334 – Quimby
CalWater – Water Pressure Fire Flow $525 334 – Quimby
Kosmont – Financial Services $23,777 101 – General Fund
Total Year to Date Expenditures $549,135
B-3
Table 2. Outstanding Commitments as of April 6, 2021
OUTSTANDING COMMITMENTS AMOUNT FUNDING
Johnson Favaro – Design $290,069 334 – Quimby
Michael Baker – CEQA Analysis for PC Meeting $8,006 101 – General Fund
Kosmont – Financial Services $1,723 101 – General Fund
Total Outstanding Commitments $299,798
Table 3. Estimated Future Costs as of April 6, 2021
HARD COSTS AMOUNT
Community Center (enclosed areas and covered areas) $5,700,000
Sitework (demolition of existing buildings, site prep, etc.) $6,700,000
Furnishings, fixtures, equipment (FFEs) $300,000
Sub-total of Construction Costs $12,700,000
Construction Contingency (5%) $640,000
Total Estimated Hard Costs $13,340,000
SOFT COSTS
Construction Management (5%) $640,000
Construction Inspection (7.5%) $950,000
Permitting (2%) $250,000
Hazardous Materials Abatement (1%) $130,000
Engineering Support During Construction (3%) $380,000
Total Estimated Soft Costs $2,350,000
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS $15,690,000
Updated Project Working Cost Estimate
During the April 6, 2021 meeting, the City Council adopted a resolution upholding the
Planning Commission-approved Conditional Use Permit, Major Grading Permit, Variance
and Site Plan Review with modifications to the Conditions of Approval. The City Council
also directed Staff to relocate and optimize handicap parking spaces closer to the building
and explore cost-effective ways to install exterior shutters over glass surfaces to provide
security for future consideration by the Council.
After the April 6 meeting, the City Council’s Public Facilities Subcommittee, comprised of
Mayor Alegria and Councilmember Cruikshank, met with some residents from the Ladera
Linda neighborhood to discuss concerns raised during the public hearing process. In
response, the Subcommittee requested minor revisions be considered to the City Council-
approved design. Specifically, they requested that the proposed bathroom be enclosed
and to add as many parking spaces as possible within the existing footprint. In response,
on May 5, 2021, the Community Development Director issued a Minor Modification that
included the reconfiguration of the proposed open-air restroom configuration into
enclosed and separate men’s and women’s restrooms consisting of traditional stalls and
wash basins, and a minor reconfiguration of the parking lot to accommodate three
additional parking spaces (resulting in a total of 57 spaces rather than 54) and the
relocation of two accessible parking spaces closer to the lobby entrance.
B-4
The City Council directed changes and the Minor Modifications resulted in changes to the
project cost estimate presented at the April 6, 2021 City Council meeting, which are
shown in Table 4 below. The bathroom enclosure increased the design costs by
approximately $10,000, but resulted in a decrease to the construction cost estimate. This
is because the cost of enclosing the bathrooms was offset by the reduction in the amount
of exterior wall as shown in Figure 1 below.
Table 4. City Council Directed Changes and Minor Modification Cost Estimate Implications
PROJECT CHANGE COST INCREASE
Bathroom Enclosure -$125,000
Parking Lot Modifications $15,000
Total Cost Change -$110,000
All costs are rounded to the nearest $5,000 and includes contingencies.
Figure 1. Bathroom Enclosure Cost Offset
Updated Working Cost Estimate
In addition to the year-to-date costs in Table 1 and outstanding commitments in Table 2
above, the tables below show total updated future estimated costs. Table 5 shows the
total future construction costs for the buildings. Table 6 shows the total future construction
costs for the site grounds. Some project elements are attributable to both the building and
the site grounds; in other words, they would be partially needed if there was no building,
and they would be partially needed if there were no site grounds. Those items are shown
in Table 7. Future architecture/engineering, project management, quality assurance
review, constructability review, plan check, construction management, and construction
inspection and testing costs are shown in Table 8. The total estimated remaining project
cost is the sum of all four tables.
LEGEND
Red = Eliminated Exterior Walls
Yellow = New Exterior Walls
--~---
6 I ..
_J I
CLASSROOM 2
~ 8
' I
/
" "
I
-L ~--~
I •
I I I i I C
B-5
Table 5. Estimated Future Building Construction Costs
ENCLOSED BUILDINGS AMOUNT
Demolition (Existing Building) $340,000
Foundation, Walls, Roof, and Floor $3,210,000
Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing $1,635,000
Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment (Fixed) $245,000
Sub Total $5,430,000
COVERED BUILDINGS AMOUNT
Roof Framing $80,000
Roofing $155,000
Soffit Finish $320,000
Sprinklers $65,000
Sub Total $620,000
BUILDING SECURITY ELEMENTS AMOUNT
Building Security $75,000
Sub Total $75,000
LOOSE FURNITURE, FIXTURES, AND EQUIPMENT AMOUNT
Tables, Chairs, Etc. $200,000
Audio-Visual Equipment $140,000
Sub Total $340,000
UTILITIES AMOUNT
Site Utility Lines $515,000
Electric Transformer and Feeder $200,000
Sub Total $715,000
OTHER AMOUNT
Hazardous Materials Abatement for Existing Buildings $105,000
Sub Total $105,000
CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY AMOUNT
5% Construction Contingency (Excludes Loose FFE,
Electric Transformer and Feeder, Hazmat Abatement)
$335,000
Sub Total $335,000
Estimated Building Construction Sub-Total $7,620,000
All costs are rounded to the nearest $5,000 to reflect a level of precision that is commensurate
with a forecast of expected future costs.
Table 6. Estimated Future Site Construction Costs
PARK GROUNDS AMOUNT
Site Preparation, Including Rough Grading $995,000
Landscaping and Irrigation $1,385,000
Stormwater Drainage $420,000
Outdoor Furnishings $200,000
Fencing and Walls $895,000
Sub Total $3,895,000
EXTERIOR LIGHTING AMOUNT
Exterior Lighting $800,000
Sub Total $800,000
SITE SECURITY ELEMENTS AMOUNT
B-6
Site Security $25,000
Sub Total $25,000
CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY AMOUNT
5% Construction Contingency $235,000
Sub Total $235,000
Estimated Site Construction Sub-Total $4,955,000
All costs are rounded to the nearest $5,000 to reflect a level of precision that is commensurate
with a forecast of expected future costs.
Table 7. Estimated Future Construction Costs for Items Attributable
to both Building and Site
HARDSCAPE AMOUNT
Parking Lot $640,000
Sidewalk and Paths, including Fine Grading $1,070,000
Sub Total $1,710,000
CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY AMOUNT
5% Construction Contingency $85,000
Sub Total $85,000
Estimated Items Attributable to Building and Site
Construction Sub-Total
$1,795,000
All costs are rounded to the nearest $5,000 to reflect a level of precision that is commensurate
with a forecast of expected future costs.
Table 8. Architecture/Engineering, Management, and Permitting Costs
Subsequent to April 6, 2021
PERMITTING AND FEES AMOUNT
Building Plan Check Review $100,000
Utility Service Fees $50,000
Sub Total $150,000
ARCHITECTURE/ENGINEERING, CONSTRUCTION
OVERSIGHT, AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES
AMOUNT
Johnson Favaro – Restroom Enclosure Design $10,000
Johnson Favaro – Cost Estimate Revision $15,000
Johnson Favaro – Security Subconsultant $45,000
Johnson Favaro – Utility & AV-IT Subconsultant $90,000
Architect/Engineer Construction Administration $335,000
Project Management, Quality Assurance Review,
Constructability Review, Construction Management,
Inspection, and Testing
$880,000
Sub Total $1,375,000
Estimated Future Architecture/Engineering,
Management, and Permitting Costs
$1,525,000
All costs are rounded to the nearest $5,000 to reflect a level of precision that is commensurate
with a forecast of expected future costs.
The prior cost estimate assumed a construction start date of December 2021, which was
considered aggressive and required everything to go exactly according to plan. The start
date assumed that sub-consultant contracts, including the site-security contract, would
B-7
be awarded at the earliest opportunity, and that Staff and the Subcommittee would
provide input to complete the plan.
The construction start date has now been revised to February 202 2. This assumes that
that the site security sub-consultant contract will be awarded this evening and includes
the time needed to present a site security plan to the City Council. The revised start dated
added approximately two months of escalation at a rate of 0.33% per month for a total of
approximately $100,000 (approximately $50,000/month).
The revised construction start date is also aggressive and requires everything to go
exactly according to plan. A construction start date any later than February 2022 adds at
least 0.33% of escalation per month, or approximately $50,000.
The revised total cost estimate subsequent to April 6, 2021 is approximately $15,895,000,
with an additional $100,000 for escalation due to the revised construction start date,
bringing the total to approximately $15,995,000. Although this is the total project cost; the
number often referenced for a capital project is the construction cost of the general
construction contractor, or the expected bid amount. This bid amount is approximately
$13,280,000 because it excludes architecture/engineering, management, and permitting;
loose furniture, fixtures and equipment; the electric transformer and feeder; and
contingency.
Cost Estimate Exclusions:
The cost estimate excludes the following items:
• Moving costs, which will be absorbed by the operating budget.
• Office supplies, which will be absorbed by the operating budget.
• Financing costs, which will be determined when financing is secured.
• Photovoltaic roof panels, which are anticipated to be procured under a net-zero
cost arrangement.
• Replacement of the entry monument sign, which would be part of potential future
project to update monument and entry signs citywide.
• Stair removal and installation of fencing between the site and Forrestal Drive to
limit parking at Ladera Linda for accessing the Preserve through unauthorized
paths, which will be absorbed by the operating budget.
Market Volatility:
During the process of updating the cost estimate, MGAC identified increased uncertainty
in the construction market which may affect the overall price that potential construction
contractors would bid to build the project. This is due to greater market volatility in certain
material and skilled labor prices. This may be a temporary phenomenon that resolves in
the short term, or it may continue for a prolonged period. In fact, the market is showing a
gradual stabilization than what has been observed over the past few months. However,
MGAC recommends the City Council consider a market volatility factor of at least 10%,
or $1,440,000 to account for possible continuing volatility.
B-8
Alternatives with Additional Cost:
During the April 6, 2021 meeting, the City Council directed Staff to explore cost-effective
ways to install exterior shutters over glass surfaces to provide security for future
consideration by the Council. The cost to install motorized roll-down security grates over
all glazed surfaces instead of just at the exterior breezeway is shown in Table 9 below.
Table 9. Alternatives with Additional Cost
Current Design Proposed Alternate Cost Increase
Motorized Rolling Security Grilles at
Exterior Breezeway
Motorized Roll-Down Security Grates
Over All Glazing
$260,000*
Total $260,000*
Rounded to the nearest $5,000 to reflect a level of precision that is commensurate with a forecast of expected future costs and includes
5% construction contingency.
Value Engineering Substitutes:
Staff directed Johnson Favarro to develop a list of project elements that could be replaced
with lower-grade substitutes to reduce cost, such as materials, finishes, etc. Most project
components cannot be replaced with alternate materials that would result in a tangible
cost savings. For example, building components need to meet certain design parameters
and do not allow for this type of flexibility. In coordination between Staff and Johnson
Favarro, there is one identified project element that is a candidate for substitution and can
result in a notable cost reduction, as shown in Table 10 below. Staff will continue to work
with Johnson Favaro to identify any other potential value engineering substitutes.
Table 10. Value Engineering Substitutes
Current Design Proposed Alternate Cost Savings
Wood Light Pole Fixture Steel Light Pole Fixture $100,000
Total $100,000
Rounded to the nearest $5,000 to reflect a level of precision that is commensurate with a forecast of
expected future costs.
Amendment No. 4 to the Johnson Favaro PSA
On December 18, 2018, the City Council approved the PSA with Johnson Favaro for
architectural and engineering design services for the Ladera Linda Community Center
and Park Project in the amount of $538,460 .
On December 17, 2019, the City Council approved Amendment No. 1 to the PSA,
extending the term by one year and increasing the contract amount by $14,740 for
additional services. This increased the amount of the PSA to $553,200.
On December 1, 2020, the City Council approved Amendment No. 2 to the Johnson
Favaro PSA, extending the term by one additional year to allow sufficient time to complete
the Conditional Use Permit/California Environmental Quality Act process and the
subsequent development of construction-ready documents. There was no cost increase
with Amendment No. 2.
B-9
On June 1, 2021, the City Council approved Amendment No. 3 to the PSA with Johnson
Favaro, increasing the contract amount by $25,548, bringing the PSA total to $578,748.
This amendment was for design services to update the cost estimate to account for the
approved minor modifications to the project design, to change the cost estimate format in
response to requests from the community for a different format than is typically used , and
for design services to modify plan sheets and specifications to change the open cabana
restrooms to separate fully enclosed men’s and women’s restrooms.
At the June 1 meeting, the City Council considered amending the PSA to engage a
security sub-consultant to provide drawings and specifications for security camer as and
associated systems for the building and surrounding grounds. After considering
information presented that evening, the City Council requested Staff return with a contract
amendment incorporating all needed sub-consultants for the project to complete
construction documents. The City Council also requested to review the security plan when
completed.
This evening, the City Council is being asked to consider Amendment No. 4 to the PSA,
which brings the contract sum to $711,082, and includes the following sub-consultant
services:
1. Security sub-consultant to provide security plan options for approval by the City
Council and subsequently construction plans and specifications for a security
system for the building and surrounding grounds . This service has a base cost of
$33,988 and optional services for additional meetings and presentations in the
amount of $8,796, for a total of $42,784.
2. Dry utility sub-consultant, approved by Southern California Edison, to coordinate
with electrical, cable, and telecom providers to facilitate removal of existing idle
infrastructure, and provide new service. This service has a not-to-exceed cost of
$44,000.
3. Underground utility surveying subconsultant to provide surveys and field-
determined locations for connection points to existing electrical, sanitary sewer,
and storm sewer connections. This service has a not-to-exceed cost of $17,000.
4. Audio-visual and information technology sub -consultant to provide technology
consulting, engineering, and design services for the building and site. This service
has a fixed cost of $28,550.
The total cost to perform the work in Amendment No. 4 is not to exceed $132,334 and an
additional appropriation request in this amount is needed.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Next Steps
The next step in the project process is completion of the construction contract documents,
primarily the plans and specifications. Before the plans and specifications can be
completed, the security plan must be finalized. Accordingly, the security plan options will
be presented to the City Council around August 2021. Upon approval of a security plan
B-10
by the City Council, assumed to occur in one meeting, the construction drawings will be
progressed to the final stage in fall 2021.
Following completion of the construction documents, a notice inviting bids will be widely
advertised to the community of construction contractors and subcontractors in winter
2021-2022. Once bids are received and a qualified lowest bidder is identified , the actual
construction cost of the project will become known. Additionally, during the completion of
the construction documents, proposals will be solicited for project management,
construction management, inspection, and materials testing services. These costs will
also become known and the total project cost can be calculated.
Given the market uncertainty described above, in the event construction bids come in
higher than estimated, Staff will develop options for the City Council’s consideration to
adjust the project scope and quantify the impacts of scope-reduction options on the
project cost. This will provide the City Council with options for cost-reduction measures
should the market volatility materialize in a manner that warrants reducing the cost of the
project, or should the lowest bid be significantly larger than the cost estimate forecasts.
Such measures would likely require further contract amendments to the design and may
delay the start of construction. Additionally, Staff will formulate strategies to negotiate with
the lowest bidder to attempt to further reduce project costs.
Future Contracts and Amendments
The contract amendments presented to the City Council in this staff report account for all
architecture/engineering services needed to prepare construction documents and
complete the bidding process for the project as currently designed. However, additional
professional services are needed to support Staff during the design process, to represent
the City during the construction phase, and to inspect and test the construction
contractor’s work. Costs associated with these additional services have been captured in
the working estimate presented earlier in this report. PSAs will be brought before Council
at a future date for the following services:
1. Architecture/Engineer construction administration services to include activities
such as site visits to confirm that construction meets the design intent; participation
in project meetings; review of certain construction contractor submittals for
conformance with construction documents; responses to requests for design
clarification from the construction contractor; and design revisions necessitated by
unknown field conditions.
2. Project management and construction management services to expand staff
bandwidth in support of the project ; manage the scope, schedule, and budget
during design and construction; minimize the risk of construction change orders by
performing quality assurance review of all construction documents for errors,
omissions, vague, or conflicting information; perform constructability review to
assure that the design can be constructed as designed; perform value engineering
and identify opportunities to improve design and reduce costs; oversee
construction inspectors; review proposed change orders for validity and prepare
B-11
necessary documentation, proactively identify and resolve any potential
construction problems; and act as a liaison between the City and other parties.
3. Construction inspection services for activities such as inspection of all aspects of
the site for conformance with the contract documents; compliance with state and
regulatory safety and environmental protection requirements; checking of
materials deliveries for compliance with requirements and record-keeping of
associated documents; and completion of daily inspection reports.
4. Materials testing services including field and laboratory sampling and testing of
materials and products to ensure they meet the contract specifications.
These contracts and amendments are not included in today’s requests for approval either
because they are currently under solicitation, or because the needed services will be
better known as construction documents near completion.
Financing for the Project
On May 18, the City Council approved the financing framework for the project and directed
staff to begin the pre-qualification with iBank for an estimated financing of $5.5 million
which can be adjusted to accommodate the current cost estimate . Staff has begun the
process and is expected to receive a respond from iBank in the upcoming weeks. The
application and process will be reviewed by the Finance Advisory Committee before going
to the City Council for consideration.
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize an additional appropriation of $132,334
in support of the ongoing design effort for the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park
Project and authorize the Mayor to approve Amendment No. 4 with Johnson Favaro for
ongoing architectural and engineering services.
ALTERNATIVES:
In addition to the Staff recommendation, the following alternative actions are available for
the City Council’s consideration:
1. Direct Staff to make further changes to the format of the cost estimate.
2. Do not approve the changes in scope and additional spending authorization with
Johnson Favaro.
3. Take other action, as deemed appropriate.
B-12
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Request for Proposals
LADERA LINDA COMMUNITY CENTER AND
PARK PROJECT MANAGER AND
CONSTRUCTION MANAGER
Public Works Department
Attention: Ramzi Awwad, Public Works Director
30940 Hawthorne Blvd, Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Phone: 310-544-5275 | Email: rawwad@rpvca.gov
RFP Release Date: June 04, 2021
Request for Clarification Deadline: June 18, 2021
RFP Submittal Deadline: July 06, 2021
C-1
LADERA LINDA COMMUNITY CENTER AND PARK PROJECT
MANAGER AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGER
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes is requesting proposals from qualified
consulting firms to serve as the Project Manager and Construction
Manager for the Ladera Linda Park and Community Center project.
All correspondence and questions regarding this RFP should be submitted via
email to:
Ramzi Awwad, Public Works Director
Email: rawwad@rpvca.gov
To be considered for this project, submit an electronic copy of the proposal to the
above email address by 4:30PM on July 06, 2021
C-2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction Page 4
II. Solicitation Objective Page 4
III. Project Background Page 4
IV. Project Description Page 6
V. Scope of Services Page 10
VI. Project Schedule Page 12
VII. Necessary Qualifications and Submittal
Requirements Page 13
VIII. Submission of Proposal Page 16
IX. Evaluation and Selection Process Page 16
Attachment A – Sample Professional Services Agreement
Attachment B – April 6, 2021 Staff Report to City Council
Attachment C – Ladera Linda Concept Design 2019
C-3
I. INTRODUCTION
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes (City) is a scenic, upscale, residential coastal
community, with a population of approximately 42,000, located on the Palos Verdes
Peninsula of southwestern Los Angeles County.
The City is a contract city, meaning that some services are provided by contract with
agencies (both public and private) and some services are delivered by the City’s own
employees.
City Government: Rancho Palos Verdes is a General Law City and has operated under
the Council-Manager form of government since its incorporation in 1973. Policy-making
and legislative authority are vested in the gov erning City Council, which consists of five
Council Members, including the Mayor and Mayor Pro-Tem. The City is fiscally sound and
functions on an annual budget cycle.
The purpose of this document is to provide proposers with the information needed to
submit a proposal for review by the City and, if selected, enter into a Professional Service
Agreement with the City. Enclosed is a blank Professional Services Agreement form for
proposers’ review (Attachment A).
II. SOLICITATION OBJECTIVE
The City is requesting proposals from qualified consulting firms to serve as the project
manager and construction manager for the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park
project. This scope of services covers overall project management and construction
management activities; whereas an architectural/engineering firm has been retained to
develop design drawings and contract documents, and a separate solicitation will be
issued for Construction Inspection services.
III. PROJECT BACKGROUND
The project site was originally developed in the 1960s by the Palos Verdes Peninsula
Unified School District (PVPUSD) into Ladera Linda Elementary, which included five
structures and ancillary site improvements. The school operated until 1980 when the City
purchased the property and the Rancho Palos Verdes Parks and Recreation Department
took over operations of the site. The park officially opened to the public in 1982. From
1993 to 2011, a Montessori School leased several classrooms on the site. Since 2011,
the community center and park has been exclusively used for park recreation purposes.
In 2015, the City commissioned a Parks Master Plan Update (Master Plan), which was
prepared by Richard Fisher Associates (RFA). The Master Plan update recommended a
separate Master Plan for Ladera Linda. In 2018, the City Council reviewed and approved
a conceptual Master Use Plan for Ladera Linda Park prepared by RFA.
C-4
Subsequent to approval of the conceptual Master Use Plan for Ladera Linda Park, the
City Council directed Staff to proceed with developing a Request for Proposals (RFP) to
solicit proposals for the preparation of Phase 1 - Final Concepts Drawings and Phase 2
- Detailed Construction Drawings. The architectural firm Johnson Favaro was awarded
the contract to prepare the project plans.
Johnson Favaro began its design work with numerous small exploratory meetings with a
wide range of interested parties in February 2019 in order to gain a better sense of
community concerns. Johnson Favaro met with representatives from four Homeowner’s
Associations (HOAs) located in the vicinity of the park, individual councilmembers, Los
Serenos de Point Vicente docents, City staff, individual residents and other small
groups. As a result of this public and internal engagement, Johnson Favaro developed a
refined conceptual design.
On August 20, 2019, after a comprehensive public outreach and engagement effort, the
City Council approved the Ladera Linda Park and Community Center Master Plan. The
City Council’s August 20, 2019 actions included approving the design of the
replacement Community Center, landscaping, and ancillary site improvements, which
also included factors such as park security, staffing levels and facility rentals.
On February 23, 2021, the Planning Commission conditionally approved the planning
entitlements for the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park project. The Planning
Commission Conditions of Approval included mitigation of project impacts related to
safety and security measures, hours of operation, limits on the number of rentals and
special events, noise restrictions, and lighting. The Planning Commission also adopted
recommendations for consideration by the City Council which include implementing of
traffic and parking measures, prioritizing park usage to City residents and assessing
current and future site usage.
On March 2, 2021, the City Council, voted to appeal the Planning Commission’s
approval of the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park land-use applications. In its
decision, the City Council indicated that their action did not represent disagreement with
the Planning Commission’s decision, but felt the decision of this City project should be
in the jurisdiction of the City Council, thereby warranting the appeal.
On April 6, 2021, the City Council held an appeal of the Planning Commission-approved
entitlements. The City Council adopted a resolution upholding the Planning
Commission-approved Conditional Use Permit, Major Grading Permit, Variance and
Site Plan Review for the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park project with
modifications to the Conditions of Approval. As part of this action, the City Council also
directed staff to proceed with the completion of construction documents and authorized
advertisement of bids upon final completion of plans and sp ecifications.
After the April 6 meeting, the City Council’s Public Facilities Subcommittee
(Subcommittee) met with some residents from the Ladera Linda neighborhood to discuss
concerns raised during the public hearing process. In response, the Subcommitte e
C-5
requested minor revisions be considered to the Council-approved design. Specifically,
they requested that the proposed bathroom be enclosed and to add as many parking
spaces as possible within the existing footprint . The Community Development Director
issued a Minor Modification that includes the reconfiguration of the proposed open-air
restroom configuration into enclosed and separate men’s and women’s restrooms
consisting of traditional stalls and wash basins, and a minor reconfiguration of the parking
lot to accommodate three additional parking spaces and the relocation of two accessible
parking space.
IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City Council-approved Ladera Linda Community Center and Park project, excluding
the Minor Modification, involves the following:
• Demolition of five existing buildings (18,574 ft2 in gross area), parking, ancillary
site improvements and landscaping;
• Construction of a new 6,790 ft2 single-story building (Community Center) with an
overall building footprint of 13,720 ft2 (enclosed and covered areas) at an overall
height of 16 feet – 6 ¼ inches;
• Construction of a 775 ft2 outdoor tiered seating area;
• Construction of a 54-stall parking lot located adjacent to building and playground,
including four clean air vehicle spaces;
• Construction of a naturalistic children’s playground area in the upper tier;
• Construction of one full basketball court and a half-court basketball court in the
upper tier;
• Renovation of two existing paddle tennis courts in the upper tier;
• Construction of a 400 ft2 storage facility at 12 feet in height for City and
emergency supplies;
• Construction of walking paths throughout park area along with upper and lower
lawn areas;
• Construction of a lawn area in the lower tier;
• Utilization of existing driveway off Forrestal Drive as the only vehicular entrance
into the park;
• Installation of low-impact, native and drought-tolerant landscaping, including 30-
foot to 100-foot buffer zone between the building and southerly slope;
• 9,000 cubic yards combined balanced on-site grading (4,500 cubic yards of cut
and 4,500 cubic yards of fill);
• Grading cut and fill over 5 feet in height to support an Americans with Disability
Act (ADA) access ramp between middle- and upper-tiers;
• Construction of retaining and combination walls to a maximum height of 15 ½
feet to accommodate accessibility and ADA compliant ramps;
• Installation of a new 12-foot flagpole;
• Construction of mechanical equipment and refuse storage area;
• Installation of new bike and storage area;
• Installation of vehicular entry gate for park security; and,
C-6
• Installation of on-site lighting.
Below is the proposed 6,790 ft2 single-story building floor plan diagram illustrating the
enclosed spaces:
The building is proposed to contain the following components:
• A 1,880 ft2 divisible multi-purpose room with a seating capacity of 144 in lecture
format;
• Two classrooms with a combined area of approximately 1,690 ft2. Classroom 1
has a seating capacity of 60 in lecture format or capacity for 24 seats at tables.
Classroom 2 has a seating capacity of 24 seats at tables;
• A 660 ft2 multi-function meeting room with Discovery Room displays built into the
walls and a seating capacity of 16 at tables;
• A 240 ft2 work room with a maximum occupant load of 3;
• Storage and staging areas with a combined area of approximately 490 ft 2;
• Public restrooms;
• A 380 ft2 staff office with a maximum occupant load of 4;
• A 137 ft2 outdoor breezeway/patio covered lobby;
• A 150 ft2 kitchenette and staging area with a maximum occupant load of 2;
• Covered walkways;
• Janitorial and electrical rooms; and
• Vestibules
The building footprint measures 13,720 ft2, which consists of the entire roofed area of the
structure including the 6,790 ft2 enclosed area.
The following aerial image shows the existing school buildings (red-striped) overlaying
the proposed building siting. Please note that the new Community Center was setback
further from the southwesterly transition slope to mitigate potential view impacts to
residential properties located in the Seaview neighborhood.
C-7
A comparison of the existing versus proposed hardscape and vehicular
circulation/parking footprint is demonstrated in the tables below:
Hardscape Comparison (courts, driveway, parking)
Current Design Proposed Design
Acreage 2.68 acres 1.59 acres
Square Footage 116,900 ft2 69,075 ft2
Vehicular Circulation & Parking Comparison
Current Design Proposed Design
Acreage 1.5 acres .88 acres
Square Footage 65,500 ft2 38,374 ft2
Proposed Park Building Hours
The following table shows current and proposed Ladera Linda park and building hours.
Park & Building Hours Hours: Mon-Fri Hours: Sat-Sun
Current 12:00 p.m.- 5:00 p.m. 10:00 a.m.- 5:00 p.m.
Proposed 8:00 a.m.- dusk 8:00 a.m.- dusk
Hours would be extended to 9:00 p.m. if rentals or classes are scheduled. Ladera Linda
Park is currently staffed by one part-time employee per shift who is overseen by a full-
time recreation supervisor. The new building will likely increase staffing to two part-time
employees per shift with one full-time supervisor.
C-8
Proposed Park Usage
The table below shows current Ladera Linda usage policies. While the park will be used
more during the day, restrictions on park usage and rental hours are proposed.
**Restriction does not apply to non-profits, City events, or HOA rentals.
Conditions require that no nighttime special events (one hour after dusk) would be permitted
without a Special Use Permit being issued, which will require public notification. Staff will
coordinate with the AYSO schedule to minimize impact by avoiding large rentals or event s at the
same time as AYSO game days.
Building and Park Security
Security will be incorporated into the overall design of the park and Community Center,
which will be formalized during the construction design phase. Following is a summary
of the security measures incorporated into the City Council design-approved project and
the Planning Commission-adopted Conditions of Approval:
• Clear points of entry and improved sight lines in the final design
• Appropriately placed exterior and interior security cameras and motion sensors
• Appropriate low-level landscaping
• Control of ingress and egress points during operating hours and non-operating
hours
• Glass break sensors
• Window shutters
• Comprehensive best practices, lighting design throughout park and building
• Ability to secure park perimeter at night through fencing and improved entrance
gates for both pedestrian and vehicular access points
• Reduction/elimination of blind spots
• Increased utilization of the park combined with increased staff supervision
The Planning Commission-approved Conditions of Approval include provisions to
secure the lobby breezeway, restroom, and accompanying sink areas with roll-down
gates and automatically shut-off the water to the wash area on a nightly basis.
The Minor Modification issued by the Community Development Director include reconfiguring
the open-air restroom design to create dedicated separate enclosed men’s and women’s
Rental Polices LL Current LL Proposed
Rental Hours Not specified 10:00 a.m.- 9:00 p.m.
Classes Not specified 8:00 a.m.- 9:00 p.m.
Private Rentals after 5 p.m. No current limits 2 x month **
Amplified Music (indoor only.
Outdoor prohibited)
10:00 a.m. – 10:00
p.m. 11:00 a.m.- 8:00 p.m.
Special Events No limit 8/year
C-9
restroom facilities with traditional stalls and wash basins, resulting in 334 ft2 of
additional enclosed building area and a new total structure size of 7,124 ft2; and
reconfiguring the parking lot to relocate two ADA parking spaces in closer proximity to
the front of the Community Center, changing 11 standard parking spaces to compact
spaces, and modifying the driveway aisles to a one-way design to allow for additional
parking spaces for a net gain of three spaces for a total of 57 parking spaces.
V. SCOPE OF SERVICES
The City is accepting proposals from qualified firms to serve as the Owner’s
representative for project management and construction management activities until final
close-out of the project. The awarded firm shall proactively anticipate barriers to efficient
project execution, analyze issues, and partner with the Owner, Architect/Engineer, and
stakeholders to develop solutions.
SCOPE OF WORK
1. GENERAL MANAGEMENT
a) Develop Project Work Plan (on City form) to map out how project will go from
current status to final completion;
b) Prepare reports, deliver presentations, and lead meetings (prepare agendas
and read-aheads, facilitate discussions, develop and distribute meeting
minutes) to the City Council, City leadership team, and stakeholder groups;
c) Submit weekly Project Status Report (on City form) to document:
i. Project risks or issues that may impact scope, schedule, or budget
ii. Current status
iii. Prior week’s activities
iv. Upcoming week’s activities
v. Current schedule against baseline schedule
vi. Current budget status against baseline budget
vii. Contract authorization available, expiration date, and needed action .
2. SCHEDULE MANAGEMENT
a) Prepare overall project schedule using Critical Path Method for inclusion
Project Work Plan;
b) Conduct regular design progress meetings and monitor progress compared to
baseline schedule; update project schedule when needed and document
reason for deviation from baseline;
c) Proactively identify schedule risk and develop recovery strategies to mitigate
impact.
3. BUDGET MANAGEMENT
a) Prepare overall project budget by phase for inclusion in Project Work Plan ;
C-10
b) Track actual costs by phase and compare to budgeted amount; forecast
ongoing resource needs and assesses sufficiency of remaining budget;
request additional budget when needed and provide justification;
c) Proactively identify budget risk and develop recovery strategies to mitigate
impact;
d) Prepare Design Change Order/Contract Amendment packages (on City form)
including narratives explaining circumstances leading to Change Order, cost
analysis, and other supporting documentation;
e) Review Pay Requests/Invoices from the General Contractor, A/E, and any
other associated contractors for accuracy and inclusion of all necessary
information and recommend approval.
4. QUALITY MANAGEMENT
a) Perform quality assurance review of all design submittals, check-sets, and bid
documents; generally including plans, specifications, cost estimates, and
other contract documents to assure:
i. Plans and specifications meet all applicable standards
ii. No errors, omissions, vague, or conflicting information
iii. Engineering judgment is appropriately used
iv. Assumptions are reasonable and valid
v. Cost estimates are comprehensive, use most applicable units and
prices, and apply suitable contingencies
vi. Critical path method construction schedule provides the appropriate
amount of time to complete construction as quickly as possible without
increasing costs due to excessive schedule constraints;
b) Perform constructability review to ensure that design can be constructed
within the known physical constraints;
c) Perform value engineering and identify opportunities to improve design and
reduce costs.
5. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT
a) Serve as City’s representative during construction and act as liaison between
the City, the construction contractor, and the Architect/Engineer;
b) Oversee Construction Inspectors to assure that they are performing adequate
inspection of the construction contractor’s work for compliance with the
construction documents;
c) Conduct bi-weekly progress, and other necessary meetings; including
preparing and distributing agendas, meeting minutes, and other necessary
documentation;
d) Review, comment on, and recommend acceptance of the construction
contractor’s construction schedule. Ensure that the construction contractor
stays on schedule. If the construction contractor is not progressing according
to schedule, document delays and notify the City and the construction
contractor. As directed by the City, develop strategies to mitigate delays,
prepare notices to cure, and calculate liquidated damages;
C-11
e) Review, comment on, and recommend approval of all submittals including
shop drawings, samples, and testing reports; consulting with the
Architect/Engineer when necessary;
f) Review all Requests for Information and prepare responses through
consultations with the Architect/Engineer when necessary;
g) Periodically spot-check field inspection activities to ensure that inspection
work is being done correctly both in terms of the level of inspection for
specific activities as well as the method of inspection;
h) Check that all Construction Inspector Daily Reports are produced in a timely
fashion and include the appropriate amount and type of information;
i) Collect and file electronic copies of materials tickets, testing reports, quality
assurance checklists, and Daily Reports;
j) Review all Proposed Change Orders, review justification for contract change,
prepare data-driven independent cost estimates, and analyze schedule
impacts. Recommend approval or rejection of Proposed Change Orders. For
approved Change Orders, prepare necessary documentation (on City forms);
k) Review all Pay Requests for accuracy of work completed and quantity
installed, ensure that all pertinent information is included, and provide
comments and recommendations for payment;
l) Proactively identify and investigate any potential construction problems and
recommend solutions;
m) Immediately document any non-compliance with the construction contract,
unusual occurrences, or accidents occurring within the project limits;
n) Schedule and conduct walk-through inspection. Prepare comprehensive
punch list and coordinate close-out of all punch list items;
o) In consultation with City staff, act as liaison between the City and the
public/stakeholders concerning issues with construction.
6. COORDINATION
a) Coordinate with outside agencies to ensure that all permits are procure d in a
timely manner;
b) Assist with bidder solicitation activities;
c) Assist in the procurement of furniture, fixtures, and equipment;
d) Assist in coordinating the temporary relocation of staff and operations prior to
and during construction.
Consultant shall complete other tasks deemed necessary for the accomplishment of a
complete and comprehensive outcome as described in the project objective. Consultant
shall expand on the above-noted tasks, where appropriate, and provide suggestions
which might lead to efficiencies and enhance the results or usefulness of the work.
Deliverables
As part of the Services, Consultant will prepare and deliver the following tangible work
products to the City.
C-12
1. Project Work Plan (on City-provided form)
2. Weekly Project Status Report (on City-provided form)
3. Baseline project schedule
4. Project schedule markups and updates
5. Project schedule deviation memoranda
6. Baseline project budget
7. Design Change Order/Contract Amendment packages (on City-provided form)
8. Project budget markups and updates
9. Pay Request recommendations
10. 90% Construction Documents comments
11. Constructability Review comments
12. Value Engineering Review comments
13. Permit Documents comments
14. 100% Construction Documents comments
15. Construction Change Order package comments
16. Construction oversight documentation comments
17. Meeting agendas and minutes
18. Correspondence materials
19. Reports, memoranda, and presentation materials to the City Council, City’s
leadership team, Public Works Director, and other stakeholders
City staff may request that check-sets or working versions of documents be submitted
for ongoing routine review. City staff will review all deliverables, including preparatory or
record materials for service deliverables, and provide comments. Consultant is required
to revise draft deliverables to address City staffs’ comments.
VI. PROJECT SCHEDULE
A. RFP Schedule
The following is the anticipated schedule for the RFP process:
Request for Proposal available June 04, 2021
Request for Clarification due June 18, 2021
Proposals due July 06, 2021
Anticipated Notice of Award July 20, 2021
B. Anticipated Project Schedule
Final Construction Documents Review July 21, 2021 to July 30, 2021
Permit Documents Review July 21, 2021 to August 30, 2021
City Council Request for Approval to Bid October 4, 2021 to October 19, 2021
C-13
Bid Process October 20, 2021 to December 6, 2021
Construction Contract Award December 7, 2021 to December 27, 2021
Construction December 28, 2021 to February 28, 2023
Closeout February 28, 2023 to March 14, 2023
Offering firms shall have available resources and personnel, either in-house or under
subcontract, to ensure the completion of the Scope of Services within this schedule.
VII. NECESSARY QUALIFICATIONS AND SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
1. Only one proposal per firm will be considered.
2. The submittal should be typed and as brief as possible while adequately
describing the qualifications of the firm. The final submittal shall be sent as a
PDF via email to Ramzi Awwad, Public Works Director, at rawwad@rpvca.gov.
3. The proposing firm shall submit the following information with the package,
including the same information for subcontractors, in the following format:
a) Cover Letter: Provide the name, address, and phone number of the firm; the
present staff (size, classification, credentials); the primary contact’s name,
phone number, and email address; any qualifying statements or comments
regarding the proposal; and identification of any sub-consultants and their
responsibilities. Identify the firm’s type of organization (individual, partnership,
corporation), including names and contact information for all officers, and
proof that the organization is currently in good standing. The signed letter
should also include a paragraph stating that the firm is unaware of any conflict
of interest in performing the proposed work. (No more than two pages)
b) Approach to Scope of Services: Re-state the Scope of Services with any
additions, expansions, clarifications, or modifications that the firm proposes in
order to provide the services and produce the deliverables contained in this
RFP. Describe how completing the Scope of Services will be approached and
any cost-saving or value-adding strategies or innovations the firm will bring to
the project. (No more than two pages)
c) Organization and Staffing: Identify the person who will be the Project
Manager and primary contact person responsible for the overall delivery of
the project. Provide an organizational chart of the project team that clearly
delineates communication and reporting relationships among the project staff
and among the sub-consultants involved in the project. Identify key personnel
to perform work in the various tasks and include major areas of subcontracted
work. Indicate the expected contributions of each staff member in time as a
C-14
percentage of the total effort. Specifically show the availability of staff to
provide the necessary resource levels to meet the City’s needs. Indicate that
the Project Manager and key staff will remain assigned to this project through
completion of the Scope of Services. (No more than two pages)
d) Staff Qualifications and Experience: Describe qualifications of the assigned
staff and sub-contractors including relevant technical experience. Staff
assigned to complete the Scope of Services must have p revious experience
in providing the necessary services as described under the Scope of
Services. A registered Professional Engineer must be the Project Manager.
Description of Consultant’s experience should include:
• Prior Experience: Demonstrate that the firm has significant experience
providing services similar to those described under the Scope of Services.
(No more than two page)
• Staff Qualifications: Provide resumes for the Project Manager and any
other key staff members to be assigned to contribute to the Scope of
Services, with an emphasis on similar services which they provided to
other agencies. (No more than ten pages)
• Reference Projects: Include at least three projects with similar scope of
services performed by the project team within the past three years and
indicate the specific responsibilities of each team member on the
reference project. Provide contact information for each client. (No more
than ten pages)
e) Project Schedule: Provide a resource allocation schedule detailing the
personnel resources and levels that will be applied at each stage of the
project. . (No more than one 11” x 17” page)
f) Quality Control Plan: Describe the quality control procedures and associated
staff responsibilities which will ensure that the deliverables will meet the City’s
needs. (No more than one page)
g) Acceptance of Conditions: State the offering firm’s acceptance of all
conditions listed in the Request for Proposal (RFP) document and Sample
Professional Services Agreement (Attachment D). Any exceptions or
suggested changes to the RFP or Professional Services Agreement (PSA),
including the suggested change, the reasons therefore and the impact it may
have on cost or other considerations on the firm’s behalf must be stated in the
proposal. Unless specifically noted by the firm, the City will rely on the
C-15
proposal being in compliance with all aspects of the RFP and in agreement
with all provisions of the PSA. (No more than one page)
VIII. Submission of Proposal
A. Requests for Clarification
Requests for clarification of the information contained herein shall be submitted
in writing prior to 4:30 pm on June 18, 2021. Responses to any clarification
question will be provided to each firm from which proposals have been
requested. It is highly recommended that the prospective consultant firms visit
the City to view the project location prior to submitting a request for clarification.
B. Confirmation Email
Upon submission of proposal to the City, the proposing firm shall request an email
confirmation that the proposal was received and retain the email as a record. If an
email confirmation is not received, the proposing firm shall correspond with the
City until a confirmation is received.
IX. EVALUATIONS AND SELECTION PROCESS
1. Proposals Will be Evaluated Based on the Following Criteria:
a) Approach to Scope of Services (25%)
• Understanding of the Scope of Services as demonstrated by the
thoroughness of the proposal, introduction of cost-saving or value-adding
strategies or innovations (including those applying to overall project
schedule), and an overall approach most likely to result in the desired
outcome for the City.
b) Proposal Schedule (20%)
• Ability to complete the work within the project schedule outlined above.
c) Staff Qualifications and Experience (30%)
• Relevance of experience of the proposing firm (to provide support
resources to the project team)
• Relevance of experience and strength of qualifications of the Project
Manager
• Relevance of experience and strength of qualifications of the key
personnel performing the work
• Relevance of referenced projects and client review of performance during
those projects
d) Organization and Staffing (15%)
• Availability of key staff to perform the services throughout the duration of
the project
C-16
•Assignment of appropriate staff in the right numbers to perform the Scope
of Services
•Appropriate communication and reporting relationships to meet the City’s
needs
e)Quality Control (10%)
•Adequate immediate supervision and review of staff performing the work
as well as appropriate independent peer review of the work by qualified
technical staff not otherwise involved in the project.
2.Selection Process
An evaluation panel will review all proposals submitted and select the proposal, if
any, which best fulfills the City’s requirements. The City will then further refine the
scope and schedule with that firm and request a time-and-materials fee proposal.
The City will negotiate the fee with that firm. The City reserves the right to negotiate
special requirements and proposed service levels using the selected proposal as
a basis. If the City is unable to negotiate an agreeable fee for services with top
firm, the City will negotiate with the next firm chosen among the top firms.
3.Award Notification
The City will notify all proposers in writing of the outcome of the selection process
and intent to award. This RFP does not commit the City to award an agreement,
nor pay any costs incurred in the preparation and submission of the proposal in
anticipation of an agreement. The City reserves the right to reject any or all
proposals, or any part thereof, to waive any formalities or informalities, and to
award the agreement to the proposer deemed to be in the best interest of the City
and the Department.
4.Award of Agreement
The selected firm shall be required to enter into a written agreement (see sample
City agreement in Attachment A with the City, in a form approved by the City
Attorney, to perform the Scope of Services. This RFP and the proposal, or any part
thereof, may be incorporated into and made a part of the final agreement; however,
the City reserves the right to further negotiate the terms and conditions of the
agreement with the selected consultant. The agreement will, in any event, include
a maximum "fixed cost" to the City.
C-17
ATTACHMENT A
SAMPLE PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT
C-18
CONTRACT SERVICES AGREEMENT
By and Between
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
and
C-19
AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT SERVICES
BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AND
THIS AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT SERVICES (herein “Agreement”) is made and
entered into on , 2020, by and between the CITY OF RANCHO PALOS
VERDES, a California municipal corporation (“City”) and , a [form of company]
(“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, the performance of the
services defined and described particularly in Article 1 of this Agreement.
B. Consultant, following submission of a proposal 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”, as stated in the Proposal, 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 mean
C-20
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 Proposal 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
C-21
day, or portion thereof, for each worker paid less than the prevailing rates as determined by the
DIR for 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.”
C-22
Consultant’s Authorized Initials ________
(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 in the form of a Change Order.
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.
C-23
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 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 Change 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 fifteen percent (15%)
of the Contract Sum; or, in the time to perform of up to ninety (90) days, may be approved by the
Contract Officer through a written Change Order. 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.
If in the performance of the contract scope, the Consultant becomes aware of material defects in
the scope, duration or span of the contract or the Consultant becomes aware of extenuating
circumstance that will or could prevent the completion of the contract, on time or on budget, the
Consultant shall inform the Contracting Officer of an anticipated Change Order. This proposed
change order will stipulate, the facts surrounding the issue, proposed solutions, proposed costs
and proposed schedule impacts.
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.
C-24
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 $XXX ( 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; (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,
and (b) 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, using the City template,
or in a format acceptable to the City, 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
C-25
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.
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 through a Change
Order, but not exceeding ninety (90) 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
[INSERT PERFORMANCE PERIOD] from the date hereof, except as otherwise provided in the
C-26
Schedule of Performance (Exhibit “D”). The City may, in its discretion, extend the Term by
[INSERT NUMBER OF EXTENSIONS IF APPLICABLE] additional [INSERT DURATION
OF EXTENSIONS IF APPLICABLE]-year terms.
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:
(Name) (Title)
(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 the personnel included in the Proposal 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. City shall have the right to approve or reject any proposed replacement
personnel, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.
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.
C-27
4.3 Contract Officer.
The Contract Officer shall be or such person as may be
designated by the Public Works Director. 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.
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; all subcontractors included
in the Proposal are deemed approved. 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
C-28
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) Workers’ compensation insurance. Consultant shall maintain Workers’
Compensation Insurance (Statutory Limits) and Employer’s Liability Insurance (with limits of at
least $1,000,000).
(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.
C-29
(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 hereunder
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 and continuously maintain 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 own right of recovery
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
C-30
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
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.
C-31
(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:
(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
C-32
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.
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
C-33
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 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
C-34
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 fifteen (15) 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 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.
C-35
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 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. 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. 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 of termination without cause pursuant to this Section, the City need not provide the
Consultant with the opportunity to cure pursuant to Section 7.2.
7.8 Termination for Default of Party.
If termination is due to the failure of the other Party to fulfill its obligations under this
Agreement:
(a) 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.
(b) Consultant may, after compliance with the provisions of Section 7.2, terminate the
Agreement upon written notice to the City‘s Contract Officer. Consultant shall be entitled to
payment for all work performed up to the date of termination.
C-36
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
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,
C-37
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.
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.
C-38
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 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]
C-39
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
Eric Alegria, Mayor
ATTEST:
Emily Colborn, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ALESHIRE & WYNDER, LLP
William W. Wynder, City Attorney
CONSULTANT:
By:
Name:
Title:
By:
Name:
Title:
Address:
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.
C-40
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
On __________, 2021 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.
C-41
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
On __________, 2021 before me, ________________, personally appeared ________________, proved to me o n
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.
C-42
EXHIBIT “A”
SCOPE OF SERVICES
[ATTACH SCOPE OF SERVICES FROM PROPOSAL]
C-43
EXHIBIT “B”
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
(Superseding Contract Boilerplate)
[INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
C-44
EXHIBIT “C”
SCHEDULE OF COMPENSATION
[INSERT COMPENSATION FROM PROPOSAL]
C-45
EXHIBIT “D
[INSERT SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE FROM PROPOSAL]
C-46
ATTACHMENT B
APRIL 6, 2021
LADERA LINDA STAFF REPORT
TO CITY COUNCIL
C-47
PUBLIC HEARING
Date: April 6, 2021
Subject:
Consideration and possible action to consider an appeal of the Planning Commission -approval for the
Ladera Linda Community Center and Park project located at 32201 Forrestal Drive (Case No.
PLCU2020-0007).
Recommendation:
1.Review the Planning Commission-approved Conditional Use Permit, Major Grading Permit,
Variance and Site Plan Review application findings (planning entitlements) and Conditions of
Approval for the construction of the new Ladera Linda Community Center and Pa rk project;
2.Review responses to public comments and recommendations adopted by the Planning
Commission, via minute order, to the proposed project;
3.Review Staff recommended modifications to the Planning Commission-adopted Conditions of
Approval;
4.If acceptable, adopt Resolution No. 2021-__; upholding the Planning Commission-approved
Conditional Use Permit, Major Grading Permit, Variance and Site Plan Review for the Ladera
Linda Community Center and Park project with modifications to the Conditions of Appro val;
and
5.If acceptable, direct Staff to proceed with the completion of construction documents and
authorize advertisement of bids upon final completion of plans and specifications for the
Ladera Linda Community Center and Park project.
6.Report of Notice Given: Deputy City Clerk
7.Declare Public Hearing Open: Mayor Alegria
8.Request for Staff Report: Mayor Alegria
9.Staff Report & Recommendation: Octavio Silva, Deputy Director of Community Development
10.Council Questions of Staff (factual and without bias):
11.Testimony from members of the public:
The normal time limit for each speaker is three (3) minutes. The Presiding Officer may grant additional time to a representative speaking
for an entire group. The Mayor also may adjust the time limit for individual speakers depending upon the number of speakers who
intend to speak.
7.Declare Hearing Closed/or Continue the Public Hearing to a later date: Mayor Alegria
8.Council Deliberation:
The Council may ask staff to address questions raised by the testimony, or to clarify matters. Staff and/or Council may also answer
questions posed by speakers during their testimony. The Council will then debate and/or make motions on the matter.
9.Council Action:
The Council may: vote on the item; offer amendments or substitute motions to decide the matter; reopen the hearing for additional
testimony; continue the matter to a later date for a decision. C-48
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 04/06/2021
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Public Hearing
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action to consider an appeal of the Planning Commission -
approval for the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park project located at 32201
Forrestal Drive (Case No. PLCU2020-0007).
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
(1) Review the Planning Commission-approved Conditional Use Permit, Major
Grading Permit, Variance and Site Plan Review application findings (planning
entitlements) and Conditions of Approval for the construction of the new Ladera
Linda Community Center and Park project;
(2) Review responses to public comments and recommendations adopted by the
Planning Commission, via minute order, to the proposed project;
(3) Review Staff recommended modifications to the Planning Commission -adopted
Conditions of Approval;
(4) If acceptable, adopt Resolution No. 2021-__; upholding the Planning
Commission-approved Conditional Use Permit, Major Grading Permit, Variance
and Site Plan Review for the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park project
with modifications to the Conditions of Approval; and
(5) If acceptable, direct Staff to proceed with the completion of construction
documents and authorize advertisement of bids upon final completion of plans
and specifications for the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park project.
FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact associated with the City Council’s appeal hearing.
Project specific costs are further discussed in the ‘Additional Information’ section of this
report.
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
ORIGINATED BY: Octavio Silva, Deputy Director of Community Development
REVIEWED BY: Ken Rukavina PE Director of Community Development
APPROVED BY: Ara Mihranian, AICP, City Manager
C-49
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
Click on the following links to view the supporting attachments except for Attachment A:
A. Draft Resolution No. 2021-___ (page A-1)
B. Project Plans (page B-1)
C. Planning Commission-Adopted Resolution No. 2021-02 (page C-1)
D. Public Facilities City Council Subcommittee Appeal Request (page D-1)
E. Public Comments (page E-1)
F. Environmental Assessment Determination (page F-1)
G. Willdan Engineering Traffic & Parking Impact Analysis (page G-1)
H. Ladera Linda Community Center & Park Usage Analysis (page H-1)
I. Grading & Retaining Wall Exhibit (page I-1)
J. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated February 23, 2021 (page J-
1)
K. Potential Project Design Modifications Exhibit (page K-1)
L. Finance Advisory Committee Presentation dated February 25, 2021 (page
L-1)
BACKGROUND:
In 1960s, the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District (PVPUSD) developed the
project site into the Ladera Linda Elementary, which included five structures and
ancillary site improvements. The school operated until 1980 when the City purchased
the property and the Rancho Palos Verdes Parks and Recreation Department took over
operations of the site. The park officially opened to the public in 1982. From 1993 to
2011, a Montessori School leased several classrooms on the site. Since 2011, the
community center and park has been exclusively used for park recreation purposes.
2015 Master Plan Update
In 2015, the City commissioned a Parks Master Plan Update (Master Plan), which was
prepared by Richard Fisher Associates (RFA). The Master Plan update recommended
a separate Master Plan for Ladera Linda to include, but not limited to, the following
components:
• Demolish existing buildings and construct a new Community Center;
• Incorporate an expanded Nature Center/Preserve Annex;
• Incorporate a Sheriff/Ranger Drop-in Office;
• Pave access road between lower and middle parking lots.
Early in the public outreach process for the Parks Master Plan and Ladera Linda Master
Plan, there was general agreement to keep existing components and not add any new
elements. After two years of extensive community outreach and design work, in 2018,
the City Council reviewed and approved a conceptual Master Use Plan for Ladera Linda
Park prepared by RFA, which included an approximately 8,900 ft2 Community Center
building with two sets of restrooms along with ancillary site improvements. Based on
C-50
public input, the City Council-approved Master Use Plan for Ladera Linda was modified
as follows:
• Large scale recreation components such as a gymnasium, pool or skate park
were removed from consideration;
• Active recreation elements were relocated from the lower park tier to the upper
park tier to minimize noise and visual impacts to the Ladera Linda neighborhood;
• The height and density of project landscaping was modified to minimize visual
impacts on adjacent neighborhood while still allowing for adequate security
sightlines; and
• Multiple reductions were made to the building square footage from its current
existing size, including several Richard Fisher design iterations that resulted in
the approved 2018 RFA Master Plan.
Subsequent to approval of the conceptual Master Use Plan for Ladera Linda Park, the
City Council directed Staff to proceed with developing a Request for Proposals (RFP) to
solicit proposals for the preparation of Phase 1 - Final Concepts Drawings and Phase 2
- Detailed Construction Drawings. At City Council’s direction, representatives from the
Seaview, Ladera Linda, Mediterrania, and Seacliff Hills homeowners’ associations
(HOAs) were invited to participate in the consultant selection process due to their
proximity to the Ladera Linda site. Staff prepared a draft RFP that was reviewed and
approved by the City Council RFP ad hoc subcommittee. Based on the results of the
RFP interview, the architectural firm Johnson Favaro was awarded the contract to
prepare the project plans.
Johnson Favaro Project Design
Johnson Favaro began its design work with numerous small exploratory meetings with a
wide range of interested parties in February 2019 in order to gain a better sense of the
community concerns. Johnson Favaro met with representatives from four HOAs
(Seaview, Ladera Linda, Mediterrania and Seacliff Hills) located in the vicinity of the
park, individual councilmembers, Los Serenos de Point Vicente docents, City staff,
individual residents and other small groups. As a result of this public and internal
engagement, Johnson Favaro developed a refined conceptual design, which includes:
• Reduction in the building size of approximately 4,800 ft2 from the RFA building
design;
• Further realignment of active features away from the Ladera Linda neighborhood
by positioning the building away from the western bluff edge overlooking the
Seaview neighborhood and modifications to the meeting room layout and design;
• Elimination of second set of restrooms;
• Elimination of lobby/gallery area;
• Replacement of the Discovery Room with a smaller multi-function meeting room
that incorporates elements of the Discovery Room per City Council direction; and
• Reduction in the size of the multi-purpose room.
In July 2019, the City and Johnson Favaro conducted a public workshop, in wh ich
Johnson Favaro presented its outreach efforts and proposed park design. 84 people
C-51
attended the Master Plan workshop at Ladera Linda with 38% of attendees from the
Ladera Linda HOA, 14% from the Seaview HOA, 2% from the Mediterrania HOA, and
46% were from other parts of the City. During the workshop, park operations were also
presented to the public including proposed hours and days of operation, staffing levels,
and Community Center usage.
On August 20, 2019, after a comprehensive public outreach and engagement effort, the
City Council approved the Ladera Linda Park and Community Center Master Plan. The
City Council’s August 20, 2019 actions included approving the design of the
replacement Community Center, landscaping, ancillary site improvements, which also
included factors such as park security, staffing levels and facility rentals.
On October 15, 2019, the City Council reviewed roof design options, including a green
roof or pitched roof, and subsequently directed Staff to study the installation of a solar
roof option on a flat roof as part of the detailed construction drawings phase. The size
and configuration of the solar panel system will be determined during the final design
phase; however, the solar panels can be laid flat and flush with the roof and sill provide
energy to operate the building.
Since 2019, the proposed project design has been further modified as follows:
• Additional reduction of approximately 110 ft2 in the size of the Community Center
square footage;
• A reduction in the overall building height and the width of exterior covered
walkways to further minimize building massing and reduce visual impacts of the
building on the site; and
• A reduction in the building exterior glass wall area by 31% and an increase in
solid wall surface area by 30% as compared to the August 2019 City Council
approved Johnson Favaro design.
On January 26, 2021, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider
the planning entitlements for the Council-approved Ladera Linda Community Center
and Park project. The planning entitlements include a Conditional Use Permit (CUP),
Variance, Major Grading Permit and Site Plan Review. After considering information
presented at the meeting including public testimony, the Planning Commission
continued the public hearing to February 23, 2021 , to provide Staff an opportunity to
incorporate project feedback provided by the Planning Commission.
On February 23, 2021, the Planning Commission conducted the continued public
hearing and after consider information presented including public testimony, the
Planning Commission adopted P.C. Resolution No. 2021-02 (Attachment C),
conditionally approving the planning entitlements for the Ladera Linda Community
Center and Park project. The Planning Commission in their motion, which passed on a
7-0 vote, approved Conditions of Approval to mitigate project impacts that included, but
were not limited to, safety and security measures, hours of operation, limits on the
number of rentals and special events, noise restrictions, and lighting. The Planning
Commission also adopted, via minute order, recommendations for consideration by the
City Council which include implementing of traffic and parking measures, prioritizing
C-52
park usage to City residents and assessing current and future site usage.
On February 24, 2021, the City Council’s Public Facilities Subcommittee, consisting of
Mayor Alegria and Councilmember Cruikshank, notified the City Manager that they are
requesting that consideration of an appeal of the Planning Commission’s approval of the
subject project be placed on the March 2, 2021 City Council agenda.
On March 2, 2021, the City Council, after considering information presented including
public testimony, voted to appeal the Planning Commission’s approval of the Ladera
Linda Community Center and Park land-use applications and tentatively set the appeal
hearing for April 6, 2021 (Attachment D). In its decision, the City Council indicated that
their action did not represent disagreement with the Planning Commission’s decision,
but felt the decision of this City project should be in the jurisdiction of the City Council,
thereby warranting the appeal.
On March 11, 2021, a public notice announcing the City Council’s consideration of the
appeal was sent to property owners within a 500-foot radius of the project site and
interested parties as well as published in the Peninsula News. As of the preparation of
this report, staff has received 33 public communications (Attachment E) in response to
the public notice. These public comments are discussed in the Public Correspondence
Section of this report.
DISCUSSION:
Pursuant to Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code (RPVMC) § 17.80.070(F) (De Novo
Review), a City Council appeal hearing is not limited to consideration of the materials
presented to the Planning Commission. Any matter or evidence relating to the action on
the application, regardless of the specific issue appealed, may be reviewed by the City
Council at the appeal hearing. As such, this staff report presents information considered
by the Planning Commission, as well as new evidence and is outlined as follows:
1. Site Description
2. Project Description
3. Planning Entitlement Code Considerations & Analysis
o Conditional Use Permit
o Variance
o Major Grading Permit
o Site Plan Review
o Environmental Analysis
4. Public Comments
5. Planning Commission Recommendations
6. Staff Recommended Modified Conditions of Approval
7. Additional Information
o Potential Project Modifications
o Project Cost
o Project Timeline
o Miscellaneous
C-53
1. Site Description
The project site is owned and operated by the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and
consists of approximately 11.031 acres. The project site is bounded by Forrestal Drive
and open space preserve (Forrestal Reserve) to the north and east, the Ladera Linda
Neighborhood Community to the southeast, Dauntless Drive and the Seaview
Neighborhood Community to the south and southwest and Ladera Linda Park soccer
fields (owned by the PVPUSD) to the west. The site is currently composed of five
buildings (approximately 18,574 ft2 in gross area)1 comprising the Community Center,
surface parking, playground paving, equipment, two full-court basketball courts, two
paddle tennis courts, fields, landscaping, City offices, and emergency preparedness
storage containers. Approximately 7 acres of the site are used for these purposes with
the remainder of the area being steep terraced slopes to the south and southwest of the
site that are improved with mature landscaping and drainage swales. As a result of the
topography in the area, the project site is configured into three tiers, a lower, middle,
and upper. The project site also includes two easements that traverse the property from
north to south for storm drain purposes.
The project site has a General Plan and Zoning designation of Institutional Public and
Institutional (I), respectively. The site is immediately adjacent to the south-west of the
Forrestal Reserve (a sub-area of the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve) and in the
immediate area of a number of public trails including, but not limited to, the Forrestal,
Pirate and Quarry Trails. The site is also within the vicinity of various conceptual trails
as outlined in the City’s Conceptual Trails Plan. Additional information about the public
trails in the area of the project site are further discussed in the Public Trails section of
this report. The existing Ladera Linda Park and Community Center is the only City
facility serving residents and the community on the east side of the City.
2. Project Description
The City Council-approved Ladera Linda Community Center and Park project involves
the following:
• Demolition of five existing buildings (18,574 ft2 in gross area), parking, ancillary
site improvements and landscaping;
• Construction of a new 6,790 ft2 single-story building (Community Center) with an
overall building footprint of 13,720 ft2 (enclosed and covered areas) at an overall
height of 16 feet – 6 ¼ inches;
• Construction of a 775 ft2 outdoor tiered seating area;
• Construction of a 54-stall parking lot located adjacent to building and playground,
including four clean air vehicle spaces;
• Construction of a naturalistic children’s playground area in th e upper tier;
1 Please note that the gross floor area of the existing buildings was previously reported to be 19,000 ft2. After
further examination of the project site survey, it was determined that the enclosed and covered area of the
buildings total approximately 18,574 ft2.
C-54
• Construction of one full basketball court and a half-court basketball court in the
upper tier;
• Renovation of two existing paddle tennis courts in the upper tier;
• Construction of a 400 ft2 storage facility at 12 feet in height for City and
emergency supplies;
• Construction of walking paths throughout park area along with upper and lower
lawn areas;
• Construction of a lawn area in the lower tier;
• Utilization of existing driveway off Forrestal Drive as the only vehicular entrance
into the park;
• Installation of low-impact, native and drought-tolerant landscaping, including 30-
foot to 100-foot buffer zone between the building and southerly slope;
• 9,000 cubic yards combined balanced on-site grading (4,500 cubic yards of cut
and 4,500 cubic yards of fill);
• Grading cut and fill over 5 feet in height to support an Americans with Disability
Act (ADA) access ramp between middle- and upper-tiers;
• Construction of retaining and combination walls to a maximum height of 15 ½
feet to accommodate accessibility and ADA compliant ramps;
• Installation of a new 12-foot flagpole;
• Construction of mechanical equipment and refuse storage area;
• Installation of new bike and storage area;
• Installation of vehicular entry gate for park security; and,
• Installation of on-site lighting.
Below is the proposed 6,790 ft2 single-story building floor plan diagram illustrating the
enclosed spaces:
The building is proposed to contain the following components:
• A 1,880 ft2 divisible multi-purpose room with a seating capacity of 144 in lecture
format;
• Two classrooms with a combined area of approximately 1,690 ft2. Classroom 1
has a seating capacity of 60 in lecture format or capacity for 24 seats at tables.
Classroom 2 has a seating capacity of 24 seats at tables;
• A 660 ft2 multi-function meeting room with Discovery Room displays built into the
walls and a seating capacity of 16 at tables;
• A 240 ft2 work room with a maximum occupant load of 3;
• Storage and staging areas with a combined area of approximately 490 ft2;
• Public restrooms;
C-55
• A 380 ft2 staff office with a maximum occupant load of 4;
• A 137 ft2 outdoor breezeway/patio covered lobby;
• A 150 ft2 kitchenette and staging area with a maximum occupant load of 2;
• Covered walkways;
• Janitorial and electrical rooms; and
• Vestibules
The building footprint measures 13,720 ft2, which consists of the entire roofed area of the
structure including the 6,790 ft2 enclosed area.
The following aerial image shows the existing school buildings (red-striped) overlaying
the proposed building siting. Please note that the new Community Center was setback
further from the southwesterly transition slope to mitigate potential view impacts to
residential properties located in the Seaview neighborhood.
A comparison of the existing versus proposed hardscape and vehicular
circulation/parking footprint is demonstrated in the tables below:
Hardscape Comparison (courts, driveway, parking)
Current Design Proposed Design
Acreage 2.68 acres 1.59 acres
Square Footage 116,900 ft2 69,075 ft2
Vehicular Circulation & Parking Comparison
Current Design Proposed Design
Acreage 1.5 acres .88 acres
Square Footage 65,500 ft2 38,374 ft2
C-56
Proposed Park Building Hours
The following table shows current and proposed Ladera Linda park and building hours.
Park & Building Hours Hours: Mon-Fri Hours: Sat-Sun
Current 12:00 p.m.- 5:00 p.m. 10:00 a.m.- 5:00 p.m.
Proposed 8:00 a.m.- dusk 8:00 a.m.- dusk
Hours would be extended to 9:00 p.m. if rentals or classes are scheduled. Ladera Linda
Park is currently staffed by one part-time employee per shift who is overseen by a full-
time recreation supervisor. The new building will likely increase staffing to two part-time
employees per shift with one full-time supervisor.
Proposed Park Usage
The table below shows current Ladera Linda usage policies. While the park will be used
more during the day, restrictions on park usage and rental hours are proposed.
**Restriction does not apply to non-profits, City events, or HOA rentals.
Conditions require that no nighttime special events (one hour after dusk) would be permitted
without a Special Use Permit being issued, which will require public notification. Staff will
coordinate with the AYSO schedule to minimize impact by avoiding large rentals or events at the
same time as AYSO game days.
Building and Park Security
Security will be incorporated into the overall design of the park and Community Center,
which will be formalized during the construction design phase. Following is a summary
of the security measures incorporated into the City Council design -approved project and
the Planning Commission-adopted Conditions of Approval:
• Clear points of entry and improved sight lines in the final design
• Appropriately placed exterior and interior security cameras and motion sensors
• Appropriate low-level landscaping
• Control of ingress and egress points during operating hours and non-operating
hours
• Glass break sensors
Rental Polices LL Current LL Proposed
Rental Hours Not specified 10:00 a.m.- 9:00 p.m.
Classes Not specified 8:00 a.m.- 9:00 p.m.
Private Rentals after 5 p.m. No current limits 2 x month **
Amplified Music (indoor only.
Outdoor prohibited)
10:00 a.m. – 10:00
p.m. 11:00 a.m.- 8:00 p.m.
Special Events No limit 8/year
C-57
• Comprehensive best practices, lighting design throughout park and building
• Ability to secure park perimeter at night through fencing and improved entrance
gates for both pedestrian and vehicular access points
• Reduction/elimination of blind spots
• Increased utilization of the park combined with increased staff supervision
The Planning Commission-approved Conditions of Approval include provisions to
secure the lobby breezeway, restroom and accompanying sink areas with roll-down
gates and automatically shut-off the water to the wash area on a nightly basis.
3. Planning Entitlement Code Consideration & Analysis
The following reflects the Planning Commission’s analysis finding that the Project is
consistent with the City’s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance in relation to the required
planning entitlements for the proposed project. The planning entitlements include a
Conditional Use Permit, Variance, Major Grading Permit and Site Plan Review whereby
the required applications are analyzed separately below:
a. Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
The project site has a zoning designation of Institutional. Pursuant to RPVMC §
17.26.030(A), a CUP is required in the Institutional Zoning District for public facilities
owned or used and operated for governmental purposes by the City (emphasis added),
the county, the state and the government of the United States of America, and any
special district or other local agency. In addition, pursuant to RPVMC § 17.26.040(B),
institutional buildings erected in the City shall have a building height not greater than 16
feet and shall not exceed one story, unless with the approval of a CUP by the Planning
Commission (or City Council on appeal). As the proposed Ladera Linda Community
Center and Park site is owned and operated by the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and
the proposed building will be over 16 feet in height, at 16 feet- 6 ¼ inches, thereby a
CUP is required for the project. In considering a CUP, pursuant to RPVMC §
17.60.050(A), the Planning Commission made the following findings in reference to the
property and project, which is now under consideration by the City Council (Finding
language is boldface, followed by assessment of the Project in normal type):
1. The site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use
and for all of the yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping and other
features required by this title or by conditions imposed under this section
to integrate said use with those on adjacent land and within the
neighborhood.
The project site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use. The
project site is approximately 11.031 acres in size and currently utilized as a park and
Community Center with multiple facility buildings, surface parking, playground pav ing,
equipment and paddle tennis courts, fields, landscaping and emergency preparedness
storage containers. The proposed project includes the demolition of the existing facilities
and improvements, with the exception of the paddle tennis courts, to constru ct a single
Community Center structure that would be approximately 40% of the total area of the
C-58
existing facility. Consequently, the new building would occupy a significantly smaller
footprint than the existing buildings and be located in the middle of the existing built
areas of the Park. The proposed Community Center and ancillary facilities are sited
throughout the 11.031-acre tiered site, so as to provide enhanced setbacks to adjacent
properties and provide enhanced line of sight from the perimeter of the property for
security purposes. The proposed 54 on-site parking spaces, which consist of four ADA
spaces, four dedicated spaces for clean air vehicles (one Van ADA space included),
exceed the parking stalls required for both weekend (42 spaces) and weekday (15
spaces) conditions for the proposed project as outlined in the latest edition of the
Institute of Transportation Engineer’s Parking Generation Manual (5th Edition, 2019). As
such, this finding can be made.
2. The site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways sufficient to
carry the type and quantity of traffic generated by the subject use.
The proposed project relates to streets and highways sufficient to carry the type and
quantity of traffic generated by the use. The project replaces the existing Community
Center facility, comprised of several buildings, with a single building that would be less
than 40% of the total area of the existing facilities. In addition, the new building would
occupy a smaller footprint than the existing Community Center buildings within the
existing built areas of the Park. Furthermore, the Project will not result in any increases
to the existing uses, programming, and activities. Rather, uses, programming and
activities are proposed to be limited and regulated, and would, therefore, have
substantially the same purpose, but with less capacity than the existing facility that will
be replaced. The park does not create a cumulative impact on traffic within the City of
Rancho Palos Verdes. The traffic on Forrestal Drive is mostly attributed to the only
outlet to over 160 single family homes off Pirate Drive. The proposed Community
Center and Park does not affect the traffic signal warrant at the intersection of Palos
Verdes Drive South and Forrestal/Trump National as noted in the Traffic Impact
Analysis prepared by Willdan Engineering (Attachment G). As such, this finding can be
made.
3. In approving the subject use at the specific location, there will be no
significant adverse effect on adjacent property or the permitted use
thereof.
The project site is currently improved with a park use and will continue to serve as such
as part of the proposed project. The new Community Center will serve all residents and
the community, particularly those located on the east side of the City, as an area for
recreational opportunities as well as for emergency preparedness activities such as, but
not limited to, a cooling center, storage location and emergency evacuation center. The
height of the proposed Community Center is 16 feet- 6 ¼ inches and will not create a
significant adverse effect, as residential properties to the east and south of the project
site have views of the ocean and Catalina Island oriented in the opposite direction of the
proposed building. Furthermore, the building pad of the proposed Community Center
will be located approximately 25 feet below the street of access (Forrestal Drive),
therefore views from the street and adjacent trails can be observed over the proposed
building height. The project will not result in any adverse safety or security impacts, as
C-59
the City Council design-approved project includes a comprehensive list of safety
measures and designs such as the incorporation of a surveillance system , motion and
glass break sensors, perimeter fencing, and lighting design. The project will not result in
adverse noise impacts as the project incorporates construction noise regulations for
potential short-term construction impacts, hours of operation for the community center
and limitations on mechanical equipment noise for potential long-term operational
impacts. The project lighting will not result in an adverse impact because the site
lighting has been designed to comply with RPVMC regulations that require lighting to be
down-cast and avoid illumination of the night sky and to provide for park safety and
security. As such, this finding can be made.
4. The proposed use is not contrary to the General Plan.
The use of the property for a community center and park is consistent with the
Institutional-Public General Plan Land Use designation for the site. The project site is
currently a park with a community center and will continue to be utilized as such. The
new community center and park will serve all residents and the community, particularly
those located on the east side of the City, as an area for recreational opportunities as
well as for emergency preparedness activities such as, but not limited to, a cooling
center, storage location, and emergency evacuation center. Furthermore, the
Conservation and Open Space Element of the City’s 2018 General Plan Update (p age
COS-39) identified the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park as an Institutional-
Public land use with passive and active amenities including playground and sports
equipment, multipurpose rooms and classrooms, as well as ancillary site improvements
including a parking lot and restrooms. The General Plan also notes that a Master Plan
process for the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park was included in the Parks
Master Plan Update. As such, this finding can be made.
5. If the site of the proposed use is within any of the overlay control districts
established by Chapter 17.40 (Overlay Control Districts) of this title [Title 17
“Zoning”], the proposed use complies with all applicable requirements of
that chapter.
The project site is not within an overlay control district. Therefore, this finding is not
applicable to the project.
6. That conditions regarding any of the requirements listed in this paragraph,
which the Planning Commission finds to be necessary to protect the
health, safety and general welfare, have been imposed (including but not
limited to): setbacks and buffers; fences or walls; lighting; vehicular
ingress or egress; noise, vibration, odors and similar emissions;
landscaping; maintenance of structures, grounds or signs; service roads
or alleys; and such other conditions as will make possible development of
the city in an orderly and efficient manner and in conformity with the intent
and purposes set forth in this title (Title 17 – Zoning).
Conditions of Approval were approved by the Planning Commission to mitigate potential
impacts to adjacent properties and to protect the health, safety and general welfare of
C-60
the residents, businesses, and visitors of the City. A further discussion of the proposed
Conditions of Approval is presented in the ‘Conditions of Approval’ section of this report.
Based on the above discussion, the Planning Commission was able to make the
required CUP findings as reflected in the attached resolution for City Council
consideration.
b. Variance
Pursuant to RPVMC § 17.76.030(C)(2)(b)(ii), walls combined with a fence, the total
height may not exceed 8 feet, as measured from grade on the lower side and may not
exceed 7 feet as measured from grade on the higher side. The project proposes the
construction of a retaining wall measuring up to 15 ½ feet (retaining wall and safety
railing) in height and approximately 265 feet in length to support ADA complaint ramps
between the middle- and upper-tiers of the park. Pursuant to RPVMC § 17.64.010(A),
the Planning Commission was able to find that a Variance may be granted because of
practical difficulties, unnecessary hardships or results inconsistent with the general
intent and purpose of the title occurred by reason of the strict interpretation of any of its
provisions, as reflected in the following findings (Finding language is boldface,
followed by assessment of the Project in normal type) are met:
1. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applicable to the property involved, or to the intended use of the property,
which do not apply generally to other property in the same zoning district;
The project site was originally developed as an elementary school with multiple
classroom buildings and play areas on a three-tiered site due to the unique and steep
topographic conditions in the area, which have been used as a community center and
park facilities since the 1980s. The three tiers include a lower, middle and upper tier
with 5-foot to 15-foot transitional slopes between the tiers. The project proposes to
maintain the same three-tier park layout and will also include new accessible walking
paths and ramps to enhance accessibility and walkability throughout the project site. In
order to accommodate an ADA-compliant accessible ramp between the middle- and
upper-tiers of the park, the project proposes to construct a retaining wall with an overall
height of up to 15½ feet. The existing site development and requirement to provide for
enhanced accessibility to meet ADA requirements present exceptional circumstances
that warrant the need to construct a retaining wall that exceeds the height lim itations
established in the RPVMC. Although other Institutional-zoned properties in the City
were developed with similar topographic conditions, the project site is unique in that it
was previously developed as an elementary school and the project proposes to re-
develop the site but maintain the existing park’s tiered layout but meet current
accessibility requirements without conducting substantially more grading that would
disturb the overall site. As such, this finding can be made.
2. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant, which right is possessed by other
property owners under like conditions in the same zoning district;
C-61
The construction of the proposed retaining wall up to 15½ feet in height are necessary
for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right, which right is
possessed by other property owners under like conditions in the same zoning district.
The project site is encumbered by steep topographical conditions in certain areas of the
project site, including transitional slopes between the various tiers of the park that are
not present in other developed Institutional zoned properties. As a public facility, owned
and operated by the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, the City is required to provide for
ADA accessibility throughout the site and to ensure the safety of the public . As such,
this finding can be made.
3. That granting the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to property and improvements in the area in which the
property is located; and,
The construction of the proposed retaining wall up to 15½ feet in height in order to
accommodate an ADA access ramp will not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to property and improvement in the area, as the construction of the
proposed wall will be reviewed and inspected by the City’s Building and Safety Division
for conformance with the California Building Code and associated geological
requirements. In addition, the proposed retaining wall will support the transition slope
between the middle and upper tiers of the park. Not granting the Variance application
request for the construction of retaining walls up to 15½ feet in height and not
accommodating an ADA accessible ramp would in fact be materially detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to visitors of the park. Furthermore, the face of the retaining
walls will be screened with landscaping and include areas of terracing, so as to soften
the appearance and scale of the structure. A rendering of the proposed retaining wall
along with landscape improvements is attached to this staff report (Attachment I). As
such, this finding can be made.
4. That granting the variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the
general plan or the policies and requirements of the coastal specific plan.
The variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the General Plan or the policies
and requirements of the Coastal Specific Plan. The project site is not located in the
City’s Coastal Specific Plan. The use of the property as a community center and park is
consistent with the City’s updated General Plan. The Conservation and Open Space
Element (Pg. COS-6) of the City’s General Plan includes goals and policies related to
Open-Space and Recreation Resources, which promote public access to all recreational
land and building additional parks and playfields, where appropriate, for multiple use by
various groups. The proposed retaining wall with an overall height of 15 ½ feet, will
provide enhanced ADA accessibility to recreational land and for the use of various
groups. As such, this finding can be made.
c. Major Grading Permit
Pursuant to RPVMC §17.76.040(B)(2)(a), a Major Grading Permit is required for
projects that result in an excavation, fill or combination thereof, in excess of 50 cubic
yards in any two-year period. Since a total of 9,000 cubic yards combined grading
C-62
(4,500 cubic yards of cut and 4,500 cubic yards of fill) as part of the project request, a
Major Grading Permit is required. RPVMC §17.76.040(E) sets forth the criteria (in bold
type) that the Planning Commission was able to make (or the City Council on appeal) to
approve the required Major Grading application:
1. The grading does not exceed that which is necessary for the permitted
primary use of the lot;
The grading does not exceed that which is necessary for the permitted primary use of
the lot. The proposed project is in an Institutional Zoning District, in which the primary
use of the lot is a park and community center. The new park and community center will
serve all residents and the community, particularly those located on the east side of the
City, as an area for recreational opportunities as well as for emergency preparedness
activities such as, but not limited to, a cooling center, storage location, and emergency
evacuation center. The proposed 9,000 yd3 of grading will be balanced on-site therefore
avoiding the need to export or import soil or rock. Furthermore, the proposed grading
will be limited to the existing developed portions of the site, which have been previously
graded and disturbed to support existing improvements. The project grading proposes
targeted cut and fill into portions of the existing site to accommodate the proposed park
and community center, parking lot, tiered seating, walking paths, ADA compliant
accessible ramp, and other ancillary park improvements. In addition, the proposed
grading will enhance adequate drainage of the site. As such, this finding can be made.
2. The proposed grading and/or related construction does not significantly
adversely affect the visual relationships with, nor the views from the viewing
area of neighboring properties. In cases where grading is proposed for a new
residence or an addition to an existing residence, this finding shall be
satisfied when the proposed grading results in a lower finished grade under
the building footprint such that the height of the proposed structure, as
measured pursuant to Section 17.02.040(B) of the Municipal Code, is lower
than a structure that could have been built in the same location on the lot if
measured from preconstruction (existing) grade;
The proposed project and associated grading will not significantly adversely affect the
visual relationships with, nor the views from the viewing areas of neighboring properties
because the project site is currently improved with an existing park, building facilities,
and ancillary site improvements. The proposed grading will continue to accommodate a
park use and a single community center building that would be less than 40% of the
total area of the existing facility. In addition, the new community center would occupy a
smaller footprint than the community center buildings within the existing built areas of
the Park. The proposed building height will not create a significant adverse effect, as the
height of the community center, as a result of the site grading, will not impact vi ews as
observed from neighboring properties due to the topographic conditions in the area.
Residential properties to the east and south of the project site have views of the ocean
and Catalina Island oriented in the opposite direction of the proposed build ing. Finally,
the building pad of the proposed community center will be located approximately 25 feet
below the street of access (Forrestal Drive), whereby views from the street and adjacent
C-63
trails can be observed over the proposed building height. As such, this finding can be
made.
3. The nature of the grading minimizes disturbance to the natural contours and
finished contours are reasonably natural;
The nature of the grading minimizes disturbance to the natural contours and finished
contours are reasonably natural because the proposed grading is generally limited to
developed portions of the site. In addition, the proposed grading maintains a majority of
the existing contours surrounding the developed areas on the project site. The project
proposes to maintain the existing transitional slope along the south and southwest of
the site as well as the slopes between the project site and Forrestal Drive. The finished
contours of the project will blend with the existing contours on the existing site. As such,
this finding can be made.
4. The grading takes into account the preservation of natural topographic
features and appearances by means of land sculpturing so as to blend any
man-made or manufactured slope into the natural topography;
The grading takes into account the preservation of natural topographic features and
appearances by means of land sculpturing. The project site has been previously graded
in order to accommodate the existing park, parking lot and ancillary site improvements.
The proposed grading is generally limited to developed portions of the site to support
the construction of ADA-compliant ramp. Moreover, the proposed grading generally
follows the existing slope of the property and results in finished slopes that appear
reasonably natural. Additionally, although some land-sculpturing is proposed to occur, it
is designed so as to blend the manufactured slopes into the natural topography. As
such, this finding can be made.
5. For new single-family residence, the grading and/or related construction is
compatible with the immediate neighborhood character;
The proposed grading does not involve a new single-family residence and therefore this
criterion does not apply.
6. In new residential tracts, the grading includes provisions for the
preservation and introduction of plant materials so as to protect slopes from
soil erosion and slippage and minimize the visual effects of grading and
construction on hillside areas;
The proposed grading does not involve a new residential tract and theref ore this
criterion does not apply.
7. The grading utilizes street designs and improvements which serve to
minimize grading alternatives and harmonize with the natural contours and
character of the hillside;
The proposed project does not involve modification s to streets or other public
C-64
infrastructure and therefore, this criterion does not apply.
8. The grading would not cause excessive and unnecessary disturbance of the
natural landscape or wildlife habitat through removal of vegetation;
The grading would not cause excessive and unnecessary disturbance of the natural
landscape or wildlife habitat through removal of vegetation because the proposed
grading area does not contain natural landscape or wildlife habitat. The proposed
grading is limited to areas of the project site that have been previously graded to
accommodate existing structures and ancillary site improvements. As such, this finding
can be made.
9. The grading conforms to standards related to grading on slopes equal to or
exceeding 35%; fill and cut depths; grading on slopes exceeding 50%
gradient; number and location of retaining walls and driveways:
The grading conforms to the City’s standards for grading on slopes, maximum finished
slopes, maximum depth of cut and fill, and retaining wall heights with the exception
grading on slopes over 50% steepness and the construction of a retaining wall up to 6
feet-11 inches in height along the driveway in the immediate area of the mechanical and
refuse enclosures. The proposed grading over slopes with 50% and the retaining wall
are consistent with the purpose of the Grading Permit because it will result in the
reasonable development of the project site. In addition, the proposed grading and
retaining wall will contribute to the overall site accessibility and retention of groundcover
to aid against flooding, erosion and other similar hazards. Furthermore, the sce nic
character of the neighborhood would not be altered as the retaining wall along the
driveway would not be readily visible from the public right-of-way as the location of the
wall will be located below the Forrestal Drive street level. The proposed grading and
retaining wall will comply with the goals and policies of the General Plan, as the project
supports policies for public health/ safety related to the environment. More specifically,
the proposed retaining wall is required to be designed to performan ce standards that
ensure both engineering standards and the topographic treatment of slopes on the
property. Furthermore, the City’s geotechnical consultant and the Building Official will
be required to review and approve engineered grading plans prior to grading permit
issuance and inspections will be conducted throughout the construction process. With
these provisions, the proposed deviation will not cause a detrimental impact to public
safety and/or other properties in the vicinity of the project. Notice of this decision shall
be given to all owners of property adjacent to the property.
d. Site Plan Review
Pursuant to RPVMC § 17.70.010, the Site Plan Review procedure enables the Planning
Commission (or the City Council on Appeal) to check development proposals for
conformity with the provisions of the Municipal Code and for the manner in which they
are applied, when no other application is required. As the project proposes a number of
ancillary site improvements, including but not limited to, parking, a 400 ft2 storage
facility, and mechanical equipment, a Site Plan Review is required to ensure compliance
with the Institutional zoning designation of the project site. Based on a review of the
C-65
project plans, the proposed project including, but not limited to, the accessory
structures, flag-pole, mechanical equipment and parking was determined by the
Planning Commission to comply with applicable code requirements such as
development setbacks.
e. Environmental Analysis
The Planning Commission has determined that the proposed project is Categorically
Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
pursuant to § 15302 of the State CEQA Guidelines—Class 2, Replacement or
Reconstruction. The proposed project meets the requirements of Class 2, as it consists
of the reconstruction of an existing facility where the new structure will be located on the
same site as the structure(s) replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and
capacity. A Class 2 Categorical Exemption Evaluation Report and Cultural Resources
memorandum (Attachment F) were prepared to provide supplemental information
related to staff’s environmental assessment.
Based on the analysis above, the Planning Commission determined that the proposed
Ladera Linda Community Center and Park project is consistent with the requested CUP,
Variance, Major Grading Permit and Site Plan Review applications and that all the
associated permit findings for the project can be affirmatively made. Attached for the
City Council’s consideration is a draft resolution, including conditions of approval,
memorializing the findings made for the required planning entitlements (Attachment A)
4. Public Comments
As part to the Planning Commission’s consideration of the Ladera Linda Community
Center and Park project, Staff received a wide range of public comments both in
support and opposition to the proposed project. In response to the public notice that
was issued on March 11th, announcing the City Council’s appeal consideration, Staff
received an additional 33 comments as of the preparation of this report. The comments
in opposition expressed concerns related to, but not limited to, design, compatibility,
traffic, safety, and facility/park use. The table on the next page summarizes public
comments and provides a staff analysis of the issues, as well as any corresponding
Planning Commission-approved Conditions of Approval or newly proposed conditions of
approval intended to address the concern (please note that newly proposed Conditions
of Approval are identified with the “New” notation):
C-66
Table No. 1- Public Comment Analysis
Summary of
Comment
Project Clarification and/or
Staff Analysis
Recommended
Mitigating
Condition(s) of
Approval No.
Community
Center
Structure Size
Public
comments
requested
clarification
regarding the
overall size of
the proposed
community
center and
Community
Centers at
Hesse Park,
Ryan Park and
PVIC.
Ladera Linda
Community
Center:
• 6,790 ft2
(enclosed
building
areas)
• 13,720 ft2
(building
footprint
including
extended
roof eves)
Hesse Park
Community
Center
(approx.):
• 7,901 ft2
(enclosed
building
areas)
• 9,130 ft2
(building
footprint
including
extended
roof eves)
Ryan Park
(approx.):
• 1,379 ft2
(enclosed
building
areas)
• 2,208 ft2
(building
footprint
including
extended
roof eves)
PVIC
(approx.):
• 10,781 ft2
(enclosed
building
areas)
• 13,365 ft2
(building
footprint
including
extended
roof eves)
None
C-67
Summary of
Comment
Project Clarification and/or
Staff Analysis
Recommended
Mitigating
Condition(s) of
Approval No.
Traffic
Conditions
Public
comments
expressed
concerns with
the project
impacts on
traffic conditions
in the immediate
aera of the site.
Willdan Engineering prepared
a Traffic Impact Analysis
(Attachment G), which
determined that:
• The park does not create a
cumulative impact on traffic
within the City.
• Traffic on Forrestal Drive is
mostly attributed to the only
outlet to over 160 single
family homes off Pirate
Drive.
• The proposed community
center and park do not
affect the traffic signal
warrant at the intersection
of Palos Verdes Drive
South and Forrestal/Trump
National. The traffic signal
was warranted based on
weekend traffic volumes
due to AYSO soccer
matches, Trump National
traffic and residential trips
accessing the intersection.
None
On-Site
Security
The public
raised security
and safety
concerns related
to the proposed
project and
design.
Robust security features will
be developed by a security
specialist and incorporated
into the final design, including
but not limited to:
• Clear points of entry and
improved sightlines;
• Surveillance cameras;
• Low-level landscaping;
• Control of ingress and
egress points;
• Glass break sensors;
• Fencing and improved
entrance gates;
• Drop down gates to
preclude access to
Condition Nos.
28 - 31
C-68
Summary of
Comment
Project Clarification and/or
Staff Analysis
Recommended
Mitigating
Condition(s) of
Approval No.
restroom and wash areas
during non-operating hours;
• Lighting; and
• Increased park supervision.
The driveway entrance from
Forrestal will be gated and
locked during non-operating
hours.
Building
Design
Public
comments
expressed
project concerns
with the glass
façade; climate
control;
extended roof
eves, open
restroom design;
neighborhood
compatibility
(Please see the
‘Potential
Project
Modifications’
section of this
report of more
information)
Total wall surface area and
glass wall/glass door area
were reduced from the City
Council design-approved
project in August 2019,
including a 9% reduction in
total wall area, a 31%
reduction in glass wall area
and a 30% increase in solid
wall area. The glass areas of
the building incorporate high
performance glazing.
Furthermore, as currently
designed, the Community
Center incorporates roll down
black-out blinds on the
interior of the building.
The proposed community
center is designed with
extended roof eves around
the perimeter of the building.
The extended roof eves serve
to provides shade, reduces
the amount of air conditioning
needed, reduces the overall
cost of the building, provides
a circulation route around and
into the building, and allows
for overflow from classes and
events where appropriate,
given use and amplified
sound conditions. The overall
size of the building footprint
Condition Nos.
30-34
C-69
Summary of
Comment
Project Clarification and/or
Staff Analysis
Recommended
Mitigating
Condition(s) of
Approval No.
with extended roof eves is
approximately 13,720 ft2.
The Planning Commission-
approved Conditions of
Approval include provisions to
secure the open lobby,
restroom and accompanying
sink areas with a roll-down
gate and automatically shut-
off the water to the wash area
on a nightly basis.
The Community Center is
designed as a single-story
structure with articulated
facades that include
vernacular finished materials
(glass, wood, concrete) that
are found in the immediate
area.
Project
Lighting
Public
comments
expressed
concerns with
the proposed
project lighting
and illumination
impacts to
neighboring
properties.
Project lighting has been
designed to:
• illuminate the ground
surface for safety;
• not illuminate park areas
that will not be used
during night hours;
• provide minimum lighting
for the operation of
surveillance cameras,
security patrols and park
personnel surveillance;
and to achieve code-
required illumination for
egress.
Condition Nos.
56-63
Seismic Public
comments
voiced seismic
concerns with
the glass
building design.
Proposed Conditions of
Approval require project
review and approval by the
City’s Geologist prior to
Grading or Building Permit
issuance.
Condition No.
21
C-70
Summary of
Comment
Project Clarification and/or
Staff Analysis
Recommended
Mitigating
Condition(s) of
Approval No.
Community
Center Rooms
Public
comments
expressed
concerns with
the number and
size of
community
center rooms.
Use Analysis (Attachment H)
of existing and proposed
facility use at Ladera Linda
Park determined that the
proposed project will result in
a reduction of available space
for classes, rentals and other
programing.
None
Museum &
Amphitheater
Public
comments
expressed
concerns with a
museum and
amphitheater.
The proposed project does
not include a museum or
amphitheater, but rather a
660 ft2 multi-use meeting
room that also includes some
interactive displays and 775
ft2 outdoor tiered seating area
built into an existing slope.
The project architect,
Johnson Favaro, prepared a
grading exhibit that depicts
proposed grading between
the middle- and upper-tiers of
the park, which included a
rendering of the proposed
tiered seating area
(Attachment I).
None
Discovery
Room
Exhibits
Concerns were
expressed with
the incorporation
of the existing
Discovery Room
exhibits into the
project.
The current Discovery Room
is a single-use 961 ft2 room at
Ladera Linda full of geologic,
cultural and static animal
artifacts and displays.
The proposed new design
does not include a stand-
alone dedicated Discovery
Room. In its place, is a 660
ft2 multi-use meeting room
with a capacity of 16 people.
Designed for small meetings,
the room has wall spaces and
built-in cabinets to display a
fraction of the Discovery
Room’s total exhibits. There
is no space in the proposed
Condition No.
72 (New)
C-71
Summary of
Comment
Project Clarification and/or
Staff Analysis
Recommended
Mitigating
Condition(s) of
Approval No.
building to store these items.
A Condition of Approval is
proposed that would require
that the exhibits be placed in
storage containers at the
Point Vicente Interpretive
Center or alternate location to
be determined prior to
construction.
Other
Improvements
Public
Comments
suggested that
the Community
Center would
include shower
facilities.
The proposed design does
not include shower facilities.
None
Silhouette
Public
comments
requested that a
building
silhouette be
constructed.
The Planning Commission-
approved Conditions of
Approval do not include
provisions that require the
construction of a project
silhouette prior to
construction. A project
silhouette is not required as
the project plans include 3-D
renderings and a community
center model was developed.
Furthermore, the Planning
Commission determined that
the community center will not
significantly impair views from
neighboring properties.
None
Noise Public
comments
expressed
concerns with
noise impacts
The Planning Commission-
approved Conditions of
Approval include a
comprehensive list of noise
restrictions and requirements
related to mechanical
equipment, deliveries, and
amplified noise.
Condition Nos.
65-68
C-72
Project Cost Public
comments
express a
concern with the
cost of the
proposed
project.
Please see Staff’s analysis in
the ‘Project Cost’ section of
this report.
None
Parking Public
comments
request that
more project
parking be
provided.
Willdan Engineering traffic
and parking analysis
determined that the proposed
54 on-site parking spaces will
more than accommodate park
and community center needs.
Condition Nos.
46-50.
Compliance
Review
Concerns were
expressed on
operational
impacts.
The Planning Commission-
approved Conditions of
Approval include a one-year
review (or earlier) to assess
community center operations,
at which time conditions may
be added, deleted or modified
accordingly.
Condition No. 2
Enforcement
of Conditions
Concerns were
expressed with
the enforcement
of proposed
Conditions
Enforcement of conditions will
occur through compliance
review, park supervision and
signage.
None
Based on the discussion above, Staff is of the opinion that additional clarification has
been provided to further address public comments and concerns with the proposed
project. Furthermore, in response to the public comments, the Planning Commission -
approved Conditions of Approval include a comprehensive set of provisions to mitigate
negative project impacts.
5. Planning Commission Project Recommendations
As part of the Planning Commission’s approval of the Ladera Linda Community Center
and Park project applications, the Planning Commission also provided a number of
recommendations, adopted via minute order, for the City Council’s consideration to
further address project impacts (Attachment J). The table below identifies the
recommendations along with staff’s analysis and/or associated action(s):
C-73
Table 2. Planning Commission Project Recommendations
Recommendation Staff’s Analysis Recommended
Mitigating
Condition(s) of
Approval No.
Develop parking and traffic
strategies for Preserve
Access, AYSO activities, and
the Community Center that
limits parking on residential
streets and long wait times at
PVD South. Strategies to
include:
A. Collection of traffic data
and usage in the vicinity
of the park, so as to
develop a baseline by
which to assess future
project-specific traffic
and parking impacts;
B. Consider
implementation of traffic
calming measures, in
order to provide
immediate traffic relief
in the area; and
C. Develop a parking
permit program in the
area of the project site
A. Add new Condition of
Approval requiring the City
to collect baseline traffic
data in the area of the park,
prior to grading and
construction activities.
B. Installation of the traffic
signal at Palos Verdes
Drive South and Palos
Verdes Drive East is
expected to begin in the
spring of 2021 and be
completed in the summer of
2021. Additionally, a
Citywide traffic and speed
study is being prepared that
will assess, among other
areas, this intersection.
C. Add new Condition of
Approval requiring the City
to perform a parking
demand analysis to assess
alternatives for the
development of a parking
management program as
part of the annual
compliance review
Condition Nos.
73 and 74
Explore ways to prioritize
community center and park
use for City residents.
The City Attorney’s Office
reviewed the request and
determined that preferential
treatment to residents needs
to be justified by rational basis
and supported by relevant
evidence.
Additionally, it is anticipated
that the majority of community
center and park users will be
City residents based on usage
at Hesse Park. In review of
the 2019 data, the last full year
prior to the pandemic, shows
that 94% of reserved hours at
None
C-74
Recommendation Staff’s Analysis Recommended
Mitigating
Condition(s) of
Approval No.
Hesse Park’s McTaggert Hall
were used by either RPV
resident non-profits or RPV
resident private rentals. The
remaining 6% were a
combination of non-resident or
non-profit private rentals.
Facility Rental Group
Breakdown:
Group I
• City Sponsored Events,
Gov. Agencies, Peninsula
Residents, Public or
Candidates Forums, RPV
HOA’s, Peninsula Seniors
Groups, Peninsula Non-Profit,
Civic, Social and Youth
Organizations with Non-Paid
Management.
Group II
• Non-Resident HOA’s,
Non-Resident Non-Profit,
Civic, Social and Youth
Organizations with Paid
Management.
Group III
• RPV Residents/Private
Party Activities, Resident
Commercial and Religious
Organizations.
Group IV
• Non-Residents/Private
Party Activities, Non-Resident
Commercial and Religious
Organizations.
Lastly, Staff is of the opinion
that park use restrictions are
not warranted, as the park
does not create a cumulative
impact on traffic and the
C-75
Recommendation Staff’s Analysis Recommended
Mitigating
Condition(s) of
Approval No.
project and Planning
Commission-approved
Conditions of Approval provide
sufficient measures to reduce
project impacts in the area.
Assess current and future
usage of proposed park
improvements, such as the
basketball and paddleball
courts, to ensure balance of
recreational opportunities and
adequate facilities.
During community workshops
and meetings regarding this
project, there was strong local
community support for
maintaining existing
recreational components.
During the outreach process,
there was limited support for
expanding the quantity of
existing facilities.
None
Address public safety
concerns and parking impacts
of stairs that provide access
from the park’s court area to
the soccer fields owned by the
Palos Verdes Unified School
District.
Given the age of the stairs,
their relatively poor condition,
and the fact that they are not
currently intended to provide
for access to or from the
soccer field, a Condition of
Approval is recommended to
remove the stairs as part of
the park reconstruction.
Condition No. 75
Staff is of the opinion that the Planning Commission’s recommendations and associated
Conditions of Approval serve to further address any project impacts as well as to ensure
that new Ladera Linda Community Center and Park remains compatible to with the
surrounding land uses.
6. Modified Conditions of Approval
Based on the Planning Commission’s recommendations and a reassessment of the
adopted Conditions of Approval, Staff proposes that the City Council consider adding
the following conditions of approval to the Commission-adopted conditions:
• Condition No. 72- Prior to on-site grading or construction activities, the City shall
place all Discovery Room exhibits/displays into storage at Point Vicente
Interpretive Center or at other City facilities as deemed appropriate. After
construction is complete, the exhibits/displays that are not incorporated into the
Discovery Room, shall remain in storage.
• Condition No. 73 - Prior to on-site grading or construction activities, the City shall
conduct a traffic engineering study to collect baseline traffic data in the area of
C-76
the park.
• Condition No. 74 - The City shall perform a parking demand analysis to assess
alternatives for the development of a parking management program as part of the
annual compliance review.
• Condition No. 75 - The access stairs between the upper tier of the project site
and the adjacent property in the area of the lower soccer fields shall be removed
as part of the park reconstruction.
7. Additional Information
Potential Project Modifications
Through the public comment process, Staff received a number of comments
recommending modifications to the design of the proposed Community Center . During
the Planning Commission’s consideration of the proposed project, the Planning
Commission was directed to focus on the land-use/planning entitlements and to not to
make design modifications to the Community Center, as design modifications would
present fiscal impacts and project schedule extensions that would be under the purview
of the City Council. The table below summarizes the potential project modifications
along with Staff’s analysis, which includes an assessment of fiscal and project schedule
impacts as well as any corresponding Condition(s) of Approval for the City Council’s
consideration. The table also includes a Planning Commission conditioned project
modification requiring that the lobby breeze, restroom and accompanying sink areas be
secured with roll-down gates as well as shutting off the water to the wash area on a
nightly basis. Please note that visual representations of the project modifications
that would add security gates, enclose the breezeway or add a corridor
(Modifications 1-4) are available in Attachment K of this report.
Table 3. Project Modifications and Analysis
Project Modification Staff’s Analysis Recommended
Mitigating
Condition(s) of
Approval No.
1. Secure Community Center
lobby breeze, restroom and
accompanying sink areas with
roll down security gates as well
as shutting off the water to the
wash area on a nightly basis
(Commission-approved).
$45,000 approximate
cost increase; No
schedule increase.
Condition No.
31 (included as
part of the
proposed
Conditions of
Approval)
2. Enclosing the Community
Center lobby breezeway (but
not restrooms).
$100,000 approximate
cost increase;1 month
schedule increase;
changes to building plan
backgrounds and
None
C-77
Project Modification Staff’s Analysis Recommended
Mitigating
Condition(s) of
Approval No.
involves all consultants;
requires re-design and
City approval of re-
design before
proceeding with
Construction Document
Phase.
3. Enclosing the Community
Center restrooms (but not the
lobby).
$175,000 approximate
cost increase; 2 month
schedule increase;
requires re-design and
City approval of re-
design before
proceeding with
Construction Document
Phase.
None
4. Creating an enclosed corridor
along the north side of the
Community Center enclosing
the lobby and restrooms.
$1,550,000 approximate
cost increase; 3 month
schedule increase; will
require the building to
move south on the site to
accommodate a
separation between the
building and parking lot;
increased annual
operating costs with
added interior floor area;
requires re-design and
City approval of re-
design before
proceeding with
Construction Document
Phase.
None
5. Modifying the flat roof design
of the Community Center to a
pitched roof design.
$1,325,000 approximate
cost increase; City
Council was presented
with a wide range of roof
options in October 2019
with comparative costs
for each option. Cost
increase is associated
with added building
material and increased
cost to operations due to
None
C-78
Project Modification Staff’s Analysis Recommended
Mitigating
Condition(s) of
Approval No.
added volume to the
interior.
6. Removing Discovery Room ($35,795) approximate
cost decrease; the
Discovery Room is not a
dedicated room, but
rather a part of the
660 ft2 multi-function
meeting room, whereby
the multi-purpose room
can function as a
“Discovery Room” when
displays built into the
walls are turned visibly
outward; eliminating this
feature will not cause a
reduction in floor area or
size of building footprint;
cost savings are for
fixtures only.
None
Based on the analysis above, all changes other than the installation of roll-down
security gates at the restroom area and lobby breezeway will result in a significant
increase to the project budget and the project schedule. More specifically, th e
modifications requiring major project revisions (i.e. creating an enclosed corridor) will
require the project architect and associated consultant team to step-back into the
Design Development Phase before proceeding to the Construction Document Phase.
Staff is of the opinion that the incorporation of the roll down security gates augments the
project’s comprehensive set of safety and security measures, which include, but are not
limited to, surveillance cameras, lighting, fencing and increased site supervision.
Project Cost
The following discussion encompasses a financial analysis of costs incurred to date and
committed expenditures, project construction cost estimate, operating and maintenance
cost estimates, and a summary of potential procurement and financing options.
a. Year-to-Date Expenditures and Commitments
To date, the project cost is approximately $849,993 based on year-to-date expenditures
and committed expenditures, as described in greater detail below. From 2016 to March
12, 2021, the City has expended almost $550,000 in both the General Fund and the
Quimby Fund toward the development of the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park
Project. Of this amount, $263,000 or 48% was expended on design with Johnson
Favaro and $184,000 or 34% was expended on the master plan with Richard Fisher
C-79
and Associates. The remaining $102,000 or 19% was expended on surveys,
environmental review, financial services, traffic study, and other miscellaneous services.
At this time, the project has almost $300,000 committed for design services, CEQA
analysis, and financial services. Table 4 below page summarizes the project year-to-
date expenditures and outstanding commitments by categories and funds.
Table 4. Year-to-Date Expenditures and Commitments
*YTD as of March 1, 2021
b. Project Construction Cost Estimate
Pursuant to the project description stated earlier in this report, the Ladera Linda
Community Center and Park Project has two major components, which include the
community center building and the park ground improvements. The enclosed building is
approximately 6,790 ft2 while the building footprint which includes the enclosed interior
of the building and covered walkways and eaves is approximately 13,720 ft2. The total
overall project, community center building and park improvements, encompass
approximately 273,600 ft2 or 6.3 acres out of a total site of approximately 11 acres.
The estimated total construction cost for both the community center building and park
grounds is approximately $15.7 million. This cost includes the construction costs,
escalation costs, and soft costs associated with the project. The escalation cost of
YEAR-TO-DATE EXPENDITURES Amount Funding
Anderson Penna - Survey/Geotech 62,883$ 334 - Quimby
Richard Fisher and Associates - Master Plan 184,045$ 334 - Quimby
Priority One Environmental - Environmental Review 1,500$ 334 - Quimby
Willdan - traffic study for PC meeting 10,175$ 101 - General Fund
Michael Baker - CQEA analysis for PC meeting 3,599$ 101 - General Fund
Johnson Favaro - Design 263,131$ 334 - Quimby
Cal-Water - water pressure fire flow 525$ 334 - Quimby
Kosmont - Financial services 23,277$ 101 - General Fund
Total year-to-date expenditures 549,135$
OUTSTANDING COMMITMENTS
Anderson Penna - Survey/Geotech -$ 334 - Quimby
Johnson Favaro - Design 290,069$ 334 - Quimby
Michael Baker - CQEA analysis for PC meeting 8,006$ 101 - General Fund
Kosmont - Financial services 1,723$ 101 - General Fund
Total year-to-date expenditures 299,798$
TOTAL YTD PROJECT COSTS 848,933$
YTD PROJECT COSTS BY FUND Amount
334 - Quimby 802,153$
101 - General Fund 46,780$
TOTAL YTD PROJECT COSTS BY FUND 848,933$
C-80
approximately $550,000 is included in the estimate with a projected construction start
date of December 2021. The projected escalation cost per month is approximately
$31,000 for each month delay from the December 2021 start date.
Table 5 below provides a summary of the total estimated project cost based on the
project scope as approved by the Planning Commission.
Table 5. Total Estimated Construction Cost
*The estimated future costs include rounding and escalation to a projected start date of
December 2021
Table 6. Total Estimated Construction Cost per FT²
*The estimated future costs include rounding and escalation to a projected start date of
December 2021
The soft costs are estimated as a percentage of hard costs based on staff experience;
the percentages applied can vary depending on project manager judgement and the
organizational structure and staffing of Public Works departments.
HARD COSTS Amount
Community Center (enclosed areas and covered areas) 5,700,000$
Sitework (demolition of existing buildings, site prep, etc.) 6,700,000$
Furnishings, fixtures, equipment (FFEs)300,000$
Sub-total of construction costs 12,700,000$
Construction contigency (5%)640,000$
Total estimated construction costs 13,340,000$
SOFT COSTS
Construction management (5%)640,000$
Construction inspection (7.5%)950,000$
Permitting (2%)250,000$
Hazardous materials abatement (1%)130,000$
Engineering support during construction (3%)380,000$
Total estimated soft costs 2,350,000$
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS 15,690,000$
Description Area Amount Unit
Community Center (40%)6,276,000$
Sitework (60%)9,414,000$
15,690,000$
Structural framed area (ft²)13,720.00 457.43$ per ft²
Enclosed building areas (ft²) 6,790.00 924.30$ per ft²
Park ground (ft²)259,870.00 36.23$ per ft²
Overall project (ft²)273,590.00 57.35$ per ft²
C-81
The estimated construction costs for the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park
have been publicly compared to other facility projects in nearby communities. However,
the publicly stated costs for other projects, do not include soft costs such engineering,
management, permitting, and inspection; escalation to projected year of construction;
furnishings, fixtures, and equipment (FFEs); special requirements; and contingencies.
These costs can increase the project totals by at least 30% to 50%, particularly when
projects are in the early planning stages.
Table 7. Comparison between the George F Canyon Nature Center and the Ladera
Linda Community Center
c. Phased Construction Cost
Should City Council decide to phase the project, e.g., build only one section of building
now and the remainder later, costs are almost certain to increase. First, a decision will
need to be made as to what is to be included in the first phase, which will require an
iterative scoping phase and a phasing plan. There will be additional costs for multiple
bidding processes, and plan revisions as building codes may change prior to permitting
later phases. Next, phased construction requires additional mobilizations and
secondary impacts to neighbors. There will be the need to join existing construction
and match materials. Additionally, phasing loses the advantage of economy of scale for
construction of improvements and for engineering, inspection, and construction
management. Lastly, there will likely be increased construction costs due inflationary
cost escalation affecting materials and contactors’ overhead, as well costs associated
with operational impacts.
d. Operating & Maintenance Costs
Currently, Ladera Linda Community Center and Park has one part-time employee per
shift who is overseen by a full-time recreation supervisor. The estimated operating and
maintenance costs for FY 2020-21 is approximately $191,000. Staff estimates the
operating and maintenance costs for the new facility and park to be less than $210,000.
The estimate includes staffing, supplies, utilities, maintenance, playground equipment
repair, and fuel modification. Due to the health emergency order and the shutdown of
park facilities, staffing and supplies for FY 2020-21 is lower than a typical year. Staff
anticipates that the new facility will require more staffing (as previously reported) and
supplies. However, staff anticipates that the newer facility will not have the same
George F Canyon
Nature Center
Ladera Linda
Community Center
Building 1,750 6,790
Structural framed area 3,355 13,720
Estimated costs w/out soft costs and contingency 1,694,376$ 5,080,000$
Cost per ft²505$ 370$
C-82
maintenance needs and will more energy efficiency, so staff is projecting these to
remain flat or just a modest increase. Table 8 below illustrates the increase of the
operating and maintenance budget of the new facility to FY 2020-21.
Table 8. Proposed Operating & Maintenance Costs
e. Procurement and Financing Options
In October 2019, the City entered into a Municipal Advisory and Consulting Services
agreement with Kosmont Transaction Services (KTS). The scope of the agreement is
for KTS to identify alternative financing options based on the 2019 City Council's
approved design for the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park Project. KTS
presented the procurement and financing options to the Finance Advisory Committee
(FAC) on February 25, 2021. A copy of the presentation given to the FAC on February
25 is attached (Attachment L).
According to the presentation provided to the FAC, there are generally two major
components to consider funding this City capital project:
I. Procurement Options
o Traditional
▪ The City is responsibility from start to finish of the project.
▪ May take longer to complete.
▪ Flexible financing options.
o Total Project Delivery
▪ The City is not responsible for the project installation.
▪ Guaranteed delivery.
▪ Limited to lease payment.
o Design-Build
▪ One contractor to design and build.
▪ The City is responsibility from start to finish of the project.
▪ Streamline process to reduce the time to complete.
▪ Flexible financing options.
FY 2020-21 Proposed Increase
Salaries & benefits 47,400 127,300 79,900
Supplies 1,000 6,500 5,500
Utilities 28,200 27,700 (500)
Maintenance 115,000 76,800 (38,200)
TOTAL 191,600 238,300 46,700
C-83
The P3 (public private partnership) model was not presented as a procurement option
because of the size of the project. A desirable P3 project for most developers would have
to be in the range of $50 million or more. Moreover, since most of the design work has
been completed, it too is less desirable for a P3 developer.
II. Financing Options
o Current Resources
▪ Cash reserve
▪ Grants
▪ Special revenues
o Issue Securities
▪ Loan
▪ General Obligation Bonds – requires an affirmative vote of 2/3 of
registered voters
▪ Lease Revenue Bonds – no voter requirement
o Lease
▪ Direct Lease – non-tax exempt, term of less than 30 years
▪ Total Project Delivery – tax exempt, 30-year term
As illustrated on Page 11 of the FAC presentation (Attachment L), financing 100% of the
project is the most expensive financing method. The general obligat ion bond requires
an affirmative vote of 2/3 and has to be on a ballot during a November election. The
lease revenue bond does not require a 2/3 vote but it needs a good credit rating to take
advantage of a low interest rate. A capital loan with iBank is s ubject to credit check and
project review. These financing options have at least a 20-year term. Table 9 below
provides an example of the financing cost per $1 million as presented by KTS on
February 25, 2021.
Table 9. Financing Comparison Per $1 Million
Based on the information provided above and discussion at the FAC meeting, if the
project budget is deemed acceptable to the City Council, Staff will bring the information
back to the FAC at a meeting tentatively scheduled for April 22nd for further discussion
and recommendations for consideration by the City Council tentatively at its May 4,
2021 meeting.
Variable 100% Cash
50% Cash
50% Financed 100% Financed
Principal amount N/A $515,000 $1,025,000
Financing costs -$ 10,300$ 20,500$
Total principal & interest payment -$ 789,800$ 1,569,350$
Cash 1,000,000$ 500,000$ -$
Total spent on project 1,000,000$ 1,289,800$ 1,569,350$
All-in interest cost N/A 3.16%3.16%
Average annual payment N/A 26,327$ 52,312$
C-84
Project Timeline
If the City Council approves the requested land -use applications for the Ladera Linda
Community Center and Park, the project timeline will be as follows:
• Completion of Construction Documents: approximately three months
• Permitting: approximately two months
• Bidding: approximately four months
Design changes directed by the City Council could increase the project timeline by up to
three months, depending on the changes.
MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION
Appeal Hearing Participation
Staff invited the Planning Commission Chairman Gordon Leon to participate in the City
Council appeal hearing. Staff also invited Steve Johnson of Johnson Favaro and his
consultant team, including the cost estimator, to participate in the public hearing.
Advisory Committee Update
Staff provided the Infrastructure Management Advisory Committee (IMAC), Civic Center
Advisory Committee (CCAC) and the FAC with a presentation of the Ladera Linda
Community Center and Park project for informational purposes.
ALTERNATIVES
In addition to the staff recommendation, the following alternative actions are available
for the City Council’s consideration:
1. Provide staff with further project input and continue the public hearing to the May
4, 2021 City Council meeting in order to provide staff with an opportunity to
incorporate feedback.
2. Uphold the Planning Commission’s approval of the Ladera Linda Community
Center and Park planning entitlements with no modifications to the approved
Conditions of Approval.
3. Overturn the Planning Commission’s approval of the Ladera Linda Community
Center and Park planning entitlements thereby denying the project.
C-85
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES UPHOLDING THE PLANNING
COMMISSION-APPROVED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,
MAJOR GRADING PERMIT, VARIANCE AND SITE PLAN
REVIEW FOR THE LADERA LINDA COMMUNITY CENTER
AND PARK PROJECT WITH MODIFICATIONS TO THE
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (CASE NO. PLCU2020-
0007).
WHEREAS, on August 20, 2019, after a comprehensive public outreach and
engagement effort, the City Council approved the Ladera Linda Community Center and
Park Master Plan, which included approving the design of the replacement Community
Center, landscaping, ancillary site improvements, as well as factors such as park security,
staffing levels and facility rentals; and,
WHEREAS, on October 15, 2019, the City Council reviewed roof design options
and directed Staff to study the installation of a solar roof option as part of the detailed
construction drawings phase; and,
WHEREAS, on December 10, 2020, a 15-day public notice for the public hearing
on the project-required planning entitlements was sent to property owners within a 500 -
foot radius of the project site, interested parties, as well as published in the Peninsula
News; and,
WHEREAS, on December 31, 2020, an amended public notice was issued to
identify additional required project applications that were not previously outlined in the
original public notice; and,
WHEREAS, on January 26, 2021, the Planning Commission held a public hearing
regarding the proposed project to review plans for the replacement of the Ladera Linda
Community Center and Park, as it relates to Chapter 17 (Zoning) of the Rancho Palo
Verdes Municipal Code, and continued the public hearing to February 23, 2021, in order
to provide staff an opportunity to assess input and incorporate project feedback as
necessary; and,
WHEREAS, on February 23, 2021, the Planning Commission held a public hearing
to further discuss the subject project and after considering public testimony adopted P.C.
Resolution No. 2021-02, conditionally approving the requested Conditional Use Permit,
Major Grading Permit, Variance and Site Plan review with minute-order recommendations
to the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, on February 24, 2021, the City Council Public Facilities
Subcommittee, consisting of Mayor Alegria and Councilmember Cruikshank, notified City
Manager Mihranian to request that an item be placed on the next available agenda for
C-86
the City Council to consider whether to appeal the Planning Commission’s approval of
the subject project; and,
WHEREAS, on March 2, 2021, the City Council approved the filing of an appeal to
the Planning Commission’s approval of the subject project and setting the appeal hearing
date to April 6, 2021; and
WHEREAS, on March 11, 2021, a 15-day public notice of the public hearing
regarding the appeal was provided to all property owners within a 500 foot radius of the
Property and published in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News; and
WHEREAS, Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act,
Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et. seq. ("CEQA"), the State's CEQA Guidelines,
California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et. seq., the City's Local CEQA
Guidelines, and Government Code the proposed project has been found to be
categorically exempt under Section 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction) of the CEQA
Guidelines. Specifically, the project consists of the reconstruction of an existing facility
where the new structure will be located on the same site as the structure(s) replaced and
will have substantially the same purpose and capacity; and,
WHEREAS, on April 6, 2021, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing,
at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present
evidence.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS
VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The above recitals are hereby incorporated into this Resolution as
set forth herein.
Section 2: The project involves the demolition of five existing buildings,
parking, ancillary site improvements and landscaping to accommodate the construction
of a new 6,790ft2 single-story community center building measuring 16’-6¼” in height,
parking for 54 cars on-site, play areas, landscaping, ancillary site improvements and
9,000 yd3 of combined balanced on-site grading (4,500 yd3 of cut and 4,500 yd3 of fill).
Section 3: The Conditional Use Permit for the new Ladera Linda Park, 6,790 ft2
single-story community center, play areas, landscaping, and ancillary site improvements
is warranted based on the following findings:
A. The project site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the
proposed use. The project site is approximately 11.031 acres in size and
currently utilized as a park and Community Center with multiple facility
buildings, surface parking, playground paving, equipment and paddle tennis
C-87
courts, fields, landscaping and emergency preparedness storage
containers. The proposed project includes the demolition of the existing
facilities and improvements, with the exception of the paddle tennis courts,
to construct a single Community Center structure that would be
approximately 37% of the total gross square footage of the existing facility.
Consequently, the new building would occupy a significantly smaller
footprint than the existing buildings and be located in the middle of the
existing built areas of the Park. The proposed Community Center an d
ancillary facilities are sited throughout the 11.031 -acre tiered site, so as to
provide enhanced setbacks to adjacent properties and provide enhanced
line of sight from the perimeter of the property for security purposes. The
proposed 54 on-site parking spaces, which consist of four ADA spaces, four
dedicated spaces for clean air vehicles (one Van ADA space included),
exceed the parking stalls required for both weekend (42 spaces) and
weekday (15 spaces) conditions for the proposed project as outlined in the
latest edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s Parking
Generation Manual (5th Edition, 2019).
B. The proposed project relates to streets and highways sufficient to carry the
type and quantity of traffic generated by the use. The project replaces the
existing Community Center facility, comprised of several buildings, with a
single building that would be less than 40% of the total square footage of
the existing facilities. In addition, the new building would occupy a smaller
footprint than the existing Community Center buildings within the existing
built areas of the Park. Furthermore, the Project will not result in any
increases to the existing uses, programming, and activities. Rather, uses,
programming and activities are proposed to be limited and regulated, and
would, therefore, have substantially the same purpose, but with less
capacity than the existing facility that will be replaced. The park does not
create a cumulative impact on traffic within the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes. The traffic on Forrestal Drive is mostly attributed to the only outlet
to over 160 single family homes off Pirate Drive. The proposed Park and
Community Center does not affect the traffic signal warrant at the
intersection of Palos Verdes Drive South and Forrestal/ Trump National.
C. The project site is currently improved with a park use and will continue to
serve as such as part of the proposed project. The new Community Center
will serve all residents and the community, particularly those located on the
east side of the City, as an area for recreational opportunities as well as for
emergency preparedness activities such as, but not limited to, a cooling
center and storage location. The height of the proposed Community Center
is 16 feet- 6 ¼ inches and will not create a significant adverse effect, as
residential properties to the east and south of the project site have views of
the ocean and Catalina Island oriented in the opposite direction of the
C-88
proposed building. Furthermore, the building pad of the proposed
Community Center will be located approximately 25 feet below the street of
access (Forrestal Drive), therefore views from the street and adjacent trails
can be observed over the proposed building height. The project will not
result in any adverse safety or security impacts, as the City Council design -
approved project includes a comprehensive list of safety measures and
designs such as the incorporation of a surveillance system, motion and
glass break sensors, perimeter fencing, and lighting design. The project will
not result in adverse noise impacts as the project incorporates construction
noise regulations, hours of operation for the community center and
limitations on mechanical equipment noise. The project ligh ting will not
result in an adverse impact because the site lighting has been designed to
comply with RPVMC regulations and to provide for park safety and security.
D. The use of the property for a park and community center is consistent with
the Institutional- Public General Plan land use designation for the site. The
project site is currently a park with a community center and will continue to
be utilized as such. The new park and community center will serve all
residents and the community, particularly th ose located on the east side of
the City, as an area for recreational opportunities as well as for emergency
preparedness activities such as, but not limited to, a cooling center and
storage location. Furthermore, the Conservation and Open Space Element
of the City’s 2018 General Plan Update (pg. COS-39) identified the Ladera
Linda Park and Community Center as an Institutional-Public land use with
passive and active amenities including playground and sports equipment,
multipurpose rooms and classrooms as well as ancillary site improvements
including a parking lot and restrooms. The General Plan also notes that a
Master Plan process for the Ladera Linda Park and Community Center was
included in the Parks Master Plan Update.
Section 4: The Variance for the construction of retaining walls up to 15½ feet in
height to support ADA complaint ramps between the middle -tier and upper-tiers of the
park is warranted based on the following findings:
A. The project site was originally developed as an elementary school wit h
multiple classroom buildings and play areas on a three-tiered site due to the
unique and steep topographic conditions in the area, which have been used
as a community center and park facilities since the 1980s. The three tiers
include a lower, middle, and upper tier with 5-foot to 15-foot transitional
slopes between the tiers. The project proposes to maintain the same three-
tier park layout and will also include new accessible walking paths and
ramps to enhance accessibility and walkability throughout th e project site.
In order to accommodate an ADA-compliant accessible ramp between the
middle and upper tiers of the park, the project proposes to construct a
C-89
retaining wall with an overall height of up to 15½ feet. The existing site
development and requirement to provide for enhanced accessibility to meet
ADA requirements present exceptional circumstances that warrant the need
to construct a retaining wall that exceeds the height limitations established
in the RPVMC. Although other Institutional-zoned properties in the City were
developed with similar topographic conditions, the project site is unique in
that it was previously developed as an elementary school and the project
proposes to re-develop the site but maintain the existing park’s tiered layout
but meet current accessibility requirements.
B. The construction of the proposed retaining wall up to 15½ feet in height are
necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property
right, which right is possessed by other property owners under like
conditions in the same zoning district. The project site is encumbered by
steep topographical conditions in certain areas of the project site, including
transitional slopes between the various tiers of the park that are not present
in other developed Institutional zoned properties. As a public facility, owned
and operated by the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, the City is r equired to
provide for ADA accessibility throughout the site and to ensure the safety of
the public.
C. The construction of the proposed retaining wall up to 15½ feet in height to
accommodate an ADA access ramp will not be materially detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to property and improvement in the area, as the
construction of the proposed wall will be reviewed and inspected by the
City’s Building and Safety Division for conformance with the California
Building Code and associated geological requirements. In addition, the
proposed retaining wall will support the transition slope between the middle
and upper tiers of the park. Not granting the Variance application request
for the construction of retaining walls up to 15½ feet in height and not
accommodating an ADA accessible ramp would in fact be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to visitors of the park.
D. The variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the General Plan or
the policies and requirements of the Coastal Specific Plan. The project site
is not located in the City’s Coastal Specific Plan. The use of the property as
a park and community center is consistent with the City’s updated General
Plan. The Conservation and Open Space Element (Pg. COS-6) of the City’s
General Plan includes goals and policies related to Open -Space and
Recreation Resources, which promote public access to all recreational land
and building additional parks and playfields, where appropriate, for multiple
use by various groups. The proposed retaining wall with an overall height
of 15 ½ feet, will provide enhanced ADA accessibility to recreational land
and for the use of various groups.
C-90
Section 5: The Major Grading Permit to conduct 9,000 yd3 of combined grading
consisting of 4,500 yd3 of cut and 4,500 yd3 of fill with grading above 5 feet in height is
warranted based on the following findings:
A. The grading does not exceed that which is necessary for the permitted
primary use of the lot. The proposed project is in an Institutional Zoning
District, in which the primary use of the lot is a park and Community Center.
The new park and community center will serve all residents and the
community, particularly those located on the east side of the City, as an
area for recreational opportunities as well as for emergency preparedness
activities such as, but not limited to, a cooling center and storage location.
The proposed 9,000 yd3 of grading will be balanced on-site therefore
avoiding the need to export or import soil or rock. Furthermore, the
proposed grading will be limited to the existing developed portions of the
site, which have been previously graded to support existing improvements.
The project grading proposes targeted cut and fill into po rtions of the
existing site to accommodate the proposed park and community center,
parking lot, tiered seating, walking paths, ADA compliant accessible ramp,
and other ancillary park improvements. In addition, the proposed grading
will enhance adequate drainage of the site.
B. The proposed project and associated grading will not significantly adversely
affect the visual relationships with, nor the views from the viewing areas of
neighboring properties because the project site is currently improved with
an existing park, building facilities, and ancillary site improvements. The
proposed grading will continue to accommodate a park use and a single
community center building that would be less than 40% of the total square
footage of the existing facility. In addition, the new community center would
occupy a smaller footprint than the community center buildings within the
existing built areas of the Park. The proposed building height will not create
a significant adverse effect, as the height of the community center, as a
result of the site grading, will not impact views as observed from neighboring
properties due to the topographic conditions in the area. Residential
properties to the east and south of the project site have views of the ocean
and Catalina Island oriented in the opposite direction of the proposed
building. Finally, the building pad of the proposed community center will be
located approximately 25 feet below the street of access (Forrestal Drive),
whereby views from the street and adjacent trails can be observed over the
proposed building height.
C. The nature of the grading minimizes disturbance to the natural contours and
finished contours are reasonably natural because the proposed grading is
generally limited to developed portions of the site. In addition, the proposed
C-91
grading maintains a majority of the existing contours surrounding the
developed areas on the project site. The project proposes to maintain the
existing transitional slope along the south and southwest of the site as well
as the slopes between the project site and Forrestal Drive. The finished
contours of the project will blend with the existing contours on the existing
site.
D. The grading takes into account the preservation of natural topographic
features and appearances by means of land sculpturing . The project site
has been previously graded to accommodate the existing park, parking lot
and ancillary site improvements. The proposed grading is generally limited
to developed portions of the site. Moreover, the proposed grading generally
follows the existing slope of the property and re sults in finished slopes that
appear reasonably natural. Additionally, although some land-sculpturing is
proposed to occur, it is designed so as to blend the manufactured slopes
into the natural topography.
E. The grading would not cause excessive and unnecessary disturbance of
the natural landscape or wildlife habitat through removal of vegetation
because the proposed grading area does not contain natural landscape or
wildlife habitat. The proposed grading is limited to areas of the project site
that have been previously graded to accommodate existing structures and
ancillary site improvements.
F. The grading conforms to the City’s standards for grading on slopes,
maximum finished slopes, maximum depth of cut and fill, and retaining wall
heights with the exception grading on slopes over 50% steepness and the
construction of a retaining wall up to 6 feet-11 inches in height along the
driveway in the immediate area of the mechanical and refuse enclosures.
The proposed grading over slopes with 50% and the retaining wall are
consistent with the purpose of the Grading Permit because it will result in
the reasonable development of the project site. In additi on, the proposed
grading and retaining wall will contribute to the overall site accessibility and
retention of groundcover to aid against flooding, erosion and other similar
hazards. Furthermore, the scenic character of the neighborhood would not
be altered as the retaining wall along the driveway would not be readily
visible from the public right-of-way as the location of the wall be located
below the Forrestal Drive street level. The proposed grading and retaining
wall will comply with the goals and policies of the General Plan, as the
project supports policies for public health/ safety related to the environment.
More specifically, the proposed retaining wall is required to be designed to
performance standards that ensure both engineering standards and the
topographic treatment of slopes on the property. Furthermore, the City’s
geotechnical consultant and the Building Official will be required to review
C-92
and approve engineered grading plans prior to grading permit issuance and
inspections will be conducted throughout the process. With these
provisions, the proposed deviation will not cause a detrimental impact to
public safety and/or other properties in the vicinity of the project. Notice of
this decision shall be given to the Applicant and to all owners of property
adjacent to the property
Section 6: The Site Plan Review for the proposed ancillary site improvements
including, but not limited to, the accessory structures, flag pole, mechanical equipment
and parking comply with all applicable Code requirements.
Section 7: In order to further mitigate any potential project impacts to
neighboring properties in the area, the City Council also modifies the Planning-
Commission approved Conditions of Approval to include the following Conditions of
Approval:
• Condition No. 72 - Prior to on-site grading or construction activities, the City shall
place all Discovery Room exhibits/displays into storage at Point Vicente
Interpretive Center or at other City facilities as deemed appropriate. After
construction is complete, the exhibits/displays that are not incorporated into the
Discovery Room, shall remain in storage.
• Condition No. 73 - Prior to on-site grading or construction activities, the City shall
conduct a traffic engineering study to collect baseline traffic data in the ar ea of
the park.
• Condition No. 74 - The City shall perform a parking demand analysis to assess
alternatives for the development of a parking management program as part of the
annual compliance review.
• Condition No. 75 - The access stairs between the upper tier of the project site
and the adjacent property in the area of the lower soccer fields shall be removed
as part of the park reconstruction.
Section 8: Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act,
Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et. seq. ("CEQA"), the State's CEQA Guidelines,
California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et. seq., the City's Local CEQA
Guidelines, and Government Code the proposed project has been found to be
categorically exempt under Section 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction) of the CEQA
Guidelines. Specifically, the project consists of the reconstruction of an existing facility
where the new structure will be located on the same site as the structure(s) replaced and
will have substantially the same purpose and capacity.
C-93
Section 9: The City Clerk shall certify to the passage, approval, and adoption
of this Resolution, and shall cause this Resolution and her certification to be entered in
the Book of Resolutions of the City Council.
Section 10: The time within which judicial review of the decision reflected in this
Resolution must be sought is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil
Procedure and/or Section 21167 of the California Public Resources Code.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 6th day of April 2021.
_________________________________
Eric Alegria, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES )
I, __________, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, do hereby certify that the
above Resolution No. 2021-__, was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said
City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on April 6, 2021.
__________________________________
CITY CLERK
C-94
EXHIBIT 'A'
LADERA LINDA COMMUNITY CENTER AND PARK PROJECT
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, VARIANCE,
MAJOR GRADING PERMIT & SITE PLAN REVIEW
(CASE NO. PLCU-0007)
1. Approval of this permit shall not be construed as a waiver of applicable and
appropriate zoning regulations, or any Federal, State, County and/or City laws and
regulations. Unless otherwise expressly specified, all other requirements of the
City of Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code (RPVMC) shall apply.
2. No later than one year after the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the
Community Center building, the City Council shall review the Conditions of
Approval contained herein at a duly noticed public hearing. As part of the review,
the City Council Commission shall assess the project’s compliance with the
Conditions of Approval and the adequacy of the conditions imposed. At that time,
the City Council may add, delete, or modify any conditions of approval as evidence
presented at the hearing demonstrates are necessary and appropriate to address
impacts resulting from operation of the project. Notice of the review hearing shall
be published and provided to owners of property within a 500-foot radius of the
site, to persons requesting notice, to all affected homeowners associations, and to
the property owner, in accordance with the RPVMC. As part of this review, the City
Council shall consider, among other things, the parking conditions, circulation
patterns, lighting, landscaping, noise, and operational hours. The City Council may
require such subsequent additional reviews, as the City Council deems
appropriate. This provision shall not be construed as a limitation on the City’s ability
to enforce any provision of the RPVMC regarding this project.
The City Council may remand this review to the Planning Commission to provide
recommendations in the advisory capacity. In this case, the Planning Commission
shall conduct a duly noticed public hearing pursuant to public notification
requirements stated above.
3. Pursuant to RPVMC Section 17.78.040, the Director of Community Development
is authorized to make minor modifications to the approved plans and any of the
conditions of approval if such modifications will achieve substantially the same
results as would strict compliance with the approved plans and conditions.
Substantial changes to the project shall be considered a revision and require
approval by the final body that approved the original project, which may require
new and separate environmental review and public notification.
4. The project development on the site shall conform to the specific standards
C-95
contained in these Conditions of Approval or, if not addressed herein, shall
conform to the Institutional zoning district development standards of the RPVMC,
including but not limited to height, setback standards.
5. In the event that any of these conditions conflict with the recommendations and/or
requirements of another permitting agency or City department, the stricter standard
shall apply.
6. Unless otherwise designated in these conditions, all construction shall be
completed in substantial conformance with the plans stamped APPROVED by the
City with the effective date of this Resolution.
7. This approval is only for the items described within these conditions and identified
on the stamped APPROVED plans and is not an approval of any existing illegal or
legal non-conforming structures on the property, unless the approval of such illegal
or legal non-conforming structure is specifically identified within these conditions
or on the stamped APPROVED plans.
8. The construction site and adjacent public and private properties and streets shall
be kept free of all loose materials resembling trash and debris in excess of that
material used for immediate construction purposes. Such excess ma terial may
include, but not be limited to: the accumulation of debris, garbage, lumber, scrap
metal, concrete asphalt, piles of earth, salvage materials, abandoned or discarded
furniture, appliances or other household fixtures.
9. All construction sites shall be maintained in a secure, safe, neat and orderly
manner, to the satisfaction of the City’s Building Official. All construction waste and
debris resulting from a construction, alteration or repair project shall be removed
on a weekly basis by the contractor or property owner. Existing or temporary
portable bathrooms shall be provided during construction. Portable bathrooms
shall be placed in a location that will minimize disturbance to the surrounding
property owners, to the satisfaction of the City’s Building Official.
10. Permitted hours and days for construction activity are 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday, with no construction
activity permitted on Sundays or on the legal holidays specified in RPVMC Section
17.96.920. During demolition, construction and/or grading operations, trucks shall
not park, queue and/or idle at the project site or in the adjoining street rights -of-
way before 7:00 a.m. Monday through Friday and before 9:00 a.m. on Saturday,
in accordance with the permitted hours of construction stated in this condition.
When feasible to do so, the construction contractor shall provide staging areas on -
site to minimize off-site transportation of heavy construction equipment. These
areas shall be located to maximize the distance between staging activities and
neighboring properties, subject to approval by the building official.
C-96
11. If construction projects that are accessible from a street right-of-way or an abutting
property and which remain in operation or expect to remain in operation for over
30 calendar days, the City shall provide temporary construction fencing, as defined
in RPVMC Section 17.56.050(C). Unless required to protect against a safety
hazard, temporary construction fencing shall not be erected sooner than 15 days
prior to commencement of construction.
Project Specific Conditions
12. This approval allows for the following:
• Demolition of five existing buildings (18,574 ft2 in gross area), parking,
ancillary site improvements and landscaping;
• Construction of a new 6,790 gross ft2 single-story building (community
center) and adjacent 137 ft2 of covered patio areas with an overall height of
16 feet – 6 ¼ inches;
• Construction of a 400 ft2 storage facility at 12 feet in height for City and
emergency supplies;
• Construction of a 54-stall parking lot located adjacent to building and
playground, including four clean air vehicle spaces;
• Construction of a naturalistic children’s playground area in the upper
terrace;
• Construction of one full basketball court and a half-court basketball court in
the upper terrace;
• Renovation of two existing paddle tennis courts in the upper t errace;
• Construction of walking paths throughout park area along with upper and
lower lawn areas;
• Construction of an outdoor tiered seating area between the middle - and
upper- terraces;
• Construction of a lawn area in the lower terrace;
• Utilization of existing Forrestal Drive entrance into the park;
• Installation of low-impact, native and drought-tolerant landscaping,
including 30-foot to 100-foot buffer zone between the building and southerly
slope;
• 9,000 cubic yards combined balanced on-site grading (4,500 cubic yards of
cut and 4,500 cubic yards of fill);
• Grading cut and fill over 5 feet in height to support an Americans with
Disability Act (ADA) access ramp between the middle- and upper terraces;
• Construction of retaining and combination walls to a maximum height of
15 ½ feet to accommodate accessibility and ADA compliant ramps;
• Installation of a new 12-foot flagpole;
• Construction of mechanical equipment and refuse storage area;
C-97
• Installation of new bike and storage area;
• Installation of vehicular entry gate for park security; and,
• Installation of on-site lighting.
13. The height of the proposed community center shall be 16 feet-6 ¼ inches tall, as
measured from the highest existing grade covered by the structure
(elev. 448.00 feet) to the highest roof ridgeline (464.525 feet).
BUILDING HEIGHT CERTIFICATION IS REQUIRED TO BE PROVIDED BY A
LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR OR CIVIL ENGINEER PRIOR TO ROOF
SHEATHING INSPECTION.
14. The height of the proposed accessory storage building shall not exceed a height
of 12 feet as measured as measured from the lowest preconstruction grade
adjacent to the foundation wall to the ridge.
15. Unless modified by the approval of future planning applications, the approved
community center building and storage building shall maintain the following
setbacks:
• Front & Street Side- 25 feet (abutting a dedicated street)
• Interior Side & Rear- 20 feet
Grading Permit Conditions
16. The following maximum quantities and depths of grading are approved for the
project site as shown on the grading plan reviewed and approved by the City
Council:
a. 9,000 cubic yards of combined on-site grading (4,500 cubic yards of cut and
4,500 cubic yards of fill) with retaining walls up to 12 feet in height in support
of the proposed improvements.
b. Cut and fill depths up to 10 feet in height
No export or import of earth material shall occur with the exception of base material
and other construction related material.
17. The Director of Community Development shall be authorized to allow deviations to
the project grading quantities up to 200 cubic yards over the stated maximum
quantities for unforeseen circumstances due to conditions encountered in the field
provided that such deviation or modification to the grading quantities achieve
substantially the same results as with the strict compliance with the grading plan.
C-98
Any modifications resulting in additional grading in excess of the above amounts
shall require approval of an amendment to the grading permit by the City Council
at a duly noticed public hearing. This is a balanced grading project. No export or
import of earth shall be permitted, except for rock material or fine grading materials,
such as select fill.
18. Prior to the final inspection of the precise grading, a certified as -built grading plan
prepared and wet-stamped by a license engineer shall be reviewed and approved
by the Building Official and the Director of Public Works. If applicable, the as -built
grading plan shall identify any revisions to the grading plan.
19. For all grading, landscaping and construction activities, the City shall employ
effective dust control techniques, either through screening and/or watering.
20. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING OR BUILDING PERMITS, haul routes to
transport soil shall be approved by the Public Works Department, if applicable.
21. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF GRADING OR BUILDING PERMITS, the
contractor shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director of Community
Development how dust generated by the grading activities will be mitigated, so as
to comply with the South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 and the
RPVMC requirements, which require watering for the control of dust.
22. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF GRADING OR BUILDING PERMITS, the project
geologist shall review and approve final plans and specifications and shall stamp
and sign such plans and specifications.
23. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING OR BUILDING PERMITS, the City shall
submit for review and approval a drainage plan that complies with the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits for stormwater
discharges.
24. All grading shall be monitored by a licensed engineering geologist and/or soils
engineer in accordance with the applicable provisions of the RPMVC and the
recommendations of the Director of Public Works. Written reports, summarizing
grading activities, shall be submitted on a weekly basis to t he Director of Public
Works and the City’s Building Official.
25. Grading activity on-site shall occur in accordance with all applicable City safety
standards.
26. If applicable, any water features, including bioswales, shall be lined to prevent
percolation of water into the soil. Designs of all water features shall be included on
the grading plans submitted for review by the City’s Building Official and the City’s
C-99
Geologist prior to the issuance of any grading permits.
27. Prior to the final grading inspection by the Building and Safety Division, the graded
slopes shall be properly maintained in accordance with the project landscape plan.
Plan materials shall generally include significant low ground cover to impede
surface water flows.
Safety Conditions
28. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY GRADING OR BUILDING PERMITS, the
project plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Los Angeles Count y Fire
Department to ensure compliance with the fire code and fuel modification
requirements.
29. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY GRADING OR BUILDING PERMITS, the
City shall contract with a security consultant to develop a Safety & Security Plan,
which incorporates the following safety design elements:
• Clear points of entry and improved sight lines in the final design;
• Appropriately placed exterior and interior security cameras and motion
sensors with lighting;
• Appropriate low-level landscaping;
• Control of ingress and egress points during operating hou rs and non-
operating hours;
• Glass break sensors;
• On-site security lighting incorporating comprehensive best practices in
lighting design throughout the park grounds and building;
• Ability to secure park perimeter at night through fencing and improved
entrance gates for both pedestrian and vehicular access points;
• Ability to make restroom and vestibule area secured and inaccessible
during community center non-operating hours;
• Reduction/elimination of blind spots; ,
• Increased utilization of the park combined with increased staff supervision
30. The on-site surveillance system, including security cameras and motion sensors
shall be maintained by the City in perpetuity.
31. The community center open lobby, restrooms and accompanying sink areas shall
be designed to be secured on a nightly basis with a roll-down security gate or other
means to secure the area and prevent hour use.
C-100
Landscape and Park Improvement Conditions
32. A final Landscape Plan shall be prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect in
accordance with the standards set forth in the RPVMC. The Landscape Plan shall
be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development, a qualified
Landscape Architect, and/or an Arborist hired by the City, prior to the issuance of
any building or grading permits. The Landscape Plan shall include, at include, a
minimum, the plant species (Latin and common names), growth rate, and
maximum height at maturity of all proposed trees. During the Director’s review, the
Landscape Plan shall also be made available to the public for review.
The Landscape Plan shall comply with the City’s Water Efficient Landscape
Ordinance, the View Preservation Ordinance, the planting requirements, the
irrigation system design criteria, and all other requirements RPVMC. All new trees
and foliage shall not exceed 16-feet in height, as measured from the grade
adjacent to the tree or foliage. The Landscape Plan shall also include an Integrated
Pest Management Plan that addresses the use of grass-cycling and pesticides for
the lawn and landscape areas.
33. Prior to approval of the landscape plan, the project shall comply with the City’s Low
Impact Development Ordinance, as applicable.
Construction Conditions
34. All construction vehicles onsite shall minimize idling time by requiring that
equipment be shut down after 5 minutes when not in use (as required by the State
airborne toxics control measure, 13 CCR § 2485). Clear signs that lists this
requirement shall be posted with the requirements for workers at the entrances to
the site and provide a plan for the enforcement of this requirement including a
phone number to contact a designated City employee (i.e. project manager).
35. Unless safety provisions require otherwise, the construction contractor shall adjust
all audible back‐up alarms to the lowest volume appropriate for safety purposes
(i.e. still maintaining adequate signal‐to‐noise ratio for alarm effectiveness). The
contractor shall consider signal persons, strobe lights, or alternative safety
equipment and/or processes as allowed for reducing reliance on high ‐amplitude
sonic alarms.
36. The project shall utilize construction equipment equipped with standard noise
insulating features during construction to reduce source noise levels.
37. All project construction equipment shall be properly maintained to assure that no
additional noise, due to worn or improperly maintained parts is generated.
C-101
38. Construction of the project should not impede upon any City Council-approved
public trails in the immediate area.
39. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY GRADING OR BUILDING PERMITS, a
Staging Plan shall be prepared and reviewed by the Director of Community
Development, which includes, but is not limited to, the identification of equipment
staging and construction-associated parking.
Operational Conditions
40. Pursuant to RPVMC Section 12.16.030, the Ladera Linda park ground hours shall
be one hour before sunrise to one hour after sunset, seven days a week, or as
designated by City Council action.
41. The Ladera Linda parking lot shall be open at 8:00 a.m. to dusk, seven days a
week, or as designated by City Council action.
42. The Ladera Linda Park Community Center hours shall be 8:00 a.m. to 9 p.m. seven
days a week, or as designated by City Council action. Operating hours may be
extended if rentals are scheduled, or for City conducted business, such as public
meetings.
43. Rental for purposes of the use of the community center shall mean any contracted
or permitted use of a park facility by an individual, business, non -profit, HOA, or
the City, and hours of use shall be limited to between 10:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m.
44. Classes (instructor-led class, either private or City-sponsored) shall be conducted
only between 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m.
45. No more than two private rentals per month shall be allowed after 5 :00 p.m. This
restriction shall not apply to non-profits, City events, or HOA rentals.
46. No more than eight special events (a large City-sponsored or permitted private
event) shall be allowed per calendar year. Special events that extend until after
9:00 P.M. shall only be permitted upon approval of a Special Event Permit.
47. All maintenance and grounds-keeping equipment shall be entirely enclosed when
not in use.
Parking Conditions
48. No fewer than 54 on-site parking spaces consisting of 47 standard parking spaces
at a minimum of 9 feet wide by 20 feet deep, one electric vehicle space, one ADA
electric van accessible space, three clean air vehicle spaces and three ADA
C-102
accessible spaces.
49. All parking, loading and access shall comply with RPVMC Chapter 17.50
(Nonresidential Parking and Loading Standards).
50. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY GRADING OR BUILDING PERMITS, a
Parking Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community
Development that shall include, but not be limited to, parking striping, directional
arrows, wheel stops or curbs, landscaping, way finding signs and other necessary
parking and circulation amenities.
51. All proposed driveways and aisle shall be designed in substantially the same
alignment as shown on the propose project site plan, subject to final design review
and approval by the Los Angeles County Fire Department and Director of Public
Works.
52. Prior to the installation of the bicycle storage lockers, a color sample for the
locker exterior shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community
Development.
On-Site Walk and Pathway Conditions
53. The location and number of on-site walk and pathways shall generally comply with
the project plans. These walk and pathways shall be constructed pursuant to the
standards approved by the Director of Public Works.
54. Handicap access ramps shall be installed in accordance with the current standards
established by the Americans with Disabilities Act.
55. All sidewalks and pathways throughout the project site shall be designed to comply
with the minimum width standards set forth in the most recent Disabled
Accessibility Guidebook.
Site Lighting Conditions
56. The Lighting Plan approved by the City Council shall comply with the Non-
Residential Outdoor Light Ordinance pursuant to RPVMC Section 17.56.040. An
as-built lighting plan shall be submitted to the City prior to the final inspection and
shall include, but not limited to, the location, height, number of lights, wattage and
estimates of maximum illumination on site and spill/glare at properties lines for all
exterior circulation lighting, outdoor building lighting, walking and sidewalk lighting,
parking lot lighting, landscape ambiance lighting and sign lighting. The Lighting
Plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Director of Community
Development prior to the issuance of any building permit.
C-103
57. An Illuminated mock-up of one of the proposed -10-foot high light poles shall be
placed prior to installation for review by the Director of Community Development.
58. There shall be a trial period of thirty (30) days from the installation of all the project
exterior lighting, including building and parking lot lighting, during which the lighting
shall be assessed for potential impacts to the surrounding properties. At the end
of the thirty (30) day period, the Director of Community Development may require
additional screening or reduction in the intensity or numbers of lights which are
determined to be excessively bright or otherwise create adverse impacts.
Furthermore, said lighting shall be reviewed as part of the one-year compliance
review described in Condition No. 3.
59. Parking and security lighting shall be kept to minimum safety standards and shall
conform to City requirements. Fixtures shall be shielded to emit light below 90
degrees so that only the project site is illuminated; there shall be no spillover onto
residential properties or halo into the night sky.
60. No outdoor lighting is permitted where the light source or fixture, if located on a
building, is above the line of the eaves. If the light source or fixture is located on a
building with no eaves, or if located on a standard or pole, the light source or fixture
shall not be more than 10 feet above existing grade, adjacent to the building or
pole.
61. The parking lot light standards shall be limited to a maximum height of 10 feet, as
measured from adjacent finished grade.
62. The lighting bollards shall be limited to a maximum height of 42 inches, as
measured from adjacent finished grade.
63. The use of laser lights, strobe lights, flashing lights, or any similar lighting shall be
prohibited during all events.
Utility Conditions
64. Prior to issuance of the final inspection for the project grading, all new utilities
exclusively serving the project site shall be placed underground including, but not
limited to, cable, telephone, electrical, gas and water. All appropriate permits shall
be obtained for any such installation.
65. No above ground utility structure cabinets, poles, pipes, or valves shall be
constructed within the public rights-of-way without prior approval of the Director of
Public Works. If permitted, above ground utility structure cabinets, pipes, or valves
shall not impede on the pedestrian circulation flow and shall be painted a color to
C-104
the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. The use of above
ground utility poles is prohibited.
66. The project shall comply with all recorded easements on the property.
Noise and Mechanical Equipment
67. If applicable, all new mechanical equipment, regardless of its location, shall be
housed in enclosures designed to attenuate noise to a level of 65 dBA CNEL at
the project site’s property lines.
68. Mechanical equipment shall be oriented away from any sensitive receptors such
as neighboring residences, and where applicable, must be installed with any
required acoustical shielding.
69. Use of amplified sound in excess of 65 dB at the property lines shall require a
special event permit pursuant to RPVMC Section§ 12.20.040.
70. The use of indoor amplified music shall be permitted between 11:00 a.m and 8:00
p.m. Music amplification or reproduction equipment shall not be operated in such
a manner that it is plainly audible from the nearest property line in any direction
from the community center building for classes or exercise programs . Use of
amplified music outdoors shall require a special event permit; not be allowed after
9 p.m.; speakers shall be oriented away from residential property and sound shall
not be in excess of 65 dB at the property lines.
71. All deliveries of goods and supplies; trash pick -up, including the use of parking
lot trash sweepers; and the operation of machinery or mechanical equipment
which emits noise levels in excess of 65 dBA, as measured from the closest
property line to the equipment, shall only be allowed between the hours of 8:00
a.m. and dusk, Monday through Sunday .
April 6, 2021 City Council-Approved Conditions
72. Prior to on-site grading or construction activities, the City shall place all Discovery
Room exhibits/displays into storage at Point Vicente Interpretive Center or at other
City facilities as deemed appropriate. After construction is complete, the
exhibits/displays that are not incorporated into the Discovery Room, shall remain
in storage.
73. Prior to on-site grading or construction activities, the City shall conduct a traffic
engineering study to collect baseline traffic data in the area of the park.
74. The City shall perform a parking demand analysis to assess alternatives for the
C-105
development of a parking management program as part of the annual compliance
review.
75. The access stairs between the upper tier of the project site and the adjacent
property in the area of the lower soccer fields shall be removed as part of the
park reconstruction.
C-106
C-107
I
I
I
MINUTES
RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL/IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY
REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 6, 2021
CALL TO ORDER:
A Regular meeting of the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council for the purpose of a Closed
Session was called to order by Mayor Alegria at 6:04P.M. at McTaggart Hall in Fred
Hesse Community Park, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard, and via teleconference/virtual
meeting using the Zoom platform notice having been given with affidavit thereto on file.
City Council roll call was answered as follows:
PRESENT: Cruikshank, Ferraro and Mayor Alegria
ABSENT: Bradley* (excused) and Dyda* (excused)
Also present were Ara Mihranian, City Manager; Karina Baiiales, Deputy City Manager;
William W. Wynder, City Attorney; Trang Nguyen, Director of Finance; and Teresa
Takaoka, Deputy City Clerk.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
None.
CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S) ANNOUNCED:
City Attorney Wynder announced the item to be discussed in Closed Session.
1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
GC SECTION 54957.6
Agency designated representatives: Attorney William Wynder.; Ara Mihranian,
City Manager; Karina Baiiales, Deputy City Manager, Trang Nguyen, Director of
Finance
Employee Organization: Rancho Palos Verdes Employees Association
RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION (FIRESIDE ROOM):
At 6:06P.M., the Council recessed to Closed Session.
*At 6:10P.M. Councilmembers Bradley and Dyda joined the meeting in the Fireside
room.
C-108
RECONVENE TO REGULAR MEETING:
At 7:08P.M. the Closed Session was adjourned to the Regular meeting.
REGULAR MEETING -OPEN SESSION
CALL TO ORDER:
A Regular meeting of the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council was called to order by
Mayor Alegria at 7:08P.M. at Fred Hesse Community Park, McTaggart Hall, 29301
Hawthorne Boulevard, notice having been given with affidavit thereto on file.
City Council roll call was answered as follows:
PRESENT: Bradley, Cruikshank, Dyda, Ferraro, and Mayor Alegria
ABSENT: None
Also pres.ent were Ara Mihranian, City Manager; Karina Bariales, Deputy City Manager;
William W. Wynder, City Attorney; Trang Nguyen, Director of Finance; Ken Rukavina,
Director of Community Development; Cory Linder, Director of Recreation and Parks;
Ramzi Awwad, Director of Public Works; Lukasz Buchwald, Information Technology
Manager; and Teresa Takaoka, Deputy City Clerk.
Also present was Captain James Powers, Lomita Station, Los Angeles County Sheriffs
Department
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Jordan, Jacob, Billy, and Jim Hevener.
CLOSED SESSION REPORT:
City Attorney Wynder reported that the City Council met in Closed Session with its labor
negotiators to discuss labor negotiations with the Rancho Palos Verdes Employees
Association. All five members of the City Council participated in Closed Session. There
was a privileged and confidential briefing and negotiation direction was given.
MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Mayor Alegria announced that Los Angeles County has entered the Orange Tier for
coronavirus restrictions on Monday, April 5, 2021.
Mayor Alegria shared that the City of was named fourth safest city in California by
SafeWis_e.
I
I
C1ty Council Minutes I
Apnl6, 2021
Page 2 of 11
C-109
I
I
I
Mayor Alegria and City Council recognized outgoing Traffic Safety Committee member
Jim Guerin.
Mayor Alegria paid tribute to Jeffrey Frankel, Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School
District Board Member, who passed away on Sunday, April4, 2021. Mayor Alegria
noted the meeting would be adjourned in his memory.
Mayor Alegria introduced Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District
Superintendent Dr. Alex Chern iss who provided information and updates School
District's reopening process.
RECYCLE AND EMERGENCY PERSONAL PREPAREDNESS KIT DRAWING:
Mayor Alegria announced the Recycle Winners for the March 16, 2021, City Council
meeting: Clarence Choe and Andre Nizetich. He indicated that all winners receive a
check for $250 and urged everyone to participate in the City's Recycling Program. He
noted that in addition to winning the Recycler Drawing, the two individuals also won a
Personal Emergency Preparedness Kit from the City valued at $40.00.
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA:
Councilmember Cruikshank moved, seconded by Councilmember Ferraro, to approve
the agenda as presented.
The motion passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Bradley, Cruikshank, Dyda, Ferraro, and Mayor Alegria
None
PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR NON-AGENDA ITEMS:
Deputy City Clerk Takaoka reported that there were four requests to speak and one
voicemail.
The following members of the public addressed the City Council: Grace Crofton;
Mohammad Chaudhry; Teresa Lee; and Jerry Duhovic (voicemail).
CITY MANAGER REPORT:
City Manager Mihranian provided updates on the following: April1 0, 2021 Virtual Whale
of a Day; Point Vicente Interpretive Center re-opening on Monday, April12, 2021; Los
Angeles moving into the orange-tier for covid restrictions; Covid vaccination updates;
Earth Day Campaign for April 2021; Drive-thru shredding event at City Hall on Saturday,
April17, 2021; Palos Verdes Nature Preserve virtual quarterly public forum on
Wednesday, April14, 2021; and Capital Improvement Program budget workshop on
Monday, April12, 2021.
City Council M1nutes
April6, 2021
Page 3 of 11
C-110
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Deputy City Clerk Takaoka reported that late correspondence was distributed prior to
the meeting regarding Items B, F, M, and Q; and that there was one request to speak I
on Item L. She notified Council that there was an additional correction to Item B and
upon approval of the Consent Calendar, she would need to read Item P into the record
as it is an introduction and adoption of an urgency ordinance.
Councilmember Cruikshank requested that Item F be considered after Regular
Business.
Councilmember Ferraro moved, seconded by Councilmember Cruikshank, to approve
the Consent Calendar with Item L to be heard immediately after the Consent Calendar;
and Item F to be considered after Regular Business.
The motion passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Bradley, Cruikshank, Ferraro, and Mayor Alegria
None
Dyda (excused)
A. Motion to Waive Full Reading
Adopted a motion to waive reading in full of all ordinances presented at this meeting
with consent of the waiver of reading deemed to be given by all Council Members I
after the reading of the title.
B. Approval of Minutes (Takaoka)
Approved the Minutes of March 2, 2021, Regular Meeting and the March 2, 2021,
Improvement Authority Meeting Minutes, respectively.
C. Registers of Demands (Amundson)
Adopted Resolution No. 2021-12, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES, ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND
DEMANDS AND SPECIFYING FUNDS FROM WHICH THE SAME ARE TO BE
PAID; and, Adopt Resolution No. lA 2021-03, A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO
PALOS VERDES IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY, ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS
AND DEMANDS AND SPECIFYING FUNDS FROM WHICH THE SAME ARE TO
BE PAID.
D. Consideration and possible action to receive and file the February 2021 Cash
Balances/Monthly Treasurer's Report. (Lin)
C1ty Council Mmutes I
AprilS, 2021
Page 4 of 11
C-111
I
I
I
-·------------
Received and filed the February 2021 Cash Balances/Monthly Treasurer's Report
for the City and the Improvement Authority.
E. Consideration and pos·sible action to receive and file a report on safe
prescription drug disposal. (Bright)
Received and filed a report on safe prescription drug disposal.
F. Consideration and possible action to authorize the Mayor to sign a letter of
support for SB809. (Bright)
This item was removed from the Consent Calendar for separate consideration.
G. Consideration and possible action to authorize the Mayor to sign a letter of
opposition to AB 377. (Bright)
Authorized the Mayor to sign both a joint Peninsula Cities and a City letter of
opposition to AB 377.
H. Consideration and possible action to authorize the Mayor to sign a letter in
support o.f AB 1251. (Bright)
Authorized the Mayor to sign a letter in support of AB 1251.
I. Consideration and possible action to authorize the Mayor to sign a letter of
support for ACA (Assembly Constitutional Amendment) No.7. (Bright)
Authorized the Mayor to sign a letter of support for ACA No. 7.
J. Consideration and possible action to authorize the Mayor to sign a letter in
support of Assembly Joint Resolution (AJR) No. 2. (Barnes)
Authorized the Mayor to sign a letter in support of AJR No. 2, which calls on
Congress and the EPA to take action on the rediscovered DDT waste site off the
coast of Catalina Island.
K. Consideration and possible action to approve the results of the performance
audit of the City's exclusive residential solid waste hauler EDCO Disposal
Corporation (EDCO) for calendar years 2017, 2018, and 2019. (Ramezani)
Approved the results of the performance audit of the City's exclusive residential solid
waste hauler EDCO between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2019.
L. Consideration and possible action to file a Notice of Completion for the
Coastal Bluff Fence Replacement Project at Vicente Bluffs Reserve.
(Ramezani)
City Council M1nutes
Apn16, 2021
Page 5 of 11
C-112
This item was removed from the Consent Calendar for separate consideration.
M. Consideration and possible action to award a professional services agreement
to Piasky Solutions to conduct a feasibility analysis of potential mixed-use I
development opportunities along Western Avenue. (Yoon)
Authorized the City Manager to execute a professional services agreement in an
amount not to exceed $25,000 to Piasky Solutions to conduct a feasibility analysis of
potential mixed-use development opportunities for specific properties along Western
Avenue, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney.
N. Consideration and possible action to authorize a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) between the Palos Verdes Peninsula Water Management
Group and approve an MOU regarding the Coordinated Integrated Monitoring
Program. (Eder)
1) Authorized the MOU between the Palos Verdes Peninsula Water Management
Group (WMG) regarding administration and cost sharing for revisions to the
Enhanced Management Program (EWMP) and Reasonable Assurance Analysis
(RAA); and 2) Approved the Second Amendment to the MOU for cost-sharing
between agencies in the Peninsula WMG to implement the Coordinated Integrated
Monitoring Program (CIMP).
0. Consideration and possible action to execute a Household Hazardous Waste
Collection Program Siting Liability Agreement between the City and the
County of Los Angeles and the County Sanitation District No. 2 of Los Angeles I
County. (Ramezani)
Authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the attached Household Hazardous
Waste Collection Program Siting Liability Agreement
P. Consideration and possible action to adopt an urgency ordinance and to
introduce an ordinance repealing and replacing Chapter 15.42 (Floodplain
Management) to update the Municipal Code caused by Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) map modifications. (Eder)
1) Adopted Ordinance No. 644U, AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING CHAPTER 15.42 (FLOODPLAIN
MANAGEMENT) OF TITLE 15 (BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION) OF THE
RANCHO PALOS VERDES MUNICIPAL CODE; and, 2) Introduced Ordinance No.
645 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES REPEALING
AND REPLACING CHAPTER 15.42 (FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT) OF TITLE 15
(BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION) OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES
MUNICIPAL CODE, by title only, waive further reading and introduce the ordinance.
Q. Consideration and possible action to authorize the Mayor to sign a comment
letter to Assemblymember Muratsuchi regarding AB 1295. (Villalpando)
C1ty Council Minutes I
Apri16, 2021
Page 6 of 11
C-113
I
I
I
Authorized the Mayor to sign a comment letter to Assemblymember Muratsuchi
regarding AB 1295.
Deputy City Clerk Takaoka read Item P ordinance, urgency ordinance, and an
introduction of an ordinance into the record.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM(S) PULLED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT:
L. Consideration and possible action to file a Notice of Completion fo.r the
Coastal Bluff Fence Replacement Project at Vicente Bluffs Reserve.
(Ramezani)
Deputy City Clerk Takaoka noted that there was one request to speak.
The following member of the public addressed the City Council: Sunshine.
Councilmember Cruikshank moved, seconded by Councilmember Ferraro, to
approve staff recommendation to: 1) Accept the Coastal Bluff Fence Replacement
Project for Fiscal Year (FY) 2019-20 at Vicente Bluffs Reserve as complete; 2)
Authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion for the project with the Los
Angeles County Registrar-Recorder's Office, and if no claims are filed within 35 days
after recordation, send a notice to the surety company to exonerate the Performance
Bond; and, 3) Authorize the Director of Public Works to release the 5% construction
retention payment to Golden Gate Construction, Inc., 35 days after recordation of
the Notice of Completion by the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder's Office,
contingent upon no claims being filed on the project.
The motion passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Bradley, Cruikshank, Dyda, Ferraro, and Mayor Alegria
None
Councilmember Dyda left the meeting at 7:58P.M. and returned at 8:03 P.M.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. Consideration and possible action to consider an appeal of the Planning
Commission-approval for the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park
project located at 32201 Forrestal Drive (Case No. PLCU2020-0007). (Silva)
Deputy City Clerk Takaoka reported that the notice of the public hearing was duly
published, no written protests were received, late correspondence was distributed
and there were 25 requests to speak .and 25 voicemails.
City Council Minutes
April6, 2021
Page 7 of 11
C-114
Mayor Alegria declared the public hearing open.
Ara Mihranian, City Manager, provided an overview of the consideration of an
appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of the planning entitlements for the
Ladera Linda Community Center and Park project.
Matt Waters, Senior Administrative Analyst, and project architect Steve Johnson of
Johnson Favaro presented a PowerPoint presentation providing project background
and design.
Octavio Silva, Deputy Director of Community Development, presented a PowerPoint
presentation providing an overview of the Planning Commission's review, project
entitlements and appeal.
Ramzi Awwad, Director of Public Works, presented a PowerPoint presentation
providing the project cost estimate and schedule.
Trang Nguyen, Director of Finance, presented a PowerPoint presentation providing
estimated project operating costs and funding options.
Discussion ensued among Council Members, Staff and Steve Johnson.
Mayor Alegria called for a brief recess at 9:35P.M. The meeting reconvened at
9:48P.M.
Mayor Pro Tern Bradley moved to extend the meeting to 12:30 A.M. Without
objection, Mayor Alegria so ordered.
The following members of the public addressed the City Council: Billy, Jacob and
Jordan Hevener; Susan Brooks; Charlene O'Neil; Sylvia Macia; Jim Hevener; Diane
Mills; Herb Stark; Jessica Vlaco; Elliot Levy; Jay Fodor; Charles Agnew; Chad Dime;
Kelvin Vanderlip; Dianne Bozler; Val English; Sharon Yarber; Paul Funk; and
Madeline Ryan.
Voicemails from the following members of the public were played: Joseph Cruz;
Pam Andresen; Craig Whited; Edmundo Hummel; Thomas Cyr; Alex Azmi; Meghan
Moore; Susan Cyr; Marty Foster; Mickey Rodich; Bill Schurmer; Carolynn Petru;
Michael Casares; Gary Randall; Lynda Sakamaki-Shepard; Yvette D'Eiia; Benoit
Hochehez; Susan Wilcox; Mark Karmelich; and Don Bell.
Mayor Alegria declared the public hearing closed.
Discussion ensued among Council Members and Staff including directing staff to
proactively address traffic, parking, security and safety concerns now before project
construction commences.
I
I
City Council M1nutes I
April6, 2021
Page 8 of 11
C-115
I
I
I
Councilmember Cruikshank moved, seconded by Mayor Alegria, to affirm the
Planning Commission's approval and to amend Condition No. 31 to add security roll-
down gates above and around the sink area in addition to the open covered area.
The motion passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Bradley, Cruikshank, Dyda, and Mayor Alegria
NOES: Ferraro
Mayor Pro Tern Bradley moved to extend the meeting to 1:00 A.M. Without
objection, Mayor Alegria so ordered.
Discussion ensued among Council Members and Staff.
Mayor Alegria moved, seconded by Councilmember Cruikshank, to: 4) Adopt
Resolution No. 2021-13; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION-
APPROVED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, MAJOR GRADING PERMIT,
VARIANCE AND SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE LADERA LINDA COMMUNITY
CENTER AND PARK PROJECT WITH MODIFICATIONS TO THE CONDITIONS
OF APPROVAL including amending Condition No. 75 to retain the stairs between
the upper tier of the project site and the adjacent lower soccer fields and include
security gate with lockbox for access by emergency personnel, Condition No. 41 to.
include that the Ladera Linda parking lot shall be open at 8:00 a.m. to one hour past
dusk or to one-half hour after classes end, whichever is later, seven days a week, or
to one-half hour past the ending time of an authorized event, and Condition No. 48
to include no fewer than 54 on-site parking spaces consisting of a combination of
standard parking spaces, electric and clean air vehicle spaces per the applicable
CaiGreen Code, and accessible spaces per Title 24; and, 5) Directed Staff to
proceed with the completion of construction documents and authorize advertisement
of bids upon final completion of plans and specifications for the Ladera Linda
Community Center and Park project.
The motion passed on the following roll call vote:
A YES: Cruikshank, Dyda, and Mayor Alegria
NOES: Bradley, and Ferraro
Councilmember Dyda moved, seconded by Councilmember Cruikshank, to
direct staff to explore relocating and optimizing handicap parking spaces closer to
the building and to explore cost and effective ways to install exterior shutters over
glass surfaces to provide_ necessary security.
The motion passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Bradley, Cruikshank, Dyda, Ferraro, and Mayor Alegria
None
City Council Minutes
April6, 2021
Page 9 of 11
C-116
REGULAR BUSINESS:
2. Consideration and possible action to initiate the process to conduct a
comprehensive classification and compensation study and an organizational
review for all full-time and part-time personnel. (DeZiel)
Mayor Alegria requested to continue this item to a future meeting.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM(S) PULLED BY A COUNCIL MEMBER:
F. Consideration and possible action to authorize the Mayor to sign a letter of
support for SB809. (Bright)
Mayor Alegria noted that this item was pulled earlier this evening by Councilmembe,r
Cruikshank.
Discussion ensued among Council Members.
Councilmember Cruikshank moved, seconded by Councilmember Ferraro, to
approve staff recommendation to authorize the Mayor to sign a letter of support for
88809.
The motion pass.ed on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Cruikshank, Dyda, Ferraro, Bradley, and Mayor Alegria
None
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:
Councilmember Ferraro requested possibly having EDCO combine unwanted
prescription medications disposal drop off with either paper shredding ore-waste
disposal in a single event.
Mayor Alegria requested Councilmember Ferraro, as Traffic Safety Committee liaison,
to request the Committee to look into the Forrestal Drive/PVDS traffic concerns to
consider the pending construction of the traffic signal at PVDE/PVDS intersection; and,
at some point to come back to Council for review and consideration of the Committee·~
recommendations.
CITY COUNCIL ORAL REPORTS:
Mayor Alegria moved to waive City Council Oral Reports. Without objection, Mayor
Alegria so ordered.
I
I
City Council M1nutes I
April 6, 2021
Page 10 of 11
C-117
I ADJOURNMENT:
I
I
At 12:58 A.M., Mayor Alegria adjourned to 6:00P.M. on April12, 2021, for an Adjourned
Regular Meeting (CIP Workshop).
Attest:
C1ty Counc1l Minutes
April6, 2021
Page 11 of 11
ATTACHMENT C
LADERA LINDA CONCEPT DESIGN
2019
C-118
C-1190 08 oo 8% D TI I I I I I I I I
ii
P R O J E C T M A N A G E R A N D C O N S T R U C T I O N M A N A G E R
Ladera Linda Community
Center & Park
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
AUGUST 25, 2021
D-1
iiii
50+
community center projects with
multi-purpose and discovery
rooms, classrooms, and associated
community spaces
40+
years of public sector
experience
100+
park projects including sport
complexes and competitive outdoor
athletic facilities
350+
publicly bid projects
Dedicated in-house
specialists for cost
estimating, community
outreach, inspection, and
infrastructure
Stellar record of completing projects under budget & ahead of schedule
WHY GRIFFIN STRUCTURES?
100+
Energy efficient, conservation projects with either LEED certified,
Net Zero, WELL certifications, and
other designations
Turn-key approach with a motto of
"No Surprises" along with our Performance Guarantee
D-2
iiiiii
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
Cover Letter
1.: Approach to Scope of Services 1
2.: Organization & Staffing 4
3.: Staff Qualifications & Experience 6
4.: Project Schedule 23
5.: Quality Control Plan 24
6.: Acceptance of Conditions 25
SANTA CLARITA CANYON COUNTRY
COMMUNITY CENTER
QUAIL HILL COMMUNITY CENTER
YORBA LINDA LIBRARY & CULTURAL ARTS CENTER
VERNOLA COMMUNITY CENTER
& PARK EXPANSIONMARINA SAILING RECREATION
CENTER & PARK
D-3
iviv
August 25, 2021
30940 Hawthorne Blvd., Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
RE: Request for Proposals, Ladera Linda Community Center and Park Project Manager and
Construction Manager
Dear Mr. Awwad and Evaluation Team,
As Griffin Structures celebrates our 40th year of providing award-winning, industry-leading public sector
Construction Management services, we are pleased to submit our proposal to the city of Rancho Palos Verdes. Our team has requisite technical expertise and considerable experience with community centers
and parks, and possesses the local and public relations knowledge and communications proficiency
required. We offer our pledge to bring the City's Ladera Linda Community Center and Park project to
successful completion.
[ EXTENSIVE PORTFOLIO WITH OVER 150+ SIMILAR PROJECTS ]
We have drawn upon our considerable staff resources and have selected a uniquely qualified group of construction management experts specializing in community centers and park projects. Our highlights
include the $58M Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center, Vernola Community Center, Quail
Hill Community Center, as well as leading parks such as the $20M Esencia Sports Park, $52M Lake Forest
Complex and a variety of additional, applicable projects. Unlike many of our competitors, Griffin Structures
is a leading community center and parks project and construction management (PMCM) firm. We are the
ongoing preferred PMCM for many of the state's largest community and recreational centers and are the on-call PMCM for nationally recognized non-profit organizations such as the Los Angeles Neighborhood
Land Trust (LANLT), The Trust for Public Land (TPL), and others.
[ SEASONED STAFF WITH APPLICABLE EXPERIENCE ]
For this project, we offer the exceptional services of long-time Griffin Structures PMCM and leader, Robert
Godfrey and Project Inspector, Cody Roth. Together, Robert Godfrey and Cody Roth have overseen the
delivery of several relevant projects, currently serving as the PMCM and Inspector for the $58M Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center slated for completion prior to the start of this project. In
fact, we welcome a tour of this project with the City at its sole discretion. Additionally, our team will be
supported by a wealth of internal resources including programming experts, landscape architects, funding
experts, infrastructure specialists, estimators, and outreach professionals.
[ THE CITY COMES FIRST ]
Unlike many large PMCM firms, we firmly believe in quality over quantity of service, do not perpetually rotate staff, and protect your interests first. Most importantly, we serve the City in a Fiduciary and Risk
Assumptive Capacity, stressing ethics and integrity in all aspects of our service. Unlike our competitors, we
will assume financial risk based on our PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE. We offer the ability for the City to
withhold 10% of our total fee billings, which will be released based solely on your discretionary satisfaction
with our performance.
[ EXCELLENCE IN PROJECT DELIVERY ]
Griffin Structures takes great pride in providing both competitive pricing and highly qualified personnel
and goes to great measures to ask ‘What is our true value added proposition to the city of Rancho Palos
Verdes?’ The answer to this question is our people. We bring a higher caliber of Project and Construction
Manager to our clients - one that is trained as a builder, but thinks as an owner. A Project and Construction
Manager that can at minimum deliver the specified scope of services, and far beyond that. Our people offer
creative delivery options, solutions-based recommendations, and true perspective of ownership that our competitors do not possess. It is for this reason we are able to provide a single point of contact at a senior level that is capable of delivery enhanced services at a competitive rate. This is our differentiator and the
meaning behind the Griffin Structures pledge to provide ‘Excellence in Project Delivery’.
We look forward to serving you,
Roger Torriero, CEO & Owner C: (949) 412-9000 | E: rtorriero@griffinholdings.net
griffinstructures.com949.497.9000Irvine, CA2 Technology Drive, Suite 150 D-4
vv
Firm Contact Information:
2 Technology Drive, Suite 150 Irvine, CA 92618
Primary Contact Information:
Jon Hughes, CCM, DBIA
Executive Vice President & Project Executive
(949) 497-9000 x.208
jhughes@griffinstructures.com
Type of Organization:
Corporation
Officers:
Conflict of Interest:
Griffin Structures has no conflicts of interests to disclose.
Organization Standing:
Roger Torriero, CEO & Owner
(949) 412-9000
rtorriero@griffinholdings.net
Jon Hughes, CCM, DBIA
Executive Vice President & Project Executive
(949) 497-9000 x208
jhughes@griffinstructures.com
Mark Hoglund
COO & CFO
(949) 497-9000 x203
mhoglund@griffinstructures.com
Kelly Boyle
Executive Vice President
(949) 497-9000 x202
kboyle@griffinstructures.com
D-5
vivi
Addendum 1 Acknowledgment
D-6
1-\.BI C WORKS OEPAR IIV!EN f
June 18, 2021
ADDENDUM NO. 1
TO THE LADERA LINDA COMMUNITY CENTER AND PARK PROJECT MANAGER AND
CONSTRUCTION MANAGER REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP)
The following changes (revisions, additions, and/or deletions) as noted below , are hereby
incorporated and made a part of the on-call construction management & inspection services
request for proposals. Portions of the RFP , not specifically mentioned in the Addendum ,
remain the same. All trades affected shall be fully advised of these revis ions , deletions, and
additions.
This Addendum forms a part of the request for proposals for LADERA LINDA COMMUNITY
CENTER AND PARK PROJECT MANAGER AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGER and modifies
the orig inal request for proposals.
Each proposer shall be responsible for ascerta ining , prior to submitting a proposal, that it has
rece ived all issued Addenda and shall ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF THIS ADDENDUM ON
THE PROPOSER'S CERTIFICATION , attached. A proposer's failure to address the
requirements of this addendum or failure to acknowledge the receipt of this addendum may
result in that proposal being rejected .
Note the following changes and/or additions to the on-call construction management &
inspection services request for proposa ls. The proposer shall execute the Cert ification at the
end of this addendum and shall attach all pages of this addendum to the proposal.
Delete:
Replace with:
Page 15
Revised page R15 (Attached) to replace item d under Staff Qualifications and
Experience that states " ... A registered Professional Engineer must be the
Project Manager .. ." with •• •.. A registered Professional Engineer or a
Certified Construction Manager must be the Project Manager ... ".
End of Addendum No. 1
Any questions regarding this Addendum should be directed to the Sean Lopez, at (31 0)
544w5333.
Sean Lopez.
Assistant Engineer
PAGE 1 OF 1
viivii D-7
percentage of the total effort. Specifically show the availab ility of staff to
provide the necessary resource levels to meet the City's needs. Indicate that
the Project Manager and key staff will remain assigned to this project through
completion of the Scope of Services. (No more than two pages)
d) Staff Qualifications and Experience: Describe qualifications of the assigned
staff and sub-contractors including relevant technical exper ience. Staff
assigned to complete the Scope of Services must have previous experience
in providing the necessary services as described under the Scope of
Services. A registered Professional Engineer or a Certified Construction
Manager must be the Project Manager. Description of Consultant's
experience should include:
• Prior Experience: Demonstrate that the firm has significant experience
providing services similar to those described under the Scope of Services.
(No more than two page)
• Staff Qualifications: Provide resumes for the Project Manager and any
other key staff members to be assigned to contribute to the Scope of
Services , with an emphasis on similar services which they provided to
other agencies. (No more than ten pages)
• Reference Projects: Include at least three projects with similar scope of
services performed by the project team within the past three years and
indicate the specific responsibilities of each team member on the
reference proj ect. Provide contact information for each client. (No more
than ten pages}
e) Project Schedule: Provide a resource allocation schedule detailing the
personnel resources and levels that will be applied at each stage of the
project.. (No more than one 11 " x 17w page)
f) Quality Control P lan: Describe the quality control procedures and associated
staff responsibilities which will ensure that the deliverables will meet the City's
needs. (No more than one page)
g) Acceptance of Conditio ns : State the offering firm 's acceptance of all
conditions listed in the Request fo r Proposal (RFP) document and Sample
Professional Services Agreement (Attachment D). Any exceptions or
suggested changes to the RFP or Professional Services Agreement (PSA),
including the suggested change, the reasons therefore and the impact it may
have on cost or other considerations on the firm's behalf must be stated in the
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
RFP· Ladera Linda Commun ity Center and Parle Project Manager and Construction Manager
June 18, 2021
Page RlS of 17
viiiviii D-8
PROPOSER'S CERTIFICATION
I acknowledge receipt of the foregoing Addendum No. 1 and accept all conditions
contained therein.
Roger Torriero , CEO & Owner 716121
By Date
Please sign above and include this signed addendum in the proposal package. Failure to
do so may result in that proposal being rejected.
PAGE 2 OF 2
ixix
Addendum 2 Acknowledgment
D-9
C ITY OF
ADDENDUM NO. 2
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
PLBLC WOR't<S OHAA rMENT
June 28, 2021
TO THE LADERA LINDA COMMUNITY CENTER AND PARK PROJECT MANAGER AND
CONSTRUCTION MANAGER REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP)
The following changes (revisions, additions. and/or deletions) as noted be low. a re hereby
incorporated and made a part of the on-call construction management & i nspection services
request for proposals. Portions of the RFP, not specifically mentioned in the Addendum,
remain the same. All trades affected shall be fu lly advised of these revisions , deletions, and
additions .
Th is Addendum forms a part of the req uest for proposals for LADERA LINDA COMMUN ITY
CENTER AND PARK PROJECT MANAGER AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGER and modifies
the orig inal request f or proposals.
Each proposer shall be responsible for ascertaining, prior to submitting a proposal, that it has
received all issued Addenda and shall ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT O F THIS ADDENDUM ON
THE PROPOSER'S CERTIFICATION , attached . A proposer's failure to address the
requirements of this addendum or failure to acknowledge the receipt of th is addendum may
result in that proposal being rejected .
Note the following changes and/or additions to the on -call construction management &
inspection services request for proposals . T he proposer shall execute the Certification at the
end of this addendum and shall attach all pages of this addendum t o the proposal.
Delete :
Replace with:
Page R15
Revised page R2-15 (Attached) to rep lace item (d) Reference Projects under
Staff Qualifications and Experience that states "Include at least three projects
with similar scope of services performed by the project team within the
past three years and Indicate the specific responsibilities of each team
member on the reference project: with "Include at least three projects with
similar scope of services performed by the project team within the past
th-¥ee five years and indicate the specific responsibilities of each team
member on the reference project".
End of Addendum No. 2
Any questions regarding this Addendum should be directed to the Sean Lopez, at (310)
544-5333.
Sean Lopez.
Assistant Engineer
PAGE 1 OF 1
xx D-10
percentage of the total effort. Specifically show the availability of staff to
provide the necessary resource levels to meet the City's needs . Indicate that
the Project Manager and key staff will remain assigned to this project through
completion of the Scope of Services. (No more than two pages)
d) Staff Qualifications and Experience: Describe qualifications of the assigned
staff and sub-contractors includ ing relevant technica l experience. Staff
assigned to complete the Scope of Services must have previous experience
in providing the necessary services as described under the Scope of
Services. A registered Professional Engineer or a Certified Construction
Manager must be the Project Manager. Description of Consultant's
experience should include:
• Prior Experience: Demonstrate that the firm has significant experience
providing services similar to those described under the Scope of Services.
(No more than two page)
• Staff Qualifications: Provide resumes for the Project Manager and any
other key staff members to be assigned to contribute to the Scope of
Services , with an emphasis on similar services which they provided to
other agencies. (No more than ten pages)
• Reference Projects: Include at least three projects with similar scope of
services performed by the project team within the past tAfee five years
and ind icate the specific responsibilities of each team member on the
reference project. Provide contact information for each client. (No more
than ten pages)
e) Project Schedule: Provide a resource allocation schedule detailing the
personnel resources and levels that will be applied at each stage of the
project. . (No more than one 11" x 17" page)
f) Quality Control Plan: Describe the quality control procedures and associated
staff responsibilities which will ensure that the deliverables will meet the City's
needs. (No more than one page)
g) Acceptance of Conditions: State the offering firm's acceptance of all
conditions listed in the Request fo r Proposal (RFP) document and Sample
Professional Services Agreement (Attachment D). Any exceptions or
suggested changes to the RFP or Professional Services Agreement (PSA),
including the suggested change, the reasons therefore and the impact it may
have on cost or other considerations on the firm's behalf must be stated in the
Oty of Rancho Palos Verdes
RFP -Ladera Unda Community Center and Park Project Manager and Construction
Manager June 28, 2021
Page R2-15 of 17
xixi D-11
PROPOSER'S CERTIFICATION
I acknowledge receipt of the foregoing Addendum No. 2 and accept all conditions
contained therein.
-
Roger Torriero, CEO & Owner 7/6/21
By Date
Please sign above and Include this signed addendum In the proposal package. Failure to
do so may result in that proposal being rejected.
PAGE2 OF 2
1. Approach to Scope of Services“Griffin Structures Construction
Managers do an excellent job
holding the Contractor to the
approved schedule and are able to
anticipate and address issues that
may impact your completion date.”
Wayne Weber, Parks Planning Manager
City of Santa Clarita
Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center D-12
11
Established in 1981, Griffin Structures, Inc. (Griffin) is
a California corporation and is a diversified Program
and Construction Management/Owners Representative
firm serving the public, institutional, non-profit and
private sectors. We have built in excess of $2B in public
sector facilities, the scope of these projects ranging
from $1M to greater than $400M. Our comprehensive
experience includes various projects and building types
inclusive of leading community centers and parks. Our
award-winning portfolio encompasses not only new
construction, but extensive renovations and facility
upgrades as well.
Project Understanding
Griffin Structures recognizes this is a significant
project for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and that
the City has expended considerable effort to bring
this project to fruition. This project site has served
the community for many years as both a public and
Montessori school. Once completed, the delivery of this
project will continue this legacy, offering a synergized
community hub for generations to come.
Specifically we understand this project to consist of
the demolition of the existing school buildings and the
construction of a new 6,790 SF Community Center,
tiered seating, parking lot, naturalistic playground,
renovation of two paddle tennis courts, construction
of a new storage facility, walking paths, and a new lawn
area. The project will also include drought-tolerant
landscaping, grading, underground utilities, mechanical
and refuse storage area, and a new vehicular gate.
A key to the success of this project rests in the proper
execution of subsequent phases of work, specifically
the plan review and contractor bidding phases. Griffin
Structures has extensive experience in performing
in-depth constructability reviews to ensure the
plans and specifications are complete, biddable, and
constructable. Our approach to this effort will be
extensive and utilize multiple individuals who will
review the plans from varying perspectives. We
have seasoned inspectors, licensed contractors, and
landscape architects on staff, all of whom will review
these plans for compilation into a comprehensive
Bluebeam report. This will be critical to ensuring
the project documents are of the highest quality and
produce the most comprehensive bids.
Similar to the plan review, we take great pride in the
preparation of the bid documents and the management
of the bid process to ensure we receive complete,
responsive, and responsible bids. This effort includes a
comprehensive review of the City’s General Provisions,
Special Provisions, Division 01 Specifications, and
the incorporation of Greenbook and City standards
should they apply. Our goal is always to produce the
most defensible set of documents possible for bidding,
which will, in turn, provide the most complete bids and
protect the City from frivolous change orders in the
future to ensure the project unfolds efficiently.
1. Approach to Scope of Services
Pre-Construction
Needs Assessment Program Management Space Planning Site Selection Project Budgeting Design Management Constructability Review Scheduling Value Engineering Total Project Budgeting Contractor Pre-Qualification
and Procurement
Bid Management
Construction
Construction Management Owner’s Representative Budget Management Contractor Oversight Document Control Quality Assurance/Control Sustainability Management Safety Management RFI & CO Management FF&E Procurement &
Coordination Building Commissioning & Closeout
Delivery Method Consultation
Design-Bid-Build Design-Build Integrated Project Delivery Public-Private Partnership
Scope of Services
D-13
22
Approach
Griffin Structures hereby affirms that we will perform the scope of services contained in the
RFP.
Griffin approaches projects with the perspective of an Owner, and the insight of an Architect
and Contractor. Like an Owner, we approach each project as if it is our own money, schedule,
and facility that is being developed. With several licensed Architects and Contractors within
our ranks, we also understand the technical aspects and trade secrets essential to providing
quality services.
Together with these two key components, Griffin provides Inspection and Construction
Management services based on our unique blend of experience as both a public agency
Construction Managers and at-risk fee developers - uniquely enhancing our ability to provide
enhanced services to our clients. With that said, we confirm we will provide all services
listed in the RFP and have included a summary within this section detailing our approach and
available project and construction management services.
Communication / Document Control
Standardized Communication and Document Management Protocols will
be utilized for all project document controls. All RFIs, submittals, ASIs,
CCDs, Deltas, daily reports, project photos, SWPPP reports, schedules,
and closeout documents will be carefully integrated into the City’s third-
party web-based Software-as-a-Service (SaaS).
Schedule Management
A comprehensive master project schedule will be created to include all
aspects of the project, including, but not limited to: design iterations &
review times, permitting phases, pre-qualification, bidding, contracts &
insurance, construction phasing, city installations, utility connections,
IT installations, punchlist, commissioning, & contingency.
Financial Controls
Effective financial controls depend on change management, timely
invoices, claim mitigation & avoidance, commitment to value, clear
documentation and legal comprehension. Our expertise in this category
is best-in-class and includes an estimating team to serve as a reference
point in developing project budgets or negotiating change orders.
Quality Control Observations
Inspections, photography/technology such as recordings, photography,
Bluebeam Technology to facilitate the communication of challenges
in field for quick resolution & documentation, Building Information
Modeling (BIM), and Field Observation Reports will be employed for
Quality Control and Assurance.
D-14
33
Griffin Structures goes to great lengths to research and understand the challenges and opportunities
for every pursuit. As a result of this effort, we have prepared the following strategic considerations to
demonstrate our approach to Construction Management and illustrate the value we bring to a project.
These considerations are prepared in a question-and-answer format for ease of reading. We have utilized
a page from Staff Qualifications to include an additional page for this section.
Question: How might the City be assured that the plans and specifications are of the highest quality
and result in comprehensive bids?
Answer: As mentioned in the project understanding, Griffin Structures takes great pride in the performance of Constructability Reviews. This effort will involve multiple disciplines, ranging from licensed contractors to landscape architects, and will be performed in Bluebeam format. This
format provides a snapshot of the detail in question, clear and concise reference to the issue, and
recommendations for adjustment if necessary. We also will establish an in-depth page turn session with
the Design Team to go through each comment and discuss what revisions may or may not be needed.
This will also involve an inherent value engineering perspective, not to wholesale change the design but to evaluate if the specified detail or material is appropriate for its intended use. By performing such a comprehensive analysis, we are confident the City will benefit from the issuance of bid documents of the
highest quality.
Question: How might the Construction Management team mitigate the impact this project will have
on the surrounding neighborhood?
Answer: Having worked on municipal projects for 40 years, Griffin has become very sensitive to the
importance of maintaining good neighborhood relations during construction. For this reason, we
have a very robust neighborhood relations approach that includes multiple tools of communication.
Those tools include, but are not limited to, weekly reports to staff, monthly reports for senior staff and council, quarterly updates, and all necessary content for website updates. Of particular importance is our recommendation that the City arrange for a dedicated project hotline that is posted on project
signage. This hotline will have a pre-recorded outgoing message that allows any passerby, neighbor, or
constituent to leave a message, question, or concern with the promise of receiving a return call within 24
hours. Our Project and Construction Manager will monitor this inbox and will respond accordingly. We
believe this will help the City demonstrate that it takes the concerns of its constituents seriously and is
responsive to any issues that may arise.
Question: Are there any traffic concerns related to this project?
Answer: Yes. This project is in a very dense residential area. Therefore, all construction traffic will occur
in this residential environment. With this in mind, we will require the Contractor to employ very specific traffic control measures, trucking routes and enforce strict start and finish times for construction.
Additionally, we will require the Contractor to produce detailed and regularly updated site utilization
plans so all traffic is managed in and out as efficiently as possible. Griffin will work closely with the City
and the Design Team to craft exhibits and language to be included in the bid documents to ensure the
City’s needs are clearly communicated with all bidders.
Value-Adding Strategies, Innovations & Strategic Considerations
D-15
2. Organization & Staffing“Griffin Structures helped us build a
strong team and their expert guidance
limited our change orders and allowed
us to complete our project on time and
on budget.”
Steve Didier, Municipal Projects Manager
City of Carlsbad
Carlsbad Pine Ave. Community Center D-16
44
Our proposed team shares a long history of successful partnerships and is comprised of leading Project and
Construction Managers, specializing in the development and construction of new construction, expansion, and
renovation of leading community centers and parks. The project team will be managed by Project Executive, Jon
Hughes, providing oversight to the Project and Construction Manager, Robert Godfrey, who will be responsible
for the day-to-day operations of the project providing his expertise in the delivery of projects of this type. Robert
will oversee the operations of Project Inspector, Cody Roth. The project team will also be supported by our wealth
of internal resources including, Cost Estimator, Jay Helekar, and our Value Engineering Expert, Ryan Craven. The
Project Manager and key staff will remain assigned to this project through completion of the Scope of Services.
With certifications from the Construction Management Association of America (CCM), Design-Build Institute of
America (DBIA), and the U.S. Green Building Council (LEED AP). Griffin Structures employees are professionally
trained as Owner's Representatives, are experienced and highly trained to provide exceptional services to our
Clients.
Roger Torriero
Principal-In-Charge,
Owner & Founder
Jon Hughes
CCM, DBIA
Project Executive,
Executive Vice Pres.
Robert Godfrey
CCM
Sr. Project &
Construction Manager
Jay Helekar
LEED AP
Cost Estimator
Ryan Craven
Value Engineering
Expert
Cody Roth
Construction Manager
- Inspector
2. Organization & Staffing
D-17
55
Involvement & Availability
Employee & Title % of Involvement Availability
Roger Torriero
Principal-In-Charge,
Owner & Founder
>10%Located from our corporate headquarters in Irvine, Roger
provides leadership to all projects as-needed.
Jon Hughes, CCM, DBIA
Project Executive >20%Located from our corporate headquarters in Irvine, Jon
provides leadership to all projects as-needed.
Robert Godfrey, CCM
Project & Construction
Manager
70%
Located from our Irvine office, Robert is currently serving
as the lead for several projects slated for December 31,
2021 completion and the Santa Clarita Canyon Country
Community Center project slated for September 30, 2021
completion.
Cody Roth
Project Inspector 100%Located from our Irvine office, Cody is currently serving
on the Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center
project slated for September 30, 2021 completion.
Jay Helekar, LEED AP
Cost Estimator >15%
Located from our corporate headquarters in Irvine, Jay
is currently serving as the lead estimator for multiple
projects as-needed of which the completion dates are
on-going. Jay's time will be properly allocated to ensure
your needs are properly served.
Ryan Craven
Value Engineering Expert >15%
Located from our corporate headquarters in Irvine, Ryan
is currently serving on multiple projects as-needed of
which the completion dates are on-going. Ryan's time
will be properly allocated to ensure your needs are
properly served.
D-18
3. Staff Qualifications & Experience“Griffin Structures is professional,
responsive, detail oriented and does
what it takes to get the job done.
Staff was regularly briefed on the
project timeline, the status of multiple
budgets within the project, and no
question ever went unanswered.
They were an excellent partner and
brought the project to a successful
completion.”
Carrie Lixey, Library Director
City of Yorba Linda
Yorba Linda Library & Cultural Arts Center D-19
6
The Griffin Structures possesses unparalleled
experience in managing projects containing
identical, key elements to the Ladera Linda
Community Center and Park project. These
have included community centers with flexible
multi-purpose rooms, classrooms, discovery
spaces, and associated supportive staff areas,
as well as California leading park projects with
playgrounds, hard and soft courts, and outdoor
maintenance and storage facilities. Additionally,
our proposed team has led incredibly
ambitious sustainability projects, including
the Environmental Nature Center in Newport
Beach – LEED Platinum, AIA Top 10 COTE
Winner and number one recognized educational
sustainability project in the nation.
With this experience, our project team can
forecast and mitigate unforeseen circumstances
from day one, maintaining exceptional
relationships with industry partners to ensure
quality design and construction oversight. We
have highlighted key projects which perfectly
align with the Ladera Linda Community Center
and Park project in our Reference Projects
section and encourage the City to contact the
references provided.
3. Staff Qualifications & Experience
1. Santa Clarita Canyon Country
Community Center
2. Marina Sailing Recreation Center &
Park
3. Huntington Beach Community Ctr.
4. Burlingame Community Center
5. Northeast Stockton Library &
Community Center
1. Laguna Beach Community & Senior
Center
2. Fullerton Multigenerational
Community Center
3. Lawndale Community Center
4. Frisbie Park Expansion & Renovation
5. Silverlakes Sports Complex
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
Prior Experience
D-20
7
6. Esencia Sports Park
7. Lake Forest Sports Complex & Recreation
Center
8. Bower Kidseum
9. Discovery Cube Science Center
10. Samueli Academy
11. Environmental Nature Center & Preschool
11
13 14
12
16
15
D-21
88
Roger Torriero
Principal-In-Charge
Education
Master of Architecture, Accademia di
Belli Arti di Firenze Italia
Bachelor of Architecture,
Syracuse University, New York
Certification
California Contractor License
#793600, Class B
Affiliations
U.S. Green Building Council, Member
Urban Land Institute, Member
American Public Works Association
Associated General Contractors of
America, Member
Construction Management Association
of America, Member
Design-Build Institute, Member
Years of Experience
42+
QUALIFICATIONS
As our Principal-In-Charge, CEO, and Owner, Roger focuses
on the delivery of complex projects for the private and
public sectors, including newly constructed, expanded, and
renovated community centers and parks. Roger has also led
the pre-design, design, and construction for virtually all public
and private sector projects, including real estate development,
finance, design, and construction. Roger provides Griffin with
specialized expertise in the conceptualization and realization
of challenging projects. He is an expert in forward planning,
finance, entitlements, project delivery methodologies, and
community-based participatory planning.
As Principal-In-Charge, Roger will provide valuable insight
to the project team, ensuring your scheduling and financial
expectations are met throughout the duration of our services.
REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE
• Vernola Community Center & Expansion, Jurupa Valley, CA
• Quail Hill Community Center, Irvine, CA
• Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center, CA
• Rancho Cucamonga Sports Center, CA
• Yorba Linda Library & Cultural Arts Center, CA
• Carlsbad Pine Ave. Community Center & Garden, CA
• Frisbie Park Expansion, Rialto, CA
• Esencia Park, CA
• Lake Forest Sports Complex, CA
• Fullerton Multigenerational Community Center & Aquatic Facilities, CA
• Great Park Ice & Sports Complex, Irvine, CA
• Burlingame Community Center, CA
• Lawndale Community Center, CA
• Rancho Cucamonga Sports Center, CA
• Marina Park & Sailing Recreation Center, Newport Beach, CA
• Rengstorff Park Aquatic Center, Mountain View, CA
• The Trust for Public Land Projects, CA
»Aliso Creek Park
»Bicentennial Park
»South Victoria Park
»Rudolph Park
»Madison Avenue
»Benito Juarez Park
»Patton St. Pocket Park & Garden
»Avalon Green Alleys
»Zamora Park
Staff Qualifications
D-22
99
Jon Hughes
CCM, DBIA
Project Executive
Education
Bachelor of Science, Philosophy and
History, Westmont College
Certification
Certified Construction Manager (CCM)
Design Build of America Institute (DBIA)
Associate
California Contractor License
#793600, Class A
Affiliations
NAVFAC and US Army Corps
Construction Quality Management
(CQM) Program
Construction Management
Association of America, Member
Years of Experience
28
QUALIFICATIONS
Jon Hughes’ career spans some of the region’s most prestigious
properties in Southern California. His experience and skills
with program and construction management tools and
processes have enabled him to deliver winning results on every
project. Jon’s resume highlights include newly constructed,
expanded, or renovated community centers and parks.
Jon’s construction management experience includes pre-
construction services, bid review, contract negotiations, safety
protocols, site evaluation, quality control, budgetary controls,
change order review, materials acquisition and supply chain
management, schedule review and enforcement, site staging,
off-sites and grading, dry utility installation, inter-contractor
coordination, punch list, and turnover.
As Project Executive, Jon is responsible for overseeing the
overall lifecycle of the project.
REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE
• Vernola Community Center & Expansion, Jurupa Valley, CA
• Quail Hill Community Center, Irvine, CA
• Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center, CA
• Rancho Cucamonga Sports Center, CA
• Yorba Linda Library & Cultural Arts Center, CA
• Carlsbad Pine Ave. Community Center & Garden, CA
• Frisbie Park Expansion, Rialto, CA
• Esencia Park, CA
• Lake Forest Sports Complex, CA
• Fullerton Multigenerational Community Center & Aquatic Facilities, CA
• Great Park Ice & Sports Complex, Irvine, CA
• Burlingame Community Center, CA
• Lawndale Community Center, CA
• Rancho Cucamonga Sports Center, CA
• Marina Park & Sailing Recreation Center, Newport Beach, CA
• The Trust for Public Land Projects, CA
»Aliso Creek Park
»Bicentennial Park
»South Victoria Park
»Rudolph Park
»Madison Avenue
»Benito Juarez Park
»Patton St. Pocket Park & Garden
»Avalon Green Alleys
»Zamora Park
D-23
1010
QUALIFICATIONS
Robert Godfrey brings 20 years of combined experience in
construction management and planning. As a construction
manager, he has been involved during all phases of
development and construction. His responsibilities as a
project/construction manager have entailed pre-construction
services, public and stakeholder outreach, managing
entitlement and plan check processes, obtaining building
permits and coordinating inspections, and generating
punch lists and overseeing project closeout. Robert has a
proven record of project management involving effective
communication with design team members, coordinating
consultants, vendors and contractors - all to assure the client’s
goals and objectives are achieved.
As Project and Construction Manager, Robert will be
responsible for the day-to-day management of the project.
REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE
• Vernola Community Center & Expansion, Jurupa Valley, CA
• Quail Hill Community Center, Irvine, CA
• Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center, CA
• Rancho Cucamonga Sports Center, CA
• Lawndale Community & Arts Center, CA
• The Trust for Public Land Projects, CA
»Aliso Creek Park
»Bicentennial Park
»South Victoria Park
»Rudolph Park
»Madison Avenue
»Benito Juarez Park
»Patton St. Pocket Park & Garden
»Avalon Green Alleys
»Zamora Park
• Jordan Downs Housing Redevelopment, Los Angeles, CA
• LINC Housing: Temple View Affordable Housing, Los Angeles, CA
• Buena Park Navigation Center, CA
• Downtown Women's Center, Los Angeles, CA
• Tustin Transitional Homeless Shelter, CA
• La Canada Flintridge Civic Center, CA
Robert Godfrey
CCM
Sr. Project & Construction Manager
Education
Bachelor of Science, Management, The
George Institute of Technology
Registration
Certified Construction Manager
(CCM)
Affiliations
Construction Management
Association of America, Member
Years of Experience
20
D-24
1111
QUALIFICATIONS
Cody has a wealth of knowledge stemming from his experience
as a public works inspector for multiple municipal agencies
throughout his career. He has extensive experience in
conducting field inspections ensuring compliance with
all pertinent codes, regulations, and plans. His project
background include sports park/complex projects and parks,
in addition to many others.
As Project Inspector, Cody will work on-site, coordinating
with the project team daily while monitoring specific details to
avoid impacts and ensure project delivery.
REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE
• Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center, CA
• Esencia Sports Park, Rancho Mission Viejo, CA
• Laguna Beach Village Entrance, CA
• LANLT, Wishing Tree Park, Los Angeles, CA
• Laguna Beach Animal Shelter & Laguna Creek Erosion
Protection, Laguna Beach, CA
• City of Tustin Building Inspector
»Greenwood by Cal Atlantic & Brookfield
»The Village at Tustin Legacy Shopping Center (16 buildings, 22-acre project that included multiple construction types)
»Tustin Council Chambers Renovation
»County of Orange Library Restoration
»Hoag 3-Story Medical Office
• City of Vista Building Inspector
»Serra by Shear Homes
»Avalon Apartments (12 Buildings)
»Belching Beaver Brewery Tavern & Grill
Cody Roth
Construction Manager - Inspector
Education
Santa Ana College, Fire Science Degree
Rio Hondo College, Fire Academy
Graduate
Saddleback College, Building Inspector
Courses
Certification
International Code Council B-1 Building
Inspection
International Code Council E-1 Electrical
Inspection
International Code Council P-1 Plumbing
Inspection
CAL OES Safety Assessment Program
(ID#77558)
Orange County Stormwater Program
Various Certificates from the California
Building Officials Training Institute
Years of Experience
10
D-25
1212
Jay Helekar
LEED AP
Cost Estimator
Education
Construction Management Engineering,
California State University, Long Beach
Certification
Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design Accredited Professional (LEED
AP)
Affiliations
U.S. Green Building Council, Member
Years of Experience
22+
QUALIFICATIONS
Ryan is an expert in value engineering and construction cost
estimating, including master-planning, conceptual, schematic
design development and construction document phases. He is
a skilled mediator, participating in change order preparation,
validation and negotiation. He has reconciliation experience with
general contractors and subcontractors, and communicates well
with all design team members, promoting open door dialogue and
effective project solutions.
REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE
• Vernola Community Center & Expansion, Jurupa Valley, CA
• Quail Hill Community Center, Irvine, CA
• Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center, CA
• Rancho Cucamonga Sports Center, CA
• Yorba Linda Library & Cultural Arts Center, CA
• Carlsbad Pine Ave. Community Center & Garden, CA
• Frisbie Park Expansion, Rialto, CA
• Esencia Park, CA
Ryan Craven
Value Engineering
Expert
Education
Bachelor of Science, Construction
Engineering, National University,
Costa Mesa
Affiliations
CPE
ASPE, Member
CoreNet Global (Young Leaders Group)
Years of Experience
14
QUALIFICATIONSK
Jay has 22 years of cost estimating experience on various
municipal projects, including renovation and new construction.
He has a unique perspective on the industry, as he has a mixed
background of being both a pre-construction manager and a
general contractor. He brings his creative and expert skills to his
work, including cost estimating, LEED analysis, value engineering,
constructability reviews, master planning, and scheduling. He is
also a skilled mediator, participating in change order preparation,
validation, and negotiation. As Cost Estimator, Jay will provide cost
estimating services through each stage of the project to ensure
your fiscal objectives are achieved from inception to completion.
REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE
• Vernola Community Center & Expansion, Jurupa Valley, CA
• Quail Hill Community Center, Irvine, CA
• Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center, CA
• Rancho Cucamonga Sports Center, CA
• Yorba Linda Library & Cultural Arts Center, CA
• Carlsbad Pine Ave. Community Center & Garden, CA
• Frisbie Park Expansion, Rialto, CA
D-26
13
Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center
Santa Clarita, CA
This 27,780 SF community center and outdoor recreational
facilities encompasses a 16.5 acre project site. Outdoor
improvements include open play areas, outdoor market/
mercado, event stage area, basketball half-court, event garden,
shade structures, outdoor restroom building, and perimeter
trail. Indoor spaces include a multi-purpose room, gymnasium,
classrooms, catering and teaching kitchen, fitness room, staff
offices, reception lobby, and supporting uses such as restrooms
and storage areas. In addition, the proposed project will also
include improvements to the Mint Canyon Channel.
Once completed, the new community center’s indoor and
outdoor amenities would be open to the public for recreational
activities, community programs, classes, community events (e.g.
farmers market, music programs, and fundraiser events), and
private functions (e.g., banquet and weddings).
Relevancy
• Community Center with Multi-
Purpose Rooms
• Classrooms• Park Elements and Playground
Completion DatePending 2021 Completion
Value
$58M
Client + Contact
City of Santa Clarita
Wayne Weber, Parks Planning Manager wweber@santa-clarita.com (661) 255-4961
TeamRobert Godfrey, PMCMJon Hughes, PX
Roger Torriero, PIC
Cody Roth, Project Inspector
Jay Helekar, Estimator
Ryan Craven, Value Engineering
Reference Projects
D-27
1414
Vernola Community Center & Park Expansion
Jurupa Valley, CA
The Jurupa Area Recreation & Park District (JARPD) selected
Griffin Structures for the new Vernola Park Expansion and
Community Center project, also known as the Sky View Event
Center.
This new facility encompasses over 17,890 SF of building and
approximately 8.8 acres of land, featuring a new community
center with 360-person multi-purpose room, kitchen, and
supportive offices. Two asphalt paved parking lots, landscaping,
asphalt paving, and bio-retention basin were also included.
This new community center also utilizes a pre-engineered steel
frame supported on a shallow foundation system resulting in
exceptional savings for the JARPD.
Relevancy
• Community Center with Multi-
Purpose Room
• Park Facilities
Completion Date
• Vernola Community Center
Completed in 2021
• Park Phase II commencement TBD
Value
$12.2M
Client + Contact
Jurupa Area Recreation
& Park District
Colby Diguid, General Manager(909) 721-8065
Colby@jard.org
TeamRobert Godfrey, PMCM
Jon Hughes, PX
Roger Torriero, PIC
Jay Helekar, Estimator
Ryan Craven, Value Engineering
D-28
15
Quail Hill Community Center
Irvine, CA
The new 18,943 SF Quail Hill Community Center is one of the
largest community centers in the area, and serves to bring the
region together through education and exploration. Envisioned
as a gateway to nature, the goal was to create connected indoor
and outdoor spaces that offer various activities, programs and
classes—all connected to nature and the local trail system.
Sustainable features include solar panel arrays, high-efficiency
LED lighting, low water use fixtures, and native landscaping.
These strategies resulted in a LEED Gold certification through
the U.S. Green Building Council. The center houses an exercise
room for wellness activities such as dance and yoga classes;
classrooms, fine arts camps, adult art classes; and large multi-
purpose room. Outdoor spaces include gardens, playground, and
adjacent trails.
Awards include LEED Gold, APWA Project of the Year, CPRS
Award of Excellence, and USGBC EcoAward Most Sustainable
Land Plan.
Relevancy
• Community Center with Multi-
Purpose Rooms
• Classrooms
• Park Elements and Playground
Completion Date
2018
Value
$11M
Client + Contact
City of Irvine
Thomas Perez, PE
Former CIP Administrator
(949) 464-6688
tperez@lagunabeachcity.net
Team
Robert Godfrey, PMCM
Jon Hughes, PX Roger Torriero, PIC
Jay Helekar, Estimator
Ryan Craven, Value Engineering
D-29
16
Rancho Cucamonga Sports Center
Rancho Cucamonga, CA
This new 56,000 SF Rancho Cucamonga Sports Center serves
the City’s popular youth and adult basketball and volleyball
leagues. The project included two pre-engineered steel
structures–one enclosed and one open-air pavilion. The project
featured three indoor regulation-sized basketball/volleyball
courts as well as concession and public common areas, a
multipurpose room, restroom facilities, and administrative office
space.
The 21,500 SF open-air structure covered an additional
three full-size outdoor basketball courts, protecting players
and spectators from the sun and heat. The pre-engineered
metal building design resulted in savings of over $900,000,
both in materials and schedule savings during the 14-month
construction phase.
This project received the APWA Project of the Year award.
Relevancy
• Community/Recreational Center
with Multi-Purpose Rooms
• Three Indoor/Outdoor Courts
Completion Date
2018
Value
$14M
Client + Contact
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Jeff Benson
Management Analyst II (CIP Manager)
(909) 774-4137
Jeff.benson@cityofrc.us
Team
Robert Godfrey, PMCM
Jon Hughes, PX Roger Torriero, PIC
Jay Helekar, Estimator
Ryan Craven, Value Engineering
D-30
17
Robert Godfrey, with the Griffin team, has delivered over ten
projects in coordination with The Trust for Public Land, a non-profit
agency dedicated to the implementation of parks in-and-around
neighborhoods. We maintain excellent relationships with The Trust for
Public Land and encourage you to contact Robin Mark.
ALISO CREEK CONFLUENCE PARKCARLTON WAY PARK
• New Construction & Renovation
• Community Structures
• Children's Play Equipment
• Open Space Design
• Natural/Artificial Playfields
• Hardcourts & Softcourts
• Energy Efficient Design
• Park Maintenance Facilities
• ADA & Seismic Upgrades
BICENTENNIAL PARK
MADISON AVENUE BENITO JUAREZ PARK
SOUTH VICTORIA PARK
The Trust for Public Land
Robin Mark
Program Manager
robin.mark@tpl.org
(323) 223-0441
Non-Profit Park Projects
These projects feature:
RUDOLPH PARK
MONITOR AVENUE PARK
PATTON STREET PARK
D-31
18
Yorba Linda Library & Cultural Arts Center
Yorba Linda, CA
Griffin provided PMCM services for the construction of a new
two-story, approximately 45,000 SF library and 13,500 SF arts
center, in the downtown district of Yorba Linda. The library
features include a secure outdoor children’s area, expanded
collections areas, dedicated spaces for story time, teens and
tweens, small group study rooms, a community multi-purpose
room and flexible classroom space, friends of the library book
store, and improved technology features.
The Arts Center features a flexible 250-seat black box theater
with state-of-the-art sound system, art & dance studios, and
gallery high volume exhibit space. The campus-like environment
will feature a central paseo between the two structures,
dedicated outdoor plazas and a great lawn providing space for
additional programming.
This project was delivered $2M under budget and received an
ASCE Outstanding Community Improvement Project award.
Relevancy
• Community/Cultural Center with
Multi-Purpose Rooms
• High Volume Exhibit Spaces (Similar
to Discovery Rooms)• Classrooms
Completion Date
2020
Value
$52M
Client + Contact
City of Yorba Linda
Carrie Lixey Library Director (714) 777-2466
carrie.lixey@ylpl.org
TeamJon Hughes, PX
Roger Torriero, PIC
Jay Helekar, Estimator
Ryan Craven, Value Engineering
D-32
19
Carlsbad Pine Avenue Community Center & Garden
Carlsbad, CA
This new two-story, multi-generational project was comprised
of two primary components: an 18,000 SF two-story community
center with related site improvements and an ornamental
and community garden. The entire project was designed to
strengthen community connectivity, promote health and
wellness, and foster sustainability.
The first floor includes a history wall and the multi-purpose
gymnasium features a hardwood court striped for regulation
high school basketball, volleyball, badminton, and pickleball also
includes a scoreboard. A low climbing wall spans one side of the
gym. The second floor features meeting and activity rooms, a
teen center, homework room, classrooms, computer lab, and
covered terrace.
Outdoor highlights include an “ornamental” garden with a
community plaza, shade structure, drought tolerant plants,
picnic areas, artwork, a water feature, and seating. Each wooden
raised bed has its own watering source and can be leased to
residents for growing flowers and vegetables.
Relevancy
• Community Center with Multi-
Purpose Rooms
• Classrooms
• Gymnasium/Indoor Courts
• Outdoor Spaces/Garden
Completion Date
2018
Value
$12M
Client + Contact
City of Carlsbad
Steven Didier
Municipal Projects Manager
(706) 602-7539 sdidier@carlsbadca.gov
TeamJon Hughes, PX Roger Torriero, PIC
Jay Helekar, Estimator
Ryan Craven, Value Engineering
D-33
20
Frisbie Park Expansion
Rialto, CA
Griffin provided PMCM services for the expansion of Frisbie
Park. The 27.4-acre site is partially developed with six ball
fields, two basketball courts, a playground area, a pavilion, field
lighting, basketball and volleyball courts, and asphalt concrete
paved drive and parking areas.
The project included the renovation of some existing elements
such as an existing restroom; and an 8.5-acre expansion which
feature tennis courts, t-ball fields, two playgrounds, a skate park,
new restroom and concession building, perimeter walking paths,
open turf areas, lighting, shade structures, improved ADA access
and other visitor amenities.
Relevancy
• Significant Sports/Park Facility
• Playground
• Basketball Courts
• Outdoor Maintenace/Storage Facilities
Completion Date
2020
Value
$15M
Client + Contact
City of Rialto
Robert G. Eisenbeisz
Public Works Director (909) 384-5203
Eisenbeisz_Ro@sbcity.org
TeamJon Hughes, PX
Roger Torriero, PIC
Jay Helekar, Estimator
Ryan Craven, Value Engineering
D-34
21
Esencia Sports Park
Rancho Mission Viejo, CA
Designed to fit into a tiered landscape concept, Esencia Sports
Park is a 30-acre multi athletic park site in one of Rancho
Mission Viejo’s newest communities.
The lower park site encompasses two lighted baseball fields and
one lighted softball field with supporting amenities, including
covered dugouts, attached bullpens and soft toss cages, tiered
concrete spectator seating, batting cages and scoreboards. A
lighted multi-use soccer field with tiered concrete spectator
seating and a 1,500 SF concession/restroom building support
the team sports uses. The lower park also includes a children’s
tot lot and play features. The upper park site encompasses
two lighted tennis courts, two lighted pickleball courts, a
swimming pool with three swim lanes, splash pad, and a 1,500
SF pool building. The pool area amenities include community
barbecues and fire pits as well as cabanas surrounding the pool
for comfort.
This sports park was envisioned as a center for sports and family
activities with connections to Esencia’s network of trails.
Relevancy
• Significant Sports/Park Facility
• Playground
• Basketball Courts
• Outdoor Maintenance/Storage
Facilities
Completion Date
2020
Value
$20M
Client + Contact
Rancho Mission Viejo Company
Bill Sadler
Construction Manager
(562) 221-9779 bsadler@ranchomv.com
Team
Jon Hughes, PX Roger Torriero, PIC
Cody Roth, Project Inspector
Jay Helekar, Estimator
Ryan Craven, Value Engineering
D-35
22
The list below is inclusive of additional community
centers and parks completed which we have included
as a supplemental highlight and testament to our
extensive and relevant Project and Construction
Management public works portfolio, encompassing
most of Southern and Northern California.
Aliso Creek Park
Aliso Viejo Boys and Girls Club
Bicentennial Park
Bloomington Branch Library
Brea Sports Park
Buena Park Community Center
Burlingame Community Center
Capistrano Valley Boys and Girls Club Gardens
Carlton Way Pocket Park
Central Jefferson High School Park
College Park Aquatic & Recreation Center
Cypress Community Center
Cypress Mackay Park
Delhi Community Center & Park
Dixon Hall Memorial Park
El Centro Martin Luther King Sports Pavilion
Fullerton Lemon Park & Maple Community Center
Fullerton Multigenerational Community Center
Fullerton Tennis Center
Great Park Ice & Sports Complex
Hesperia Civic Plaza Park
Huntington Beach Senior Center in Central Park
Laguna Beach Community / Senior Center
Laguna Beach Senior Center Needs Assessment
Lake Forest Community Center
Lake Forest Sports Park
Lawndale Community Center
Lexington Sports Park
Lompoc Sports Complex
Long Beach Belmont Pool & Recreation Facilities
Madison Avenue Park
Marguerite Aquatics Complex
Marina Sailing Recreation Center & Park
Maywood Avenue Park
Mountain View Rengstorff Park Aquatic Center
Newport Beach Community Center
Northeast Stockton Library & Community Center
Patton Street Park
Placer Valley Sports Complex
Rancho Santa Margarita Civic Center Central Park
Rancho Santa Margarita Community Center
Roberts Pool Renovation
Rudolph Park
San Bruno Recreation & Aquatics Center
San Dimas Community Center Expansion
San Dimas Swim & Racquet Club Facilities
Santa Ana Parks and Recreation On-Call Park
Upgrades
Santa Clarita Canyon Country Community Center
Santa Monica On-Call Park Upgrades
Serenity Park
Silverlakes Sports and Equestrian Park
South Victoria Park
Summerwind Sports Park
Terra Lago Community Recreation Center
Tustin Peppertree Park
Vernola Park Expansion & Community Center
West Hollywood Plummer Park Community Ctr.
Westminster Parks Renovation
Wishing Tree Park
Zamora Park
D-36
4. Project Schedule“The Griffin team conducted detailed
review of change orders and ensured
the City got exactly what we paid for
and that the project stayed within
budget. The Griffin Structures team
delivered a very high-quality amenity
that will serve the community for years
to come.”
Thomas Perez, CIP Administrator
City of Irvine
Quail Hill Community Center D-37
4. Project Schedule
OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG
TTOOTTAALLSS
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 9900
10 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 118866
65 65 65 65 65 65 65 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 664477
24 32 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 90 22,,772266
40 40 8800
40 40 40 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 227700
Sr. Program & Construction Manager: Robert Godfrey
Construction Manager - Inspector: Cody Roth
Estimating - Cost Validation: Ryan Craven
Neighborhood Relations Specialist: Susan Harden
Final Inspections and Commissioning
Punch List and Closeout
Principal In Charge: Roger Torriero
Project Executive: Jon Hughes
Building Foundations
Building Core and Shell
Building Interiors
Site Hardscape and Features
Site Softscape Installation
PROJECT PHASE
MONTHLY STAFFING HOURS
22002211 22002222 22002233
PPRREECCOONNSSTTRRUUCCTTIIOONN
Initial Project Analysis and Start Up
Constructability Review of 50% Set
Design Management to 90%
Plan Check & Bid Doc Preparation
Contractor Prequalification
Contractor Bidding
CCOONNSSTTRRUUCCTTIIOONN
Demolition and Abatement
Grading and Underground
D-38
5. Quality Control Plan“Griffin’s construction management
team was instrumental in successfully
tackling the complexities of our public
project, which was ultimately delivered
on time and under budget.”
Laura Detweiler, Director
City of Newport Beach
Marina Sailing Recreation Center & Park D-39
2424
5. Quality Control Plan
Griffin's Project and Construction Managers are
inherently construction inspectors. By utilizing
our keen understanding of all aspects of design
and construction, our PMCM team will perform
the following key areas of focus to deliver quality
controlled, exceptional service:
Constructability Reviews
Griffin will provide a constructability review at key
milestones of the design process. We will review all
plans and reference materials and provide a report
with recommendations. At a minimum, the report
will cover the feasibility of construction methods,
current availability of materials and labor and time
requirements for procurement, and identify long lead
services and materials. Griffin will coordinate the
delivery of the report to City staff and the team. Our
input will be vital in identifying proactive measures of
success.
Construction Inspections
We will review material deliveries, material types,
installation methods, finished installations in
comparison to contract documents, and construction
code adherence. Additionally, we will coordinate the
timely execution of all specialty inspections, including
geotechnical, building dept., special inspections, and
materials testing, to ensure the City receives the
highest level of quality and consistency with the plans
and specifications as well as all standards and practices.
Photography and Technology
Griffin utilizes multiple forms of photography and
technology to enforce the quality of the construction
process. Accordingly, we will perform the following:
Video Tape Existing Conditions
Before a contractor begins construction, we will
perform detailed video surveillance of the entire site
and the surrounding site to ensure there is no damage
to the existing infrastructure and to mitigate against
any potential future claims.
Daily Photography
Griffin will photograph the progress of the job. This will
serve as a record of the project throughout the duration
of the job and serve as a vehicle for resolving issues.
Bluebeam Technology
Our team employs the use of Bluebeam technology
to facilitate communication challenges in the field for
their quick resolution and documentation.
BURLINGAME COMMUNITY CENTER
D-40
6. Acceptance of Conditions“Griffin Structures is a strong partner.
Their staff is highly competent,
efficient and professional. They were
able to complete our project within the
designated time frame and well below
budget.”
Maureen Gebelein, Facilities Director
City of Fullerton
Fullerton Multigenerational Community Center D-41
2525
We have reviewed the Contract Services Agreement for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and have included the
proposed exceptions and deviations below. We are ready, willing, and able to discuss these items immediately
and execute an agreement with the City as soon as possible.
1.1 – 5th line –delete “and warrants”. The use of “warrants” within a contract provision is a subtlety that
may extend the standard of care beyond what is expected and reasonable. The word “represents” in this
sentence already reflects that Consultant will do everything in our power to comply, we cannot warrant
that there will be absolute compliance.
1.11 – 0th line –delete the entire sentence beginning with “Consultant covenants…” and instead insert “In
providing services under this Agreement, Consultant shall perform in a manner consistent with, but limited
to, that degree of skill and care commonly used by other reputable members of Consultant’s profession
practicing in the same or similar locality and under similar circumstances. Nothing in this Agreement shall
be interpreted to require Consultant to meet any higher standard of care, and this paragraph shall control
over any such contrary provision.”
1.1 – 13th line – delete entire sentence beginning with “For purposes of this Agreement….”.
1.6 – f1st and 5th lines – replace “warrants” with “represents” – logic for this request is spelled out under
the first comment above.
3.1 – Replace this section with “The Consultant shall not be responsible for delays from any and all causes
beyond its reasonable control.”
5.2 (f) – 3rd line – delete “agents” and “and volunteers”.
5.2 (j) – 2nd line – same request as at 5.2 (f) above.
5.3 – 2nd line – delete “and agents”.
5.3 – 6th and 7th lines – delete “arising out of or in connection with” and replace with “as caused by the”, as
we do not wish to indemnify and defend for something we did not cause.
5.3 (a) – change “any action or actions filed in connection with any of said claims or liabilities” with “any
action or actions filed due to a claim or liability caused by”.
5.3 (b) – 2nd and 4th lines – delete “agents”.
5.3 (c) – 1st and 5th lines – delete “agents”.
8.2 – 2nd paragraph – 5th line – replace “warrants” with “represents” – same logic as explained in the first
comment above.
6. Acceptance of Conditions
D-42
2626
This page has been left intentionally blank.
CONFIDENTIAL
California Civil Code §3426.1 (d); California Evidence Code § 1040 and § 1060;
California Government Code § 6254 (k); Freedom of Information Act 5 U.S.C. § 552 (b) (4)
Do not release without redactions
D-43
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
OFFICE
2 Technology Drive, Suite 150
Irvine, CA 92618
(949) 497-9000
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
OFFICE
1850 Warburton Avenue, Suite 120
Santa Clara, CA 95050
(408) 955-0431
D-44
GRIFFIN STRUCTURES FEE PROPOSAL
LADERA LINDA COMMUNITY CENTER & PARK
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
08/27/2021
Griffin Structures’ Fee Proposal is based on all reasonable costs necessary to perform Construction Management &
Inspection Services for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Ladera Linda Community Center & Park project. For these
requisite services Griffin Structures proposes the following Not-to-Exceed Fee:
Project and Construction Management: $ 647,500
Reimbursable Expenses: $ 12,500
Grand Total $ 660,000
This proposal is offered as a Time & Materials, Not to Exceed fee. As such, all work will be performed on an as-
needed basis and not limited to any specific scope item or work effort. All costs will be billed based on actual time
spent. Any unused savings will be returned to the City or reallocated for another use as it deems appropriate.
All proposed hourly rates are fully burdened and include overhead profit, taxes, and benefits. The hours identified
for each individual employee and task are estimates only and are not to be construed as not to exceed hours for any
individual task, phase, or time period. We reserve the right to reallocate hours between staff members,
subconsultants, and tasks, in consultation with the City, in order to accomplish the overall objectives and
requirements of the project.
Services are based on the attached Fee Proposal and Resource Allocation Schedule, which provides detail on the
allocation of hours for services as they occur over time. Any extension of the schedule may result in additional fee,
in good faith negotiation with the City.
Should the Sr. Project Manager / Construction Manager or the Construction Manager – Inspector be away from the
project due to holidays, vacation, or other such absence, Griffin will provide alternate personnel and/or supplement
that absence with the suitable and appropriate work force to minimize disruption to the project.
APPROACH TO PROJECT SCHEDULE
This proposal assumes the following schedule as described in the RFP and as illustrated in the Resource Allocation
Schedule attached:
1. Pre-Construction: September 2021 thru March 2022 (7 Months)
2. Construction: March 2022 thru April 2023 (14 months)
E-1
3. Project Closeout: May 2023 thru June 2023 (2 Months)
APPROACH TO STAFFING AND PROJECT TEAM
To bring the highest level of efficiency and value to the City, Griffin Structures has assembled following team in
accordance with the scope of work described in the RFP:
Roger Torriero will service as Principal in Charge for the duration of the project and will provide direction and
quality assurance to the project team for a total of 90 hours. To bring value to the City, Roger’s time is offered AT
NO COST for a total VALUE ADDED of $24,750
Jon Hughes will serve as the Project Executive for the duration of the project and will provide as-needed leadership
to the team to ensure a successful delivery. Key to the success of the project will be Jon’s experience with public
safety facilities and his experience in public contracting procedures. For this level of service, we have allocated a
total of 186 hours of Jon’s time.
Robert Godfrey will serve as the Sr. Project & Construction Manager for the duration of the project. Robert will
bring leadership to the team, establish all construction management protocols, maintain all communications, and
bring his considerable experience managing the Pre-Construction phase of the project and then transition to a
supportive role during the Construction phase. For this level of service, we have allocated a total of 647 hours of
Robert’s time.
Cody Roth will serve as the Construction Manager & Inspector for this project. During Pre-Construction Cody will
support Robert Godfrey, performing constructability reviews, site staging analysis, and Contractor bid support.
Once Construction begins, Cody will be deployed full time to the site and serve as the Construction Manager and
quality assurance inspector for the duration of the project. For this level of service, we have allocated a total of
2726 hours of Cody’s time to this project.
Jay Helekar and Ryan Craven will provide cost validation and value engineering services for this project. In this
role they will review the cost estimates being provided by the design team and validate the accuracy of the estimate
for unit pricing and completeness.
QUALIFICATIONS AND EXCLUSIONS
1. Hourly rates are valid through December 2023 and will escalate by CPI annually thereafter.
2. On-site trailer rental, furniture, utilities, and sanitary facilities for our field staff (Project Management team)
are excluded. We assume that offices will be provided as part of the construction site trailer(s) being
provided by the City’s contractor.
3. Costs for all permits required for the project are excluded. It is assumed that the City will pay for all
permitting fees, assessments, easements, school fees, and other agency or governmental fees or costs to
support the design and construction the project. We have not included any permit related fees within our
fee proposal. Permits will be pulled by others.
4. At no cost to the Owner, and subject to Internal Revenue Code 179D, (Deduction for Energy Efficient
Commercial Buildings) Owner agrees to allocate any applicable tax deductions to construction manager
(Griffin Structures) as may be relevant to ‘public entity’ projects.
5. Costs for surveying, construction staking, environmental and hazardous materials surveys, and all
environmental and hazardous materials transportation and remediation costs are excluded
E-2
6. Software licenses or user fees and all software training costs for specific project management software being
required by either the City or their contractor(s) is excluded.
7. Cost of bulk blueprinting for plans and specifications for use by the contractors and subcontractors is
excluded. Funds included in reimbursable expenses are for Griffin printing costs alone.
8. Wage Compliance Program including Certified Payroll auditing, field interviews, or reporting is excluded.
Based on State Law SB 854, it is assumed that the Dept. of Industrial Relations (DIR) will manage this effort
at the State level. Griffin will enforce the Contractor registration requirements stipulated by the DIR.
9. Independent or third-party testing companies such as Roofing, Peer Reviews, LEED, or other specialized
third-party oversight services other than those listed herein are excluded.
10. Commissioning requirements required by Cal Green (Title 24) are excluded. Griffin will manage the
commissioning process, but we have not included a commissioning agent, nor development of
commissioning specifications.
11. Security and 24-hour surveillance is excluded.
12. Construction Manager will review all RFI’s, Submittals, and Substitutions only for completeness, approvals
to be executed by the designer of record. RFI’s that are not design related will be reviewed by the
Construction Manager in coordination with the City as needed.
13. For document tracking control, Griffin has included the use of “Submittal Exchange” for managing
construction documentation, and based the hours allocated in this proposal accordingly. The cost of
“Submittal Exchange” is included here as a reimbursable expense.
14. This proposal does not include a formal independent Inspector of Record (IOR). All City Building Dept.
Permit Inspections are assumed to be performed by the City Building Dept.
15. Cost Validation services include unit pricing confirmation and a general overview of categories and quantities
for completeness. A complete and independent construction cost estimate is excluded.
16. Construction Cost Estimates, when provided, are based on standard industry practice, professional
experience, and knowledge of market conditions. Griffin has no control over material and labor costs,
contractor’s methods of establishing prices or the market and bidding conditions at the time of bid.
Therefore, Griffin does not guarantee that bids received will not vary from the cost estimate provided and
Griffin is not liable for any costs, liabilities, or damages incurred by City arising from Griffin’s opinion of
cost, the actual project cost to City, delays caused by events outside the control of Griffin, or any labor or
material cost increases.
17. Griffin is not responsible for, and City will hold Griffin harmless from, any schedule delays and/or any
losses, damages, or liabilities resulting therefrom that are caused by (1) events or conditions that are outside
of Griffin’s control or (2) the acts or omissions of parties for whom Griffin is not legally liable (collectively,
“Non-Consultant Delays”). The schedule for completion will be extended for any Non-Consultant Delays.
If Griffin incurs additional costs or expenses due to Non-Consultant Delays, then Griffin’s fee compensation
will be equitably adjusted to cover such additional costs or expenses.
E-3
INSPECTIONS RESPONSIBILITY MATRIX
In the interest of clarifying scope items related to inspections, below is an inspections responsibility matrix. This is
provided as a general overview of inspections and is not intended to serve as a comprehensive list of all required
inspections. Griffin Structures will work with the City to modify this list prior to contractor bidding, negotiation
with the design team for construction administration, and procurement of the testing & inspections firm.
NO.INSPECTIONS GRIFFIN
GEOTECHNICAL &
SPECIAL
INSPECTIONS
CITY BUILDING
DEPT.UTILITIES ARCHITECTURE &
ENGINEERING
GENERAL
CONTRACTOR
1 Daily progress inspections X
2 Quality assurance, project wide X
3 Issues investigation & resolution X
4 Site walks with owner and A&E X X X
5 SWPPP monitoring & support X X
6 SWPPP Qualified Stormwater Practitioner X
7 Safety monitoring & support X
8 OSHA safety compliance x
9 All Bldg Dept. required inspections X
10 Wet utilities inspections X
11 Dry utilities inspections X
12 Trench backfill X
13 Footing bottoms X
14 Foundation rebar X
15 Mansonry and masonry grout X
16 Onsite welding X
17 Concrete placement (continuous)X
18 Concrete break test X
19 Concrete slump test X
20 Grading X
21 Building pad acceptance X X X X X
22 Soils compaction X
23 Line & grade survey X X
24 Line & grade certification X X X
25 Any required special inspections X
26 Engineering inspections X
27 Concrete mix design X X
28 Tie backs and pull tests X
29 Driven piles X
30 Final Inspections X X X X X
E-4
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Ladera Linda Community Center and Park
Fee Proposal
PRINCIPAL IN
CHARGE PROJECT EXECUTIVE
SR PROJECT &
CONSTRUCTION
MANAGER
CONSTRUCTION
MANAGER -
INSPECTOR
ESTIMATING - COST
VALIDATION
Roger Torriero Jon Hughes Robert Godfrey Cody Roth Jay Helekar
$275/hr.$210/hr.$185/hr.$175/hr. $165/hr.
1 PRE-CONSTRUCTION 24 62 350 228 80
1.1 General Management Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.1.1 Develop Project Work Plan Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.1.2 Prepare Reports, Deliver Presentations, and Lead Meetings Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.1.3 Submit Weekly Project Status Reports Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.2 Schedule Management Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.2.1 Prepare Overall Project Schedule Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.2.2 Conduct Regular Design Progress Meetings Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.2.3 Proactively Identify and Mitigate Schedule Risk Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.3 Budget Management Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.3.1 Prepare Overall Project Budget Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.3.2 Track Actual Costs by Phase Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.3.3 Proactively Identify and Mitigate Budget Risk Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.3.4 Prepare Design Change Order and Contract Amendment Packages Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.3.5 Review Pay Requests/Invoices from Project Team Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.4 Quality Management Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.4.1 Perform Quality Assurance Review of all Submittals Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.4.2 Perform Constructability Reviews of Design Submittals Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.4.3 Perform Value Engineering Review Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.4.4 Recommend and Negotiate Design Team Scope of Services During Construction Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.5 Coordination Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.5.1 Coordinate with Outside Agencies Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.5.2 Assist with Bidder Solicitation Activities Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.5.3 Assist with FF&E Procurement Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
1.5.4 Assist with Temporary Relocation of Staff Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2 CONSTRUCTION 56 112 168 2408 0
2.1 Continuation of General Management Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.2 Continuation of Schedule Management Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.3 Continuation of Budget Management Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.4 Continuation of Quality Management Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.5 Continuation of Coordination Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.6 Serve as City's Representative During Construction Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.7 Oversee Construction Inspectors Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.8 Conduct Weekly Progress Meetings Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.9 Review, Comment On and Recommend Acceptance of Contractor's Schedule Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.10 Review and Coordinate Contractor Submittals Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.11 Review and Coordinate Contractor RFI's Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.12 Periodic Spot Check Field Inspections Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.13 Oversee Construction Daily Reports Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.14 Collect and File All Project Documentation Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.15 Review all Change Orders and Make Recommendations Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.16 Review All Pay Requests and Make Recommendations Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.17 Proactively Identify and Investigate Potential Construction Problems Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.18 Document Non-Compliance Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
2.19 In Consultation with the City, Act as Liaison Between City and Public Stakeholders Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
3 PROJECT CLOSEOUT 4 8 10 212 0
3.1 Coordinate and Schedule Final Punch List Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
3.2 Address Unresolved Contractor Issues Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
3.3 Finalize Record Drawings and Project Documentation Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
3.4 Prepare All Final Reports for Acceptance of Project Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
3.5 Recommend for Final Acceptance of Project Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
3.6 Transmit Approved Red Lines Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
3.7 Provide Electronic Version of All Drawings Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
3.8 Finalize and Deliver all Labor Compliance Files to the City Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
3.9 Finalize and Deliver all Construction Files to the City Incl Incl Incl Incl Incl
Total Hours 84 182 528 2848 80
Subtotals $23,100 $38,220 $97,680 $498,400 $13,200
PROJECT / CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT TOTAL NO CHARGE $647,500
4 REIMBURSABLE COSTS $12,500
4.1 Submittal Exchange $10,000
4.2 Misc. Printing and Office Supplies $2,500
GRAND TOTAL $660,000
Item No.PROJECT PHASE
Griffin Structures 08/27/2021E-5
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Ladera Linda Community Center and Park
Resource Allocation Schedule
SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG
PRECONSTRUCTION
Initial Project Analysis and Start Up
Constructability Review of 50% Set
Design Management to 90%
Plan Check & Bid Doc Preparation
Contractor Prequalification
Contractor Bidding & Mobilization
CONSTRUCTION
Demolition and Abatement
Grading and Underground
Building Foundations
Building Core and Shell
Building Interiors
Site Hardscape and Features
Site Softscape Installation
Final Inspections and Commissioning
Punch List and Closeout
TOTALS
Principal In Charge: Roger Torriero 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 0 84
Project Executive: Jon Hughes 20 10 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 0 182
Sr. Program & Construction Manager: Robert Godfrey 25 65 65 65 65 65 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 10 0 528
Construction Manager - Inspector: Cody Roth 24 32 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 40 2,848
Estimating - Cost Validation: Ryan Craven 40 40 80
Principal In Charge: Roger Torriero 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ 1,100$ -$ -$ -$ NO CHARGE
Project Executive: Jon Hughes 4,200$ 2,100$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ 1,680$ -$ -$ -$ 38,220$
Sr. Program & Construction Manager: Robert Godfrey 4,625$ 12,025$ 12,025$ 12,025$ 12,025$ 12,025$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 2,220$ 1,850$ -$ -$ -$ 97,680$
Construction Manager - Inspector: Cody Roth -$ 4,200$ -$ 5,600$ -$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 30,100$ 7,000$ -$ -$ 498,400$
Estimating - Cost Validation: Ryan Craven -$ 6,600$ -$ 6,600$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 13,200$
8,825$ 24,925$ 13,705$ 25,905$ 13,705$ 43,805$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 34,000$ 33,630$ 7,000$ -$ -$ 647,500$
PROJECT PHASE
MONTHLY STAFFING HOURS
2022 20232021
Griffin Structures 08/27/2021E-6