CC SR 20221115 J - Gensler Contract Amendment
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 11/15/2022
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Calendar
AGENDA TITLE:
Consideration and possible action to approve an amendment to the professional service
agreement with Gensler for added services to complete the preliminary site plans for the
Civic Center Master Plan Project
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
(1) Authorize Amendment No. 1 to the professional services agreement with Gensler,
in the not-to-exceed amount of $29,480, for added services to update the
preliminary site plans for the Civic Center Master Plan Project to include fire and
sheriff stations and a parking structure as an alternative option in response to
concerns expressed by officials with Los Angeles County, and to relocate
programmatic components as public safety elements for consideration by General
Services Administration (GSA), Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal
Emergency Administration (FEMA).
(2) Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the amendment in a form
acceptable to the City Attorney.
FISCAL IMPACT: These actions will result in a City expenditure not to exceed $29,480.
The original contract with Gensler was for $59,800. The cumulative
total is $89,280 which includes 10% for reimbursable expenses.
Amount Budgeted: $340,000
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): 330-400-8503-8001 (CIP Funds – Civic Center/Professional Services)
ORIGINATED BY: Matt Waters, Senior Administrative Analyst
REVIEWED BY: Karina Bañales, Deputy City Manager
APPROVED BY: Ara Mihranian, AICP, City Manager
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
A. Contract Services Agreement Amendment with Gensler (A-1)
B. Gensler Proposal (B-1)
C. February 15, 2022 Gensler Professional Services Agreement
D. Updated Program Document
E. October 27, 2022 Civic Center Advisory Committee Staff Report
1
BACKGROUND:
Beginning in 2018, Gensler facilitated the creation of a program document for the Civic
Center site that was eventually approved by the City Council in 2019. The program
document essentially identifies the estimated square footage of the uses proposed to be
located at the Civic Center. On August 17, 2021, Gensler was authorized by the City
Manager to perform additional services for $24,800 to conduct a program validation of
the 2019 program document because it had been almost two years since the Civic Center
Advisory Committee (CCAC) and the City Council approved it and it also needed to be
revised to address potential changes to operations at City Hall in light of COVID-19. On
December 7, 2021, the City Council approved the program document validation based on
a recommendation made by the CCAC (Attachment D).
On February 15, 2022, the City Council approved, among other things, a professional
services agreement with Gensler to perform initial site planning services as part of Phase
1: Project feasibility and Preliminary Site Planning (Attachment C). Gensler was identified
as the appropriate company for this component of Phase 1 due to its familiarity with the
site and its previous work on the project program document. The preliminary site plan is
intended to assist in the development of the project’s conceptual budget, as well as guide
the eventual master planning design efforts.
Since February 2022, Gensler has been working with the CCAC to develop preliminary
site plan options that would eventually be presented to the City Council. The CCAC
reviewed various iterations of a preliminary site plan and ultimately identified the following
as the preferred preliminary site plan:
2
This past summer, as staff began to develop the conceptual budget for the CCAC’s review
based on the preferred preliminary site plan, a funding, logistical, and commitment
concern was raised by the City Manager on the likelihood of Los Angeles County
constructing both a fire station and sheriff station on the top of a parking structure with
direct ingress and egress onto Hawthorne Blvd. The City Manager’s concern was initially
brought to the CCAC’s attention at its July 28, 2022 meeting. As a result, the CCAC
directed staff to reach out to officials with Los Angeles County regarding their level of
commitment to sheriff and fire stations being part of the Civic Center Master Plan.
At its September 22 and October 27, 2022 meetings, the CCAC received an update on
outreach efforts to Los Angeles County officials, as well as on recent concerns raised by
GSA, DOJ, and FEMA about public safety zone requirements, particularly in relation to
the possible removal of the sheriff and fire stations from the primary preliminary site
design.
Based on information presented to the CCAC over the past few months, on October 27
the CCAC approved Staff’s recommendation seeking City Council authorization to amend
Gensler’s contract to modify the preliminary site plans to include fire and sheriff stations
and a parking structure as an alternative option and to update the preliminary site plans
with other components of the program document as public safety elements for
consideration by GSA, DOJ, and FEMA (Attachment E).
This evening, the City Council is being asked to consider the CCAC’s recommendation
to amend the professional services agreement with Gensler to modify the preliminary site
plan based on information obtained from Los Angeles County and GSA, DOJ, and FEMA
(Attachment A).
DISCUSSION:
The following discussion summarizes the issues and concerns gleaned from discussions
with officials from Los Angeles County and GSA regarding the Civic Center Master Plan
as it relates to the public safety programmatic components of the project.
Los Angeles County Outreach
At its July 28, 2022, meeting, the CCAC discussed removing a Los Angeles County Fire
Department station, a Los Angeles County Sheriff substation, and a parking structure that
would allow access to Hawthorne Boulevard from the overflow parking lot . The fire and
sheriff stations had been part of the design considerations for the site since the project
began based on their strong scores on a 2017 resident survey and a subsequent 2018
public workshop. Both components are part of the program document and considered
public safety by the federal agencies.
The July 28 Staff Report noted that while there was general support from the Los Angeles
County Sheriff and Fire Departments officials throughout the process, a firm commitment
3
of interest and financial support was never obtained from the County. In addition, Staff
noted that recent conversations with both Fire and Sheriff officials ha d not been
encouraging regarding either Department’s willingness to commit to the Civic Center
project. Staff also expressed concerns regarding line of sight, traffic concerns with
multiple signalized driveways, potential impacts on neighboring residents, no tangible
difference to sheriff response times, and a decrease in fire department response time to
the east side of the City if Station No. 53 were to close.
At the direction of the CCAC, Staff held meetings with a number of Los Angeles County
officials, including Joe Nicchitta, Chief Deputy CEO of Los Angeles County’s Chief
Executive Office, John Cooke, Assistant Chief Executive Officer of the County’s Asset
Management Branch, and Mark Baucum, Chief of Staff to Los Angeles C ounty Supervisor
Janice Hahn. Staff and County officials discussed the review of the project in detail and
the likelihood of obtaining a firm commitment from the County to fund the construction of
a fire or sheriff station at the Civic Center site. While no definitive commitment or rejection
was received at these meetings, the consensus was that funding or support was unlikely.
Below is a summary of the concerns:
• Limited available County funding for fire or sheriff station construction.
• Fire and sheriff have separate funding sources, which raised concerns about how
that would be coordinated and allocated with a shared facility. In addition, different
funding sources for sheriff and fire stations would be a complicating factor.
• New stations are usually allocated for areas in the County experiencing population
growth and development, which is not the case in Rancho Palos Verdes. They
noted that developers' funding for these new facilities is part of their project’s
mitigation measures for increased housing.
• Fire stations are not built on top of vertical structures (i.e., parking structures). They
expressed a concern with the weight a fire truck, not to mention multiple fire trucks
and equipment, would have on a parking structure and the added cost of
engineering such a structure. They noted that slab on grade is the standard
construction approach.
• The County had done a prioritization assessment of fire stations in the Palos
Verdes Area, and Station No. 2, located in Palos Verdes Estates, has the highest
rated priority for possible replacement. Thus, if funding were to become available,
it would be for Fire Station No. 2.
• Concerns about vehicle turning radius and other logistical issues.
• Ingress and egress concerns onto Hawthorne Blvd.
• The fiscal impact of failed Los Angeles County Fire District, California, Measure
FD, Parcel Tax of 2020, a parcel tax measure that would have generated an
estimated $134 million annually to hire and train firefighters and paramedics,
replace aging equipment and vehicles, and fund new facilities.
• Little to no current capital planning for sheriff stations or substations .
• Mark Baucum noted that funding was technically possible but unlikely , given the
factors noted above.
4
Federal Government Outreach (GSA, DOJ, and FEMA)
On October 29, 2019, the City Council approved agreements with the United States
government regarding Civic Center property deed restrictions. This action followed an
extensive lobbying effort to shift oversight of that section of the property from the National
Park Service (NPS) to the DOJ and FEMA with oversight by GSA. Passive recreation
covenants on approximately 9.5 acres on the eastern side of the Civic Center property
were replaced with law enforcement (overseen by DOJ) and emergency management
(overseen by FEMA) covenants. This area is commonly referred to as the “public safety
zone.” GSA is responsible for the overall Federal administration of the site and
compliance with the covenants.
On July 28, 2022, the CCAC directed Staff to approach both DOJ and FEMA to clarify
questions and concerns about “public safety zone” requirements on the Civic Center site,
particularly about the possible removal of the sheriff and fire stations from the primary
preliminary site design, although it would be retained as an alternate option. Both DOJ
and FEMA expressed concerns about the removal of the fire and sheriff stations as they
were understood to be the basis for public safety . They also expressed concerns that
parts of several site components in the “general government zone” that are not public
safety-related extend into the “public safety zone” as shown below in shaded blue.
5
Both agencies referenced a site plan submitted in 2018 to GSA that was subsequently
reviewed and accepted by both the DOJ and FEMA. The submitted site plan was part of
the basis for approving the transfer of authority from NPS to GSA. The site plan was
created by the firm of Richard Fisher Associates and submitted to GSA and NPS by City
as part of the application process (see below).
This site plan was not known, used, or reviewed by the CCAC, current Staff, or Gensler
in creating the current program document or the preliminary site plans that have been
reviewed by the CCAC.
During subsequent conversations with DOJ, FEMA, and GSA, it became apparent that
there was an assumption on their part that the 2018 Richard Fisher Associates site plan
was an approved site plan that was going to be implemented by the City.
Staff reached out to DOJ and FEMA for clarity and greater detail, and to arrange a
meeting to discuss the next steps and ask follow -up questions, only to be informed that
the next step would be submitting a revised site plan for their review. No clarifying
questions would be addressed prior to that submission. In fact, they declined any further
communications with Staff until a revised site plan was submitted.
6
Staff subsequently met with Anita Lee, a Realty Specialist in the Real Property Utilization
& Disposal Division of GSA. She reiterated the need to submit a revised site plan to all
three Federal agencies and said the unwillingness to meet in advance of submission was
a common practice. She noted that other Civic Center elements could serve a law
enforcement or public safety purpose and may be viewed as acceptable substitutes for a
sheriff or fire station.
Ms. Lee raised the possibility that the City may be non-compliant if concrete steps are not
made toward the completion of the Civic Center per an approved site plan with public
safety elements. While emphasizing that the GSA would work closely with the City on
revisions to the project plans, she noted that non-compliance could eventually lead to the
“public safety zone” of the property reverting to Federal control which could result in an
eventual sale of the land. She added that the City could purchase the restricted “public
safety zone” and own in fee or a portion thereof at the current fair market value. She
reiterated that the GSA would rather work towards resolving any issues and advised that
creating and submitting a revised site plan was the appropriate next step.
Amended Gensler Professional Services Agreement
At its October 27, 2022, meeting the CCAC discussed the outreach to L os Angeles
County officials and the feedback from DOJ, FEMA, and GSA. Staff discussed proposed
and possible public safety and law enforcement components that could be included in the
“public safety zone” to offset the potential removal of the fire and sheriff stations. The se
components may include a multi-city emergency operations center (EOC), maintenance
yard (for emergency staging and response), Sheriff drop -in office, Park Ranger offices
and storage, and a helipad. The use of the current overflow parking lot area as an
emergency evacuation zone, relief and recovery center was also discussed.
The City Council is being asked to amend the Gensler professional services agreement
to allow for additional work, not originally envision ed, to modify the preliminary site plan
based on feedback from Los Angeles County and the federal agencies. Gensler
submitted a proposal for added services (Attachment B). The wording of the services
and the time frame was modified by Staff in the preparation of the agreement amendment.
If approved by the City Council tonight, the following proposed added services would be
performed by Gensler:
Preliminary/Conceptual Site Planning updates to prior pre-design deliverables:
• Re-plan radial bar scheme to fit General Government Use program elements within
existing civic center 7.79 acre boundary
• Remove the sheriff substation, fire station, and parking structure program elements
from this plan, but to be retained as an alternate option.
• Incorporate additional law enforcement and emergency/public safety components
including, but not limited to, sheriff drop-in office, multi-City emergency operations
center (EOC), maintenance yard, parking lot (evacuation area), and Park Ranger
facilities into Public Safety Zone to address concerns raised by federal agencies.
7
• Conduct up to two (2) public presentations to CCAC in December 2022 and
January 2023, or on an agreeable date.
• Submit CCAC approved revised site plan to federal agencies.
The total increase for added services is $29,4 80 bringing the total contract amount to
$89,200 which includes 10% for approved reimbursable expenses.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Next Steps
Gensler will work with Staff, Griffin Structures, the Civic Center Project Manager, and the
CCAC to modify the preliminary site plan as described above in the list of added services.
The CCAC will review the revised plan at a subsequent meeting, potentially in December
2022. Based on feedback from that meeting, Gensler will refine a plan to be reviewed by
the CCAC at a subsequent meeting. Following their review, a revised site plan, along
with a written narrative explaining and justifying the repositioning of site components, will
be forwarded to GSA, DOJ, and FEMA for review and acceptance. The list of components
would be based on the Council-approved Program document, not on new features.
Civic Center Master Plan Conceptual Project Budget
Determining that the proposed preliminary site plan is acceptable to those federal
agencies is a crucial step that needs to be completed before developing a preliminary
conceptual project budget. Once accepted by the federal agencies, as well as the CCAC,
Griffin Structures will work with Staff and Gensler to develop a preliminary conceptual
budget. The Finance Advisory Committee will also be asked to review the preliminary
budget and identify potential funding sources. A recommendation will then be presented
to the City Council for its consideration.
Project Cost Summary
The project cost table on the following page summarizes the current CIP project budget.
According to the cost table, the project budget is $591,167 of which $340,000 was
included in the FY 2022-23 budget. To date, the City has spent almost $223,000 in
Professional/Technical Services for the Civic Center.
8
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends approving Amendment No. 1 to the current professional services
agreement with Gensler to perform additional preliminary site planning services for the
Civic Center Master Plan Project. If approved, following completion of the additional
services by Gensler, Staff would proceed with submitting the revised plans to DOJ,
FEMA, and GSA for their review. Following that review, Staff will proceed with developing
a preliminary conceptual project budget.
ALTERNATIVES:
In addition to Staff recommendation, the following alternative actions are available for the
City Council’s consideration:
1. Do not approve a contract services agreement amendment with Gensler and give
alternative direction to Staff regarding site plan preliminary site planning services
for the Civic Center Master Plan Project.
2. Take other action, as deemed appropriate.
9
AMENDMENT NO. 1
TO CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR
CIVIC CENTER PRE-DESIGN SERVICES
This AMENDMENT to that certain “PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR
CIVIC CENTER PRE-DESIGN SERVICES” (“Amendment No. 1”) by and between the CITY
OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES, a municipal corporation (“City”), and GENSLER, a California
corporation (“Consultant”), is effective as of November 15, 2022.
RECITALS
A. City and Consultant entered into that certain Agreement for Professional Services,
dated February 15, 2022 (“Agreement”), whereby Consultant agreed to provide identified pre-design
services, including preliminary/conceptual site planning, for the purpose of assessing overall Civil
Center site constraints and capabilities (the “Services”) for a Contract Sum of $59,800.00. The
Agreement provided for a one (1) year term from and after the date of the Agreement.
B. City and Consultant now desire to amend the Agreement to increase the Scope of
Services, Exhibit “A,” increase the total compensation, and adjust the Term of the Agreement.
TERMS
1. Contract Changes. The Agreement is amended as provided herein. Deleted text is
indicated in strikethrough and added text in bold italics.
“2.1. Contract Sum. For the services rendered pursuant to this Agreement,
Consultant shall be compensated in accordance with the “Schedule of Compensation”
attached hereto as Exhibit “C” and incorporated herein by this reference, but not
exceeding the maximum contract amount of $59,800 (Fifty-Nine Thousand Eight
Hundred Dollars) $89,280 (Eighty Six Thousand Two Hundred Eighty Dollars)
together with reimbursable expenses approved by City’s Contract Officer (including a
10% mark-up to such expenses) (the “Contract Sum”).”
“3.4. Term. Unless earlier terminated in accordance with Article 7 of this
Agreement, this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect until completion of
the services but not exceeding one year from the date hereof except as otherwise
provided in the Schedule of Performance (Exhibit “D”).”
“Scope of Services, Exhibit A(I)(A). Consultant shall perform the following
identified pre-design services, including preliminary/conceptual site planning, for the
purpose of assessing overall Civil Center site constraints and capabilities to assist
Griffin Structures in developing a project cost(s) for a Civic Center construction
project. Consultant shall engage in six (6) public presentations (including a pre-
design workshop, one workshop for City Staff and one workshop for the Civic Center
Advisory Committee). Consultant shall preform the following additional services:
A-1
01203.0005/834383.1 -2-
Preliminary/Conceptual Site Planning updates to prior pre-design deliverables to
re-plan radial bar scheme to fit General Government Use program elements within
existing civic center 7.79 acre boundary (Public Safety Zone). Such additional
services shall include removal of sheriff, fire department, and parking structure
program elements from this plan, but to be retained as an alternate option. Such
additional services shall include addition of law enforcement and emergency/public
safety components including, but not limited to, Sheriff drop-in office, multi-City
Emergency Operations Center, maintenance yard, parking lot (evacuation area),
and Park Ranger facilities into Public Safety Zone to address concerns raised by
federal agencies. Such additional services shall include up to two (2) public
presentations to City’s Civic Center Advisory Committee in December 2022 and
January 2023, or on an agreeable date.”
2. Continuing Effect of Agreement. Except as amended by this Amendment, all
provisions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect. From and after the
date of this Amendment, whenever the term “Agreement” appears in the Agreement, it shall mean
the Agreement, as amended by this Amendment to the Agreement.
3. Affirmation of Agreement; Warranty Re Absence of Defaults. City and
Consultant each ratify and reaffirm each and every one of the respective rights and obligations
arising under the Agreement. Each party represents and warrants to the other that there have been no
written or oral modifications to the Agreement other than as provided herein. Each party represents
and warrants to the other that the Agreement is currently an effective, valid, and binding obligation.
Consultant represents and warrants to City that, as of the date of this Amendment, City is not
in default of any material term of the Agreement and that there have been no events that, with the
passing of time or the giving of notice, or both, would constitute a material default under the
Agreement.
City represents and warrants to Consultant that, as of the date of this Amendment, Consultant
is not in default of any material term of the Agreement and that there have been no events that, with
the passing of time or the giving of notice, or both, would constitute a material default under the
Agreement.
4. Adequate Consideration. The parties hereto irrevocably stipulate and agree that they
have each received adequate and independent consideration for the performance of the obligations
they have undertaken pursuant to this Amendment.
5. Authority. The persons executing this Amendment 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 Amendment on behalf of said party, (iii) by so executing this Amendment, such party is
formally bound to the provisions of this Amendment, and (iv) the entering into this Amendment does
not violate any provision of any other agreement to which said party is bound.
[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
A-2
01203.0005/834383.1 -3-
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
David L. Bradley, Mayor
ATTEST:
Teresa Takaoka, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ALESHIRE & WYNDER, LLP
William W. Wynder, City Attorney
CONSULTANT:
GENSLER
By:
Name: Peter Barsuk
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.
A-3
01203.0005/834383.1
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
On __________, 2022 before me, ________________, personally appeared ________________, proved to me on the
basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose names(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their
signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the
instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true
and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature: _____________________________________
OPTIONAL
Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could
prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form .
CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT
INDIVIDUAL
CORPORATE OFFICER
_______________________________
TITLE(S)
PARTNER(S) LIMITED
GENERAL
ATTORNEY-IN-FACT
TRUSTEE(S)
GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR
OTHER_______________________________
______________________________________
SIGNER IS REPRESENTING:
(NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITY(IES))
_____________________________________________
_____________________________________________
___________________________________
TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT
___________________________________
NUMBER OF PAGES
___________________________________
DATE OF DOCUMENT
___________________________________
SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the
document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy or validity of that document.
A-4
01203.0005/834383.1
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
On __________, 2022 before me, ________________, personally appeared ________________, proved to me on the
basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose names(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their
signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the
instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true
and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature: _____________________________________
OPTIONAL
Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could
prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form .
CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT
INDIVIDUAL
CORPORATE OFFICER
_______________________________
TITLE(S)
PARTNER(S) LIMITED
GENERAL
ATTORNEY-IN-FACT
TRUSTEE(S)
GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR
OTHER_______________________________
______________________________________
SIGNER IS REPRESENTING:
(NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITY(IES))
_____________________________________________
_____________________________________________
___________________________________
TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT
___________________________________
NUMBER OF PAGES
___________________________________
DATE OF DOCUMENT
___________________________________
SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the
document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy or validity of that document.
A-5
•
B-1
•
•
•
B-2