Agenda
Regular Meeting of the
Bell City Council/Bell Community Housing Authority/Successor Agency to the Bell Community Redevelopment Agency/ Bell Public Finance Authority
Wednesday, January 26, 2022
5:00 P.M. CLOSED SESSION
7:00 P.M. OPEN SESSION
Alicia Romero
Mayor
Ana Maria Quintana Monica Arroyo
Vice-Mayor Council Member
Fidencio J. Gallardo Ali Saleh Council Member Council Member
Welcome to the City Council Meeting
The Bell City Council and staff welcome you. This is your City Government.
Individual participation is a basic part of American Democracy and all Bell residents are encouraged to attend meetings of the City Council. Regular City Council meetings are held the second and fourth Wednesday of the month at 7:00 p.m., Bell Co mmunity Center , 6 250 Pine Avenue. For more information, you may call City Hall during regular business hours 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday at (323) 588-6211 Extension 2615.
City Council Organization
There are five City Council members, one of whom serves as Mayor and is the presiding officer of the City Council. These are your elected representatives who act as a Board of Directors for the City of Bell. City Council members are like you, concerned residents of the community who provide guidance in the operation of your City.
Addressing the City Council
If you wish to speak to the City Council on any item which is listed or not listed on the City Council Agenda, please complete a Request to Speak Card available in the back of the City Council Chambers. Please submit the completed card to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. The Mayor will call you to the microphone at the appropriate time if you have filled out a Request to Speak Card. At that time, approach the podium and please clearly state your name and address, and proceed to make your comments.
Compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act
The City of Bell, in complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), request individuals who require special accommodation(s) to access, attend, and or participate in a City meeting due to disability. Please contact the City Clerk’s Office, (323) 588 -6211, Ext. 2 615, at least one business day prior to the scheduled meeting to ensure that we may assist you.
Statement Regarding Compensation for Members of the Bell City Council
Compensation for the members of the Bell City Council is $673 a month. In accordance with Government Code Section 54952.3, Councilmembers will not receive any additional compensation or stipend for the convening of the following regular meetings: Successor Agency to the Bell Community Redevelopment Agency, the Bell Community Housing Authority, the Bell Public Finance Authority, the Bell Surplus Property Authority, and the Bell Solid Waste Authority.
Meeting of the
Bell City Council and Related Agencies
January 26, 2022
REGULAR JOINT MEETING OF THE
Bell City Council/Bell Community Housing Authority/Successor Agency to the Bell Community Redevelopment Agency/Bell Public Finance Authority
January 26, 2022
5:00 P.M. Closed Session
7:00 P.M. Regular Meeting
Call to Order
Roll Call of the City Council in their capacities as Councilmembers/Members of all Related Agencies: Arroyo, Gallardo, Saleh, Quintana and Romero
Communications from the Public on Closed Session Items
This is the time for members of the public to address the City Council and related Authorities and Agencies only on items that are listed under Closed Session.
THIS MEETING WILL BE CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF AB 361 WHICH ALLOWS FOR THE CITY
COUNCIL AND/OR CITY STAFF TO PARTICIPATE VIA TELECONFERENCE
On September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed AB 361, which modified the Brown Act to allow for teleconferencing participation at local legislative body public meetings during a proclaimed state of emergency. As urgency legislation, this law took effect immediately. Pursuant to Government Code section 54953(e)(1)(B), the City Council is holding its January 26, 2022 meeting via teleconferenc e. To ensure the health and safety of the public by limiting human contact that could spread COVID-19, the Bell Community Center will not be open to the public.
The public is encouraged to view the meeting through the City's website at http://www.cityofbell.org/?NavID=101
PUBLIC COMMENT: If you wish to make a comment you may provide input electronically through a temporary public comment email established for City of Bell City Council meetings [email protected]. Please indicate in the Subject Line “For Public Comment” and submit your written comment by 4pm on Wednesday, January 26, 2022. Any emails received after the time indicated will not be included in the record. Written Comments will be subject to the three minute time limitation (approximately 350 words).
Public Comment could also be submitted by telephone by calling 1- 669-900-9128. To provide a comment on items listed on closed session call no later than 5 PM, for the regular session of the agenda, please call no later than 7PM . City staff will be using the Zoom audio communication platform for this meeting. Each speaker is limited to 3 minutes and will be given the opportunity to speak in the order your phone call is received. After you submit your comment, you will be disconnected but will still have access to view the meeting live on the City’s website at http://www.cityofbell.org/?NavID=101
If participating via Zoom or phone, during the Public Comment Period, use the "raise hand" function on your computer or *9 by phone and wait for the Mayor to announce your name/phone number. When you are prompted, please unmute your line.
Join Zoom Meeting (ONLY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT)
Phone Number: 1-669-900-9128
Meeting ID: 876 7299 0278
Password: 047575
Meeting of the
Bell City Council and Related Agencies
January 26, 2022
Closed Session
The City Council and the related Authorities and Agencies will recess to closed session to confer with legal counsel regarding the following matters:
a) CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS- Government Code Section 54957.6, Agency designated representatives: Acting City Manager Carlos Islas, City Attorney Dave Aleshire, Human Resources & Risk Manager Sergio Ibarra and Contract Deputy City Attorney Colin Tanner.
Employee Organization: Bell Police Officers Association (BPOA)
b) CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS- Government Code Section 54957.6, Agency designated representatives: Acting City Manager Carlos Islas, City Attorney Dave Aleshire, Human Resources & Risk Manager Sergio Ibarra and Contract Deputy City Attorney Colin Tanner.
Employee Organization: Bell Police Officers Association (BCEA)
c) CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS- Government Code Section 54957.6, Agency designated representatives: Acting City Manager Carlos Islas, City Attorney Dave Aleshire, Human Resources & Risk Manager Sergio Ibarra and Contract Deputy City Attorney Colin Tanner.
Employee Organization: All Unpresented Employees and At-will Management Group
d) Public Employment/Public Employee Appointment (Government Code Section 54957(b)) Title: City Manager
Reconvene Regular City Council Meeting
Roll Call of the City Council in their capacities as Councilmembers/Members of all Related Agencies: Arroyo, Gallardo, Saleh, Quintana and Romero
Pledge of Allegiance
City Attorney Report
The City Attorney will report out on any action(s) to be taken by the City Council/Agencies on Closed Session matters.
Presentations and Recognitions
None.
Communications from the Public
This is the time members of the public may address the City Council and related Authorities and Agencies. The public may speak on items that are on the agenda and on non-agenda items that are under the subject matter jurisdiction of City Council and/or its related authorities and agencies.
Meeting of the
Bell City Council and Related Agencies
January 26, 2022
Mayor and City Council Communications
Pursuant to Assembly Bill 1234, this is the time and place to provide a brief report on meetings, seminars and conferences attended by the Mayor and City Councilmembers.
City Manager Report
In this portion of the agenda, the City Manager will provide a brief report on items of interest to the City Council and/or the community.
Business Session
1. Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan – Retention of The Arroyo Group. (City Council)
Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council award a contract to The Arroyo Group in an amount not to exceed $269,730 to prepare a Specific Plan for the Atlantic Avenue area and prepare the associated environmental documentation.
2. Cheli Specific Plan – Retention of The Arroyo Group. (City Council)
Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council award a contract to The Arroyo Group in an amount not to exceed $330,270 to prepare a Specific Plan for the Cheli area and prepare the associated environmental documentation.
3. Consideration to Approve Amendment No. 1 with Infinity Technology to include Geographic Information System (GIS) Services. (City Council)
Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council approve Amendment No. 1 with Infinity Technologies to add GIS services and increase the total contract compensation to $214,120.00.
4. Discussion on the City’s 95
th Birthday Celebration Options. (City Council)
Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council defer the city’s 95 th incorporated birthday, but rather focus on a 5 -year strategic plan to celebrate the centennial which will take place on November 7, 2027.
5. Resolutions pertaining to the City of Bell’s General Municipal Election to be held Tuesday, June 7, 2022. (City Council)
Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council initiate the process of the June 7, 2022 General Municipal Election by adopting Resolution Nos. 2022-06 through 2022-08.
Consent Calendar
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non- controversial. They are acted upon by the City Council and related authorities at one time without discussion. The reading of the full text of ordinances and resolutions will be waived unless a Councilmember requests otherwise.
Recommendation: Approve agenda items 6 through 9.
Meeting of the
Bell City Council and Related Agencies
January 26, 2022
6. Receive and File the City of Bell and Successor Agency Investment Reports as of December 2021. (City Council/Successor Agency to the Bell Community Redevelopment Agency)
7. It is recommended that the City Council read by title only, waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 2022-05 titled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BELL, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING THE PUBLIC WORKS
STANDARDS, INC. 2021 EDITION OF THE STANDARD
SPECIFICATIONS AND PLANS FOR PUBLIC WORKS
CONSTRUCTION
8. Receive and File the Donation Reports for the months of November and December 2021.
9. General Warrants, Successor Agency to the Bell Community Redevelopment Agency and Community Housing Authority Warrants dated January 26 , 2022 . (Council/Successor Agency to the Bell Community Redevelopment Agency/Bell Community Housing Authority).
Pending Items – None
Next Regular Meeting, Wednesday, February 9, 2022
I, Angela Bustamante, City Clerk of the City of Bell, certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on January 20, 2022 at least seventy-two (72) hours prior to the meeting as required by law.
________________________________
Angela Bustamante, City Clerk
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
BELL CITY COUNCIL AND RELATED AGENCIES
January 26, 2022
5:00 P.M. Closed Session
7:00 P.M. Regular Session
INDEX
Agenda Category Item Number Page Numbers
CLOSED SESSION a - d
AGENDA & INDEX 1-7
PUBLIC HEARING(s) NONE
BUSINESS SESSION 1 8-104
2 105-200
3 201-243
4 244-245
5 246-255
CONSENT CALENDAR 6 256-332
7 333-336
8 337-339
9 340-401
PROPOSAL TO THE CITY OF BELL FOR THE
ATLANTIC AVENUE SPECIFIC
PLAN (AASP) AND THE CHELI
SPECIFIC PLAN (CSP)
JANUARY 1 2,
2022
CORRECTED
The Arroyo Group Planning, Housing, Urban Design
Los Angeles Neighborhood Initiative Community
Engagement Impact Sciences CEQA Analysis
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates Economics
Iteris Mobility and Parking
Sherwood Design Engineers Civil Engineering
B
Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan This page intentionally left blank.
i
The Arroyo Group
PLANNERS, URBAN DESIGNERS & ARCHITECTS
40 E COLORADO BOULEVARD
SUITE B
PASADENA
CALIFORNIA
91105-1902
VOICE 626 795.9771
Philip Burns, AICP, Principal
323.382.2402, [email protected]
PLANNERS, URBAN DESIGNERS & ARCHITECTS
40 E COLORADO BOULEVARD
SUITE B
PASADENA
CALIFORNIA
91105-1902
VOICE 626 795.9771
January 12, 2022
City of Bell
Attn: Javier Ochiqui, Contracts and Facilities Manager
Attn: Manuel Acosta, Community Development Director
6330 Pine Ave.
Bell, CA 90201
Dear Mr. Ochiqui and Mr. Acosta:
On behalf of our team, The Arroyo Group is pleased to submit this proposal to the City of Bell to prepare the Atlantic Avenue and Cheli Specific Plans. We are pleased to be working with you currently on the update to the General Plan Housing, Environmental Justice and Health and Safety Elements, and we look forward to implementing the policy direction set in those plans through Specific Plans for these two key areas of the City.
Our team has a great deal of experience in Specific Plans, including recent plans in South Gate, Willowbrook, Compton and Vernon. We are confident that we will be able to deliver Specific Plans that are effective at attracting development of the type that the City desires and improving the overall environment and quality of life for residents of Bell.
As a result of the changing circumstances of the City, we have revised our proposal to separate the Atlantic Avenue and Cheli Specific Plans into two completely separate processes with individual environmental clearances. We have also increased our level of effort on the Cheli Specific Plan, incorporating a stakeholder engagement and negotiation process based on our current efforts to sort through competing interests in the City of Vernon.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit our proposal. We look forward to discussing it in detail with you.
Respectfully,
Philip Burns, AICP, Principal
323.382.2402, [email protected]
ii
Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan This page intentionally left blank.
iii
The Arroyo Group
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PROJECT TEAM & PERSONNEL ......................................................................................................................................1
2. SCOPE OF WORK.............................................................................................................................................................15
3. FEE SCHEDULE ................................................................................................................................................................33
4. PUBLIC OUTREACH .........................................................................................................................................................35
5. REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................................................45
6. CERTIFICATION OF PROPOSAL ....................................................................................................................................51
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 - Team Organization ..................................................................................................................................................3 Figure 2 - Team Planning & Urban Design Approach ............................................................................................................15 Figure 3 - Atlantic Avenue Planning Opportunities .................................................................................................................16 Figure 4 - Cheli Planning Opportunities .................................................................................................................................17 Figure 5 - Urban Design Framework ......................................................................................................................................23 Figure 6 - Opportunity Sites ...................................................................................................................................................24 Figure 7 - Public Realm Element and Complete Streets.. ......................................................................................................25 Figure 8 - Fee Schedule .........................................................................................................................................................33 Figure 9 - Public Workshop Infographics ...............................................................................................................................43
iv
Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan Colorado Boulevard Old Pasadena. Pasadena, CA.
1 The Arroyo Group
1PROJECT TEAM & PERSONNEL
The Arroyo Group is a 44 year-old Southern California
professional planning and urban design firm that balances diverse interests and inspired design with economic realities.
We design revitalized downtowns, dynamic districts, livable neighborhoods and inviting public spaces that build on the unique physical attributes of a community as well as its distinctive identity and character.
The Arroyo Group Philosophy
The Arroyo Group derives its name and approach from the Arroyo Guild, an assembly of turn-of-the-century California architects, planners, engineers, artists, craftsmen, and performing artists who lived along the Arroyo Seco in
Pasadena. Common to all their creative efforts was a
careful consideration for the unique beauty and meaning of the environment in which they worked, and an overriding concern for quality, craftsmanship and detail. Their
association was characterized by intense dialogue across traditional professional boundaries, and mutual respect for the contribution each could make to the other’s work. The Guildsmen left a legacy of work that is to this day functional and beautiful in itself and in its setting.
Much like the Arroyo Guild, our team members work together because we have the shared belief that sensitive and
workable relationships between people and the environment can be achieved today and integrated with the sound social and fiscal considerations so essential to successful design, planning and development. Our practice strives to reflect the spirit of the Arroyo Guild through a respect for quality and detail, and by tapping the wisdom and experience
of individuals of varying professional and experiential backgrounds. Our concern is for the lasting value of our plans to our clients and their communities.
Most important to The Arroyo Group team is the creation of plans that respect, reflect and create a unique sense of place, and are responsible to the realities of existing and potential market demand. It is the actual revitalization of communities in which we take our greatest pride. Plans do get built.
Relevant Experience
Specific, Area and Master Plans
• The Plan for Old Pasadena, Pasadena Heritage
• Pasadena Civic Center/Mid-Town Design Plan, City of
Pasadena
• Inglewood Transit-Oriented Development Plans (Downtown Inglewood, Fairview Heights, Westchester/Veterans and
Crenshaw/Imperial), City of Inglewood
• Tweedy Boulevard and Hollydale Village Specific Plans, City of South Gate
• Willowbrook Transit-Oriented Development Specific Plan, County of Los Angeles
• Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan, City of Orange
• Compton Station Specific Plan, City of Compton (in progress) • Vernon Westside Specific Plan, City of Vernon (in progress) Housing Plans, Ordinances and Projects
• Vernon Housing Element, City of Vernon (in progress)
• Congregational Land Campaign for Affordable Housing,
Multiple Jurisdictions
• Affordable Housing Feasibility Studies, Multiple Jurisdictions • Review of Pasadena Inclusionary Housing Feasibility Study, Making Housing and Community Happen
Active Transportation and Streetscape Plans
• First/Last Mile Plan for the Foothill Gold Line Extension 2B, LA Metro
• Pasadena Playhouse District Streetscapes and Alley
Walkways Plan, City of Pasadena
• Glendora First/Last Mile Concept Refinement, City of
Glendora
• Carson Neighborhood Villages Plan, Southern California Association of Governments
Primary Contact
Philip Burns, AICP
40 E. Colorado Boulevard, Suite B, Pasadena CA 91105
(323) 382-2402, [email protected]
Legal Name: The Arroyo Group
Form of Business: S Corporation
Certifications: SBE, DBE
Company Ownership: Privately held and incorporated
March 26, 1976
Employees: 8
Offices Servicing CA Accounts: Pasadena
Locations Where Work is to be Assigned:
40 E Colorado Blvd, Suite B
Pasadena CA 91105-1910
2 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
1. Project Team & Personnel
THE ARROYO GROUP TEAM
Supporting us in this project are our team members from the General Plan Update project and other firms who have partnered with us over decades to prepare adopted, constructed and award- winning plans around Southern California, Specific Plans in Vernon, South Gate, Inglewood, Compton and Willowbrook.
The Arroyo Group Team members are:
Los Angeles Neighborhood Initiative (LANI) – Community
Engagement
Los Angeles Neighborhood Initiative (LANI) is an independent nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization whose mission is to revitalize neighborhoods by engaging people and building vibrant public spaces. Founded in 1994 as a demonstration project, LANI has delivered unprecedented results in 45 low- and middle-income communities, most of which are home to majority BIPOC and Latinx populations. LANI is leading community outreach for the Bell General Plan Update.
Impact Sciences – CEQA Analysis
Impact Sciences, Inc. has been preparing thorough, credible and legally defensible environmental documentation since 1988.
Owner, Managing Principal and Project Manager Jessica Kirchner Flores has managed numerous complex EIRs for Specific Plans, Community Plans and the SCAG 2020 RTP. Impact Sciences is leading environmental justice and CEQA analysis for the General Plan Update.
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates – Economics
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates (SRHA) is an urban economics and financial consulting firm established in 1981. SRHA has been a longtime partner of The Arroyo Group, providing market, real estate, fiscal and implementation inputs into recent Specific Plans in Willowbrook, Compton, South Gate and Inglewood. SRHA is now led by Bravish Mallavarapu, longtime analyst at the firm who conducted technical analysis for all of the aforementioned plans.
Iteris – Mobility & Parking
Iteris, Inc., a publicly-traded corporation (NASDAQ: ITI) with over 400 staff nationwide, is the market leader in applying informatics solutions to the transportation industry since 1987. Los Angeles office leader Viggen Davidian and key staff Deepak Kaushik and Sean Daly have all managed projects with The Arroyo Group.
The firm has extensive experience in multimodal mobility, parking studies, parking management, and Traffic Impact Analyses.
Sherwood Design Engineers - Civil Engineering
Sherwood Design Engineers is a site civil engineering practice committed to the optimal integration of ecology, infrastructure, and design. We specialize in water management strategies and water resources engineering. We document site infrastructure as well as master plan engineering solutions at a campus, neighborhood, and district scale. Important to our engineering practice is our ability to span building and landscape. Sherwood works collaboratively with project teams to find ways to maximize efficiencies through an integrated and ecological approach that results in high performance buildings and landscapes recognized for function as well as aesthetics and user experience. Sherwood is working with The Arroyo Group on a Specific Plan in the City of Vernon.
More information about The Arroyo Group Team’s project
experience can be found on the following pages. Work samples are available on each client agency’s web site or by request.
Reference information is given with each project.
Staff and firm project managers of The Arroyo Group Team are shown in Figure 1. We see ourselves as working as an extension of City staff and forming part of a larger City of Bell/The Arroyo Group Team that also reaches out and engages other departments, City Commissions, other agencies and the community at large, involving them in decision-making. Staff resumes are given in the following pages.
3 The Arroyo Group
1. Project Team & Personnel
Citizens of Bell
Bell City Council
Community Development
Department
Manuel Acosta, Director of Community
Development*
Paula Kelly , Contract Planner
Megan Covarrubias, Assistant Planner
City Departments
Public Works
City Commissions
Planning
Community Services
Youth
Environmental
Outside Agencies
Metro
THE ARROYO GROUP
Planning, Housing, Urban Design
Philip Burns, AICP, Principal, Project Manager*
Robert Paternoster , FAICP , Principal Planner
Lance Lowrey , ASLA, Sr. Associate, Landscape Design
Margaret Muñoz, Associate, Planning, Engagement, Housing Stakeholders
Bell High School
Elementary Schools
Residents
Businesses
Property Owners
Public at Large
English-Speaking
Spanish-Speaking
CITY OF BELL
THE ARROYO GROUP TEAM
*Communication Focal Points
SHERWOOD DESIGN
ENGINEERS
Civil Engineering
Drew Norton, Principal
Jimmy Galvez,
PE, Senior Project
Management
Robyn Chaconas, Design
Engineer
STANLEY R.
HOFFMAN
ASSOCIATES
Economics
Bravish Mallavarapu,
PhD, Director*
Timothy Lowe, MAI,
CRE, FRICS, Principal,
Waronzof Associates
ITERIS
Mobility & Parking
Viggen Davidian, PE, Vice
President
Deepak Kaushik, PE,
Associate Vice President*
Sean Daly , AICP , PTP , Senior
Engineer
IMPACT SCIENCES
CEQA Analysis
Jessica Kirchner Flores,
AICP , Managing Principal*
Kevin Varzandeh, Deputy
Project Manager , Planner
Yasmeen Hussain, JD,
Planner III
LANI
Community Engagement
Veronica Hahni,
Executive Director
Arturo Nevarez,
Program Manager
Moises Gomez,
Program Manager
FIGURE 1 - TEAM ORGANIZATION
4 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
1. Project Team & Personnel
Philip Burns is a principal and project manager at The Arroyo Group with experience in land use planning, housing issues, urban design and transportation planning. His specialties include community engagement and public participation (ensuring inclusive, accessible and consensus- building public processes), data analysis, active transportation and form-based codes. A former urban planning Peace Corps Volunteer and United Nations officer in Guatemala, he enjoys cross-cultural work and making abstract and counter-intuitive planning concepts understandable to the average citizen.
Possessing a variety of technical skills, Philip often manages multidisciplinary teams and serves as primary agency point of contact for complex planning projects. He is detail-oriented, yet adept at understanding and conveying the larger picture toward which the firm’s projects build.
Philip has managed ten planning projects since joining The Arroyo Group, including:
• Inglewood Transit-Oriented Development Plans. Philip served as project planner for the development of the Downtown Inglewood and Fairview Heights TOD Plans in 2015-2016, then project manager for the subsequent Westchester/Veterans and Crenshaw/Imperial TOD Plans. Together the plans provide for 8,000 new housing units and 10,000 new jobs. • Metro Foothill Gold Line Extension Phase 2B First/Last Mile Planning. Philip led this active transportation project which involved extensive coordination and negotiation between the five local city governments, Metro and the Foothill Gold Line Construction Authority. Philip oversaw and conducted thirty outreach events which garnered comments from over 1,500 people, and guided the design process.
• Carson Neighborhood Mobility Area Plan. Philip managed this project which combined land use planning, active transportation network planning, code studies, and intensive traffic modeling to develop a plan to reduce VMT in auto-oriented neighborhoods with limited public transit service. The plan is envisioned to reduce per capita VMT by 4.8% over the buildout period.
• Compton Station Specific Plan. Philip is leading this effort to plan for the revitalization of Downtown Compton.
• South Gate Tweedy Boulevard Specific Plan. Philip managed the end of this specific plan process, which involved preserving economic feasibility of the plan while addressing community concerns about density.
Prior to joining The Arroyo Group, Philip led the development of a community-driven streetscape and open space plan in Arleta and Pacoima for the City of Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks, where he directed eighteen educational and input-gathering workshops and focus groups in English and Spanish.
Philip is a member of the Greater Pasadena Affordable Housing Group (GPAHG), where he analyzes and advocates for reasonable solutions to the housing crisis. He has undertaken significant academic work tracking the social outcomes of low-income residents in gentrifying neighborhoods. In his spare time, Philip leads children’s and youth groups at a local church. His friends know him as an avid transit advocate and rider who nevertheless loves a good road trip.
THE ARROYO GROUP
Philip Burns, AICP
Principal & Project Manager
EDUCATION
BA, Urban Studies
Brown University
MA, Planning
University of Southern California
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Bilingual community
engagement and public
participation
• Housing Policy
• Zoning
• Active transportation
5 The Arroyo Group
1. Project Team & Personnel
Bob Paternoster is a creative and energetic urban planner and community development manager. His broad skills and expertise make him equally adept at managing a team of design professionals, resolving community problems with a citizen group, or negotiating a public/private development partnership. His nationally recognized career has been primarily in the public sector. He understands local government, and exudes a “make it happen” approach which links planning and management to get results.
As Planning Director in Pittsburgh, PA, Bob created a new six-year development programming process, combining the best elements of the general plan and the capital improvement program into a bi-annual policy document. He instituted a Community Planning Program, assigning professional planners to every residential area of the City. He designed and implemented affordable housing rehabilitation and construction programs which set the model for similar programs nationwide.
As Director of Planning and Building in Long Beach, CA, Bob personally managed the preparation of the City’s Local Coastal Program; the two-year process involving a diverse citizen advisory committee, led to the uncontested adoption of the plan by City Council and the Coastal Commission. He was appointed Director of the Queensway Bay Project, managing the planning, design, financing and construction of the 300-acre, $35 million development which links Downtown to its waterfront, and includes the popular world-class Long Beach Aquarium of the Pacific.
Bob also served as Director of Community Development for the City of Sunnyvale, CA, where he managed the redevelopment of the bankrupt Town Center Mall into a $600 million open-air extension of the traditional Downtown, integrating retail, entertainment and residential uses within an attractive and walkable environment. He initiated a massive community outreach program, culminating in a Community Visioning Festival, to develop a 20-year Vision for Sunnyvale which provided the context and direction for subsequent revision of the General Plan.
THE ARROYO GROUP
Robert Paternoster, FAICP
Consulting Principal
Implementation
EDUCATION
BS, Civil Engineering
Lehigh University
MCP, City Planning
Harvard University
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Team-based management
• Creative problem solving
• Community consensus builder
THE ARROYO GROUP
Lance Lowrey, ASLA
Senior Associate
EDUCATION
BS, Landscape Architecture
Colorado State University
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Landscape design
• Urban design
• Open space planning
Lance Lowrey has a broad range of experience in the fields of landscape architecture, urban design and planning. His work spans the gamut of project scales, geographies, and industry sectors, including work with international, resort, residential, hotel, waterfront, commercial, mixed use, ecological, park, civic, transportation-based, educational, industrial, and planned community projects. Lance places strong emphasis on finding unique and creative solutions to clients’ project requirements, and developing fresh, new ideas.
Lance’s unique perspective and background in ‘placemaking’, integrated throughout The Arroyo Group’s planning process, has been a foundational in our approach to creating plans with the end user and their ultimate experiences in mind.
Lance has experience developing urban design concepts and visualizations for station-adjacent sites, including shared streets and plazas. Recent experience includes developing concepts at key sites for the Foothill Gold Line Extension 2B FLM Plan and helping revision downtown Compton in and around the Compton Station.
Lance’s other relevant experience includes:
• Compton Station TOD Specific Plan - Compton, CA
• Vernon Mixed-Use Specific Plan - Vernon, CA
• San Marino Mission Street Visioning
• Metro Gold Line Extension First-Last Mile Pla n - Glendora, CA, San Dimas, CA, La Verne, CA, Pomona, CA, Claremont, CA
• City of Tempe Urban Core Master Plan -Tempe, Arizona
• Mixed-use Residential TOD Development - Dubai, United Arab Emirates
6 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
1. Project Team & Personnel
Veronica joined LANI in 2006 and became Executive Director in 2009. She has worked closely with public agencies in developing project scopes and managed many grant contracts with local, state, and federal departments and agencies. Her areas of expertise include economic development, transportation, and community planning. Prior to joining LANI, Veronica served as Manager of Legal Services for the AIDS Service Center (ASC) and HIV & AIDS Legal Services Alliance (HALSA).
For this project, Veronica will manage LANI’s contracts with the prime contractor and provide oversight of LANI staff; she will also help process draw requests and progress reports, ensuring that information provided to the prime contractor is accurate and timely.
Veronica’s professional experience includes:
• ULI Transit Oriented Los Angeles Conference Program Committee Member - 2015-Present • Vice President, Barnhart School Board of Trustees, 2016-Present • FASTLinkDTLA Board Member 2017-Present
• Metro ExpressLanes Corridor Advisory Group, 2009-2016 • UCLA Executive Director Roundtable, 2012-2015
• ULI FutureBuild Conference Program Committee, 2011-2013 • Emmaus School Board of Education, 2003-2010
• Judicial Appointments Committee, Los Angeles County Bar Association, 2002-2009 • Volunteer Judge, Los Angeles County Bar Association Barristers, 2002-2004 LANI
Veronica Hahni
Executive Director
EDUCATION
Juris Doctor
University of Southern California
Law School
BS, Business Administration and
Economics
California State University, Los
Angeles
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Project development and
management
• Community development and
outreach
Margaret’s work with the Arroyo Group involves writing housing elements, writing specific plans, and working on affordable housing initiatives such as congregational land overlay zones and community land trusts. Margaret joined the Arroyo Group in April 2021.
A Los Angeles and San Gabriel Valley native, Margaret left home to study Urban Studies at Haverford College outside of Philadelphia, including a semester studying Metropolitan Studies in Berlin. At the University of Southern California, she concentrated in housing and real estate development, through which she developed a strong background in policy that incentivizes af - fordable housing development. Additionally, Margaret has experience organizing in communities across Los Angeles County to help solve Southern California’s housing crisis.
Since joining The Arroyo Group, Margaret has been involved in the following projects:
• Vernon Housing Element
• Inglewood Housing Element
• Yorba Linda Congregational and Commercial Overlay Zones Margaret is a founding member of the Pasadena Affordable Housing Coalition, a broad-based, inclusive campaign to ensure safe and affordable housing for all Pasadenans. She also is a member of Pasadena for All, a grassroots organization providing direct outreach to unhoused Pasadena residents.
THE ARROYO GROUP
Margaret Muñoz
Associate
EDUCATION
Master of Urban Planning
University of Southern California
BA, Urban Studies
Haverford College
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Housing Policy
• Community Engagement and
Public Participation
7 The Arroyo Group
1. Project Team & Personnel
Moises Gomez is one of LANI’s bilingual Spanish Program Managers and Manager of the Byzantine-Latino Quarter Pico Business Improvement District (BID). Moises works closely with BID Board of Directors, business owners, property owners, residents, and other community groups. Moises has expertise in workforce development, community organization, economic development, and small business entrepreneurship.
In addition, Moises grew up in Bell and maintains community connections there; for this project, he would provide outreach support and liaise with the community.
Moises’s professional experience includes:
• Community Wellness Specialist, Hathaway-Sycamores
• Executive Assistant, MLK Community Health Foundation
• Operations Manager, Engine Company No. 28 Restaurant
• coordinating with advocacy organizations and labor unions • working with elected officials and government representatives LANI
Moises Gomez
Program Manager
EDUCATION
MA, Human Development:
Leadership in Education and Human
Services
Pacific Oaks College
BA, Human Development: Social
Change
Pacific Oaks College
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Business outreach and local
business development
• Development and dissemination
of community resources
Arturo joined LANI in 2017 and has been responsible for community improvement projects in underserved communities varying from sidewalk reconstruction to façade redevelopment. Prior to joining LANI, Arturo worked with non-profit advocacy organizations, labor unions, and the California State Legislature. Arturo is bilingual in Spanish, and has dedicated his profesional life to promoting equity among impacted communities of color.
For this project, Arturo will manage the project on-the-ground and be the main point person for community engagement and outreach.
Arturo’s professional experience includes:
• Senior Field Representative, 48th District, California State Assembly • Program Manager, Southern California Resource Services For Independent Living (SCRS) • coordinating with advocacy organizations and labor unions • working with elected officials and government representatives LANI
Arturo Nevarez
Program Manager
EDUCATION
BA, Anthropology
University of California, Irvine
PROJECT ROLE
• Community development
and outreach and directing
grassroots activities
• Policy research and advocacy
• Engaging underserved
communities
•
8 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
1. Project Team & Personnel
Ms. Kirchner Flores has more than 15 years of experience in environmental analysis for a variety of projects. In addition to policy work in the areas of regional open space planning and greenhouse gas analysis, she is experienced in preparing CEQA/NEPA documents including initial studies and environmental impact reports for residential, commercial, mixed-use, and school development projects, as well as large transportation projects and plans. Her primary responsibilities include project management, CEQA/NEPA documentation, aesthetics, cultural resources, greenhouse gas analysis/sustainability, population, housing, employment, marketing and proposal preparation, mitigation monitoring, technical editing, presentations to decision makers and communities, and staff training.
Projects Ms. Kirchner Flores has been involved with include:
• Caltrans Climate Adaptation Report - California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) • SCAG 2020 Regional Transportation Plan EIR - Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)
• Boyle Heights Community Plan Update EIR - Los Angeles, CA • Los Angeles CEQA Threshold Guide Update - Los Angeles, CA • Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) Ordinance - Los Angeles, CA • Southeast Los Angeles Community Plan Update EI - Los Angeles, CA
IMPACT SCIENCES
Jessica Kirchner Flores, AICP,
ENV SP
Managing Principal
EDUCATION
BA, Journalism
Rutgers University
MPL, Planning
University of Southern California
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• CEQA/NEPA Documentation
• Project Management
• Population and Housing
• Alternatives Analyses
Mr. Varzandeh has assisted in the preparation of environmental documents pursuant to CEQA, including sections and background reports for EIRs, ISs, EAs, and he has prepared MMRPs, Findings, and other compliance documents. Mr. Varzandeh is currently serving as a section preparer for SCAG’s Connect SoCal EIR and the Program EIRs for the City of Los Angeles’ Harbor LA Community Plans and Boyle Heights Community Plans.
Projects Mr. Varzandeh has been involved with include:
• Boyle Heights Community Plan Update EIR - Los Angeles, CA • SCAG 2020 Regional Transportation Plan EIR - Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)IMPACT SCIENCES
Kevin Varzandeh
Deputy Project Manager
EDUCATION
MS, Environmental Studies
California State University Fullerton
BS, Environmental Sciences &
Environmental Systems and Society
University of California, Santa
Barbara
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Environmental Policy
• City Planning
• Sustainability
9 The Arroyo Group
1. Project Team & Personnel
Ms. Hussain has a multicultural background and demonstrated commitment to public service and disadvantaged communities. Prior to her role at Impact Sciences, she reviewed complex land use permits for consistency with adopted plans and regulations for the County of Monterey Resource Management Agency. During the COVID crisis she served as County emergency personnel and community liaison. She has also served as a human rights advocate from the perspective of illicit trade and corporate responsibility in acquisition of natural resources. She also worked for the United Nations where she reviewed sustainable developments to promote economic efficiency of natural resources.
Ms. Hussain’s duties also include preparation of environmental documents, including Initial Studies, Mitigated Negative Declarations (MNDs), and sections of Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs). She is responsible for research of technical sections covering topics such as environmental justice, cultural resources, geology, hazards, land use, noise, and population and housing. She has a diverse educational background in environmental planning, policy analysis, and human rights. She is fluent in both Spanish and Arabic.
Projects Ms. Hussain’s current projects include:
• Harbor Los Angeles Community Plan EIR and environmental justice review – South Los Angeles, CA
• Boyle Heights Community Plan EIR and environmental justice review - Los Angeles, CA • Density Bonus EIR - Los Angeles, CA
IMPACT SCIENCES
Yasmeen Hussain
Planner III
EDUCATION
JD, American University Washington
College of Law
B.A. The University of Chicago,
International Studies and Human
Rights
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Environmental Justice policy
development
• CEQA Environmental Analyses
Dr. Bravish Mallavarapu has worked with Stanley R. Hoffman Associates (SRHA) since 2003 in growing roles. Currently, as Director, he is overseeing professional operations consequent to the sudden passing of its founding President, Stan Hoffman. Dr. Mallavarapu brings to this project considerable experience and working relationships of SRHA in TOD economic and land use development in the Gateway/South LA region, including several with the Arroyo Group.
His work specializes in the integration of market demand conditions and development feasibility with land use planning, and its fiscal and financial implications. Key elements include industry and market evaluations, demographic and employment projections, labor market industry-occupation dynamics, retail and real estate market analysis, development feasibility, and public finance implications of economic and land use developennt.
Some representative projects in the area that Dr. Mallavarapu has worked on for SRHA include:
the City of Compton TOD Specific Plan, City of Downey Imperial Corridor Economic Development Strategy, the South Gate Tweedy Blvd and Hollydale Area Specific Plan, the Downtown Inglewood TOD Economic Study, Willowbrook TOD Specific Plan Economic Development Study, and the LA Metro East San Fernando Valley Corridor Study.
Dr. Mallavarapu earned his Ph.D. in urban and regional economics from the UCLA Department of Urban Planning. He has also worked on several international projects for the the United Nations and the World Bank on sustainable urban planning and economic development. He has lectured in the Urban Planning program at UCLA and the Real Estate program at New York University.
STANLEY R. HOFFMAN
ASSOCIATES
Bravish Mallavarapu, Ph.D
Director
EDUCATION
Ph.D, Urban and Regional Planning
MA, Urban Planning
University of California, Los Angeles
Bachelor of Architecture
School of Planning and Architecture,
New Delhi (India)
PROJECT ROLE
• Project Manager
• Economic Development Strategy
• Market and Real Estate Study
10 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
1. Project Team & Personnel
Mr. Lowe provides real estate consulting and valuation work including strategy and best practice analyses, market and highest & best use studies, market value and fair compensation appraisals; acquisition due diligence; economic feasibility analysis; and advanced financial analysis for large-scale project development. His practice has emphasis in litigation, investment analysis and counseling.
As Principal with Waronzof, Mr. Lowe is responsible for directing real estate consulting and valuation engagements.His experience includes appraisal and consulting engagements across the continental United States, Alaska and Hawaii, Canada and Argentina. Mr. Lowe is a member of the Green Building Finance Consortium, an industry group working to establish underwriting and valuation guidelines for sustainable buildings.
Prior to founding Waronzof, Mr. Lowe was a Director in the Real Estate Consulting and Litigation Practice with Deloitte & Touche in Los Angeles, and earlier a Vice President and Chief Appraiser with Arthur Gimmy International in San Francisco. Mr. Lowe has been accepted as an expert witness in state and federal courts in the areas of real estate and going concern valuation, project feasibility and plan feasibility.
Mr. Lowe also partnered with Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. and The Arroyo Group, providing his land economics and pro forma analysis expertise to the following projects:
• Economic Study for Downtown Inglewood Transit-Oriented Development - Inglewood, CA • Market Analysis and Financial Implementation Study, Downtown Hemet Specific Plan - Hemet, CA
• Tweedy Boulevard and Hollydale Village Specific Plan - South Gate, CA • Willowbrook TOD Specific Plan - Los Angeles County, CA STANLEY R. HOFFMAN
ASSOCIATES
Timothy Lowe, MAI, CRE, FRICS
Principal, Waronzof Associates
EDUCATION
Architecture
University of Colorado, Boulder
Real Estate and Accounting
University of Alaska, Anchorage
PROJECT ROLE
• Development Feasibility
Analysis
• Identification of Land Use
Alternatives
Mr. Kaushik serves as an Associate Vice President for Iteris’ Transportation Systems division and has been with the firm since September 2008. He has over 16 years of transportation planning and engineering experience, which includes transportation systems analysis, multimodal mobility planning, highway operations, traffic safety, and travel-demand modeling.
He enjoys the technical aspects of the projects he manages, but also embraces the interaction with stakeholders, city officials, and the public. Most of all, he welcomes the challenge of finding solutions that improve mobility for all users.
Projects Mr. Kaushik has been involved with include:
• Inglewood Transit-Oriented Development Plans - Inglewood, CA • Carson Neighborhood Mobility Plan - Carson, CA
• Senate Bill 743 Mitigation Measures Analysis, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) – Los Angeles County, CA • Ontario Airport Northwest Cargo Intelligent Transportation System (ITS), Ontario International Airport Authority (AIAA) – Ontario, CA
• Griffith Park Circulation and Parking Study – Los Angeles, CA • Traffic/Transportation Impact Fee Program – Rialto, CA • Crenshaw Light Rail Transit (LRT) Grade Separation at Centinela Avenue, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) – Inglewood, CA ITERIS
Deepak Kaushik, PE
Associate Vice President
EDUCATION
BS, Civil Engineering
University of California, Irvine
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Transportation Planning
• Multimodal Planning
• Travel Demand Modeling
• Transit
11 The Arroyo Group
1. Project Team & Personnel
Mr. Daly serves as a Senior Engineer for Iteris’ Transportation Systems division. He has 19 years of public sector and professional consulting experience in transportation planning and started with Iteris in July 2006. His approach to planning puts people first to ensure access and connectivity rather than barriers and isolation. He is supported by Iteris’ focus on to bring professional planning services to his clients through a broad array of knowledge, expertise and experience in transportation impact analysis; multimodal studies; corridor analysis; analytics; transportation finance; and the regional travel demand model process. Prior to Mr. Daly’s time at Iteris, he was the Transportation Improvement Program Manager at the Boston Metropolitan Planning Organization. Previously located in his native southern California, he now lives in Louisiana. He is the Professional Development Officer for the APA Louisiana and served on the National Planning Conference Committee as the Mobile Workshop Chair of the 2018 National Planning Conference in New Orleans and is the current Chair of the ASCE Louisiana Transportation and Development Institute.
Projects Mr. Daly has been involved with include:
• Carson Neighborhood Mobility Plan - Carson, CA
• Senate Bill 743 Mitigation Measures Analysis, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) – Los Angeles County, CA • Environmental Impact Reports (EIR) / Statements, Port of Los Angeles (POLA) and Port of Long Beach (POLB) – Los Angeles, CA
• Countywide Strategic Truck Arterial Network, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) – Los Angeles County, CA • Jordan Downs Specific Plan and EIR – Watts, CA
ITERIS
Sean Daly, AICP, PTP
Senior Engineer
EDUCATION
MS, City Planning
University of Pennsylvania
BA, Geography, Minor in Public
Policy
California State University, Los
Angeles
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Transportation Planning
• Traffic Engineering & Operations
• Goods Movement
Drew Norton serves as a Principal at Sherwood Design Engineers, Sonoma County. Drew has extensive experience designing and managing improvement plans and construction for residential, institutional, private and public projects necessitating lotting, utilities, water management, erosion control, road design, grading, driveway improvements, and drainage.
Drew manages several of Sherwood’s most collaborative and innovative projects.
Drew has worked extensively in the historic Presidio Fort Scott area. Drew was selected to reach a consensus building between all groups involved while assessing the most practical, sustainability-minded ways to approach stormwater, potable and non-potable water sourcing, energy, ecology and transportation.
Drew’s campus projects require a sensitive integration with the site’s existing fabric, a key component that drove the design parameters for the new facilities. Other work experience includes green buildings designs, utility infrastructure, streetscape, earthwork, fine grading and drainage design, integrated stormwater management and feasibility studies.
Projects Mr. Norton has been involved with include:
• Green Infrastructure Plan, Presidio Fort Scott, San Francisco, CA • Presidio Coastal Trail, Presidio Fort Scott, San Francisco, CA • UC Berkeley Lower Sproul Redevelopment Project, Berkeley, CA • Spirit Rock Center, Woodacre, CA
• Moscone Expansion Center, San Francisco, CA
• Los Angeles Union Station Forecourt and Esplanade Improvement, Los Angeles, CA
SHERWOOD DESIGN
ENGINEERS
Drew Norton
Principal
EDUCATION
BS, Civil Engineering
California State University,
Sacramento
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Project Management
• Green Building Design
• Utility Infrastructure
• Integrated Stormwater
Management
12 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
1. Project Team & Personnel
Jimmy Galvez has extensive depth of design experience on projects at the institutional/higher education campus scale, neighborhood district-scale, and streetscape city-scale. He has served as project lead in coordination with government agencies, multi-disciplinary design teams, contractors, and other stakeholders for clients in both the private and public sectors. He has been responsible for site design and supporting calculations for the preparations of plans and specifications including cost and bond estimates for a variety of land development protects.
Jimmy is currently working on the Moscone Expansion Center in San Francisco, CA, a 6 year design to construction project. Earlier this year, he began leading Sherwood’s efforts on stormwater low impact development design and sustainable framework support for the Los Angeles Union Station Forecourt and Esplanade Improvements as part of a multidisciplinary team and working with a number of city agencies including various departments at City of Los Angeles.
Jimmy’s diverse experience applying technical innovation and solid engineering to projects at all scales result in outcomes that save time and resources and exceeded the expectations of stakeholders.
Projects Mr. Galvez has been involved with include:
UC Berkeley Lower Sproul Redevelopment Project, Berkeley, CA Spirit Rock Center, Woodacre, CA
Moscone Expansion Center, San Francisco, CA
Los Angeles Union Station Forecourt and Esplanade Improvement, Los Angeles, CA
SHERWOOD DESIGN
ENGINEERS
Jimmy Galvez, PE
Senior Project Manager
EDUCATION
BS, Civil Engineering
California Polytechnic State
University
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Stormwater Low Impact
Development Design
• New Utility Design
• Civil Design & Architectural/
Landscape Architectural Design
Coordination
Robyn Chaconas serves as a Design Engineer at Sherwood. She has served on a variety of projects that concentrate on regional infrastructure services, Low-Impact Development (LID) stormwater management and sustainable water resource planning. Her work experience includes infrastructure master planning, sustainability guidelines and implementation, water resources planning, and decentralized stormwater management strategies.
She has considerable experience preparing infrastructure and environmental assessments, construction document plan sets, relevant project exhibits, and conducting community engagement. Robyn coordinates and collaborates with the entire planning and design team to produce quality work. Her recent project experience includes parks and open spaces, higher education, regional master planning, and resiliency projects.
SHERWOOD DESIGN
ENGINEERS
Robyn Chaconas
Design Engineer
EDUCATION
Colorado School of Mines,
Bachelor of Sicence in Mechanical
Engineering
Minor: Humanitarian Engineering
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Sustainability Guidelines and
implementation
• Infrastructure & Environmental
Assessment
13 The Arroyo Group
1. Project Team & Personnel
14 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
2. Scope of Work
Willowbrook, CA
Willowbrook Transit-oriented Development Plan
15 The Arroyo Group
2SCOPE OF WORK
UNDERSTANDING OF THE ASSIGNMENT
The City of Bell is seeking a consultant to prepare the Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and Cheli Specific Plan. These Specific Plans will be important implementation vehicles for many of the goals, policies, and strategies in the City’s General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements, and those that will be in the forthcoming Housing Element, Environmental Justice Element and Health and Safety Element that we are working on.
THE ARROYO GROUP TEAM’S APPROACH
For over four decades, The Arroyo Group’s plans have been based on a Planning and Urban Design Approach that integrates the considerations of People, Economics and Place through an educating, designing, communicating and consensus-building dialogue which is illustrated in Figure 2 . The key to our track record of success is that each plan fulfills all three considerations, building consensus and creating an implementable plan. We therefore have assembled a multidisciplinary team for this project which covers all of the relevant aspects of People, Economics and Place.
People
LANI will lead the community engagement effort of the project, with The Arroyo Group’s active participation and guidance along the way. Community engagement will operate as a continuation of the General Plan Update (GPU) process and draw upon the inputs received from the community in initial, listening-stage GPU engagement around the Atlantic Avenue and Cheli areas. These will form the basis for the formulation of a draft community vision and urban design framework alternatives to be tested in outreach activities with the community in the middle of the process. LANI’s approach to community engagement is described in more depth in Section 4 of this proposal.
Economics
Economic considerations determine the implementability of any plan. Public programs and infrastructure improvements must be fiscally feasible for the public sector, while land development projects must be feasible from the private sector.
Our longtime partner Stanley R. Hoffman Associates (SRHA) will represent this perspective on our team. SRHA’s work covers four main areas:
• Market demand analysis
• Pro forma analysis for development feasibility
• Fiscal analysis
• Implementation and financing strategies
SRHA will address all of these areas; however, emphasis will be placed on nonresidential demand, fiscal relationships and implementation within the base budget.
Place
The consideration of place refers to the creation of a plan that is responsive to its context, and at least in the case of Atlantic Avenue, creates a distinct, unique identity - a place that the community identifies with and can enjoy spending time in. Figures 2 and 3 on the next page describe some of the major Place-related issues in each Specific Plan area.
Our approach to urban design is based on tight integration between concepts for the public and private realms. Due to budgetary limitations, our base scope of work focuses on the private realm.
However, we strongly recommend preparing plans for the public realm as well.
PEOPLE
Needs
Priorities
Ideas
ECONOMICS
Public Sector
Private Sector
PLACE
Public Realm
Private Realm
Education
Communication
Decision Making
THE ARROYO GROUP/
CITY OF BELL TEAM
FIGURE 2 - THE ARROYO GROUP TEAM’S PLANNING
AND URBAN DESIGN APPROACH
16 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
2. Scope of Work
FIGURE 3 - ATLANTIC AVENUE PLANNING OPPORTUNITIES
Social places that engage both the public and private realm are needed to support residential development and provide opportunities for addressing environmental justice concerns such as access to recreation. Corners present interesting opportunities for placemaking, and major character features that have local interest could be added to expand access for future residents.
Urban design that instills a sense of safety and comfort during the day and nighttime hours is an essential ingredient to making new development feasible and successful. Attempts have been made over the years to improve the look and feel of the Atlantic Avenue Corridor. However, these attempts have fallen short in prioritizing the experience of the pedestrian. Paths that abruptly end, lack of curb ramps, windowless walls, deactivated storefronts and sidewalks that are kept narrow in order to preserve median landscaping and parking contribute to the lack of comfort.
The corridor has several large underutilized shopping centers and parking lots which present clear opportunities for urban mixed-use development.
Supportive Urban Design
Open Space
Source: City of Sterling, IL
Opportunity Sites
17 The Arroyo Group
2. Scope of Work
Implement a connected, sustainable environment to encourage new residential opportunities on underutilized, vacant or city owned lots close to the Salvation Army Bell Shelter.
Link south Cheli potential housing areas to existing and new supportive surrounding uses and programs like community gardens (Grow Good Urban Farm), nonprofit organizations (Food Forward’s Produce Pit Stop), the Richard N. Slawson Occupational Center and others.
Mitigate noxious conditions from the Long Beach Fwy and North Cheli Industrial areas. Consolidate and develop Bandini Boulevard as a Business Industrial Corridor.
Improve pedestrian and bicycle connectivity within Cheli, to the rest of Bell and adjacent cities, and to bus stops. Needs include a connected sidewalk network, street trees, and protected bicycle lanes.
FIGURE 4 - CHELI PLANNING OPPORTUNITIES
18 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
2. Scope of Work
Detailed Scope of Work
This section contains The Arroyo Group Team’s proposed scope of work to complete the tasks requested in the RFP. This scope of services anticipates one round of review for all deliverables.
ATLANTIC AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN
TASK 1: PROJECT ADMINISTRATION
1.1 Walking Tour
The Arroyo Group and City staff will conduct a walking/driving tour of the Atlantic Avenue in order to discuss issues, opportunities and potential strategies.
1.2 Project Coordination
The Arroyo Group will hold regular coordination meetings with City staff on a monthly or biweekly basis. Agendas and notes with action items will be produced for each meeting.
Deliverables: Meeting agendas and notes
1.3 Prepare Outreach Programming
Within sixty (60) days of contract engagement, The Arroyo Group and LANI will propose a community outreach program for the Specific Plans to the City of Bell. We anticipate that this will be an extension of our current outreach program for the General Plan Update.
The RFP suggests five community meetings on the Specific Plans. However, based on our experience during the General Plan Update, we anticipate a community engagement process that is more focused on community surveys, business canvassing, and pop-up events than community meetings. Study sessions with commissions will also be included.
More information about LANI’s public outreach approach can be found in Section 4.
Deliverables: Draft and Final Outreach Plan, Community
Meetings and Study Sessions as agreed.
TASK 2: BASELINE STUDIES
2.1 Existing Conditions and Needs Analysis
The Arroyo Group Team will prepare a concise memorandum which will address the topics identified below.
Planning Framework
The Arroyo Group will review the project’s planning framework including the setting and history of Atlantic Avenue. The existing General Plan Land Use Element’s Area Plan for each area, General Plan street classifications, relevant goals and policies, and City’s Zoning Code will be reviewed. In particular, portions of the General Plan and Zoning Code that will need changes will be catalogued.
Existing Utilities Study
Sherwood will document existing wet and dry utility systems along the Atlantic Avenue corridor and on adjacent alleys. The work will include research, site investigations, project kick off meeting, as- built collection/analysis, and existing infrastructure write ups.
Land Use and Urban Design Patterns and Opportunity Sites Identification
The Arroyo Group will document land use and urban design patterns in the project area. This will include a documentation of existing land uses, open spaces, streetscape conditions and the pedestrian orientation of existing buildings. Salient natural and environmental factors, such as slope, prevailing winds, and freeway and truck contamination will be drawn from the Environmental Justice and Health and Safety Elements. Analysis of this information will include the identification of a preliminary system of districts and gateways and other potential focal points.
Existing land use, urban design mapping, improvement to assessed value calculations and market study results, as available, and Housing Element work will all input into the identification of potential opportunity sites for the project to focus on.
Mobility Opportunities Overview
The Arroyo Group will review existing Average Annual Daily Trips (AADT) data, bus stop utilization data from Metro, as well as field observations to conduct a high-level evaluation of the feasibility of potential bicycle, pedestrian and transit-rider improvements to Atlantic Avenue and intersecting streets.
Natural, Cultural and Historic Resources
The Arroyo Group Team will map natural, cultural and historic resources that are identifiable visually or in discussion with City staff or community members. It is our understanding that there are no designated historic resources in the area other than the James George Bell House.
19 The Arroyo Group
2. Scope of Work
Community Assets and Resources Map
LANI will map community assets and resources such as libraries, recreational centers, businesses that support the local economy and private and non-profit organizations operating near the Specific Plan areas.
2.2 Market Overview
This task contemplates the baseline study for economics and market factors. High-level fiscal analysis will be conducted as a part of the Urban Design Framework Options (Task 3.1) and economic developemnt strategies will be formulated as part of the Administrative Draft Specific Plan (Task 3.5).
Data Gathering
SRHA will build upon information gathered for the Housing Element Update. This information will include economic profiles and growth projections, NAICS industry-sector evaluations of the economic base, and retail market conditions for demand and supply of goods and services. Real estate market conditions, including rental and sales prices will also be collected.
Market Demand for Non-Residential Uses
In our experience, while residential projects are not always feasible financially, market demand for major types of residential uses is generally high across the central areas of the Los Angeles region.
Therefore, market demand information will focus on non-residential uses.
At the onset of the project, SRHA and The Arroyo Group (with City input) will set a geographic boundary for the competitive market area. SRHA will then prepare a profile of the local retail market relevant to the project, with descriptions of the market for different types of retail (classified by type of goods/services and typical physical format). A retail leakage analysis will be included as a part of this description. An overview of conditions for the industrial market will also be provided.
2.3 Development Feasibility Analysis
Land use financial feasibility analysis, using the “developer’s pro forma” approach, provides a framework for understanding the financial impact of density bonus incentives at various levels of density. The feasibility analysis integrates existing and anticipated land use regulation with anticipated market conditions to assess the feasibility of specific prototypical types of development. We will develop pro forma evaluations of six (6) land use concepts that will assist in the formulation of feasible residential and non-residential land uses. The various land use types will be based on the Market Study, review of existing General Plan and Specific plans, key stakeholder interviews, and public meetings and may include a combination of:
• Standalone retail/restaurant uses in different formats • Mixed-use development at low and high densities
• Residential townhomes
• Garden apartments/condominiums
We anticipate that this framework will provide several broad parameters or incentive relationships, including the effect of reduced parking requirements upon development feasibility.
From previous studies conducted for The Arroyo Group in South Gate, Willowbrook and Compton, we anticipate that market demand and private development feasibility may be limited for land uses with high residential and/or employment density. Therefore, the study will also focus on identifying existing opportunities and models for public-private partnerships (P3’s) and development incentives necessary to achieve such changes if this is the City’s vision. Potentials for affordable and mixed-income housing will also be identified.
2.4 Parking and Traffic Conditions
Iteris will document existing parking conditions within the study area. The evaluation will include commercial corridor on-street parking and off-street parking at approximately two large off-street lots. Hourly utilization counts will be collected during times which traditionally experience higher parking demand. These times will be based on coordination with City staff. Upon completion of the on- street and off-street parking counts, Iteris will detail locations with deficient or excess parking supply as compared to peak demands.
Iteris will document traffic-related conditions at facilities within the study area. As an initial step, new a.m. and p.m. peak period traffic counts will be collected at up to three (3) signalized intersections.
Utilizing the traffic counts, the traffic analysis will highlight the locations with the highest traffic volumes, directional patterns in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, and any current deficiencies in traffic operations. The intersection-level traffic operations will be presented in terms of peak hour Level of Service (LOS) using either Los Angeles County or City-specific traffic study guidelines.
Deliverables: Baseline studies memorandum including all items described in Task 2.
20 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
2. Scope of Work
TASK 3: ATLANTIC AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN
3.1 Community Vision and Urban Design Framework
Alternatives
The beginning of the design process will launch from understanding gained during the Housing Element Update, particularly the community survey and initial outreach meetings which will include activities aimed at understanding the community vision for Atlantic Avenue. We will also draw from the vision expressed for each area in the General Plan Land Use Element to prepare a draft vision statement or set of goals for outreach.
Accompanying the draft vision statement or goals will be a set of Urban Design Framework alternatives which highlight the range of different feasible scenarios for the Plan’s opportunity sites, land use districts, and streetscape modifications. Their purpose is to generate feedback from the public and stakeholders, and it is anticipated that elements of different alternatives will eventually be combined in the Final Plan. SRHA will prepare order of magnitude fiscal revenue-cost relationships illustrating the direction of fiscal impact associated with each alternative.
The Urban Design Framework will be conveyed through overall maps with each potential land use district or streetscape/open space idea illustrated through a simple sketch or photographic example.
The intent is to make the potential character understandable to the average member of the public. They will be packaged in a format will be in a presentation suitable for the specific community outreach activities where they will be discussed, such as a PowerPoint presentation or boards.
Following the preparation of a memorandum describing community feedback on the Urban Design Framework presentation, The Arroyo Group Team and City of Bell will define a preferred alternative which will form the base of the development of the remainder of the planning process.
3.2 Administrative Draft Specific Plan
The Arroyo Group will write an Administrative Draft Specific Plan which conforms to all legal requirements including those of Government Code Section 65450. The elements of this Specific Plan are anticipated to be:
Background, Role and Process of the Specific Plan
This section will introduce the Specific Plan and describe procedures administration, consistency with the General Plan. A section will be devoted to describing the accompanying California Environmental Quality Act review and outlining manners in which future developers can take advantage of tiering and streamlining to prepare minimal environmental reviews in the future.
Concept Plan
The Concept Plan will describe and illustrate the overall vision for the Specific Plan area through a vision statement, maps, renderings and photographic examples. An overall, final Urban Design Framework identifying land use districts, opportunity sites, public parking locations and the streetscapes/open space network will be a key element of the plan. The Concept Plan will address how all elements of the Specific Plan work together to form a cohesive network.
Opportunity Sites Concepts
This chapter will identify key development opportunity sites for catalyzing the realization of the vision, and provide a description of the existing characteristics, and future vision (development type, preferred land use(s), alternative land use(s)) for the site.
Illustrative renderings matched with photographic examples illustrating different features of the development will be prepared for three (3) opportunity sites (see Figure 7 for examples).
Land Use Element
The land use element provides the regulatory framework for real estate development in the Specific Plan area. The Arroyo Group has structured this in multiple ways depending upon the project.
At this point we assume that the components of the land use element would be:
• Zoning Districts Map identifying existing and new zoning districts to be applied within the Specific Plan areas
• Land use table showing permitted, prohibited and
conditionally permitted uses in each district. For ease of use, it is recommended to use a more general list of land uses; however, should the City decide to include a detailed list of land uses, The Arroyo Group will take the current code’s use standards as a base to work off of.
• Development standards relating to particular zoning districts and/or building types, including minimum and maximum lot sizes, minimum and maximum heights, permitted parking,
and vehicular access and pedestrian access locations.
• Standards for building frontages along Atlantic Avenue. • If desired, site-specific development standards for
opportunity sites. Based on the opportunity sites vision described in the previous element, minimum regulatory
standards relating to frontages, heights, uses, and on-site open space will be developed in order to ensure that the community vision for these sites is implemented.
• General design and development standards. Per recent
amendments to the state Housing Accountability Act, all design and development standards must be able to be
evaluated objectively for them to be able to stand up to a legal challenge to project denial for any project that is composed of at least 2/3 residential units.
21 The Arroyo Group
2. Scope of Work
• Parking standards will be evaluated and if necessary, shared parking strategies developed to facilitate the
efficient use of the district.
• A description of how state Density Bonus Law relates to the standards outlined in the land use element.
Public Realm Element
The “Public Realm” is a general term relating to all public property, including street rights-of-way, open spaces and public parking lots. In our plans, The Arroyo Group ties all of these systems together into a comprehensive network that supports the overall vision of the Specific Plan.
• Pedestrian Realm – The description of the pedestrian
realm will include:
o Mapping and description of key pedestrian
connections, including streetscapes, open spaces,
alleys/mid-block passthroughs, and their relationship
to key destinations including existing destinations,
opportunity sites and shared/public parking lots.
o Street tree palette and lighting/furniture palette for typical segment(s) of key streets.
o Identified locations for new infrastructure for pedestrian safety and comfort such as curb extensions and high-
visibility crosswalks.
o Identified locations or typical locations for public art, with appropriate types of art.
• Open Spaces – Open spaces such as corner plazas,
parklets or courtyards will be mapped where applicable
and illustrated through illustrative concept plans or
photographic examples. Illustrations/renderings of such spaces on Opportunity Sites will be included the isometric views of these sites.
• Parking – The Arroyo Group and Iteris will prepare parking strategies within the study area. The strategies may
include parking management, creation of shared parking
resources, or repurposing underutilized parking resources for development. The Arroyo Group and Iteris also worked together to produce comprehensive recommended code
amendments related to parking for the City of Carson. It is anticipated that code amendments will also be prepared related to parking for this area.
• First/Last Mile and Active Transportation Improvements – Bicycle routes will be mapped and cross-sections produced.
The section will also describe other potential first/last mile interventions, such as pick up/drop off areas, micromobility, bus service or environmental improvements, etc.
Infrastructure Element
Sherwood will present maps of wet and dry utility networks and any required upgrades to lines based on the projected buildout of the Specific Plan. In addition, locations will be identified and a short description provided for any recommended green infrastructure projects. Quantitative modeling will not be included in this effort, but we will use rule of thumb judgments to identify anticipated sizing and capital improvement projects that may be necessary.
Implementation, Financing and Phasing Element
This section will include a list or table of implementation strategies for the plan, along with rough timelines (short-, medium- and long-term).
• Based on the revenue-cost relationship for the prototypical uses described in Task 3.1, SRHA will develop an order
of magnitude assessment of the fiscal balance for the
proposed plan.
• SRHA and The Arroyo Group will identify potential funding sources, including grants, assessment districts, tax
increment financing, etc.
• These funding options will also include new approaches under the so-called Redevelopment 2.0 toolkit, to evaluate the feasibility of set up and implementation of such
approaches. Also discussed will be new examples of
public-private collaborations on specific project types.
Capital Improvements Plan
All members of The Arroyo Group Team will prepare rough order of magnitude cost estimates for public realm and
utilities improvements identified in the plan. The planning-level estimates will be consistent with estimates prepared by the team in other jurisdictions. This information will feed into the Capital Improvement Plan, which will include a short description of each improvement, key to the page where it is described in more detail in the Plan, its cost estimate and potential funding sources.
Deliverable: Administrative Draft Specific Plan
3.3 Screencheck Draft Specific Plan and General Plan/
Zoning Amendments
City review of the Draft Specific Plan is requested to produce a comprehensive list of comments formatted as Word comments/ track changes, hard copy markup, or Excel table of comments.
The Arroyo Group Team will then revise the Draft Specific Plan in accordance with the City’s comments.
22 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
2. Scope of Work
At the same time, The Arroyo Group will prepare draft amendments to the General Plan, Zoning Code and Zoning Map that are required by the Specific Plan, in keeping with the work completed in Task 2.1, and submit to the City for review. Amendments will be provided in text format for the City of Bell to incorporate into its existing documents and maps.
Deliverable: Screencheck Draft Specific Plan, Administrative Draft General Plan and Zoning Amendments
3.4 Public Review Draft Specific Plan
City staff will check to ensure that the Screencheck Draft Specific Plan responds adequately to their comments on the first Administrative Draft Specific Plan, and then authorize the creation of a Public Review Draft Specific Plan to be released to the public either: a) when ready, or b) together with the release of the Draft CEQA document. Public review of the Draft Specific Plan will continue for at least thirty (30) days.
Deliverables: Public Review Draft Specific Plan, Public Review Draft General Plan and Zoning Amendments
3.5 Final Specific Plan
After City Council adoption of the Specific Plan, The Arroyo Group will make a final Specific Plan within seven (7) days incorporating any changes to the Plan which were included in the adopting motion. At this time, The Arroyo Group will also provide to the City a final Adobe InDesign package of the final Specific Plan so that the City can make changes to the plan in-house in the future if needed.
Deliverables: Final Specific Plan, Final General Plan and Zoning Amendments, Final Specific Plan InDesign package.
TASK 4: ANALYSIS
4.1 LOS Traffic Analysis
Iteris will undertake a Level of Service traffic analysis demonstrating anticipated traffic conditions at three (3) intersections along Atlantic Avenue with the Plan buildout. This analysis will not be used for EIR purposes, but will be provided to the City of Bell to inform their evaluation of the Plan. The following scenarios will be run:
• Existing
• Future year No Project
• Future year with Specific Plan
Deliverables: LOS Addendums to CEQA transportation
Analysis memorandum.
4.2 Fiscal Impact Analysis
SRHA will create a fiscal model including the following elements:
City Revenues
SRHA will include City tax revenues such as property taxes, sales and use tax, utility users tax, franchise fees, transient occupancy tax, business taxes, and certain other miscellaneous taxes. We typically do not include City fees and other charges related to planning permit processing, construction permits and mitigation fees in a net fiscal impact analysis, because these charges are supposed to be set at prices that directly offset City costs, and therefore do not represent new revenues to the City. The revenue items in the fiscal analysis will be projected using special models and a series of “demand drivers” and pro-rata shares, based on population, dwelling units, and employment though the use of “equivalent” dwelling units or other planning factors.
City Service Costs
SRHA will then estimate the average annual costs for the City to provide public services to the subject site or each component of the specific plan using a form of per-capita costing – i.e., expressing relevant categories of City service costs on a per-person basis, and then multiplying the resulting cost factors by the number of all employees, expressed as “resident equivalents,” based on the average time they are present in the City, plus new residents, if applicable. Netting out the costs of City services delivered to the Specific Plan areas at build out from the tax revenues associated with revenues yields the true “bottom line” for the City’s treasury.
Deliverables: Fiscal Impact Analysis memorandum
TASK 5: ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Impact Sciences will conduct CEQA analysis for the Atlantic Ave - nue Specific Plan:
5.1 Prepare Initial Study and MND
An Initial Study (IS) will be prepared. Impact Sciences will use the 2020 CEQA Guidelines Checklist unless there is another format preferred by the City. The IS will include a narrative discussion of the setting, anticipated impacts, and the means by which existing policies or programs will fully address impacts. Impact Sciences will also assist the City with the SB 18 and AB 52 process to ensure timely consideration of the project. Impact Sciences will draft the letter to the Native American Heritage Commission to receive the list of tribes, and draft invitation to consultation for those tribes that have notified the City. After City review, the letters should be placed on City letterhead and any consultation should include City Staff,
23 The Arroyo Group
2. Scope of Work
FIGURE 5 URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK
Potential elements to be considered for the urban design framework of the Atlantic Avenue Corridor and Cheli area include:
• Key destinations/development sites/points of energy
• New districts
• Complete Streets
• Open spaces/streetscape resources
• Primary access pathways for pedestrians, bicycles, autos, etc.
• Transit patterns and stops
• Gateways and vistas
• Shared parking locations
• Key development opportunities such as vacant parcels
• Other elements as identified through field work and
discussion with the community.
The urban design framework will be a mapped expression of the community’s vision for the community, stakeholders, decision makers and developers to inspire action toward implementing the vision.
Urban design frameworks include maps, sections, and images. as AB 52 consultation is a government-to-government action. If no tribes respond, we will close out the consultation.
In support of the determination of transportation impacts, Iteris will prepare a CEQA transportation analysis focused on the calculation of operational trips and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) from the proj- ect and comparing to a regional average.
Impact Sciences will provide the City with an electronic copy of the IS/MND for review. We will assume one round of consolidated comments from the City. Once the comments are addressed, we will prepare the IS/MND for public circulation, including preparation of the notices for the County Clerk and State Clearinghouse. No additional noticing is included in this scope of work.
Upon the close of the public review period, although not required, we would prepare written responses to comments received on the IS/MND. We will provide the responses to the City and anticipate one round of consolidated comments from the City. Once the doc- ument is certified, we will prepare and file the Notice of Determi - nation.
Deliverables:
• One electronic version of the Admin Draft IS
• One electronic version of the Screencheck Draft IS
• Public Draft IS/MND
• Final IS/MND
24 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
2. Scope of Work
FIGURE 6 - OPPORTUNITY SITES
Opportunity sites for new housing or mixed-use development are identified through a variety of qualitative and quantitative factors. While some of these sites are smaller and more contextual in nature, others have the potential to create developments that mold the overall urban design framework of the area. With public spaces or unique architectural features, we create a development plan that is coordinated with pro forma analysis to ensure that it is realistic.
Then create visual concepts that express plan vision and intent and facilitate feedback from the public and officials. If and when the vision is to be translated into regulations, these concepts are supplemented with clear tables and diagrams expressing minimum objective development standards, a table of permitted uses, and encouraged design guidelines.
25 The Arroyo Group
2. Scope of Work
FIGURE 7 - PUBLIC REALM ELEMENT AND COMPLETE STREETS
The Arroyo Group’s Complete Streets approach starts with the accommodation of different modes of transportation including pedestrians, bicycles, buses and automobiles. However, we think about more than transportation, crafting a street’s function in a city as a public space, special place, and environment for development.
Complete streets (re)designed by The Arroyo Group and built to plan include Colorado Boulevard in Pasadena, Garfield Avenue and Holly Street in Pasadena and Pine Avenue in Long Beach.
Each of these streets exists within a network of open spaces which includes pedestrian-friendly streetscapes with traffic calming, alley walkways, interior courtyards, mid-block passthroughs and/or mid-block crossings.
26 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
2. Scope of Work
CHELI SPECIFIC PLAN
TASK 6: PROJECT ADMINISTRATION
6.1 Walking Tour
The Arroyo Group and City staff will conduct a walking/driving tour of the Cheli area in order to discuss issues, opportunities and potential strategies.
6.2 Project Coordination
The Arroyo Group will hold regular coordination meetings with City staff on a monthly or biweekly basis. Agendas and notes with action items will be produced for each meeting.
Deliverables: Meeting agendas and notes
6.3 Stakeholders Engagement Process
The Arroyo Group will facilitate a series of six (6) meetings between key stakeholders in the Cheli Specific Plan area. The stakeholders group is intended to include the major property owners, service providers, and environmental justice groups, as well as relevant City departments and possibly, elected officials.
The purpose of each meeting will be to build consensus around each step of the Specific Plan process. The topics and scheduling of each meeting will be agreed upon between The Arroyo Group and City staff. The Arroyo Group will undertake significant preparation of presentations, discussion topics and desired outcomes prior to the meeting. At minimum, Robert Paternoster (committee facilitator) and Philip Burns (project manager) will be present at each meeting, along with subconsultants as needed.
Deliverables: Stakeholder meeting agendas, presentations and notes
TASK 7: BASELINE STUDIES
7.1 Existing Conditions and Needs Analysis
The Arroyo Group Team will prepare a brief memorandum which will address the topics identified below.
Planning Framework
The Arroyo Group will review the project’s planning framework including the setting and history of Cheli. The existing General Plan Land Use Element’s Area Plan, General Plan street classifications, relevant goals and policies, and City’s Zoning Code will be reviewed. In particular, portions of the General Plan and Zoning Code that will need changes will be catalogued.
Existing Utilities Study
Sherwood will document existing wet and dry utility systems in the Cheli area. The work will include research, site investigations, project kick off meeting, as-built collection/analysis, and existing infrastructure write ups.
Land Use and Urban Design Patterns and Opportunity Sites Identification
The Arroyo Group will document land use and urban design patterns in the project area. This will include a documentation of existing land uses, open spaces, streetscape conditions and the pedestrian orientation of existing buildings. Salient natural and environmental factors, such as slope, prevailing winds, and freeway and truck contamination will be drawn from the Environmental Justice and Health and Safety Elements. Analysis of this information will include the identification of a preliminary system of districts and gateways and other potential focal points.
Existing land use, urban design mapping, improvement to assessed value calculations and market study results, as available, and Housing Element work will all input into the identification of potential opportunity sites for the project to focus on.
Mobility Opportunities Overview
The Arroyo Group will review existing Average Annual Daily Trips (AADT) data, bus stop utilization data from Metro, as well as field observations to conduct a high-level evaluation of the feasibility of potential bicycle, pedestrian and transit-rider improvements to principal streets in the Cheli area.
Natural, Cultural and Historic Resources
The Arroyo Group Team will map natural, cultural and historic resources that are identifiable visually or in discussion with City staff or community members. It is our understanding that there are no designated historic resources in the area other than the James George Bell House. However, the “Sleepy Lagoon,” site of a murder that contributed to the beginning of the Zoot Suit Riots, may have been located within the Cheli area.
Community Assets and Resources Map
The Arroyo Group Team will map community assets and resources such as libraries, recreational centers, businesses that support the local economy and private and non-profit organizations operating near the Specific Plan areas.
27 The Arroyo Group
2. Scope of Work
7.2 Market Overview
At the onset of the project, SRHA and The Arroyo Group (with City input) will set a geographic boundary for the competitive market area. SRHA will then prepare a profile of the local industrial market relevant to the project, with descriptions of the market for different types of industrial uses.
7.3 Development Feasibility Analysis
Land use financial feasibility analysis, using the “developer’s pro forma” approach, provides a framework for understanding the financial impact of density bonus incentives at various levels of density. The feasibility analysis integrates existing and anticipated land use regulation with anticipated market conditions to assess the feasibility of specific prototypical types of development. We will develop pro forma evaluations of two (2) land use concepts that will assist in the formulation of feasible residential and non-residential land uses. The various land use types will be based on the Market Study, review of existing General Plan and Specific plans, key stakeholder interviews, and public meetings and will include a combination of industrial/logistics uses.
7.4 Parking and Traffic Conditions
Iteris will document existing parking conditions within any areas of the Cheli area which present parking issues, as well as at the Salvation Army.
Iteris will document traffic-related conditions at facilities within the study area. As an initial step, new a.m. and p.m. peak period traffic counts will be collected at up to three (3) signalized intersections.
Utilizing the traffic counts, the traffic analysis will highlight the locations with the highest traffic volumes, directional patterns in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, and any current deficiencies in traffic operations. The intersection-level traffic operations will be presented in terms of peak hour Level of Service (LOS) using either Los Angeles County or City-specific traffic study guidelines.
Deliverables: Baseline studies memorandum including all items described in Task 7.
TASK 8: CHELI SPECIFIC PLAN
8.1 Community Vision and Urban Design Framework
The beginning of the design process will launch from an understanding of the differing goals and perspectives of key industrial, residential and public stakeholders. We will also draw from the vision expressed in the General Plan Land Use Element to prepare a draft vision statement or set of goals for outreach.
The Urban Design Framework will be conveyed through overall maps showing the key land use changes/opportunity sites and connections to be established. They will be packaged in a format will be in a presentation suitable for the specific community outreach activities where they will be discussed, such as a PowerPoint presentation or boards.
8.2 Administrative Draft Specific Plan
The Arroyo Group will write an Administrative Draft Specific Plan which conforms to all legal requirements including those of Government Code Section 65450. The elements of this Specific Plan are anticipated to be:
Background, Role and Process of the Specific Plan
This section will introduce the Specific Plan and describe procedures administration, consistency with the General Plan. A section will be devoted to describing the accompanying California Environmental Quality Act review and outlining manners in which future developers can take advantage of tiering and streamlining to prepare minimal environmental reviews in the future.
Concept Plan
The Concept Plan will describe and illustrate the overall vision for the Specific Plan area through a vision statement, maps, renderings and photographic examples. An overall, final Urban Design Framework identifying land use districts, opportunity sites, public parking locations and the streetscapes/open space network will be a key element of the plan. The Concept Plan will address how all elements of the Specific Plan work together to form a cohesive network.
Opportunity Sites Concepts
This chapter will identify key development opportunity sites for catalyzing the realization of the vision, and provide a description of the existing characteristics, and future vision (development type, preferred land use(s), alternative land use(s)) for the site. Conceptual development program and site layouts will be prepared for two (2) opportunity sites (see Figure 7 for examples); alternatively, this scope may be fulfilled with planning or conceptual design of streets or other public spaces.
Land Use Element
The land use element provides the regulatory framework for real estate development in the Specific Plan area. The Arroyo Group has structured this in multiple ways depending upon the project.
At this point we assume that the components of the land use element would be:
• Zoning Districts Map identifying existing and new zoning
28 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
2. Scope of Work
districts to be applied within the Specific Plan areas
• Land use table showing permitted, prohibited and
conditionally permitted uses in each district. For ease of use, it is recommended to use a more general list of land uses; however, should the City decide to include a detailed list of land uses, The Arroyo Group will take the current code’s use standards as a base to work off of.
• Development standards relating to particular zoning districts and/or building types, including minimum and maximum lot sizes, minimum and maximum heights, permitted parking,
and vehicular access and pedestrian access locations.
• General design and development standards. Per recent
amendments to the state Housing Accountability Act, all design and development standards must be able to be
evaluated objectively for them to be able to stand up to a legal challenge to project denial for any project that is composed of at least 2/3 residential units. These standards will also include environmental mitigation strategies.
• Parking standards will be evaluated.
• A description of how state Density Bonus Law relates to the standards outlined in the land use element.
Public Realm Element
The “Public Realm” is a general term relating to all public property, including street rights-of-way, open spaces and public parking lots. In our plans, The Arroyo Group ties all of these systems together into a comprehensive network that supports the overall vision of the Specific Plan.
• Pedestrian Realm – The description of the pedestrian
realm will include:
o Mapping and description of key pedestrian
connections, including new sidewalks, open spaces,
and off-street connections.
o Street tree palette for key streets.
o Identified locations for new infrastructure for pedestrian safety and comfort such as curb extensions and high-
visibility crosswalks.
• Open Spaces – Any proposed open spaces will be mapped and described.
• Parking – Parking management strategies may be
developed to facilitate the efficient use of the district. • First/Last Mile and Active Transportation Improvements – Bicycle routes will be mapped and cross-sections produced.
The section will also describe other potential first/last mile interventions, such as pick up/drop off areas, micromobility, bus service or environmental improvements, etc.
Infrastructure Element
Sherwood will present maps of wet and dry utility networks and any required upgrades to lines based on the projected buildout of the Specific Plan. In addition, locations will be identified and a short description provided for any recommended green infrastructure projects. Quantitative modeling of utilities will not be included in this effort, but we will use rule of thumb judgments to identify anticipated sizing and capital improvement projects that may be necessary.
Implementation, Financing and Phasing Element
This section will include a list or table of implementation strategies for the plan, along with rough timelines (short-, medium- and long-term).
• Based on the revenue-cost relationship for the prototypical uses described in Task 3.1, SRHA will develop an order
of magnitude assessment of the fiscal balance of the
proposed plan.
• SRHA and The Arroyo Group will identify potential funding sources, including grants, assessment districts, tax
increment financing, etc.
• These funding options will also include new approaches under the so-called Redevelopment 2.0 toolkit, to evaluate the feasibility of set up and implementation of such
approaches. Also discussed will be new examples of
public-private collaborations on specific project types.
Capital Improvements Plan
All members of The Arroyo Group Team will prepare rough order of magnitude cost estimates for public realm and
utilities improvements identified in the plan. The planning-level estimates will be consistent with estimates prepared by the team in other jurisdictions. This information will feed into the Capital Improvement Plan, which will include a short description of each improvement, key to the page where it is described in more detail in the Plan, its cost estimate and potential funding sources.
Deliverable: Administrative Draft Specific Plan
8.3 Screencheck Draft Specific Plan
City review of the Draft Specific Plan is requested to produce a comprehensive list of comments formatted as Word comments/ track changes, hard copy markup, or Excel table of comments.
The Arroyo Group Team will then revise the Draft Specific Plan in accordance with the City’s comments.
At the same time, The Arroyo Group will prepare draft amendments to the General Plan, Zoning Code and Zoning Map that are required by the Specific Plan, in keeping with the work completed
29 The Arroyo Group
2. Scope of Work
in Task 2.1, and submit to the City for review. Amendments will be provided in text format for the City of Bell to incorporate into its existing documents and maps.
Deliverable: Screencheck Draft Specific Plan, Administrative Draft General Plan and Zoning Amendments
8.4 Public Review Draft Specific Plan
City staff will check to ensure that the Screencheck Draft Specific Plan responds adequately to their comments on the first Administrative Draft Specific Plan, and then authorize the creation of a Public Review Draft Specific Plan to be released to the public either: a) when ready, or b) together with the release of the Draft CEQA document. Public review of the Draft Specific Plan will continue for at least thirty (30) days.
Deliverables: Public Review Draft Specific Plan, Public Review Draft General Plan and Zoning Amendments
8.5 Final Specific Plan
After City Council adoption of the Specific Plan, The Arroyo Group will make a final Specific Plan within seven (7) days incorporating any changes to the Plan which were included in the adopting motion. At this time, The Arroyo Group will also provide to the City a final Adobe InDesign package of the final Specific Plan so that the City can make changes to the plan in-house in the future if needed.
Deliverables: Final Specific Plan, Final General Plan and Zoning Amendments, Final Specific Plan InDesign package.
TASK 9: ANALYSIS
9.1 LOS Traffic Analysis
Iteris will undertake a Level of Service traffic analysis demonstrating anticipated traffic conditions at three (3) intersections in the Cheli area with the Plan buildout. This analysis will not be used for EIR purposes, but will be provided to the City of Bell to inform their evaluation of the Plan. The following scenarios will be run:
• Existing
• Future year No Project
• Future year with Specific Plan
Deliverables: LOS Addendums to CEQA transportation
Analysis memorandum.
9.2 Fiscal Impact Analysis
SRHA will create a fiscal model including the following elements:
City Revenues
SRHA will include City tax revenues such as property taxes, sales and use tax, utility users tax, franchise fees, transient occupancy tax, business taxes, and certain other miscellaneous taxes. We typically do not include City fees and other charges related to planning permit processing, construction permits and mitigation fees in a net fiscal impact analysis, because these charges are supposed to be set at prices that directly offset City costs, and therefore do not represent new revenues to the City. The revenue items in the fiscal analysis will be projected using special models and a series of “demand drivers” and pro-rata shares, based on population, dwelling units, and employment though the use of “equivalent” dwelling units or other planning factors.
As a part of this analysis, SRHA will examine City assumptions related to the possible incorporation of a ready-mix plant at the Cemex facility and provide an evaluation.
City Service Costs
SRHA will then estimate the average annual costs for the City to provide public services to the subject site or each component of the specific plan using a form of per-capita costing – i.e., expressing relevant categories of City service costs on a per-person basis, and then multiplying the resulting cost factors by the number of all employees, expressed as “resident equivalents,” based on the average time they are present in the City, plus new residents, if applicable. Netting out the costs of City services delivered to the Specific Plan areas at build out from the tax revenues associated with revenues yields the true “bottom line” for the City’s treasury.
Deliverables: Fiscal Impact Analysis memorandum
TASK 10: ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND
ADOPTION
10.1 Environmental Impact Report
Impact Sciences will prepare a Program Environmental Impact Re- port for the Cheli Specific Plan.
Project Description & NOP
Impact Sciences will prepare the NOP for distribution to all appro- priate local, regional, and state agencies, as well as any neigh - borhood groups and private individuals. Impact Sciences will as - sist City staff in conducting a scoping meeting during the 30-day EIR scoping period. Impact Sciences will assist in conducting the meeting, and Impact Sciences will prepare materials such as sign- in sheets, and comment cards. Our Project Manager and a staff
30 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
2. Scope of Work
planner will attend the scoping meeting. At the end of the scoping period, it is assumed that City staff will provide Impact Sciences with copies of all comment letters received on the NOP for inclu - sion in an appendix to the Draft EIR. Once the NOP is published and comments from interested parties received, Impact Sciences will compile all comments and create a matrix to be included in the EIR that identifies major topics addressed by each party and where these issues are addressed in the EIR. Any comments received during the scoping meeting will be compiled with NOP comments and summarized in the matrix to be included in the PEIR.
A detailed narrative project description, including maps, plans, and other graphics sufficient to fully define the project and its location will be prepared. The project description will meet the content re - quirements of the State CEQA Guidelines by identifying the project objectives, each of the proposed discretionary approval actions, and the physical characteristics of the project. The project descrip- tion will describe all components at the level of detail appropriate for a Program EIR. The project description will be submitted to the team for review and comment.
Deliverables:
• One NOP in MS Word and PDF
• Presentation materials for a scoping meeting
• Facilitation of scoping meeting
• Matrix with scoping meeting/NOP comments
• One electronic version of the project description
Administrative Draft EIR
Many of the topics that will be addressed in the EIR will use infor- mation from technical studies prepared by the project team and will be expected to rely heavily on existing conditions information complied during the planning process. Due to the date of the City’s General Plan (2003), we do not expect to rely on information in that document. For any potentially significant impact, Impact Sciences will work with The Arroyo Group and City staff to develop project design features and/or mitigation measures that would reduce im- pacts to less than significant levels where feasible.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Each resource topic of the EIR will follow a master format designed to demonstrate CEQA compliance and increase the ability of the public to understand the information in the EIR using the thresholds established as part of the IS. Each section will be organized as follows:
• Existing conditions relevant to each resource topic will be pre - sented.
• Applicable regulations and policies will be identified. • Thresholds of significance will be described to allow the reader to understand the significance of each identified impact.
• Project impacts will be identified and discussed by type of impact, based on factual evidence.
• Cumulative impacts will be identified and discussed. Consistent with Section 15130 (b) of the State CEQA Guidelines, cumulative impacts will be assessed for each resource topic based on a list of related projects or using the projections approach if appropriate. • Mitigation measures for each significant impact will be identified and discussed.
• Conclusions regarding the significance of each impact after miti- gation will be presented.
Deliverables:
• One (1) electronic Draft copy of the Administrative Draft EIR • One (1) electronic Draft copy of the Screencheck Draft EIR Public Draft EIR
Impact Sciences will prepare the Draft EIR for public review and comment. Impact Sciences will assist City staff in identifying any responsible and trustee agencies, possibly including but not limited to the RWQCB and the SCAQMD. No mailing or noticing is includ- ed in this scope. The project manager will attend the public hearing on the EIR and provide presentation materials as well as present on the impacts identified in the EIR.
Deliverables:
• Public Draft EIR
• Presentation materials for Public Hearings
Responses to Comments and Final PEIR
The time necessary to complete this task is highly dependent on the volume and depth of the comments received. However, based on experience with similar projects, we anticipate the budgeted time is sufficient. Our scope of work assumes a maximum of 40 hours (and no more than 15 unique comments) to respond to com- ments; if any responses require additional analysis, we would pre- pare the additional analysis and responses on a time-and-materials basis, according to our hourly rate schedule. Based on our local experience, we expect many comments will be on a limited number of environmental topics and many will not be relevant to the CEQA analysis, as they will likely be focused on specifics of the Hous - ing Element. Our suggestion will be to prepare master responses.
Master responses will reduce the staff-time necessary for respond- ing to comments in the Final EIR, thereby reducing costs. Master responses will also provide information in a format that is more user friendly than multiple detailed individual responses. The budget for this task will be reviewed with the City and adjusted, if needed, after review of all comments received on the Draft EIR.
In conjunction with the preparation of the Final EIR, Impact Scienc- es will prepare the MMRP, that identifies the mitigation measures
31 The Arroyo Group
2. Scope of Work
included in the Draft EIR and updated in the Final EIR, the timing of the implementation of each measure, and the entity (project appli- cant, agency, or both) responsible for implementing and monitoring each measure. Impact Sciences will use the City’s preferred for - mat, if one is not available Impact Sciences will provide one.
Impact Sciences will prepare the Findings and Statement of Over- riding Considerations (SOC) for the project, if necessary. Our scope assumes one round of review and comment from the City.
Findings and SOC will be provided electronically.
Impact Sciences will also prepare the Notice of Determination. Our scope assumes the City will be responsible for fish and game fees associated with filing.
Deliverables:
• Responses to comments for 15 individual comments/re - sponses in electronic format for review and comment
• Master responses for repeated comments in electronic for- mat for review and comment
• One (1) electronic copy of the draft and final MMRP
• One (1) electronic draft copy of the Administrative Final EIR • Prepare one (1) copy of the Findings and SOC in Word • Preparation of the Notice of Determination
Assumptions:
• The Initial Study will scope out many environmental topic areas. • No site-specific technical analysis will be required. • No traffic model runs will be necessary.
• Assumptions of development will be made based on zoning.
10.2 Public Hearings
The Arroyo Group and Impact Sciences will prepare a presentation for and attend one public hearing with the Planning Commission in order to present the process, content and impacts of the Public Review Draft Specific Plans. We assume that both plans will be addressed together.
Once a recommendation has been emitted by the Planning
Commission, The Arroyo Group, LANI and Impact Sciences will prepare a presentation for and attend a public hearing with the City Council in order to present the process, content and impacts of the Public Review Draft Specific Plans.
Deliverables: One (1) hearing each with Planning Commission and/or City Council, presentation.
OPTIONAL TASK
TASK 11: CEMEX READY-MIX ANALYSIS
11.1 Project-Level CEQA Analysis
CEMEX, one of the largest property owners in the Cheli Specific Plan area, has expressed an interest in modifying the operations of their cement plant to include on-site sales of ready-mix concrete.
At the City’s option, Impact Sciences will incorporate a project- level analysis for this ready-mix concrete expansion within the Cheli Specific Plan EIR, thereby eliminating the need for future environmental analysis for the project. This project-level analysis will include more detailed air quality analysis, as well as appropriate additions in all topic areas of the Specific Plan EIR.
32 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
2. Scope of Work
33 The Arroyo Group Team
3FEE SCHEDULE
Figure 8 presents the budget for the Atlantic Avenue and Cheli Specific Plans. The total budget for the Atlantic Avenue and Cheli Specific Plans is $600,000, with an optional project-level Cemex ready-mix concrete plant CEQA analysis for a cost of $25,100. Hourly labor rates are given along the top of the table.
FIGURE 8 - FEE SCHEDULE
Principal/Project
Manager
Principal Planner
Sr. Associate: Landscape &
Urban Design
Associate
Executive Director
Director of Improvement
Programs
Program Manager (A.
Nevarez)
Program Manager (M.
Gomez)
Director
Senior Associate
Real Estate Analyst
Support Staff
Senior Transportation
Engineer
Senior Transportation
Planner I
Associate Transportation
Planner/Engineer
Assistant Transportation
Planner/Engineer
Principal
Project Manager
Engineer III
Engineer II
Managing Principal
Sr. Project Manager
Planner III
Planner II
Air Quality Analyst
Graphic Artist
QA/QC
Admin Asst
TEAM
ATLANTIC AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN
$175
$200
$150
$100
$104
$87
$55
$54
$200
$180
$200
$100
$230
$220
$155
$120
$250
$180
$140
$120
$250
$150
$125
$110
$130
$115
$145
$75
TASK 1 PROJECT ADMINISTRATION $17,125 $17,016 $0 $0 $0 $0 $34,141
1.1 Site Visit 2 2 2 2 $1,250 4 4 $564 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,814
1.2 Project Coordination 15 2 15 $4,525 15 15 $2,115 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,640
1.3 Prepare Outreach Programming 42 40 $11,350 4 59 40 122 $14,337 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,687 TASK 2 BASELINE STUDIES $14,275 $432 $16,800 $8,700 $13,530 $0 $53,737
2.1 ExisitIng Conditions and Needs Analysis 25 12 40 $10,175 8 $432 $0 $0 5 8 26 60 $13,530 $0 $24,137
2.2 Market Overview 6 $1,050 $0 22 5 10 $6,400 $0 $0 $0 $7,450
2.3 Development Feasibility Analysis 8 $1,400 $0 4 48 $10,400 $0 $0 $0 $11,800
2.4 Parking and Traffic Conditions 6 6 $1,650 $0 $0 12 15 22 $8,700 $0 $0 $10,350 TASK 3 ATLANTIC AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN $73,575 $0 $8,200 $5,940 $9,800 $0 $97,515
3.1 Community Vision and Urban Design Framework Alternatives 20 4 14 25 $8,900 $0 8 $1,600 $0 $0 $0 $10,500
3.2 Prepare Administrative and Screencheck Draft 36 12 16 83 $19,400 $0 14 6 $3,400 3 6 8 $2,970 4 4 10 20 $5,520 $0 $31,290 Opportunity Sites Concepts 9 6 16 72 $12,375 $0 4 6 $2,000 $0 $0 $0 $14,375 Public Realm Element 25 40 72 $17,575 $0 $0 3 6 8 $2,970 6 10 $2,480 $0 $23,025 Capital Improvements Plan 6 16 8 $4,250 6 $1,200 $0 2 12 $1,800 $0 $7,250
3.3 Screencheck Draft Specific Plan and General Plan/Zoning Amendments 8 7 19 $4,700 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,700
3.4 Public Review Draft Specific Plan 12 24 $4,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,500
3.5 Final Specific Plan 5 10 $1,875 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,875 TASK 4 ANALYSIS $2,650 $0 $10,800 $4,775 $2,480 $0 $20,705
4.1 LOS Traffic Analysis 2 8 $1,150 $0 $0 5 11 16 $4,775 $0 $0 $5,925
4.2 Fiscal Impact Analysis 4 4 $1,500 $0 50 8 $10,800 $0 6 10 $2,480 $0 $14,780 TASK 5 ADOPTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW $7,850 $0 $0 $8,520 $0 $41,100 $57,470
5.1 Prepare Initial Study and MND 26 $4,550 $0 $0 16 12 8 8 $8,520 $0 26 48 56 58 75 12 12 2 $40,100 $53,170
5.2 Public Hearings 12 12 $3,300 $0 $0 $0 $0 4 $1,000 $4,300 Labor Cost $47,075 $7,400 $17,400 $43,600 $115,475 $416 $6,786 $2,200 $8,046 $17,448 $21,600 $0 $11,800 $2,400 $35,800 $8,970 $8,580 $2,945 $7,440 $27,935 $2,250 $4,680 $7,840 $11,040 $25,810 $7,500 $7,200 $7,000 $6,380 $9,750 $1,380 $1,740 $150 $41,100 $263,568 Non-Labor Expenses 1 $1,362 $3,000 $100 $1,000 $350 $350 $6,162 Total Cost $116,837 $20,448 $35,900 $28,935 $26,160 $41,450 $269,730
CHELI SPECIFIC PLAN
$570,000
TASK 6 PROJECT ADMINISTRATION $33,075 $0 $1,600 $1,840 $1,440 $3,000 $40,955
6.1 Site Visit 2 2 2 2 $1,250 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,250
6.2 Project Coordination 15 2 15 $4,525 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,525
6.3 Stakeholders Engagement Process 60 60 32 $27,300 $0 8 $1,600 8 $1,840 8 $1,440 12 $3,000 $35,180 TASK 7 BASELINE STUDIES $11,100 $0 $7,200 $8,700 $13,530 $0 $40,530
7.1 ExisitIng Conditions and Needs Analysis 16 8 30 $7,000 $0 $0 $0 5 8 26 60 $13,530 $0 $20,530
7.2 Market Overview 6 $1,050 $0 12 3 6 $3,600 $0 $0 $0 $4,650
7.3 Development Feasibility Analysis 8 $1,400 $0 2 16 $3,600 $0 $0 $0 $5,000
7.4 Parking and Traffic Conditions 6 6 $1,650 $0 $0 12 15 22 $8,700 $0 $0 $10,350 TASK 8 CHELI SPECIFIC PLAN $61,650 $0 $3,300 $2,970 $9,800 $0 $77,720
8.1 Community Vision and Urban Design Framework 12 8 12 15 $7,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,000
8.2 Prepare Administrative and Screencheck Draft 36 16 16 64 $18,300 $0 7 3 $1,700 $0 4 4 10 20 $5,520 $0 $25,520 Opportunity Sites Concepts 18 9 3 31 $8,500 $0 2 $400 $0 $0 $0 $8,900 Public Realm Element 25 24 52 $13,175 $0 $0 3 6 8 $2,970 6 10 $2,480 $0 $18,625 Capital Improvements Plan 6 8 16 8 $5,850 $0 6 $1,200 $0 2 12 $1,800 $0 $8,850
8.3 Screencheck Draft Specific Plan and General Plan/Zoning Amendments 8 7 19 $4,700 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,700
8.4 Public Review Draft Specific Plan 6 12 $2,250 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,250
8.5 Final Specific Plan 5 10 $1,875 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,875 TASK 9 ANALYSIS $2,650 $0 $10,800 $4,775 $0 $0 $18,225
9.1 LOS Traffic Analysis 2 8 $1,150 $0 $0 5 11 16 $4,775 $0 $0 $5,925
9.2 Fiscal Impact Analysis 4 4 $1,500 $0 50 8 $10,800 $0 $0 $0 $12,300 TASK 10 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND ADOPTION $11,700 $0 $0 $8,520 $0 $130,620 $150,840
10.1 Environmental Impact Report 48 $8,400 $0 $0 16 12 8 8 $8,520 $0 134 114 104 272 149 86 42 10 $129,620 $146,540
10.2 Public Hearings 12 12 $3,300 $0 $0 $0 $0 4 $1,000 $4,300 All Optional Tasks ##### $20,300 $19,775 $49,700 $120,175 #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $22,900 $0 $0 $0 $0 $26,805 $24,770 $37,500 $17,100 $13,000 $29,920 $19,370 $9,890 $6,090 $750 $133,620 $328,270 Non-Labor Expenses 1 $1,000 $1,000 $0 $2,000
Total Cost $121,175 $0 $22,900 $27,805 $24,770 $133,620 $330,270
CEMEX READY-MIX ANALYSIS
$570,000
TASK 11 CEMEX READY-MIX ANALYSIS $1,400 $0 $0 $0 $0 $23,700 $25,100
11.1 Project-Level CEQA Analysis 8 $1,400 $0 $0 $0 $0 48 90 $23,700 $25,100 Total Cost $1,400 $0 $0 $0 $0 $23,700 $25,100
Notes: 1. Non-labor expenses will be billed as incurred with each monthly invoice. Non-labor expenditures may include, but are not limited to, hotels, meals, car rentals, travel, mailing and delivery, reproduction, production/meeting materials, equipment rentals, traffic counts, etc.
Environmental
Economics - Market and Fiscal
ITERIS
Transportation and Parking
SHERWOOD DESIGN ENGINEERS
Civil Engineering
IMPACT SCIENCES
Figure 8 - Project Cost
for Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and Cheli Specific Plan
THE ARROYO GROUP
Planning and Urban Design
LOS ANGELES NEIGHBORHOOD
INITIATIVE
Community Engagement
STANLEY R. HOFFMAN ASSOCIATES
34 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
4. Public Outreach
Community Engagement - English and Spanish Inglewood, CA
35 The Arroyo Group
4PUBLIC OUTREACH
LANI will lead the outreach program as an extension of the current outreach plan for the general plan update. Understanding that community members know the needs of their neighborhood best, LANI’s unique program empowers local stakeholders by giving them an active role in planning. LANI is a known and trusted entity in many underserved communities, and our community-centered approach enables us to effectively work with disenfranchised populations that have historically been uninvolved with the planning process. In the development of the Atlantic Avenue and Cheli Specific Plan, LANI will conduct extensive outreach enabling diverse and typically underrepresented individuals to fully participate in the process of re-envisioning their neighborhood and the infrastructure necessary to create a more livable community.
Working collaboratively with the entire project team, including the planning consultant and relevant City agencies and departments, LANI will ensure the backing of city stakeholders needed to bring a thorough, implementable plan to fruition.
The outreach plan for the General Plan Update centers on three strategies:
Strategy 1. Neighborhood Engagement & Outreach
Strategy 2. Stakeholder Education & Surveying
Strategy 3. Public and focus group meetings
• Three public workshops on the Housing Element
• Two public workshops on the Environmental Justice and Health & Safety Elements
• Four Council/Commission Study Sessions
For the Specific Plans, we propose to add:
• Two public workshops on the Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan • One public workshop on the Cheli Specific Plan
• Four Council/Commission presentations or study sessions As the COVID-19 pandemic enters an uncertain phase, LANI and The Arroyo Group are experienced and comfortable at using both digital and in-person tools. For instance, The Arroyo Group produced a video paired with a community survey and social media campaign for the Compton Station Specific Plan (see image).
On the following pages please find a listing of stakeholders that we plan to engage as a part of both projects. As the maps show, many are near the Atlantic Avenue and Cheli areas. Following this stakeholder listing are relevant examples of LANI outreach projects.
36 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
4. Public Outreach
37 The Arroyo Group
4. Public Outreach
38 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
4. Public Outreach
39 The Arroyo Group
4. Public Outreach
40 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
4. Public Outreach
41 The Arroyo Group
4. Public Outreach
Go Human Tactical Urbanism Project: Round
Three Various Locations. Southern California
Association of Governments (SCAG)
Sherman Way Conceptual Plan
Community Coordinator
Go Human, a project of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), is an educational outreach campaign established with the goals of reducing traffic collisions in Southern California and encouraging people to walk and bike more. LANI’s effort took place in 2019 in five jurisdictions (Costa Mesa, Walnut Park, West Covina, Culver City, and La Cañada-Flintridge) and incorporated temporary street improvements in the public right-of-way that enhance the pedestrian experience, such as bulb-outs, creative crosswalks, parklets, people-plazas, bike lanes, and extended sidewalks to create safer environments for pedestrians and cyclists.
LANI provided extensive community outreach and engagement services in each of the five project areas, including door-to-door resident and local business outreach, advisory committee meeting facilitation for representatives of the communities and cities, and engagement with local groups such as schools and Council Districts. LANI partnered with the project designer to work directly with advisory committees and community leaders to establish goals, identify fabrication materials, and develop a site design for a selected corridor, which was then implemented in a site installation that was uniquely specific to each city. These temporary installations give cities the opportunity to test specific street improvements for a duration of time and collect feedback from the community to include in grant applications for funding future permanent installations of these improvements.
The Sherman Way Conceptual Plan was part of Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti’s Great Streets Initiative in 2016. Initiated by the Office of Los Angeles City Councilman Bob Blumenfield, Council District 3, LANI served as the Community Coordinator on this project, mobilizing local community partners, obtaining funding, overseeing project administration, and partnering with the design team on the conceptual design and creative outreach efforts to engage the community in developing a vision for this Reseda neighborhood.
The project used LANI’s community engagement process to create a plan that truly reflects the values and needs of the neighborhood. The final document provides in-depth descriptions of the improvements prioritized by the community, including detailed drawings, cost estimates, project phasing and maintenance plans. The Conceptual Plan Document is meant to serve as a tool for securing funding for future design, construction of improvements, and implementation of revitalization strategies that will lead to economic growth.
Stakeholders not only provided input but were responsible for substantive planning and decision- making. The PSC guided the project from conceptualization to design, establishing consultant evaluation criteria, interviewing and selecting the design consultant team, and participating in public outreach. All project collateral materials were bilingual, English and Spanish, and many outreach materials were developed in Vietnamese to ensure that information was accessible to diverse constituents.
42 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
4. Public Outreach
West Boulevard Community Linkages and
Revitalization Plan
LANI was selected by Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (METRO) to provide community design services and outreach to this extremely challenged South Los Angeles neighborhood. Neglected for decades, METRO is extending the light rail network to include this community along the proposed Crenshaw/LAX line, connecting this community to Los Angeles International Airport and portions of the existing METRO light rail train system, becoming the last link in establishing the east/west rail system in the LA basin.
The design and outreach team was tasked with improving community connections to the future transit line, and identifying public and private realm projects and capital improvements to better serve the diverse needs of the community. The plan developed through the proven LANI model served community members’ needs first and provided a framework to attain identified goals over time, through pursuit of a precise vision. The plan was funded by an Environmental Justice: Context Sensitive Planning Grant awarded by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to METRO.
The consultant conducted a walking tour of the area and met on several occasions with advisory committees and the broader community to incorporate their input into the design response and create the design vision to support the coming changes that modern transit would bring to this community.
Key elements of the plan include:
• Streetscape revitalization including lighting, site furnishings, landscape, public art, traffic calming design features, bike lanes/sharrows
• Street-side plazitas to accommodate vendors, street musicians, and neighborhood identity through cultural design features
• Recommend conversion to mixed-use zoning in key areas to intensify residential density near the station area
• Bus/Train connections and easy passenger pick up and drop off • Identification of candidate buildings for façade renovation • Gateway identification and opportunities for creating a “neighborhood brand” • Improve multi-modal accessibility for pedestrians, cyclists, and disabled commuters • Potential Opportunity Sites for catalytic development • Wayfinding signage to the station area, parking, and neighborhood amenities • Implementation strategies, timeline, and capital budgets LANI has been involved with this project since its inception. In addition, LANI was engaged by LADOT to write a Metro Call application to move the project forward to implementation, which successfully secured $1.5 million towards achieving the community’s vision for the station area. LANI is currently assisting LADOT in coordinating with stakeholders as the implementation phase is poised to begin.
43 The Arroyo Group
4. Public Outreach
m etro.net//f_irstlastmile
San Dimas Station
/w.sc/h.sc/e.sc/r.sc/e.sc /w.sc/o.sc/u.sc/l.sc/d.sc /y.sc/o.sc/u.sc /m.sc/a.sc/k.sc/e.sc /i.sc/m.sc/p.sc/r.sc/o.sc/v.sc/e.sc/m.sc/e.sc/n.sc/t.sc/s.sc /f.sc/o.sc/r.sc /f.sc/i.sc/r.sc/s.sc/t.sc//l.sc/a.sc/s.sc/t.sc /m.sc/i.sc/l.sc/e.sc /a.sc/c.sc/c.sc/e.sc/s.sc/s.sc? Pioneer
Park
Rhoads Park
Marchant Park
San Dimas Station
DOWNTOWN
SAN DIMAS
SAN JOSE HILLS
ARROW HWY
BONITA AV
1ST ST
2ND ST
3RD ST
4TH ST
5TH ST
SAN DIMAS AV
IGLESIA ST
WALNUT AV
WALNUT AV
CATARACT AV
MONTE VISTA AV
COVINA BL
ACACIA ST
ACACIA ST
1/2 mile radius around station
2 minute walk (480’)
1 minute bike (880’)
Station Portals
FIGURE 9 - PUBLIC WORKSHOP INFOGRAPHICS
m etro.net//f_irstlastmile
San Dimas Station
/n.sc/e.sc/w.sc//i.sc/m.sc/p.sc/r.sc/o.sc/v.sc/e.sc/d.sc /s.sc/i.sc/d.sc/e.sc/w.sc/a.sc/l.sc/k.sc/s.sc/n.sc/e.sc/w.sc//i.sc/m.sc/p.sc/r.sc/o.sc/v.sc/e.sc/d.sc /c.sc/r.sc/o.sc/s.sc/s.sc/i.sc/n.sc/g.sc/s.sc /s.sc/t.sc/r.sc/e.sc/e.sc/t.sc /t.sc/r.sc/e.sc/e.sc/s.sc /s.sc/i.sc/d.sc/e.sc/w.sc/a.sc/l.sc/k.sc /l.sc/i.sc/g.sc/h.sc/t.sc/i.sc/n.sc/g.sc/s.sc/t.sc/r.sc/e.sc/e.sc/t.sc /f.sc/u.sc/r.sc/n.sc/i.sc/t.sc/u.sc/r.sc/e.sc /t.sc/r.sc/a.sc/f.sc/f.sc/i.sc/c.sc /c.sc/a.sc/l.sc/m.sc/i.sc/n.sc/g.sc/p.sc/l.sc/a.sc/z.sc/a.sc /p.sc/e.sc/d.sc/e.sc/s.sc/t.sc/r.sc/i.sc/a.sc/n.sc /s.sc/t.sc/r.sc/e.sc/e.sc/t.sc//w.sc/a.sc/l.sc/k.sc/w.sc/a.sc/y.sc /v.sc/i.sc/s.sc/u.sc/a.sc/l.sc /e.sc/n.sc/h.sc/a.sc/n.sc/c.sc/e.sc/m.sc/e.sc/n.sc/t.sc/s.sc WHAT WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO WALK /BIKE /ROLL TO THE STATION ? /s.sc/a.sc/n.sc /d.sc/i.sc/m.sc/a.sc/s.sc /s.sc/t.sc/a.sc/t.sc/i.sc/o.sc/n.sc Next stop:
connected
communities.
m etro.net//f_irstlastmile
Monday, December 10, 7–9pm
San Dimas Community Center
201 E Bonita Ave
San Dimas, CA 91773
Light refreshments will be provided.
Join Metro and the City of San Dimas as we
explore how to help you walk and bike to the
future San Dimas Gold Line Station. In this
Public Workshop, we will present our initial
ideas for improving station access and listen
to your feedback and ideas.
44 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
4. Public Outreach
45 The Arroyo Group
The Arroyo Group has led a multi-disciplinary planning effort to prepare Specific Plans for two areas in the City of South Gate:
Hollydale Village and Tweedy Boulevard. The Hollydale Village Specific Plan, adopted in 2017, will revitalize this older part of the City with a plan that builds on its original historic character while positioning the area to take advantage of two future West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor stations anticipated in the vicinity.
The Tweedy Boulevard Specific Plan is intended to revitalize Tweedy Boulevard as the heart of the City and its “main street.” Both plans include design standards and guidelines for the public and private realms which address architectural and facade design issues, as well as important design considerations for achieving pedestrian and human-scaled development in the City’s mixed use areas and residential neighborhoods.
Firms: The Arroyo Group, Iteris
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates
Dates: 1/2014 - 2/2019
City of South Gate, CA
Hollydale Village Specific Plan, Tweedy
Boulevard Specific Plan
Reference: Joe Perez,
Fmr. Community Development Director,
(951) 332-6464
[email protected]
Garden rooms on Tweedy Boulevard are proposed to created spaces for outdoor dining, public art, and retailing.
Community engagement events were held in English and Spanish and yielded substantial input.
The plan envisions new, context-sensitive mixed-use development complementing the historic Allen Theater.
Garfield Avenue will be enhanced for walkability.
5REFERENCES
46 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
5. References
Firms: The Arroyo Group,
Sherwood Design Engineers,
Iteris, Impact Sciences.
Dates: 10/2020 - Present
City of Vernon, CA
Housing Element & Westside Specific Plan
Reference: Dan Wall,
Public Works Director,
(323) 583-8811 x 305,
[email protected]
The Arroyo Group is currently leading a team to develop a specific plan for the City of Vernon, located southeast of Downtown Los Angeles. Vernon is a primarily industrial city whose uses shifted from heavy industrial to a mix of manufacturing and warehousing over the past century, with a population of approximately 100 residents. Due to the shifting pace of economic change in Southern California accelerating as well as shifts in market demand, Vernon must continue to evolve in a manner which is not yet fully understood. The City of Vernon seeks to purposely direct its evolution and change in a manner which will maintain its regional competitive advantage as a center of production, and create a more prosperous, diversified and resilient community with a strong positive identity. Residential uses are considered to be an important part of the mix, despite major environmental barriers, in order to improve the City’s governance and grant eligibility.
The West Side of Vernon, with its present mixture of land uses, parcel sizes, and building configurations, together with its proximity to the Arts District in the City of Los Angeles, provides the first opportunity for creative new development and adaptive reuse. The Westside Specific Plan will create a vision for this area and establish the framework for its gradual evolution to fulfill that vision.
The plan will set new zoning and development standards governing what can be developed in different portions of the West Side, and provide an implementation strategy describing catalytic projects, infrastructure improvements and financing mechanisms. The Westside’s building stock must be carefully evaluated, as well as identifying optimal uses throughout the district.
47 The Arroyo Group
5. References
City of Inglewood, CA
Inglewood Transit Oriented Development Plans
and Design Guidelines
Reference: Mindy Wilcox,
Planning Manager,
(310) 412-5230,
[email protected]
The Arroyo Group team prepared transit-oriented development plans for four Metro station areas in the city of Inglewood. The plan for Downtown Inglewood and Fairview Heights stations was adopted unanimously by City Council in December 2016, while the plans for Westchester/Veterans and Crenshaw stations are currently undergoing environmental review. The plans have been developed with an extensive program of community participation including stakeholder interviews, a stakeholder’s advisory committee appointed by the mayor, community workshops held at Inglewood’s two largest churches, surveys and youth outreach at Inglewood High School.
Downtown’s revitalization is anchored by new, Crenshaw Line-adjacent districts including mixed-use zones along Market Street and an employment district named TechTown. Green Boulevard complete streets with separated bikeways provide connections from all of Downtown’s civic, retailing and employment districts to the Crenshaw Line.
The Fairview Heights Station not only serves a historic neighborhood in Inglewood but also creates the eastern gateway to the City from Los Angeles. The station area design guidelines call for an iconic, mixed use structure including retail and residential or educational uses. A proposed Parking Courtyard serves a future Metro Joint Development project and a pedestrian and bicycle pathway connects from Fairview Heights Station to Vincent Park.
Firms: The Arroyo Group,
Stanley R. Hoffman
Associates, Iteris.
Dates: 4/2015 - 11/2016
Phase 1)
9/2016 - Present (Phase 2)
0 1,000 2,000 3,000500
Feet
N2 minute
walk (480 ft) 2 minute
bike (1,760 ft)
2 minute
hoverboard
(1,060 ft)
Downtown
Urban Design Framework
FIGURE 2.5
Crenshaw/LAX Line
Downtown Plan Boundary
Primary Pedestrian Promenade
Green Boulevard
Neighborhood Connector
Existing Vista Terminations
P
Plazas
Existing Public Parking or Parking that can be used for Off-Cycle Public Use
Mobility Hub
Major New Public Parking (approximate locations)P
Green Alleys and Mid-Block Passthroughs
Renovated Fox Theater
Open Spaces
Green Parking Lot
New Vista Terminations
Pedestrian Bridge
Major Transit Oriented Development Sites
Special Pedestrian Crossings
Historic Market Street District
Daylighted Stream and Pedestrian and Bike Path
Potential Plazas
PP
PP
P
P
P
P
Beach Av.
La Brea Av.
Hyde Park Bl.
Hazel St.
Eucalyptus Av.
Market St.
Prairie Av.
Queen St.
Warren Ln.
Stepney St.
Centinela Av.
Olive St.
Oak St.
Hillcrest Bl.
Regent St.
Spruce Av.
Locust St.Fir Av.
Manchester Bl.
Inglewood Av.
Grace Av.
Grevillea Av.
Edgewood St.
Exton Av.
Aerick St.
La Colina Dr.
Manchester Ter.
Cable Pl.
Manchester Dr.
Railroad Pl.
Juniper St.
Regent Cir.
Howland Dr.
Hillcrest Bl.
Kelso St.
Market St.
Forum
Multimodal pathways link the Downtown Inglewood Station with new land use districts and mixed-use developments, which can benefit the existing Market Street environment. Green Boulevards increase tree canopy, treat runoff and provide protected bicycle lanes throughout the TOD areas.
48 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
5. References
The Arroyo Group led a team to prepare a First/Last Mile Plan for five new Metro Gold Line station areas in the eastern San Gabriel Valley. The Plan seeks to improve access to the future stations for pedestrians, cyclists and those arriving by other modes by capitalizing on the unique character and built environment of each city, including their intimate, historic downtown districts.
Community engagement for the plan was broad-based, reaching over 1,500 people through thirty events including community walk audits, pop-up events, focus groups, public workshops and presentations to City Commissions and Councils. Pathway and project type decisions were reviewed and modified through discussion and debate, leading to a community-driven plan in which traceable comments support nearly every FLM project identified.
The plan lays out eight potential approaches for implementation, tracing the ones that are applicable to each individual project. It provides cost estimate ranges and priority ratings to each project in order to help implementing agencies use the Plan as a guide for future actions.
Los Angeles County Metropolitan
Transportation Authority (Metro)
Foothill Gold Line Extension Phase 2B First/
Last Mile Plan
Reference: Katie Lemmon, Transportation Planning Manager, 1 Gateway Plaza, Los Angeles CA 90012,
(213) 922-7441, [email protected]
New/Improved Crossings
New/Improved Sidewalks
Sidewalk Lighting
Street Trees
Walkway/Shared Street
Bike Parking/Bike ShareStreet Furniture
Pick Up/Drop Off
Plaza
Enhanced/New Bus Stop
Blaisdell Park
Claremont
Pooch Park
Shelton Park
Marston Quad
Walker Beach
Mallows
Park
College Park
Cambridge Av
1st St &
Claremont Bl
CLAREMONT
VILLAGE
CLAREMONT
COLLEGES
Pomona College
Keck Graduate
Institute
INDIAN HILL BL
BUCKNELL AV
NOTRE DAME RD
INDIAN HILL BL
BERKELEY AV
COLLEGE AVSPRING ST
SPRINGFIELD ST
COLLEGE WY AMHERST AV
AMHERST AV
MILLS AV
MILLS AV
HARVARD AV
COLUMBIA AV
OBERLIN AVCORNELL AV
BERKELEY AV
YALE AV
HARVARD AV
YALE AV
ARROW HWY
ARROW HWY
CUCAMONGA AV
OAKDALE DR
PLUNK PL
ELDER DR
GREEN ST
WATSON DR
GREEN ST
6TH ST
HARRISON AV
4TH ST
2ND ST 2ND ST
1ST ST
BONITA AV
7TH ST
HARRISON AV
STANFORD DR
SANTA FE STWHARTON DR
OAK PARK DR
CINDERELLA DR
1/2 mile radius around station
Figure 9-3: Pathway Network and Project Ideas
Claremont
Pathway Network & Project Types
Pathway Arterial
Community-Identified Pathway
on Private Property
Further Coordination Required
Pathway Arterial Cut-Through
Pathway Collector
Pathway Collector Cut-Through
Station Entrances
(Point to Direction of Exit)
K-12 School Metro Gold Line & Station
Metrolink & Station
2 minute walk (480’)
1 minute bike (880’)
2 minute walk (480’)
1 minute bike (880’)
Shared Use Path
Bike Lane
Separated Bikeway
Bike Boulevard
Firms: The Arroyo Group.
Dates: 5/2018 - 6/2020
49 The Arroyo Group
5. References
As a Pasadena-based firm, The Arroyo Group’s involvement in the City of Pasadena has been extensive. Over the last four decades, we have been instrumental in creating and enhancing the four districts within Downtown Pasadena – Old Pasadena, Pasadena Playhouse District, Pasadena Civic Center District, and South Lake Avenue – shaping the physical, social and economic environment of Downtown Pasadena, and helping to turn it into the vibrant, pedestrian-friendly downtown that it is today. However, in recent years, our focus has shifted to efforts to retain the City’s economic diversity in the face of worsening affordability pressures, so that people of diverse economic and racial backgrounds can continue to enjoy the amenities the City has to offer. We have partnered with Mitchelville Real Estate Group and Making Housing and Community Happen, a local advocacy group, for many of these efforts.
City of Pasadena, CA
Downtown Pasadena Urban Design Plans - for City of Pasadena Plan for Old Pasadena
Pasadena Playhouse District Streetscapes
Civic Center/Mid-Town Design Plan
Affordable Housing Zoning Assistance - for Making Housing & Community Happen
Accessory Dwelling Unit Comparative Analysis
Review of Inclusionary Housing Code Update
Congregational Land Campaign and Overlay Zone
The Arroyo Group’s urban design concepts for activating alleys and creating a system of mid-block pass throughs, paseos, and courtyards reinvigorated Old Pasadena and the Playhouse District, both of which have become vibrant pedestrian-oriented destinations.
Firms: The Arroyo Group, Stanley
R. Hoffman Associates.
Reference: David Reyes, Planning
Director,
City of Pasadena, (626) 744-4650,
[email protected]
50 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
5. References
Accessory Dwelling Unit Comparative Analysis – In 2017, prior to State laws legalizing Accessory Dwelling Units in a blanket fashion across the state, The Arroyo Group undertook a comparative study of the effects of existing Accessory Dwelling Units on neighborhood visual character, parking, traffic, neighborhood property values and crime in treatment and control neighborhoods.
This study was used to craft permissive yet sensitive regulations in the City’s new ADU ordinance.
Review of Inclusionary Housing Code Update – The Arroyo Group conducted a review of proposed inclusionary zoning regulations in 2019. The crux of the analysis was a thorough review of the pro forma analysis conducted by the City’s consultant. Through careful analysis and dialogue with City staff, The Arroyo Group was able to show the feasibility of increasing the inclusionary housing set- aside from 15% to 20%, increasing in-lieu fees, eliminating “trade-downs” and other code amendments which strengthened the ordinance.
Congregational Land Campaign and Overlay Zone – The Arroyo Group is working with churches and other institutional property owners throughout Southern California to develop viable, impactful and mutually beneficial vision plans for mixed-income and affordable housing on their land. We help recruit qualified developers through an RFP process and negotiate fair deals with these developers. Through this campaign, we also identified the need for more permissive zoning regulations on church properties in Pasadena, many of which are zoned commercial or public/semi-public. We wrote an overlay zone proposal that is currently under consideration by the Planning Commission. Appropriate height and density standards were developed through a Citywide GIS analysis modeling three different approaches to constructing the overlay zone. The proposed overlay zone would allow for the construction of approximately 2,600 market rate and 2,600 afforadble housing units on church properties in the city, more than half of the city’s RHNA allocation.
Table 1 - Combined Results - R1 and R4 Prototype Analysis Without Workforce With Workforce
10% Very Low/5% Low/5% Moderate
Meets
10%?
Meets Base
Case ROC?
10% Very Low/5% Low/5% Moderate/
5% Workforce B
Meets
10%?
Meets Base
Case ROC?
No Incentives NO NO No Incentives NO NO
Expedited Processing + Parking Expedited Processing + Parking 6 mo, 25-33% Reduction YES NO 6 mo, 25-33% Reduction NO NO Density Bonus + Expedited Processing + Parking Density Bonus + Expedited Processing + Parking 10% Bonus, 6 mo, 25-33% Reduction YES YES 10% Bonus, 6 mo, 25-33% Reduction YES YES 15% Bonus, 6 mo, 25-33% Reduction YES YES 15% Bonus, 6 mo, 25-33% Reduction YES YES 5% Very Low/10% Low/5% Moderate
Meets
10%?
Meets Base
Case ROC?
5% Very Low/10% Low/5% Moderate/
5% Workforce B
Meets
10%?
Meets Base
Case ROC?
No Incentives NO NO No Incentives NO NO
Expedited Processing + Parking Expedited Processing + Parking 6 mo, 25-33% Reduction YES NO 6 mo, 25-33% Reduction NO NO Density Bonus + Expedited Processing + Parking Density Bonus + Expedited Processing + Parking 10% Bonus, 6 mo, 25-33% Reduction YES YES 10% Bonus, 6 mo, 25-33% Reduction YES YES 15% Bonus, 6 mo, 25-33% Reduction YES YES 15% Bonus, 6 mo, 25-33% Reduction YES YES
CONCEPT SITE PLAN - GROUND LEVELS
FAIR OAKS AVE.
LINDER ALLEY
1” = 30’
SANCTUARY
(existing with modifications)
LIFE CENTER
(existing with modifications)
CHURCH PATIO
RETAIL/
OFFICE/
COMMUNITY
ROOM
3000sf
2-BED
900sf
2-BED
900sf
2-BED
900sf
2-BED
900sf
4-BED
1 300sf
CHURCH-CONTROLLED HOUSING UNITS
RESIDENTIAL
COURTYARD
GARAGE ACCESS
STORAGE (new)
Recent policy and design work on housing is preparing Pasadena to improve its RHNA outcomes for lower income levels, while continuing the city’s recent growth in urban, market-rate housing.
51 The Arroyo Group
APPENDIX B
CERTIFICATION OF PROPOSAL TO THE CITY OF BELL
1. The undersigned hereby submits its proposal and, by doing so, agrees to furnish services to the City in accordance with the Request for Proposal (RFP) and to be bound by the terms and conditions of the RFP.
2. This firm has carefully reviewed its proposal and understands and agrees that the City is not responsible for any errors or omissions on the part of the proposer and that the proposer is responsible for them.
3. It is understood and agreed that the City reserves the right to accept or reject any or all proposals and to waive any informality or irregularity in any proposal received by the City.
4. The proposal includes all of the commentary, figures and data required by the Request for Proposal.
5. This firm has carefully read and fully understands all of the items contained in Section 7, General Requirements. This firm agrees to all of the general requirements except for those disclosed by the firm in project proposal, listed on an attachment.
6. The proposal shall be valid for 60 days from the date of submittal.
Name of Firm: ___________________________
By: ____________________________________
(Authorized Signature)
Print Name: __________________________ __
Title: ________________________________ __
Date: _________________________________
The Arroyo Group
Philip Burns
Principal
February 25, 2021
6CERTIFICATION OF PROPOSAL
January 12, 2022
CO
NTRACT SERVICES AGREEMENT
By and Between
CITY OF BELL
and
The Arroyo Group
AG
REEMENT FOR CONTRACT SERVICES
BETWEEN THE CITY OF BELL AND
THE ARROYO GROUP
THIS AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT SERVICES (herein “Agreement”) is made and entered into this ____ day of ________, 2022 by and between the City of Bell, a California charter city (“City”) and The Arroyo Group a California corporation, (“Consultant” ). City and Consultant may be referred to, individually or collectively, as “Party” or “Parties.”
RECITALS
A. City has sought, by issuance of a Request for Proposals or Invitation for Bids, the performance of the services defined and described particularly in Article 1 of this Agreement.
B. Consultant , following submission of a proposal or bid f or 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 Bell Municipal Code, City has authority to enter into and execute this Agreement.
D. The P arties desire to formalize the selection of Consultant for performance of those services defined and described particularly in Article 1 of this Agreement and desire that the terms of that performance be as particularly defined and described herein.
OPERATIVE PROVISIONS
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants made by the Parties and contained herein and other consideration, the value and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1. SERVICES OF CONSULTANT
1.1 Scope of Services.
In compliance with all terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Consultant shall provide those services specified in the “ Scope of Services ” attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by this reference, which may be r eferred 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 serv ices 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 ab ility, 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
s
tandards of practice recognized by one or more first -class firms performing similar work under similar circumstances.
1.2 Consultant’s Proposal.
The Scope of Services shall include the Consultant’s scope of work or bid which shall be incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth herein. In the event of any inconsistency between the terms of such proposal and this Agreement, the terms of this Agreement shall govern.
1.3 Compliance with Law.
Consultant shall keep itself informed concerning, and shall render all services hereunder in accordance with , all ordinances, resolutions, statutes, rules, and regulations of the City and any Federal, State or local governmental entity having jurisdiction in effect at the time service is rendered.
1.4 Licenses, Permits, Fees and Assessments.
Consultant shall obtain at its sole cost and expense such licenses, permits and approvals as may b e required by l aw fo r 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 ar e 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 im posed against City hereunder.
1.5 Familiarity with Work.
By executing this Agreement , Consultant warrants that Consultant (i) has thoroughly investigated and considered the scope of services to be performed, (ii) has carefully considered how the services shou ld be performed, and (iii) fully understands the facilities, difficulties and restrictions attending performance of the services under this Agreement. If the services involve work upon any site, Consultant warrants that Consultant has or will investigate the site and is or will be fully acquainted with the conditions there existing, prior to commencement of services hereunder. Should the Consultant discover any latent or unknown conditions, which will materially affect the performance of the services hereunder, Consultant shall immediately inform the City of such fact and shall not proceed except at Consultant’ s risk until written instructions are received from the Contract Officer.
1.6 Care of Work.
The Consultant shall adopt reasonable methods during the life of the Agreement to furnish continuous protection to the work, and the equipment, materials, papers, documents, plans, studies and/or other components thereof to prevent losses or damages, and shall be
r
esponsible 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.
1.7 Further Responsibilities of Parties.
Both parties agree to use reasonable care and diligence to perform their respective obligations under this Ag reement. 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 resp onsible for the service of the other.
1.8 Additional Services.
City shall have the right at any time during the performance of the services, without invalidating this Agreement, to order extra work beyond that specified in the Scope of Services or make changes by altering, adding to or deducting from said work. No such extra work may be undertaken unless a written order is first given by the Contract Officer to the Consultant, incorporating therein any adjustment in (i) the Contract Sum for the actual costs of the extra work, and/or (ii) the time to perform this Agreement, which said adjustments are subject to the written approval of the Consultant. Any increase in compensation of up to ten percent (10%) of the Contract Sum or $25,000, whichever i s less; or, in the time to perform of up to one hundred eighty (180) days, may be approved by the Contract Officer . Any greater increases, taken either separately or cumulatively, must be approved by the City Council. It is expressly understood by Consultant that the provisions of this Section shall not apply to services specifically set forth in the Scope of Services. Consultant hereby acknowledges that it accepts the risk that the services to be provided pursuant to the Scope of Services may be more costly or time consuming than Consultant anticipates and that Consultant shall not be entitled to additional compensation therefor. City may in its sole and absolute discretion have similar work done by other Consultants. No claims for an increase in the Contra ct Sum or time for p erformance shall be valid unless the procedures established in this Section are followed.
1.9 Special Requirements.
Additional terms and conditions of this Agreement, if any, which are made a part hereof are set forth in the “ Special Requi rements” attached he reto 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, i ncluding reimbursement for actual expenses, shall not exceed Two Hundred Sixty Nine Thousand and Seven Hundred Thirty
Dollars ($269,730) (the “Contract Sum”), unless additional compensation is approved pursuant to Section 1.9.
2.2 Method of Compensation.
The method of compensation may include: (i) a lump sum payment upon completion; (ii) payment in accordance with specified tasks or the percentage of completion of the services, less contract retention; (iii) payment for time and materials based upon the Consul tant’s rates as specified in the Schedule of Compensation, provided that (a) time estimates are provided for the performance of sub tasks, (b) contract retention is maintained, and (c ) the Contract Sum is not exceeded; or (iv) such other methods as may be specified in the Schedule of Compensation.
2.3 Reimbursable Expenses.
Compensation may include reimbursement for actual and necessary expenditures for reproduction costs, telephone expenses, and travel expenses appro ved by the Contract Officer in advance, or actual subcontractor expenses of an approved subcontractor pursuant to Section 4.5, and only if specified in the Schedule of Compensation. The Contract Sum shall include the attendance of Consultant at all project meetings reasonably deemed necessary by the City.
Coordination of the performance of the work with City is a critical component of the services. If Consultant is required to attend additional meetings to facilitate such coordination, Consultant shall not be entitled to any additional compensation for attending said meetings.
2.4 Invoices.
Each month Consultant shall furnish to City an original invoice for all work performed and expenses incurred during the preceding month in a for m approved by City’ s Director of Finance. By submitting an invoice f or payment under this Agreement, Consultant is certifying compliance with all provisions of the Agreement. The invoice shall contain all information specified in Exhibit “C” , and sha ll detail charges for all necessary and actual expenses by the following c ategories: 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 expens es 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 re ceipt 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 Consult ant f or 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 pur suant 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 serv ices p ursuant to this Agreement upon receipt of a written notice to proceed and shall perform all services within the time period(s) established in the “Schedule of Performance” attached hereto as Exhibit “D” and incorporated herein by this reference. When requested by the Consultant, extensions to the time period(s) specified in the Schedule of Performance may be approved in writing by the Contract Officer but not exceeding one hundred eighty (180) days cumulatively.
3.3 Force Majeure.
The time period(s) speci fied i n 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 perform ing the services for the peri od 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 co nclusive 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 exceedin g one (1) years from the date hereof, except as otherw ise provided in the Schedule of Performance (Exhibit “D”). The City may, in its sole discretion, extend the Term for two (2) additional one- year terms.
ART
ICLE 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 re presentatives of Consultant authorized to act in its behalf with respect to the work specified herein and make all decisions in connection therewith:
Philip Burns, AICP Principal Project Manager
(Name) (Title)
It is expressly understood that the experience, knowledge, capability and reputation of the foregoing principals were a substantial inducem ent for City to enter into th is Agreement.
Therefore, the foregoing principals shall be responsible during the term of this Agreement for directing all act ivities of Consultant and devoting sufficient time to personally supervise the services hereunder. All personnel of Consultant , and any authorized agents, shall at al l 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 s ubstantially reduced by Consultant without the express written approval of City. Additionally, Consultant shall utilize only competent personnel to perform services pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall make every reasonable effort to maintain the s tability and continuity of Consultant’ s staff and subcontractors, if any, assig ned to perform the services required under this Agreement.
Consultant shall notify City of any changes in Consultant’s staff and subcontractors, if any, assigned to perform the services required under this Agreement, prior to and during any such performance.
4.2 Status of Consultant.
Consultant shall have no authority to bind City in any ma nner, 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. Consul tant shall not at any time o r in any manner represent that Consultant or any of Consultant’ s o fficers, 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 cl aim Consultant may have to any such rights.
4.3 Contract Officer.
The Contract Officer shall be Manuel Acosta. It shall be the Consultant’s responsibility to assure that the Contract Officer is kept informed of the progress of the performanc e of the services and the Consultant shall refer any decisions which must be made by City to the Contract Officer. Unless otherwise speci fied herein, any approval of City required her eunder shall mean the approval of the Contract Officer. The Contract Officer shall have authority, if specified in
w
riting 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 no r any of its employees shall have an y control over the manner, mode or means by which Consultant , its agents or employees, perform the services r equired herein, except as ot herwise 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 co ntractor 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 purpos e become or be deemed to be a partner of Consultant in its business or otherwise or a joint venturer or a mem ber 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 Ag reement. Therefore, Consultant shall not contract with any other entity to perform in whole or in part the services required hereunder without the express written approval of the City . In addition, neither this Agreement nor any interest herein may be tran sferred, 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 pers on 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 bankru ptcy proceeding, this Agreement shall be void. No approved transfer shal l 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 s ervices under this Agreement, Consultant shall obtain, provide and maint ain 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 insu rance. Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance w ith coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CG 00 0 1, in an amount not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence, $4,000,0 00 general aggregate, for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. The policy must include contractual liability that has not been am ended. Any endorsement restricting standard ISO “insured contract” language will not be accepted.
(b
) Automobile liability insurance . Consultant shall mainta in automobile insurance at least as broad as Insurance Services Office fo rm CA 00 01 covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of the Consultant arising out of or i n connection with Services to be performed under this Agreement, includi ng 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 & omis sions) insurance . Consulta nt shall maintain professional liability insur ance that covers the Services to be p erformed in connection with this Agreement, in the minimum amo unt 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 fur nish separate certificates and certified endo rsements for each subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall include all of the requireme nts stated herein.
(f) Additional Insurance. Policies of such other insurance, as m ay be required in the Special Requirements in Exhibit “B”.
5.2 General Insurance Requirements.
(a) Proof of insurance . Consultant shall provide cert ificates of insurance to City as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein, along with a waiver of subro gation endorsement for wor kers’ compensation. Insurance certificates an d endor sements must be approved by City’s Risk Manager prior to commence ment of performance. Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with City at all times during the term of this Agreement. Cit y reserves the right to require complete, cer tified copies of all required insura nce policies, at any time.
(b) Duration of coverage . Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of this Agreement insurance against cl aims 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 req uired herein may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess in surance. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contai n a provision that such cover age shall also apply on a primary an d non -
c
ontributory 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 insur ance required under this Agreement does not comply with these specifications or is canceled and not replaced, City has the right but not the duty t o obtain the insurance it deems necessary and any premium paid by City will be promptly reimbursed by Consultant or City will withhold amounts sufficient to pay premium from Consultant payments. In the alternative, City may cancel this Agreement. (e) Acceptable insurers. All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact business of insurance or that is on the List of Approved Surplus Line Insurers in the State of California, with an assigned policyholders’ Rating of A- (or higher) and Financial Size Category Class VI (or larger) in accordance with the latest edition of Best’ s Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by the City’s Risk Manager.
(f) Waiver of subrogation . All insura nce c overage maintained or p rocured pursuant to this agreement shall be e ndorsed to waive subrogation against City, its elected or appointed officers, agents, officials, employees and volunteers or shall specifically allow Consultant or others providing insu rance 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 p rovisions (non -estoppel). Cons ultant 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 obli gations on the City nor does it waive any rights hereunder.
(h) Requirements not limiting. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits c ontained in this section are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits or other requirements, or a waive r 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 ot her coverage, or a waiv er of any type. If the Consultant maintains higher l imits 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 e xcess 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 cancell ation (except for nonpayment for which a ten (10) day notice is required) or nonrenewal of coverage for each required coverage.
(j) Additional in sured status . General liabil ity policies shall provide or be endorsed to provide that City and its officers, of ficials, employees, and agents, and volunteers
s
hall be additional insure ds und er such policies. This provision shall also apply to any excess/umbrella liability policies.
(k) Prohibition of undisclosed coverage limitations . None of the coverages required he rein will be in compliance with these requirements if they include any l imiting 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 thr ough clause . Consultant agrees to ensure that its s ubconsultants, 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 cover age and endorsements required of Consultant. Consultant agrees to monit or 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 c hange the amounts and types of insurance required by giving the Consultant ninet y (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 m ust 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 t his A greement, and that involve or may involve coverage under any of the required liability policies.
(q) Additional insurance . Consultant shall also procure and maintain, a t its own cost and expense, any additional kinds of insurance, which in its own judgm ent 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, an y and a ll actions, either judicial, administrative, arbitration or regulatory claims, damages to per sons or property, losses, costs, penalties, obligations, errors, omissions or liabilities whether actual or threatened (herein “claims
o
r liabilities”) that may be asserted or claimed by any p erson, 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 a ny indi vidual or entity for which Co nsultant is legally liable (“indemnit ors”), 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 ter m, 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 pa y any judgment rendered against the City , its officers, agents or employees for any such claims or liabilities ar ising out of or in connect ion with the negligent performance of or fail ure 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 off icers, 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, incl uding but not limited to, legal costs and attorneys ’ fees.
Consultant shall incorporate similar indemnity agreements with its subcontra ctors and if it fails to do so Consult ant shall be fully responsible to indemnify City hereunder therefore, and failure of City to monitor compliance with these provisions shall not be a waiver h ereof. 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 perform ance 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 ac ts or omissions, but, to the fullest extent permitted by law, shall apply to claims and liabilities resulting in part from City ’s negligence, except that design professionals’ indemnity hereunder shall be limited to claims and liabilities arising out of the negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of the design professional . The indemnity obligation shall be binding on successors and assigns of Consultant and shall survive termination of this Agreement.
ARTICLE 6. RECORDS, REPORTS, AND RELEASE OF INFORMATION
6.1 Records.
Consultant shall keep, and require subcontractors to keep, such ledgers , books of accounts, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, reports, studies or other documents relating to the disbursements charged to City and servic es performed hereunder (the “ books and records ”), as shall be necessary to perform the services required by thi s Agreement and enable the Contract Officer to evaluate the performance o f such services. Any and all such documents shall be
m
aintained in accordance with generally accepte d 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 thre e (3) years following completion of the services hereunder, and the City s hall 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 ac cess shall be provided by Consultant’s successor in interest. Notwithstanding the above, the Consultant sha ll 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 Offic er 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 conc erned about the cost of work and services to be performed pursuant to t his Agreement. For this reas on, Consultant agrees that if Consultant becomes aware of any facts, circumstances, techniques, or events that may or will materially increase or decrease t he cost of the work or services cont emplated herein or, if Consultant is providing design services, the cost of the project being designed, Consultant shall promptly notify the Contra ct Officer of said fact, circumstance, technique or event and the estimated inc reased or decreased cost relat ed thereto and, if Consultant is pro viding design services, the estimated increased or decreased cost estimate for the project being designed.
6.3 Ownership of Documents.
All draw ings, specifications, maps, designs, photogra phs, s tudies, surveys, data, notes, computer files, reports, records, do cuments 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 Ci ty 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 assig nment of the documents and materials hereunder. Any use, reuse o r 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 wit hout liability to Consultant , and Co nsultant’s guarantee and war ranties shall not extend to such use, re use or assignment . Consultant may retain co pies 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 resulti ng 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 inf ormation 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 o r entities other than City without prior written authorization from the Contract Officer.
(b) Consultant , its of ficers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not, without prior w ritten authorization from the Contra ct Officer or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide documents, declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, res ponse to interrogatories or other information concerning the work perform ed 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 admiss ions 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 rep resent Consultant or be present at any deposition, hearing or similar proc eeding. Consultant agrees to cooper ate 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 an d to performance of the parties in accordance with the laws of the Stat e of California. Legal actions concerning any dispute, claim or matter a rising 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 count y, 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 sha ll lie exclusively in the Ce ntral 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 co ntinue compensating Consul tant for any work performed
af
ter 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. T his timeframe is presumptively thirty (30) days, but may be extended, though not reduced, if circumstanc es warrant. During the period of tim e that Consultant is in defa ult, 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 s ole discretion, elect to pay some or all of the outstanding invoices during the period of default. I f Consultant does not cure the default, the City may take necessary steps to termin ate this Agreement under this Article. Any failure on the part of the Cit y to gi ve 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 payabl e 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 loss es, costs, liabilities, or damages suffered by City , and (ii) all amounts f or which City may be liable to third parties, by reason of Consul tant’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 f or interest because of such withholding, an amount sufficient to cover suc h 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 t erm, 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 wai ver of any subsequent breach or violation of any provision of this Agree ment.
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 r emedy by a non- defaulting party on any default shall impair such right or remedy or be constr ued as a waiver. Any waiver by either party of any default must be in writing and s hall 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 an d 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 m ore 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 Agreeme nt, 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 f or 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 t ermination is due to the fault of the Consultant , the period of notice may be such shorter time as may be deter mined by the Contract Officer . In addition, t he Consultant reserves the right to terminate this Contract at any time, with or without cause, upon sixty (60) days’ written notice to City, except that where termination is due to t he fault of the City , the period of notice may be such shorter time as the Consultant may determine. Upon receipt of any notice of termination, Consultant shall immediately cease all services hereunder except such as may be specifically approved by the Contr act Officer. Except where the Consultant has initiated termination, the Consultant shall be entitled to compensation for all services rendered prior to the effective date of the notice of termination and for any services authorized by the Contract Officer thereafter in accordance w ith the Schedule of Compensation or such as m ay be approved by the Contract Offic er, except as provided in Section 7.3. In the event the Consultant has initiated termination, the Consultant shall be entitled to compensation only for the reasonable value of the work product actually produced hereunder. In the event of termination without cause pursuant to this Section, th e terminating party need not provide the non -terminating party with the opportunity to cure pursuant to Section 7.2.
7.8 Termination for Default of Consultant.
If termination is due to the failure of the Consultant to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement, City may, after complian ce 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 fo r completion of the services required hereunder exceeds the compensation herein stipulated (provided that the City shall use reasonable efforts to mitig ate such damages), and City may withhold any payments to the Consultant for the purpose of set-off or partial payment of the amounts owed the City as previously stated.
7.9 Attorneys’ Fees.
If either party to this Agreement is required to initiate or defe nd or made a party to any action or proceeding in any way connected with t his A greement, 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 at torney’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
r
easonable cos ts for investigating such action, taking depositions and discovery and all other necessary costs the court allo ws which are incurred in such litigation. All such f ees shall be deemed to have accrued on commencement of such actio n 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 p ersonally 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 becom e d ue 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 o r which would in any way hinde r Consultant’s performance of servic es 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, age nt or subcontractor without the express written consent of the Contract Officer . Consultant agrees t o at all times avoid conflicts of interest or the appearance of any conflicts of inte rest with the interests of City in the performance of this Agreement.
No officer or employee of the City shall have any financial interest, di rect or indirect, in this Agreement nor shall any such officer or employee participate in any decision r elating to the Agreement which affe cts her/ his financial interest or the financia l inte rest of any corporation, partnership or association in which (s)h e 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 pe rsons claiming under or through them, that there shall be no discrimina tion against or segregation of, any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, rel igion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry or other protected class in the performance of this Agreement. Consultant s hall take affirmative action to ins ure that applicants are employed and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, color, creed, religion, sex, gender , sexual orientation, marita l 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 connec tion
t
herewith, 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 san ctions be imposed against City for such use of unauthorized aliens, Consultant hereby agrees to and shall rei mburse 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 , conse nt, 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 pr epaid, first-class mail, in the case of the City, to the City Manager and to the attention of the Contract Of ficer (with her/his name and City title), City of Bell, 6330 Pine Avenue, Bell, California 90201 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 th is Agreement shall be construed in a ccordance 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 includi ng the attachments hereto is the ent ire, complete and exclusive expression of the understanding of t he parties. It is understood that there are no oral agreements between the parties he reto affecting this Agreem ent 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 writte n 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, cla uses, paragraphs, or sections contained in this Agreement shall be declared invalid or unenforceable by a valid
j
udgment or decree of a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidit y or unenforceability shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, sent ences, clauses, paragraphs, or secti ons of this Agreement which are hereby declared as severable and shall be interpreted to carry out the intent of the parties hereunder unless the i nvalid provision is so mater ial 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 i nterest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement, nor shall any official, of ficer, 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, partnershi p, 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 indirect ly 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 fou nd 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 l imited to, any City official, office r, or employee, any money, considera tion, 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 ac t(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 obtain ing 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 ot her 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 organi zed a nd existing, (ii) they are duly authorized to execute and deliver thi s 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]
I
N WITNESS WHEREOF , the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date and year first-above written.
CITY:
CITY OF BELL, a charter city
Alicia Romero, Mayor
ATTEST:
Angela Bustamante, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ALESHIRE & WYNDER, LLP
David J. Aleshire, City Attorney
CONSULTANT:
The Arroyo Group
By:
_____________________________________________
Name: Philip Burns, AICP
Title: President
By:
_____________________________________________
Name: Phillip Burns. AICP
Title: Secretary
Address: 40 E. Colorado Blvd., Suite B
Pasadena, CA 91105-1910
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 AT TESTATIONS SHALL BE
INCLUDED AS MAY BE REQUIRED BY THE BYLAWS, ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION, OR OTHER RULES OR REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO CONSULTANT’S BUSINESS ENTITY.
CAL
IFORNIA 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 rel ying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form
CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT
INDIVIDUAL
CORPORATE OFFICER
_______________________________
TITLE(S)
P ARTNER(S) L IMITED
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.
CAL
IFORNIA 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 a nd 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.
EXHIBIT “A”
SCOPE OF SERVICES
I. Consultant will perform the following Services:
Project Administration
A. The Consultant and City staf f shall conduct a walking/driving tour of the Atlantic Avenue together in order to discuss issues, opportunities , and potential strategies.
B. Members of the Consultant Team (as used herein, the reference to “Consultant Team” shall in clude the Arroyo Group, Los An geles Neighborhood Initiative (LANI), Impact Sciences, Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Iteris, and Sherwood Design Engineers, as described in Arroyo Group’s Proposal dated February 25, 2021) shall hold regular coordination meetings with City s taff on a monthly or biweekly ba sis. T he Consultant Team shall produce agendas and notes wit h action items for each meeting.
C. Within sixty ( 60) da ys of contract engagement , t he Consultant Team shall prepare and propose a community outreach program for the Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan. The Consultant Team members shall o rganize two City Council or Commission presentations or study s essions. Consul tant s hall conduct community engagement activities, including community surveys, business canvassing, and pop-up events. General engagement activities from the General Plan Update, such as contacting community groups with standing meetings and coordinating soci al media outreach with the Bell C ommunity Services Department, will continue.
Baseline Studies
D. The Consultant Team shall prepare a memorandum addressing the topics listed from Task E to Task N.
E. The Consultant Team shall revie w the project’s planning framework including the setting and history of Atlantic Avenue, the existing General Plan Land Use Element’s Area Plan , General Plan street classifications, relevant goals and policies, City’s Zoning Code and c atalogue portions of the General Plan and Zoning Code that will need changes.
F. The Consultant Team shall document all existing utility systems along the Atlantic Aven ue corridor and on adjacent alleys. This work shall include
r
esearch, site investigations, project kick off meeting, as-built collection/analysis, and existing infrastructure write ups.
G. The Consultant Team shall document land use and urban design patterns in the Atlantic Avenue project area. This will include a documentation of existing land uses, open spaces, streetscape conditions and the pede strian orientation of existing buildings. Sali ent natural and environmental factors, s uch as slope, prevailing winds, and freeway and truck contamination shall be drawn from the Environmental Justice and Health and Safety Elements . A nalysis of this information shall include the identif ication of a pre liminary system of districts and gateways and other potential focal points.
H. The Consultant Team shall input existing land use, urban design mapping, improvement to assessed value calcul ations and market study results, as available, and Housing Element wor k into the identification of potentia l opportunity sites for the project to focus on.
I. The C onsultant Team shall pre pare existing A verage Annual Dai ly Trips (AADT) d ata, bus stop utili zation data from the Los Angel es County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (“Metro”), as well as field observations to conduct a high- level evaluation of the feasibility of potentia l bicycle, pedestrian and transit -rider improvements to Atlantic Avenue and intersecting streets.
J. The Consultant Team shall map natural, cultural and historic resources within the Specific Plan areas that are identifiable visually or in di scussion with City staff or community members.
K. The C onsultant Team shall map community a ssets and resources such a s libraries, recreational c enters, businesses that support the local economy and private and non-profit organizations operating near the Specific Plan areas.
L. The Consultant Te am shall conduct a baseline study for economics and market factors. The Consultant Team shall build upon information gathered for the Housing Element Update. This information will include economic profiles and growth proje ctions, NAICS industry -sector evaluations of the eco nomic base, retail market conditions for demand and supply o f goods and services, and r eal estate market conditions, including rental and sales prices.
M. D
uring t he baseline studies , t he C onsultant Team, with City input , shall set a geographic boundary for the competitive market area and prepare a profile of the local retail market relevant to the project, with descriptions of the market for different types of retail, retail leakage analysis, and an overview of conditions for the industrial market.
N. The Consultant Team shall develop pro forma evaluations of six (6) land use concepts that will assist in the formulation of feasible residential and non - residential land uses. The various land use types shall be based on the Market Study, review of existing General Plan and Specific plans, key stake holder interviews, and public meetings and may include a combination of:
a. Standalone retail/restaurant uses in different formats b. Mixed-use development at low and high densities
c. Residential townhomes
d. Garden apartments/condominiums
The study shall also focus on identifying existing opportunities and models for public-private partnerships and development incentives necessary to achi eve such changes and identifying potentials for affordable and mixed-income housing.
O. The Consultant Team shall document existing parking conditions within t he study area. The evaluation shall include commercial corridor on- street parking and off-street parking at approximately two large off-street lots. Hourly utilization counts shall be collected during times which traditionally experience higher parking demand, based on coordination with City staff. Upon completion of the on-street and off-street parking counts, The Consultant Team shall detail locations with deficient or excess parking supply as compared to peak demands.
P. The Consultant Team shall document t raffic-related conditions at facilities within the study area. As an initial step, new a.m. and p.m. peak period traffic counts shall be collected at up to three (3) signalized intersections. Utilizing the traffic counts, the traf fic analysis shall highlight the locations with the hi ghest traffic volumes, directional patterns in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, and any current deficiencies in traffic operations. The intersection -level traffic operations shall be presented in terms of peak hour Level of Service (LOS) using either Los Angeles County or City-specific traffic study guidelines.
A
tlantic Avenue Specific Plan1
Q. For Atlantic Avenue, the Consultant Team shall prepare a draft vision s tatement or set of goals for outre ach and Urban Design Framework alt ernatives which highlight the range of differe nt feasible scenarios for the Plan’s opportunity sites, land use districts, and streetscape modifications . The Consultant Team shall also prepare o rder of magnitude fiscal revenue- cost r elationships illustrating the direction of fiscal impact associated with each alternative.
R. The Consultant Team shall present the alternatives described in section Q to the community through outreach activities a nd prepare a memorandum describing community feedback on the Urban D esign Framework pre sentation. The Consultant Team and the City shall then choose a preferred alternative, which will form the base of the development of the remainder of the planning process.
S. The Consultant Team shall prepare an Administrative Draft Specific Plan which conforms to all legal requirements including those of Government Code Section 65450 et. al. The elements of this Specific Plan are anticipated to be:
Background, Role and Pr ocess of the Specific P lan; Concept Plan; Opportunity Sites Concepts ; Land Use Element; Public Realm Element; Infrastructure Element; Implementation, Financing and Phasing Element. a. Opportunity Sites Concepts chapter shall identify key development opportunity sites for catalyzing the realization of the vision, and provide a description of the existing characteristics, and future vision (development type, preferred land use(s), alternative land use(s)) for the site. Conceptual development program and site layouts shall be prepared for two (2) opportunity site; alternatively, this scope may be fulfilled with planning or conceptual design of streets or other public spaces
b. Public Realm Eleme nt relates to all public property, including street rights-of-way, open spaces and public parking lots. The Consultant Team shall tie all of these systems together into a comprehensive network that supports the overall vision of the Specific Plan.
T. All members of t he Consultant Team shall prepare rough order of magnitude cost estimates for public realm and utilities improvements identified in the plan.
The planning-level estimates shall be consistent with estimates prepared by the team in other jurisdictions. This information shall feed into the Capital Improvement Plan, which will include a short description of each impr ovement, key to the page where it is described in more detail in the Plan, its cost estimate and potential funding sources.
U. The City shall review the Draft Specific Plan and provide a comprehensive list of comments formatted as Word comments/ track changes, hard copy mar kup, 1 Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan will allow mixed commercial and residential use.
or
Excel table of comm ents. The Consultant T eam shall then revise the Draft Specific Plan in accordance with the City’s comments.
V. The Consultant Team shall prepare draft amendments to the General Plan, Zoning Code and Zoning Map t hat are required by the Specific Plan and submit to the City for review. Amendments shall be provided in text format for the City to incorporate into its existing documents and maps.
W. Upon the City’s approval of Administrative Draft Specific Plan, the City shall authorize the c reation of a Public Review Draft Specific Plan to be released to the public either: a) when ready, or b) together with the release of the Draft CEQA document. Public review of the Draft Specific Plan shall continue for at least thirty (30) days.
X. After City Council adop tion of the Specific Plan, t he Consultant Team shall prepare a final Specific Plan within seven (7) days incorporating any changes to the Plan which were included in the adopting motion. The Consultant Team shall also pr ovide to the City a fin al Adobe InDe sign package o f the final Specific P lan so that the City c an make changes to the plan in -house in the future if needed.
Analysis
Y. The Consultant Team shall undertake a Level of Service traffic analysis demonstrating anticipated traffic conditions at thre e (3) intersections along Atlantic Avenue with the Plan buildout. This analysis shall not be used for Environmental Impact Report purposes, but will be provided to the City of Bell to inform their evaluation of the Plan. The following scenarios will be run:
Existing, Future year No Project, Future year with Specific Plan.
Z. The Consul tant T eam shall create a F iscal Impact Analy ses M emorandum for Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan, including the following elements:
a. City tax revenues such as property taxes, sale s and use tax , utility users tax, franchise fees, transient occupancy tax, business taxes, and certain other miscellaneous taxes.
b. Average annual costs for the City to provide public services to the subject site or each component of each specific plan using a f orm of pe r-capita costing.
Environmental Review
AA. The Co nsultant Team shall conduct CEQA analysis for the Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan.
BB. T
he C onsultant Team sha ll prepare Initial Stu dy ( IS) using the 2020 C EQA Guidelines Checklist unless the City specifies another preferred format.
CC. The Consultant Team shall assist the Ci ty with the SB 18 and AB 52 process , including drafting lett ers to the Nativ e American Heritag e Commission to receive the list of tribes, an d draft an invitation to consultation for those tr ibes that have notified the City.
DD. The Consultant Team shall prepare a CEQA transportation analysis focused on the calculation of operational trips and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) from the project and comparing to a regional average.
EE. The Consultant Team s hall provide the City with an electronic copy of the IS/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND ) for review. The City is expected to provide one round of consolidated comment s. Once the comments are addressed, the Consultant Team shall prepare the IS/MND for p ublic circulation, including preparation of the notices for the County Clerk and State Clearinghouse. No additional noticing is included in this scope of work.
FF. Upon the close of the public review period, Consultant Team shall prepare written responses to comments received on the IS/MND. Consultant Team shall provide responses to the City and anticipate one round of consolidated comments .
Once IS/MND is ce rtified, the Consultant shall prepare and file the Notice of Determination.
II. All work products are subject to review and acceptance by th e City, and must be revised by the Consultant without addi tional charge to the Cit y unt il found satisfactory and accepted by City.
III. Consultant will utilize the following personnel to accomplish the Services:
THE ARROYO GROUP
• Philip Burns, AICP, Principal, Project Manager* Robert Paternoster, FAICP, Principal Planner
• Douglas Kim, AICP, Consulting Principal, Policy and City Engagement • Lance Lowrey, ASLA, Sr. Associate, Landscape Design Daniela Orellana, Associate, Urban Design, GIS and Graphics
LANI
• Veronica Hahni, Executive Director Rebecca Draper, Director of Neighborhood Improvement Projects
•
Arturo Nevarez, Program Manager Moises Gomez, Program Manager
Economics
EXHIBIT “B”
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
(Superseding Contract Boilerplate)
EXHIBIT “C”
SCHEDULE OF COMPENSATION
I. Consultant shall perform the following tasks at the following rates:
TASK SUB-
BUDGET
A. Site Visit $1,814
B. Project Coordination $6,640
C. Prepare Outreach
Programming
$25,687
Baseline Studies
D – K
Existing Conditions
and Needs Analysis
$24,137
L, M Market Overview $7,450
N Development
Feasibility Analysis
$11,800
O, P Parking and Traffic
Conditions
$10,350
Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan
Q, R Community Vision
and Urban Design
Framework
Alternatives
$10,500
S Prepare
Administrative and
Screencheck Draft
$31,290
S (a) Opportunity Sites
Concepts
$14,375
S (b) Public Realm
Element
$23,025
T Capital $7,250
Improvements Plan
U, V Screencheck Draft
Specific Plan and
General Plan/Zoning
Amendments
$4,700
W Public Review Draft
Specific Plan
$4,500
X Final Specific Plan $1,875
Analysis
Y LOS Traffic
Analysis
$5,925
Z Fiscal Impact
Analysis
$14,780
Adoption and Environmental Review
AA -
DD
Prepare Initial Study
and MND
$53,170
EE, FF Public Hearings $4,300
Non-Labor Expenses $6,162
Total Cost $269,730
II. Within the budgeted amounts for each Task, and with the approv al of the Contract Officer, funds may be shift ed from one Tas k subbudget to anothe r so long as the Contract Sum is no t e xceeded per Section 2.1, unless Additional Services are approved per Section 1.9.
III. The City will compensate Consultant for the Services performed upon submission of a valid invoice. Each invoice is to include:
A. L ine items for all personnel descri bing the work performed, the number of hours worked, and the hourly rate.
B. Line items for all materials and equipment properly charged to the Services.
C. Line items for all other approved reimbursable expenses claimed, with supporting documentation.
D. Li
ne items for all approved subcontractor labor, supplies, equipment, m aterials, and travel properly charged to the Services.
IV. T he total c ompensation for the Services shall not exceed the Contract Su m as provided in Section 2.1 of this Agreement.
V. The Consultant’s billing rates for all personnel are attached as Exhibit C-1.
EXHIBIT “D”
SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
I. Consultant shall perform all services timely in accordance with the following schedule: within 18 months.
II. C onsultant shall deliver the following tan gible work pro ducts to th e City by the following dates.
• Site Visit – Feb. 28, 2022
• Coordination Meetings – Ongoing
• Outreach Plan – Feb. 28, 2022
• Baseline Studies Memorandum – Mar. 31, 2022
• Atlantic Avenue Urban Design Framework Alternatives Maps – Apr. 30, 2022 • Alternatives Community Feedback Memo – Jun. 30, 2022
• Administrative Draft Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan – Jan. 15, 2023 • Screencheck Draft Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan – Mar. 15, 2023 • Administrative Draft General Plan Amendments for Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan – Mar. 15, 2023
• Public Review Draft Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan – Mar. 31, 2023 • Final Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan – Jun. 30, 2023
• Presentations for One (1) Planning Commission and One (1) City Council Hearing – Jun. 30, 2023
• Not Applicable
• IS/MND Administrative Draft – Jan. 31, 2023
• IS/MND Public Draft– Mar. 31, 2023
• IS/MND Final – May 15, 2023
• LOS Addenda to CEQA Transportation Analysis Memorandum – Feb. 28, 2023 • Fiscal Impact Analysis Memorandum – Jan. 31, 2023
III
. The Contract Off icer may ap prove ext ensions f or performance of the services in accordance with Section 3.2.
PROPOSAL TO THE CITY OF BELL FOR THE
ATLANTIC AVENUE SPECIFIC
PLAN (AASP) AND THE CHELI
SPECIFIC PLAN (CSP)
JANUARY 1 2,
2022
CORRECTED
The Arroyo Group Planning, Housing, Urban Design
Los Angeles Neighborhood Initiative Community
Engagement Impact Sciences CEQA Analysis
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates Economics
Iteris Mobility and Parking
Sherwood Design Engineers Civil Engineering
B
Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan This page intentionally left blank.
i
The Arroyo Group
PLANNERS, URBAN DESIGNERS & ARCHITECTS
40 E COLORADO BOULEVARD
SUITE B
PASADENA
CALIFORNIA
91105-1902
VOICE 626 795.9771
Philip Burns, AICP, Principal
323.382.2402, [email protected]
PLANNERS, URBAN DESIGNERS & ARCHITECTS
40 E COLORADO BOULEVARD
SUITE B
PASADENA
CALIFORNIA
91105-1902
VOICE 626 795.9771
January 12, 2022
City of Bell
Attn: Javier Ochiqui, Contracts and Facilities Manager
Attn: Manuel Acosta, Community Development Director
6330 Pine Ave.
Bell, CA 90201
Dear Mr. Ochiqui and Mr. Acosta:
On behalf of our team, The Arroyo Group is pleased to submit this proposal to the City of Bell to prepare the Atlantic Avenue and Cheli Specific Plans. We are pleased to be working with you currently on the update to the General Plan Housing, Environmental Justice and Health and Safety Elements, and we look forward to implementing the policy direction set in those plans through Specific Plans for these two key areas of the City.
Our team has a great deal of experience in Specific Plans, including recent plans in South Gate, Willowbrook, Compton and Vernon. We are confident that we will be able to deliver Specific Plans that are effective at attracting development of the type that the City desires and improving the overall environment and quality of life for residents of Bell.
As a result of the changing circumstances of the City, we have revised our proposal to separate the Atlantic Avenue and Cheli Specific Plans into two completely separate processes with individual environmental clearances. We have also increased our level of effort on the Cheli Specific Plan, incorporating a stakeholder engagement and negotiation process based on our current efforts to sort through competing interests in the City of Vernon.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit our proposal. We look forward to discussing it in detail with you.
Respectfully,
Philip Burns, AICP, Principal
323.382.2402, [email protected]
ii
Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan This page intentionally left blank.
iii
The Arroyo Group
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PROJECT TEAM & PERSONNEL ......................................................................................................................................1
2. SCOPE OF WORK.............................................................................................................................................................15
3. FEE SCHEDULE ................................................................................................................................................................33
4. PUBLIC OUTREACH .........................................................................................................................................................35
5. REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................................................45
6. CERTIFICATION OF PROPOSAL ....................................................................................................................................51
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 - Team Organization ..................................................................................................................................................3 Figure 2 - Team Planning & Urban Design Approach ............................................................................................................15 Figure 3 - Atlantic Avenue Planning Opportunities .................................................................................................................16 Figure 4 - Cheli Planning Opportunities .................................................................................................................................17 Figure 5 - Urban Design Framework ......................................................................................................................................23 Figure 6 - Opportunity Sites ...................................................................................................................................................24 Figure 7 - Public Realm Element and Complete Streets.. ......................................................................................................25 Figure 8 - Fee Schedule .........................................................................................................................................................33 Figure 9 - Public Workshop Infographics ...............................................................................................................................43
iv
Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan Colorado Boulevard Old Pasadena. Pasadena, CA.
1 The Arroyo Group
1PROJECT TEAM & PERSONNEL
The Arroyo Group is a 44 year-old Southern California
professional planning and urban design firm that balances diverse interests and inspired design with economic realities.
We design revitalized downtowns, dynamic districts, livable neighborhoods and inviting public spaces that build on the unique physical attributes of a community as well as its distinctive identity and character.
The Arroyo Group Philosophy
The Arroyo Group derives its name and approach from the Arroyo Guild, an assembly of turn-of-the-century California architects, planners, engineers, artists, craftsmen, and performing artists who lived along the Arroyo Seco in
Pasadena. Common to all their creative efforts was a
careful consideration for the unique beauty and meaning of the environment in which they worked, and an overriding concern for quality, craftsmanship and detail. Their
association was characterized by intense dialogue across traditional professional boundaries, and mutual respect for the contribution each could make to the other’s work. The Guildsmen left a legacy of work that is to this day functional and beautiful in itself and in its setting.
Much like the Arroyo Guild, our team members work together because we have the shared belief that sensitive and
workable relationships between people and the environment can be achieved today and integrated with the sound social and fiscal considerations so essential to successful design, planning and development. Our practice strives to reflect the spirit of the Arroyo Guild through a respect for quality and detail, and by tapping the wisdom and experience
of individuals of varying professional and experiential backgrounds. Our concern is for the lasting value of our plans to our clients and their communities.
Most important to The Arroyo Group team is the creation of plans that respect, reflect and create a unique sense of place, and are responsible to the realities of existing and potential market demand. It is the actual revitalization of communities in which we take our greatest pride. Plans do get built.
Relevant Experience
Specific, Area and Master Plans
• The Plan for Old Pasadena, Pasadena Heritage
• Pasadena Civic Center/Mid-Town Design Plan, City of
Pasadena
• Inglewood Transit-Oriented Development Plans (Downtown Inglewood, Fairview Heights, Westchester/Veterans and
Crenshaw/Imperial), City of Inglewood
• Tweedy Boulevard and Hollydale Village Specific Plans, City of South Gate
• Willowbrook Transit-Oriented Development Specific Plan, County of Los Angeles
• Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan, City of Orange
• Compton Station Specific Plan, City of Compton (in progress) • Vernon Westside Specific Plan, City of Vernon (in progress) Housing Plans, Ordinances and Projects
• Vernon Housing Element, City of Vernon (in progress)
• Congregational Land Campaign for Affordable Housing,
Multiple Jurisdictions
• Affordable Housing Feasibility Studies, Multiple Jurisdictions • Review of Pasadena Inclusionary Housing Feasibility Study, Making Housing and Community Happen
Active Transportation and Streetscape Plans
• First/Last Mile Plan for the Foothill Gold Line Extension 2B, LA Metro
• Pasadena Playhouse District Streetscapes and Alley
Walkways Plan, City of Pasadena
• Glendora First/Last Mile Concept Refinement, City of
Glendora
• Carson Neighborhood Villages Plan, Southern California Association of Governments
Primary Contact
Philip Burns, AICP
40 E. Colorado Boulevard, Suite B, Pasadena CA 91105
(323) 382-2402, [email protected]
Legal Name: The Arroyo Group
Form of Business: S Corporation
Certifications: SBE, DBE
Company Ownership: Privately held and incorporated
March 26, 1976
Employees: 8
Offices Servicing CA Accounts: Pasadena
Locations Where Work is to be Assigned:
40 E Colorado Blvd, Suite B
Pasadena CA 91105-1910
2 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
1. Project Team & Personnel
THE ARROYO GROUP TEAM
Supporting us in this project are our team members from the General Plan Update project and other firms who have partnered with us over decades to prepare adopted, constructed and award- winning plans around Southern California, Specific Plans in Vernon, South Gate, Inglewood, Compton and Willowbrook.
The Arroyo Group Team members are:
Los Angeles Neighborhood Initiative (LANI) – Community
Engagement
Los Angeles Neighborhood Initiative (LANI) is an independent nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization whose mission is to revitalize neighborhoods by engaging people and building vibrant public spaces. Founded in 1994 as a demonstration project, LANI has delivered unprecedented results in 45 low- and middle-income communities, most of which are home to majority BIPOC and Latinx populations. LANI is leading community outreach for the Bell General Plan Update.
Impact Sciences – CEQA Analysis
Impact Sciences, Inc. has been preparing thorough, credible and legally defensible environmental documentation since 1988.
Owner, Managing Principal and Project Manager Jessica Kirchner Flores has managed numerous complex EIRs for Specific Plans, Community Plans and the SCAG 2020 RTP. Impact Sciences is leading environmental justice and CEQA analysis for the General Plan Update.
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates – Economics
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates (SRHA) is an urban economics and financial consulting firm established in 1981. SRHA has been a longtime partner of The Arroyo Group, providing market, real estate, fiscal and implementation inputs into recent Specific Plans in Willowbrook, Compton, South Gate and Inglewood. SRHA is now led by Bravish Mallavarapu, longtime analyst at the firm who conducted technical analysis for all of the aforementioned plans.
Iteris – Mobility & Parking
Iteris, Inc., a publicly-traded corporation (NASDAQ: ITI) with over 400 staff nationwide, is the market leader in applying informatics solutions to the transportation industry since 1987. Los Angeles office leader Viggen Davidian and key staff Deepak Kaushik and Sean Daly have all managed projects with The Arroyo Group.
The firm has extensive experience in multimodal mobility, parking studies, parking management, and Traffic Impact Analyses.
Sherwood Design Engineers - Civil Engineering
Sherwood Design Engineers is a site civil engineering practice committed to the optimal integration of ecology, infrastructure, and design. We specialize in water management strategies and water resources engineering. We document site infrastructure as well as master plan engineering solutions at a campus, neighborhood, and district scale. Important to our engineering practice is our ability to span building and landscape. Sherwood works collaboratively with project teams to find ways to maximize efficiencies through an integrated and ecological approach that results in high performance buildings and landscapes recognized for function as well as aesthetics and user experience. Sherwood is working with The Arroyo Group on a Specific Plan in the City of Vernon.
More information about The Arroyo Group Team’s project
experience can be found on the following pages. Work samples are available on each client agency’s web site or by request.
Reference information is given with each project.
Staff and firm project managers of The Arroyo Group Team are shown in Figure 1. We see ourselves as working as an extension of City staff and forming part of a larger City of Bell/The Arroyo Group Team that also reaches out and engages other departments, City Commissions, other agencies and the community at large, involving them in decision-making. Staff resumes are given in the following pages.
3 The Arroyo Group
1. Project Team & Personnel
Citizens of Bell
Bell City Council
Community Development
Department
Manuel Acosta, Director of Community
Development*
Paula Kelly , Contract Planner
Megan Covarrubias, Assistant Planner
City Departments
Public Works
City Commissions
Planning
Community Services
Youth
Environmental
Outside Agencies
Metro
THE ARROYO GROUP
Planning, Housing, Urban Design
Philip Burns, AICP, Principal, Project Manager*
Robert Paternoster , FAICP , Principal Planner
Lance Lowrey , ASLA, Sr. Associate, Landscape Design
Margaret Muñoz, Associate, Planning, Engagement, Housing Stakeholders
Bell High School
Elementary Schools
Residents
Businesses
Property Owners
Public at Large
English-Speaking
Spanish-Speaking
CITY OF BELL
THE ARROYO GROUP TEAM
*Communication Focal Points
SHERWOOD DESIGN
ENGINEERS
Civil Engineering
Drew Norton, Principal
Jimmy Galvez,
PE, Senior Project
Management
Robyn Chaconas, Design
Engineer
STANLEY R.
HOFFMAN
ASSOCIATES
Economics
Bravish Mallavarapu,
PhD, Director*
Timothy Lowe, MAI,
CRE, FRICS, Principal,
Waronzof Associates
ITERIS
Mobility & Parking
Viggen Davidian, PE, Vice
President
Deepak Kaushik, PE,
Associate Vice President*
Sean Daly , AICP , PTP , Senior
Engineer
IMPACT SCIENCES
CEQA Analysis
Jessica Kirchner Flores,
AICP , Managing Principal*
Kevin Varzandeh, Deputy
Project Manager , Planner
Yasmeen Hussain, JD,
Planner III
LANI
Community Engagement
Veronica Hahni,
Executive Director
Arturo Nevarez,
Program Manager
Moises Gomez,
Program Manager
FIGURE 1 - TEAM ORGANIZATION
4 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
1. Project Team & Personnel
Philip Burns is a principal and project manager at The Arroyo Group with experience in land use planning, housing issues, urban design and transportation planning. His specialties include community engagement and public participation (ensuring inclusive, accessible and consensus- building public processes), data analysis, active transportation and form-based codes. A former urban planning Peace Corps Volunteer and United Nations officer in Guatemala, he enjoys cross-cultural work and making abstract and counter-intuitive planning concepts understandable to the average citizen.
Possessing a variety of technical skills, Philip often manages multidisciplinary teams and serves as primary agency point of contact for complex planning projects. He is detail-oriented, yet adept at understanding and conveying the larger picture toward which the firm’s projects build.
Philip has managed ten planning projects since joining The Arroyo Group, including:
• Inglewood Transit-Oriented Development Plans. Philip served as project planner for the development of the Downtown Inglewood and Fairview Heights TOD Plans in 2015-2016, then project manager for the subsequent Westchester/Veterans and Crenshaw/Imperial TOD Plans. Together the plans provide for 8,000 new housing units and 10,000 new jobs. • Metro Foothill Gold Line Extension Phase 2B First/Last Mile Planning. Philip led this active transportation project which involved extensive coordination and negotiation between the five local city governments, Metro and the Foothill Gold Line Construction Authority. Philip oversaw and conducted thirty outreach events which garnered comments from over 1,500 people, and guided the design process.
• Carson Neighborhood Mobility Area Plan. Philip managed this project which combined land use planning, active transportation network planning, code studies, and intensive traffic modeling to develop a plan to reduce VMT in auto-oriented neighborhoods with limited public transit service. The plan is envisioned to reduce per capita VMT by 4.8% over the buildout period.
• Compton Station Specific Plan. Philip is leading this effort to plan for the revitalization of Downtown Compton.
• South Gate Tweedy Boulevard Specific Plan. Philip managed the end of this specific plan process, which involved preserving economic feasibility of the plan while addressing community concerns about density.
Prior to joining The Arroyo Group, Philip led the development of a community-driven streetscape and open space plan in Arleta and Pacoima for the City of Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks, where he directed eighteen educational and input-gathering workshops and focus groups in English and Spanish.
Philip is a member of the Greater Pasadena Affordable Housing Group (GPAHG), where he analyzes and advocates for reasonable solutions to the housing crisis. He has undertaken significant academic work tracking the social outcomes of low-income residents in gentrifying neighborhoods. In his spare time, Philip leads children’s and youth groups at a local church. His friends know him as an avid transit advocate and rider who nevertheless loves a good road trip.
THE ARROYO GROUP
Philip Burns, AICP
Principal & Project Manager
EDUCATION
BA, Urban Studies
Brown University
MA, Planning
University of Southern California
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Bilingual community
engagement and public
participation
• Housing Policy
• Zoning
• Active transportation
5 The Arroyo Group
1. Project Team & Personnel
Bob Paternoster is a creative and energetic urban planner and community development manager. His broad skills and expertise make him equally adept at managing a team of design professionals, resolving community problems with a citizen group, or negotiating a public/private development partnership. His nationally recognized career has been primarily in the public sector. He understands local government, and exudes a “make it happen” approach which links planning and management to get results.
As Planning Director in Pittsburgh, PA, Bob created a new six-year development programming process, combining the best elements of the general plan and the capital improvement program into a bi-annual policy document. He instituted a Community Planning Program, assigning professional planners to every residential area of the City. He designed and implemented affordable housing rehabilitation and construction programs which set the model for similar programs nationwide.
As Director of Planning and Building in Long Beach, CA, Bob personally managed the preparation of the City’s Local Coastal Program; the two-year process involving a diverse citizen advisory committee, led to the uncontested adoption of the plan by City Council and the Coastal Commission. He was appointed Director of the Queensway Bay Project, managing the planning, design, financing and construction of the 300-acre, $35 million development which links Downtown to its waterfront, and includes the popular world-class Long Beach Aquarium of the Pacific.
Bob also served as Director of Community Development for the City of Sunnyvale, CA, where he managed the redevelopment of the bankrupt Town Center Mall into a $600 million open-air extension of the traditional Downtown, integrating retail, entertainment and residential uses within an attractive and walkable environment. He initiated a massive community outreach program, culminating in a Community Visioning Festival, to develop a 20-year Vision for Sunnyvale which provided the context and direction for subsequent revision of the General Plan.
THE ARROYO GROUP
Robert Paternoster, FAICP
Consulting Principal
Implementation
EDUCATION
BS, Civil Engineering
Lehigh University
MCP, City Planning
Harvard University
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Team-based management
• Creative problem solving
• Community consensus builder
THE ARROYO GROUP
Lance Lowrey, ASLA
Senior Associate
EDUCATION
BS, Landscape Architecture
Colorado State University
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Landscape design
• Urban design
• Open space planning
Lance Lowrey has a broad range of experience in the fields of landscape architecture, urban design and planning. His work spans the gamut of project scales, geographies, and industry sectors, including work with international, resort, residential, hotel, waterfront, commercial, mixed use, ecological, park, civic, transportation-based, educational, industrial, and planned community projects. Lance places strong emphasis on finding unique and creative solutions to clients’ project requirements, and developing fresh, new ideas.
Lance’s unique perspective and background in ‘placemaking’, integrated throughout The Arroyo Group’s planning process, has been a foundational in our approach to creating plans with the end user and their ultimate experiences in mind.
Lance has experience developing urban design concepts and visualizations for station-adjacent sites, including shared streets and plazas. Recent experience includes developing concepts at key sites for the Foothill Gold Line Extension 2B FLM Plan and helping revision downtown Compton in and around the Compton Station.
Lance’s other relevant experience includes:
• Compton Station TOD Specific Plan - Compton, CA
• Vernon Mixed-Use Specific Plan - Vernon, CA
• San Marino Mission Street Visioning
• Metro Gold Line Extension First-Last Mile Pla n - Glendora, CA, San Dimas, CA, La Verne, CA, Pomona, CA, Claremont, CA
• City of Tempe Urban Core Master Plan -Tempe, Arizona
• Mixed-use Residential TOD Development - Dubai, United Arab Emirates
6 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
1. Project Team & Personnel
Veronica joined LANI in 2006 and became Executive Director in 2009. She has worked closely with public agencies in developing project scopes and managed many grant contracts with local, state, and federal departments and agencies. Her areas of expertise include economic development, transportation, and community planning. Prior to joining LANI, Veronica served as Manager of Legal Services for the AIDS Service Center (ASC) and HIV & AIDS Legal Services Alliance (HALSA).
For this project, Veronica will manage LANI’s contracts with the prime contractor and provide oversight of LANI staff; she will also help process draw requests and progress reports, ensuring that information provided to the prime contractor is accurate and timely.
Veronica’s professional experience includes:
• ULI Transit Oriented Los Angeles Conference Program Committee Member - 2015-Present • Vice President, Barnhart School Board of Trustees, 2016-Present • FASTLinkDTLA Board Member 2017-Present
• Metro ExpressLanes Corridor Advisory Group, 2009-2016 • UCLA Executive Director Roundtable, 2012-2015
• ULI FutureBuild Conference Program Committee, 2011-2013 • Emmaus School Board of Education, 2003-2010
• Judicial Appointments Committee, Los Angeles County Bar Association, 2002-2009 • Volunteer Judge, Los Angeles County Bar Association Barristers, 2002-2004 LANI
Veronica Hahni
Executive Director
EDUCATION
Juris Doctor
University of Southern California
Law School
BS, Business Administration and
Economics
California State University, Los
Angeles
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Project development and
management
• Community development and
outreach
Margaret’s work with the Arroyo Group involves writing housing elements, writing specific plans, and working on affordable housing initiatives such as congregational land overlay zones and community land trusts. Margaret joined the Arroyo Group in April 2021.
A Los Angeles and San Gabriel Valley native, Margaret left home to study Urban Studies at Haverford College outside of Philadelphia, including a semester studying Metropolitan Studies in Berlin. At the University of Southern California, she concentrated in housing and real estate development, through which she developed a strong background in policy that incentivizes af - fordable housing development. Additionally, Margaret has experience organizing in communities across Los Angeles County to help solve Southern California’s housing crisis.
Since joining The Arroyo Group, Margaret has been involved in the following projects:
• Vernon Housing Element
• Inglewood Housing Element
• Yorba Linda Congregational and Commercial Overlay Zones Margaret is a founding member of the Pasadena Affordable Housing Coalition, a broad-based, inclusive campaign to ensure safe and affordable housing for all Pasadenans. She also is a member of Pasadena for All, a grassroots organization providing direct outreach to unhoused Pasadena residents.
THE ARROYO GROUP
Margaret Muñoz
Associate
EDUCATION
Master of Urban Planning
University of Southern California
BA, Urban Studies
Haverford College
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Housing Policy
• Community Engagement and
Public Participation
7 The Arroyo Group
1. Project Team & Personnel
Moises Gomez is one of LANI’s bilingual Spanish Program Managers and Manager of the Byzantine-Latino Quarter Pico Business Improvement District (BID). Moises works closely with BID Board of Directors, business owners, property owners, residents, and other community groups. Moises has expertise in workforce development, community organization, economic development, and small business entrepreneurship.
In addition, Moises grew up in Bell and maintains community connections there; for this project, he would provide outreach support and liaise with the community.
Moises’s professional experience includes:
• Community Wellness Specialist, Hathaway-Sycamores
• Executive Assistant, MLK Community Health Foundation
• Operations Manager, Engine Company No. 28 Restaurant
• coordinating with advocacy organizations and labor unions • working with elected officials and government representatives LANI
Moises Gomez
Program Manager
EDUCATION
MA, Human Development:
Leadership in Education and Human
Services
Pacific Oaks College
BA, Human Development: Social
Change
Pacific Oaks College
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Business outreach and local
business development
• Development and dissemination
of community resources
Arturo joined LANI in 2017 and has been responsible for community improvement projects in underserved communities varying from sidewalk reconstruction to façade redevelopment. Prior to joining LANI, Arturo worked with non-profit advocacy organizations, labor unions, and the California State Legislature. Arturo is bilingual in Spanish, and has dedicated his profesional life to promoting equity among impacted communities of color.
For this project, Arturo will manage the project on-the-ground and be the main point person for community engagement and outreach.
Arturo’s professional experience includes:
• Senior Field Representative, 48th District, California State Assembly • Program Manager, Southern California Resource Services For Independent Living (SCRS) • coordinating with advocacy organizations and labor unions • working with elected officials and government representatives LANI
Arturo Nevarez
Program Manager
EDUCATION
BA, Anthropology
University of California, Irvine
PROJECT ROLE
• Community development
and outreach and directing
grassroots activities
• Policy research and advocacy
• Engaging underserved
communities
•
8 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
1. Project Team & Personnel
Ms. Kirchner Flores has more than 15 years of experience in environmental analysis for a variety of projects. In addition to policy work in the areas of regional open space planning and greenhouse gas analysis, she is experienced in preparing CEQA/NEPA documents including initial studies and environmental impact reports for residential, commercial, mixed-use, and school development projects, as well as large transportation projects and plans. Her primary responsibilities include project management, CEQA/NEPA documentation, aesthetics, cultural resources, greenhouse gas analysis/sustainability, population, housing, employment, marketing and proposal preparation, mitigation monitoring, technical editing, presentations to decision makers and communities, and staff training.
Projects Ms. Kirchner Flores has been involved with include:
• Caltrans Climate Adaptation Report - California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) • SCAG 2020 Regional Transportation Plan EIR - Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)
• Boyle Heights Community Plan Update EIR - Los Angeles, CA • Los Angeles CEQA Threshold Guide Update - Los Angeles, CA • Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) Ordinance - Los Angeles, CA • Southeast Los Angeles Community Plan Update EI - Los Angeles, CA
IMPACT SCIENCES
Jessica Kirchner Flores, AICP,
ENV SP
Managing Principal
EDUCATION
BA, Journalism
Rutgers University
MPL, Planning
University of Southern California
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• CEQA/NEPA Documentation
• Project Management
• Population and Housing
• Alternatives Analyses
Mr. Varzandeh has assisted in the preparation of environmental documents pursuant to CEQA, including sections and background reports for EIRs, ISs, EAs, and he has prepared MMRPs, Findings, and other compliance documents. Mr. Varzandeh is currently serving as a section preparer for SCAG’s Connect SoCal EIR and the Program EIRs for the City of Los Angeles’ Harbor LA Community Plans and Boyle Heights Community Plans.
Projects Mr. Varzandeh has been involved with include:
• Boyle Heights Community Plan Update EIR - Los Angeles, CA • SCAG 2020 Regional Transportation Plan EIR - Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)IMPACT SCIENCES
Kevin Varzandeh
Deputy Project Manager
EDUCATION
MS, Environmental Studies
California State University Fullerton
BS, Environmental Sciences &
Environmental Systems and Society
University of California, Santa
Barbara
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Environmental Policy
• City Planning
• Sustainability
9 The Arroyo Group
1. Project Team & Personnel
Ms. Hussain has a multicultural background and demonstrated commitment to public service and disadvantaged communities. Prior to her role at Impact Sciences, she reviewed complex land use permits for consistency with adopted plans and regulations for the County of Monterey Resource Management Agency. During the COVID crisis she served as County emergency personnel and community liaison. She has also served as a human rights advocate from the perspective of illicit trade and corporate responsibility in acquisition of natural resources. She also worked for the United Nations where she reviewed sustainable developments to promote economic efficiency of natural resources.
Ms. Hussain’s duties also include preparation of environmental documents, including Initial Studies, Mitigated Negative Declarations (MNDs), and sections of Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs). She is responsible for research of technical sections covering topics such as environmental justice, cultural resources, geology, hazards, land use, noise, and population and housing. She has a diverse educational background in environmental planning, policy analysis, and human rights. She is fluent in both Spanish and Arabic.
Projects Ms. Hussain’s current projects include:
• Harbor Los Angeles Community Plan EIR and environmental justice review – South Los Angeles, CA
• Boyle Heights Community Plan EIR and environmental justice review - Los Angeles, CA • Density Bonus EIR - Los Angeles, CA
IMPACT SCIENCES
Yasmeen Hussain
Planner III
EDUCATION
JD, American University Washington
College of Law
B.A. The University of Chicago,
International Studies and Human
Rights
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Environmental Justice policy
development
• CEQA Environmental Analyses
Dr. Bravish Mallavarapu has worked with Stanley R. Hoffman Associates (SRHA) since 2003 in growing roles. Currently, as Director, he is overseeing professional operations consequent to the sudden passing of its founding President, Stan Hoffman. Dr. Mallavarapu brings to this project considerable experience and working relationships of SRHA in TOD economic and land use development in the Gateway/South LA region, including several with the Arroyo Group.
His work specializes in the integration of market demand conditions and development feasibility with land use planning, and its fiscal and financial implications. Key elements include industry and market evaluations, demographic and employment projections, labor market industry-occupation dynamics, retail and real estate market analysis, development feasibility, and public finance implications of economic and land use developennt.
Some representative projects in the area that Dr. Mallavarapu has worked on for SRHA include:
the City of Compton TOD Specific Plan, City of Downey Imperial Corridor Economic Development Strategy, the South Gate Tweedy Blvd and Hollydale Area Specific Plan, the Downtown Inglewood TOD Economic Study, Willowbrook TOD Specific Plan Economic Development Study, and the LA Metro East San Fernando Valley Corridor Study.
Dr. Mallavarapu earned his Ph.D. in urban and regional economics from the UCLA Department of Urban Planning. He has also worked on several international projects for the the United Nations and the World Bank on sustainable urban planning and economic development. He has lectured in the Urban Planning program at UCLA and the Real Estate program at New York University.
STANLEY R. HOFFMAN
ASSOCIATES
Bravish Mallavarapu, Ph.D
Director
EDUCATION
Ph.D, Urban and Regional Planning
MA, Urban Planning
University of California, Los Angeles
Bachelor of Architecture
School of Planning and Architecture,
New Delhi (India)
PROJECT ROLE
• Project Manager
• Economic Development Strategy
• Market and Real Estate Study
10 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
1. Project Team & Personnel
Mr. Lowe provides real estate consulting and valuation work including strategy and best practice analyses, market and highest & best use studies, market value and fair compensation appraisals; acquisition due diligence; economic feasibility analysis; and advanced financial analysis for large-scale project development. His practice has emphasis in litigation, investment analysis and counseling.
As Principal with Waronzof, Mr. Lowe is responsible for directing real estate consulting and valuation engagements.His experience includes appraisal and consulting engagements across the continental United States, Alaska and Hawaii, Canada and Argentina. Mr. Lowe is a member of the Green Building Finance Consortium, an industry group working to establish underwriting and valuation guidelines for sustainable buildings.
Prior to founding Waronzof, Mr. Lowe was a Director in the Real Estate Consulting and Litigation Practice with Deloitte & Touche in Los Angeles, and earlier a Vice President and Chief Appraiser with Arthur Gimmy International in San Francisco. Mr. Lowe has been accepted as an expert witness in state and federal courts in the areas of real estate and going concern valuation, project feasibility and plan feasibility.
Mr. Lowe also partnered with Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. and The Arroyo Group, providing his land economics and pro forma analysis expertise to the following projects:
• Economic Study for Downtown Inglewood Transit-Oriented Development - Inglewood, CA • Market Analysis and Financial Implementation Study, Downtown Hemet Specific Plan - Hemet, CA
• Tweedy Boulevard and Hollydale Village Specific Plan - South Gate, CA • Willowbrook TOD Specific Plan - Los Angeles County, CA STANLEY R. HOFFMAN
ASSOCIATES
Timothy Lowe, MAI, CRE, FRICS
Principal, Waronzof Associates
EDUCATION
Architecture
University of Colorado, Boulder
Real Estate and Accounting
University of Alaska, Anchorage
PROJECT ROLE
• Development Feasibility
Analysis
• Identification of Land Use
Alternatives
Mr. Kaushik serves as an Associate Vice President for Iteris’ Transportation Systems division and has been with the firm since September 2008. He has over 16 years of transportation planning and engineering experience, which includes transportation systems analysis, multimodal mobility planning, highway operations, traffic safety, and travel-demand modeling.
He enjoys the technical aspects of the projects he manages, but also embraces the interaction with stakeholders, city officials, and the public. Most of all, he welcomes the challenge of finding solutions that improve mobility for all users.
Projects Mr. Kaushik has been involved with include:
• Inglewood Transit-Oriented Development Plans - Inglewood, CA • Carson Neighborhood Mobility Plan - Carson, CA
• Senate Bill 743 Mitigation Measures Analysis, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) – Los Angeles County, CA • Ontario Airport Northwest Cargo Intelligent Transportation System (ITS), Ontario International Airport Authority (AIAA) – Ontario, CA
• Griffith Park Circulation and Parking Study – Los Angeles, CA • Traffic/Transportation Impact Fee Program – Rialto, CA • Crenshaw Light Rail Transit (LRT) Grade Separation at Centinela Avenue, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) – Inglewood, CA ITERIS
Deepak Kaushik, PE
Associate Vice President
EDUCATION
BS, Civil Engineering
University of California, Irvine
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Transportation Planning
• Multimodal Planning
• Travel Demand Modeling
• Transit
11 The Arroyo Group
1. Project Team & Personnel
Mr. Daly serves as a Senior Engineer for Iteris’ Transportation Systems division. He has 19 years of public sector and professional consulting experience in transportation planning and started with Iteris in July 2006. His approach to planning puts people first to ensure access and connectivity rather than barriers and isolation. He is supported by Iteris’ focus on to bring professional planning services to his clients through a broad array of knowledge, expertise and experience in transportation impact analysis; multimodal studies; corridor analysis; analytics; transportation finance; and the regional travel demand model process. Prior to Mr. Daly’s time at Iteris, he was the Transportation Improvement Program Manager at the Boston Metropolitan Planning Organization. Previously located in his native southern California, he now lives in Louisiana. He is the Professional Development Officer for the APA Louisiana and served on the National Planning Conference Committee as the Mobile Workshop Chair of the 2018 National Planning Conference in New Orleans and is the current Chair of the ASCE Louisiana Transportation and Development Institute.
Projects Mr. Daly has been involved with include:
• Carson Neighborhood Mobility Plan - Carson, CA
• Senate Bill 743 Mitigation Measures Analysis, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) – Los Angeles County, CA • Environmental Impact Reports (EIR) / Statements, Port of Los Angeles (POLA) and Port of Long Beach (POLB) – Los Angeles, CA
• Countywide Strategic Truck Arterial Network, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) – Los Angeles County, CA • Jordan Downs Specific Plan and EIR – Watts, CA
ITERIS
Sean Daly, AICP, PTP
Senior Engineer
EDUCATION
MS, City Planning
University of Pennsylvania
BA, Geography, Minor in Public
Policy
California State University, Los
Angeles
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Transportation Planning
• Traffic Engineering & Operations
• Goods Movement
Drew Norton serves as a Principal at Sherwood Design Engineers, Sonoma County. Drew has extensive experience designing and managing improvement plans and construction for residential, institutional, private and public projects necessitating lotting, utilities, water management, erosion control, road design, grading, driveway improvements, and drainage.
Drew manages several of Sherwood’s most collaborative and innovative projects.
Drew has worked extensively in the historic Presidio Fort Scott area. Drew was selected to reach a consensus building between all groups involved while assessing the most practical, sustainability-minded ways to approach stormwater, potable and non-potable water sourcing, energy, ecology and transportation.
Drew’s campus projects require a sensitive integration with the site’s existing fabric, a key component that drove the design parameters for the new facilities. Other work experience includes green buildings designs, utility infrastructure, streetscape, earthwork, fine grading and drainage design, integrated stormwater management and feasibility studies.
Projects Mr. Norton has been involved with include:
• Green Infrastructure Plan, Presidio Fort Scott, San Francisco, CA • Presidio Coastal Trail, Presidio Fort Scott, San Francisco, CA • UC Berkeley Lower Sproul Redevelopment Project, Berkeley, CA • Spirit Rock Center, Woodacre, CA
• Moscone Expansion Center, San Francisco, CA
• Los Angeles Union Station Forecourt and Esplanade Improvement, Los Angeles, CA
SHERWOOD DESIGN
ENGINEERS
Drew Norton
Principal
EDUCATION
BS, Civil Engineering
California State University,
Sacramento
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Project Management
• Green Building Design
• Utility Infrastructure
• Integrated Stormwater
Management
12 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
1. Project Team & Personnel
Jimmy Galvez has extensive depth of design experience on projects at the institutional/higher education campus scale, neighborhood district-scale, and streetscape city-scale. He has served as project lead in coordination with government agencies, multi-disciplinary design teams, contractors, and other stakeholders for clients in both the private and public sectors. He has been responsible for site design and supporting calculations for the preparations of plans and specifications including cost and bond estimates for a variety of land development protects.
Jimmy is currently working on the Moscone Expansion Center in San Francisco, CA, a 6 year design to construction project. Earlier this year, he began leading Sherwood’s efforts on stormwater low impact development design and sustainable framework support for the Los Angeles Union Station Forecourt and Esplanade Improvements as part of a multidisciplinary team and working with a number of city agencies including various departments at City of Los Angeles.
Jimmy’s diverse experience applying technical innovation and solid engineering to projects at all scales result in outcomes that save time and resources and exceeded the expectations of stakeholders.
Projects Mr. Galvez has been involved with include:
UC Berkeley Lower Sproul Redevelopment Project, Berkeley, CA Spirit Rock Center, Woodacre, CA
Moscone Expansion Center, San Francisco, CA
Los Angeles Union Station Forecourt and Esplanade Improvement, Los Angeles, CA
SHERWOOD DESIGN
ENGINEERS
Jimmy Galvez, PE
Senior Project Manager
EDUCATION
BS, Civil Engineering
California Polytechnic State
University
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Stormwater Low Impact
Development Design
• New Utility Design
• Civil Design & Architectural/
Landscape Architectural Design
Coordination
Robyn Chaconas serves as a Design Engineer at Sherwood. She has served on a variety of projects that concentrate on regional infrastructure services, Low-Impact Development (LID) stormwater management and sustainable water resource planning. Her work experience includes infrastructure master planning, sustainability guidelines and implementation, water resources planning, and decentralized stormwater management strategies.
She has considerable experience preparing infrastructure and environmental assessments, construction document plan sets, relevant project exhibits, and conducting community engagement. Robyn coordinates and collaborates with the entire planning and design team to produce quality work. Her recent project experience includes parks and open spaces, higher education, regional master planning, and resiliency projects.
SHERWOOD DESIGN
ENGINEERS
Robyn Chaconas
Design Engineer
EDUCATION
Colorado School of Mines,
Bachelor of Sicence in Mechanical
Engineering
Minor: Humanitarian Engineering
AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Sustainability Guidelines and
implementation
• Infrastructure & Environmental
Assessment
13 The Arroyo Group
1. Project Team & Personnel
14 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
2. Scope of Work
Willowbrook, CA
Willowbrook Transit-oriented Development Plan
15 The Arroyo Group
2SCOPE OF WORK
UNDERSTANDING OF THE ASSIGNMENT
The City of Bell is seeking a consultant to prepare the Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and Cheli Specific Plan. These Specific Plans will be important implementation vehicles for many of the goals, policies, and strategies in the City’s General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements, and those that will be in the forthcoming Housing Element, Environmental Justice Element and Health and Safety Element that we are working on.
THE ARROYO GROUP TEAM’S APPROACH
For over four decades, The Arroyo Group’s plans have been based on a Planning and Urban Design Approach that integrates the considerations of People, Economics and Place through an educating, designing, communicating and consensus-building dialogue which is illustrated in Figure 2 . The key to our track record of success is that each plan fulfills all three considerations, building consensus and creating an implementable plan. We therefore have assembled a multidisciplinary team for this project which covers all of the relevant aspects of People, Economics and Place.
People
LANI will lead the community engagement effort of the project, with The Arroyo Group’s active participation and guidance along the way. Community engagement will operate as a continuation of the General Plan Update (GPU) process and draw upon the inputs received from the community in initial, listening-stage GPU engagement around the Atlantic Avenue and Cheli areas. These will form the basis for the formulation of a draft community vision and urban design framework alternatives to be tested in outreach activities with the community in the middle of the process. LANI’s approach to community engagement is described in more depth in Section 4 of this proposal.
Economics
Economic considerations determine the implementability of any plan. Public programs and infrastructure improvements must be fiscally feasible for the public sector, while land development projects must be feasible from the private sector.
Our longtime partner Stanley R. Hoffman Associates (SRHA) will represent this perspective on our team. SRHA’s work covers four main areas:
• Market demand analysis
• Pro forma analysis for development feasibility
• Fiscal analysis
• Implementation and financing strategies
SRHA will address all of these areas; however, emphasis will be placed on nonresidential demand, fiscal relationships and implementation within the base budget.
Place
The consideration of place refers to the creation of a plan that is responsive to its context, and at least in the case of Atlantic Avenue, creates a distinct, unique identity - a place that the community identifies with and can enjoy spending time in. Figures 2 and 3 on the next page describe some of the major Place-related issues in each Specific Plan area.
Our approach to urban design is based on tight integration between concepts for the public and private realms. Due to budgetary limitations, our base scope of work focuses on the private realm.
However, we strongly recommend preparing plans for the public realm as well.
PEOPLE
Needs
Priorities
Ideas
ECONOMICS
Public Sector
Private Sector
PLACE
Public Realm
Private Realm
Education
Communication
Decision Making
THE ARROYO GROUP/
CITY OF BELL TEAM
FIGURE 2 - THE ARROYO GROUP TEAM’S PLANNING
AND URBAN DESIGN APPROACH
16 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
2. Scope of Work
FIGURE 3 - ATLANTIC AVENUE PLANNING OPPORTUNITIES
Social places that engage both the public and private realm are needed to support residential development and provide opportunities for addressing environmental justice concerns such as access to recreation. Corners present interesting opportunities for placemaking, and major character features that have local interest could be added to expand access for future residents.
Urban design that instills a sense of safety and comfort during the day and nighttime hours is an essential ingredient to making new development feasible and successful. Attempts have been made over the years to improve the look and feel of the Atlantic Avenue Corridor. However, these attempts have fallen short in prioritizing the experience of the pedestrian. Paths that abruptly end, lack of curb ramps, windowless walls, deactivated storefronts and sidewalks that are kept narrow in order to preserve median landscaping and parking contribute to the lack of comfort.
The corridor has several large underutilized shopping centers and parking lots which present clear opportunities for urban mixed-use development.
Supportive Urban Design
Open Space
Source: City of Sterling, IL
Opportunity Sites
17 The Arroyo Group
2. Scope of Work
Implement a connected, sustainable environment to encourage new residential opportunities on underutilized, vacant or city owned lots close to the Salvation Army Bell Shelter.
Link south Cheli potential housing areas to existing and new supportive surrounding uses and programs like community gardens (Grow Good Urban Farm), nonprofit organizations (Food Forward’s Produce Pit Stop), the Richard N. Slawson Occupational Center and others.
Mitigate noxious conditions from the Long Beach Fwy and North Cheli Industrial areas. Consolidate and develop Bandini Boulevard as a Business Industrial Corridor.
Improve pedestrian and bicycle connectivity within Cheli, to the rest of Bell and adjacent cities, and to bus stops. Needs include a connected sidewalk network, street trees, and protected bicycle lanes.
FIGURE 4 - CHELI PLANNING OPPORTUNITIES
18 Bell Atlantic Avenue Specific Plan and the Cheli Specific Plan
2. Scope of Work
Detailed Scope of Work
This section contains The Arroyo Group Team’s proposed scope of work to complete the tasks requested in the RFP. This scope of services anticipates one round of review for all deliverables.
ATLANTIC AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN
TASK 1: PROJECT ADMINISTRATION
1.1 Walking Tour
The Arroyo Group and City staff will conduct a walking/driving tour of the Atlantic Avenue in order to discuss issues, opportunities and potential strategies.
1.2 Project Coordination
The Arroyo Group will hold regular coordination meetings with City staff on a monthly or biweekly basis. Agendas and notes with action items will be produced for each meeting.
Deliverables: Meeting agendas and notes
1.3 Prepare Outreach Programming
Within sixty (60) days of contract engagement, The Arroyo Group and LANI will propose a community outreach program for the Specific Plans to the City of Bell. We anticipate that this will be an extension of our current outreach program for the General Plan Update.
The RFP suggests five community meetings on the Specific Plans. However, based on our experience during the General Plan Update, we anticipate a community engagement process that is more focused on community surveys, business canvassing, and pop-up events than community meetings. Study sessions with commissions will also be included.
More information about LANI’s public outreach approach can be found in Section 4.
Deliverables: Draft and Final Outreach Plan, Community
Meetings and Study Sessions as agreed.
TASK 2: BASELINE STUDIES
2.1 Existing Conditions and Needs Analysis
The Arroyo Group Team will prepare a concise memorandum which will address the topics identified below.
Planning Framework
The Arroyo Group will review the project’s planning framework including the setting and history of Atlantic Avenue. The existing General Plan Land Use Element’s Area Plan for each area, General Plan street classifications, relevant goals and policies, and City’s Zoning Code will be reviewed. In particular, portions of the General Plan and Zoning Code that will need changes will be catalogued.
Existing Utilities Study
Sherwood will document existing wet and dry utility systems along the Atlantic Avenue corridor and on adjacent alleys. The work will include research, site investigations, project kick off meeting, as- built collection/analysis, and existing infrastructure write ups.
Land Use and Urban Design Patterns and Opportunity Sites Identification
The Arroyo Group will document land use and urban design patterns in the project area. This will include a documentation of existing land uses, open spaces, streetscape conditions and the pedestrian orientation of existing buildings. Salient natural and environmental factors, such as slope, prevailing winds, and freeway and truck contamination will be drawn from the Environmental Justice and Health and Safety Elements. Analysis of this information will include the identification of a preliminary system of districts and gateways and other potential focal points.
Existing land use, urban design mapping, improvement to assessed value calculations and market study results, as available, and Housing Element work will all input into the identification of potential opportunity sites for the project to focus on.
Mobility Opportunities Overview
The Arroyo Group will review existing Average Annual Daily Trips (AADT) data, bus stop utilization data from Metro, as well as field observations to conduct a high-level evaluation of the feasibility of potential bicycle, pedestrian and transit-rider improvements to Atlantic Avenue and intersecting streets.
Natural, Cultural and Historic Resources
The Arroyo Group Team will map natural, cultural and historic resources that are identifiable visually or in discussion with City staff or community members. It is our understanding that there are no designated historic resources in the area other than the James George Bell House.