City of Fort BraggRequest for ProposalsCity of Fort BraggRequest for Proposals City of Fort Bragg
Request for Proposals
City of Fort Bragg
Request for Proposals
Environmental Impact Report
Mill Pond Remediation Project
Written Questions Due:
October 14, 2022
Response to Questions Posted:
October 28, 2022
Pre-Proposal Meeting:
November 4, 2022
Proposals Due:
November 18, 2022
Interviews:
December 7, 2022
Table of Contents
Introduction & Background 3
Project Location 3
Project Objectives 3
Department of Toxic Substance Control 3
EIR Objectives 5
1. Consistency with Regulatory Requirements 5
2. Seamless Coordination with DTSC and Processing Remedial Action Plan (RAP) for OU-E. 5
3. Public Involvement in Environmental Review Process. 6
4. Complete Understanding of the City’s Local Coastal Program Requirements. 6 EIR Analysis 6
Proposed Mill Pond Dam Improvement Project. 6
Robust Analysis of Project Alternatives 6
Potential Environmental Impacts 7
Consultant Qualifications & Capabilities 8
Preferred Consultant Skills and Experience 8
Scope of Work 8
Deliverables 11
RFP Schedule 12
Proposal Submittal Requirements 12
Background Studies 14
Attachments 17
Introduction & Background
The City of Fort Bragg has received an application from Mendocino Railway for a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) to provide remediation on part of the former Georgia Pacific Mill Site. A detailed project description can be found at Attachment 6. In addition to needing a CDP from the City for compliance with the Local Coastal Program (LCP) requirements, the remediation work also requires:
California Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) consideration of a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) for the Remediation of Operable Unit E; Division of Safety of Dams (DSOD) consideration of a Pond 8 Dam Structural Stabilization Project; and City of Fort Bragg consideration of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.
The City is seeking proposal from qualified environmental consulting firms to prepare a project level EIR for this project.
Project Location
The City of Fort Bragg is located on the north coast of Mendocino County, California. Historically, the local economy has been primarily resource dependent, with the first timber mill established in 1853. In 2002, a 415-acre mill site operated by Georgia Pacific closed. This area comprises about a third of the land area of the City of Fort Bragg, and is located entirely on the west side of CA Hwy 1 overlooking the Pacific Ocean (Figure 1).
The 35-acre project site is situated in the central portion of the former Georgia Pacific Timber Facility (Mill Site) on a coastal terrace. The project site has elevations ranging from 0’ at the beach, to 40’ at the coastal bluffs. The Pacific Ocean is immediately to the west, and the Noyo Headlands Park trail is to the north, south, east and west. Notable features include:
Soldier Bay and beach, located to the west and north of the project site; The City’s wastewater treatment facility, located on the bluff tops to the south west; Maple Creek riparian area, located south east of the project site; Alder Creek drainage area, located northeast of the project site; Downtown Fort Bragg located east and northeast of the project site; and The Noyo Headland Park and Fort Bragg Coastal Trail, which circumambulates around the south, east and north sides of the project area.
Project Objectives
The requested CEQA document is associated with a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) for the proposed mill pond dam improvement project. CDPs are a discretionary land use permit that authorizes development within the coastal zone, and subject to compliance with any conditions of approval imposed on the permit. The overall project objectives include: 1) the project is consistent with the regulatory requirements of the Lead Agency, Responsible Agencies and Trustee Agencies; 2) the project is protective of human and ecological health; 3) the project will result in effective flood control and water quality benefits.
Department of Toxic Substance Control
Following decades of timber operations, the Mill Site required substantial environmental cleanup of hazardous materials and the City invoked the Polanco Redevelopment Act bringing cleanup efforts under the oversight of California’s Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC). To help organize the investigation and remediation, DTSC divided the Mill Site into five geographic areas called Operable Units (OU-A, OU-B, OU-C, OU-D, OU-E). Currently most of the 415-acre Mill Site has met DTSC clean-up goals, with the majority of the areas needing remedial action sited within OU-E.
OU-E includes several ponds (Ponds 1 through 9, and the North Pond). When the mill was in operation, Pond 8 was used for log storage, Pond 9 was available for fire protection, Ponds 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 were utilized for storm water management, and water used for debarking flowed in to Pond 6 and the North Pond. The applicant submitted Draft OU-E Remedial Action Plan (RAP) identifies the preferred remediation as leaving contaminants in place, and implementing dam stabilization improvements. DTSC will begin its formal public review process of the OU-E RAP concurrently with the public review period associated with the project level EIR, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Lead Agency for CEQA is the City of Fort Bragg.
The proposed project area focuses on Pond 6 and Pond 8, referred to herein as the “Mill Ponds” (Figure 2). This is an eight-acre area in the central portion of the Mill Site comprised of two ponds, dam, crib wall, spillway, beach berm, wetlands, and drainage catch. Water from the Mill Pond flows through the site, out over a dam, across the beach, and into the Pacific Ocean. The crib wall near the spillway has deteriorated due to erosion, age and the original construction techniques. The north wall of the pond has also deteriorated due to the passage of time. In 2014, Georgia Pacific completed an interim dam maintenance project, which included repairs to the Dam Spillway and the Crib Wall. Other notable facts related to the Mill Ponds include:
Historically, Pond 6 served as a stormwater collection pond, as well as water for the Powerhouse. Pond 8 also served to collect stormwater, served as the on-site log pond, and the water was utilized operating the hydraulic debarker. In the past, the dam and spillway controlled water levels in the pond during mill operations.
Currently, the Mill Pond functions primarily for stormwater polishing. Approximately 70% of the current flow through the pond comes from storm water runoff from Fort Bragg streets and surfaces (over a third of the City's stormwater). The remaining 30% of flow is runoff from the Mill Site.
The Mill Pond has filled with sediment over the decades and could more properly be characterized as an “upland marsh” in terms of its ecological function; offering habitat for water fowl and amphibians.
EIR Objectives
The purpose of the EIR is to identify potentially significant environmental issues and impacts associated with the Mendocino Railway’s preferred remedial action for OU-E – Institutional Control / Containment Alternative. The Institutional Controls / Containment method was proposed in the Final Feasibility Study Operable Unit E (September 2019), and is further outlined in the Draft Remedial Action Plan Operable Unit-E (October 2020).
The final remedial action project is required to meet the regulatory requirements of all permitting agencies, and be consistent with the City’s objectives for the area and the remediation process, ultimately achieving the following objectives:
Consistency with Regulatory Requirements
Analyze the proposed project, and all project alternatives, for consistency with the regulatory requirements of all relevant permitting agencies, which may include:
City of Fort Bragg: A Coastal Development Permit is required to analyze the project’s compliance with City’s certified Local Coastal Program. If the project is approved by the City of Fort Bragg, the entire project is appealable to the California Coastal Commission; Department of Toxic and Substance Control: Retains oversight of hazardous material removal/remediation. - Remedial Action Plan for OU-E; Department of Fish and Wildlife: A Clean Water Act Section 1602 Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement may be required for one or more components of the project include changes to the Mill Pond configuration and/or changes to the underground Alder or Maple drainages. In addition, Section 2081 take permit may be necessary if the project causes impacts to nesting areas for identified State listed avian species or take of State listed plants or wildlife species; Army Corp of Engineers: The proposed project includes the placement of a weir and is considered wetland fill. Other project alternatives may also require a Section 404 Permit; Regional Water Quality Control Board: Section 401 certification will be necessary if the project involves discharge of dredged or fill materials into the ocean, if dredging of the Mill Pond is necessary, or if wetlands are filled as part of the project.
Division of Safety of Dams: DSOD has determined that the Mill Pond dam would be structurally unsound in a maximum credible earthquake (8.0). The intention of the proposed dam improvement project is twofold: 1) structurally stabilize the dam; and 2) create a smaller area contained by the dam in order to remove the dam from DSOD jurisdiction; California State Water Resources Control Board: The Division of Water Rights will need to be consulted if water is stored; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: A permit may be required related to federally threatened and endangered species. For example, if pelagic fish (Coho and Steelhead Salmon) access is introduced into a day-lighted creek system that terminates in an undergrounded City storm drain system.
US Environmental Protection Agency: A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System will be necessary to address changes to City and/or Mill Site stormwater management system.
Seamless Coordination with DTSC Processing of Remedial Action Plan (RAP) for OU-E.
The environmental consulting team will work closely with the applicant’s remediation specialists (Kennedy/Jenks Consultants) and DTSC on the process for environmental review of the RAP.
Public Involvement in Environmental Review Process.
Fort Bragg and coastal residents have invested significant time and resources to the clean-up and reuse of the Mill Site. It is of the utmost importance to provide a comprehensive public participation process. The City and DTSC have held a number of public workshops and hearings over the years regarding remediation and reuse of the Mill Pond area, specifically. At a minimum, the public participation effort should include one informal information session, a public scoping workshop, a public meeting on the Draft EIR and a public hearing on the Final EIR. Public participation efforts will need to be coordinated with the City’s Coastal Development Permit process, as well as DTSC’s OU-E RAP process.
Complete Understanding of the City’s Local Coastal Program Requirements.
The City’s Local Coastal Program (LCP) controls development in the coastal zone, providing guidance for future development and protection of coastal resources; it is comprised of a Land Use Plan (LUP) and Implementation Program (IP). The City’s LUP includes the Coastal General Plan and Land Use Map, while the City’s IP includes the Coastal Land Use and Development Code and Zoning District Map. A Local Coastal Program grants the City permitting authority over most development, however, the Coastal Commission retains permanent jurisdiction on tidelands, submerged land, public trusts and will act on appeals from local decisions on this project.
EIR Analysis
A comprehensive EIR addressing all topic areas, with a range of feasible alternatives, is required. While the City has not undertaken a formal scoping process, several potential environmental impacts have been identified, which will require significant analysis:
Proposed Mill Pond Dam Improvement Project.
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants is the lead consultant for this work, and the team that developed the Final Feasibility Study Operable Unit E, recommending Institutional Control / Containment alternative, reflected in the proposed project. This project proposes to address California Division of Safety of Dams (DSOD) requirements to meet the criteria for non-jurisdictional dams by hydraulically dividing Pond 8 into two smaller ponds. A Rock Slope Protection (RSP) buttress and earthen ground construction techniques are also being proposed to improve the seismic stability.
Robust Analysis of Project Alternatives
Fort Bragg serves as the primary commercial center for the Mendocino coastal region, and the future use of the Mill Site is important to the entire region. Extensive community engagement has taken place related to reuse of the site since Georgia Pacific closed the timber facility in 2002. The community has long awaited the remediation of OU-E, and it is important that the EIR provide robust analysis on project alternatives; to foster public participation and informed decision-making. There is strong community sentiment that environmental remediation of Mill Pond area requires the removal of hazardous materials and restoration of the project site, rather than dam improvements to stabilize and contain hazardous materials.
The following alternative projects are provided as a starting point. City Council will provide direction on the alternative project description to be evaluated at a future date, based on input received during public scoping session, expertise of selected environmental consulting team, and staff recommendation.
Feasibility of Full Restoration Project Alternative. The full restoration project alternative would involve dam and beach berm dismantlement, the area thoroughly cleaned of toxic contamination. The daylighting of Maple and Alder Creeks, restoring tidal flows, marshes and wetlands, and establishing public access would also be included.
Feasibility of Partial Restoration Project Alternative #1. A partial restoration project alternative would consider a creative solution to the full restoration alternative, possibly limiting creek daylighting activities, wetland restoration and providing limited public access.
Feasibility of Partial Restoration Project Alternative #2. A second partial restoration project alternative may consider alternative construction techniques, relocating aquatic sediment to other portions of the Mill Site, and providing public access in some way.
Potential Environmental Impacts
Coastal Resources. Establishing and protecting public access to the coast is an important aspect of the Coastal Act. The public was unable to access this part of the coastline for generations. Since the mill’s closure, the City has established the Noyo Headlands Park, which stretches the length of the Mill Site property along the coastal bluffs, and includes amenities such as a multi-use trail, artist benches, picnic tables, and restrooms. The proposed dam improvement project includes adding additional armoring to the beach, which would continue to impede public access to this area of the coastline.
Biological Resources. The Mill Site in general, and the project area specifically, contain a number of sensitive species, including those listed below:
Wetlands. The project is located within an area of extensive wetlands including Army Corp and Coastal Act Wetlands (see Attachment 3). The proposed project and the proposed project alternatives have the potential to result in either the elimination of wetlands and/or temporary disturbance of wetlands. Wetland mitigation will be required for the project and project alternatives. Consultation with the appropriate agencies will be an important part of identifying and addressing environmental impacts to wetlands and wetland species.
Special Status Wildlife. Special status bird species observed on or adjacent to the Mill Site include: California brown pelican, white-tailed kite, northern harrier, American peregrine falcon, black oystercatcher, and Bryant’s savannah sparrow. Special status mammal species with a high potential to occur on the Mill Site include: Pacific harbor seal, long-eared myotis (a type of bat), fringed myotis, and the long legged myotis.
Special Status Plant Communities. The Mill Site contains five sensitive plant communities, including: coastal terrace prairie, northern coastal bluff scrub, north coast riparian scrub, aquatic plant communities, freshwater seeps, seasonal riparian wetlands, and season wetland ditch. The project site includes three sensitive plant communities: freshwater seeps, riparian wetland, and season wetland ditch.
Special Status Plant Species. The larger Mill Site is habitat for five identified special status plants: Blasdale’s bent grass, Mendocino coast Indian paintbrush, wallflower, and short leaved evax and Vancouver rye strand. Past botanical studies conducted within Mill Pond area identified the special status plant - Vancouver Rye Strand. An updated biological study has been requested.
Cultural Resources. Although an archeological analysis of the project site has not been completed, an archaeological study for other areas of the Mill Site have identified significant cultural resources. Per Public Resources Code Section 5024 consultation with State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) is required. Consultant would be responsible for SHPO consultation. City staff, with Consultant participation, will coordinate formal Government-to-Government consultation between the City of Fort Bragg and Sherwood Band of Pomo Indians.
Sea Level Rise, Tsunami Hazards, and Increased Erosion. The City of Fort Bragg is located just on shore from the California Triple Junction a place of significant geotechnical subduction with the potential to generate a tsunami event on site. The EIR should analyze the potential impact of tsunami and earthquake events on the proposed project and project alternatives. Sea Level rise may also have the potential to impact the stability of portions of the project site that could be inundated by sea level rise or could be impacted by storm surge due to sea level rise.
Circulation. Project alternatives that require the removal of significant quantities of sediment and/or soil from the site will have impacts on traffic and transportation; especially the removal of the Mill Pond sediment would result in significant trip generation over many months. Regardless of project alternative, pedestrian access to the trails on Noyo Headlands Park and pedestrian circulation connecting the northern and southern portions of Noyo Headlands Park must be considered.
Consultant Qualifications & Capabilities
The consultant team will be under contract with the City of Fort Bragg, and the work of the environmental review team will be managed by the City. The City will process the coastal development permit project and will act as the Lead Agency for the associated environmental review. DTSC and DSOD will be Responsible Agencies. The following agencies are Trustee Agencies with regard to the project: California Coastal Commission, Department of Fish and Wildlife, Army Corp of Engineers, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Preferred Consultant Skills and Experience
The City is looking for a consultant team with the following qualities:
A project manager with direct experience completing EIRs for projects within the California coastal zone, and success at working with a consultant team to identify environmental issues early in the process that result in self-mitigating design changes to the project as feasible.
Team members with experience in environmental review of remediation projects and coordination with DTSC.
Team members with experience in the environmental review of wetland fill and wetland mitigation projects.
Team members with experience interpreting biological surveys, specifically botanical, avian, wildlife, and marine mammal surveys.
Team members with experience analyzing impacts to cultural and archaeological resources.
Team members with experience analyzing climate change impacts, specifically potential sea level rise and tsunami hazard issues.
Team members with a successful track record of preparing EIRs that satisfy local, regional, and state environmental laws and regulatory agencies.
Scope of Work
This contract will include the following major tasks listed below, which are detailed in the following section.
1. Project Meeting Kick-off
2. Project Coordination & Project Management
3. Prepare Notice of Preparation (NOP)
4. Evaluate Existing Technical Studies and Incorporate into the Environmental Review
5. Technical Evaluation of Issues & Identification of Additional Technical Information Needed
6. Consultation with Trusted and Responsible Agencies in Coordination with City
7. Public Scoping Session
8. Prepare Administrative Draft EIR: Public Resource Code Sections 15122 through 15131
9. Respond to Internal Review of Administrative Draft EIR
10. Draft EIR, Notice of Completion and Notice of Availability
11. Public Hearing on DEIR
12. Evaluation of and Response to Comments
13. Respond to Internal Review of Administrative Draft of Response to Comments
14. Prepare Final EIR: Public Resource Code Sections 15122 through 15132
15. Certification Hearing on Final EIR
16. Prepare CEQA Resolution and Findings
17. Prepare Statement of Overriding Considerations
18. Presentation of Findings in Public Meetings
Project Kickoff
The consultant will meet with the City to review the scope of work and timeline. Consultant will be provided with a complete set of all technical information.
Coordination & Project Management
Consult, communicate, and meet with staff as often as necessary to verify, refine, and complete the project requirements and review the progress of the project. Initiate consultation with responsible agencies and other involved local, state, federal agencies. The consultant shall develop and maintain a project schedule and prepare status reports submitted to the City on a monthly basis.
Prepare and Distribute the Notice of Preparation (NOP)
The City of Fort Bragg, Mendocino Railway, DTSC, and DSOD are in the process of developing the full project/program description in order to issue the Notice of Preparation (NOP). The selected consultant will review the project description, identify any additional needs, and prepare the draft NOP, including an environmental scoping study that describes the topics to be analyzed in the EIR. Filing responsibilities to appropriate local, State, and Federal agencies will be the Consultants, including a Cc to the City staff identified as project manager.
Evaluate Existing Technical Studies and Incorporate into the Environmental Review The consultant will review all pertinent documents and existing studies in order to analyze potential project impacts. Based on an evaluation of the existing technical documents and complete project description and the consultant team’s recommendations, the City and/or Georgia-Pacific will contract with appropriate experts to complete additional technical studies. This incorporation will make every effort to analyze the relevance of the data in the main body of the document and incorporate actual data itself by reference or in an appendix.
Technical Evaluation of Issues & Identification of Additional Technical Information The consultant shall evaluate all factual information necessary to complete the analyses of issues of concern. The process may include fieldwork, interviews and meetings, map and exhibit preparation. Identification of additional technical information, if needed, to prepare environmental document, including additional botanical, avian, and marine mammal surveys, as well as cultural and archaeological surveys Consultation with Trusted and Responsible Agencies in Coordination with City The consultant team will likely need to undertake initial consultations with the following agencies in order to obtain early input and address initial agency concerns:
California Coastal Commission
DTSC
Sherwood Valley Band of Pomo Indians Tribal Council
State Historic Preservation Office
DSOD
North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board
State Water Resources Control Board
California Department of Fish & Wildlife
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U. S. Army Corp of Engineers
Caltrans
Public Scoping Session
Participate in one or two public scoping meetings. Because of the extensive public interest in and scope of the project, the City will hold at least one and possibly two public meetings to receive comments from the public on the proposed scope of the EIR. The consultant will be responsible for developing and presenting materials and information. The consultant will prepare a written summary of environmental issues raised at the scoping meetings. Additional scoping meetings with staff, public agencies, and the project proponents may be conducted at the discretion of the consultant.
Prepare Administrative Draft EIR: PRC Sections 15122 through 15131 Prepare and submit an electronic version in Microsoft Word, plus two hard copies of an Administrative Draft EIR (ADEIR) to the City of Fort Bragg for review. The ADEIR will include an executive summary and a summary table of impacts and mitigation measures to facilitate comparison of impacts among the alternatives.
Respond to Internal Review of Administrative Draft EIR
City Staff will consolidate the comments from all agencies and prepare one set of comments for incorporation into the Draft EIR (DEIR). The consultant will be required to meet with City staff to discuss each section as necessary. City staff modifications must be incorporated into the DEIR. The first required screen-check section will consist of the draft Table of Contents, Project Description, and Environmental Setting. The precise time schedule for screen-checks shall be determined after the project schedule is finalized. The consultant shall inform the City of any circumstances arising that may delay or change the contracted work program.
Draft EIR, Notice of Completion and Notice of Availability Following City review, the consultant will revise the ADEIR based upon the City direction. The consultant will be responsible for providing secure shared electronic access to .pdf of Draft EIR (DEIR), as well as all word processing and graphic files of DEIR. Consultant will provide DEIR electronically (and if requested, in hardcopy) to Trusted and Responsible Agencies, the California State Clearinghouse, Mendocino County, the Applicant, the Applicant’s Agent, and the City. Two hardcopies shall be provided for public review at the Fort Bragg Public Library and City Hall. Notice of availability shall be provided to the public concurrently with agency notification, and the public review period shall be between 45-days and 60-days.
11. Public Hearing on DEIR
In accordance with Fort Bragg Municipal Code section 17.72.100E, the City Council is required to hold a public hearing on the Draft EIR during the public review period. 12 Evaluation of and Response to Comments
Consultants shall evaluate comments and prepare written responses, pursuant to CEQA. If significant revisions are incorporated into DEIR, the document must be recirculated. *Public agencies that provided comments shall be responded to in writing at least ten-days prior to decision on Final EIR.
13. Respond to Internal Review of Administrative Draft of Response to Comments Following City review, consultant will revise the Administrative Draft of Response to Comments, based upon City direction. If comments result in significant changes to DEIR, an administrative review of the DEIR by City staff will be necessary, and the document recirculated. The consultant will be responsible for providing secure shared electronic access to .pdf of revised DEIR (or if revisions are limited to a few chapters, only modified chapters), as well as all word processing and graphic files of revised DEIR. Consultant will provide revised DEIR electronically (and if requested, in hardcopy) to Trusted and Responsible Agencies, the California State Clearinghouse, Mendocino County, the Applicant, the Applicant’s Agent, and the City. Two hardcopies shall be provided for public review at the Fort Bragg Public Library and City Hall.
14. Prepare Final EIR: PRC Sections 15122 through 15132 Consultant will prepare and provide Administrative Draft Final EIR electronically (and if requested, hardcopy) in the form of response to comments/errata document. The City, Responsible Agencies, and Trusted Agencies will have an opportunity to review and comment on the administrative Final EIR. The Final EIR will include as a minimum, the following:
Draft EIR;
Provide a list of all persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting; Copies of all written comments;
Responses to all environmental issues raised in the review process; and Revisions to the Draft EIR, based on City input.
15. Certification Hearing on Final EIR
In accordance with section 17.72.110C, the City Council is required to hold a public hearing on the certification of the final EIR. An additional public hearing will then be held before the Planning Commission on the CDP.
16. Prepare CEQA Resolution and Required Findings
The consultant will prepare the findings required by CEQA for certification of the Final EIR.
17. Prepare Statement of Overriding Considerations
To the extent, a Statement of Overriding Considerations is necessary; the consultant will prepare the draft statement.
18. Presentation of Findings in Public Meeting
The Planning Commission is the decision making body on the CDP, subject to an appeal. City staff believes it is likely this project will be appealed to the City Council. The CDP may also be appealed to the California Coastal Commission.
Deliverables
Estimated project timeline
Regular progress meetings with City staff (frequency TBD at Kickoff Meeting) Participation in a minimum of eight public hearings/meetings – 2 scoping meetings; 2 community meetings, City Council DEIR review hearing; City Council FEIR certification hearing; Planning Commission CDP hearing; City Council CDP hearing on appeal Administrative Draft EIR
Screencheck Draft EIR
Draft EIR
Administrative Draft Response to Comments
Response to Comments and if significant new information is added, a Revised DEIR Final EIR
Draft CEQA Resolution, Findings, and Statement of Overriding Considerations Electronic copies of all deliverables shall be submitted via secured shared drive access.
Project Timeline
The consultant solicitation process will culminate in the selection of an environmental review team in December 2022. Technical work is expected to begin immediately thereafter. However, please note the coastal development permit application for the project is not yet complete. The City is waiting to receive additional submittal requirements from the applicant; including an updated biological report (botanical study period generally takes place Feb-August). The EIR approval is expected to occur over an 18-month timeframe. A conceptual schedule for the environmental review is included in this RFP as an attachment.
RFP Schedule
Written Questions Due: October 14, 2022
Response to Written Questions Posted: October 28, 2022
Pre-Proposal Meeting: November 4, 2022
Proposals Due: November 18, 2022
Interviews: December 7, 2022
Written Questions
Written questions will be accepted through October 14, 2022 and should be directed to:
Sarah McCormick
Assistant City Manager
City of Fort Bragg
416 North Franklin Street
Fort Bragg, CA 95437
E-mail: [email protected]
Responses to written questions will be posted to the City’s website on October 28, 2022.
Oral questions will not be taken or answered.
Proposal Submittal Requirements
1. Proposers should submit completed proposals electronically, and send 3 print copies so that they are received by the City no later than 5:00 p.m. on November 18, 2022 to:
City of Fort Bragg
Attention: June Lemos, CMC, City Clerk
416 North Franklin Street
Fort Bragg, CA 95437
2. Format: Proposal should be 8 ½ x 11 inches, printed two-sided on recycled and recyclable paper and recycled covers with removable bindings, bound in a single document and organized in sections following the order specified under contents.
3. Contents: Proposal shall contain the following information, in the following order A. Firm Description
Provide a description of your firm and list relevant information about capabilities, size, rate of services, and length of time in existence.
B. Relevant Experience
The consultant team should have experience in environmental consulting and CEQA. Experience with remediation, DTSC, large public works projects, wetland mitigation and the coastal act are useful. The detail of relevant project experience should highlight projects on which the proposed team members have worked. Please list projects that were completed by the proposed team members first in your proposal, and include a list of the team members that worked on the project, and their role in the project. You may also include relevant project descriptions completed by non-team members; however, these will be given less weight in the review.
C. Key Personnel Qualifications
Identify key personnel who would work on the project, their respective roles, and a synopsis of relevant experience. The project manager should have proven experience in preparing quality EIRs. Experience with projects involving multiple agency approvals would be beneficial.
D. References
List of at least three public agencies or clients for whom similar work has been performed by project team members, with the name, title, e-mail address, and phone number of a contact person. References must be for projects worked on by team members on the proposed team. The City prefers that at least one reference has managed a majority of the key team members on a project. We are looking to know if your team has worked successfully together before.
E. Project Understanding, Approach, and Scope of Work
Please provide an overview of your project understanding and approach. Include a detailed scope of work including all tasks associated with the project, including how you propose to complete each task. Please use the information provided in the RFP and the proposed scope of work identified by the City herein. Feel free to elaborate and provide additional tasks you think might be necessary, however list them as optional tasks and include them in the overall budget as separate line items.
F. Budget and Schedule of Charges
Provide a “Not to Exceed” project budget that details hours and personnel by task. Include also all travel reimbursement and other costs by task. For components for which it is difficult to define the scope of work (such as consultation with resource agencies), please provide an hourly rate only. Most of the progress meetings with City staff can occur as virtual meetings. The consultant shall identify a per hour cost for meeting attendance beyond the identified eight meetings. Please provide a separate budget for optional tasks.
Work Schedule
Provide a time schedule for completion of work.
Sample Work Product
Please provide one copy of an environmental document (EIR) and associated technical documents prepared by the proposed project manager and key staff and preferably prepared for a public agency for a similar type of project. The sample work product should be provided electronically on a thumb drive.
Insurance
The individual or firm receiving the contract shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property that may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, his agents, representatives, employees or subcontracts as set forth in Section 11 of Attachment 7 which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. The cost of such insurance shall be included in the consultant’s proposal.
Consultant Agreement
The City’s standard consultant services agreement is attached as Attachment 7. Please identify if your firm would have any issues with the provisions of the City’s standard consulting services agreement.
Evaluation Criteria
Proposals will be evaluated on the basis of the following criteria:
Qualifications and experience of key individuals, including the Project Manager and key analysts (30%) Capabilities and resources of the firm (15%)
Project understating and detailed scope of work (20%)
Work sample and demonstrated ability to produce an effective quality document that has an excellent summary, a minimum of authors and styles, effective, cogent and well distilled data analysis, focus on relevant issues, excellent graphics, well explained and articulated decisions, and quality control. (10%) Cost and schedule for completion of work (25%)
The above selection criteria is provided to assist proposers, and is not meant to limit other considerations that may become apparent during the course of the selection process. The City of Fort Bragg reserves the right to reject any and all proposals. This Request for Proposals does not commit the City to award a contract, pay any costs incurred in the preparation of proposals, or to procure or contract for supplies or services. The City of Fort Bragg reserves the right to negotiate with any qualified source or to cancel, in part of or in its entirety, this Request for Proposals, if it is in the best interest of the City to do so. The City may choose to interview some or all of the proposers. The City may require the selected consultant to participate in negotiations, and submit such price, technical or other revisions of the proposal that may result from negotiations.
Background Studies
The City is aware that additional and/or updated studies may need to be completed as part of the EIR review process. The cost for preparing additional studies should not be included in the scope of work or the budget. However, the consultant should list studies that it anticipates will be required for the EIR analysis. The City may choose to contract these studies with the selected firm or to other consultant firms.
Following is a list of technical information that is currently available. Once hired, the consultant will be required to review all relevant background materials, including the technical documents. Data contained therein shall be used to identify outstanding issues that require further analysis, and the technical information shall be utilized during preparation of the EIR.
Archaeological Studies
Ganda, 2010. Archaeological Extended Phase I Studies Within the Northern Portion of the Georgia-Pacific Corporation Property, Fort Bragg, Mendocino County, California, March 2010 SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA). 2009. Paleontological Resources Assessment Report for the North Fort Bragg Coastal Restoration and Trail Project, City of Fort Bragg, Mendocino County, California.
Tiley, S. and H. Renick. June 2015. Ethnographic Report for the Fort Bragg Coastal Trail Restoration and Parkland Property: All That Stuff is Worth Remembering.
TRC. 2003. Archaeological Survey of the Georgia Pacific Lumber Mill Fort Bragg, California. TRC Companies, Inc. March.
TRC. 2004a. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Georgia-Pacific California Wood Products Manufacturing Division, 90 West Redwood Avenue, Fort Bragg, California. Prepared for Georgia-Pacific Corporation, 133 Peachtree Street, NE, Atlanta, Georgia. Project No. 41-041901. TRC Companies, Inc. March.
TRC. 2004b. Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, Georgia-Pacific, 90 West Redwood Avenue, Fort Bragg, California 95437. Prepared for Georgia-Pacific, 133 Peachtree Street, NE, Atlanta, Georgia. Project No. 41-041908. TRC Companies, Inc. May 14.
TRC. 2004c. Additional Site Assessment Report, Georgia Pacific Former Sawmill Site, 90 West Redwood Avenue, Fort Bragg, California. Prepared for Georgia-Pacific, 133 Peachtree Street, NE, Atlanta, Georgia. October.
Van Bueren, T.M. and S. Carmack. 2011. Historical Resources Evaluation Report for the Fort Bragg Coastal Restoration and Trail Project, City of Fort Bragg, Mendocino County, California.
Van Bueren, T.M. 2011. Draft Historic Property Treatment Plan for the Fort Bragg Coastal Trail Project in the City of Fort Bragg, California.
Biological Studies
Acton Mickelson Environmental (AME). 2006. Rocky Intertidal Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Engineering and Biological Assessment for Appeal No. A-1-FTB-05-053. Prepared for Georgia-Pacific. February 2006.
Arcadis. 2011. Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas Delineation Report, Former Georgia- Pacific Wood Products Facility, Fort Bragg, California. Prepared for Georgia-Pacific LLC. April.
BioConsultant. 2010. Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia) Winter Survey, South Parkland Parcel. Prepared for Marie Jones, Community Development Director, City of Fort Bragg. February 2010.
BioConsultant. 2010b. Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia) Breeding Survey, South Parkland Parcel. Prepared for Marie Jones, Community Development Director, City of Fort Bragg. June 2010.
Sholars, T. 2005. Late Season Botanical Survey for the GP Mill Site Bluffs. Prepared for Georgia-Pacific Corporation. August.
WRA Environmental Consultants (WRA). 2005. Biological Assessment, Georgia Pacific Fort Bragg Sawmill Factory, Fort Bragg, Mendocino County, California. Prepared for Georgia Pacific, Atlanta, Georgia.
WRA Environmental Consultants, Inc. 2007. Species lists updated WRA, 2005. Biological Assessment for the Georgia Pacific Fort Bragg Sawmill, November WRA, Inc., 2006. Avian Habitat Utilization and Impact Assessment for the Georgia Pacific Mill Site, January WRA, Inc., 2005. Assessment of Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHAs), Former Georgia Pacific Fort Bragg Sawmill, Fort Bragg, Mendocino County. Prepared for Georgia Pacific.
WRA, 2005. Delineation of Potential Section 404 Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waters for the Former Georgia Pacific Fort Bragg Sawmill, December WRA. 2009. Delineation of Potential Section 404 Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waters, Former Georgia-Pacific Wood Products Facility, Fort Bragg, Mendocino County, California. September.
WRA. 2009. Fort Bragg Coastal Trail Botanical Study; Glass Beach and Georgia-Pacific Mill, Fort Bragg, Mendocino County, California. Prepared for SWCA Environmental Consultants. December 2009.
WRA. 2010. South Fort Bragg Coastal Trail and Noyo Center Botanical Study and California Coastal Act Wetland Delineation; Southern Section of the Georgia-Pacific Mill, Fort Bragg, Mendocino County, California. Prepared for City of Fort Bragg. August 2010.
WRA, Inc., 2008, Marine Mammal Monitoring Report.
Climate Change Studies
Fort Bragg, City of. 2012. City of Fort Bragg Climate Action Plan. https://city.fortbragg.com/DocumentCenter/Home/View/3660.
Fort Bragg City of. 2008. Fort Bragg Green House Gas Inventory Geotechnical & Soil Studies
BACE Geotechnical. 2004. Engineering Geologic Reconnaissance Report, Planned Blufftop Access Trail, Georgia-Pacific Property, Fort Bragg, California. Prepared for the City of Fort Bragg. Project No. 11886.1. BACE Geotechnical (a division of Brunsing Associates, Inc.). September.
Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2002. Soil Survey for Mendocino County, California, Western Part.
PWA, 2010. Tsunami Study
Remediation & Hazard Studies
Arcadis. 2010. Site Investigation Work Plan, Operable Unit E – Upland, Former Georgia- Pacific Wood Products Facility, Fort Bragg, California. Prepared for Georgia-Pacific LLC. Arcadis U.S., Inc. May.
Arcadis. 2011. Operable Unit E Upland – Site Investigation Sampling Summary, Former Georgia-Pacific Wood Products Facility, Fort Bragg, California. Prepared for Georgia- Pacific LLC. Arcadis U.S., Inc. March 2.
Arcadis. 2012. Mill Pond (Pond 8) Geotechnical and Chemical Characterization Results, Former Georgia-Pacific Wood Products Facility, Fort Bragg, California. Prepared for Georgia-Pacific LLC. December.
Arcadis. 2014. Mill Site Dam Supplemental Site Investigation Work Plan, Former Georgia- Pacific Wood Products Facility, Fort Bragg, California. Prepared for Georgia-Pacific LLC. July.
Arcadis. 2015. Baseline Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment – Operable Unit E, Former Georgia-Pacific Wood Products Facility, Fort Bragg, California. Prepared for Georgia-Pacific LLC. August.
Arcadis. 2016. Removal Action Work Plan Operable Unit E, Former Georgia-Pacific Wood Products Facility, Fort Bragg, California. Prepared for Georgia-Pacific LLC. May.
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants. 2018. Remedial Action Completion Report for Operable Units OU-C, OU-D, and OU-E, Former Georgia-Pacific Wood Products Facility, Fort Bragg, California. March 12.
Kennedy Jenks Consultants. 2019. Final Feasibility Study Operable Unit E: Former Georgia-Pacific Wood Products Facility. September 12.
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants. 2020. Draft Remedial Action Plan Operable Unit-E Former Georgia-Pacific Wood Products Facility, Fort Bragg, California. October 14.
Stormwater
Fort Bragg, City of. 2004. 2004 Storm Drainage Master Plan.
City of Fort Bragg (City). 2004. Environmental Assessment. City of Fort Bragg Municipal Improvement District Number 1 Inflow and Infiltration Repair. Prepared by the City of Fort Bragg.
North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. 2011. Water Quality Control Plan for the North Coast Region, Section 3. Water Quality Objectives.
Project Alternative Information
Arcadis 2011. Mill Pond Complex Restoration Draft Conceptual Design, Former Georgia- Pacific Wood Products Facility, Fort Bragg, California. Prepared for Georgia-Pacific LLC, June.
Stetson Engineers. 2006. Technical Study for the Mill Pond Improvement Project, Georgia-Pacific’s Former Sawmill Facility, Fort Bragg, Mendocino County, California. January 2006.
Stetson Engineers, Inc. 2005. Geotechnical Analysis of Mill Pond.
Georgia-Pacific. 1981. Plant Drain System. Drawing No. 4730, Revision 1. Original scale: 1 inch = 100 feet. Georgia-Pacific Corporation. January 27.
Marie Jones. 2017 Joint City Council & Planning Commission Work Session Regarding Possible Future Daylighting Of Creeks On Mill Site, March Non-Site Specific
Municipal Services Review, City of Fort Bragg, 2017
Storm Drainage Master Plan, Winzler & Kelly, 2004
Coastal General Plan, City of Fort Bragg, 2008
Coastal Land Use and Development Code, City of Fort Bragg, 2008 Coastal General Plan, City of Fort Bragg,
CAD drainage maps, City of Fort Bragg Public Works Department, 2008 A partial list of documents are available for review on the City’s website: www.cityfortbragg.com/departments/community-development A full list will be available at the project pre-proposal meeting on November 4, 2022.
Attachments
Attachment 1 – Kennedy Jenks Technical Memorandum
Attachment 2 - Brief analysis of project compliance with Fort Bragg’s Certified LCP Attachment 3 – Creek Daylighting Staff Report & Attachments Attachment 4 – Army Corp Wetland Delineation
Attachment 5 – Conceptual Schedule
Attachment 6 – Draft OU-E RAP
Figure 1 Context Map
Figure 2 Existing Conditions
Figure 3 Sensitive Plant Communities
Figure 4 Special Status Plant Species
Figure 5 Site Geology
Figure 6 Site Hydrology
Figure 7 Site Drainage
Figure 8 Operable Units
Attachment 7 - City’s Standard Professional Services Agreement and insurance requirements. If the consultant team has any issues with the City’s requirements, these issues must be explicitly identified in the proposal. 17