October 21 City Council Agenda
AMENDED AGENDA - 10-21-24.PDF
October 21 Agenda Packet
PACKET-AMENDED 10-21-24.PDF
1. Documents:
1.I. 5:30 PM
Documents:
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA-AMENDED
Tim Hepburn, Mayor
Wendy Lau, Council Member
Steven Frank Johnson, Mayor Pro Tem
Rick Crosby, Council Member
Meshal "Kash" Kashifalghita, Council Member
Monday, October 21, 2024
Study Session at 5:30 PM
Regular Meeting & Closed Session at 6:30 PM
La Verne City Hall - Council Chambers,
3660 D Street, La Verne, CA 91750
Remote Location-Council Member Rick Crosby
68-3840 Lua Kula Street, Unit A103, Waikoloa, Hawaii
In compliance with the American Disabilities Act, any person with a disability who requires a modification or accommodation to participate in a meeting should contact the City Clerk’s Office at (909) 596-8726 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. Regular Meetings are held on the 1st and 3rd Monday of every month.
Individuals can email their comments to the City Clerk's Office at [email protected] up to noon on the day of the meeting. Those comments will be shared with City Council in advance of the City Council meeting and included as part of the permanent record. Please be advised that public comments submitted by emails or any other format to the City are public records that will be made available for public viewing.
Individuals who wish to share their comments with Council during the meeting may do so in a variety of ways:
• Attend the City Council Meeting in person and fill out a comment card or raise your hand to request to comment on the current agenda item(s).
• Participate via Zoom, by visiting cityoflaverne.org/zoom where you will be automatically redirected to the meeting or call into the meeting via phone 1-669-900-6833 and enter ID 837 3881 3808 when prompted. Public comments via Zoom may be accepted for the agenda items listed within the Consent Calendar, Public Hearing and Other Matters sections of the agenda. Zoom participants who violate decorum protocols will be called to order by the presiding officer and if a violation continues, will be muted by direction of the presiding officer. • Once items are considered by the City Council, no further public comment on that matter will be accepted. A time limit of 3-minutes is set for all public comments.
Council Meeting Decorum: Per the City’s Rules for Decorum, all Speakers and Members of the Audience are to conduct themselves with decorum and not engage in willful conduct which interrupts the meeting or with the orderly conduct of the meeting.
STUDY SESSION AGENDA - 5:30 PM
AGENDA City Council 10/21/2024 Page 2
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL Council Member Meshal “Kash” Kashifalghita, Council Member Rick Crosby, Council Member Wendy Lau, Mayor Pro Tem Steven F. Johnson and Mayor Tim Hepburn.
STUDY SESSION TOPIC
Discussion and Direction Regarding Reorganization of City Public Advisory Committees, Commissions, and Boards. City Council direction is requested for a proposed reorganization of City advisory committees to better align subject matters and provide wider opportunities for residents to become involved in local government issues.
The City Council will recess and reconvene at 6:30 PM for the regularly scheduled City Council meeting.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - 6:30 PM
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - PETE SERRANO, ARMY E-4
ROLL CALL Council Member Meshal “Kash” Kashifalghita, Council Member Rick Crosby, Council Member Wendy Lau, Mayor Pro Tem Steven F. Johnson and Mayor Tim Hepburn.
PRESENTATIONS
Assembly Member Chris Holden. Legislative Update
Domestic Violence Awareness Month. October 2024 is Domestic Violence Awareness Month, encouraging all residents to challenge the social norms that enable domestic violence, offer meaningful support to survivors, and acknowledge the dedicated efforts of those working to prevent and respond to this issue.
Police Department Promotions and New Hires. The Police Department will introduce several new and recently promoted employees. These employees include Sergeant Steve Figueroa, Sergeant Carlos Flores, Lead Communications Officer Jaslyn Cedeno, Lead Communications Officer Shantelle Garcia, Communications Officer Tracy Montez, Communications Officer Brittany Kilmer, and Cadel Brenden Pi.
ANNOUNCEMENTS OF UPCOMING COMMUNITY EVENTS
(Any person who wishes to make a brief announcement of a future community event that is open to the public may do so at this time.)
CONSENT CALENDAR
(All items on the Consent Calendar are routine and will be enacted by one motion unless a member of the Council or member of the audience requests separate discussion.) AGENDA City Council 10/21/2024 Page 3
1. City Council Minutes of the regular meeting of October 7, 2024.
Recommendation: That the City Council approve the minutes.
2. Register of Audited Demands in the amount of $492,536.76 dated 10/02/2024.
Recommendation: That the City Council approved the audited demands.
3. Professional Services Agreement with LSA Associates, INC. for Lutheran High School Residential Development Project California Environmental Quality Act Services The applicants, John Graham and Dave Little, of the Arroyo Seco Group, Inc., have agreed to the City's selection of LSA Associates, Inc. as the consultant to prepare the required environmental documents to meet the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Staff is proposing the City enter into an agreement with LSA Associates, Inc. to prepare the necessary documents for a proposed project at the Lutheran High School located at 3960 Fruit Street. The applicant will be fully responsible for the costs of the agreement.
Recommendation: That the City Council approve the Professional Service Agreement with LSA Associates, Inc. to perform CEQA services related to the Lutheran High School residential development project.
4. City of La Verne Treasurer's Report for Quarter Ending September 30, 2024 The Treasurer’s Report for Quarter ending September 30, 2024, is submitted for City Council to receive and file per City of La Verne Administrative Regulation Number 215, the Statement of Investment Policy, and the State of California’s Government Code (GC) Section 53646.
Recommendation: That the City Council receive and file the Treasurer’s Report for the quarter ending September 30, 2024.
5. Authorize Removal of Approximately 88 Trees Related to the B Street - Bonita to Foothill Pavement Project, Project Number ST2304 Based on an arborist evaluation, roadway impacts, and the City's goal to limit future liability, this action will authorize the removal of approximately 88 trees as part of the B Street - Bonita to Foothill Pavement Project ST2304.
Recommendation: That the City Council authorize the removal of approximately 88 trees related to the B Street - Bonita to Foothill Pavement Project, Project ST2304.
6. Adopt a Resolution Appropriating $45,000 from Large Building CFD Fund and Award a Contract to FC & Sons Roofing, Inc. in the amount of $192,495 for the Fire Station 2 Roof Project The roof at Fire Station 2 is failing due to age. The City Council is recommended to adopt a Resolution appropriating an additional $45,000 from the Large Building CFD Fund reserve balance to the FY 2024-25 CIP Roofing Project (fully funding the project at $200,000) and award a construction contract to FC & Sons Roofing Incorporated, the lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of $192,495.
Recommendation: That the City Council:
1. Adopt a Resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Adopted Budget in the amount of $45,000 from the Large Building CFD Fund (Fund 252) to fund the Fire Station 2 Roof Project (Project No. CF2402);
2. Award a Public Works Construction contract to FC & Sons Roofing Incorporated, the lowest, most responsible bidder, in the amount of $192,495 for the Fire Station 2 Roof Project, No. CF2402, and authorize the City Manager to execute applicable documents; AGENDA City Council 10/21/2024 Page 4
and,
3. Authorize staff to issue change orders up to $7,505, for a total possible construction contract of $200,000.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
7. Emergency Ordinance for Housing Element, Housing Program No. 25: Provide Adequate Sites for Lower Income Households on Non-vacant and Vacant Sites Previously Identified. An Urgency Ordinance is requested to add a new Chapter 18.66 for ministerial approval of sites identified in the adopted and certified Housing Element related to sites previously identified in the City's 5th Cycle Housing Element, pursuant to Government Code section 65583.2(i). While the City is in full compliance with the Housing Element, this Urgency Ordinance finalizes the requirement to codify compliance with the Government Code section.
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt the Urgency Ordinance implementing the requirements of Housing Element Program Number 25, allowing by-right development on designated properties for projects that provide at least 20% affordable units, and directing staff to also process the Ordinance through the normal Ordinance process.
OTHER MATTERS
8. Adoption of a Resolution Approving 2024 Engineering and Traffic Survey and Introduction of An Ordinance Setting Proposed Speed Limits Local speed limits are established by findings of an engineering study pursuant to California Vehicle Code Division 11 Chapter 7. Such studies are conducted to ensure speed limits are reflective of current conditions and to support enforcement of speed law with radar or other electronic equipment as used by the La Verne Police Department.The only roadway that is proposed to receive a speed limit increase within this report is Wheeler Avenue from Arrow Highway to Puddingstone Drive, increasing from 30 MPH to the proposed 35 MPH. All other speed limits will remain unchanged.
Recommendation: That City Council:
1. Adopt a Resolution titled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LA VERNE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING AN ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC SURVEY JUSTIFYING THE SPEED LIMIT ON CITY STREETS," and
2. Introduce by title only and waive further reading of an Ordinance titled, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of La Verne, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RESCINDING ORDINANCE NO. 1066 AND SETTING LOCAL SPEED LIMITS," establishing local speed limits in accordance with the La Verne Municipal Code.
9. Approval of a Memorandum of Understanding for a Workers’ Compensation Alternative Dispute Resolution with the Police Officers’ Association The La Verne Police Officers’ Association (POA) recently approached the City and requested consideration of a Workers’ Compensation Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) for claims made by the City’s sworn police personnel. ADR’s provide an expeditious review, treatment, and dispute process for workers’ compensation claims. The City has come to an agreement with the POA on an ADR process and a Memorandum of Understanding (MOUs) is the final step prior to implementation.
Recommendation: That the City Council:
AGENDA City Council 10/21/2024 Page 5
1. Approve a Memorandum of Understanding between the City of La Verne and the La Verne Police Officers’ Association; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the Memorandum of Understanding with the La Verne Police Officers’ Association.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
This is the time set aside for anyone wishing to address the City Council on items not listed in any other place on the agenda. Under the provisions of the Brown Act, the legislative body is prohibited from talking or engaging in discussion on any item not appearing on the posted agenda. However, your concerns may be referred to staff or set for discussion later. Please email your public comment to the City Clerk's Office at [email protected]. Your public comment will be shared with the City Council and included as part of the permanent record. There is a 3-minute time limit on public comments.
COUNCIL COMMENTS AND CONFERENCE/MEETING REPORTS
Each Council Member may address the Council and public on matters of general information and/or concern. This is also the time for Council Members to report on conferences and/or meetings they have attended per Assembly Bill 1234.
CLOSED SESSION
Litigation Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), Claim of David Diaz.
Negotiations Conference with Labor Negotiators, pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6:
Negotiators: City Manager, Assistant City Manager, and City Attorney.
Employee Organization(s): La Verne Police Middle Management Association, and all Unrepresented Middle Management Employees.
ADJOURNMENT
THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OF THE LA VERNE CITY COUNCIL IS SCHEDULED FOR MONDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 2024, at 5:30 P.M.
AGENDA City Council 10/21/2024 Page 6
RESIDENT INFORMATION
UPCOMING EVENTS AND MEETINGS
Friday, October 25 - Senior Seminar Series, Community Center, 9:30 am
Friday, October 25 - Dance for Those with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, Community Center, 5:00 pm - 8:00 pm
Saturday, October 26 - 21st Annual Pumpkin Patch Classic Car Show, Heritage Park, 10:00 am - 3:00 pm
Sunday, October 27 - Heritage Harvest Pumpkin Patch Heritage Park, 10:00 am - 8:00 pm
Tuesday, October 29 - Youth & Family Action Committee, City Council Chamber, 5:00 pm
Thursday, October 31 - Old Town La Verne Trick or Treating, 2:00 pm -5:00 pm
Friday, November 1 - Senior Dinner Dance, Community Center, 4:00 pm - 7:00 pm
Monday, November 4 - Old Town La Verne Business Improvement District, Cafe Wang, 8:30 am - 9:30 am
Monday, November 4 - City Council Meeting, Council Chamber, 5:30 pm
Tuesday, November 5 - Development Review Committee, City Hall, 9:00 am -10:00 am
Wednesday, November 6 - Youth Sports Committee, City Hall, 6:00 pm
Friday, November 8 - Senior Seminar Series, Community Senter, 9:30 am
Posting Statement: A true and amended copy of this Agenda was posted on October 15, 2024, on the bulletin board at La Verne City Hall, 3660 D Street, La Verne, and on the City’s website at www.cityoflaverne.org.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA-AMENDED
Tim Hepburn, Mayor
Wendy Lau, Council Member
Steven Frank Johnson, Mayor Pro Tem
Rick Crosby, Council Member
Meshal "Kash" Kashifalghita, Council Member
Monday, October 21, 2024
Study Session at 5:30 PM
Regular Meeting & Closed Session at 6:30 PM
La Verne City Hall - Council Chambers,
3660 D Street, La Verne, CA 91750
Remote Location-Council Member Rick Crosby
68-3840 Lua Kula Street, Unit A103, Waikoloa, Hawaii
In compliance with the American Disabilities Act, any person with a disability who requires a modification or accommodation to participate in a meeting should contact the City Clerk’s Office at (909) 596-8726 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. Regular Meetings are held on the 1st and 3rd Monday of every month.
Individuals can email their comments to the City Clerk's Office at [email protected] up to noon on the day of the meeting. Those comments will be shared with City Council in advance of the City Council meeting and included as part of the permanent record. Please be advised that public comments submitted by emails or any other format to the City are public records that will be made available for public viewing.
Individuals who wish to share their comments with Council during the meeting may do so in a variety of ways:
• Attend the City Council Meeting in person and fill out a comment card or raise your hand to request to comment on the current agenda item(s).
• Participate via Zoom, by visiting cityoflaverne.org/zoom where you will be automatically redirected to the meeting or call into the meeting via phone 1-669-900-6833 and enter ID 837 3881 3808 when prompted. Public comments via Zoom may be accepted for the agenda items listed within the Consent Calendar, Public Hearing and Other Matters sections of the agenda. Zoom participants who violate decorum protocols will be called to order by the presiding officer and if a violation continues, will be muted by direction of the presiding officer. • Once items are considered by the City Council, no further public comment on that matter will be accepted. A time limit of 3-minutes is set for all public comments.
Council Meeting Decorum: Per the City’s Rules for Decorum, all Speakers and Members of the Audience are to conduct themselves with decorum and not engage in willful conduct which interrupts the meeting or with the orderly conduct of the meeting.
STUDY SESSION AGENDA - 5:30 PM
AGENDA City Council 10/21/2024 Page 2
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL Council Member Meshal “Kash” Kashifalghita, Council Member Rick Crosby, Council Member Wendy Lau, Mayor Pro Tem Steven F. Johnson and Mayor Tim Hepburn.
STUDY SESSION TOPIC
Discussion and Direction Regarding Reorganization of City Public Advisory Committees, Commissions, and Boards. City Council direction is requested for a proposed reorganization of City advisory committees to better align subject matters and provide wider opportunities for residents to become involved in local government issues.
The City Council will recess and reconvene at 6:30 PM for the regularly scheduled City Council meeting.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - 6:30 PM
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - PETE SERRANO, ARMY E-4
ROLL CALL Council Member Meshal “Kash” Kashifalghita, Council Member Rick Crosby, Council Member Wendy Lau, Mayor Pro Tem Steven F. Johnson and Mayor Tim Hepburn.
PRESENTATIONS
Assembly Member Chris Holden. Legislative Update
Domestic Violence Awareness Month. October 2024 is Domestic Violence Awareness Month, encouraging all residents to challenge the social norms that enable domestic violence, offer meaningful support to survivors, and acknowledge the dedicated efforts of those working to prevent and respond to this issue.
Police Department Promotions and New Hires. The Police Department will introduce several new and recently promoted employees. These employees include Sergeant Steve Figueroa, Sergeant Carlos Flores, Lead Communications Officer Jaslyn Cedeno, Lead Communications Officer Shantelle Garcia, Communications Officer Tracy Montez, Communications Officer Brittany Kilmer, and Cadel Brenden Pi.
ANNOUNCEMENTS OF UPCOMING COMMUNITY EVENTS
(Any person who wishes to make a brief announcement of a future community event that is open to the public may do so at this time.)
CONSENT CALENDAR
(All items on the Consent Calendar are routine and will be enacted by one motion unless a member of the Council or member of the audience requests separate discussion.)
AGENDA City Council 10/21/2024 Page 3
1. City Council Minutes of the regular meeting of October 7, 2024.
Recommendation: That the City Council approve the minutes.
2. Register of Audited Demands in the amount of $492,536.76 dated 10/02/2024.
Recommendation: That the City Council approved the audited demands.
3. Professional Services Agreement with LSA Associates, INC. for Lutheran High School Residential Development Project California Environmental Quality Act Services The applicants, John Graham and Dave Little, of the Arroyo Seco Group, Inc., have agreed to the City's selection of LSA Associates, Inc. as the consultant to prepare the required environmental documents to meet the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Staff is proposing the City enter into an agreement with LSA Associates, Inc. to prepare the necessary documents for a proposed project at the Lutheran High School located at 3960 Fruit Street. The applicant will be fully responsible for the costs of the agreement.
Recommendation: That the City Council approve the Professional Service Agreement with LSA Associates, Inc. to perform CEQA services related to the Lutheran High School residential development project.
4. City of La Verne Treasurer's Report for Quarter Ending September 30, 2024 The Treasurer’s Report for Quarter ending September 30, 2024, is submitted for City Council to receive and file per City of La Verne Administrative Regulation Number 215, the Statement of Investment Policy, and the State of California’s Government Code (GC) Section 53646.
Recommendation: That the City Council receive and file the Treasurer’s Report for the quarter ending September 30, 2024.
5. Authorize Removal of Approximately 88 Trees Related to the B Street - Bonita to Foothill Pavement Project, Project Number ST2304 Based on an arborist evaluation, roadway impacts, and the City's goal to limit future liability, this action will authorize the removal of approximately 88 trees as part of the B Street - Bonita to Foothill Pavement Project ST2304.
Recommendation: That the City Council authorize the removal of approximately 88 trees related to the B Street - Bonita to Foothill Pavement Project, Project ST2304.
6. Adopt a Resolution Appropriating $45,000 from Large Building CFD Fund and Award a Contract to FC & Sons Roofing, Inc. in the amount of $192,495 for the Fire Station 2 Roof Project The roof at Fire Station 2 is failing due to age. The City Council is recommended to adopt a Resolution appropriating an additional $45,000 from the Large Building CFD Fund reserve balance to the FY 2024-25 CIP Roofing Project (fully funding the project at $200,000) and award a construction contract to FC & Sons Roofing Incorporated, the lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of $192,495.
Recommendation: That the City Council:
1. Adopt a Resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Adopted Budget in the amount of $45,000 from the Large Building CFD Fund (Fund 252) to fund the Fire Station 2 Roof Project (Project No. CF2402);
2. Award a Public Works Construction contract to FC & Sons Roofing Incorporated, the lowest, most responsible bidder, in the amount of $192,495 for the Fire Station 2 Roof Project, No. CF2402, and authorize the City Manager to execute applicable documents;
AGENDA City Council 10/21/2024 Page 4
and,
3. Authorize staff to issue change orders up to $7,505, for a total possible construction contract of $200,000.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
7. Emergency Ordinance for Housing Element, Housing Program No. 25: Provide Adequate Sites for Lower Income Households on Non-vacant and Vacant Sites Previously Identified. An Urgency Ordinance is requested to add a new Chapter 18.66 for ministerial approval of sites identified in the adopted and certified Housing Element related to sites previously identified in the City's 5th Cycle Housing Element, pursuant to Government Code section 65583.2(i). While the City is in full compliance with the Housing Element, this Urgency Ordinance finalizes the requirement to codify compliance with the Government Code section.
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt the Urgency Ordinance implementing the requirements of Housing Element Program Number 25, allowing by-right development on designated properties for projects that provide at least 20% affordable units, and directing staff to also process the Ordinance through the normal Ordinance process.
OTHER MATTERS
8. Adoption of a Resolution Approving 2024 Engineering and Traffic Survey and Introduction of An Ordinance Setting Proposed Speed Limits Local speed limits are established by findings of an engineering study pursuant to California Vehicle Code Division 11 Chapter 7. Such studies are conducted to ensure speed limits are reflective of current conditions and to support enforcement of speed law with radar or other electronic equipment as used by the La Verne Police Department.The only roadway that is proposed to receive a speed limit increase within this report is Wheeler Avenue from Arrow Highway to Puddingstone Drive, increasing from 30 MPH to the proposed 35 MPH. All other speed limits will remain unchanged.
Recommendation: That City Council:
1. Adopt a Resolution titled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LA VERNE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING AN ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC SURVEY JUSTIFYING THE SPEED LIMIT ON CITY STREETS," and
2. Introduce by title only and waive further reading of an Ordinance titled, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of La Verne, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RESCINDING ORDINANCE NO. 1066 AND SETTING LOCAL SPEED LIMITS," establishing local speed limits in accordance with the La Verne Municipal Code.
9. Approval of a Memorandum of Understanding for a Workers’ Compensation Alternative Dispute Resolution with the Police Officers’ Association The La Verne Police Officers’ Association (POA) recently approached the City and requested consideration of a Workers’ Compensation Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) for claims made by the City’s sworn police personnel. ADR’s provide an expeditious review, treatment, and dispute process for workers’ compensation claims. The City has come to an agreement with the POA on an ADR process and a Memorandum of Understanding (MOUs) is the final step prior to implementation.
Recommendation: That the City Council:
AGENDA City Council 10/21/2024 Page 5
1. Approve a Memorandum of Understanding between the City of La Verne and the La Verne Police Officers’ Association; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the Memorandum of Understanding with the La Verne Police Officers’ Association.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
This is the time set aside for anyone wishing to address the City Council on items not listed in any other place on the agenda. Under the provisions of the Brown Act, the legislative body is prohibited from talking or engaging in discussion on any item not appearing on the posted agenda. However, your concerns may be referred to staff or set for discussion later. Please email your public comment to the City Clerk's Office at [email protected]. Your public comment will be shared with the City Council and included as part of the permanent record. There is a 3-minute time limit on public comments.
COUNCIL COMMENTS AND CONFERENCE/MEETING REPORTS
Each Council Member may address the Council and public on matters of general information and/or concern. This is also the time for Council Members to report on conferences and/or meetings they have attended per Assembly Bill 1234.
CLOSED SESSION
Litigation Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), Claim of David Diaz.
Negotiations Conference with Labor Negotiators, pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6:
Negotiators: City Manager, Assistant City Manager, and City Attorney.
Employee Organization(s): La Verne Police Middle Management Association, and all Unrepresented Middle Management Employees.
ADJOURNMENT
THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OF THE LA VERNE CITY COUNCIL IS SCHEDULED FOR MONDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 2024, at 5:30 P.M.
AGENDA City Council 10/21/2024 Page 6
RESIDENT INFORMATION
UPCOMING EVENTS AND MEETINGS
Friday, October 25 - Senior Seminar Series, Community Center, 9:30 am
Friday, October 25 - Dance for Those with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, Community Center, 5:00 pm - 8:00 pm
Saturday, October 26 - 21st Annual Pumpkin Patch Classic Car Show, Heritage Park, 10:00 am - 3:00 pm
Sunday, October 27 - Heritage Harvest Pumpkin Patch Heritage Park, 10:00 am - 8:00 pm
Tuesday, October 29 - Youth & Family Action Committee, City Council Chamber, 5:00 pm
Thursday, October 31 - Old Town La Verne Trick or Treating, 2:00 pm -5:00 pm
Friday, November 1 - Senior Dinner Dance, Community Center, 4:00 pm - 7:00 pm
Monday, November 4 - Old Town La Verne Business Improvement District, Cafe Wang, 8:30 am - 9:30 am
Monday, November 4 - City Council Meeting, Council Chamber, 5:30 pm
Tuesday, November 5 - Development Review Committee, City Hall, 9:00 am -10:00 am
Wednesday, November 6 - Youth Sports Committee, City Hall, 6:00 pm
Friday, November 8 - Senior Seminar Series, Community Senter, 9:30 am
Posting Statement: A true and amended copy of this Agenda was posted on October 15, 2024, on the bulletin board at La Verne City Hall, 3660 D Street, La Verne, and on the City’s website at www.cityoflaverne.org.
City of La Verne,City Council
Agenda Report
DATE: October 21, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Ken Domer, City Manager
SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION REGARDING REORGANIZATION OF CITY PUBLIC ADVISORY COMMITTEES, COMMISSIONS, AND BOARDS.
SUMMARY
City Council direction is requested for a proposed reorganization of City advisory committees to better align subject matters and provide wider opportunities for residents to become involved in local government issues.
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council provide direction to the City Manager regarding potential reorganization of City committees, commissions, and boards.
DISCUSSION
In early 2023, the issue was asked how City Boards, Commissions, and Committees (hereinafter “Committees”) were formed, how much support was provided by City staff, and if the current committee setup was effective for the City. The City Manager’s office was requested to work with the City Attorney to review all City Committees.
In general, different methods have developed over the years in how committees were formed in the City. Other than the Planning Commission, Design Review Committee (a staff level committee), and Old Town La Verne Business Improvement District, which are formed by ordinance, other committees have been formed by resolutions of differing styles. Because there are different styles of committees, there are also different qualifications for being on a committee.
Cities in California have the legal authority to establish committees, primarily through state law and local municipal codes. California state law grants cities the authority to establish committees through the power to create advisory bodies, commissions, and committees. Some portions of State code, specifically under the California Government Code (GC), are more detailed such as Sections 65100 through 65702 for Planning Commissions. GC Section 65100 authorizes the establishment of a Planning Commission while 65103 and 65104 grant Planning Commissions the authority to perform various functions. Otherwise, GC Section 54950 et seq., otherwise known as the Ralph M. Brown Act, provides for guidance of any formed standing committee related to meetings and transparency once formed by a legislative body.
Currently, the following City committees are active for eligible resident/ business/organization representative appointment:
Discussion and Direction Regarding Reorganization of City Public Advisory Committees, Commissions, and Boards.,
• Planning Commission
• Active Transportation Committee
• Senior Citizen Advisory Committee
• Youth & Family Action Committee
• Measure LV Oversight Committee
• Youth Sports Committee
• Old Town La Verne Business Improvement District Advisory Board • Public Financing Authority, Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District Board
This review will examine each of the listed committees, their formation, purpose, and membership. Recommendations will be provided related to each of the current committees as well as a draft ordinance recommendation establishing committees, setting forth general provisions for committees, and providing options on making appointments to committees. City staff has reviewed standing committees of other cities within the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments to understand what committees are most typical in neighboring cities. That review was solely to better understand what committees other cities have, not what La Verne should have, as each city’s circumstances are different.
Current City Boards, Commissions, and Committees
The following are current Boards, Commissions, or Committees for the City with description and information related to their formation.
Planning Commission
The purpose of the Planning Commission is to oversee and ensure high quality development within the community; to carry out goals, policies and objectives as set forth by the City Council; and to ensure compliance with the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan. The Planning Commission is formed under the authority of Government Code Section 65101, and by adopted Ordinances, the City Council has assigned certain functions related to planning reserved for the City Council. The Planning Commission is a decision-making body as well as an advisory body.
Formation document: Ordinance No. 3 (November 1, 1948); Ordinances No. 406; 482; 493; 593; and 937.
Membership: 5 residents
Term: Four (4) year term and two (2) terms total
Active Transportation Committee
The mission of the Active Transportation Committee (ATC) is to increase safe, attractive, comfortable, and independent access and travel for the La Verne community, utilizing best management principles and practices associated with mobility, Complete Streets policies, and applicable state and federal traffic safety guidelines. The ATC was formed via Resolution 19-36 on June 17, 2019, and was originally a working group formed in 2017 to aid in the creation of an Active Transportation Plan. The ATC is an advisory body to the City Council, making recommendations related to active transportation issues, education, and safety in the
Discussion and Direction Regarding Reorganization of City Public Advisory Committees, Commissions, and Boards.,
City. Resolution 19-36 set membership at nine (9) members, five (5) of which are residents.
Formation document: Resolution 19-36 (June 17, 2019)
Membership: 5 residents, 2 City Council members, 2 City staff Term: Four (4) year term and two (2) terms total
Senior Citizen Advisory Committee
The Senior Citizen Advisory Committee acts in an advisory capacity to the City Council responsible for all senior programs and activities at the Community Center. The purpose of the Committee is to investigate the needs of senior citizens and propose ways to meet those needs, recommending programs, and promoting the programs within the community.
Formation Documents: Resolution 89-117 and Resolution 91-97 (expanding membership) Membership: Seven (7) members, of which at least three (3) shall be over 55-years of age Term: Two-year terms and no term limit
Youth & Family Action Committee
The purpose of the Youth and Family Action Committee Executive Board is to encourage, coordinate and facilitate the involvement of citizens and community organizations in combating the problems of substance abuse, gang activity, and community violence. In 1992, the City established through resolution the Red Ribbon Committee to combat the problems of substance abuse, gang activity, and other societal destructive behaviors affecting young people. In 1997, the Committee’s name was changed to Youth & Family Action Committee to more accurately describe the purpose of the Committee and avoid the misconception that activities were limited to “Red Ribbon Week” festivities.
Formation Documents: Resolution 92-52 (Red Ribbon Committee), 96-02, and 97-103 Membership: Open to participation by any interested individual or organization; however, the Mayor appoints a five (5) member Executive Board, one which is a member of the City Council who shall serve as the Chair of the Board. Traditionally, two members of the City Council have participated on the Executive Board.
Term: Two-year terms and no term limit
Measure LV Oversight Committee
The Committee is charged with ensuring that the revenues from Measure LV are spent in accordance with the approved spending guidelines. The Committee is expected to meet at least three times a year based on the use of Measure LV revenue.
Formation Documents: Resolution 19-91
Membership: Five (5) residents. Members should have knowledge of finance, banking, business, or retirement planning. Members are selected by a majority of the City Council Term: Four-year term and two (2) term total
Youth Sports Committee
The purpose of the Youth Sports Committee is to facilitate coordination and communication between youth sports organizations, the City, and schools within the community with a focus on scheduling and maintenance of the sports fields and recreation facilities, issues of coordination
Discussion and Direction Regarding Reorganization of City Public Advisory Committees, Commissions, and Boards.,
between groups, and updates.
Formation Documents: Resolution 96-03
Membership: The Committee is comprised of an individual designated in writing from each of the following organizations and one citizen-at-large appointed by the City Council: AYSO, Club Soccer, Pop Warner Football, Little League, Softball, Pony/Colt Baseball, Bonita High School Term: One year term for organizational representatives and a two-year term, for a maximum of three (3) terms, for the citizen-at-large
Old Town La Verne Business Improvement District Advisory Board The Old Town La Verne Business Improvement District is an advisory Board to the City Council on items related to the District. The Board is responsible for planning and organizing promotional events and marketing materials, making recommendations on the budget, and planning for physical improvements within the District.
Formation Documents: Ordinance 720 (Establishment of District); Ordinance 733 (Advisory Board); Ordinance 960 (Old Town Name); Adopted Bylaws
Membership: Five (5) members, appointed by the Mayor with the approval of the City Council. Members must reside in the City for one year and/or have membership in the District. Bylaws require one member to be a representative of the University of La Verne.
Term: Two-year terms and no term limit.
Public Financing Authority, Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District Board The primary purpose of the Authority is to accelerate the financing of public improvements needed to attract the development that is envisioned within the City's Old Town La Verne Specific Plan and to compliment the extension of the Metro light rail, “A” Line, formerly known as the Gold Line.
Formation Documents: Resolution 17-47, amended by Resolution 17-59 and Resolution 19-52 Membership: The Board is composed of five members. Two members of the La Verne City Council, one member of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors (District 1) or their Alternate, and two public members, one to be appointed by the La Verne City Council and the other to be appointed by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors. Public member applicant must be at least 18 years old, should have knowledge of finance, banking, and business and preference will be given to applicants who currently reside or work in La Verne.
Term: Per the bylaws, each Board member is appointed to serve at the pleasure of the respective appointing authority.
City Council Participation
City Council participation on committees varies based on the committee. For example, the Public Financing Authority/EIFD specifically states that two members of the City Council are voting members, while a member of Council is on the Executive Board of YFAC and serves as the Chair. For the Youth Sports Committee, two City Council Members are selected as liaisons to serve as advisors to the Committee as is one for the Senior Advisory Committee. For the Active Transportation Committee, there are nine members, two of which are members of the City Council.
Discussion and Direction Regarding Reorganization of City Public Advisory Committees, Commissions, and Boards.,
City Council Liaison
Under current City practice, the City Council may appoint one of its members as a Liaison to each standing body. The role of the Council Liaison is to provide guidance to the body. However, it is not expected that the Council Liaison will be present at all meetings of the body given other obligations fulfilled by Council members. However, the Council members appointed to YFAC are more active on that committee than on other committees.
In general, since Committees are advisory to the City Council, it is best, unless required by State law, to not have City Council members sit on a committee as a voting member. This maintains the resident-based advisory status of the committee to the entire City Council. The Council Liaison may facilitate communications between the committee and the Council, but the Liaison should not be an advocate for the committee, give direction, or influence a decision of the committee.
The purpose of the Liaison is recommended to acts as:
i. Spokesperson on behalf of the Council when so directed by the Council when seated as a body.
ii. Contact person, if the committee or an individual committee member wants such a channel of communication, though it is advised the primary communication on operational issues be through assigned City staff.
iii. Monitor the committee to identify procedural and structural issues relating to the effective functioning of the committee for Council.
Role of Boards, Commissions, and Committees in City Governance
Committees are advisory bodies unless provided discretionary decision ability through State law or City ordinance. They are appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the City Council mostly, with the exception of the Planning Commission, in an advisory capacity to provide citizen input and recommendations. Committees advise and make recommendations to the City Council, but the City Council has the final responsibility for all policy decisions. As directed, they may also study issues, develop policy and program recommendations, and provide feedback. Committees which are formed by the City Council for a defined period of time or to perform a specific task, are referred to as an Ad Hoc Committee.
In the City of La Verne, the Planning Commission serves as a decision-making body, per State law, with discretionary decisions over various development applications.
Accordingly, Committees should be structured to best serve the City Council in soliciting community input and advise on long-standing services and community needs, versus short-term engagement on specific issues or singular focuses (unless considered ad-hoc) which may be better addressed through other means. Committees formed by the City Council are all required to operate under the Ralph M. Brown Act and require staff support for efficient operations and such staff support may be a consideration for the amount and type of committees.
When the issue was brought up in early 2023, it involved concerns about City support of the Cultural Awareness and Social Inclusion Committee of La Verne (CASI). CASI was an external
Discussion and Direction Regarding Reorganization of City Public Advisory Committees, Commissions, and Boards.,
group formed in 2019. At a City Council meeting in June, 2020, the Council requested an item which was heard on July 20, 2020, to support and participate in CASI. It was understood that the prior establishment of YFAC was to serve as a model for CASI; however, while YFAC was ‘established’ as a committee, CASI was not. The biggest distinction between the two groups seems that the intent for CASI was more support of an outside group, with the July 20, 2020, resolution resolving that the City Council support the efforts and that it was the City Council's desire to be an active participant through the appointment of liaisons. That item (Section 3 of the resolution) instructed the City Manager to identify staff members from Administrative Services, Community Services, and Police to serve as non-voting members and work with the group to finalize their bylaws and other governing documents. There was a final action for the August 17, 2020, agenda with a recommended action of “…that the City Council approve the proposed staffing representation and identify two Council members that will serve as the liaisons to the Committee.” In the staff report, it stated that City support is being requested to assist with the coordination of the meetings and agendas. However, the minutes only reflect that the Council approved the appointment of Council members to serve as liaisons to the Committee with no further authority for further support or “establishment” of the group as an official City committee. As it stands now, CASI is not an official “City” committee, but it does have two Council liaisons appointed.
To better understand the roles of committees in a city's governance, a review of other San Gabriel Valley cities was done to see what committees were used by those cities. A Planning Commission is present in nearly all cities in the San Gabriel Valley and across cities throughout the state. Those without a Planning Commission typically have the City Council act as its planning body due to the requirement under Government Code Section 65101 that the legislative body of each city assign the function of a planning agency, handle the function itself, or a combination thereof. The next most common committees within the 31 cities of the San Gabriel Valley deal with: Parks & Recreation (26 cities); Housing/Design/Historic Preservation (20); Public Safety & Transportation (19); Library Board (11); Personnel & Human Resources (11); and Senior & Aging (9). There are about 20 other various committees in function throughout the 31 cities. The review of other cities was done for reference, not as a direct model for the City to follow.
Proposed Committees/Structure for Consideration
Given the size of the City, and after more than a year of review of City operations and resources, the following Committee structure is proposed for consideration by the City Council:
• Development of an ordinance establishing general guidelines for Committees (see section below for more information on this).
• Planning Commission
o Retain the Planning Commission in its current form and review the appointment process as part of creating an ordinance for overall general provisions for committees related to districts.
• Committee on Public Works/Environmental/Active Transportation - “Active Transportation and Infrastructure Commission”
1. Currently the City has an Active Transportation Committee that looks at pedestrian and bicycle accessibility, safe streets, and “active transportation”
Discussion and Direction Regarding Reorganization of City Public Advisory Committees, Commissions, and Boards.,
issues. This committee evolved from a workgroup formed for the enacted Active Transportation Plan. The concept of a Public Works/ Environmental/Active Transportation committee is to broaden the advisory role of a committee to provide input on the City’s Capital Improvement Program, energy sustainability issues, active transportation, and transit needs. The committee would be staffed by the Public Works Department and provide advisory capacity to the City Council on infrastructure, energy, facilities, and transportation. It is proposed to meet quarterly unless otherwise required to meet for specific needs. • Community Services Commission or Parks and Recreation Commission (Parks/Recreation/Youth Sports/YFAC)
1. It is proposed to create a Commission to be staffed primarily by the Community Services Department with assistance by Public Works for park maintenance/improvement/development issues. The committee can provide advisory capacity to the City Council on facilities and programs within the recreational needs of the community, to include input from a Youth Sports Working Group, community events and Community Center usage, and cultural events. The current Youth and Family Action Committee’s objectives could become part of the new Commission (see note on YFAC below). The City previously had a Park and Recreation Commission from 1950 or before, and changed the name to the Parks and Human Services Commission in 1981, the name again changed to Parks and Community Services Commission in 1992, and the Commission was repealed in 1996.
• Finance Commission (Measure LV/Audit Oversight/Fiscal Sustainability)
1. It is proposed that a Finance Commission be developed which would succeed the Measure LV Oversight Committee and add audit oversight and fiscal sustainability to its purview. The Commission would annually review the revenue generated from the Measure LV use tax to ensure that the funds are utilized as intended within the established spending guidelines. Audit oversight includes reviewing the independent auditor’s comments on auditing procedures, internal controls, and findings in conjunction with the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report, recommending the final report to the City Council and participating in selecting an external auditor. Additional tasks include serving in an advisory capacity for fiscal sustainability initiatives including an annual review of the City’s investment policy and serving as a resource on matters such as internal controls, investment brokers, and multi-year financial projections.
• Public Financing Authority/Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District Board
1. The PFA/EIFD is proposed to remain the same due to State law and the formation of the Board. The Administration Department will be the responsible staffing department.
• Senior Citizen Advisory Committee
1. The Senior Citizen Advisory Committee is proposed to remain the same and is recommended to appoint a liaison to the Community Services Commission.
Current Committees/Boards Proposed for Different Status • Youth Sports Working Group
Discussion and Direction Regarding Reorganization of City Public Advisory Committees, Commissions, and Boards.,
1. The Youth Sports Committee would be reclassified as a working group but continue to facilitate coordination and communication between youth sports organizations, the City, and schools within the community with a focus on scheduling and maintenance of the sports fields and recreation facilities, issues of coordination between groups, and updates. The Staff liaison would report out issues to the Community Services Commission. The City Council would not appoint members, instead, each youth league under agreement to use fields will be part of the working group as well as a representative from Bonita High School/BUSD. The City Council liaisons would remain as part of the working group as the working group is not advisory to the City Council. • Old Town La Verne Business Improvement District Advisory Board
1. Based on a review of the statutory law establishing the Downtown Business Improvement District (DBID), it is proposed that the City Council designate the non-profit Old Town La Verne Business Improvement Association as the Advisory Board to the City Council. The bylaws of the non-profit will be changed to provide for Board of Director positions from assessment paying participants and a representative of ULV. Currently, the DBID is being reviewed by a qualified business improvement district consultant to recommend potential changes. The DBID will continue to submit required annual budgets and reports to the City Council.
• Youth and Family Action Committee (YFAC)
1. YFAC is proposed to have its objectives incorporated into the Community Services Commission. It is understood that there is community support for the programs and mission of YFAC. As such, it would be proposed to continue YFAC as a sub-committee to the Community Services Commission and continue to provide it the ability to use the non-profit status of the City for donations for its programs until another organization, such as a community foundation, is formed which could then serve as the umbrella for such fundraising opportunities. As a sub-committee, City Council members could remain as part of the group as it would not be advisory to the City Council.
Potential Future Committee(s)
• Economic Development Advisory Committee
1. Upon adoption of the forthcoming General Plan Update, the City will have its first Economic Development Element. It is proposed that shortly after adoption of the General Plan that the City form a committee to focus on the goals and objectives listed in the Economic Development Element. This committee would be under the purview of the Community Development Department.
Proposed Ordinance to Establish General Provisions Regarding Committees, Commissions, and Boards
Currently, there is a lack of consistency on how committees are established and operated, to
Discussion and Direction Regarding Reorganization of City Public Advisory Committees, Commissions, and Boards.,
include different appointment procedures, requirements, and terms. It is proposed that the City Council consider adopting an ordinance establishing general provisions to include how commissions are established, number of members, qualifications, appointment and removal, term, meetings/quorums, absence from meetings, and basic decorum, among other items. The ordinance would create a clear understanding of committees while allowing the City Council to create additional committees or change focus of committees in the future by ordinance or resolution. A proposed ordinance will be crafted, in part, based on direction from this Study Session.
One item for consideration involves how committee members are to be chosen to serve on any formed committee. Currently, vacancies are advertised and noticed and the City Council conducts interviews of applicants for eligible positions. This process can remain the same or, since the City Council has moved to by-district elections, it can move to directly appointed positions by each Council member. Under such a process, the individual Council member selects a qualified applicant and at a noticed time during a Council meeting, states the name of the person to be appointed to the committee in question. The candidate would not be required to live in the same district as the Council member making the appointment. If a committee includes more than five resident members, an application process can be employed for additional at-large appointments.
Overall, committees are a means for gathering more community input, increasing participation by residents into local government, and having committee members provide advisory services on wide-ranging matters to the City Council for final deliberation and action. The proposed reorganization of committees into major departmental subjects – Public Works, Community Services, Finance, Community Development (Planning Commission) – broadens the scope of committees and their services to the City Council.
Minimal meeting times are set (quarterly or bi-monthly) in order to represent the expected demands of issues as well as to reduce the burden on the staff support of the committee. Meetings can be called more frequently based on the need.
FISCAL ANALYSIS
Not applicable.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Not applicable.
LEGAL REVIEW
The City Attorney has reviewed elements of this proposal and will assist in crafting the necessary ordinances and resolutions based on ultimate City Council approved action.
ATTACHMENTS
None
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2024
ACTION MINUTES
“see items in italics”
CALL TO ORDER - The meeting was called to order at 6:34 pm PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - ADRIAN ROMERO, ARMY SPECIALIST E-4 Council presented Adrian with a Pride of La Verne certificate.
ROLL CALL Council Member Meshal “Kash” Kashifalghita, Council Member Wendy Lau, Council Member Rick Crosby, Mayor Pro Tem Steven F. Johnson, and Mayor Tim Hepburn.
Council Members present: Lau, Johnson, and Hepburn.
Absent: Crosby and Kashifalghita.
Advisory Staff Present: City Manager Ken Domer, City Attorney Kimberly Hall Barlow, and Assistant City Manager JR Ranells.
PRESENTATIONS
Introduction to University of La Verne Interim President Risa Dickson. Risa Dickson, PhD, brings nearly three decades of experience in higher education, and 25 years of higher education administrative experience. Throughout her career, Dr. Dickson has focused on fostering collaborative governance, strategic planning, and academic excellence. Dr. Dickson joined the University as the interim provost in January.
Interim President Dickson introduced herself and gave a short presentation on ULV and her goals for the next 18 months until a new permanent president is installed.
Hispanic Heritage Month Proclamation. Hispanic Heritage Month is celebrated annually from September 15 to October 15 to recognize the contributions and influence of Hispanic Americans on the history, culture, and achievements of the United States.
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson read the Hispanic Heritage Month proclamation celebrating the contributions of Hispanic Americans specifically for the benefit of La Verne.
Fire Prevention Month Proclamation. Every year, October 2024 is recognized as National Fire Prevention month to raise fire safety awareness and help protect homes and families. The La Verne Fire Department works diligently to protect the community against potential wildfires and during this time will provide a few tips residents implement to prevent fires.
Fire Marshall Fred St. Ange received a proclamation on Fire Prevention Month and had an assist from Sparky to discuss the importance of smoke detectors and fire prevention in general. 2024 Pink Patch Project. The La Verne Police Department will present an overview of the Pink Patch initiative, covering its mission, objectives, and progress in promoting breast cancer awareness
and how La Verne Police and other local agencies are participating in this life-saving campaign.
Police Community Services Supervisor Hollie Savage presented on the Police Department’s Pink Patch Project. This project creates a new, pink themed police patch each year that sells for $10 with proceeds going to support breast cancer awareness. Firefighter Kenny Villasenor presented on the Fire Associations T-Shirt sales to support breast cancer awareness. T-shirts are $25.
Police Department Promotions. The Police Department has recently promoted several employees to fill existing vacancies after the retirement of employees. These employees include Lieutenant Jay Alvarado, Corporal Alan Weinreb, Corporal Julian Silva, Police Support Services Manager Rebekah Biedermann, Police Services Technician Alyssa Cortez, and Management Analyst Yasmin Potts.
Police Chief Gonzalez announced newly promoted Police employees.
ANNOUNCEMENTS OF UPCOMING COMMUNITY EVENTS
(Any person who wishes to make a brief announcement of a future community event that is open to the public may do so at this time.)
Mayor Hepburn announced that the Community Survey is now available online to gauge community satisfaction and assist with the upcoming 2025 Strategic Planning process, we want your voice to be heard from now until October 25th residents can share their thoughts on what’s most important. He also announced the raffle winner from the first group that submitted surveys.
Announcements were received from: Adrian Romero, La Verne Librarian, Barbara Smythe, Yvonne Gallegos, Vice Chair of the Cultural Awareness and Social Inclusion Committee, Sherry Best, President of the La Verne Historical Society, Brittany Allison, VP for the La Verne/San Dimas Educational Foundation, Residents Rick Bowen and Danita Beauchamp.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(All items on the Consent Calendar are routine and will be enacted by one motion unless a member of the Council or member of the audience requests separate discussion.) It was moved by Lau, seconded by Johnson, and approved by a vote of 3-0, with Crosby and Kashifalghita absent.
6. City Council Minutes of the Joint Study Session, Regular Council Meeting & Closed Session of September 16, 2024.
Recommendation: That the City Council approve the minutes of the September 16, 2024, meeting. Approved
7. Register of Audited Demands in the following amounts:
$2,528,414.46 dated 09/11/24
$443,385.88 dated 09/18/24
$3,541,927.88 dated 09/25/24
Recommendation: That the City Council approve the Registers of Audited Demands. Approved
8. Cooperative Agreement between the City of Pomona and City of La Verne for Maintenance of Two Traffic Signals on Fulton Road at Arrow Highway and on Fulton Road at Railroad Tracks Approval of the Cooperative Maintenance Agreement between Cities of Pomona and La Verne which outlines each City's responsibility for traffic signal maintenance and future improvements of two shared intersections at Fulton Road and Railroad Tracks and Fulton Road and Arrow Highway.
Recommendation: That the City Council approve the attached "Cooperative Agreement between City of Pomona and City of La Verne for the Maintenance of Two Traffic Signals on Fulton Road at Arrow Highway and at Railroad Tracks" and authorize the City Manager, or designee, to execute any necessary amendments or documents related to the implementation of the Agreement. Approved
9. Award of Contract to MMC Inc, in the amount of $204,000, for Booster Pump Upgrade - Zone 3 to Zone 4 This action awards a construction contract to MMC Incorporated in the amount of $204,000 with funding in the FY 24/25 Approved CIP “Booster Pump Upgrade – Zone 3 to Zone 4” Project WT2403. The purpose of this booster pump project is to improve current pumping infrastructure to provide increased water reliability during the Water - Plateau Summit Pipeline Replacement Project.
Recommendation: That the City Council:
1. Award a public works construction contract to MMC Incorporated, the lowest, most responsible bidder, in the amount of $204,000 for the Booster Pump Upgrade - Zone 3 to Zone 4 (Proj. No. WT2403); and
2. Authorize staff to issue change orders not exceeding 10% of the construction budget for a total possible cost of $224,400.
The recommendations above were both approved.
10. Rejection of Proposals for Video Management Systems The Police Department has an outdated video management system and plans to replace by using federal grant funding. A Request for Proposals (RFP) was issued, resulting in eight submissions. Based on the proposals received, the City has determined a need to narrow down the scope of work, including the specification of equipment type that best meets the existing facilities at the Police Department and federal requirements related to the federal grant funding.
Recommendation: That the City Council reject all submitted proposals for the Video Management Systems RFP. Approved
11. League of California Cities General Assembly Meeting Voting Delegates The League of California Cities requests the selection of one delegate to vote on behalf of the City at the General Assembly Meeting. It is recommended that the City Council designate Mayor Tim Hepburn as the voting delegate and Mayor Pro Tem Steve Johnson as the alternate voting delegate. The selection must be appointed by the City Council.
Recommendation: That the City Council appoint Mayor Tim Hepburn to represent the City of La Verne as the voting delegate for the League of California Cities General Assembly Meeting and Mayor Pro Tem Steve Johnson as the alternate. Approved
PUBLIC HEARINGS
12. Public Hearing Regarding the Request for Time Extension on Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 82001 (500 Baseline Road) On September 17, 2024, the City Council set a public hearing for October 7, 2024, to consider a one-year time extension to Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTTM) No. 82001.
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt a resolution titled "A Resolution of The City Council, City of La Verne, California, Granting a Time Extension to Vesting Tentative Tract (VTTM) Map No. 82001 Pursuant to the Provisions of the Title 7, Division 2, Chapter 3, of the Government Code of the State of California, establishing the new expiration date of the VTTM No 82001 as November 3, 2025.
City Engineer Cody Howing reported on this item.
Public Comments: None
Council Comments: None
It was moved by Johnson, seconded by Lau, and approved by a vote of 3-0, with Crosby and Kashifalghita absent.
OTHER MATTERS
13. Award Construction Contract, in the amount of $3,110,000, to MNR Construction for Plateau Summit Water Pipeline This action will award a construction contract to MNR Construction in the amount of $3,110,000 for the Plateau Summit Water Transmission Pipeline Replacement Project, Proj. No. WT2301. The purpose of the project is to replace approximately 2,000’ of 16” riveted steel transmission mainline that has reached its functional life span.
Recommendation: That the City Council:
1. Award a public works construction contract to MNR Construction Incorporated, the lowest, most responsible bidder, in the amount of $3,110,000 for the Plateau Summit Water Transmission Pipeline Replacement Project (Proj. No. WT2301) and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract; and
2. Authorize staff to issue change orders not exceeding 15% of the construction budget for a total possible construction cost of $3,576,500.
Acting Utilities Manager Ryan Ciotti reported on this item.
Public Comment: Danita Beauchamp
Council Comments: Mayor Hepburn ask for clarification on MNR Construction, since we have not used them in the past, were we comfortable with them, since there is quite a difference in price. We’re comfortable and confident that MNR at this price will deliver the project.
Public Works Director McWade, yes they were fully vetted, and every single price point was reviewed.
Council Member Lau ask about the 90 day timeline, is it from when the boosters come in or when the booster stations are complete?
Public Works Director McWade, it’s a combination of both. We will move forward on the booster pump as that will help the system be able to serve water to Zone 5. As long as the procurement timelines line up, it’ll be 90 days.
Mayor Hepburn asked, just to confirm there will be no disruption of water service to the community up there.
Public Works Director McWade, stated that yes, that is our goal.
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson inquired on the pressure on the pipes.
Public Works Director McWade, 220 psi at the bottom, that is what the pressure is today.
It was moved by Lau, seconded by Johnson, and approved by a vote of 3-0, with Crosby and Kashifalghita absent.
14. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the Update to Administrative Regulation 215, Investment Policy and Allow for the Investment of monies into California Class Prime Fund. Adoption of a resolution updating the City's Investment Policy to include the California
CLASS Prime Fund, a local government investment pool, as an allowable investment option.
This change aims to diversify the City’s portfolio, optimize interest earnings, and maintain fund safety and liquidity. Approval of this resolution will allow the City to begin investing in the fund, which is already utilized by other government entities, as detailed in the attached report.
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt a Resolution titled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA VERNE, CALIFORNIA, ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT AND FILING OF THE CITY’S INVESTMENT POLICY FOR PUBLIC FUNDS AND AUTHORIZING THE INVESTMENT OF MONIES IN THE CALIFORNIA CLASS PRIME FUND.” Finance Director Christy Lopez reported on this item.
Public Comments: None
Council Comments: Mayor Hepburn commented on the pro and cons of this investment fund.
Council Member Lau ask how often the fund will be looked at, quarterly, what are you anticipating the process for handling this type of fund.
Finance Director Lopez explained it will be based on cash needs. This gives us the opportunity to place funds into different things depending on what the returns are. While ensuring we are earning as much as we can on our funds. Also, through out the process, we are still advised by Schuster Financial.
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson, stated his concerns have been addressed.
It was moved by Johnson, seconded by Lau, and approved by a vote of 3-0, with Crosby and Kashifalghita absent.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
This is the time set aside for anyone wishing to address the City Council on items not listed in any other place on the agenda. Under the provisions of the Brown Act, the legislative body is prohibited from talking or engaging in discussion on any item not appearing on the posted agenda. However, your concerns may be referred to staff or set for discussion later. Please email your public comment to the City Clerk's Office at [email protected]. Your public comment will be shared with the City Council and included as part of the permanent record. There is a 3-minute time limit on public comments.
Public Comments were received from: Peter Hildalgo, Trustee of Mount San Antonio College.
Brittany Allison, Ralph Beltran, and Richard Bowen.
COUNCIL COMMENTS AND CONFERENCE/MEETING REPORTS
Each Council Member may address the Council and public on matters of general information and/or concern. This is also the time for Council Members to report on conferences and/or meetings they have attended per Assembly Bill 1234.
Council Comments were received from: Council Member Lau attended Senator Rubio’s annual Women Inspiring the next Generation of Sisterhood event, and the Pet Depot 20th Anniversary event, the turnout was great. The K-9 Foundation was there, with food trucks and a young entrepreneur, 10 years old, selling homemade dog toys, and flavored doggie bubbles. October is the month of everything, Breast Cancer Awareness, Domestic Violence Awareness, House of Ruth is looking for donations. University of La Verne is having Homecoming , and a street Faire, come out and meet some great students.
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson its time to vote, it’s very important, it’s a very important process, please
exercise your right.
Mayor Hepburn, yes you’ve got to vote, it’s very important. Vendor Fair at Heritage Park, Saturday, October 12th. Let’s help the victims of the storms in Florida, go to the Red Cross website and donate if you can. They need our support, whatever we can do as a community, let’s do it.
ADJOURNMENT
Adjournment in Memory of Robert Paul Brannon. Robert was born on April 17, 1956, in Coronado North Island of San Diego County, his parents moved several times before settling in Norwalk, where he graduated from Dominguez High School and immediately joined the U.S. Navy.
He served as a firefighter on the battleship Enterprise during the Vietnam War. After his commitment in the military, he left the service to pursue his college education and subsequently a career in architectural design drafting and computer-aided design drafting, as well as raising a family.
In 2017, he graduated from La Verne CERT training and ascended to a Level 2 which holds the responsibilities of being a part of the activation and deployment team in the event of an emergency. He had an incredible sense of humor which carried him through happy and difficult times in his life. Always the first responder at heart, whether it was a stray dog, an accident on the street, or a person in need he always stepped in to help. He loved the community of La Verne and was happy to live here for almost 10 years.
Robert passed away on August 23, 2024. He is survived by his wife, Hanna, and numerous immediate family members. He will be missed forever.
Meeting was adjourned at 8:49 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Debra Fritz, CMC
Deputy City Clerk
CITY OF LA VERNE
REGISTER OF AUDITED DEMANDS
t0/212024
Fv 24-2s
DEMANDS PRESENTED HAVE BEEN APPROVED CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S PURCHASING/FUNDING POLICY AND HAVE BEEN REVIEWED BY THE DIRECTOR FOR ACCURACY AND PROPER APPROVAL.
SUMMARY OF DEMANDS
LARGEST IO CITY DEMAND PAYMENTS OTHER THAN PAYROLL AND RELATED BENEFTTS.
AMOUNT ISSUEDTO DESCRIPTION
l.
2. 3.
4. 5.
6. 7.
8. 9.
t0.
50,928.53
40,338.94
3s.3'12.84
27,866.65
,) ??s ))
22,043.25
20,262.90
20, I 19.38
19,624.62
18,468.69
DEPARTMENT OF ruSTICE
GREENSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES INC.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH CARE SERVICES
SDI PRESENCE LLC
GENTRY BROTHERS, INC.
WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC.
GOVERNMENTJOBS.COM, INC.
CDCE
MERRIMAC ENERCY GROUP
GENERAL PUMP COMPANY
OTHER DEMANDS
2023.24 LEASE AND MAY 2024 ELECTRIC BILL (L A CLEAR)
SEIrT. 2024 MAINTENANCE SPORTSPARK/BRUSH CLEARANCEAI'EED ABATEMENT,']/ARIOUS PAYMENT #4 MANACED CARE AND SERVICE FEE
AUGUST 2024 LICENSE FEE AND M SUPPORT
EMERGENCY REPAIR WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT
MARSHALL CYN 8/16.3Il24 TREE MAINTENANCE
ONE YEAR SUBSCRIPTION. ONBOARD AND PERFORMANCE SOFTWARE
DOCKING STATIONS SUPPLIES AND INSTALLATION FOR ENGINE
DIESEL PURCHASE
MILLS TRACT WELL REHABILMAION
188,307.78
s 465.668.80
DEMANDS OF $26,867,96 WERE PAID ON BEHALF OF LAIMPACT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT TASK FORCE OPERATIONS.
IN WITH GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 37202, I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND ACCURATE REGISTER OF AUDTTED DEMANDS-
CHRISTY
FINANCE DIRECTOR
Page I of4
CITY OF LA VERNE FY 24.25
REGISTER OF AUDITED DEMANDS - EXHIBIT A
CHECK NO. AMOUNT ISSUED TO
101212024
t70193
170794
170795
170796
170797
170798
170799
1 70800
I 7080 1
I 70802
I 70803
I 70804
1 70805
l 70806
I 70807
I 70808
I 70809
170810
17081 1
170812
170813
170814
1708r5
170816
170817
170818
170819
r 70820
17082]l
170822
170823
170825
t70826
t70827
I 70828
170829
I 70830
I 7083 I
170832
I 70833
170834
l 70835
I 70836
170837
1 70838
I 70839
I 70840
I 7084 I
170842
170843
170844
I 70845
170846
170847
I 70848
I 70849
78.1 8
6,710.00
4,855.00
442.17
1,023.2s
s76.00
6.77 20,1 19.38
809.80
6,290.00
r 63.00
48.00 280.00
t3t.2s
480.00
3,377.50
90.00 250.00
l,003.06
1,054.55
4,155.28
I,015.84
379.48
14t.67
103.22
1 ,555. 14
3,372.35
22,335.22
64.65 20,262.90
527.36
3,727.08
792.00
163.13
100.00
42.00 16.99
2,130.00
5,646.29
344.26
4,950.00
525.00
4,796.00
1,000.00
45.00 45.00
150.00
800.00
218.62
645.98
95.00 4,801 .56
8,026.78
25.00 27,866.65
27.73 ALBERTSONS/SAFEWAY
ALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES, INC.
AMERICAN TANK TESTING
ASCAP
BROWN MOTOR WORKS
BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP
CARTER, JOSEPH
CDCE
CHARTER COMMLNICATIONS
CHASE ELECTRIC COMPANY
CHELSEY LEVAY
CHERYL AUSTRIA
CHRISTIAN CAMPOS
CITY OF COVINA
RETIRED SENIOR VOLLINTEER PATROL
CIVILTEC ENGINEERING, INC.
CLEANTECH ENVIRONMENTAL INC
CRESPO, MIGUEL
D&HWATERSYSTEMS
DANIELS TIRE SERVICE
DATAPROSE,INC.
EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS
FACTORY MOTOR PARTS
FTRE APPARATUS SOLUTIONS
FIREMANS GRAPHICS
FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS
FULLER TRUCK ACCESSORIES
GENTRY BROTHERS, INC.
GLENDORA DODGE JEEP
GOVERNMENTJOBS.COM, INC.
HIRSCH PIPE AND SUPPLY
HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
JULIAN FARM AND ORCHARD
K & M TOOLS,INC.
KAY HELD
KYOCERA DOCUMENT SOLUTIONS WEST
LA VERNE PETTY CASH
LESLIE'S POOLMART, INC.
LIFE-ASSIST
LINE GEAR
LINX AUTOMATION
LOPEZ CONCRETE PUMPING, INC.
LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT
MARISOL FRIAS
MARTHA FANDEL
MICKEYMULLINS
MONICA PEREA
CITY OF MONTCLAIR
MR. LNIFORM
O.F. WOLFINBARGER
PREMIER FAMILY MEDICINE ASSOCIATES
PUMP BROTHERS INC.
RAFTELIS
CHRISTIAN ROJAS
SDI PRESENCE LLC
SEQUOIA FINANCIAL SERVICES
Page2of 4
CITY OF LA VERNE FY 24-25
REGISTER OF AUDITED DEMANDS. EXHIBIT A
CHECK NO. AMOLTNT ISSUED TO
101212024
r 708s0
I 7085 1
170852
I 70853
I 70854
I 70855
I 70856
I 70857
r 70858
r 70859
I 70860
I 7086 I
170862
1 70863
I 70864
I 70865
I 70866
170867
r 70868
I 70869
I 70870
I 7087 I
170872
170873
170874
I 70875
170876
1708't7
I 70878
170879
I 70880
I 7088 I
EFT
EFT
EFT
EFT
EFT
EFT
EFT
EFT
EFT
EFT
EFT
EFT
EFT
EFT
EFT
EFT
EFT
EFT
EFT
EFT
EFT
EFT
EFT
2,072.70
125.90
4,654.t0
t,131.79
720.00
776.66
250.00
1,072.51
5,000.00
189.03
1,070.00
1,791.56
88.53 2,774.29
9,928.00
2,874.39
27.06 32.60
1,07 6.s9
506.47
s0,928.53
17.56 395.00
2,478.57
395.00
79.85 l3l.l3
212.14
250.07
I 95.3 I
306.62
1,539.83
777.07
7,037.95
12,465.7 5
25.00 49.60
35,372.84
599. I 3
18,468.69
1,344.00
270.36
40,338.94
43.64 16,392.96
3,931.30
157.98
525.00
19,624.62
r,500.00
10,313.17
12,093.47
425.00
106.20
22,043.25
SPRAGUES',INC,
STAPLES
SUPERIOR COURT OF CA,COUNTY OF L.A.
T-MOBILE
DIANE TEMPLE
TENNIS ANYONE INC.
TERRIQUEZ, RIGO
THE BRIEFING ROOM, LLC
TOWNSEND PUBLIC AFFAIRS, INC
TRILOGY MEDWASTE WEST, LLC
TRUST ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS
UNITED RENTALS (NORTH AMERICA), INC
VERIZON WIRELESS
WAGEWORKS,INC.
WATERTALENT LLC
WELLS FARGO VENDOR FINANCIAL SVCS
WEX BANK
YICHEN TSENG
ZOLL MEDICAL CORPORATION
4IMPRINT,INC
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION
KENNEDY, SAMANTHA
MASERGY CLOUD COMMLINICATIONS, INC
MOODY, DANNY
ODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, LLC
RFI ENTERPRISES INC.
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TROPHY COMPANY
TALMO, BLAINE
YELAZQUEZ. GABRIELLA
VERDUGO, CHANTEL
VEzuZON WIRELESS
ALL STAR FIRE EQUIPMENT INC.
BABCOCK LABORATORIES INC.
BRENNTAG PACIFIC TNC.
CASADOS, RICHARD
COLLEGIATE PRESS
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH CARE SERVICES
FIGUEROA, STEVE
GENERAL PUMP COMPANY
GIRON, ANTHONY
GRAINGER
GREENSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES INC.
HAAKER EQUIPMENT CO.
HACK COMPANY
HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS LLC
INTERSTATE BATTERY INLAND VALLEY
LAW ENFORCEMENT MEDICAL SERVICES
MERRIMAC ENERGY GROUP
POMONA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
RKA CONSULTING GROUP
SALT WORKS INC.
TERRY'S TESTING INC
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT OF SO CAL
WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC.
465,668.80
CITY OF LA VERNE FY 24-25
REGISTER OF AUDITED DEMANDS - EXHIBIT A
CHECK NO. ISSUED TO
t01212024
26,867.96 Total LAIMPACT Demands
Total Demand 492,536.76
LAIMPACT Law Enforcement Task Force Demands
l 70882
1 70883
Total
23,849.43
3,018.53
NAMPA VALLEY HELICOPTERS
NEIL'S STATIONERS, INC.
26,867.96
LAIMPACT demands are paid from federal asset forfeiture dollars allocated to LAIMPACT crime prevention activities. These funds are not city funds and are not available for city use outside of LAIMpACT activities.
City of La Verne,City Council
Agenda Report
DATE: October 21, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Eric Scherer, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
FOR LUTHERAN HIGH SCHOOL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT SERVICES
SUMMARY
The applicants, John Graham and Dave Little, of the Arroyo Seco Group, Inc., have agreed to the City's selection of LSA Associates, Inc. as the consultant to prepare the required environmental documents to meet the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Staff is proposing the City enter into an agreement with LSA Associates, Inc. to prepare the necessary documents for a proposed project at the Lutheran High School located at 3960 Fruit Street. The applicant will be fully responsible for the costs of the agreement.
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council approve the Professional Service Agreement with LSA Associates, Inc. to perform CEQA services related to the Lutheran High School residential development project.
DISCUSSION
As is practice for development projects, staff sent seven prospective environmental consultants a letter requesting proposals for the review and preparation of CEQA documents for a proposed residential development at the Lutheran High School property located at 3960 Fruit Street. At the conclusion of the process, a total of three firms submitted proposals to prepare the required environmental documents. Staff reviewed each proposal in detail and concluded that LSA Associates, Inc. offered the most comprehensive proposal at a fair price. LSA Associates, Inc. was also chosen due to their prior experience working in the area, and having worked on projects of a similar scope.
LSA Associates, Inc. $169,980
Rincon Consultants $151,889
PlaceWorks $183,503
LSA associates, Inc. will be tasked with the preparation of an environmental document compliant with CEQA. Once completed, the results from the environmental document will be presented to the Planning Commission, estimated to occur in June 2025, and a final determination will be made by the City Council, tentatively scheduled for July 2025. While the contract is with the City, all funds for the contract will be deposited by the applicant.
FISCAL ANALYSIS
Professional Services Agreement with LSA Associates, INC. for Lutheran High School Residential Development Project California Environmental Quality Act Services, Page 2
The applicant will provide a deposit of $169,980 to the City to cover the cost of the CEQA review agreement. This deposit includes the full contract amount for services provided by LSA Associates, Inc. and is in addition to the initial deposit required for staff time and other expenses. The funds will be held in a designated account and used exclusively for the environmental consultant's services. No City funds will be used for this agreement, ensuring the CEQA review is fully funded by the applicant.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Not applicable.
LEGAL REVIEW
This report and PSA agreement were reviewed and approved by the City Attorney.
ATTACHMENTS
1. PSA LSA with exhibits 10-3-24
Report Prepared By:
Gabriel Rivera, Associate Planner
1 LSA Associates Inc.
Rev. 7-2024
CITY OF LA VERNE
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
THIS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into this 21st day of October 2024, by and between the CITY OF LA VERNE , a municipal corporation (“City”), and LSA Associates, Inc., an environmental consultant.
RECITALS
A. City proposes to utilize the services of Consultant as an independent contractor to prepare the necessary environmental documents required for the residential development project at 3960 Fruit Street to check for conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as more fully described herein; and
B. Consultant represents that it has that degree of specialized expertise contemplated within California Government Code section 37103, and holds all necessary licenses to practice and perform the services herein contemplated; and
C. City and Consultant desire to contract for the specific services described in Exhibit “A” and desire to set forth their rights, duties and liabilities in connection with the services to be performed; and
D. No official or employee of City has a financial interest, within the provisions of sections 1090-1092 of the California Government Code, in the subject matter of this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions contained herein, the parties hereby agree as follows:
1.0. SERVICES PROVIDED BY CONSULTANT
1.1. Scope of Services. Consultant shall provide the profess ional services described in City’s Request for Proposals, attached hereto as Exhibit “A,” and Consultant’s Proposal, attached hereto as Exhibit “B,” both incorporated herein.
1.2. Professional Practices. All professional services to be provided by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement shall be provided by personnel experienced in their respective fields and in a manner consistent with the standards of care, diligence and skill ordinarily exercised by professional consultants in similar fields and circumstances in accordance with sound professional practices. Consultant also warrants that it is familiar with all laws that may affect its performance of this Agreement and shall advise City of any changes in any laws that may affect Consultant’s performance of this Agreement.
1.3. Performance to Satisfaction of City . Consultant agrees to perform all the work to the complete satisfaction of the City. Evaluations of the work will be done by the City Manager or his or her designee. If the quality of work is not satisfactory, City in its discretion has the right to:
(a) Meet with Consultant to review the quality of the work and resolve the matters of concern;
2 LSA Associates Inc.
Rev. 7-2024
(b) Require Consultant to repeat the work at no additional fee until it is satisfactory; and/or
(c) Terminate the Agreement as hereinafter set forth.
1.4. Warranty. Consultant warrants that it shall perform the services required by this Agreement in compliance with all applicable Federal and California employment laws, including, but not limited to, those laws related to harassment, workplace violence, discrimination, minimum hours and wages; occupational health and safety; fair employment and employment practices; workers’ compensation insurance and safety in employment; and all other Federal, State and local laws and ordinances applicable to the services r equired under this Agreement. Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless City from and against all claims, demands, payments, suits, actions, proceedings, and judgments of every nature and description including attorneys’ fees and costs, presented, brought, or recovered against City for, or on account of any liability under any of the above-mentioned laws, which may be incurred by reason of Consultant’s performance under this Agreement.
1.5. Non-Discrimination. In performing this Agreement, Consultant shall not engage in, nor permit its agents to engage in, discrimination in employment of persons because of their race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or military or veteran status, except as permitted pursuant to s ection 12940 of the Government Code.
1.6. Non-Exclusive Agreement . Consultant acknowledges that City may enter into agreements with other consultants for services similar to the services that are subject to this Agreement or may have its own employees perform services similar to those services contemplated by this Agreement.
1.7. Delegation and Assignment. This is a personal service contract, and the duties set forth herein shall not be delegated or assigned to any person or entity without the prior written consent of City. Consultant may engage a subcontractor(s) as permitted by law and may employ other personnel to perform services contemplated by this Agreement at Consultant’s sole cost and expense.
1.8. Confidentiality. Employees of Consultant in the course of their duties may have access to financial, accounting, statistical, and personnel data of private individuals and employees of City. Consultant covenants that all data, documents, discussion, or other information developed or received by Consultant or provided for performance of this Agreement are deemed confidential and shall not be disclosed by Consultant without written authorization by City. City shall grant such authorization if disclosur e is required by law. All City data shall be returned to City upon the termination of this Agreement. Consultant’s covenant under this Section shall survive the termination of this Agreement.
2.0. COMPENSATION AND BILLING
2.1. Compensation. Consultant shall be paid in accordance with the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit “C,” attached hereto and made a part of this Agreement (the “Fee Schedule”).
Consultant’s total compensation shall not exceed one hundred sixty -nine thousand and nine
3 LSA Associates Inc.
Rev. 7-2024
hundred-eighty dollars ($ 169,980.00).
2.2. Additional Services. Consultant shall not receive compensation for any services provided outside the scope of services specified in the Consultant’s Proposal unless the City Manager or designee , prior to Consultant performing the additional services, approves such additional services in writing. It is specifically understood that oral requests and/or approvals of such additional services or additional compensation shall be barred and are unenforceable.
2.3. Method of Billing. Consultant may submit invoices to the City for approval on a progress basis, but no more often than two times a month. Said invoice shall be based on the total of all Consultant’s services which have been completed to City’s sole satisfaction. City shall pay Consultant’s invoice within forty-five (45) days from the date City receives said invoice. Each invoice shall describe in detail, the services performed , the date of performance, and the associated time for completion. Any additional services approved and performed pursuant to this Agreement shall be designated as “Additional Services” and shall identify the number of t he authorized change order, where applicable, on all invoices.
2.4. Records and Audits. Records of Consultant’s services relating to this Agreement shall be maintained in accordance with generally recognized accounting principles and shall be made available to City or its Project Manager for inspection and/or audit at mutually convenient times from the Effective Date until three (3) years after termination of this Agreement.
3.0. TIME OF PERFORMANCE
3.1. Commencement and Completion of Work. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the parties, t he professional services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall commence within five (5) days from the Effective Date of this Agreement. Said services shall be performed in strict compliance with the Project Schedule approved by City as set forth in Exhibit “D,” attached hereto and incorporated herein. The Project Schedule may be amended by mutual agreement of the parties. Failure to commence work in a timely manner and/or diligently pursue work to completion may be grounds for termination of this Agreement.
3.2. Excusable Delays . Neither party shall be responsible for delays or lack of performance resulting from acts beyond the reasonable control of the party or parties. Such acts shall include, but not be limited to, acts of God, fire, strikes, pandemics (excluding COVID-19), material shortages, compliance with laws or regulations, riots, acts of war, or any other conditions beyond the reasonable control of a party (each, a “Force Majeure Event”). If a party experiences a Force Majeure Event, the party shall, within five (5) days of the occurrence of the Force Majeure Event, give written notice to the other party stating the nature of the Force Majeure Event, its anticipated duration and any action being taken to avoid or minimize its effect. Any suspension of performance shall be of no greater scope and of no longer duration than is reasonably required and the party experiencing the Force Majeure Event shall use best efforts without being obligated to incur any material expenditure to remedy its inability to perform; provided, however, if the suspension of performance continues for sixty (60) days after the date of the occurrence and such failure to perform would constitute a material breach of this Agreement in the absence of such Force Majeure Event, the pa rties shall meet and discuss in good faith any amendments to this Agreement to permit the other party to exercise its rights under this Agreement. If the parties are not able to agree on such amendments within thirty (30) days and if suspension of performa nce continues, such other party may terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the party experiencing the Force Majeure Event, in which case neither party shall have any liability to
4 LSA Associates Inc.
Rev. 7-2024
the other except for those rights and liabilities that accrued prior to the date of termination.
4.0. TERM AND TERMINATION
4.1. Term. This Agreement shall commence on the Effective Da te and continue for a period of 10 months, ending on August 21, 2025, unless previously terminated as provided herein or as otherwise agreed to in writing by the parties. This Agreement may be extended by 1 additional 1-year periods upon mutual written agreement of both parties.
4.2. Notice of Termination . The City reserves and has the right and privilege of canceling, suspending or abandoning the execution of all or any part of the work contemplated by this Agreement, with or without cause, at any time, by providing written notice to Consultant.
The ter mination of this Agreement shall be deemed effective upon receipt of the notice of termination. In the event of such termination, Consultant shall immediately stop rendering services under this Agreement unless directed otherwise by the City.
4.3. Compensation. In the event of termination, City shall pay Consultant for reasonable costs incurred and professional services satisfactorily performed up to and including the date of City’s written notice of termination. Compensation for work in progress shall be prorated based on the percentage of work completed as of the effective date of termination in accordance with the fees set forth herein. In ascertaining the professional services actually rendered hereunder up to the effective date of termination of this Agreement, consideration shall be given to both completed work and work in progress, to complete and incomplete drawings, and to other documents pertaining to the services contemplated herein whether delivered to the City or in the possession of the Consultant.
4.4. Documents. In the event of termination of this Agreement, all documents prepared by Consultant in its performance of this Agreement including, but not limited to, finished or unfinished design, development and construction documents, data studies, drawings, maps and reports, shall be delivered to the City within ten (10) days of delivery of termina tion notice to Consultant, at no cost to City. Any use of uncompleted documents without specific written authorization from Consultant shall be at City’s sole risk and without liability or legal expense to Consultant.
5.0. INSURANCE
5.1. Minimum Scope and Limits of Insurance . Consultant shall obtain , maintain, and keep in full force and effect during the life of this Agreement all of the following minimum scope of insurance coverages with an insurance company admitted to do business in California, rated “A,” Class X, or better in the most recent Best’s Key Insurance Rating Guide, and approved by City:
(a) Commercial general liability, including premises -operations, products/completed operations, broad form property damage, blanket contractual liability, independent contractors, personal injury or bodily injury with a policy limit of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence, Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00) general aggregate.
(b) Business a utomobile liability for owned vehicles, hired, and non -owned vehicles, with a policy limit of not less than One Million Dollars
5 LSA Associates Inc.
Rev. 7-2024
($1,000,000.00) combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
(c) Workers’ compensation insurance as required by the State of California.
Consultant agrees to waive, and to obtain endorsements from its workers’ compensation insurer waiving subrogation rights under its workers’ compensation insurance policy against the City , its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers arising from work performed by Consultant for the City and to require each of its subcontractors, if any, to do likewise under their workers’ compensation insurance policies.
(d) Professional errors and omissions (“E&O”) liability insurance with policy limits of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00), combined single limits, per occurrence and aggregate. Architects’ and engineers’ coverage shall be endorsed to include contractual liability. If the policy is written as a “claims made” policy, the retro date shall be prior to the start of the contract work. Consultant shall obtain and maintain, said E&O liability insurance during the life of this Agreement and for three years after completion of the work hereunder.
5.2. Endorsements. The commercial general liability insurance policy and business automobile liability policy shall contain or be endorsed to contain the following provisions:
(a) Additional insureds: “The City of La Verne and its elected and appointed boards, officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers are additional insureds with respect to: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant pursuant to its contract with the City; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant; automobiles owned, leased, hired, or borrowed by the Consultant.”
(b) Notice: “Said policy shall not terminate, be suspended, or voided, nor shall it be cancelled, nor the coverage or limits reduced, until thirty (30) days after written notice is given to City.”
(c) Other insurance: “ The Consultant’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City of La Verne, its officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers. Any other insurance maintained by the City of La Verne shall be excess and not contributing with the insurance provided by this policy.”
(d) Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City of La Verne , its officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers.
(e) The Consultant’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer’s liability.
6 LSA Associates Inc.
Rev. 7-2024
5.3. Deductible or Self Insured Retention. If any of such policies provide for a deductible or self-insured retention to provide such coverage, the amount of such deductible or self-insured retention shall be approved in advance by City. No policy of insurance issued as to which the City is an additional insured shall contain a provision which requires that no insured except the named insured can satisfy any such deductible or self-insured retention.
5.4. Certificates of Insurance. Consultant shall provide to City certificates of insurance showing the insurance coverages and required endorsements described above, in a form and content approved by City, prior to performing any services under this Agreement.
5.5. Non-Limiting. Nothing in this Section shall be construed as limiting in any way, the indemnification provision contained in this Agreement, or the extent to which Consultant may be held responsible for payments of damages to persons or property.
5.6. Excess Coverage . To the extent that Contractor maintains any insurance coverage(s) in amounts or types which are not expressly called out in this Agreement, such additional coverage(s) shall be deemed to be required by this Agreement.
6.0. GENERAL PROVISIONS
6.1. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to any matter referenced herein and supersedes any and all other prior writings and oral negotiations. This Agreement may be modified only in writing, and signed by the parties in interest at the time of such modification. The terms of this Agreement shall prevail over any inconsistent provision in any other contract document appurtenant hereto, including exhibits to this Agreement.
6.2. Representatives. The C ity Manager or his or her designee shall be the representative of City for purposes of this Agreement and may issue all consents, approvals, directives and agreements on behalf of the City, called for by this Agreement, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement.
Consultant shall designate a representative for purposes of this Agreement who shall be authorized to issue all consents, approvals, directives and agreements on behalf of Consultant called for by this Agreement, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement.
6.3. Project Managers. City shall designate a Project Manager to work directly with Consultant in the performance of this Agreement.
Consultant shall designate a Project Manager who shall represent it and be its agent in all consultations with City during the term of this Agreement. Consultant or its Project Manager shall attend and assist in all coordination meetings called by City.
6.4. Notices. Any notices, documents, correspondence or other communications concerning this Agreement or the work hereunder may be provided by personal delivery or mail and shall be addressed as set forth below. Such communication shall be deemed served or delivered: (a) at the time of delivery if such communication is sent by personal delivery, and (b) 48 hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail as reflected by the official U.S. postmark if such
7 LSA Associates Inc.
Rev. 7-2024
communication is sent through regular United States mail.
IF TO CONSULTANT: IF TO CITY:
LSA Associates, Inc.
1500 Iowa Avenue, Ste. 200
Riverside, CA 92507
City of La Verne
3660 D Street
La Verne, CA 91750
Tel: (951)777-2338 Tel: (909)596-8706
Attn: Dionisios Glentis,
Associate Environmental Planner
Attn: Gabriel Rivera, Associate
Planner
Courtesy copy to:
City of La Verne
3660 D Street
La Verne, CA 91750
Attn: Finance Dept. | Purchasing
6.5. Drug-Free Workplace Policy. Consultant shall provide a drug -free workplace by by complying with all provisions set forth in the United States Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988, 41 U.S.C. Section 701, et seq. Consultant’s failure to conform to these requirements shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement and shall be cause for immediate termination of this Agreement by City.
6.6. Attorneys’ Fees. In the event that litigation is brought by any party in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the opposing party all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred by the prevailing party in the exercise of any of its rights or remedies hereunder or the enforcement of any of the terms, conditions, or provisions hereof.
6.7. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of California without giving effect to that body of laws pertaining to conflict of laws. In the event of any legal action to enforce or interpret this Agreement, the parties he reto agree that the sole and exclusive venue shall be a court of competent jurisdiction located in Los Angeles County, California.
6.8. Assignment. Consultant shall not voluntarily or by operation of law assign, transfer, sublet or encumber all or any part of Consultant ’s interest in this Agreement without City’s prior written consent. Any attempted assignment, transfer, subletting or encumbrance shall be void and shall constitute a breach of this Agreement and cause for termination of this Agreement. Regardless of City ’s consent, no subletting or assignment shall r elease Consultant of Consultant’ s obligation to perform all other obligations to be pe rformed by Consultant hereunder for the term of this Agreement.
6.9. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, hold free and harmless the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees, at
8 LSA Associates Inc.
Rev. 7-2024
Consultant’s sole expense, from and against any and all claims, actions, suits or other legal proceedings brought against the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees arising out of the performance of the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, of the work undertaken pursuant to this Agreement. The defense obligation provided for hereunder shall apply without any advance showing of negligence or wrongdoing by the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, but shall be required whenever any claim, action, complaint, or suit asserts as its basis the negligence, errors, omissions or misconduct of the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, and/or whenever any claim, action, complaint or suit asserts liability against the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees based upon the work performed by the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors under this Agreement, whether or not the Consultant, its emp loyees, and/or authorized subcontractors are specifically named or otherwise asserted to be liable.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Consultant shall not be liable for the defense or indemnification of the City for claims, actions, complaints or suits arising out of the sole active negligence or willful misconduct of the City. This provision shall supersede and replace all other indemnity provisions contained either in the City’s specifications or Consultant’s Proposal, which shall be of no force and effect.
6.10. Independent Contractor . Consultant is and shall be acting at all times as an independent contractor and not as an employee of City. Consultant shall have no power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability on behalf of City or otherwise act on behalf of City as an agent.
Neither City nor any of its agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant’s employees, except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not, at any time, or in any manner, represent that it or any of its agents or employees are in any manner agents or employees of City. Consultant shall secure, at its sole expense, and be responsible for any and all payment of Income Tax, Social Security, State Disability Insurance Compensation, Unemployment Compensation, and other payroll deductions for Consultant and its officers, agents, and employees, and all business li censes, if any are required, in connection with the services to be performed hereunder. Consultant shall indemnify and hold City harmless from any and all taxes, assessments, penalties, and interest asserted against City by reason of the independent contra ctor relationship created by this Agreement. Consultant further agrees to indemnify and hold City harmless from any failure of Consultant to comply with the applicable worker’s compensation laws. City shall have the right to offset against the amount of any fees due to Consultant under this Agreement any amount due to City from Consultant as a result of Consultant’s failure to promptly pay to City any reimbursement or indemnification arising under this paragraph.
Consultant’s duties and services under this Agreement shall not include preparing or assisting the City with any portion of the City's preparation of a request for proposals, request for qualifications, or any other solicitation regarding a subsequent or additional contract with the City.
The City shall at all times retain responsibility for public contracting, including with respect to any subsequent phase of this project. Consultant's participation in the planning, discussions, or drawing of project plans or specifications, if any, shall be limited to conceptual, preliminary, or initial plans or specifications. Consultant shall cooperate with the City to ensure that all bidders for a subsequent contract on any subsequent phase of this project have access t o the same information, including all conceptual, preliminary, or initial plans or specifications prepared by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement.
6.11. PERS Eligibility Indemnification. In the event that Consultant or any employee, agent, or subcontractor of Consultant providing services under this Agreement claims or is
9 LSA Associates Inc.
Rev. 7-2024
determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) to be eligible for enrollment in PERS as an employee of the City, Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City for the payment of any employee and/or employer contributions for PERS benefits on behalf of Consultant or its employees, agents, or subcontractors, as well as for the payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions, which would otherwise be the responsibility of City.
Notwithstanding any other agency, state or federal policy, rule, regulation, law or ordinance to the contrary, Consultant and any of its employees, agents, and subcontractors providing service under this Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled t o, and hereby agree to waive any claims to, any compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by City, including but not limited to eligibility to enroll in PERS as an employee of City and entitlement to any contribution to be paid by City for emplo yer contribution and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits.
6.12. Cooperation. In the event any claim or action is brought against City relating to Consultant’s performance or services rendered under this Agreement, Consultant shall render any reasonable assistance and cooperation which City might require.
6.13. Ownership of Documents. All findings, reports, documents, information and data including, but not limited to, computer tapes or discs, files and tapes furnished or prepared by Consultant or any of its subcontractors in the course of performance of this Agreement, shall be and remain the sole property of City. Consultant agrees that any such documents or information shall not be made available to any individual or organization without the prior consent of City. Any use of such documents for other projects not contemplated by this Agreement, and any use of incomplete documents, shall be at the sole risk of City and without liability or legal exposure to Consultant. City shall indemnify and hold harmless Consultant from all claims, damages, losses, and expenses, including attorneys’ fees, arising out of or resulting from City’s use of such documents for other projects not contemplated by this Agreement or use of incomplete documents furnished by Consultant. Consultant shall deliver to City any findings, reports, documents, information, data, in any form, including but not limited to, computer tapes, discs, files audio tapes or any other Project related items as requested by City or its authorized representative, at no additional cost to the City.
6.14. Public Records Act Disclosure . Consultant has been advised and is aware that this Agreement and all reports, documents, information and data , including, but not limited to, computer tapes, discs or files furnished or prepared by Consultant, or any of its subcontractors, pursuant to this Agreement and provided to City may be subject to public disclosure as required by the California Public Records A ct (California Government Code s ection 7920.000, et seq.).
Exceptions to public disclosure may be thos e documents or information that qualify as trade secrets, as that term is defined in the California Government Code section 7924.510, and of which Consultant informs City of such trade secret. The City will endeavor to maintain as confidential all information obtained by it that is designated as a trade secret. The City shall not, in any way, be liable or responsible for the disclosure of any trade secret including, without limitation, those records so marked if disclosure is deemed to be required by law or by order of the Court.
6.15. Conflict of Interest . Consultant and its officers, employees, associates and subconsultants, if any, will comply with all conflict of interest statutes of the State of California applicable to Consultant's services under this agreement, including, but not limited to, the Political Reform Act (Government Code s ections 81000, et seq.) and Government Code s ection 1090.
10 LSA Associates Inc.
Rev. 7-2024
During the term of this Agreement, Consultant and its officers, employees, associates and subconsultants shall not, without the prior written approval of the City Representative, perform work for another person or entity for whom Consultant is not currently performing work that would require Consultant or one of its officers, employees, associates or subconsultants to abstain from a decision under this Agreement pursuant to a conflict of interest statute.
6.16. Responsibility for Errors. Consultant shall be responsible for its work and results under this Agreement. Consultant, when requested, shall furnish clarification and/or explanation as may be required by the City’s representative, regarding any services rendered under this Agreement at no additional cost to City. In the event that an error or omission attributable to Consultant occurs, then Consultant shall, at no cost to City, provide all necessary design drawings, estimates and other Consultant professional services necessary to rectify and correct the matter to the sole satisfaction of City and to participate in any meeting required with regard to the correction.
6.17. Prohibited Employment. Consultant will not employ any regular employee of City while this Agreement is in effect.
6.18. Order of Precedence. In the event of an inconsistency in this Agreement and any of the attached Exhibits, the terms set forth in this Agreement shall prevail . If, and to the extent this Agreement incorporates by reference any provision of any document, such provision shall be deemed a part of this Agreement. Nevertheless, if there is any conflict among the terms and conditions of this Agreement and those of any such provision or provisions so incorporated by reference, this Agreement shall govern over the document referenced.
6.19. Costs. Each party shall bear its own costs and fees incurred in the preparation and negotiation of this Agreement and in the performance of its obligations hereunder except as expressly provided herein.
6.20. Binding Effect. This Agreement binds and benefits the parties and their respective permitted successors and assigns.
6.21. No Third Party Beneficiary Rights . This Agreement is entered into for the sole benefit of City and Consultant and no other parties are intended to be direct or incidental beneficiaries of this Agreement and no third party shall have any right in, under or to this Agreement.
6.22. Headings. Paragraphs and subparagraph headings contained in this Agreement are included solely for convenience and are not intended to modify, explain or to be a full or accurate description of the content thereof and shall not in any way affect the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement.
6.23. Construction. The parties have participated jointly in the negotiation and drafting of this Agreement and have had an adequate opportunity to review each and every provision of the Agreement and submit the same to counsel or other consultants for review and comment. In the event an ambiguity or question of intent or interpretation arises with respect to this Agreement, this Agreement shall be construed as if drafted jointly by the parties and in accordance with its fair meaning. There shall be no presumption or burden of proof favoring or disfavoring any party by virtue of the authorship of any of the provisions of this Agreement.
11 LSA Associates Inc.
Rev. 7-2024
6.24. Amendments. Only a writing executed by the parties hereto or their respective successors and assigns may amend this Agreement.
6.25. Waiver. The delay or failure of either party at any time to require performance or compliance by the other of any of its obligations or agreements shall in no way be deemed a waiver of those rights to require such performance or compliance. No waiver of any prov ision of this Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the party against whom enforcement of a waiver is sought. The waiver of any right or remedy in respect to any occurrence or event s hall not be deemed a waiver of any right or remedy in respect to any other occurrence or event, nor shall any waiver constitute a continuing waiver.
6.26. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable in any circumstance, such determination shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining terms and provisions hereof or of the offending provision in any other circumstance. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the value of this Agreement, based upon the substantial benefit of the bargain for any party , is materially impaired, which determination made by the presiding court or arbitrator of competent jurisdiction shall be binding, then both parties agree to substitute such provision(s) through good faith negotiations.
6.27. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original. All counterparts shall be construed together and shall constitute one agreement.
6.28. Corporate Authority . The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the parties hereto warrant that they are duly authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of said parties and that by doing so the parties hereto are formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement.
[Signatures appear on following page.]
12 LSA Associates Inc.
Rev. 7-2024
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by and through their respective authorized officers, as of the date first above written.
CONSULTANT
__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Signature
__________________________________
Dionisios Glentis
Associate Environmental Planner
CITY OF LA VERNE
__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Tim Hepburn
Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Debra Fritz
Deputy City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Kimberly Hall Barlow
City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO INSURANCE:
__________________________________ Date: __________________________
13 LSA Associates Inc.
Rev. 7-2024
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
__________________________________ Date: __________________________ John Graham
Project Manager
DEPARTMENTAL APPROVAL:
__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Eric Scherer, AICP
Community Development Director
APPROVED AS TO PURCHASING:
__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Christy Lopez
Finance Director
EXHIBIT A
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
See attached document
EXHIBIT A
August 22, 2024
To: Prospective CEQA Consultants
RE: Request for CEQA Proposal for the Lutheran High School Residential Development (3960 Fruit Street) Proposal
Dear Consultant:
The City of La Verne is requesting proposals for the review and preparation of a CEQA document for a proposed single/multi-family residential development at the formally known Lutheran High School located at 3960 Fruit Street in the City of La Verne.
Proposed Project: The project consists of 121 homes, which consist of 51 two-story single-family dwellings and 70 three-story townhomes, with unit square footages ranging from 1,455 sq. ft. to 2,183 sq. ft. homes on a lot 9.3-acre lot. The applicant has chosen to dedicate 12 of the homes as low-income housing. The lot formally contained the Lutheran High School, however, the high school closed in August of 2023. The existing gym of the high school will be retained as part of the development. The project area is entirely within the City with single-family residential uses to the north and east, a multi-family residential use to the south, and a mobile-home park to the west.
The discretionary actions required are: Precise Plan Review, Zone Change, General Plan Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, Specific Plan Amendment, and a Development Agreement. Due to the existing site being formally the Lutheran High School, the zoning designation for the project site is Institutional, with a General Plan designation of Community Facility. As part of the development process, the applicants are seeking a General Plan Amendment to amend the project site to be High Density Residential. They will also be pursuing a zone change to change the designation from Institutional to the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan zone. The zone change will also incur a Specific Plan Amendment in order to bring the project site within the boundaries of the specific plan zone. The applicant has also filed an SB330 application. The application package submittal thus far includes the SB330 application, preliminary site plan, preliminary elevation and landscape plan, project narrative, and site survey. The submitted plans and documents are also subject to change. The application materials can be accessed using the link below:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/4ks344fxqlf0d0n645x3g/ABrX706OgwM6X7uMCGrC3GA?rlkey=5 rg04npd1nit7cavd9p47kch8&st=e1qvdl6s&dl=0
The City expects the consultant’s analysis, public workshop, staff review and Initial Study will ultimately be combined to complete the final determination for the necessary environmental process. A proposal by your firm should be based upon completion of an Initial Study, but any technical studies conducted for the project should have transferability in the event of future changes.
The applicant has chosen the option to potentially provide studies from their own selected consultant, which is expected to be peer reviewed as part the selected consultant’s analysis.
This would be considered as option B, with option A being the studies and analyses are completed by the chosen consultant. The City expects a cost breakdown for both options, along with a breakdown of the timelines for completion of both options.
An appropriate scope should include a developed Initial Study/CEQA checklist, appropriate technical analysis, determination of the need for a Negative Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration, or Environmental Impact Report, and anticipate up to two public workshops, staff meetings, and 1-2 public hearings.
The proposal should include:
1. Cover Letter:
o Introduction to the firm and statement of interest.
o Contact information of the primary point of contact
2. Firm Qualifications:
o Description of the firm’s experience with similar projects. o Resumes of key personnel who will be assigned to this project.
3. Approach and Methodology for Options A and B:
o Detailed description of the approach and methodology for conducting the environmental review.
o Proposed timeline and key milestones.
4. Cost Proposal for Options A and B:
o Detailed breakdown of costs, including labor, materials, and any other expenses. o Hourly rates for personnel and estimated total cost.
5. References:
o List of at least three references from similar projects, including contact information.
The City will require submittal of consultant proposals for this project no later than 12:00 noon, Tuesday, October 1, 2024. An electronic copy of the proposal must be submitted to [email protected] no later than the deadline indicated.
If you have any questions about the development and the process. Please feel free to contact me at (909) 596-8706. Our office is open Monday-Thursday from 8:00a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Sincerely,
Gabriel Rivera
Assistant Planner
EXHIBIT B
CONSULTANT’S PROPOSAL
See attached document
CEQA PROPOSAL FOR THE
LUTHERAN HIGH SCHOOL
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
(3960 FRUIT STREET) PROJECT
OCTOBER 1, 2024
REVISED OCTOBER 3, 2024
LSA is a business name of LSA Associates, Inc.
CARLSBAD
CLOVIS
IRVINE
LOS ANGELES
PALM SPRINGS
POINT RICHMOND
RIVERSIDE
ROSEVILLE
SAN LUIS OBISPO
1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200, Riverside, CA 92507 951.781.9310 www.lsa.net
1. Cover Letter
October 1, 2024
Revised October 3, 2024
Gabriel Rivera, Associate Planner
City of La Verne
3660 D Street
La Verne, California 91750
Subject: CEQA Proposal for the Lutheran High School Residential Development (3960 Fruit Street) Project for the City of La Verne
Dear Mr. Rivera:
LSA is pleased to submit this proposal for the review and preparation of a CEQA document for a proposed single/multi-family residential development (Villages at Legacy Green Project) at 3960 Fruit Street in La Verne.
LSA has extensive experience supporting the City of La Verne (City) with CEQA compliance for residential developments , including preparing an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) and supporting technical studies for Brandywine Homes Residential Development adjacent to the south of Lutheran High School.
The LSA Team will be led by Kyle Simpson, Principal Environmental Plann er, and Dionisios Glentis, Associate Environmental Planner . Mr. Glentis will serve as Project Manager and the primary point of contact for this project. Mr. Glentis is a resident of La Verne who lives 0.5 mile southwest of the project site and takes pride in his project experience in the city. Most recently, Mr. Glentis served as project manager and author of an IS/MND for the development of 50 attached townhomes on a 2.26 -acre infill site in La Verne, as well as eight single -family affordable housing units on 0.70 acre for the Brandywine Homes Residential Development Project (63-20SPA, 65-20SPA, 122-20GPA, 123-20GPA, 15-21CUP, 30- 21CUP, etc.). Mr. Glentis also managed CEQA compliance documents for the Brethren Hillcrest Homes Master Plan Update (26 -19MPA, etc.) and the Damien High School Master Plan Update (61- 17CUP). In addition, LSA’s in-house staff has prepared technical environmental studies for numerous residential projects (e.g., 1941 N. White Avenue Project, Brethren Hillcrest Homes Master Plan Update, Brandywine Homes Residential Development, La Verne Village [mixed -use], and Sage Canyon) throughout the C ity.
With LSA’s extensive experience in the city and familiarity with the La Verne General Plan and Municipal Code, we will prepare a defensible CEQA document and technical studies quickly and proficiently.
If you have any questions regarding this submittal, p lease contact Dionisios Glentis at (951) 777-2338 or [email protected]. Thank you for the opportunity to provide our proposal.
Sincerely,
LSA Associates, Inc.
Anthony Petros
Chief Executive Officer
LSA’s Primary Point of
Contact:
Dionisios Glentis
Associate Environmental
Planner
Role: Project Manager
[email protected]
(951) 777-2338
1 | Page
2. Firm Qualifications
Firm Profile
Environmental planning and documentation have been the core of LSA’s professional services since the firm’s founding in 1976 and continue to be the key practice areas. LSA is a full -service environmental planning and impact assessment firm. Our team of certified and registered professionals provides in - house technical support covering the majority of services necessary to prepare environmental documents and supporting technical documentation. LSA’s environmental planners and analysts are active in all aspects of community development, land use planning, and public involvement.
LSA is a 100 percent employee-owned environmental consulting firm with a staff of approximately 180 full-time and part-time employees in nine offices throughout California.
W
orking with specialists across multiple technical disciplines, LSA’s environmental planners and technical specialists offer deep knowledge of science and regulations, solid problem-solving skills, and well-r ounded
solutions. This balanced approach has earned LSA a reputation for thorough, credible, and objective analysis that accommodates agency requirements without compromising clients’ objectives. With respect to ongoing education, LSA staff members maintain and supplement the firm’s knowledge, understanding, and technical expertise in the application of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by regularly attending workshops on recent court outcomes and legislative amendments. Additionally, we regularly work with land use and CEQA attorneys who provide us with specific suggestions as to how the most recent case law should be interpreted and incorporated into our Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs) and other CEQA documents.
LSA’s Project Experience
LSA has extensive experience working with the City on residential, mixed-use, and institutional projects.
Projects that best represent our experience in reviewing and preparing environmental documents for the proposed project are summarized below, including the Brandywine Homes Residential Project located adjacent to the south of the proposed project site.
LSA has 48 years of experience in providing a full range of environmental review services throughout California.
2 | Page
City of La Verne, Brandywine Homes Residential Project
LSA prepared an IS/MND for the development
of 50 attached townhomes on a 2.26-acre infill
site adjacent to the proposed project, as well
as eight single-family affordable housing units
on 0.70 acre on a separate property in the city
in conjunction with, and as a condition of, the
50-townhome development. LSA also
prepared supporting technical studies for
transportation, air quality/greenhouse gas,
noise, architectural history and archaeological
resources, and biological resources and
arboriculture, as well as peer review of Phase
I and II Environmental Site Assessment reports
provided by Brandywine Homes. The project is
located within the Brackett Airport Land Use
Compatibility Plan and includes a General Plan Amendment, two Specific Plan Amendments, and a Zone Change. The La Verne Planning Commission and City Council approved the IS/MND in September 2021 and October 2021, respectively.
City of La Verne, Brethren Hillcrest Homes Master Plan Update LSA prepared an IS/MND and technical studies related
to architectural history, biological resources and
arboriculture, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions,
noise and vibration, and transportation to update the
Brethren Hillcrest Homes Master Plan. The project
included construction of 14 new attached and detached
single-family homes with common area landscaping on
1.7 acres. The project require d an update to
Neighborhood 6 of the Master Plan, a Zone Change,
General Plan Amendment, Roadway Vacation, Parcel
Merger, Precise Plan Review, and Tree Removal
Application. The La Verne Planning Commission and
City Council approved the IS/MND in November 2019
and January 2020, respectively.
City of La Verne, Sage Canyon
Residential Project
LSA prepared an IS/MND and supporting technical
studies for transportation, air quality and greenhouse
gases, noise/vibration, and biological resources for
development of 14 single -family residential units on
11.4 acres. The project included a zone change, tree
removal permit, and Hillside Development Overlay
Zone (HDOZ) modifications as a Zoning Amendment
that required two modifications to the HDOZ
requirements: (1) a cul-de-sac length that exceeds the
current standard; and (2) one access point instead of
the currently required two points of access. The
3 | Page
property is within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone and was subject to conditions of approval from the La Verne Fire Department. Specific issues addressed included hillside development, wildfire, transportation, noise, and preservation of heritage oak trees. The La Verne Planning Commission and City Council approved the IS/MND in November and December 2015, respectively.
City of La Verne, Emerald Court Specific Plan
LSA prepared an IS/MND for 19 single-family homes on
an urban infill site of 3.2 acres located at 2006 Baseline Road. The project site is located between Baseline
Road to the north and Interstate 210 to the south and
was subject to substantial mobile noise that required
mitigation. Major issues included additional traffic and turning movements south of Baseline at the project
entrance, noise from the adjacent 210 freeway, loss of
heritage oak trees, and dust and other air pollutant
emissions during construction. The La Verne Planning Commission approved the IS/MND in January 2016.
City of La Verne, Village Mixed-Use Project
LSA prepared an IS/MND and supporting technical
studies for transportation, air quality and greenhouse
gases, and noise/vibration to amend the Foothill
Boulevard Specific Plan in support of 174 multi -family residential units and 16,500 square feet of commercial
uses on 7.7 acres previously developed as a car
dealership. Specific issues addressed included
transportation, air quality and greenhouse gases,
noise/vibration, aesthetics, and hazardous materials.
The La Verne Planning Commission approved the IS/MND in April 2011.
City of La Verne, Damien High School Master Plan
LSA prepared an IS /MND to update the Damien High
School Master Plan. The Master Plan buildout is
anticipated over a 10 -year period and would include
the construction of a student center, a c hapel, a
science building, and a performing arts studio totaling approximately 73,000 square feet of new building area
within three phases of development on a 25.8 -acre
high school campus. LSA also prepared supporting
technical studies in the fields of air quality and
greenhouse gas emissions, cultural resources, noise
and vibration, and traffic as part of the project. Specific issues addressed include historic properties, noise and vibration, air quality, traffic, and hazards and hazardous materials. The La Verne Planning Commission and City Council approved the IS/MND in April 2019 and May 2019, respectively.
4 | Page
City of La Verne, 1941 N. White Avenue Project
LSA pr epared cultural and biological technical
studies and provided general environmental
consulting services to Novipax Buyer, LLC for
development of up to 367 residential units and
1,588 square feet of ground -floor retail uses
within a five -story building on a 4.8- acre
property at the northwest corner of Arrow
Highway and White Avenue in La Verne . The
project was found exempt from CEQA pursuant
to Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects)
and Section 15182 (Projects Pursuant to a
Specific Plan) of the CEQA Guidelines and was
approved by t he City Development Review
Committee in June 2024.
LSA Team
LSA has built a strong, versatile team of experts in their respective fields to fulfill the full scope of services required for this project. The LSA Team will be led by Dionisios Glentis, who will serve as Project Manager, and Kyle Simpson, who will serve as Principal in Charge. Mr. Glentis will administer the contract, delegate assignments, coordinate with in -house technical specialists, and ensure that all tasks required by the scope of services are completed in a thorough, efficient, cost-effective, and timely manner. As Principal in Charge, Mr. Simpson will implement LSA’s Quality Assurance/Quality Control Program and ensure that all documents meet LSA’s standards. A brief summary of the background and qualifications of LSA ’s project management team is provided below, followed by an organizational chart of the LSA Team. Resumes for the team are included in Appendix A.
Kyle Simpson, Principal Environmental Planner
Role: Principal in Charge
Mr. Simpson is a CEQA and NEPA practitioner and project manager with over 17 years of experience. He has served as project manager or key staff on dozens of projects across California. He has extensive experience with project-level analysis for residential, mixed-use development, school facilities, public facilities, and open space/recreational facilities. His responsibilities at LSA include project management and preparation of CEQA/NEPA documents.
Mr. Simpson’s relevant project
experience includes currently managing preparation of an IS/MND and supporting technical studies for the Brethren Hillcrest Gateway Project in south La Verne.
Dionisios Glentis, Associate Environmental Planner
Role: Project Manager
Mr. Glentis has 18 years of experience in environmental planning, transportation planning, and land use planning. Mr. Glentis specializes in environmental planning, cultural resources management, and construction site compliance. Mr. Glentis has managed, authored, reviewed, and implemented hundreds of environmental compliance documents that include Proponent’s Environmental Assessments, IS/MNDs, EIRs, Environmental Impact Statements, Section 4(f) Evaluations, Water Quality Assessment Reports, Worker Environmental Awareness Programs, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Programs, Phase I/Class III Cultural Resources Inventories, and Phase
5 | Page
II Archaeological Testing and Evaluation Reports. Mr. Glentis’ relevant project experience includes having served as project manager and author of the IS/MNDs to update the Brethren Hillcrest Homes Master Plan and Damien High School Master Plan , as well as for the Brandywine Homes Residential Development Project adjacent to Lutheran High School. Mr. Glentis also provided general environmental consulting services and managed technical environmental studies for Novipax Buyer, LLC for the 1941 N.
White Avenue Project.
Organizational Chart
6 | Page
3. Approach and Methodology
Project Understanding
The project is located at 3960 Fruit Street (Assessor’s Identification Number [AIN] 8666-018-009) on the site of the former Lutheran High School. Frank and Hyacinth Kalousek donated the property in 1970 to the Lutheran Church to construct the second Lutheran High School in greater Los Angeles. The school closed in 2023 after 50 years of operation.
The project includes demolition of Lutheran High School (the gymnasium will be retained) and construction of 121 residential units consisting of 51 single-family homes and 70 three-story townhomes on 9.3 gross acres (7.6 net acres). Twelve of the proposed units will be designated low income . Related discretionary actions for City approval include Precise Plan Review, Zone Change, Specific Plan Amendment, General Plan Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, and Development Agreement.
The zoning designation for the project site is Institutional, and the General Plan designation is Community Facility. The project would require a Zone Change to Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan zone and General Plan Amendment to High Density Residential to facilitate the proposed development. With the Zone Change, the project would also amend the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan to integrate the site into the specific plan zone. Finally, the project is located in Brackett Field Airport Land Use Compatibilit y Plan Safety Zone 6, which has no limit on Maximum Residential Densities ; however, the project will require review by the Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) in accordance with Section 1.4.1 of the Brackett Field Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan because the project includes a General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment .1 Furthermore, the project is located within the FAR High Terrain Area and may require notification to the Federal Aviation Administration since ground elevation exceeds or is within 35 feet beneath an Airspace Protection Surface as defined by FAR Part 77 for the airport.
LSA is uniquely qualified to support the City on this project because we prepared CEQA documentation and technical environmental studies for the Brandywine Homes Residential Project on the adjacent property to the south (3717 Fruit Street). T he Brandywine Homes Residential Project likewise included three-story attached townhomes and affordable housing and required a Zone Change to Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan zone, amendment to the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, and General Plan Amendment to High Density Residential to entitle that project. Because of this experience, we understand the sensitivity of the community in this part of the City and the challenges ahead for entitlement of the Villages at Legacy Green Project.
Accordingly, LSA proposes to evaluate potential environmental effects of the project through provision of the following services:
Option A:
Preparation of the following technical studies:
o Literature Search, Habitat Assessment, and Arborist Report; o Architectural History Assessment;
o Noise and Vibration Assessment;
o Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Assessment; and
1 LSA expects the project will require review by the ALUC Administrative Officer via a Minor Aviation Application.
7 | Page
o Transportation Study (TS) and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Assessment. Preparation of a CEQA Environmental Document (assumed [Mitigated] Negative Declaration) along with the Initial Study checklist.
Option B:
LSA Peer Review of the following technical studies:2
o Literature Search, Habitat Assessment, and Arborist Report; o Architectural History Assessment;
o Noise and Vibration Assessment;
o Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Assessment; and o TS and VMT Assessment.
Preparation of a CEQA Environmental Document (assumed [Mitigated] Negative Declaration) along with the Initial Study checklist.
In order to gauge the public’s interest and opinion of the proposed Villages at Legacy Green Project , LSA will present the CEQA process at up to two public workshops that will be used to focus the analyses in the Initial Study. LSA will also attend the Planning Commission and City Council public hearings to respond to questions related to the environmental analysis from planning commissioners, the City Council, and the public at large.
Approach and Methodology
Task 1.0: Project Initiation
Task 1.1: Project Kick-Off Meeting
LSA will conduct a project kick-off conference call to ensure an orderly flow of project efforts. The call will be held with Arroyo Land Partners and City staff to establish a mutual understanding of the environmental documentation objectives and key issues, explore community and C ity concerns regarding the project, and discuss the C ity’s expectations for LSA’s work effort. LSA also will consult with C ity case planner Gabriel Rivera to document the procedures the City will implement for this project to comply with Senate Bill 18 and Assembly Bill 52.
Task 1.2: Project Description
LSA will draft a comprehensive project description based on the most recent project information provided by Arroyo Land Partners, City staff, and other team members. The project description will provide a detailed narrative of the proposed project and geographical setting as required by CEQA. Additionally, LSA will visit the project site to establish an understanding of existing site conditions, the physical setting of the project site, and the relationship between the project site and adjacent land uses. This scope and cost
2 LSA expects any geotechnical, hydrological, hazardous materials, or airport land use compatibility studies prepared for the project to be reviewed and approved by the applicable City departments and would not require peer review by LSA. Should City staff request LSA peer review of any technical environmental study not specified under Option B, LSA would request a contract amendment to provide the additional services requested.
8 | Page
estimate assume one round of review/revision based on one set of consolidated comments each from Arroyo Land Partners and City staff.
Task 2.0 Option A: Technical Studies
LSA will prepare the following technical studies with associated memoranda and/or tabular documentation as specified below. Each of these assessments will be prepared in accordance with CEQA standards and will be applicable in support of an IS/MND or EIR. LSA will prescribe mitigation measures as necessary and will submit each assessment to the City for review as an appendix to the CEQA document.
LSA assumes one round of consolidated comments from Arroyo Land Partners and City staff to each of the technical studies. Comments made by attorneys and/or any third-party reviewer(s) will be considered an additional round of review and potentially be subject to a budget augment.
Task 2.1: Literature Search, Habitat Assessment, and Arborist Report LSA will conduct a literature search to identify sensitive or special -status biological resources that have potential to occur on or adjacent to the project site . The literature search will include the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) maintained by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) system. The results of the literature search will be used to address th e CEQA environmental checklist questions for biological resources under Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines.
LSA also will conduct a tree evaluation and prepare an arborist report in accordance with Section 18.78 (“Preservation, Protection and Removal of Trees”) of the City’s Municipal Code. An LSA arborist certified by the International Society of Arboriculture will conduct the evaluation and prepare the report. The evaluation will include an inventory of all trees on the project site with a single -trunk caliper of 4 inches or greater. Dead trees, palms under 8 feet tall, and invasive species such as tree of heav en (Ailanthus altissima) will not be inventoried.
Based on aerial photography, LSA estimates that there are up to 50 trees on the project site that would need to be inventoried. Each tree will be assigned a number and identified to species if possible. Any inventoried tree that may meet the definition of “significant tree” (i.e., any cedar, camphor tree, oak tree, California sycamore, or southern California black walnut that has a caliper of eight inches or more ) or “heritage tree” under Section 18.78.020 will be further evaluated by measuring its height, canopy, and trunk caliper, estimating its age, and assessing its general condition.
LSA will prepare an Arborist Report pursuant to Section 18.78.130 to present the results of the evaluation.
The report will include a summary of the data collected for each tree, a map showing tree locations, and a photograph of each significant and heritage tree. The report will also include proposed protection measures for each significant and heritage tree that will be preserved in accordance with project plans and consistent with the required protective measures specified in Section 18.78.160 of the Cit y’s Municipal Code.
Please Note: This scope does not include any focused species surveys or a Jurisdictional Delineation. If requested/required by the City, LSA would request a contract amendment to provide these services.
Task 2.2: Architectural History Assessment
Preliminary research indicates Lutheran High School at 3960 Fruit Street was built in 1973. Because the school is 50 years of age or older, it is required to be evaluated for historical significance. An LSA architectural historian will conduct archival research to determine the dates of construction and alterations, identify historically significant events and/or people associated with the school, and develop relevant historic contexts for the property. LSA will complete an intensive-level field survey of the property
9 | Page
and will photograph the exteriors of the buildings and related features and prepare detailed notations regarding their architectural styles, character-defining features, integrity, and conditions.
LSA will document and evaluate the campus on State Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 forms using the California Register of Historical Resources criteria, as well as any applicable local criteria for historic significance. LSA stipulates that a maximum of one property and seven buildings will be evaluated.
LSA will prepare a memorandum that will summarize the research and field methods and results and the significance evaluations. If appropriate, recommendations for mitigation will be provided. The DPR forms will be attached to the memorandum. If the campus as a whole or any individual buildings are evaluated as historically significant, an impacts assessment may be required. In that event, LSA will notify City staff and request a contract amendment to prepare an impacts assessment.
Please note that this scope of work does not include a cultural resources record search because LSA proposes to utilize recent record search data compiled from our evaluation of the 2021 Brandywine Homes Residential Project adjacent to the south of Lutheran High School for City staff to use during consultation with interested Native American Tribes pursuant to Senate Bill 18 and Assembly Bill 52.
Task 2.3: Noise and Vibration Assessment
LSA will prepare a Noise and Vibration Assessment in accordance with all applicable procedures and requirements of the City, County, and CEQA Guidelines . The assessment will include a review of the Federal Transit Administration’s applicable noise and vibration standards and will assess potential short- term construction impacts as well as long -term traffic -related and operational impacts to sensitive receptors in the project vicinity. The following tasks will be completed for this effort:
Survey of existing ambient noise levels (up to four long-term 24-hour measurements); Determination of short-term construction noise and vibration effects to off-site sensitive uses; Determination of operational noise and vibration effects to off-site sensitive uses; and Determination of project-related transportation noise and vibration effects to off-site sensitive uses.
The Noise and Vibration Assessment will be used to address the CEQA environmental checklist questions for noise under Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, with modeling data to be included as an appendix.
Task 2.4: Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Assessment LSA will utilize the California Emissions Estimator Model, Version 20 22.1, to evaluate the amounts of criteria air pollutants and greenhouse gases the proposed project would emit and to determine the amount of energy that would be required to construct and operate the project. LSA would prepare the analysis consistent with applicable City, Count y, and South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) guidelines and CEQA Guidelines. The analysis will include the following:
Regulatory setting and significance thresholds;
Short-term construction emissions, including a construction health risk assessment (HRA) that will summarize cancer risk and non-cancer risk (chronic and acute) and will compare the results of the HRA with the SCAQMD’s recommended thresholds;
Long-term mobile and stationary source emissions;
Quantification of greenhouse gas emissions (construction and operation); Localized significance analysis;
Determination of the project’s consistency with the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan; Evaluation of potentially objectionable odors; and
10 | Page
Energy assessment, including an assessment of the project’s compliance with applicable energy efficiency standards.
The Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Assessment will be used to address the CEQA environmental checklist questions for air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and energy under Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, with modeling data to be included as appendices.
Task 2.5: Transportation Study and Vehicle Miles Traveled Assessment LSA has prepared multiple Transportation Studies (TS) within the City, including the recently completed Brandywine Homes Residential Development Project ( 3717 Fruit Street ) consisting of 50 townhomes adjacent to the proposed project. As part of the Brandywine Homes Residential Development Project TS, LSA evaluated multiple intersections along the Fruit Street corridor, including Fruit Street/Amherst Street, Fruit Street/Foothill Boulevard, multiple driveways within this corridor , and the Lutheran High Schoo l driveways along Fruit Street. Based on our previous project experience, LSA anticipates the TS for the proposed project must address two major concerns in the neighborhood, specifically:
1) Traffic operations along Fruit Street between Amherst Street and Foothill Boulevard, with special attention to several driveways within this corridor, and 2) Cut-through traffic within the residential neighborhoods north and east of the project site.
Therefore, the scope of work for preparation of this TS is based on our experience with the adjacent project and community concerns related to traffic raised during preparation of the previous TS and subsequent public hearings. The TS for the proposed project will be prepared based on the City of La Verne Transportation Study Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled and Level of Service dated August 2020 (TS Guidelines). As per the City’s TS Guidelines and preliminary evaluation of the proposed project, LSA proposes a Level of Service (LOS) Analysis and a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis as part of the TS.
The detailed scope of work is as follows:
Task 2.5.1: Level of Service (LOS) Analysis
The LOS analysis will address existing traffic conditions, future traffic forecasts, project -related operational deficiencies, and recommended improvements. The analysis will be prepared consistent with the City’s TS Guidelines and in consultation with City staff. Based on the City’s TS Guidelines, traffic conditions will be examined for the following scenarios:
Existing Conditions;
Project Opening Year (Without Project);
Project Opening Year (With Project);
Horizon Year (Without Project); and
Horizon Year (With Project).
The TS will include analysis of intersection operations during a.m. and p.m. peak hour conditions, with the a.m. peak hour defined as the highest one hour of traffic occurring between 7 and 9 a.m., and the p.m. peak hour defined as the highest one hour of traffic occurring between 4 and 6 p.m.
Coordination with City Staff. Prior to preparation of the transportation study, LSA will consult with staff of the City’s Transportation Department to achieve the following:
Determine the appropriate study area;
Verify study area boundaries and analysis intersections; Determine the appropriate opening year conditions to be examined in the traffic analysis;
11 | Page
Verify the acceptability of transportation analysis assumptions, such as the a.m. and p.m. peak hour, project trip generation, and trip distribution patterns; and Identify any other traffic issues that will need to be addressed in the study.
As previously mentioned, given the concerns raised by the community for the adjacent Brandywine Homes Residential Development Project ( 3717 Fruit Street) regarding traffic along Fruit Street and cut - through traffic along Amherst Street and residential neighborhood, LSA proposes the following intersections to be included in the analysis:
1) Fruit Street/Amherst Street;
2) Existing Gymnasium Parking Lot Driveway/Amherst Street; 3) Hartshorn Ranch/Amherst Street;
4) Oak Leaf Street/Amherst Street;
5) Project Driveway 1/Amherst Street;
6) Fruit Street/Project Driveway 2;
7) Fruit Street/Project Driveway 3;
8) Fruit Street/Verdana Condominium (3717 Fruit Street) Driveway; 9) Fruit Street/2317-2371 Foothill Boulevard Driveway;
10) Fruit Street/Kohl’s Driveway; and
11) Fruit Street – White Avenue/Foothill Boulevard.
If the City requires analysis of additional intersections or operational issues that are not covered in this scope to be addressed in the TS, LSA would request a contract amendment to provide the additional services requested.
Data Collection & Site Visit. The following data will be required to prepare the TS for the proposed project:
Site Visit. LSA staff will visit the project site and gather information about lane geometrics, signal timing, signal phasing, roadway widths, etc.
Existing Intersection Counts. LSA will collect e xisting intersection traffic volumes at all study intersections.
Improvement Plans for Area Roadways. LSA will obtain available plans for the improvement of study area roadways from the City’s Engineering Division (if applicable). Information on Cumulative Projects. LSA will contact the City’s Planning Division to obtain information about approved or pending projects in the vicinity of the proposed project so that traffic generated by those projects may be incorporated into the TS.
Existing Traffic Conditions. LSA will assess e xisting daily a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic conditions and levels of service for the intersections identified for examination. Based on the Transportation Study Guidelines, intersection levels of service will be calculated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodologies for signalized intersections and Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodologies for unsignalized intersections. Additionally, if recommended by City staff, LSA would evaluate the intersection of Fruit Street/Amherst Street as both a signalized and unsignalized intersection.
Project Opening Year without Project Traffic Conditions. LSA will develop t raffic volumes for Project Opening Year without Project conditions by applying a growth rate to existing traffic volumes and by adding traffic volumes from approved and pending projects. The growth rate will be determined based
12 | Page
on consultation with City staff. Information for approved and pending projects in the vicinity of the project will be obtained from the City. For the purposes of this scope, LSA will analyze up to fifteen approved and pending projects in the analysis. The resulting intersection LOS will be calculated using the previously discussed methodologies.
Horizon Year without Project Traffic Conditions. LSA will develop traffic volumes for Horizon Year without project conditions using forecast volumes obtained from the most recent Southern California Association of Governments ( SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan ( RTP)/Sustainable Communities Strategy ( SCS) model and by applying the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) post -processing methodologies. The resulting levels of service will be calculated using the previously discussed methodologies.
Project Trip Characteristics and Changes to Traffic Patterns. LSA will develop weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour trip generation for the project using rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (11
th Edition) or other source approved by the City. Project trips will be distributed based on the locations of institutional, employment, and commercial centers and in consultation with City staff.
Project Opening Year and Horizon Year with Project Traffic Conditions. LSA will evaluate e ffects of the project on traffic by adding the project trip assignment to the corresponding without project conditions.
The resulting intersection levels of service for each scenario will be calculated using the previously discussed methodologies.
Project Impacts Assessment and Circulation Improvements. LSA will compare intersection LOS without the project to the intersection LOS with the project for each of the analysis scenarios to determine potential operational deficiencies. Determination of project impacts will be made based on the City’s LOS standards. Circulation improvements will be identified to offset operational deficiencies, as required. LOS related improvements may include intersection turn lanes, signalization, or turning movement restrictions. The LOS with improvements will be calculated and summarized, along with a comparison of the LOS without improvements.
Signal Warrant Analysis. LSA will conduct a peak hour signal warrant analysis at unsignalized study intersections if a signal is recommended as an improvement. Additionally, if the City recommends analyzing the intersection of Fruit Street/Amherst Street as a signalized intersection, LSA will conduct a signal warrant analysis at this location to determine the appropriateness of installing a signal.
Access and Circulation Analysis. LSA will evaluate intersection sight distance, turn conflicts/restrictions, adequacy of driveway lengths, corner clearance issues, pedestrian connections , and other operational issues at project driveways consistent with the City’s TS Guidelines. LSA will also evaluate existing roadway conditions to determine if safety and operational improvements are necessary due to increase in traffic from the project or cumulative conditions.
Task 2.5.2: CEQA Assessment – VMT Analysis
Based on a preliminary evaluation, the project lies within a Transit Priority Area (TPA). As per the City’s TS Guidelines, when a project is identified to lie within a TPA, additional metrics related to Floor Area Ratio (FAR), parking demand, affordable housing, and consistency with regional plans are required to be met for the project to be eligible to be screened out of VMT Analysis. Preliminary review of the project plans indicates the project may not meet the City’s criteria to screen out of a VMT analysis because of a relatively low FAR ratio and greater than minimum number of parking spaces proposed. Accordingly, the following scope is proposed to prepare a detailed VMT analysis for the project:
Project Traffic Analysis Zone Update. The first step in preparing this analysis will be to update the traffic analysis zones (TAZs) in the model that includes the project area. The SCAG RTP/SCS model uses a two - tier TAZ system – Tier 1 zones and Tier 2 zones. Two or more Tier 2 zones make up a Tier 1 zone. The
13 | Page
model utilizes a Tier 2 zone system for modeling steps such as trip generation and trip distribution while it uses a Tier 1 zone system for assignment purposes.
LSA will convert the project land use into model socioeconomic categories using SCAG conversion factors.
The socioeconomic data for both Tier 1 and Tier 2 zones in both the base and future year model scenarios will be updated. The project land use socioeco nomic data will be included into one Tier 2 TAZ.
Socioeconomic data already present in that Tier 2 TAZ will be transferred to adjacent Tier 2 TAZ. Tier 1 TAZ socioeconomic data will be adjusted accordingly.
VMT Analysis. Upon completion of the socioeconomic data update, LSA will conduct model runs for base and future year conditions. LSA will utilize the outputs from the model runs to calculate the model base year and future year project VMT.
As included in the City’s TS Guidelines, LSA will develop Origin/Destination (OD) VMT per service population for base and cumulative year and compare the cumulative no project and with project citywide link level VMT per service population to determine the project’s VMT impact.
VMT Mitigation. Please note, VMT mitigation has not been included in this scope of work since the nature of the project VMT profile is unknown at this time. In case VMT mitigation is required, LSA would request a contract amendment to evaluate appropriate VMT mitigation measures in coordination with City staff and Arroyo Land Partners.
Active Transportation and Public Transit Analysis. LSA will evaluate potential project impacts on public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities and determine significant impacts based on whether the project conflicts with adopted policies, plans, or programs for these facilities, or whether the project decreases the performance or safety of these facilities.
Task 2.5.3: Transportation Study (TS) Report and Meetings Transportation Study Preparation and Submittal. LSA will prepare a TS report documenting analysis methodologies, existing and future conditions, project impacts from LOS and VMT, and recommendations for circulation improvements. The report will be submitted to the City for review as an Adobe Acrobat PDF file. The scope and budget includes two rounds of review/revision of the traffic analysis to respond to comments from the City Public Works department.
Meetings. Representatives of LSA’s Transportation Department will attend up to three meetings or public hearings related to preparation of and/or findings of the TS Report.
Task 2.0 Option B: Peer Review of Technical Studies
If requested by City staff, LSA would implement Task 2.0 Option B in lieu of Task 2.0 Option A and would peer review the following technical environmental studies prepared by Arroyo Land Partners for CEQA adequacy:
o Biological Resources Assessment, and Arborist Report; o Architectural History Assessment;
o Noise and Vibration Assessment;
o Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Assessment; and o Transportation Study (TS) and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Assessment.
LSA expects any geotechnical, hydrological, hazardous materials, or airport land use compatibility studies prepared for the project to be reviewed and approved by the applicable City departments and would not
14 | Page
require peer review by LSA. Should City staff request LSA peer review of any technical environmental study not specified under Task 2.0 Option B, LSA would request a contract amendment to provide the additional services requested.
Task 2.1: Peer Review Biological Resources Assessment and Arborist Report LSA will conduct a desktop peer review of the project Biological Resources Assessment and summarize the findings of this peer review in a memorandum for submittal to the client. The purpose of the peer review will be to determine whether the Biological Resources Assessment conforms to accepted methodologies and procedures for biological impact assessments and applicable provisions of CEQA.
An LSA biologist certified as an arborist by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) will conduct a desktop peer review of the project A rborist Report f or consistency with local policies and ordinances regarding tree removal. Recommendations will be provided for any corrections or additions needed to make the report consistent with the City Municipal Code and adequate for project review under CEQA.
LSA will conduct a total of two rounds of review for each report. In the first round of review, the memorandum prepared by LSA will state the objectives of the review, discuss consistency with accepted methodologies for biological impact s assessments, and provide recommendations for clarification or additional analysis, if required. Once the Biological Resources Assessment has been revised pursuant to LSA’s comments, LSA will conduct a second review to confirm that the modifications originally requested have been satisfactorily incorporated into the revised report.
LSA will submit the peer review memorandum to City staff in PDF format. LSA assumes that required revisions to the report will be completed within the stated two rounds of review. In the event additional peer review is required, LSA would request a contract amendment to provide the required services.
Task 2.2: Peer Review Architectural History Assessment
An LSA architectural historian will peer review the Architectural History Assessment for the historic-period (50 years of age or older) built environment resources. The purpose of the peer review is to ensure that the Architectural History Assessment is adequate for purposes of environmental compliance under CEQA.
The peer review will analyze the methodology and findings and will illuminate weaknesses, if any, in the research and/or evaluative analysis in the context of CEQA compliance and current professional standards and practices. The peer review will not include site visits, independent research, alternative analyses, or opinions regarding the historical significance findings. LSA stipulates that the peer review is limited to one maximum 80-page study including all graphics, Department of Parks and Recreation forms, and any other appendices and/or attachments. LSA will provide a memorandum and, if appropriate, a comments matrix that discusses our conclusions regarding the adequacy of the Architectural History Assessment in terms of CEQA compliance. LSA will conduct one follow up review of the revised Architectural History Assessment to ensure our comments were adequately addressed and will prepare a follow up cover memorandum for verification.
LSA will submit the peer review memorandum to City staff in PDF format. LSA assumes that required revisions to the report will be completed within the stated two rounds of review. In the event additional peer review is required, LSA would request a contract amendment to provide the required services.
Task 2.3: Peer Review Noise and Vibration Assessment
LSA will peer review a Noise and Vibration Assessment for the proposed project. The peer review will include a review of methodology, noise measurement and modeling results, noise calculations, and findings. The peer review will ensure that the Noise and Vibration Assessment is accurate, complete, and
15 | Page
meets the requirements of the City and CEQA. The peer review includes one round of peer review and a second round verifying the implementation of the recommended changes.
LSA will submit the peer review memorandum to City staff in PDF format. LSA assumes that required revisions to the report will be completed within the stated two rounds of review. In the event additional peer review is required, LSA would request a contract amendment to provide the required services.
Task 2.4: Peer Review Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, & Energy Assessment LSA will peer review the project Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy Assessment to ensure that appropriate assessment methodologies were implemented and that appropriate rules and regulations were followed. This will include verifying that City, South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), California Air Resources Board (CARB), and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules and methodologies were followed, that the correct models were used , and that all air pollutant, greenhouse gas emissions, and energy uses were analyzed correctly. The evaluat ion will also ensure that any identified significant long -term operational impacts have feasible mitigation measures identified.
LSA will provide a memorandum report in PDF format summarizing the review process and all findings to the City upon completion of this peer review. The peer review includes one round of peer review and a second round verifying the implementation of the recommended changes. LSA assumes that required revisions to the report will be completed within the stated two rounds of review. In the event additional peer review is required, LSA would request a contract amendment to provide the required services.
Task 2.5: Peer Review Transportation Study and VMT Analysis LSA will peer review the Transportation Study (TS) and VMT Analysis memo randum provided by Arroyo Land Partners for project compliance with City LOS standards and CEQA. As part of the review, LSA will review the project description, project assumptions, and project data to ensure the analysis addresses a project that is substantially consistent with that presented to the City for review. LSA will review the study area, methodology, approach, and assumptions to ensure that the technical analysis follows the standards and requirements of the City’s TS Guidelines . LSA will review the findings and conclusions to ensure a sufficient discussion of project-specific operational deficiencies and VMT impacts and the identification of improvements and mitigations in accordance with CEQA has been provided. As necessary, LSA will contact technical authors to clarify specific analysis and/or requirements.
LSA will prepare a peer review memorandum that considers the TS/VMT Analysis adequacy pursuant to the City’s TS Guidelines and CEQA and will include a summary of p roject improvements and mitigation measures that should be carried forward into the CEQA document. LSA will submit the memorandum report in PDF format to the City upon completion of this peer review. The peer review includes one round of peer review and a second round verifying the implementation of the recommended changes. LSA assumes that required revisions to the report will be completed within the stated two rounds of review.
In the event additional peer review is required, LSA would request a contract amendment to provide the required services.
16 | Page
Task 3.0: Initial Study
Task 3.1: Draft Initial Study
LSA will prepare an Administrative Draft Initial Study based on the technical studies detailed in Task 2.0 and independent analysis, including A pplicant-provided studies not specified under Task 2.0 (e.g., Low Impact Development Plan, geotechnical, hazardous materials, and airport land use compatibility studies), and prescribe mitigation where necessary to reduce environmental impacts of the project to less than significant levels. LSA will review the City General Plan, project plans, pertinent environmental data, and other relevant documents to ascertain the extent of potential environmental impacts. LSA will address the following environmental factors presented in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines as they relate to the project, applicable City standards, and/or the standards of State or federal entities:
Aesthetics Mineral Resources
Agriculture and Forestry Resources Noise
Air Quality Population and Housing
Biological Resources Public Services
Cultural Resources Recreation
Energy Transportation
Geology and Soils Tribal Cultural Resources
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Utilities and Service Systems Hazards and Hazardous Materials Wildfire
Hydrology and Water Quality Mandatory Findings of Significance Land Use and Planning
Please Note: In the event environmental impacts of the project cannot be mitigated to levels below significance, an EIR may be determined necessary. In such a case, the Initial Study would be used to screen out the environmental factors determined not to require mitigation and/or result in significant and unavoidable impacts. To proceed with preparation of an EIR, LSA would request an amendment to this scope and budget to account for the additional services necessary to comply with CEQA. The focused EIR would address only those environmental factors that are determined to require mitigation as well as those that cannot be mitigated to levels below significance and/or are anticipated to be topics of controversy to the public based on the Public Scoping process.
LSA will complete the Administrative Draft Initial Study within 4 weeks of receipt of all required project materials and City consultation under Senate Bill 18 and Assembly Bill 52 and submit it electronically (tracked changes Word document) to City staff . Any delay in the receipt of all or part of the required technical studies and/or data may necessitate an extension of the estimated completion date. This scope and cost estimate assume up to two rounds of consolidated and non -contradictory comments (tracked changes Word document) from Arroyo Land Partners, City staff, and the City attorney.
Task 3.2: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
LSA will prepare a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) upon approval of the Draft Initial Study to implement the mitigation measures outlined in the Initial Study for the project. The mitigation measures would be included in a matrix check-off format for ease of tracking their implementation.
17 | Page
Task 4.0: Mitigated Negative Declaration
Task 4.1: IS/MND Public Review Materials
Once the Draft Initial Study has been reviewed and approved by the City (see Task 3.0), LSA would prepare all the necessary forms for circulating the IS/MND to the public and resource agencies. LSA would use standard forms or those provided by the City, whichever is preferred.
The IS/MND would be circulated for a 20- or 30-day public review period, subject to review by select State agencies. This scope and cost estimate assume the City would provide a current public agency distribution list, post the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (NOI) in local newspaper(s), and notice adjacent/nearby property owners (as necessary). If requested, LSA would post the NOI with the Los Angeles County Clerk. If requested, LSA would distribute the NOI to agencies/organizations on the C ity- provided distribution list using a t rackable delivery service, such as FedEx. LSA would provide the C ity evidence of all mailings and posting related to the distribution of the IS/MND.
To minimize print and distribution costs, LSA would provide up to seven hard copies of the IS/MND and MMRP for City records
3 but would distribute the IS/MND per the City’s mailing list via a weblink on the NOI. Distribution would include up to 30 hard copies of the NOI with a link to the City’s website where all documents can be accessed. The City would either post the IS/MND to the California State Clearinghouse or provide LSA staff upload authorization to the Office of Planning and Research Document Database.
Task 4.2: Response to Public Comments
LSA would respond to public comments on the IS/MND upon close of the public review period within 3 weeks of receipt of all public comments. This scope and cost estimate assume up to 60 hours of LSA staff time4 for this task. Time required in excess of this assumption would be incurred upon City authorization and billed on a time-and-materials basis.
As required, LSA would revise the IS/MND to incorporate relevant comments/data received during the public review period. LSA would present r evisions to the IS/MND in an errata document to facilitate subsequent review by the City.
Task 4.3: Final IS/MND and Notice of Determination
LSA would prepare up to seven hard copies of the Final IS/MND, responses to comments, and MMRP for the City’s records . Any appendices would be provided electronic ally via flash drives . Subsequent to approval of the IS/MND, LSA would provide the City with the Notice of Determination (NOD) for submission to the Los Angeles County Clerk and California State Clearinghouse. At the City’s request, LSA can file the NOD with the Los Angeles County Clerk and California State Clearinghouse, but it is the City’s responsibility to ensure Applicant-supplied filing fees are paid to the County Clerk.5 Task 5.0: Project Management and Meetings
Task 5.1: Project Management
3 Any appendices would be provided as electronic PDF files on flash drives. 4 60 hours at a composite rate of $200 per hour.
5 Failure to file the NOD and pay the filing fees within five business days of project approval would substantially increase the period during which the project approval may be legally challenged.
18 | Page
LSA’s Project Manager, Dionisios Glentis, will serve as primary author of the IS/MND and be responsible for managing the day -to-day activities associated with the project, including regular coordination with City staff and the Arroyo Land Partners team, contract management, oversight of the LSA project team, schedule coordination, and development of products. Mr. Glentis will provide City staff with regular updates regarding the status of LSA’s work and scheduled deliverables.
Task 5.2: Meetings, Public Workshops, and Public Hearings LSA will attend (via conference call or in-person) up to ten coordination meetings with City staff and the Arroyo Land Partners team, two public workshops, and up to two public hearings of the City (i.e., one Planning Commission hearing and one City Council hearing) to consider approval of the IS/MND and action on the project. If requested, LSA will explain the content, findings, and determinations of the IS/MND and will respond to relevant comments raised during the public workshops and hearings.
Schedule
Under Option A, processing of the IS/MND can be completed approximately 10 months after authorization to proceed, which is assumed to occur by November 1, 2024 to allow time for the contract to be approved by the La Verne City Council via Consent Calendar. The following table provides estimated time frames for Option A for each task outlined in the scope of work.
Option A
SCHEDULE OF TASKS DURATION DATE OF DELIVERY1
Authorization to Proceed 1 day November 1, 2024
Task 1.0: Project Initiation
1.1: Project Kick-Off Meeting 1 day Early November
1.2: Project Description 2 weeks Mid-November
Task 2.0 Option A: Technical Studies1
2.1: Literature Search, Habitat Assessment, and Arborist Report 6 weeks Mid-December
2.2: Architectural History Assessment 6 weeks Mid-December
2.3: Noise and Vibration Assessment 4 weeks2 Mid-December
2.4: Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Assessment 4 weeks2 Mid-December
2.5: Transportation Study/Vehicle Miles Traveled Assessment 12 weeks3 Late January 2025 Task 3.0: Initial Study
3.1: Draft Initial Study 4 weeks4 Late February
City Review 3 weeks Mid-March
LSA Revision 2 weeks Early April
City Review 2 weeks Late April
3.2: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program5 — Late April Task 4.0: Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.1: IS/MND Public Review Materials 1 week Late April
Start Public Review Period 1 day Late April
End Public Review Period 30 days Late May
4.2: Response to Public Comments 3 weeks Mid-June
4.3: Final IS/MND and Notice of Determination 1 week Late June
19 | Page
SCHEDULE OF TASKS DURATION DATE OF DELIVERY1
Task 5.0: Project Management and Meetings
5.1: Project Management Ongoing —
5.2: Meetings, Public Workshops, and Public Hearings
Staff Coordination Meetings Up to 10 As needed
Public Workshops 2 days To be determined
Planning Commission Public Hearing 1 day July 2025
City Council Public Hearing 1 day August 2025
TOTAL 10 months
1 Date to first delivery.
2 Requires trip generation data from Task 2.5 and therefore may not commence until trip generation data are compiled. 3 Preparation of the draft Transportation Study will require six weeks from receipt of all data including cumulative project information, approval of the Transportation Scoping Agreement, and collection of traffic counts. It is anticipated that all data including traffic counts and City approval of the Transportation Scoping Agreement would be obtained in six weeks. 4 Four weeks from receipt of all required project materials and City consultation under Senate Bill 18 and Assembly Bill 52. 5 Concurrent with completion of Task 3.1.
Under Option B, processing of the IS/MND can be completed approximately 9 months after authorization to proceed, which is assumed to occur by November 1, 2024 to allow time for the contract to be approved by the La Verne City Council via Consent Calendar. The following table provides estimated time frames for Option B for each task outlined in the scope of work.
Option B
SCHEDULE OF TASKS DURATION DATE OF DELIVERY1
Authorization to Proceed 1 day November 1, 2024
Task 1.0: Project Initiation
1.1: Project Kick-Off Meeting 1 day Early November
1.2: Project Description 2 weeks Mid-November
Task 2.0 Option B: Peer Review of Technical Studies2
2.1: Peer Review Biological Resources Assessment & Arborist Report 4 weeks Early December
2.2: Peer Review Architectural History Assessment 3 weeks Late November
2.3: Peer Review Noise and Vibration Assessment 2 weeks Mid-November
2.4: Peer Review Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, & Energy Assessment 2 weeks Mid-November
2.5: Peer Review Transportation Study and VMT Analysis 4 weeks Early December Task 3.0: Initial Study
3.1: Draft Initial Study 4 weeks3 Early January 2025
City Review 3 weeks Late January
LSA Revision 2 weeks Mid-February
City Review 2 weeks Early March
3.2: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program4 — Early March Task 4.0: Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.1: IS/MND Public Review Materials 1 week Mid-March
Start Public Review Period 1 day Mid-March
20 | Page
SCHEDULE OF TASKS DURATION DATE OF DELIVERY1
End Public Review Period 30 days Mid-April
4.2: Response to Public Comments 3 weeks Early May
4.3: Final IS/MND and Notice of Determination 1 week Mid-May Task 5.0: Project Management and Meetings
5.1: Project Management Ongoing —
5.2: Meetings, Public Workshops, and Public Hearings
Staff Coordination Meetings Up to 10 As needed
Public Workshops 2 days To be determined
Planning Commission Public Hearing 1 day June 2025
City Council Public Hearing 1 day July 2025
TOTAL 9 months
1 Date to first delivery.
2 Schedule assumes all technical reports to be peer reviewed are complete by November 1, 2024. 3 Four weeks from receipt of all required project materials and City consultation under Senate Bill 18 and Assembly Bill 52. 4 Concurrent with completion of Task 3.1.
4. Cost Proposal
LSA proposes to complete the technical studies and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration as outlined in the scope of work for $169,980 under Option A or for $97,100 under Option B. See Appendix B for details. Prior to the initiation of any work effort, LSA will confirm the necessity and scope of any technical memoranda/study to firmly establish the final contract amount with the City.
Option A
TASK COST1
Task 1.0: Project Initiation
1.1: Project Kick-Off Meeting $800
1.2: Project Description $3,995
SUBTOTAL TASK 1.0 $4,795
Task 2.0 Option A: Technical Studies
2.1: Literature Search, Habitat Assessment, and Arborist Report $12,570
2.2: Architectural History Assessment $9,300
2.3: Noise and Vibration Assessment $9,000
2.4: Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Assessment $12,000
2.5: Transportation Study/Vehicle Miles Traveled Assessment $56,000 SUBTOTAL TASK 2.0 $98,870
Task 3.0: Initial Study
3.1: Draft Initial Study $26,100
3.2: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program $1,070 SUBTOTAL TASK 3.0 $27,170
21 | Page
TASK COST1
Task 4.0: Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.1: IS/MND Public Review Materials $4,830
4.2: Response to Public Comments $12,000
4.3: Final IS/MND and Notice of Determination $6,960
SUBTOTAL TASK 4.0 $23,790
Task 5.0: Project Management and Meetings
5.1: Project Management $8,855
5.2: Meetings, Public Workshops, and Public Hearings $6,500 SUBTOTAL TASK 5.0 $15,355
TOTAL COST $169,980
1 Includes up to $2,715 in reimbursable expenses (e.g., mileage, printing, shipping, and noise monitoring equipment). Refer to Appendix B.
Option B
TASK COST1
Task 1.0: Project Initiation
1.1: Project Kick-Off Meeting $800
1.2: Project Description $3,995
SUBTOTAL TASK 1.0 $4,795
Task 2.0 Option B: Peer Review of Technical Studies
2.1: Peer Review Biological Resources Assessment & Arborist Report $7,940
2.2: Peer Review Architectural History Assessment $5,580
2.3: Peer Review Noise and Vibration Assessment $3,460
2.4: Peer Review Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, & Energy Assessment $4,760
2.5: Peer Review Transportation Study and VMT Analysis $4,060 SUBTOTAL TASK 2.0 $25,800
Task 3.0: Initial Study
3.1: Draft Initial Study $26,290
3.2: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program $1,070 SUBTOTAL TASK 3.0 $27,360
Task 4.0: Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.1: IS/MND Public Review Materials $4,830
4.2: Response to Public Comments $12,000
4.3: Final IS/MND and Notice of Determination $6,960
SUBTOTAL TASK 4.0 $23,790
Task 5.0: Project Management and Meetings
5.1: Project Management $8,855
5.2: Meetings, Public Workshops, and Public Hearings $6,500
22 | Page
TASK COST1
SUBTOTAL TASK 5.0 $15,355
TOTAL COST $97,100
1 Includes up to $ 1,150 in reimbursable expenses (e.g., mileage, printing, shipping, and noise monitoring equipment). Refer to Appendix B.
Hourly Rates
STAFF NAME TITLE BILLING RATE
Kyle Simpson Principal Environmental Planner $235
Dionisios Glentis Associate Environmental Planner $200
Ambarish Mukherjee, PE, AICP Principal Transportation Planner $295 Stanley Spencer, Ph.D. Associate Biologist, Botanist, Certified Arborist $160 Casey Tibbet Associate Historian/Architectural Historian $190 Jason Lui Certified Noise Specialist $190
Ron Brugger Senior Air Quality Specialist $180
5. References
Please find below LSA’s references from recent clients from similar projects . LSA encourages you to contact our references regarding any questions concerning the services LSA provides.
REFERENCE CONTACTS
Joshua Winter, Senior Planner
City of Upland
[email protected]
(909) 931-4143
Michael P. Diaz, Director of Community Development
City of Montclair
[email protected]
(909) 625-9432
Rina Leung, Senior Planner
City of Fontana
[email protected]
(909) 350-6566
Orlando Hernandez, Deputy Community Development Director City of Menifee
[email protected]
(951) 723-3737
23 | Page
Appendix A: Resumes
KYLE T. SIMPSON
PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER
ROLE: PRINCIPAL IN CHARGE
1 PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES
Mr. Simpson is a CEQA and NEPA practitioner and project manager with over 16 years of experience. He has served as project manager or key staff on over 70 projects in Northern California and the Central Valley. He has extensive experience with project -level analysis for mixed -use development, school facilities, public facilities, and open space/recreational facilities. His responsibilities at LSA include project management and preparation of CEQA/ NEPA documents.
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
City of Clovis, Heritage Grove Specific Plan EIR
Clovis, Fresno County, California
Mr. Simpson is currently managing the preparation of an EIR for the Heritage Grove Specific Plan, which would include residential, retail, commercial, park, and public facility uses within a n 881-acre area currently located within the Sphere of Influence of the City of Clovis. Implementation of the Specific Plan would result in over 8,500 residential units, 600,000 square feet of retail uses, and nearly 800,000 square feet of commercial uses. Currently in the preparation phase, the program -level EIR will include a detailed transportation analysis, as well as technical studies to address air quality and greenhouse gases, to address potential impacts occurring as specific projects are developed during buildout of the Specific Plan.
City of Clovis, Tract Map 6343 EIR
Clovis, Fresno County, California
Mr. Simpson is currently managing the preparation of the Tract Map 6343 EIR, a project that proposes the annexation of 246 acres from Fresno County to the City of Clovis, and the development of 590 residential units within an approximately 72-acre project site. Mr. Simpson is overseeing the preparation of a detailed transportation analysis, along with technical studies analyzing potential environmental impacts to agricultural resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, and greenhouse gases.
City of Clovis, Heritage Grove Official Plan Lines
Clovis, Fresno County, California
Mr. Simpson prepared an Addendum to the City of Clovis General Plan EIR to identify any potential environmental impacts that could occur through the establishment of Official Plan Lines for North Clovis Avenue, East Copper Avenue, East Behymer Avenue, East International Avenue, and North Minnewawa Avenue. In 2019, Mr. Simpson prepared a separate Addendum to the City of Clovis General Plan EIR focusing only on a segment of North Clovis Avenue.
City of Livermore, Downtown Specific Plan Amendment CEQA Addendum Livermore, Alameda County, California
Mr. Simpson managed the CEQA documentation for a mixed -use project located within the boundaries of the Downtown Specific Plan. Using the Specific Plan EIR, LSA prepared an Addendum to the Final EIR, supported by technical analyses. The proposed project will contain residential and commercial uses.
EXPERTISE
• CEQA Project Management
• Environmental Planning and
Impact Analysis
• Land Use Planning and
Development
EDUCATION
B.S., Political Science, Santa
Clara University, 2003
PROFESSIONAL
EXPERIENCE
Principal, LSA, Clovis,
California, 2017–Present
Senior Associate, PlaceWorks,
Clovis, California, 2006–2017
Project Coordinator,
Springboard Forward,
Mountain View, California,
2005–2006
South Bay Program
Coordinator, Greenbelt
Alliance, San Jose, California,
2004
PROFESSIONAL
AFFILIATIONS
Association of Environmental
Professionals (AEP)
KYLE T. SIMPSON
PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER
ROLE: PRINCIPAL IN CHARGE
2 City of Merced, Merced Mall Expansion Project IS/MND
Merced, Merced County, California
Mr. Simpson managed the CEQA documentation for the proposed increase of leasable retail area and construction of a new movie theater at one of two possible locations within the project site. To support the CEQA analysis, LSA prepared a stand-alone Transportation Impact Analysis and a stand-alone cultural resources study, the results of which will be incorporated into the Initial Study analysis.
City of Hayward, 2695 W. Winton Avenue Industrial Project IS/MND Hayward, Alameda County, California
Mr. Simpson managed the preparation of the CEQA document for a light industrial use project with a floor area of approximately 507,500 square feet . The building would comprise 491,000 square feet of industrial warehouse; 10,000 square feet of office space; and 6,500 square feet of mezzanine/office space.
City of Clovis, Dog Park Master Plan IS/MND
Clovis, Fresno County, California
Mr. Simpson managed the preparation of the Dog Park Master Plan IS/MND for the construction and implementation of the citywide Dog Park Master Plan intended to serve as a planning policy document that establishes best practices, design standards, and planning recommendations for a network of potential dog parks. The IS/MND evaluated the potential short- term environmental impacts resulting from constru ction of the dog parks, as well as potential long-term operational impacts resulting from park usage and maintenance.
City of Berkeley, 1110 University Avenue IS/MND and Planning Services Berkeley, Alameda County, California
Mr. Simpson managed the CEQA documentation and provided staff support for a mixed -use project located along a busy thoroughfare. He also prepared the Zoning Adjustments Board staff report and attended City meetings related to the project.
City of Madera, Village D Specific Plan EIR
Madera, Madera County, California
Mr. Simpson managed a major EIR for the City of Madera that evaluated the development of a new compact mixed-use community that extends the City of Madera’s existing urban fabric, creates walkable and bikeable streets, and integrates open space throughout the area east of the c ity limits. The EIR analyzed how implementation of the Specific Plan could result in environmental impacts, and where applicable, how those potential impacts could be reduced. To do this, both program-level and project-level analyses were used in the EIR to address potential impacts occurring as specific projects are developed during buildout of the Specific Plan.
City of Fresno, General Plan EIR Update
Fresno, Fresno County, California
Mr. Simpson managed the preparation of the update of the City’s General Plan Master EIR to a Program EIR in order for it to be in conformance with State law and to be consistent with recent legislative changes. The intent of the update was to streamline implementation of the General Plan by supporting the General Plan’s programs and projects with updated environmental analysis, regulatory framework, and mitigation measures pursuant to CEQA. Key components included an air quality analysis and health risk assessment, updating the City’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan, and transportation and vehicle miles traveled analyses.
DIONISIOS GLENTIS
ASSOCIATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER
ROLE: PROJECT MANAGER
1 PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES
Mr. Glentis has 18 years of environmental consulting experience and 15 years of progressive responsibility managing projects for compliance with CEQA and NEPA.
Mr. Glentis specializes in environmental planning, cultural resources management, and construction site compliance. As an archaeologist and planner, he has authored, reviewed, and implemented hundreds of environmental compliance documents that include Proponent’s Environmental Assessments, Initial Studies/ Mitigated Negative Declarations, Environmental Impact Reports/Statements, Section 4(f) Evaluations, Water Quality Assessment Reports, Worker Environmental Awareness Programs, Mitigation Monitoring and Repo rting Programs, Phase I/Class III Cultural Resources Inventories, and Phase II Archaeological Testing and Evaluation Reports.
Mr. Glentis has managed multiple projects ranging in size and scope from multiyear licensing projects to short -term projects constructed under rapid schedules. He has collaborated effectively with local, State, and federal agencies (e.g., Cities of La Verne, Fontana, Murrieta, and Riverside, Caltrans, California Public Utilities Commission, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) and planning/engineering/construction teams to successfully execute over 1,000 projects pursuant to CEQA and NEPA.
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
City of La Verne, Brethren Hillcrest Homes Master Plan Update Project La Verne, Los Angeles County, California
Mr. Glentis served as Project Manager and author of an IS/MND to update the Brethren Hillcrest Homes Master Plan. The Master Plan Update includes construction of 14 additional attached and detached single-family homes with common area landscaping on 1.7 acres. The project requires an update to Neighborhood 6 of the Master Plan, a Zone Change, General Plan Amendment, Roadway Vacation, Parcel Merger, Precise Plan Review, and Tree Removal Application. Mr. Glentis coordinated the preparation of technical studies (air quality, cultural resources, arboriculture, greenhouse gas, noise, and transportation) as part of the project. Specific issues addressed i nclude architectural history , tree removal and preservation, noise, hazards and hazardous materials, and tribal cultural resources. The La Verne Planning Commission and City Council approved the IS/MND in January 2020 and February 2020, respectively.
City of La Verne, Brandywine Homes Residential Development Project La Verne, Los Angeles County, California
Mr. Glentis served as P roject Manager and author of an IS/MND for the development of 50 attached townhomes on a 2.26 -acre infill site, as well as eight single -family affordable housing units on 0.70 acre on a separate property in the c ity in conjunction with, and as a condition of, the 50- townhome development. Mr. Glentis also managed the preparation of supporting technical studies for transportation, air quality/greenhouse gas,
EXPERTISE
• CEQA and NEPA Analyses
• Construction Site Compliance
• Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Programs
• Worker Environmental
Awareness Programs
• Cultural Resources
Management
EDUCATION
B.A., Anthropology (Magna
Cum Laude), Minor in
Business Administration,
California State University,
San Bernardino, 2005
Certificate of
Ethnomusicology, University
of California, Irvine, 2004
PROFESSIONAL
EXPERIENCE
Associate/Senior
Environmental Planner, LSA,
Riverside, California,
November 2015–Present
Professional Environmental
Consulting, Emphasis on
Cultural Resources, 2005–
Present
DIONISIOS GLENTIS
ASSOCIATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER
ROLE: PROJECT MANAGER
2 noise, architectural history and archaeological resources, and biological resources and arboriculture, as well as peer review of Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessment reports prepared by the project applicant. The project is located within the Brackett Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and includes a General Plan Amendment, two Specific Plan Amendments, and a Zone Change. Specific issues addressed in the IS/MND included air quality and greenhouse gas emissions, biological resources, tree removal and preservation, historic architecture, airport land use compatibility, hazardous materials, transportation level of service, noise, utilities, public services, and cumulative impacts. The La Verne Planning C ommission and City Council approved the IS/MND in September 2021 and October 2021, respectively.
City of La Verne, Damien High School Master Plan Update Project La Verne, Los Angeles County, California
Mr. Glentis serve d as Project Manager and author of the IS/MND to update the Damien High School Master Plan. The Master Plan buildout is anticipated over a 10 -year period and would include the construction of a student center, a chapel, a science building, and a performing arts studio totaling approximately 73,000 square feet of new building area within three phases of development on 25.8 acres. Mr. Glentis coordinated the preparation of supporting technical studies (air quality, cultural resources, greenhouse gas, noise, and traf fic) as part of the project. Specific issues addressed include historic properties, noise, air quality, traffic, and hazards and hazardous materials. The La Verne Planning Commission and City Council approved the IS/MND in April 2019 and May 2019, respectively.
City of Claremont, Claremont Commons Specific Plan EIR
Claremont, Los Angeles County, California
Mr. Glentis served as a contributing author of the EIR for the development of 27 single -family homes, 68 townhomes, and 5,000 square feet of commercial uses with 10 second-story residential flats on 9.5 acres in the cities of Claremont and Upland, Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties. The project is located within the Cable Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and includes an amendment to the Claremont General Plan and a Zone Change to accommodate the proposed development.
City of Hemet, Rancho Diamante Phase II Specific Plan Amendment Hemet, Riverside County, California
Mr. Glentis serve d as Project Manager and author of the Subsequent EIR for the development of 586 single - family homes and 100,000 square feet of commercial uses within the Page Ranch Planned Community Development Area (Specific Plan) for the City of Hemet. The project is located within the Hemet-Ryan Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and includes a General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan Amendment, and Zone Change. Specific issues addressed include air quality, biological resources, greenhouse gas emissions, airport land use compatibility, water quality and hydrology, land use and planning, noise, transportation, and utilities.
The Subsequent EIR was certified in June 2021.
City of Fontana, Monarch Hills Residential Project
Fontana, San Bernardino County, California
Mr. Glentis served as a contributing author of the EIR for a 489 -unit, five-neighborhood gated residential development on 136.4 acres north of I-15 along the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains. The project included a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to accommodate the proposed development, as well as the realignment of Lytle Creek Road and the Hawker -Crawford Flood Control Channel. Issues of concern included the project’s compliance with the North Fontana Conservation Program, the site’s proximity to a High Fire Severity Zone, and management of historical resources. The Fontana City Council certified the EIR in February 2019.
AMBARISH MUKHERJEE, PE, AICP
PRINCIPAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNER
ROLE: TRANSPORTATION TASK LEAD
1 PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES
As a Principal and Senior Transportation Planner at LSA’s Riverside office, Mr. Mukherjee specializes in travel demand modeling and public infrastructure projects, and he conducts traffic impact analyses (TIAs) for a wide variety of large and small projects including transit projects, residential development, mixed -use development, commercial and office projects, parking structures, roadway and circulation improvements, and General Plans and Specific Plans. He is currently in charge of LSA’s Riverside Office Transportation Group. Prior to joining LSA, he worked with the Fort Worth Transportation Authority as a Transit Planner.
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
City of La Verne, Fruit Street and Walnut Street CEQA Analysis La Verne, Los Angeles County, California
Mr. Mukherjee served as Transportation Task Manager . Mr. Mukherjee prepared a TIA to evaluate project- related LOS issues and a vehicle miles traveled analysis.
City of La Verne, Brethren Hillcrest Homes Master Plan Update Project La Verne, Los Angeles County, California
Mr. Mukherjee served as Principa l Transportation Planner. The Master Plan Update includes construction of 14 additional attached and detached single-family homes with common area landscaping on 1.7 acres. The project requires an update to Neighborhood 6 of the Master Plan, a Zone Change, General Plan Amendment, Roadway Vacation, Parcel Merger, Precise Plan Review, and Tree Removal Application.
City of Long Beach, Globemaster Corridor Specific Plan Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis
Long Beach, Los Angeles County, California
Mr. Mukherjee was the P roject Manager in charge of preparing a VMT analysis for the Globemaster Corridor Specific Plan (GCSP) Project in Long Beach. The GCSP provides the planning and regulatory framework for guiding future development and attracting quality jobs to the approximately 432.12-acre GCSP area located adjacent to the Long Beach Airport, Interstate 405, and the surrounding residential and business community. The regional (City) VMT per capita for both the base (2012) and future (2040) model scenarios were obtained from the SCAG RTP model runs. The existing (2019) VMT per capita was developed by interpolating between base and future year VMT data obtained from the SCAG RTP model. Project select zone model runs were utilized to develop the project VMT. The project VMT per capita was calculated for both base (2012) and future (2040) model scenarios. The existing (2018) project VMT per capita was developed by interpolating between the base and future year VMT per capita for the project.
City of Adelanto, Adelanto Towne Center
Adelanto, San Bernardino County, California
Mr. Mukherjee prepared a TIA to assess the potential circulation impacts associated with the proposed development of the Adelanto Towne Center.
EXPERTISE
• Traffic Impact Studies
• Pedestrian & Bicycle Planning
• Transit Routing
• Goods Movement
• Transportation Funds & Grants
Management
• GIS Analysis
• Statistical & Analytical Research
EDUCATION
Master of City and Regional
Planning with concentration in
Transportation and Land Use
Planning, and GIS, University of
Texas at Arlington, Texas, 2005
Bachelor of Architecture
(Honors), Indian Institute of
Technology, Kharagpur, India,
2003
PROFESSIONAL
EXPERIENCE
Principal/Senior Transportation
Planner, LSA, Riverside,
California, 2006–Present
Service Planner I, Fort Worth
Transportation Authority, Fort
Worth, Texas, 2005
PROFESSIONAL
CERTIFICATIONS/
REGISTRATIONS
Professional Engineer (California
C88084)
American Institute of Certified
Planners (AICP): Membership
Number 023158
AMBARISH MUKHERJEE, PE, AICP
PRINCIPAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNER
ROLE: TRANSPORTATION TASK LEAD
2 The project consisted of approximately 606,000 square feet of retail uses, which included a 183,600 -square- foot Target store on a site located on the southwest corner of the intersection of U.S. Highway 395 and Mojave Drive. The project was proposed to be completed in two phases , and the TIA included the analysis of 46 intersections.
City of Upland, Citrus Industrial District
Upland, San Bernardino County, California
Mr. Mukherjee coordinated the preparation of a TIA to assess the potential circulation impacts associated with the proposed development of the Citrus Industrial District mixed -use infill development project located on the north side of Eighth Street, east of Euclid Avenue, and west of Campus Avenue. The project lies within the historic conservation district of the City of Upland. It consisted of 732 residential condominiums and 29,000 square feet of commercial space to be built in two phases. Mr. Mukherjee coordinated with the City of Upland to recommend appropriate zoning changes and proposed modifications to the City’s General Plan land use and circulation elements. The TIA included the analysis of 14 intersections and analysis of pedestrian traffic on adjacent roadways due to the proposed development. Mr. Mukherjee analyzed various access issues, which included sight distance analysis and queuing analysis at project driveways based on American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials guidelines.
City of Highland, Harmony Specific Plan
Highland, San Bernardino County, California
Mr. Mukherjee was the primary modeler for the preparation of a TIA for the Harmony Specific Plan. The Specific Plan included approximately 3,800 single -family residences, associated public infrastructure, an elementary school, and various retail pads. The primary objective of the analysis was to define a circulation system that supported the development anticipated in the Specific Plan and identification and implementation of transportation mitigation. As part of this project, Mr. Mukherjee developed a sub-area model for the City of Highland and incorporated multiple project alternatives into the model, which aided in preparation of the Circulation Needs Assessment for the project.
City of Laguna Niguel, Laguna Niguel Town Center Modeling and VMT Analysis Laguna Niguel, Orange County, California
Mr. Mukherjee was the Project Manager and prepared a VMT analysis using the Orange County Traffic Analysis Model (OCTAM) for a mixed-use development that consists of 275 multifamily dwelling units, 54,410 square feet of office use, and 79,920 square feet of retail uses. Three separate select zone runs were created to separate out the VMT for the three different land uses. As part of this analysis, the project was compared to the regional VMT obtained from OCTAM.
Monarch Hills Residential Development EIR
Fontana, San Bernardino County, California
Mr. Mukherjee served as T ask Manager for preparing the TIA for this project. LSA prepared an EIR and technical studies for a residential development consisting of five gated residential neighborhoods, two private parks, a private recreation building and pool, trails, and water quality basins on 136.4 acres located at the northeast corner of Lytle Creek Road and Duncan Canyon Road. Included in the project was a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to accommodate the proposed development. The undeveloped site is located within the City of Fontana’s High Fire Severity Zone. The project also included the relocation of Lytle Creek Road and the San Bernardino County Hawker -Crawford Flood Control Channel. Issues of high concern include the project’s compliance with the City’s North Fontana Conservation Program. The EIR was certified and the project approved in February 2019.
STANLEY C. SPENCER, Ph.D.
ASSOCIATE BIOLOGIST, BOTANIST, CERTIFIED ARBORIST
ROLE: BIOLOGY TASK LEAD
1 PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES
As the certified arborist and botanical specialist for LSA’s Riverside office, Dr. Spencer is primarily responsible for arborist reports, rare plant surveys, floristic inventories, vegetation mapping, and vernal pool assessments and mapping. Additional responsibilities include wetland delineations, biological resources assessments, habitat suitability assessments, and focused sensitive insect, fairy shrimp, reptile, bird, and mammal species surveys.
General biological resources assessments have included biological/wetland evaluations at macrocell communication sites throughout Southern California and Southern Nevada; writing of the Biological portion of the Existing Settings report for the Riverside County General Plan; and habitat assessments, surveys, and technical reports for Riverside County’s Community Environmental and Transportation Acceptability Program and Mid County Parkway Project. Dr. Spencer has conducted focused plant and animal surveys for over 100 projects throughout Southern California. Animal survey species have included Palm Springs round- tailed ground squirrel, California gnatcatcher, least Bell’s vireo, burrowing owl, Coachella Valley fringe -toed lizard, desert tortoise, Delhi sands flower- loving fly, Quino checker spot butterfly, Crotch bumble bee, tiger beetles, and sensitive fairy shrimp species.
Prior to his employment with LSA, Dr. Spencer assisted the United States Geological Survey as a consultant in botanical studies in N orthern Arizona.
While at the Claremont Graduate University, Dr. Spencer studied vernal pool ecosystems, flora of the western Mojave Desert, and the plant genus Navarretia.
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
City of La Verne, Brethren Hillcrest Homes Master Plan Update La Verne, California
Dr. Spencer provided an arborist report and reviewed mitigation measures for protected trees on the project site.
City of Fontana, Fontana Garden Senior Housing Complex
Fontana, California
Dr. Spencer conducted habitat assessments and a general biological study for this housing project.
City of Fontana, Mango Villas
Fontana, California
Dr. Spencer conducted habitat assessments, a general biological study, and a tree inventory for compliance with the City of Fontana’s tree ordinance.
Town of Apple Valley, Apple Valley Residential
San Bernardino County, California
Dr. Spencer assisted with an inventory of over 800 Joshua trees, Mohave yuccas, and chollas on this 249- acre residential development site for compliance with California’s Desert Native Plants Act.
EXPERTISE
• Sensitive Species Habitat
Suitability Assessments
• Sensitive Species Focused
Surveys
• Biological Resources
Assessments
• Tree Inventories and
Assessments
• Botanical Inventories
• Vegetation Mapping
• Wetland Delineations
EDUCATION
Ph.D., Botany, Claremont
Graduate University,
Claremont, California, 1997
B.S., Botany (Cum Laude),
Brigham Young University,
Provo, Utah, 1991
PROFESSIONAL
EXPERIENCE
Associate/Senior Biologist/
Botanist, LSA, Riverside,
California, 1999–Present
Research Associate, University
of Maryland, Smithsonian
Institution, 1996–1998
Research Associate, Rancho
Santa Ana Botanic Garden,
1991–1996
PROFESSIONAL
CERTIFICATIONS/
REGISTRATIONS
International Society of
Arboriculture, Certified
Arborist, No. WE-9358A
STANLEY C. SPENCER, Ph.D.
ASSOCIATE BIOLOGIST, BOTANIST, CERTIFIED ARBORIST
ROLE: BIOLOGY TASK LEAD
2 A Natural High, Inc., Rancho Esqui Lago Estates
San Diego, California
Dr. Spencer conducted a focused Quino checkerspot butterfly survey for this residential development project.
Woodcrest Homes, Inc., Stonecrest
San Diego County (Ramona Area), California
Dr. Spencer conducted focused Quino checkerspot butterfly surveys for this residential development project.
City of Upland, Upland Hills Country Club Residential Project Upland, California
Dr. Spencer conducted an arborist study for this residential project, including identification, mapping, measuring, and assessing the health of 359 ornamental trees on an active golf course.
City of Fontana, Fire Station No. 73
Fontana, California
As a certified arborist, Dr. Spencer conducted a health assessment on a protected tree to assess suitability for transplanting.
Tehachapi Renewable Transmission Project
Los Angeles and Kern Counties, California
Dr. Spencer was the principal botanist for the focused plant surveys for the biological surveys and construction monitoring for this Southern California Edison 80 -linear mile (three segments) 500 -kilovolt transmission line project. He also assisted with surveys for desert tortoise and American badger, and with construction monitoring.
Caltrans, I-710 Corridor
Los Angeles County, California
Dr. Spencer conducted habitat assessments and surveys for rare plant species and assisted with a wetland delineation along I-710.
Caltrans District 7, On-Call Environmental Services
Los Angeles County, California
Dr. Spencer conducted a focused survey for sensitive tiger beetle species within coastal habitat at the SR-103/SR-1 interchange.
SCE On-Call Services
Kern, Los Angeles, Tulare, San Bernardino, and Riverside Counties, California Dr. Spencer conducted habitat assessments, focused sensitive species surveys, pre -construction surveys, and construction monitoring at deteriorated pole replacement sites.
Jurupa Ranch Industrial Use Project
Fontana, California
Dr. Spencer assisted with a tree inventory and assessment on this 40-acre development site for compliance with the City of Fontana’s tree ordinance. Assessments were conducted for 397 trees.
City of Fontana, Lake Creek Industrial Boyle West Warehouse Project and the Lake Creek Industrial Boyle East Warehouse
Fontana, California
Dr. Spencer conducted an inventory of 97 trees and arborist evaluation of 21 Heritage Trees for compliance with the City of Fontana’s tree ordinance.
CASEY TIBBET
ASSOCIATE HISTORIAN / ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN
ROLE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TASK LEAD
1 PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES
Ms. Tibbet has been practicing architectural history in S outhern California since 1997, first as part of her responsibilities as a city planner and later (2005) as a full-time architectural historian. She meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards as a Historian and Architectural Historian and has extensive experience with field recording/survey work; historic research; oral intervi ews; and preparation of historic context statements, significance evaluations, DPR 523 forms, and cultural resources reports in compliance with CEQA and NEPA regulations, Caltrans requirements for CEQA and NEPA, and USACE requirements for NEPA . She has also written cultural resources ordinances. Ms. Tibbet has worked as the on -call preservation consultant for various cities and has surveyed and evaluated thousands of built environment resources including water conveyance systems, railroad lines, roadways, fairgrounds, and buildings in rural and urban settings and has authored or contributed to hundreds of cultural resources reports. As a city planner, s he was responsible for completion of Community Development Block Grant environmental reviews in compliance with HUD, NEPA, and Section 106 requirements.
Ms. Tibbet’s 13 years of experience as a city planner for the City of Riverside also included processing of development applications and code amendments per CEQA regulations; EIR and EIS reviews; preparation of specific plans and the Housing Element; and participation in numerous planning- related special projects committees involving a wide variety of stakeholders. She also has considerable public counter experience.
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Catholic Archdiocese, Damien High School Master Plan Mitigated Negative Declaration
La Verne, Los Angeles County, California
LSA prepared an Initial Study in support of an MND to update the Damien High School Master Plan. LSA also prepared supporting technical studies in the fields of air quality and greenhouse gas emissions, cultural resources, noise and vibration, and traffic as part of the project. The school was previously evaluated as historically significant; therefore, Ms. Tibbet reviewed the preliminary conceptual site plan and building designs and completed an Impacts Assessment using the Secretary of the Interior’s Stan dards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (Rehabilitation).
National Community Renaissance, La Sierra (Affordable Housing) Apartments
Riverside, Riverside County, California
Ms. Tibbet conducted the archival research and intensive -level field surveys and evaluated several historic-period properties in compliance with CEQA for this proposed affordable housing development. One building was evaluated as significant under the City ’s preservation ordinance as a good example of Mid-Century Modern architecture as applied to a commercial property.
EXPERTISE
• Project Management
• Historic Preservation Planning
• Field Survey/Recording
• Historic Research
• CEQA/NEPA Evaluations and
Compliance
• Caltrans Compliance
• USACE Compliance
• Findings of Effect
• National Register Nominations
• Historic Preservation
Certification Part 1 and 2 Tax
Credit Applications
• City Planning
EDUCATION
M.A., History (Historic
Preservation), University of
California, Riverside, 2005
B.A., Political Science,
University of California,
Riverside, 1987
PROFESSIONAL
EXPERIENCE
Associate and Cultural
Resources Group Leader, LSA,
Riverside, California, 2005–
Present
Historian/Architectural
Historian, CRM TECH,
Riverside, California, 2003–
2005
Associate Planner, City of
Riverside, Riverside,
California, 1990–2003
CASEY TIBBET
ASSOCIATE HISTORIAN / ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN
ROLE: CULTURAL RESOURCES TASK LEAD
2 LND Management, Inc., Historic Resources Assessment, Huntley Drive Properties West Hollywood, Los Angeles County, California
Ms. Tibbet was the Project Manager for the historic resources assessment of three multifamily properties, each developed with two one-story buildings. The assessment included archival research, field surveys, significance evaluations using the California Register of Historical Resources and local criteria, and preparation of DPR 523 forms and the historic resources assessment report. The report was completed in compliance with CEQA.
Integrity Housing, The Commons Commercial Historic Restoration & Residential Project Riverside, Riverside County, California
LSA prepared a cultural resources assessment for the proposed adaptive reuse of a historically significant gas station building as a restaurant, construction of a new building, parking, and outdoor dining areas on the gas station property, and development of the adjacent vacant area with two five -story multifamily buildings and related parking. The project area is within the Downtown Specific Plan and is adjacent to the locally designated Heritage Square Historic District. Ms. Tibbet completed an Impacts Assessment for the adaptive re use project using the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and assessed potential impacts to the historic district from the proposed new construction.
City of Fontana, Transwestern Boyle Avenue Buildings
Fontana, San Bernardino County, California
Ms. Tibbet completed archival research, an intensive -level field survey, and documentation and evaluation of two historic-period buildings in the project area. The project was completed in compliance with CEQA as part of the City’s environmental review process.
City of Whittier, Residential Historic Resources Surveys Whittier, Los Angeles County, California
In partnership with Chattel Architecture, Planning, and Preservation, Inc. , LSA completed two intensive -level surveys of 1,540 historic- period residential properties in Whittier. The team photographed the properties, prepared descriptions for the properties, and conducted property- specific research on intact properties that appeared to be significant. Each of the surveyed properties was documented and evaluated under the provisions of Section 106, CEQA, and the City of Whittier Historic Resources Ordinance. California Historical Resources status codes were assigned to each property according to level of significance. In addition, the team updated the City’s historic contex t statement. A survey report was prepared that included project methodology and results, regulatory information, a historic context, evaluation criteria, recommendations, tables, and DPR forms.
City of Redlands Safety Hall and Courthouse Demolition
Redlands, San Bernardino County, California
Under contract to the City of Redlands, LSA prepared an IS/MND and technical studies for the demolition of the on-site Safety Hall and Courthouse buildings located at 212 and 216 Brookside Avenue , respectively, and General Plan and Zoning amendments to facilitate future development. As part of this process, Ms. Tibbet co - authored the cultural resources assessment and evaluated the property for historical significance using the California Register of Historical Resources and local criteria.
Various, Documentation Process
Arcadia, Los Angeles County, California
Ms. Tibbet is responsible for supervising the field surveys and property -specific research for documentation of properties in Arcadia that are proposed for demolition. These projects are sponsored by private clients, but documentation is required by the City for compliance with CEQA. As part of this process, LSA reviews the 2016 Citywide Historic Resources Survey and prepares DPR Primary Records, Building, Structure, and Object Records, and Location Maps, as well as a cover memorandum for each property proposed for demolition. When appropriate, LSA also makes recommendations.
RONALD T. BRUGGER
SENIOR AIR QUALITY SPECIALIST
ROLE: AIR QUALITY TASK LEAD
1 PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES
Mr. Brugger is a Senior Air Quality and Health Risk Specialist at LSA with over 32 years of experience conducting air quality, climate change, and health risk studies for CEQA and NEPA as well as environmental compliance with California and federal air quality regulations. He has provided expert testimony at public hearings in addition to providing third- party review of environmental documents in support of local governments and environmental attorneys. His direct experience with all industry -standard environmental models ensures a thorough analysis using the best analysis methodology.
Mr. Brugger is extremely proficient conducting air pollutant emissions inventories, air pollutant dispersion modeling, health risk assessments, conformity/consistency analyses, and global climate change analyses for high profile and highly contentious projects. He is experienced with numerous air quality emissions inventory and air pollutant dispersion models ( e.g., AERMOD, AERSCREEN, HARP2, CalEEMod, EMFAC, CT-EMFAC, CAL-CET). He contributes energy efficiency, sustainability, and global climate change impact analysis expertise to development of the Energy and Sustainability environmental sections of documentation for residential, commercial, and industrial development projects a s well as roadway improvement projects.
Mr. Brugger has conducted many quantitative he alth risk assessments of project emissions of toxic air contaminants and the health risks to nearby residents and other sensitive receptors.
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
WRT, LLC, Folsom State Recreation Area Project
Folsom, California
Mr. Brugger conducted air quality modeling of emissions from construction operations, including equipment, fugitive dust, and architectural coatings, and long-term operations, including a health risk assessment and a CO hot -spot analysis. He also incorporated all the modeling results in an air quality impact study that discussed existing conditions, applicable regulations, project impacts, cumulative impacts, and mitigation measures.
BPI Brea LLC, Brea Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Brea, California
Mr. Brugger served as Project Manager for this project, overseeing the preparation of air quality and noise technical reports. Mr. Brugger prepared the air quality/GHG technical study and an energy impact study for the project, which includes the development of a building for residential and retail uses in Brea. The analysis included CalEEMod modeling of construction and operational emissions of criteria pollutants and GHGs. Mr. Brugger also conducted a localized significance threshold analysis.
Shea Homes, Alton/Murphy Condos Project
Irvine, California
Mr. Brugger conducted air quality modeling of emissions from construction operations, including equipment, fugitive dust, and architectural coatings, and long-term operations, including a health risk assessment and a CO hot -spot analysis. He also incorporated all the modeling results in an air quality impact
EXPERTISE
• Air Quality, GHG, and Energy
Analyses, Human Health Risk
Assessment
• Air Dispersion Modeling
• Noise Modeling
• Regulatory Analysis
EDUCATION
B.S., Mechanical Engineering,
University of Wisconsin,
Madison, 1983
PROFESSIONAL
EXPERIENCE
Senior Air Quality and Health
Risk Specialist, LSA, Irvine,
California, 2003–Present
Air Quality and Health Risk
Specialist, TRC Companies,
Inc., Southern California,
1992–2003
Senior Software Engineer,
BDM International, Inc.,
Southern California, 1985–
1992
Missile Systems Analyst and
Systems Expert, Fleet Analysis
Center, Department of the
Navy, Southern California,
1983–1985
SPECIALIZED
TRAINING
Air Dispersion Modeling
Workshop and AERMOD
Course, Lakes Environmental,
2016, 2007
RONALD T. BRUGGER
SENIOR AIR QUALITY SPECIALIST
ROLE: AIR QUALITY TASK LEAD
2 study that discussed existing conditions, applicable regulations, project impacts, cumulative impacts, and mitigation measures.
City of Rolling Hills Estates, Peninsula Village Program Rolling Hills Estates, California
Mr. Brugger conducted air quality modeling of emissions from construction operations, including equipment, fugitive dust, and architectural coatings, and long-term operations, including a health risk assessment and a CO hot-spot analysis. He also incorporated all the modeling results in an air quality impact study that discussed existing conditions, applicable regulations, project impacts, cumulative impacts, and mitigation measures.
Rancho Las Flores Group, Inc., Rancho Las Flores Project Hesperia, California
Mr. Brugger conducted air quality modeling of emissions from construction operations, including equipment, fugitive dust, and architectural coatings, and long-term operations, including a health risk assessment and a CO hot-spot analysis. He also incorporated all the modeling results in an air quality impact study that discussed existing conditions, applicable regulations, project impacts, cumulative impacts, and mitigation measures.
Tri Pointe Homes, Countryside Residential Project
Menifee, California
Mr. Brugger conducted air quality modeling of emissions from construction operations, including equipment, fugitive dust, and architectural coatings, and long-term operations, including a health risk assessment and a CO hot-spot analysis. He also incorporated all the modeling results in an air quality impact study that discussed existing conditions, applicable regulations, project impacts, cumulative impacts, and mitigation measures.
Koleman Real Estate Companies, LLC, Kilroy Residential Project Irvine, California
Mr. Brugger conducted air quality modeling of emissions from construction operations, including equipment, fugitive dust, and architectural coatings, and long-term operations, including a health risk assessment and a CO hot-spot analysis. He also incorporated all the modeling results in an air quality impact study that discussed existing conditions, applicable regulations, project impacts, cumulative impacts, and mitigation measures.
Laing Homes, La Habra Homes Project
La Habra, California
Mr. Brugger conducted air quality modeling of emissions from construction operations, including equipment, fugitive dust, and architectural coatings, and long-term operations, including a health risk assessment and a CO hot-spot analysis. He also incorporated all the modeling results in an air quality impact study that discussed existing conditions, applicable regulations, project impacts, cumulative impacts, and mitigation measures.
The Madison Collection, Madison Courtyard Apartments Project Pasadena, California
Mr. Brugger served as Project Manager for this project, overseeing the preparation of air quality and noise technical reports. Mr. Brugger prepared the air quality/GHG technical study for the project, which includes the development of an apartment building in Pasadena. The analysis included CalEEMod modeling of construction and operational emissions of criteria pollutants and GHGs. Mr. Brugger also conducted a localized significance threshold analysis.
USA Multifamily Development, Lancaster 3 Residential Project Lancaster, California
Mr. Brugger prepared an air quality/GHG technical study for the Lancaster 3 Residential Project , a residential community that included 264 new apartment homes in Lancaster. The analysis included CalEEMod modeling of construction and operational emissions of criteria pollutants and GHGs. Mr. Brugger also conducted a localized significance threshold analysis.
JASON LUI
ASSOCIATE NOISE SPECIALIST
ROLE: NOISE TASK LEAD
1 PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES
Mr. Lui is a n Associate/Senior Noise Specialist at LSA with over 20 years of experience in environmental studies, specializing in noise and vibration analysis. He is responsible for preparing noise and vibration studies in accordance with procedures specified by State and local guidelines, as well as protocols for a variety of commercial, residential, industrial, and transportation projects. He is proficient in the use of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA RD-77- 108), Traffic Noise Model (TNM) 2.5 , MicroStation, and GIS. He is also responsible for conducting noise level measurements using a variety of Larson Davis sound level meters.
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
City of La Verne, Brethren Hillcrest Homes Master Plan Update Project La Verne, California
Mr. Lui prepared a Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis memorandum for the Brethren Hillcrest Homes Master Plan Update. The project would update the Brethren Hillcrest Homes (Hillcrest) Master Plan. Hillcrest consists of 229 residential homes and apartments, 48 assisted living units, 24 dementia beds, and 74 skilled nursing facility beds. The project includes development of 14 additional attached and detached single -family homes with common area landscaping on 1.7 acres . Each dwelling unit will be one story with two bedrooms, two baths, and a two-car garage built around a central courtyard.
City of La Verne, Brandywine Homes Project
La Verne, California
Mr. Lui prepar ed the Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis memorandum for the development of 50 attached, interlocking townhomes on 2.258 acres at 3717 Fruit Street and eight detached single-family affordable housing units on
0.702 acre at 1874, 1876, and 1878 Walnut Street. For the Fruit Street site, one single-family residential dwelling unit would be demolished.
City of La Verne, Damien High School Master Plan Update Project La Verne, California
Mr. Lui prepared a Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis report for the Damien High School Master Plan Update. The Master Plan Update would demolish the existing 5,972 -square-foot cafeteria facility, construct four new buildings totaling approximately 73,100 square feet of building space, and make several alterations to select hardscaped areas and parking lots ( a net increase of 67,128 s quare feet). The development was based on the need to fulfill a current demand for additional academic space and student services, as the high school is not projecting an increase in students or faculty throughout the life of the Master Plan.
Montclair Senior Living Project
Montclair, California
Mr. Lui prepar ed the noise section in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Montclair Senior Living Project in Montclair . The project would construct an 84,000-square-foot, 140 -unit senior/assisted/memory care facility . The project included the demolition of 30,000 square feet of existing medical office space and the subsequent phased development of two three -story buildings. The project was unanimously approved and the IS/MND was adopted by the City in June 2019.
EXPERTISE
• Noise and Vibration Analysis
EDUCATION
M.S., Environmental Studies,
California State University,
Fullerton, 2014
B.A., Environmental Analysis
and Design, University of
California, Irvine, 2002
PROFESSIONAL
EXPERIENCE
Associate/Senior Noise
Specialist, LSA, Irvine,
California, September 2002–
Present
PROFESSIONAL
CERTIFICATIONS/
REGISTRATIONS
Environmental Management
Certification, University of
California, Irvine
Federal Highway
Administration Traffic Noise
Model 2.5, Bowlby &
Associates, Inc., Franklin,
Tennessee
JASON LUI
ASSOCIATE NOISE SPECIALIST
ROLE: NOISE TASK LEAD
2 Trammel Crow Residential, Alexan Montclair Project
Montclair, California
Mr. Lui prepared the Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis report for the Alexan Montclair Project in Montclair.
The project would construct 211 residential units on a 6.27-acre site and provide street access for the new development. The new lots would range in size from 0.57 to 1.91 acres, arranged around the “L”-shaped public street located roughly in the center of the site. The new public street would link to both Arrow Highway and Monte Vista Avenue. In addition, the project would include a 0.24-acre private park.
Trammel Crow Residential, Montclair Station Project
Montclair, California
Mr. Lui prepared the Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis report for the Montclair Station Project. The project would construct a 302-unit residential apartment, which would consist of three- and four-story buildings. There are a total of four different res idential building types and four different leasing/amenity building types with a mix of residential dwelling units ranging from studios to three-bedroom townhomes. The project would provide a total of 531 parking spaces and construct an average 6- foot-high retaining wall along the west project boundary and partially along the southern project boundary. In addition, the project would extend Huntington Drive from the intersection at Claremont Boulevard and construct a new intersection at Monte Vista Avenue/Richton Street to access the project site.
Trammel Crow Residential, Montclair Kendry Expansion Project Montclair, California
Mr. Lui prepared the Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis report for the Montclair Kendry Expansion Project.
The project would construct a four -story 137-unit residential project and would include amenities, a leasing office, and a one-story partially submerged parking garage with 240 parking spaces. Residential dwelling units range from studios to two-bedroom townhomes.
First Industrial, First Elm Logistics Warehouse Project Fontana, California
Mr. Lui prepared a Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis memorandum for the demolition of 2,090 (+/-) square feet of existing on -site residential structures along with gravel and pavement areas and the construction and operation of an approximately 85,219 -square-foot high-cube warehouse on 5.13 acres located at 10407 Elm Avenue in Fontana . The project includes 5,000 square feet of office uses split between the first and second floors.
City of Menifee, River Walk Village Project
Menifee, California
Mr. Lui prepared the Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis memorandum for the development of 198 detached single-family residential units and common areas. The residential units would consist of four two- story floor plans, ranging in size from 1,716 square feet (Plan 1) to 1,864 square feet (Plan 4). Each unit would include a two-car garage and private back yard space. Solar panels will be installed on every residence , and all house electrical panels will be sized to accommodate future electric charging units in the individual private garages (200-amp panels). The individual residence solar power systems will each have a DC rating of 4.10 kilowatts (KW), an AC rating of 2.80 KW, and an AC output current of 11.7 amps. The common area includes a 2,800- square-foot recreational building with a kitchenette and bathroom. Other common areas include a swimming pool and two tot lots on 14.31 gross acres. The recreation building will also be equipped with solar power generation to assist in common area electrical needs. Public electric vehicle charging stations will also be placed near the recreation building.
24 | Page
Appendix B: Cost Proposal Detail
10/1/2024; Revised 10/3/2024
$235 $200 $135 $265 $180 $160 $295 $190 $260 $190 $160 $160 $130 $125 $ Task 1 Project Initiation
1.1 Project Kick-off Meeting 4 4 $0 $800
1.2 Project Description 1 8 16 25 $0 $3,995
1 1 2 1 6 00000000000 2 9 $ 0 $ 4 , 7 9 5
Task 2 Technical Studies/Reports
2.1 Literature Search, Habitat Assessment, and Arborist Report 4 62 8 4 78 $50 $12,570
2.2 Architectural History Assessment 2 2 40 3 2 49 $40 $9,300
2.3 Noise and Vibration Assessment 4 3 38 3 3 51 $455 $9,000
2.4 Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Assessment 24 5 4 1 5 66 $10 $12,000
2.5 Transportation Study/Vehicle Miles Traveled Assessment 10 60 160 20 13 263 $1,010 $56,000 0 22 0 7 54 38 60 160 2 40 62 35 27 0 507 $1,565 $98,870 Task 3 Initial Study
3.1 Administrative Draft Initial Study 12 40 80 2 2 2 2 1 2 8 8 159 $0 $26,100
3.2 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 2 4 1 7 $0 $1,070 1 2 4 2 8 4 02222012890 1 6 6 $ 0 $27,170
Task 4 Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.1 IS/MND Public Review Materials 2 8 8 1 4 4 27 $500 $4,830
4.2 Response to Public Comments 60 60 $0 $12,000
4.3 Final IS/MND and Notice of Determination 2 16 16 1 4 39 $500 $6,960 4 8 4 2 4 00000000158 1 2 6 $ 1 , 0 0 0 $23,790
Task 5 Project Management and Meetings
5.1 Project Management 4 30 1 4 1 1 41 $50 $8,855
5.2 Meetings and Public Hearings 32 32 $100 $6,500
4 6 2 010040101000 7 3 $150 $15,355
21 222 124 8 56 40 66 162 3 41 65 44 41 8 901 $2,715 $169,980 $169,980
Transporation Planner
LSA
Task Fee
Task 2 Technical Studies/Reports Subtotal
Task 3 Initial Study Subtotal
Task 5 Project Management and Meetings Subtotal
Principal Transporation
Principal Cultural
Resources
Architectural Historian
Biologist/Arborist
Hourly Rate
Total LSA Hours
Principal-in-Charge
Enviornmental Planner
Principal Air
Quality/Noise
Option A
Lutheran High School Residential
Development (3960 Fruit Street) Project
Task 1 Project Initiation Subtotal
Associate Planner
Air Quality Specialist
Noise Spcialist
Graphics/GIS Technican
Editing/Word Processing
Office Assistant
Expenses
Task 4 Mitigated Negative Declaration Subtotal
Total
10/1/2024
$235 $200 $135 $265 $180 $160 $295 $190 $260 $190 $160 $160 $130 $125 $ Task 1 Project Initiation
1.1 Project Kick-off Meeting 4 4$ 0 $ 8 0 0
1.2 Project Description 1 8 16 25 $0 $3,995
1 1 2 1 6 00000000000 2 9 $ 0 $ 4 , 7 9 5
Task 2 Technical Studies/Reports
2.1 Peer Review Biological Resources Assessment & Arborist Report 48 2 50 $0 $7,940
2.2 Peer Review Architectural History Assessment 28 2 30 $0 $5,580
2.3 Peer Review Noise and Vibration Assessment 20 2 22 $0 $3,460
2.4 Peer Review Air Quality, GHG, & Energy Assessment 25 2 27 $0 $4,760
2.5 Peer Review Transportation Study and VMT Analysis 20 2 22 $0 $4,060 0 0 0 0 25 20 0 20 0 28 48 0 10 0 151 $0 $25,800
Task 3 Initial Study
3.1 Administrative Draft Initial Study 12 40 80 2 2 2 2 2 2 8 8 160 $0 $26,290
3.2 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 2 4 1 7 $0 $1,070 1 2 4 2 8 4 02222022890 1 6 7 $ 0 $27,360
Task 4 Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.1 IS/MND Public Review Materials 2 8 8 1 4 4 27 $500 $4,830
4.2 Response to Public Comments 60 60 $0 $12,000
4.3 Final IS/MND and Notice of Determination 2 16 16 1 4 39 $500 $6,960 4 8 4 2 4 00000000158 1 2 6 $ 1 , 0 0 0 $23,790
Task 5 Project Management and Meetings
5.1 Project Management 4 30 1 4 1 1 41 $50 $8,855
5.2 Meetings and Public Hearings 32 32 $100 $6,500
4 6 2 010040101000 7 3 $150 $15,355
21 200 124 1 27 22 6 22 1 30 51 9 24 8 546 $1,150 $97,100 $97,100
Transporation Planner
LSA
Task Fee
Task 2 Technical Studies/Reports Subtotal
Task 3 Initial Study Subtotal
Task 5 Project Management and Meetings Subtotal
Principal Transporation
Principal Cultural
Resources
Architectural Historian
Biologist/Arborist
Hourly Rate
Total LSA Hours
Principal-in-Charge
Enviornmental Planner
Principal Air
Quality/Noise
Option B (Peer Review)
Lutheran High School Residential
Development (3960 Fruit Street) Project
Task 1 Project Initiation Subtotal
Associate Planner
Air Quality Specialist
Noise Spcialist
Graphics/GIS Technican
Editing/Word Processing
Office Assistant
Expenses
Task 4 Mitigated Negative Declaration Subtotal
Total
www.lsa.net
EXHIBIT C
FEE SCHEDULE
EXHIBIT D
PROJECT SCHEDULE
City of La Verne,City Council
Agenda Report
DATE: October 21, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Christy Lopez, Finance Director
SUBJECT: CITY OF LA VERNE TREASURER'S REPORT FOR QUARTER ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2024
SUMMARY
The Treasurer’s Report for quarter ending September 30, 2024, is submitted for City Council to receive and file per City of La Verne Administrative Regulation Number 215, the Statement of Investment Policy, and the State of California’s Government Code (GC) Section 53646.
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council receive and file the Treasurer’s Report for the quarter ending September 30, 2024.
DISCUSSION
The attached Treasurer’s Report is provided to the City Council per the City of La Verne Administrative Regulation Number 215, Investment Policy, and as provided under the State of California’s Government Code (GC) Section 53646. GC 53646 provides that a quarterly report (or monthly if legislatively elected) may be submitted to the City Council on a quarterly basis.
This report details cash and investments held by the City, a statement that the portfolio complies with the Investment Policy and confirms the City’s ability to meet pooled expenditure requirements for the next three months.
As of September 30, 2024, the City had total cash and invested funds (cost basis) of $109,800,135. Of this amount, $18,141,516 is held in a fiduciary capacity for the Los Angeles Interagency Metropolitan Police Apprehension Taskforce (LA IMPACT), which leaves the remainder of $91,658,619 held with the City. In addition, the City also has $2,818,291 that is held outside the treasury by a fiscal agent to meet the 1996 Revenue Bond covenant. The City’s portfolio is fully liquid; 6.17% ($6,776,619) is maintained in on-demand accounts, including those held by the State Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF).
The investment portfolio conforms to the City’s investment policy and sufficient money is available to meet City obligations due within the next six months.
FISCAL ANALYSIS
Not applicable.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Not applicable.
LEGAL REVIEW
City of La Verne Treasurer's Report for Quarter Ending September 30, 2024, Page 2
Not applicable.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Treasurer Report Tables for September 30, 2024
Report Prepared By:
Isabella Guzman, Senior Accountant
Par Value
Coupon
Rate
Moody's/
S&P Rating
Purchase
Date
Maturity/
Called Date
Days to
Maturity
Yield to
Maturity Cost Basis Market Value
On Call Deposits
Treasurer Checking Account - US Bank US Bank 1,901,795 N/A N/A N/A Demand N/A None 1,901,795 1,901,795 LA Impact - US Bank US Bank 2,528,640 N/A N/A N/A Demand N/A None 2,528,640 2,528,640 PFA La Verne Mobile Country Club (Payments)WFB Wells Fargo 223,648 N/A N/A N/A Demand N/A None 223,648 223,648 PFA La Verne Mobile Country Club (Rents) WFB Wells Fargo 27,273 N/A N/A N/A Demand N/A None 27,273 27,273 PFA Valley Rancho Mobile Home Park WFB Wells Fargo 244,771 N/A N/A N/A Demand N/A None 244,771 244,771 Local Agency Investment Fund - City LAIF 4,075,839 N/A N/A N/A Demand N/A 4.00% 4,075,839 4,075,839 Local Agency Investment Fund - LA IMPACT LAIF 29,810 N/A N/A N/A Demand N/A 4.00% 29,810 29,810 Charles Shwab Money Market - LA IMPACT Investments 15,583,065 N/A N/A N/A Demand N/A Market 15,583,065 15,583,065 Charles Shwab Bank Sweep Investments 249,000 N/A N/A N/A Demand N/A Market 249,000 249,000 Charles Shwab Premier Bank Sweep Investments 54,293 N/A N/A N/A Demand N/A Market 54,293 54,293 On-Call Deposits 24,918,135 $ 24,918,135 $ 24,918,135 $ Investment Type Bank Security Name Par Value
Coupon
Rate
Moody's/
S&P Rating
Purchase
Date
Maturity/
Called Date
Days to
Maturity
Yield to
Maturity Cost Basis Market Value
Short-Term Investments (1 year or less)
Municipal Bonds Charles Schwab RIVERSIDE CN CA 255,000 4.910% AA2 04/19/2022 02/15/2025 138 3.86% 256,302 255,602 U.S. Treasury Charles Schwab US TREASURY 2,000,000 NA 02/21/2024 01/23/2025 115 5.00% 1,911,965 1,971,975 CDs Charles Schwab ISRAEL DISCOUNT 244,000 4.85% NA 11/17/2022 11/25/2024 56 4.84% 244,000 243,975 Total Short-Term Investments 2,499,000 $ 2,412,267 $ 2,471,552 $ Long-Term Investments (2 to 5 years)
Agency Securities Charles Schwab FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 3,500,000 2.750% AAA 05/01/2024 03/25/2027 906 5.01% 3,288,450 3,410,089 Agency Securities Charles Schwab FHLB 1,000,000 2.500% AAA 02/16/2022 03/10/2027 891 2.50% 1,000,000 970,311 Agency Securities Charles Schwab FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 1,000,000 3.000% AAA 03/24/2022 04/21/2027 933 3.00% 1,000,000 978,438 Agency Securities Charles Schwab FARM CREDIT SYSTEM 2,000,000 1.000% AAA 02/27/2024 10/07/2026 737 4.65% 1,822,345 1,890,646 Agency Securities Charles Schwab FHLB 3,000,000 1.040% AA+ 09/05/2024 06/04/2027 977 5.00% 2,795,440 2,796,465 Agency Securities Charles Schwab FFCB 3,500,000 1.440% aAA 09/06/2024 01/31/2028 1,218 3.60% 3,299,110 3,288,796 Agency Securities Charles Schwab FFCB 3,500,000 1.500% Aaa 09/05/2024 06/04/2027 977 3.68% 3,248,010 3,248,543 Municipal Bonds Charles Schwab BARSTOW CALIF P 225,000 3.746% A+ 04/14/2022 06/01/2026 609 3.49% 226,062 222,903 Mortgage Pools Charles Schwab FHLMC ZK8379 7,500,000 2.500% NA 02/13/2024 11/01/2031 2,588 1,512,672 1,555,226 Mortgage Pools Charles Schwab FHLMC ZS8632 7,500,000 2.500% NA 02/09/2024 12/01/2031 2,618 1,395,193 1,429,903 Mortgage Pools Charles Schwab FNMA PL FS0533 2,600,000 2.000% NA 02/14/2024 02/01/2032 2,680 1,495,641 1,538,606 Mortgage Pools Charles Schwab FNMA PL MA4530 2,600,000 1.500% NA 02/14/2024 02/01/2032 2,680 1,523,488 1,579,846 U.S. Treasury Charles Schwab US TREASU NT 1,500,000 3.875% NA 02/22/2024 11/30/2027 1,156 4.41% 1,471,900 1,513,125 U.S. Treasury Charles Schwab US TREASU NT 2,500,000 3.625% NA 02/22/2024 05/31/2028 1,339 4.37% 2,918,546 3,004,688 U.S. Treasury Charles Schwab US TREASU NT 2,500,000 4.625% NA 02/22/2024 09/30/2028 1,461 4.35% 2,730,714 2,804,625 U.S. Treasury Charles Schwab US TREASUR NT 2,000,000 4.000% NA 02/21/2024 01/15/2027 837 4.41% 1,977,681 2,016,562 U.S. Treasury Charles Schwab US TREASUR NT 2,000,000 4.250% NA 02/21/2024 01/31/2026 488 4.62% 1,986,275 2,010,625 U.S. Treasury Charles Schwab US TREASUR NT 3,000,000 4.000% NA 02/21/2024 01/31/2029 1,584 2,962,433 3,051,094 U.S. Treasury Charles Schwab US TREASUR NT 2,000,000 3.625% NA 09/12/2024 08/31/2029 1,796 3.45% 2,015,635 2,006,250 Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab ABBVIE INC. 1,000,000 3.600% A3 02/06/2024 05/14/2025 226 5.05% 982,365 993,658 Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab AMERICAN EXPRESS 1,000,000 A2 02/08/2024 10/30/2026 760 5.56% 1,017,921 1,018,865 Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab BANK OF AMERICA C 1,000,000 A1 02/06/2024 07/21/2028 1,390 4.81% 951,445 979,970 Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab BRISTOL-MYERS SQU 1,000,000 3.900% A2 02/09/2024 02/20/2028 1,238 4.60% 974,375 985,422 Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab CHEVRON CORP 1,000,000 2.954% AA2 02/08/2024 05/16/2026 593 4.49% 967,105 986,051 City of La Verne
Investment Detail
For the Month Ended September 30, 2024
Investment Type Bank Security Name Par Value
Coupon
Rate
Moody's/
S&P Rating
Purchase
Date
Maturity/
Called Date
Days to
Maturity
Yield to
Maturity Cost Basis Market Value
Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab CITIGROUP INC 1,000,000 A3 02/06/2024 01/10/2028 1,197 4.83% 966,495 985,076 Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab COMCAST CORP 1,000,000 4.500% A3 02/06/2024 01/15/2029 1,568 4.64% 995,895 1,016,631 Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab ENTERPRISE PRODUC 1,000,000 4.600% A3 02/07/2024 01/11/2027 833 4.62% 999,205 1,012,882 Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab GILEAD SCIENCES, 1,000,000 1.200% A3 02/08/2024 10/01/2027 1,096 4.62% 886,525 921,460 Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab HONEYWELL INTERN 1,000,000 4.250% A2 02/08/2024 01/15/2029 1,568 4.52% 987,975 1,012,801 Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab INTEL CORP 1,000,000 4.875% A3 02/06/2024 02/10/2028 1,228 4.63% 954,985 967,114 Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab INTEL CORP 1,000,000 3.150% A3 02/08/2024 05/11/2027 953 4.65% 1,007,607 1,008,521 Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab JOHN DEERE CAPITA 1,000,000 4.500% A1 02/09/2024 01/08/2027 830 4.57% 997,995 1,011,538 Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab JPMORGAN CHASE & 1,000,000 A1 02/06/2024 04/26/2028 1,304 4.86% 979,605 1,002,641 Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab LOCKHEED MARTIN 500,000 3.550% A2 02/27/2024 01/15/2026 472 4.94% 487,650 496,213 Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab MORGAN STANLEY 1,000,000 A1 02/06/2024 01/24/2029 1,577 4.82% 1,339,582 1,374,184 Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab THE BANK OF NEW Y 500,000 A1 06/03/2024 04/26/2026 573 5.15% 497,155 504,909 Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab THE GOLDMAN SACHS 1,000,000 A2 02/06/2024 08/23/2028 1,423 4.95% 981,065 237,931 Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab THE GOLDMAN SACHS G 250,000 3.000% A2 02/24/2022 02/26/2027 879 3.00% 250,000 1,006,303 Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab THE WALT DISNEY C 1,000,000 2.200% A2 02/08/2024 01/13/2028 1,200 4.47% 919,045 949,062 Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab UNITEDHEALTH GRO 1,000,000 5.250% A2 02/08/2024 02/15/2028 1,233 4.54% 1,022,559 1,038,874 Corporate Bonds Charles Schwab WELLS FARGO & CO 1,000,000 A1 02/06/2024 04/30/2026 577 3.98% 962,025 981,259 Asset Backed Securities Charles Schwab ALLY AUTO RECEIV 1,100,000 5.460% Aaa 04/30/2024 05/15/2028 1,323 1,099,552 1,114,621 Asset Backed Securities Charles Schwab CNH EQUIP TR 1,100,000 3.890% Aaa 04/30/2024 11/15/2027 1,141 892,558 903,901 Asset Backed Securities Charles Schwab CAPITAL ONE FUND 1,200,000 4.950% AAA 04/30/2024 10/15/2027 1,110 1,190,744 1,208,420 Asset Backed Securities Charles Schwab DISCOVER BANK 1,100,000 4.310% Aaa 04/30/2024 03/15/2028 1,262 1,078,240 1,101,307 Asset Backed Securities Charles Schwab FORD CR AUTO OWN 1,100,000 5.090% Aaa 04/30/2024 12/15/2028 1,537 1,092,377 1,119,266 Asset Backed Securities Charles Schwab SYNCHRONY CARD 1,150,000 3.370% Aaa 04/30/2024 03/15/2030 1,992 1,125,677 1,141,544 CDs Charles Schwab AMERICAN EXPRESS 244,000 4.90% NA 11/17/2022 11/24/2025 420 4.89% 244,000 246,497 CDs Charles Schwab AUSTIN TELCO FED 248,000 5.05% NA 11/15/2022 11/27/2026 788 5.05% 248,000 254,852 CDs Charles Schwab BMW BANK OF NORTH 244,000 4.80% NA 11/17/2022 11/24/2025 420 4.79% 244,000 243,957 CDs Charles Schwab CAPITAL ONE, NTNL 245,000 2.70% NA 04/18/2022 04/21/2025 203 2.69% 245,000 242,801 CDs Charles Schwab CITY NTNL BANK 244,000 4.89% NA 11/15/2022 11/24/2025 420 4.89% 244,000 246,497 CDs Charles Schwab DISCOVER BANK 244,000 4.80% NA 11/17/2022 04/28/2025 210 4.80% 244,000 244,006 CDs Charles Schwab GOLDMAN SACHS BA 245,000 2.75% NA 04/18/2022 04/28/2025 210 2.74% 245,000 242,836 CDs Charles Schwab SYNCHRONY BANK 244,000 4.25% NA 11/15/2022 11/18/2027 1,144 4.24% 244,000 248,008 Total Long-Term Investments 82,383,000 $ 67,235,321 $ 68,366,618 $ Total Cash and Investments 109,800,135 $ 95,756,304 $ *Mortgage Pool investments are amortizing bonds whose principal is paid down over time. As such, performance should be evaluated relative to the Cost Basis of the investment, not the Par Value.
Ronald L. Clark
CITY TREASURER
I hereby certify that the investment activity for t his reporting period conforms with the current inve stment policy as set forth in Resolution No. 23-67. Per government code requirements, there are adequate funds available to meet the City of La Verne's budget ed and actual expenditures for the next six months.
Portfolio Maturity Schedule
Sum of Market Value Investment Type
Maturity Range (Years) *Mortgage Pools Agency Securities Asset Backed Securities CDs Corporate Bonds Municipal Bonds U.S. Treasury Grand Total 0 243,974.87 243,974.87
0.5 729,643.63 993,658.00 255,601.80 1,971,975.00 3,950,878.43 1 736,950.76 736,950.76
1.5 2,968,431.50 222,903.00 2,010,625.00 5,201,959.50
2 1,890,646.00 254,851.99 1,018,865.00 3,164,362.99
2.5 11,403,845.00 4,039,244.00 2,016,562.40 17,459,651.40 3 2,112,320.90 248,008.19 921,460.00 1,513,125.00 4,794,914.09
3.5 3,288,796.00 2,215,928.66 5,928,189.00 3,004,687.50 14,437,601.16 4 1,119,265.84 1,217,901.00 2,804,625.00 5,141,791.84
4.5 3,403,616.00 3,051,093.60 6,454,709.60
5 2,006,250.00 2,006,250.00
5.5 1,141,543.82 1,141,543.82
7 2,985,129.28 2,985,129.28
7.5 3,118,451.47 3,118,451.47
Grand Total 6,103,580.75 16,583,287.00 6,589,059.22 2,213,429.44 20,491,364.50 478,504.80 18,378,943.50 70,838,169.21 Investment Policy Compliance
Category % of Portfolio Policy Limit Max Maturity In-Compliance Agency Securities 16,583,287$ 19.45% None 5 years YES *Asset Backed Securities 6,589,059$ 7.73% 20% 5 years YES CDs 2,213,429$ 2.60% 30% None YES
Corporate Bonds 20,491,365$ 24.03% 30% 5 years YES *Mortgage Pools 6,103,581$ 7.16% 20% 5 years YES Municipal Bonds 478,505$ 0.56% 20% 5 years YES Schwab Money Market 10,362,879$ 12.15% 20% N/A YES U.S. Treasury 18,378,944$ 21.55% None 5 years YES LAIF (Excludes LA IMPACT) 4,075,839$ 4.78% 75,000,000$ N/A YES 85,276,887$
*Maximum maturity is measured on a weighted average life basis.
City of La Verne
Investment Detail
For the Month Ended September 30, 2024
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00
0 0.5
1 1.5
2 2.5
3 3.5
4 4.5
5 5.5
7 7.5
Millions
U.S. Treasury
Municipal Bonds
Corporate Bonds
CDs
Asset Backed Securities
Agency Securities
*Mortgage Pools
Investment Type
Maturity Range…
Sum of Market Value
City of La Verne,City Council
Agenda Report
DATE: October 21, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Meg McWade, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE REMOVAL OF APPROXIMATELY 88 TREES RELATED TO THE
B STREET - BONITA TO FOOTHILL PAVEMENT PROJECT, PROJECT NUMBER ST2304
SUMMARY
Based on an arborist evaluation, roadway impacts, and City's goal to limit future liability, this action will authorize the removal of approximately 88 trees as part of the B Street - Bonita to Foothill Pavement Project ST2304.
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council authorize the removal of approximately 88 trees related to the B Street - Bonita to Foothill Pavement Project, Project ST2304.
DISCUSSION
The City recently awarded the B Street – Bonita to Foothill Pavement Project, Project No.
ST2304, with the goal of completing the street rehabilitation by the end of the year, assuming no weather delays or unforeseen items. As part of this project, tree removals were included due to concerns about the impact of tree roots on curbs, roadways, and other infrastructure. To ensure an informed decision regarding the fate of the trees in the project area, the City opted to have a Certified Arborist review the condition of the trees.
The arborist assessed 166 trees within the project area. Cracking or displacement of the adjacent curb was observed for 116 of these trees, likely caused by root growth, which has compromised curb stability. Additionally, damage to the asphalt in the adjacent roadway was observed for 17 of the trees. The report also identified six dead trees and one stump. The overcrowded tree and shrub canopy further limits the health and growth potential of individual trees, and all subject trees were rated with a "Low Suitability for Preservation." This rating indicates that retaining these trees would likely result in further infrastructure damage and would not support long-term urban forestry goals.
While the Certified Arborist's Report recommended removal of approximately 140 trees, staff is recommending a lower number pending further review and landscape planning. As a result, the recommendation from staff is to remove approximately 88 trees - as shown in the attachment - to preserve the remaining foliage while the City takes a closer look at the future landscaping plans for this area. This recommendation is based on the Certified Arborist's findings, which highlight the extent of damage to curbs, roadways, and the overcrowded tree canopy.
Removing these trees will mitigate further infrastructure deterioration, particularly to the curbs and roadways, while addressing safety concerns related to dead or structurally compromised
Authorize Removal of Approximately 88 Trees Related to the B Street - Bonita to Foothill Pavement Project, Project Number ST2304, Page 2
trees. Additionally, project funding is limited and primarily obligated to street improvements. Based on future landscaping plans, additional funding will be identified at a later time.
The removal of these trees is also necessary to ensure the success of the B Street – Bonita to Foothill Pavement Project, which includes significant curb and road rehabilitation work. With the anticipated need for curb replacement, removing trees now will prevent future conflicts between tree roots and infrastructure repairs. Outreach to adjacent residents and other stakeholders along B Street is being conducted to inform them about the tree removals and the reasons behind this decision. The City has made it a priority to balance urban development with green space preservation and is committed to incorporating community feedback in future landscaping plans.
The findings of the Certified Arborist underscore the need for tree removal to address safety and infrastructure concerns, particularly in light of the ongoing B Street – Bonita to Foothill Project. Removing approximately 88 trees, especially those causing significant damage or deemed unsuitable for preservation, will ensure the sustainability of the urban environment and reduce future costs for curb and roadway repairs. This proactive approach will also allow the City to refine its future landscaping plans, ensuring a balance between urban development and green space while enhancing the success of the street rehabilitation project. The tree removals are anticipated to begin before the end of October with construction anticipated to be complete by the end of the year, barring weather delays or unforeseen issues.
FISCAL ANALYSIS
This project - B Street - Bonita to Foothill Pavement Project, Project No. ST2304 - is fully funded, and no additional appropriation anticipated related to the recommended tree removals.
Any additional phases of a tree removal and replanting project along B Street would be handled through the budget process.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The award of Project No. ST2304 on August 5, 2024, found this project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15301 Existing Facilities, and City of La Verne environmental guidelines.
LEGAL REVIEW
This item has been reviewed by the City Attorney.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Staff Recommended Tree Removals - B Street - Bonita to Foothill Pavement Project ST2304
2. Arborist Report B Street - Bonita to Foothill Construction Impact Report Update 100924
Coordinated with:
Cody Howing, City Engineer
STAFF RECOMMENDED TREE REMOVALS: B STREET – BONITA TO
FOOTHILL PAVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST2304
City Council – October 21, 2024
ALL HIGHLIGHTED TREES ARE RECOMMENDED FOR REMOVAL
CITY OF LA VERNE
Public Works Department
Tree Care Professionals Serving Communities Who Care About Trees www.WCAINC.com 11 Address
Tree #
Common Name
Botanical Name
Health
Structure
Form
Suitability
for
Preservation
Diameter at
Breast
Height
(DBH, in.)
Minimum
Calculated
TPZ radius
(ft)
Condition Notes
Identified
for
Removal
2500 B St
Front-1 White mulberry Morus alba Good Fair Fair Low
25 (Multitrunked
11” + 14”)
17 • Largest trunk is growing horizontally. Yes
Front-2 Aleppo pine Pinus halepensis Good Poor Fair Low 18 12 • 21° trunk lean. • Cracking of adjacent curb. Yes
Front-5
Carolina laurel cherry
Prunus caroliniana
Good
Fair
Fair
Low
11.5 (Multitrunked
5 x 1.5” + 4
x 1”)
8 • Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs.
• Cracking of adjacent curb.
Yes
Front-6 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia Good Poor Fair Low 9 6 • Topped for utility line clearance. • Cracking of adjacent curb. Yes
Front-8
Peruvian pepper
Schinus polygamus
Good
Fair
Good
Low
7 (Low
branching,
taken below
split)
5 • Codominant scaffolds with V-shaped union and included bark.
Yes
Front-14 Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia ̶ ̶ ̶ ̶ 10 ̶ • Dead Yes Front-15 Oleander Nerium oleander Good Good Fair Low
22 (Multitrunked
2” + 20 x 1”)
15 • Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs.
• Hedged. Yes
Front-16 White mulberry Morus alba Good Fair Fair Low 10 (Multitrunked 7 • Displacement of the adjacent curb. Yes 6” + 4”)
Front-17
Oleander
Nerium oleander
Good
Fair
Fair
Low
23 (multitrunked
8 x 2” + 7 x
1”)
15 • Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs.
Yes
Front-18
White mulberry
Morus alba
Poor
Poor
Poor
Low
13 (Low
branching,
taken below
9 • Most of the canopy has been removed leaving at scaffold branches.
Yes
split)
Front-19
White mulberry
Morus alba
Good
Fair
Fair
Low
11.5 (Multitrunked
6” + 2” + 2”
+ 1.5”)
8 • Lower trunk growing up against curb.
• Cracking of adjacent curb.
Yes
2600 B St
Front-2
Oleander
Nerium oleander
Good
Fair
Fair
Low
18 (Multitrunked
4 x 2” + 10 x
1”)
12 • Hedged.
Yes
Front-4
White mulberry
Morus alba
Fair
Fair
Fair
Low
13 (Low
branching,
taken below
split)
9 • Deadwood in upper canopy.
• Cracking of adjacent curb.
Yes
Front-5
Chinese elm
Ulmus parvifolia
Good
Fair
Fair
Low
9 (Low
branching,
taken below
split)
6 • Codominant scaffolds with V-shaped union and included bark.
• Cracking of adjacent curb.
Yes
Tree Care Professionals Serving Communities Who Care About Trees www.WCAINC.com 12 Address
Tree #
Common Name
Botanical Name
Health
Structure
Form
Suitability
for
Preservation
Diameter at
Breast
Height
(DBH, in.)
16 Minimum
C
alculated
TPZ radius
(ft)
• Hedged.
C
ondition Notes
Identified
for
Removal
2600 B St
2700 B St
Front-6
F
ront-7
Front-1
Front-1
Oleander
C
arolina laurel cherry
River she-oak
Aleppo pine
Nerium oleander
P
runus caroliniana
Casuarina
cunninghamiana
Pinus halepensis
Good
F
air
Fair
Fair
Fair
F
air
Good
Fair
Fair
F
air
Good
Fair
Low
Low
Low
Low
(Multitrunked
16 x
1”)
13 (Low
branching,
taken below
split)
18 19
11 9
12 14
13 • Minor displacement of adjacent curb.
• Main trunk was removed at approximately 5’.
• Signs of decay in the lower trunk.
• Cracking of adjacent curb.
• Signs of decay in lower trunk.
• Significant displacement of adjacent curb.
• 10° trunk lean.
• Twisted scaffold and secondary branch structure.
• One-sided canopy growth in direction of the trunk lean. • Deadwood in canopy.
• Twisted scaffold and secondary branch structure.
Yes
Ye
s
Yes
Yes
F
ront-2
Front-3
Aleppo pine
Shamel ash
Pinus halepensis
Fraxinus uhdei
̶
Good
̶
Good
̶
Good
̶ 14
Low 11
18 19
•
̶ •
7 •
•
12 •
•
13 •
Peeling bark on trunk.
Dead Tree
Displacement of adjacent curb.
20° trunk lean.
One-sided canopy in the direction of the trunk lean.
Dead branches throughout canopy.
Twisted scaffold and secondary branch structure.
Yes
Yes
2800 B St
Front-7
Front-8
Front-9
Front-10
Front-11
Front-13
Weeping bottlebrush
Aleppo pine
Weeping bottlebrush
Weeping bottlebrush
Weeping bottlebrush
Weeping bottlebrush
Callistemon viminalis
Pinus halepensis
Callistemon viminalis
Callistemon viminalis
Callistemon viminalis
Cal
listemon viminalis
Good
Good
Good
Good
Good
Good
Fair
Good
Good
Good
Good
Good
Fair
Good
Good
Good
Good
Good
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
1.5 1
23 15
4 (Multitrunked 3
2” + 1” + 1”)
12 (Low
branching,
taken below 8
split)
8 5
9 (Multitrunked 6
3” + 3” + 2”
+ 1”)
12 (Multitrunked 8
7” + 3” + 2”)
• Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs.
• Small tree.
• Significant displacement of adjacent curb.
•
•
• Minor displacement of adjacent curb.
•
•
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Melaleuca
quinquenervia
15 10
22 15
25 17
• Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs.
• Displacement of adjacent curb.
• 20° trunk lean.
• One-sided canopy in the direction of lean.
• Limited branching in canopy.
• Signs of trunk decay.
• Displacement of adjacent curb.
Poor
Poor
Poor
Poor
Poor
Front-12 Brazilian pepper Good Good Good Low Yes
Front-14 Aleppo pine
Yes Low Good Good Fair Cajeput tree Front-16
Yes Low Poor Poor Fair Pinus halepensis
Yes Low Fair Fair Good Pinus halepensis
Displacement of adjacent curb. Schinus terebinthifolius Low
Pinus halepensis Aleppo pine Front-5
Low Pinus halepensis Aleppo pine Front-4
Front-3 Aleppo pine Pinus halepensis Good Poor Fair Low 21.5 Yes Fair Yes
Yes
Front-15 Aleppo pine
Tree Care Professionals Serving Communities Who Care About Trees www.WCAINC.com 13 Front-17
Front-18
Front-19
Front-20
Front-21
Front-22
Aleppo pine
Cajeput tree
Cajeput tree
Coast live oak
Flaxleaf paperbark
Aleppo pine
Pinus halepensis
Melaleuca
quinquenervia
Melaleuca
quinquenervia
Quer
cus agrifolia
Melaleuca linariifolia
Pinus halepensis
Fair
Good
̶
Goo
d
Good
Good
Poor
Fair
̶
Fa
ir
Good
Fair
Poor
Fair
̶
Fa
ir
Good
Fair
Pr
eservation
Low
Low
̶
Low
Low
Low
Diameter at
B
reast
Height
(DBH, in.)
18 22
16 13
18 21 (Low
branching,
taken below
split)
Minimum
Cal
culated
TPZ radius
(ft)
12 15
̶
9 12
14 Co
ndition Notes
• 45° trunk lean beginning at 3’ above grade.
• One-sided canopy in the direction of the trunk lean.
• Displacement of adjacent curb.
• Tree has been topped historically.
• Displacement of the adjacent curb.
• Dead Tree.
• One-sided canopy growth due to crowding from adjacent shrubs and trees.
• Cracking of the adjacent curb.
• Hedged.
• Cracking of adjacent curb.
• Codominant secondary trunks with some included bark in the union.
• Cracking of the adjacent curb.
Identified
for
Removal
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
2800 B
St
Front-23
Front-24
Aleppo pine
Aleppo pine
Pinus halepensis
Pinus halepensis
Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Fair
Poor
Low 28
Low 17
•
•
19 •
•
•
11 •
•
Twisted trunk structure.
Codominant secondary trunks with some included bark in
the union.
Twisted scaffold and secondary branch structure.
Displacement of adjacent curb.
25° trunk lean beginning at 3’.
One-sided canopy in the direction of the trunk lean.
Codominant secondary trunks with some included bark in
the union.
Yes
Yes
Front-25
Front-28
Cajeput tree
Cajeput tree
Melaleuca
quinquenervia
Melal
euca
quinquenervia
Melaleuca
quinquenervia
Good
̶
Good
Fair
̶
Fair
Good
̶
Fair
Low
̶
Low
10 7
28 19
2. 5
(M
ultitrunked ̶
1.5” + 1”)
18 12
• Slightly unbalanced canopy due to crowding from adjacent shrubs and trees.
• Cracking of the adjacent curb.
• Twisted scaffold and secondary branch structure.
• Displacement of adjacent curb.
•
• One-sided canopy due to crowding from surrounding trees and shrubs.
• Cracking of adjacent curb.
Yes
Yes
Front-30
Front-31
Aleppo pine
Aleppo pine
Pinus halepensis
Pinus halepensis
Good
Good
P
oor
Poor
Poor
Poor
Low 17
Low 22
•
11 •
•
•
15 •
•
Twisted trunk structure.
One-sided canopy due to pruning on street side.
Cracking of adjacent curb.
Twisted trunk structure.
Limited canopy due to lack of space.
Cracking of adjacent curb.
Front-33
Front-34
Cajeput tree
Aleppo pine
Melaleuca
quinquenervia
Pinus halepensis
Good
Fair
Fair
Poor
Fair
Poor
Low 18
Low 22
• One-sided canopy due to shading from adjacent trees. 12 • Cracking of adjacent curb. • Twisted trunk structure.
15 • Limited canopy spread due to shading from adjacent trees and shru
Yes
Yes
Dead tree. Cajeput tree Front-27
Low Good Fair Good Pinus halepensis Aleppo pine Front-26 Suitability
Address Tree # Common Name Botanical Name Health Structure Form for
Yes
Yes
Tree Care Professionals Serving Communities Who Care About Trees www.WCAINC.com 14 bs.
Displacement of
adjacent curb.
Yes
Yes
•
Tree Care Professionals Serving Communities Who Care About Trees www.WCAINC.com 15 Address
2800 B St
Tree #
Front-35
Front-36
Front-37
F
ront-39
Front-42
Front-44
Front-45
Front-47
Front-48
Front-49
Front-51
Common Name
Coast live oak
Holly oak
Aleppo pine
H
olly oak
Brazilian pepper
Cajeput tree
Cajeput tree
Brazilian pepper
Cajeput tree
Brazilian pepper
Brazilian pepper
Botanical Name
Quercus agrifolia
Quercus ilex
Pinus halepensis
Q
uercus ilex
Schinus terebinthifolius
Melaleuca
quinquenervia
Melaleuca
quinquenervia
Schinus terebinthifolius
Melaleuca
quinquenervia
Schinus terebinthifolius
Schinus terebinthifolius
Health
Good
Good
Fair
G
ood
Good
Fair
Good
Good
Good
Good
Good
Structure
Good
Good
Poor
F
air
Fair
Fair
Fair
Good
Fair
Good
Good
Form
Good
Good
Poor
P
oor
Good
Fair
Fair
Good
Fair
Good
Fair
Suitability
for
Preservation
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Lo
w
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Diameter at
Breast
Height
(DBH, in.)
21 10
(Multitrunked
5” + 5”)
19 28
(
Multitrunked
8” + 5 x 4”)
11 (Multitrunked
2 x 4” + 3”)
12 (Multitrunked
6” + 4” + 2”)
10 (Multitrunked
5 x 2”)
20.5 (Multitrunked
8” + 7” +
3.5” + 2”)
7 18
19 52
(Multitrunked
4 x 5” + 10 x
2” + 12 x 1”)
17 23
(Multitrunked
16” + 7”)
22 (Multitrunked
2” + 20 x 1”)
12.5 (Multitrunked
2.5” + 10 x
1”)
Minimum
Calculated
TPZ radius
(ft)
14 7
13 19
7 8
7 14
5 12
13 35
11 15
15 8
Condition Notes
• Significant displacement of adjacent curb.
• Cracking of adjacent curb.
•
• Twisted trunk structure.
• 90° trunk lean in the upper canopy.
• Cracking of adjacent curb.
• Displacement of adjacent curb.
• Cracking of adjacent asphalt in the roadway.
• Hedged.
• Limited canopy space due to crowding by adjacent trees and shrubs.
• Significant displacement of adjacent curb.
• Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs.
• Crossing branches throughout canopy.
• Cracking of adjacent curb.
• Significant displacement of adjacent curb.
• Significant asphalt damage in the adjacent roadway.
• Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs.
• Tree appears to have been historically topped.
• Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs.
• Cracking of adjacent curb.
• 45° trunk lean.
• Limited canopy space due to crowding by adjacent trees and shrubs.
• Cracking of adjacent curb.
• Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs.
• Trunk of Front-47 is growing into the trunk.
• Cracking of adjacent curb.
• Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs.
• Cracking of adjacent curb.
• Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs.
• Displacement of adjacent curb.
Identified
for
Removal
Yes
Yes
Ye
s
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Schinus terebinthifolius
Cracking of adjacent asphalt in roadway.
Front-38
Front-40
Front-43
Front-46
Front-52
Shamel ash
African sumac
Shamel ash
Aleppo pine
Brazilian pepper
Fraxinus uhdei
Searsia lancea
Fraxinus uhdei
Pinus halepensis
Good
Good
Good
Fair
Good
Fair
Good
Good
Poor
Good
Fair
Good
Good
Poor
Fair
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Tree Care Professionals Serving Communities Who Care About Trees www.WCAINC.com 16 Address
Tree #
Common Name
Botanical Name
Health
Structure
Form
Suitability
for
Preservation
Diameter at
Breast
Height
(DBH, in.)
Minimum
Calculated
TPZ radius
(ft)
Condition Notes
Identified
for
Removal
Front-53 Shamel ash Fraxinus uhdei Good Good Good Low 7 5 • Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs. Yes • Cracking of adjacent curb.
Front-54
Brazilian pepper
Schinus terebinthifolius
Good
Good
Fair
Low
12 (Multitrunked
4 x 1” + 2 x
2” + 4 x 1”)
8 • Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs.
• Cracking of adjacent curb.
Yes
Front-55
Brazilian pepper
Schinus terebinthifolius
Good
Fair
Fair
Low
10 (Multitrunked
3 x 2” + 4 x
1”)
7 • Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs.
• Cracking of adjacent curb.
Yes
Front-56
Brazilian pepper
Schinus terebinthifolius
Good
Fair
Fair
Low
11 (Multitrunked
3” + 2 x 2.5”
+ 3 x 1”)
7 • Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs.
• Cracking of adjacent curb.
Yes
Front-57 Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolius Good Fair Fair Low 7 (Multitrunked
7 x 1”)
5 • Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs.
• Cracking of adjacent curb. Yes
16 Front-58 Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolius Good Good Good Low (Multitrunked 6” + 3 x 2” + 11 • Cracking of adjacent curb. Yes
4 x 1”)
31 Front-59 Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolius Good Good Good Low (Multitrunked 5” + 10 x 2” 21 • Cracking of adjacent curb. Yes
2800 B St
+ 6 x 1”)
Front-60
Brazilian pepper
Schinus terebinthifolius
Good
Fair
Fair
Low
14 (Multitrunked
6” + 4” + 4 x
1”)
9 • Hedged
• Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs.
Yes
Front-61 Lemon bottlebrush Callistemon citrinus Good Fair Fair Low 7 (Multitrunked
7 x 1”)
5 • Hedged.
• Cracking of adjacent curb. Yes
4.5 Front-65 Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolius Fair Fair Fair Low (Multitrunked
2.5” + 1” + 3 • Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs. No
1”)
11 Front-66 Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolius Good Good Good Low (Multitrunked
2 x 2.5” + 2”
+ 2 x 1.5” +
7 • Cracking of adjacent curb. Yes
1”)
4 • Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs.
Front-67 Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolius Fair Fair Fair Low (Multitrunked 3 No 4 x 1”)
16 Front-69 Weeping bottlebrush Callistemon viminalis Good Fair Fair Low (Multitrunked 3 x 4” + 2 x 11 • Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs. Yes 2”)
Front-70 Aleppo pine Pinus halepensis Good Fair Fair Low 25 17 • 15° trunk lean. Yes • Displacement of adjacent curb.
Tree Care Professionals Serving Communities Who Care About Trees www.WCAINC.com 17 Address
Tree #
Common Name
Botanical Name
Health
Structure
Form
Suitability
for
Preservation
Diameter at
Breast
Height
(DBH, in.)
Minimum
Calculated
TPZ radius
(ft)
Condition Notes
Identified
for
Removal
3300 B St
3300 B St
Front-1
Carrot wood Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
Good
Fair
Good
Low
15.5 10
• Lower branch with V-shaped union with trunk and included bark.
Yes
• Displacement of adjacent curb.
Front-3 Carrot wood Cupaniopsis
anacardioides Good Good Good Low 13 9 • Cracking of adjacent curb. Yes
Front-4
Aleppo pine
Pinus halepensis
Good
Fair
Fair
Low
23 (Low
branching,
taken below
15 • Twisted scaffold and secondary branches in canopy. • Cracking of adjacent curb.
Yes
split)
Front-5 Peruvian pepper Schinus polygamus Good Fair Fair Low 10 (Multitrunked
4” + 3 x 2”)
7 • Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs.
• Cracking of adjacent curb. Yes
Front-6
Weeping bottlebrush
Callistemon viminalis
Good
Good
Good
Low
17 (Multitrunked
6” + 3” + 4 x
2”)
11 • Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs.
• Displacement of adjacent curb.
Yes
Front-7
Flaxleaf paperbark
Melaleuca linariifolia
Good
Good
Good
Low
11 (Low
7 • Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs.
• Displacement of adjacent curb.
Yes branching,
taken below
split)
Front-8
Carrot wood
Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
Fair
Fair
Fair
Low
1.5 1
• Young tree.
• Stakes are still attached and should be removed if the tree is to be retained.
• Canopy crowded by adjacent shrubs.
No
Front-9
Weeping bottlebrush
Callistemon viminalis
Good
Good
Good
Low
22 (Multitrunked
5” + 4” + 3”
+ 10 x 1”)
15 • Cracking of adjacent curb.
Yes
Front-10
Carrot wood
Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
Good
Good
Good
Low
2 (Low
branching,
taken below
splits)
1 • Young tree.
• Stakes are still attached and should be removed if the tree is to be retained.
• Cracking of adjacent curb.
No
Front-11
Aleppo pine
Pinus halepensis
Good
Poor
Fair
Low
10 7
•
•
•
20° trunk lean after bend in trunk at approximately 3’
Yes
above grade.
Twisted scaffold and secondary branch structure in the
canopy.
Cracking of adjacent curb.
Front-12
Cajeput tree Melaleuca
quinquenervia
Good
Fair
Fair
Low
25 (Low
17 • Cracking and displacement of adjacent curb.
Yes branching,
taken below
split)
Front-13
Aleppo pine
Pinus halepensis
Fair
Poor
Poor
Low
23 15
• Twisted trunk structure.
• Conflict with overhead utility lines in upper canopy.
Yes
• Cracking of adjacent curb.
Front-14
Carrot wood Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
Good
Good
Good
Low
12.5 (Multitrunked
3 x 1.5” + 8
x 1”)
8 • Cracking of adjacent curb.
Yes