HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/6/2006 - STAFF REPORTS - 2.V. �pALM SA
O 4�
a. y
x
CITY COUNCIL and CRA
'� °•� rt°`'pP' STAFF REPORT
DATE: DECEMBER 6, 2006 CONSENT CALENDAR
SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALM
SPRINGS AND THE PLANNING CENTER, ENCUMBRANCE
REALLOCATION RELATING TO THE COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE, AND AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY.
FROM: David H. Ready, City Manager
BY: Department of Planning Services
SUMMARY
The City Council will consider introduction of an amendment to the contract between the
City of Palm Springs and The Planning Center and an encumbrance reallocation related
to the Comprehensive General Plan Update.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Minute Order No_ Approving Contract Amendment No. 1 to
Agreement No. A5023 with The Planning Center, in the amount of $50,896, for
additional services related to the Comprehensive General Plan Update.
2, Adopt Resolution No. _"A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF PALM SPPONGS,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006-2007.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Recent additional services related to the Comprehensive General Plan Update have
necessitated a request for an amendment to the contract between the City of Palm
Springs and The Planning Center and initiation of a separate contract to Endo
Engineering for traffic analysis. In addition, a review of the fund accounts for the
General Plan has provided an opportunity to reduce the project's impact on the General
Fund by reassigning encumbrances and past expenditures that were charged against
the General Plan account to other more appropriate fund accounts.
BACKGROUND
ITEM NO._�v
City Council Staff Report
December 6, 2006 -- Page 2
General Plan Update Contract Amendment and Encumbrance Reallocation
The General Plan Update contract was approved on January 12, 2005 in the amount of
$945,023, which was comprised of base scope items totaling $702,490 and optional
scope items totaling $242,533. The entire contract amount was charged against the
City's General Fund (Agreement No. A5023, Minute Order 7612 dated 1/12/05).
To date the total amount of the contract including base scope, authorized options,
deletions and augments totals $925,389. (leaving $19,634 remaining on the contract).
Following is a summary of actions to date:
$702,490 Base Contract
$183,812 Options Authorized (3105 & 8/05)
$32,820 Housing Augment Authorized (8/05)
$6 257 Old Housing Element Funds (rolled over from 2002 Housing Update)
$925,369 Total authorized to date
$19,634 Optional Tasks not used.
$945,023 Total Contract
AMENDMENT REQUEST
Staff is requesting an augment to the contract for the General Plan Update. These are
for various tasks and include such things as the 1-10 corridor Land Use restudy
requested by Council, a more detailed effort on the Parks & Recreation Strategic Plan,
additional traffic analysis required by the land use revisions, and an overall extension to
the contract period of approximately ten months. If this request is approved, the total
authorized contract amount would be $995,919.
$945,023 Total Contract
$50,896 Additional Request
$995,919 Total including Additional Services
GENERAL FUND SAVINGS
To date, all invoices for the above-mentioned authorized work has been paid against
the General Fund Account for the General Plan Update; however a review of
expenditures shows two items that can be charged to other accounts and funds.
Specifically, $43,97$1 for the Housing Element update can be reassigned to the
Redevelopment Housing Set-aside Fund Account #261-1395-54049, and $49,1182 for
the Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan Account can be reassigned to the Parks &
Recreation Capital Measure Y Fund Account#261-2494-51524.
z $39,087 + 12.5% reimbursable expenses
$43,650 + 12.5% reimbursable expenses
City Council Staff Report
December6, 2006 -- Page 3
General Plan Update Contract Amendment and Encumbrance Reallocation
There are adequate funds available in the Housing Fund Balance to have the
appropriate budget amendment submitted to the Agency Board for Approval. There is
currently $63,156 available in the Comprehensive Parks Master Plan Account in the
Measure Y Fund. Correcting these encumbrances brings the total authorized to date
against the General Plan General Fund account to $902,828.
$995,919 Total including Additional Services Request
$(43,973) Less reassignment of Housing Element Charges
49 118 Less reassignment of Parks & Recreation Strategic Plan Charges
$902,828 Total after reassignments
Lastly, a separate contract to Endo Engineering for $5,840 for additional General Plan
traffic analysis was approved on 8-14-06. This was assigned to another Planning
Department Fund Account #001-41 51-421 95 in order to expedite initiation of the work;
we have processed a change order request for this charge to be reassigned to the
General Plan Fund Account #261-1395.54049. In doing this, the total encumbrance
against the General Plan fund account after the aforementioned re-allocations are made
and additional services request are approved, would be $908,668, leaving an unspent
balance in the General Plan Update budget of$36,355.
Staff is recommending the approval of the contract amendment and approval of the
requested budget amendment. Staff will be making the appropriate accounting changes
as presented.
FISCAL IMPACT: IFinance Director Review:
There are adequate funds in the low and moderate housing fund for the proposed
budget amendment. With the proposed accounting changes, there will be no negative
impact on the General Fund. In fact, the General Fund will recognize a budget savings
of approximately $36,000. It may also be noted that the Tribe has contributed $300,000
for the G eral Plan Update through the recently adopted DDA.
— � A a —�
g ing, Thomas J. Wil n,
Dir of Planntn Services Assistant City Manager
David H. Ready, City ger
Attachments:
Draft Minute Order approving Contract Amendment No. 1
Contract Amendment No. 1 for The Planning Center including augment request
memo from The Planning Center dated August 14, 2006
Draft Resolution of the Community Redevelopment Authority
MINUTE ORDER NO.
APPROVING CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO
AGREEMENT NO. A5023 WITH THE PLANNING CENTER,
IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,896 FOR ADDITIONAL
SERVICES RELATED TO THE COMPREHENSIVE
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE.
I, James Thompson, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that this
Minute Order approving Contract Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. A5023 with The
Planning Center in the amount of $50,896 for additional services related to the
Comprehensive General Plan Update, was adopted by the City Council of the City of
Palm Springs, California, in a meeting thereof held on the_day of 2006.
James Thompson, City Clerk
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT NO. A 5023
FOR PROFESSIONAL PLANNING SERVICES
far the
COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT SERVICES AGREEMENT NO. A 5023
FOR PROFESSIONAL PLANNING SERVICES for the COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE (herein "First Amendment"), made and entered into on the day
of , 2006 by the City of Palm Springs (herein "City"), a municipal corporation,
and The Planning Center, Inc. (herein "Contractor"), amends that agreement as follows:
1. Section 5.1 Term: The Term of the contract is hereby extended ten (10) months.
2. Exhibit A, "Scope of Services" - The Scope of Services is hereby amended as follows:
(For a more detailed description of each item below, please refer to the attached Letter
' from The Planning Center dated August 14, 2006)
2.1. Task 4.1 Land Use Element $25,000
(1-10 corridor revisions, new mixed use areas,text changes)
2.2. Task 4.2 Parks & Recreation Open Space and Conservation Element (and
Strategic Plan) $11,500
(Additional detail and more thorough analysis&meetings requested by City)
2.3. Task4.9 Housing Element Update $1,700
(Changing land inventory required additional review and analysis)
2.4. Task 6.4 Meetings with Staff $10,000
(Additional meetings, phone conferences for additional 10 months)
2.5. Task 7.1 Consultant Coordination $4,550
(Additional 10 months of consultant coordination)
2.6. Task 7.2 Project Management $15,000
(Additional 10 months of project management oversight)
2.7. Task 6.7 Public Meetings $2,800
(Allowance for one additional meeting)
Total $70,550
Less optional tasks not authorized: ($19,634)
TOTAL Amendment to Contract $50,896
(SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE)
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed and entered into this First
Amendment as of the date first written above.
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
ATTEST: a municipal corporation
By: By:
City Clerk City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
City Attorney
CONTRACTOR: Check one: _Individual Partnership_Corporation
Corporations require two notarized signatures: One from each of the following. A.
Chairman of Board, President, or any Vice President: AND B. Secretary, Assistant
Secretary, Treasurer, Assistant Treasurer, or Chief Financial Officer).
By: By-.—
Signature (notarized) Signature (notarized)
Name: Name:
Title: Title:
State of State of
County of �ss County of Iss
On before me, On before
me,
personally appeared personally appeared
personally known to me (or proved to me personally known to me (or proved to me
on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to
be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are
subscribed to the within instrument and subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they acknowledged to me that he/she/they
executed the same in his/her/their executed the same in his/her/their
authorized capacity(ies), and that by authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her/their signature(s) on the his/her/their signature(s) on the
instrument the person(s), or the entity instrument the person(s), or the entity
upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, upon behalf of which the person(s) acted,
executed the instrument, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal. WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Notary
Signature: Signature:
' Notary Seal: Notary Seal:
�• I M THE
15 PLANNING
CENTER
Governmental Services
Planning& UrGan Design
6nvironmenral Studies
Landscape Architecture
August14, 2006
1580 Metro Drive
Mr. Ken Lyon, Associate Planner Costa Mesa, CA 92626
General Plan Project Manager Phone:774.966.9220
City of Palm Springs
Department of Planning Services Fa:774.96G.922T
3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way costamesa@planningcenter.com
Palm Springs, California 92263
SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN BUDGET STATUS
Dear Ken:
Attached is a revised breakdown of the Tasks for which we are requesting a budget
augmentation:
Task 4,1: Land Use Element
Augment Requested. $25,000
The original schedule identified that a proposed Land Use Plan would be approved by mid-
October 2005, with the entire project scheduled for completion by November 2006. Several
issues have prolonged the selection of the preferred plan and the drafting of the Land Use
Element text, including the addition of new mixed use areas, evolving revisions to the land plan
(such as the Chino Cone Urgency Ordinance), and the additional labor involved with analyzing
proposed land uses and potential biological impacts along the 1-10 Corridor, including the
preparation of a powerpoint show and graphics for a City Council meeting that was not in the
original scope. In addition, new graphics were prepared for the potential expansion of the
City's existing Sphere of Influence, which also was not anticipated or budgeted in the original
scope.
' It should be noted that City Staff and the Planning Center had discussions about the Land Use
Element being at 90% of the total budget as of August 2005 (one year ago). Changes to the
plan were requested after that date, and therefore, the additional funds requested for this task
will cover work already completed between August 2005 and 2006 as well as the remaining
revisions anticipated prior to the completion of the public hearing draft of the General Plan. To
date, a total of$46,652.50 of staff time has been spent on this task-$20,102.50 over the
original budget of$26,550.00.
The total amount requested above is broken into the following: costs associated wifh recisions
to the Land Use Plan and ongoing changes to the Land Use Element Text ($6,500) and costs
i3
a:�cas.oa oLwdmi„iso-acio„wuemancaaa e.06 dac - -
August 14, 2006
Page 2
associated with the additional analysis of environmental issues and the creation of a new land
use designation (Regional Business Center) along the 1-10 Freeway ($13,500).
Recently the General Plan Update project timeline was extended a month by City Staff to
provide additional time to review the traffic impacts generated by the City Council's revisions
and develop an alternative land use strategy that would achieve the City Council's objectives
along the 1-10 Corridor without significant impacts to the circulation system. Asa result of this
analysis, City Staff requested that The Planning Center develop a second approach to the RBC
designation that would take into consideration the preliminary findings of the traffic analysis in
conjunction with proposed land uses. As a result, a Special Policy Area was proposed as an
alternative to City Council's preliminary request. The additional graphic and text changes
resulting from these changes as well as the assistance The Planning Center will provide
preparing the powerpoint show for the upcoming City Council meeting will require an augment
of$5,000.
Task 4.3: parks Recreation Open Space and Conservation Element (and Strategic Plan)
Augment requested: $11,500
Originally, The Planning Center budgeted $15,000 to write the Parks and Recreation Strategic
Plan and $7,600 to draft the Recreation, Open Space and Conservation Elements. MIG had a
total budget of$17,160 to structure and conduct the outreach program and provide a summary
of the outreach efforts. Availability of information was more limited than we had assumed in our
scope, and the process to uncover base information that served as a foundation for bath
documents was much more involved than originally anticipated especially in relation to
recreational trails and bikeways. In addition, extensive comments from staff on the draft
Strategic Plan necessitated that additional research, writing, and coordination with City Staff
take place to complete the document. Lastly, staff from The Planning Center was requested to
attend meetings with the Parks and Recreation Commission, which was not incorporated into
the original scope and budget, to incorporate their feedback into both documents.
As a result, we are requesting an augment to cover the additional time expended to complete
the report and make any final revisions to the document after receiving comments from staff.
Please note that The Planning Center had a starting budget less than the outreach consultant,
but subsequently attended all of the same parks and recreation outreach meetings, and in
addition was responsible for the production of the Strategic Plan document.
Currently, all but one of the deliverables identified in Task 4.3.2 Parks and Recreation Strategic
Plan have been addressed either in the Strategic Plan or the Recreation, Open Space and
Conservation Element. Stakeholder interviews, Focus Group and Parks and Recreation
Directions Workshop deliverables (key findings and summaries) are included in the Strategic
Plan. While at one point in the process each one of these was envisioned as a Technical
Memorandum, discussions with and concurrence by City staff led The Planning Center to fold
these items directly into the document itself as opposed to having several different stand alone
documents.
The outstanding task, Develop Strategies, that evaluates the importance of ongoing
recreational programs and determines if the programs are still desirable, no longer relevant, or
those that are relevant with some change in direction. To complete this remaining deliverable
P%CPS-o OUAdministratlamqugmentOB4 aae doe
August 14, 2006
Page 3
in Task 4.3, we propose to conduct a one day event consisting of a number of structured
interviews with City staff, program managers, and class teachers chosen by City staff to
represent the range and breadth of City recreational programs. Presumably, they will be most
aware of resident needs and potential modification or addition of programs needed to meet
constituent needs. The interviews would focus on the availability, cost effectiveness, and
responsiveness of the program to local needs and recommendations for improvement, as
deemed necessary. A summary of the workshop and the conclusions discussed will be
provided to satisfy the deliverable for this component of the task.
To date, The Planning Center has expended $42,100 to complete this task, which totals
$19,422.50 above the $22,640 originally budgeted. We envision that a total of$4,000 in staff
time will be needed to complete the remaining deliverable (that is proposed as the one-day
workshop) in this task, bringing the estimated total average of this Task to $23,422.50. We are
requesting that the City split the remaining costs with The Planning Center, and as a result, we
are requesting an augment for a portion of the casts ($11,500) for this Task.
Task 4.9: Housing Element Update
Augment requested: $1,700
As you are aware, the Palm Springs Housing Element has recently received preliminary
approval by the Office of Housing and Community Development. As part of this effort, we
• budgeted $39,087 to prepare the Housing Element and secure a letter of approval from the
Department of Housing and Community Development- Since the exact amount of staff time to
guide the Draft Housing Element through the HCD approval process could not be precisely
predicted at the time the original budget was developed, we have incurred $1,700 more costs
than originally anticipated.
The additional time spent on this task was the result of the changing land inventory. When the
first Housing Element was drafted, before the start of this contract, the City had more than 300
acres of vacant multiple-family zoned land that could be counted toward the RHNA. However,
following contract execution, we discovered that the land inventory we intended to rely on had
to be completely redone due to the rapid absorption of vacant land over the past two years and
that, in reality, only 30 or more acres of vacant land were still available for higher density
housing. As a result, we conducted more detailed analysis and reiterations to use mixed use
and underutilized sites to make up the remainder of the Regional Housing Needs numbers and
to periodically adjust those sites as the Land Use Plan was being finalized.
Task 6.4: Meetings with Staff
Augment requested: $10,000
The original schedule showed that the entire General Plan Update process would be
completed in approximately 21 months. The overall budget for that timeframe was $18,125
(approximately $860 per month). The current schedule reflects an update process that will be
completed in a total of 31 months, in July 2007 (10 months after the original, proposed
completion date). In lieu of in person meetings, this task has predominantly consisted of
conference calls to minimize the rate at which the budget would be expended. To date, our
meetings with staff have totaled $20,887-50 over a period 19 months (approximately $1,100 per
P\CPS-04 OL\hdminrtranonUAugment0 11 6 dac
August 14, 2006
Page 4
month), which is $2,762.50 over the contracted amount. Since the schedule has been
extended, we are recommending an augment to this budget that is commensurate with the
additional time added to the schedule. Assuming that, overall, 10 months are added to the
original 21-month schedule, and that the cost of coordinating with staff on a monthly basis will
not exceed $1,000 per month, we are requesting a total augment of$10,000.
Task 6.5: Steering Committee Meetings
Remaining budget: $547.50
According to the original scope, two more Steering Committee Meetings remain - one to
present the consolidated plan (prior to the next Community Festival to present the
Consolidated General Plan) and one just prior to the first public hearing. At this point, the
remaining budget will only accommodate attendance at One more Steering Committee Meeting
-due in part, to meetings that ran longer than the time estimated for each meeting at the outset
of the project, and for the cost to prepare handout materials (maps, etc.) that were not
originally included in the Steering Committee budget. We would recommend eliminating The
Planning Center's attendance at one of the remaining meetings altogether (eliminate our
involvement in the overview of the Consolidated General Plan) and leave the final meeting for
an overview just prior to the presentation of the General Plan to the Planning Commission. If
staff determines that The Planning Center's presence is necessary at bath meetings, there may
be a possibility to bill some of the time to Task 6.6- Public Workshops as a total of$3,600
remains in that task, with only The Planning Center's attendance at the Community Festival
remaining. If staff anticipates that The Planning Center's involvement in the Community
Festival will be significant (MIG has been scoped to design and execute the Festival) then an
augment to Task 6.5 will be necessary to accommodate the additional hours.
Task 7.1: Consultant Coordination
r Augment requested: $4,550
The proposal identified a budget for consultant coordination that assumed a total of 80 hours
for consultant coordination (approximately 3.5 hours per month in the original 21- month
schedule). Since 10 additional months have been added to the overall work program, we are
requesting that the consultant coordination budget be adjusted accordingly. Assuming an
average bill rate of$130, at 3.5 hours per month, for an additional 10 months, we are
requesting an augment of$4,550 for this task. It should be noted that The Planning Center is
currently continuing to implement this task to ensure that the project continues to move
foreward, but in doing so, we are currently$537.50 overbudget. This is also due, in large part,
to the ongoing land use changes that are associated with the I-10 Corridor Analysis.
Task 7.2: Project Management
,Augment requested: $15,000
IDue to the extended project schedule, we are recommending an augment to this budget that is
commensurate with the additional time added to the workprogram. Due to the 10 month
completion delay and associated management costs, we are requesting a total augment of
$15,000 to this task (assumed at 2.5 hours per week, over the course of 10 months).
Task 6.7: Public Hearings
Augment requested: $2,800 for one meeting ($2,800 each additional meeting)
P\CPS-04.auAdmlnlstrudamqugmenty&I4u5 doc
August 14, 2006
Page 5
In the original scope, a total of 4 public hearings were scoped (2 Planning Commission, 2 City
Council) at an estimate of$2,800 per meeting. To date, The Planning Center has attended two
meetings to present the Downtown Urban Design Plan (1 each to Planning Commission and
City Council), one meeting to present the Proposed Land Use Plan to City Council, and one
meeting related to the Regional Business Center Land uses (for a total of 4 meetings in all).
While all four meetings have been used, approximately$5,000 remains in the budget, which
would allow The Planning Center to prepare for and attend approximately one more meeting. It
is envisioned that at least two (2) public hearings will remain to present the Consolidated
General Plan once to Planning Commission, and once to City Council. Additional meetings
may he necessary and would be billed at a cost of$2,800 per meeting.
The total of the budget augments listed above is $70,550. Please call with any questions about
the information provided above_ I am available to discuss this augment request or provide any
additional backup documentation you may need.
Sincerely,
THE PLANNING CENTER
Ric and RameYa
Principal-in-Charge
CC: Craig Ewing, Director of Planning Services
Brian Judd, Vice President of Community Planning and Design
Wendy Grant, Project Manager
P\CPS-On OLWtlmIn1aVat1omqugmontO9.14OO.doc
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE BUDGET FORTHE 2006-07
FISCAL YEAR.
WHEREAS Resolution No. _ approving the budget for the fiscal year 2006-07 was
adopted on the_ of 2006, and
WHEREAS the City Manager has recommended, and the CRA Board desires to approve,
certain amendments to said budget.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Director of Finance is authorized to record
inter-fund cash transfers as required in accordance with this Resolution, and that
Resolution , adopting the budget for the 2006-07 fiscal year is hereby amended as
follows:
SECTION 1. ADDITIONS
Fund Activity Account Amount
882 Housing Element 8382 - Pending $43,973
Update
Purpose: To provide an update the Housing Element of the General Plan.
SECTION 2. SOURCE
Fund Activity Account Amount
882 Fund Balance 29301 $43,973
ADOPTED THIS __ day of , 2006.
David H. Ready, City Manager
ATTEST-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed and entered into this First Amendment
as of the date first written above.
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
ATTEST: a municipal corporation
By: By:
City Clerk City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
City Attorney
CONTRACTOR: Check one: _Individual —Partnership_Corporation
Corporations require two notarized signatures: One from each of the following: A. Chairman
of Board, President, or any Vice President: AND B. Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Treasurer,
Assistant Treasurer, or Chief Financial Officer).
By: By:
Signature (notarized) Signature (notarized)
Name: Name.-
Title: Title:
State of State of
County of Iss County of Iss
On before me, On before
me,
personally appeared personally appeared
p
personally known to me (or proved to me o rsonally known to me (or proved to me on
the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be th( the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be thi
person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribe( person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribes
subscribed to the within instrument and subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they acknowledged to me that he/she/they
executed the same in his/her/their executed the same in his/her/their
authorized capacity(ies), and that by authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument
the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of
which the person(s) acted, executed the which the person(s) acted, executed the
instrument. instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal. WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Notary
Signature: Signature:
Notary Seal: Notary Seal: