TO:
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THROUGH:
Bruce Moe, City Manager
FROM:
Carrie Tai, AICP, Community Development Director
Talyn Mirzakhanian, Planning Manager
SUBJECT:Title
Consideration of a Resolution Awarding a Professional Services Agreement to Michael Baker International to Provide Environmental Consulting Services for the Scout House Project with a Not-to-Exceed Amount of $153,254.00 (Community Development Director Tai).
(Estimated Time: 15 Min.)
ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 22-0057
Line
_________________________________________________________
Recommended Action
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 22-0057 approving an agreement for environmental consulting services for the Scout House Project, located at 1617 North Valley Drive, with a not-to-exceed amount of $153,254.00.dy
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
The costs associated with this contract would be borne by the City and the applicant, Friends of Senior and Scout Community Center, through the joint project costs to be memorialized in the Memorandum of Understanding.
BACKGROUND:
The Scout House, built in 1952, is a structure located on City-owned property that has been used by Scout troops and seniors in the community for nearly seven decades. The structure now has outdated mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, does not comply with accessibility regulations, and lacks the physical capacity needed to accommodate current and future Scout and senior programming. In collaboration with the City, the applicant proposes to demolish the existing Scout House and construct a 7,500 square-foot, 22-foot tall modern facility that will better serve the needs of the Scouts, seniors, and the community at large.
The proposed project requires a Use Permit, Coastal Development Permit, and associated environmental review, for which a consultant is needed. The consultant would prepare parking, historic, other technical studies as necessary to prepare a legally-defensible California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) document, as well as implement a branded public outreach effort that engages a variety of community stakeholders and effectively communicates ideas in various forums and platforms.
Through the Request for Proposal (RFP) process, staff sought a consultant with prior experience in preparing legally-defensible CEQA documentation and in navigating the needs of the Manhattan Beach community as it relates to outreach and engagement. Staff ultimately selected Michael Baker International out of six consultant candidates, as they were able to demonstrate that they have the expertise to effectively and successfully deliver the aforementioned consulting services.
DISCUSSION:
The City received six consultant responses to the RFP, including from Eyestone Environmental, Environmental Science Associates (ESA), Galvin Preservation Associates (GPA), Michael Baker International (Michael Baker), Moreau, and Vandermost Consulting Services (VCS) Environmental. Each candidate was reviewed for their understanding of the project and the consultant services needed; the company’s and staff’s qualifications, experience, and availability; professional references; proven experience with stakeholder engagement; proposed methodology for completing the work; and cost. Michael Baker International was selected to complete the full breadth of work for the reasons provided below.
In its proposal, Michael Baker demonstrated a clear understanding of the scope of work and provided a detailed methodology for completing the requisite studies and CEQA documentation, as well as a well-formed strategy for stakeholder engagement. Michael Baker has a sizable team of in-house and subcontractor technical specialists and extensive experience and expertise in both implementing community engagement programs, producing CEQA documents, and overall project management. They have and continue to work with nearby municipalities on projects similar to the Scout House Project, which involve potential historic resources that require CEQA expertise. Michael Baker previously managed Manhattan Beach’s Downtown Specific Plan Project and more recently, the CEQA analysis for a proposed hotel in Manhattan Beach, demonstrating proven experience with the community.
Michael Baker proposed two environmental review options: a focused Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and a Class 32 Categorical Exemption. One of these two options would be selected based on the findings of the historic, parking, and other technical studies. The focused Environmental Impact Report (EIR) option would cost up to $153,254 and the Categorical Exemption option would cost up to $78,866.
Eyestone Environmental proposed two environmental review options: an EIR ($185,840) and a Categorical Exemption ($51,740). While their team meets the required level of experience and expertise, they were unable to demonstrate that their team had the ability to deliver the public outreach and community engagement needs anticipated for this project.
Environmental Science Associates (ESA) proposed two environmental review options: an EIR ($215,329) and a Categorical Exemption ($70,754). While their team meets the required level of experience and expertise, their stakeholder engagement strategy was not as comprehensive as the one prepared by Michael Baker International. Additionally, if determined that an EIR is required, the proposed EIR cost far exceeds the EIR cost proposed by Michael Baker International, and the option for a focused EIR was not included.
Galvin Preservation Associates (GPA) proposed four environmental review options: EIR ($337,982), Mitigated Negative Declaration ($127,519), Initial Study ($99,400), and Categorical Exemption ($79,400). Although their team meets the required level of experience and expertise, their wide swath of environmental options and services indicated a lack of a clear understanding of the scope of work. Additionally, if determined that an EIR is required, the proposed EIR cost far exceeds the EIR cost proposed by Michael Baker International, and the option for a focused EIR was not included.
Moreau did not propose any environmental review options; rather, they provided construction and design cost estimates. This indicated that they did not understand the scope of consultant services required for the project. Furthermore, their proposal indicated that they did not have the capacity to provide the necessary environmental review services.
Vandermost Consulting Services (VCS) Environmental proposed two environmental review options: EIR ($90,000) and an Initial Study ($21,000). While their team meets the required level of experience and expertise, the absence of a Categorical Exemption amongst their proposed environmental review options indicates a lack of strategy foresight.
Michael Baker International provided the best combination of qualified and available staff, a proven track record in Manhattan Beach and nearby cities, a clear understanding of the project and needed consultant services, and a well-developed strategy for navigating the environmental review process and managing stakeholder engagement. Their ability to fulfill each role included in the RFP represents a financially and administratively efficient approach that would best serve the City and ensure a comprehensive CEQA review for the Scout House Project. For the reasons provided herein, staff recommends the City enter into a contract for professional services with Michael Baker for the preparation the Scout House Project’s associated environmental documentation.
PUBLIC OUTREACH:
While public outreach was not required for awarding the contract, the planning activities supported by this award will include community engagement, public review, and public noticing, including to the public, stakeholders, and community groups. Future public outreach will include, but is not limited to, community meetings, printed noticing and advertising, and public meetings and hearings.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The awarding of this contract has been determined to be exempt from CEQA pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the common sense exemption (formerly the “general rule”) that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question can have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA, as is the case with the awarding of this contract for environmental consulting for the Scout House Project. The Scout House Project itself is subject to CEQA, and environmental review is included in the consultant’s scope of work.
LEGAL REVIEW:
The City Attorney has approved the agreement as to form.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution No. 22-0057
2. Agreement - Michael Baker International
3. PowerPoint Presentation