Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVAN DELL AND ASSOCIATES, INC - 1986-07-21091 CC1i,C111. UC 1.vrCC11 611C t, I ij QIIU fUUf I I I fit %.0 ✓, CjjQr U oil Q»c»- ty Study for proposed downtown oarkinq structures Crent feasibili in the City of Huntington Beach. Enclosed is an executed copy of the agreement for ycur tiles. Alicia M. Wen*worth City Clerk t+MW:CB:bt Enclosure CC: Don ;noble, Public dorks Dept. ti REQ lE � FCyRyJ STY C4UNG ACTION r' .. ... •� �.:' &te , ,;11 y. 111,1986 APPItovI:1� Ise• L.I1'�• C:ULi'd(:It. Su6mitted'i6: Nonorable' t•Sayor and. City Council =° Submitted by: Charles W..Thcx>son, City lninistratc Pre�iarecf by: Paul E. Crook, Director of Public t;rv,:ks ' �' c TY rr�— :4! Feasibility Study for �sessvinit ��.;st��ra::'inammng of Proposed Downtcm*n Subject: Parking Structure Consistent with`CouncWPolicyl [ :( Yes ( ] NQw Policy or Exception Statement of Issue, :Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: Staterrlent of Issue: The City desires to study the possibi l a -�v of f iinc �:lg iu:.ure da�,ntcr�,n par}:ing :. structures through an assessm-nt distri.c... Recorrrnandat ion: Authorize the Mayor and ti:e City Clerk to execute .:;;c r.,;r,�ul c:cn .:�grc�r�_►nt wi�.rY van Dell and Asscviates llo- is f!:-, nC1:. '._Q <<L"`.: :.��►,�i?;.(./i�. Ana1'Jsls : On June 16, 1986, the- City Counc-il `--md f '.,a-rnL -.rc, for the first dav,m`cr..n parking structure. The '.F«ntr-*-ii Parking Stucly, rev 4 (.:rrk'u tr; the Cit., Council in August, 19$5 identifiet3 a need fQ-- additiclr,.ii sN::ic eire, asua Sugcc`ste+d the possi- bility of funding by asses_ t-mit :listrict. ro :r;•.•estic;atr. the possibility of utilizing asses a nn . disc-rict. f imunc;ng fcv' '_:-it., desir�n and C !;- rtrctian for future parking sr_rirL•--ores ilG-lve txN---n Funding Saarce : A loan from the unapprr,1lated (If -moral funk: t:.al,x:x:e tr:, t!x� F?�:��ti•r�lc�m;`nt F,genc_r per the provisions of theit�irl{�l Iir: C7jr .'r ril i VC` :� 4recrenr. � k't..,k f n the C1.4:}• and lilt - per . Attac)•rwnts : Agrecvv--nt Insurance Form Cwr: PIr : LE. lw � •- :� ._ _ 4 �+ a,� ` '-., t � � r - A +i ! - �i t •' �� w . ` C ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT. BETWEEN THE CITY OF.HUNTINGTON 13EACH AND VAN -DELL -AND ASSOCIATESt IIJC. FOR A FEASIBILITY 'STUDY i � gyred into this llth day of THIS AGREEMEf T, made .,rd eat y July, 2.986, by and between the CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, a .munici.pal.corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as 'CITY,' and VAN DELL AND ASSOCIATES, INC., a California corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CON RACT`:R." WHEREAS, CITY desires to engage the services of an engineer- ing consultant to prepare an assessment feasibility study for proposed downtown parking structures in the City of Huntington Beach;, and CONTRACTOR has been selected to perform said services, NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by CITY and CONTRACTOR as follows: 1. 'WORK STATEMENT CONTRACTOR shall provide all engineering services as ..described in CITY'S Request for Proposal and Statemenr of and Contractor's proposal dated May 7, 1986 QualificatiR.onsn(hereinafter referred to as Exhibit A ), which is attached hereto and incorporated into this Agreement by this reference. Said services shall sometimes hereinafter be referred to as 'PROJECT.' CONTRACTOR hereby designates M. Robert Lewis, who shall represent it and be its sole contact and agent in all consulta- tions With CITY during the performance of this Agreement. 2. CITY.:iTAF: ASSISTANCE CITY shall assign a staff coordinator to work directly 3: TIME OF -PERFORMANCE Time is of the essence of this Agreement. The services of the CONTRACTOR are: to commence as soon as Practicable after the execution of this Agreement and all tasks specified in �. Exhibit A shall be completed no later than ninety (90) days from the date of this Agreement, with an additional unknown time frame for all revisions. These tunes may be extended with the writter. permission or CITY. The time for performance of the tasks identified in Exhibit "A' are generally to be as shown in the Scope of Services on the Work Program/Project Schedule. This 'schedule may be amended to benefit the PROTECT if mutually agreed by CITY and CONTRACTOR. 4. COVENSATION In consideration of the performance of the engineering services described in Section 1 above, CITY agrees to pay CON- TRACTPR a fee of nine thorsand, five hundred thirty-three dollars ($91533). 5. EXTRA WORK In the event of authorization in writing by CITY, of changes from the work described in Exhibit 'A,' or for other written permission authorizing additional work not contem- plated herein, additional compensation shall be allowed for such Extra Work, so long as the prior written approval of CITY is obtained. 2: 6.. METHOD OF..`PAYMENT A. CONTRACTOR. shall be entitled to progress payments toward the fixed fee set forth in Section 4 herein in accordance with the progress and payment schedules set forth in Exhibit "A." H. Delivery of work product: A copy of every techni- cal memo and report prepared by CONTRACTOR shall be submitted to CITY to demonstrate progress toward completion of tusks. In the evPvt CITY rejects or has comments on any such pro:iuct, CITY shall identify specific requirements for satisfart_ory completion. Any such product which has not been formally accepted or rejected by CITY shall be deemed accepted. C. The CONTRACTOR shall submit to the t.ITY an invoice for each progress payment due. Such invoice small: (1) Ref'erenc-? this Agreement; (2) Describe the services performed; (3) Show the total amount of the payment due: (4) Inciude a certification by a principal member of the CONTRACTOR'S firm that the work has been performed in accordance with the pro- visions of this Agreement; and (5) For all payments include an estimate of the percentage of work completed. Upon submission of any such invoice, if CITY is satis- fied that CONTRACTOR is making satisfactory progess toward com- pletion.of.tasks. in accordance with this Agreement, CITY shall promptly approve. the invoice, in which event payment shall be 3. made within thirty (30).days of receipt of the invoice by CITY. Such approval shall not be unreasonable withheld. If the CITY does not approve an invoice, CITY shall notify CONTRACTOR in writing of the reasons for non --approval, within seven (7) calendar days of receipt of the invoice, and the schedule of performance set forth in Exhibit "A" shall be suspended until .the parties agree that past performance by CONTRACTOR is in, or ..has been brought into compliance, or until this Agreement is terminated pursuant to Section 12 hereof. D. Any billings for extra work or additional services .authorized by the CITY shall be invoiced separately to the CITY. Such irvoice shall contain all of the information required under paragraph 6C, and in addition shall list the hours expended and hourly rate charged for such time. Such invoices shall be approved by CITY if the work performed is in accordance with the extra.work or additional services vequested, and if CITY is satisfied that the statement of nours worked and costs incurred is accurate. Such approval shall not be unreasonaoly withheld. Any dispute between the parties concerr►ing payment of such an invoice shall be treated a, separate and apart from the ongoing performance of the remainder of this Agreement. 7. DISPOSITION OF PLANS, ESTIMATES AND OTHER DOCUME14TS CITY acknowledges that CONTRACTOR'S plans and specifi- cations are instruments of professional service; nevertheless CONTRACTOR agrees that all materials prepared hereunder, including all original drawings, designs, reports, both field and office notes, calculations, maps and other documents shall 4. be turned over to CITY and shall become its property upon PROJECT completion or earlier.termination of this Agreement. In the r•/ent this Agreement is termina-ed, said materials may be used by -CITY in the completion of PROJECT; however, CITY agrees to'hold harmless, indemnify and defend CONTRACTOR against all damages, claims and losses, including defense costs, arising out of CITY': re -use of CONTRACTOR'S plans and specifications, except in the completion of the PROJECT in the case of termina- tion hereof, without CONTRACTOR'S prior written authorization. 8. INDEMNIFICATION, DEFENSE, HOLD HARMLESS CONTRACTOR hereby agrees to defend, indemnify and hold .harmless CITY, its officers and employees, frum and against any and all liability, damages, casts, losses, claims and expenses, however caused, arising from CONTRACTOR'S negligence or willful misconduct in the performance of this Agreement. Any concurrent .,negligence or willful misconduct of CITY, its officers and employees shall in no way diminish CONTRACTOR'S obligations hereunder. 4. WORKERS' COMPENSATION CONTRACTOR shall comply with all of the provisions of the Workers' Compensation Insurance. and Safety Acts of the State of California, the applicable provisions of Divisions 4 and 5 of the California Labor Code and all amend-ments thereto; and all similar states or federal acts or laws applicable; and shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY from and against all claims, demands, payments, suits, actions, proceedings and judgments of,every nature and description, including attorney's 5. w' fees and costs presented, brought or recovered against CITY, for. . or on account of any liability under any of said acts which may be incurred by reason of any work to be performed by CONTRACTOR under this Agreerr,ent. 10. I14SURANCE In addition ,.o the Workers' Compensation Insurance and CONTRACTOR'S covenant to indemnify CITY, CONTRACTOR shall obtain and.furnish to CITY the following insurance policies covering the PROJECT: A. General Liability Insurance. A policy of general public liability insurance, including motor vehicle coverage in a combined single limit bodily injury or property damage of $1,000,U00 per occurrence. Said policy shall name CY:Y, its officers and employees as Additional Insureds, and shall specifically provide that any other insurance coverage which may be applicable to the PROJECT shall be deemed excess coverage and that CONTRACTOR'S insurance shall be primary. B. Professional Liability Insurance. CONTRACTOR shall acquire a professional .liability insurance polic., covering the work performed by it here- u.-der, in an amount of not less than $250,000. Certificates of Insurance for said policies shall be approved in writing by the City Attorney prior to the commence- ment ,of -any work hereunder. All Certificates of Insurance (and the policies of insuranceer endorsements thereof) shall provide •6. that any such Certificates and policies shall not be cancelled or reduced in coverage or limits other than payments of claims Without thirty..(30)`days' prior written notice to CITY. 11. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR CONTRACTOR is, and shall be, acting at all times in the performance of this.Agreement as an independent contractor. CONTRACTOR shall secure at its expense, and be responsible for any and all payments of all taxes, social security, state dis- ability insurance compensation, unemployment compensation and other payroll deductions for CONTRACTOR and its officers, agents and employees and all business licenses, if any, in connection with the services to be performed hereunder. 12. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT All work required hereunder shall be performed in accordance with the standards of the profession for similar professionals performing services in this area at this time. CITY may terminate CONTRACTOR'S services hereunder at any time with or without cause, and whether or not PROJECT is fully complete. Any termination of this Agreement by CITY shall be made i.n.writing through the City Engineer, notice of which shall be delivered to CONTRACTOR as provided in Section lb herein. 13. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBCONTRACTING This Agreement is a personal service contract and the supervisory work hereunder shall not be delegated by CONTRACTOR to any other person or entity without the consent of CITY, C014TRACTOR shall employ no CITY official nor any regular CITY employee in the work performed pursuant to this Agreement. `No officer or employee of CITY shall have any financial interest in this Agreement in violation of California Government Code §S 1090, et seq. 16. NOTICES Any notices or special instructions required to be given in writing under this Agreement shall be given either by personal delivery to C00TRACTOR'S agent (as designated in Section 1 hereinabove) or to CITY S Director of Public Works, as the situation small warrant, or by enclosing the same in a sealed envelope, postage prepaid, and depositing the same in the United States Postal Service, addressed as follows: TO CITY: TO CONSULTANT: Paul Cook Van Dell and Associates, Inc. Director of public Wurks 17801 Cartwright Road City of Huntington ©each Irvine, C, 9271.4 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92.648 .17. 'ENTIRETY The forecoing, and Exhibit,.*A* attached hereto, set forth the entire Agreement between the parties. 1N WITNESS 1411EREOP the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by and through their authorized officers the �day, month and year first above written, CO1.4SU11TANTCITY OF HUNTIUGTON BEACH ... VAN DELL AND ASSOCIATES, INC. '- J E. Van Dell, PresidLnt Mayor ATTE.3 CL E. T.. McKibben, Asst. Secy. City Clerk REVIEW %&11D APPROVED: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Adminiltratft City Attorney INITIATED 1, D APPROVED: Director of Public Works y 1 CtT'Yt DF HI Jt'�'1 INGTON IBE a� rJ� .mW1MAIN`STREE7 CALI�ORNIA 92648 Paul` E. Cook . Public Works Department Director April 1 8. 1986 (71.4)' 536.5431 `ASL Consulting Engineers 1201 East Warner'Avenue Santa Ana, CA 92705 Subject: A.s essrnLnit ❑ntrict Feasibility Study The City 'of Huntington Beach Is In the process of a significant downtown revitalization program. Development agreemaits for ttr: construction of a pierside ;Mage`ntail area.and a hotel on Pacific Coast Highway near IM Street have been .:appr:►ved by tt-e Clty Council. The City is presently pursuing design of a 1,000 to 1,200 space:parking structure to serve these developments. In sddition to. tt>e parking structure now in pn:lirninary design, the City has identif led a need tor`up to throe adcitional parking structures in the down town area which would accommodate 400 to 600 vehicirz. The: City would like to investigate the possibility of till'zing Fassessmerit district financing for the design and construction on the three future parking structures. We are presently soliciting proposals for the study of ttx� assc.�srnr-nt district financing method for the future parking structures. The anticipated study should include, as a minimum: 1. A survey of ttv use of assessment district financing for the purpose of financing parking structures in situations similar to the Huntington Beach Downtown Radevelopmcxat area. The survey should include an analysis of the success u, failure of these assessment districts. 2 A preliminary analysis of ionc'of'benefIt and assessment spread within the zone �bwed�on the proposed size and location of the parking structures and the uses 4. An evaluation of the practi6i'lity:of financing the proposed perking structures by assessment district financing. 5. Methods `for making the assessment district method of 'financing more feasible. Proposals for this feasibility study are to be submitted to my attention by May 7, 1986 with lhe'notation "Assessment Feasibility Study"'on the envelope. Each proposal should "include, as a minimum the following item,: 1. A statement of the consultant's understanding of the scope of work. 2. The'rnethodoiogy the consultant propose, to full ill the study requirements. 3. The experience of"the firm, end the Individual preparing the study, in the preparation of similar assessment- districts. This statement should include a brief description of the project, the client agency, a contact person at the client agency, and the success I` or failure of the district. 4. An estimate of time required to prepare the study. 5. The estimated fee to complete the study based on a time and materials billing, with a not to'exceed total fee. 6. An insurance accord form listing General Liability, Professional Liability (Errors & Omission) and Workers Compensation coverage. After the receipt of proposals, applicants will be screened relevant to: 1. `Expertise and experience. 2.: The methodology to be used as outlined in the pror4sal. 3. Ability to complete the project In a timely and consistent manner. 4. Fees. `75. Abillty.`to provide General Liability, Professional Liability and Workers Compensation coverage. , , Mr. Les G. Evans` City -Engineer City ofuntington'Eeach .2000 Main. Street Hiuntington 3each,: .California 926.18 ASSESSMENT DISTRICT s `'FEASIBILITY STUDY Dear Mr. Evans: Van Dell and Associates, Inc. (VA) is pleased to present -his proposal to perform a parking structure Assessment District reasibz i i ty Stsd•yr. We have rte::ed the CI t-v's RrP and vis..ted 4 the potential sites and surroundinc area. We believe we know ::hat the City needs for this studv�and feel we can best provide for those needs. We -have asseobled a team. of e:x.-ver :s in assessment district formulation and assessment spreadi^g for this protect. tic- only CIO these individuals have the necessary -cc":ni-al background. but they are also familiar with t:.e C:ry of Huntington Beach DowntowM Spec: fic Plar. �a,,nd the: Do--ni tourn ParkIng, Transit, an:: r; nancing Stud,{. As such, t::ry are s�:nsitive to fu: �.:re ber,c fi`s which could be derived from the parking structure (s) , as wel l its the political, ecological, and financial Issues involved. VA has an established reputation for high quality work with the -on each. We planed and desk, -;red Imm-ove.ments City, of iiurting for 'r:oledo Lane, a 19164 redevelopMent groiect. We encourage you to contact our assessment district -related reference for further confirmation of our r eliab1 1tv. We thank you for' the opportunity to propose on this project and trust that the at Information is complete . Should you have "anY cxuestions or need further 1.n1. 4.ion. please feel free to UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROJECT Van.Dell.°and Associates, inc. understands that the City of 'Huntington Beach desjres.to construct three parking structures tc serve the cou-=ercial "Core" area along !-lain Street. These structures :ill be in addition to a proposed parking structure near the pier. to serge the retail hotel complex proposed. Seasonal beach parking is 4%,,o be provided by parking lots east of the pier and through shuttle service from outlying parking areas, Financing taethods available to the City to construct these facilities include, among other sources, the creation of an assessment distr ict . the ;gain purpose of the proposed "Feasibilit;,r Study. is to evaluate t;:is method of financing by developing assessment. concepts and estimated costs for each parcel within the Di s;.rict . The proposed scope of :.:orL: to eomple-e the study has been presented in the foliouing section e£ our proposal, i+et:�adology. `METHODOLOGY Our methodology.is.presented in.detail in the fillouirg section. The following outlines this scope and includes a detailed listing of proposed work tasks, `meChodology, and co�.ments : 1. *ucyf v_ o-gent Di, tri c t n� This task uill.`canvas Cities by telephone within the oeneral Southern California area to determine if an Assessment District has been used or attempted to construct parking structures similar to those proposed in F:untington Beach. If so, 'a e. estionnaire under City of untington Beach letterhead ill be sent reeuesting such infor.:.ation as type of Assessment District f Bonding Act used, date of District formation or public hearing, basis of assessment tcnes and spread, vmical project costs and assessments, and forms and nur..ber of protes� and concerns. r;nowledgabie individuals ill be ident: iie� for future re fete..^.ce. inco.:.alete or xaissing Information »ill be followed up by telephone or if convenie; ►t by nisi . The. proposed feasibility Study ::111 tabulate the Information received and Identify any conclusion:. available. �+ r+ t-r� •e+ = rt- art, r' 2 , Aa � y� i s ��..��.��L1L'_..ii;.L..r.� :ne 1� i L' ZS2LL..�.,.s3US� A�..a.r,.z:�m n.. Several alternative assessment proceedings are available to finals. the ,oropt�sed facl:.itie�:, including the ImproveL�ent Act of 1911, Municipal Improvement• Act of 1913, the Vehicle :Parking. District Law of 1943. and the Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982. Though the details of the proceedings differ, the Districts all identify parcels of 0 ` The first task is to identify those parcels which will,. z�enefit from the proposed itncarovements . ;these parcels will define the tentative boundaries of the proposed Assessment. District. The "Technical, Memorandum 14o' 1 : Parking :'aca l J ty locations" by Parsons,3rinckerhoff'Quade and Douglas Inc., Revised Auyc_st, 1985 .has identified the usage of the s true cures as "Mainly serving office and commercial uses. " (p13) :' from the commercial land uses along I -lain Street" (plz) . These parcels will form the nucleus of the District and the perceived need of additional par: -ring :or these pa:-cels :: i l l determine -he success of t:ze project . Once the boundary of the District has been tentatively identified as containing all parcels benefiting from the improvements, the relative benefit of each parcel must be - determined. No sped fie guidelines, other t han "cc;itabl e benefit", are available to assist in the develoYment of these assessments. T'nis all.o s -he District to be tailored to the needs and ��ercei ved benefits of the individual Mstr!cAl thouch details of other District proceedincs and benefit spread formulas mill e of in. eres:. and lend credibility to this protect, the .`ina: decision an the project :.:ill be de nod by the :: i ? l i ngness o f the parcel owners to- accept the bene L it spi-c 7�. cor...e p..s o .�hs r particular ,District. ict. .several detail:; :-hich tawwht be considered in developing the assessment spread are: a) differences or similarities in the prcrsosed park -Ina str uctures, including siwe, access, cost, land acquisition, special constr ucticn feature ;, etc. b)'differences o r. similarities in the parcels of land benefiting from the facilities, including existing land use, proposed land use, site, location, building li:aits or restrictions, etc. .`c) difference.; or similarities in the relationship of the : land to the, parking facilities, including distance, M visibility. etc. s -— S is - The benefits received by any parcel is a combination of the above and other factors. Conceivably there .are as'nany assessment subzones as there are parcels. However, every. effort needs to be made to standardize the assessment concepts to the most imoortant and -to discount minor differences of each parcel and each assessment. An understanc; ' e and rational basis for the assessments will contribute.;reat3y to tine success of the District, ne Feasibility Study proposed will discuss the various assessment.proceedings available with a recommendation for procedure based on discussion with City staff and a review of the Task 1 Survey. The study will establish a schedule o`. key points in the Assessment District croceedings, ic:en4ify the recomWended :ones of benefit, and list all .� parcels ::{thin the District with proposed assessment amounts . Tne assessments will be based on planning estimates of i.morovement tests and estimates of incidental expenses. Alternative assessment concerts uiii be discussed with a narrative" o i 'the im—acts anticipa :.ec on the parcel assessments. 3. P r e R: e ra t o t.:.f..QiLa_ —tI1 .:2i.x2..f.1;..�y. _:z_tudy. The Feasibility Study ,:ill be preserited to City sr.af4. for review and cor..:.ent . The City, with assistance by *:he Consultant, will then present the study in an open informational ::ar�:shop forum. Letters indicatingt:ie nature of the District and advising o: the Informational workshops will be sent to eac 1 property owner. . Address labels or w;ndow.inserts for each property owner, including the parcel.. number and estimated assessment, will be provided to the City to assist in the mailings. Comments will be solicited at the workshop and reviewers make the District reflect an equitable benefit to all parcels. The final Feasibility Study will be available for a formal presentation to the City r'ounci1 that the District be formed. Additionally. if 607. of the area so petition :-he Council, the 1931 "Deb:: Limit" Act proceedings could.be waived. ':an Dell and.hssoc-aces, Inc. is highly qualified to continue ::ith the assessment engineering rewired to form the .assessment district, however, no such work effort has s been included in this proposal. 5 increasing ...P.3.: Several met;Zods could make the District more feasible, including reductions in cons; ruct: on costs and proportionately in as ess::ents; reducing incidental costs uisitivn, band re:�e-ve funds, etc. ; such as land acc expanding he parcels benefiting from the District resulting in lower costs per parcel ; or decreasing the cost to assessment by contributions from the City. These concepts :ill be detailed and the Impact on the prc_rosed assessments in the final Feasibility �epart. Huntif p'rc-pIaISed, Jun Jun Jun Jun x. 08 15. •22 29 �01 St rt �brojec C . '002 Canvcs Cities G0� uestionncire Q t. i a'r 00 i- u � . }Yta�l Q estion . . 005 Ans,.,�er Question 006 Follow UD CQIIs .. . 007. .-'.ncIysis 0uest� .. . 003 Resrch I"cnd DcLa 009 Determine Bdry 010. Discussion 0.12 Inout Rcw Data. 013. Set Zones/Foctrs 014 Discussion 013 Draft Report 01.6 Reoort Reviev. 017 Attend 1,Vorksn0p �J 18 Set Norkshou 019 0?D Revise Re?or I'Submit Final. rapt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,�`o� . � J. A I n s u -a n* aTe 0 e rt Ic W, 4D elssocl.pll ION ADhINISTRATORS A C 0 N S U;I A rJ'T S' INC r- 0 V. X 1 7 Co ------- ....... 'can- -r 1.0 T PYINE C!^4 9 .BAN DELL NOAqSOC IATL':, 17POI CARTWRIGhT T. 14 E� fj.�iRTFJ IRVINE C v:j 006 ALL .... y..y e. .. � ... ..ii_..�1,.. ......, .. 11r� D a �"t Y�'. .S' i . .. y v ... .'1 : • ' ., ..•�:'�, if, •.. 'Si .. C 2- 7 'M G T 0 N [,,EACH CITY OF HUNT I ATTO DO W NOBLE CONTR ADh TNIST 200 hAIU ST F'1J E4 L IC WORIt'S DEPT t 11.1 N T I N G 7 (1 N REACH CA 92L.18 L I NVA F-LI R T 0 N Gt\MIA AAA. "Ail MYNIA r THE HARTFORa Named Iasi►red: Van Deli anal Associates Inc Pol 72NJ102?9 rN This: endorsement farms. a part of the policy as numbered above issued. by THE HARTFORD INSURANCE GROUP company des ignate►., therein, and takes effect .as of the effective -:late of :;aid policy unless another effective date is stated hereirt. Effective date: 9/01/86 Effective hoer is the same as stated in . the -.Declarations of the F•olicy. <F A0DIT10NAL INSURED EMPLOYER ENDORSEMENT IT IS AGREED THAT SUCH INS()W-.?4CE AS IS AFFORDED BY THE POLICY tlNUER INSURING AGREEMENT I ALSO APPLIES TO: CITY OF HUNTIN+GTON BEACH r ITS OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES 00. hair, Street >t,'.. Huntingtorx Seach� Cal i forr�i 3 9; 6.16 INSURANCE 'IS PRIMARY A5 AN ADDITIONAL lt?5UF.r:D EMPLOYER E:U7 ONLY aS RESPECTS EMPLOYEES �,. HIRED BYAND CARRIED D4 THE FAYRGLt. OF THE EMPLOYER NAMCLU IN ITEM T OF THE DECLARA 10N OF THIS POLICY. AAC..'md ISSUE: 8/27/86 i Nothi,'oq herein contained shall be held to varyy waiver alter or extend any of the .terms+ conditionsr a reeR,ents or declarations of th policy other..than a- herein stated. i This endorsement shall not be bindin•3 =anless countersigned by a duly. authorized. a9e�rtt of the company; provided that if this endorsement, taks effect as of the affective date of said policy andr at issvy of said Folicyi iorms a part thereof, countersignature on the declaration's pa-3e of said policy by a duly: authorized agent of ;the -company shell constitUte valid countersignature ..of this endorsement. F.e7ra► G�-2290-38 s, . ! ^ -1 .:•h �•.! 3 Q T,'•r. i n- „t . x n. +•i.• ,,1•!" t•r r• ,•► 'tt.1',q t ''ha 'r :ii r-tliwjn• .� +�,�IVf, 1'7':,1 .. G+:•,)..t ,", """.•.if r '� • `�� t �` . � it Zi,.a �u,SiiY'i'�- '� art:. ��1� r •:'l'y 4 S4.r R'- :r .`�i �'. g"+i�'`1 R, r•�!' !. '� .J'. / '1� r • h8 '�oJ Aft wu,R�.f���/y 1,4 :Mwy1,1 l j t..i ! trY, t .. J,,.,{. r''(.,.'ri. r.` A.�• ti'.:]{ �,� Tr:j a;l Z•1:;;�'l.rt' e, 4•5.7':� .i ZY ll..cy� T�•�.:i.,. "S �•Mi,i!•�i•• `t!,i!'..��1': qy' �. ,�y{. �,.r•.1 �. `^,,� r t(.A• , t!» . .\Ar •l!s. r r'►{. , r' �•�. •';i'', �� �::'•,,i, .C.t ♦ j� ;,•-Z.t}; 1�.. �• .( ,r„,F• y„ � �Yr' ^ R y •la .f :.r-!'; ..Jf • li' *. t>, ♦n;St'1'i" �,• �t i +•+i',S, i-i{'I`�y 1t�F:1� A •t r,. t. r a. .fi• *,; ji',;fr;M 4'' .H�l}ti fy 1{` 1t��f..��t;�j r•�.;Ca �• i���•. '�/r�+� sit{' .; t r ( �, p is t, ! (( �T,'+� 't R ,�"i t U5, t}�(. � � } if S' �tSd •t fit! (, 5,•.s.rr , � F t 4'. Y 1 h, S ri �t 11 •� �t F , ♦ Z S r. i.� .1s! t,iF Fr � i4r •.r�T i 't' .l. �tlly. .�ltt''r�{;i17r j-r. � ,,;21�Ri ,t'R'i . ♦ 77 „}}!t r t{a 'hir�F �tR i +� i ,�+I/ F. it i rS,'j �f�{ .1 t !.. 1, t�,#�Y°. ♦ F, t, .s,E# �; r_7II �r 7 ica �wVa� � ��'1.' 1",� a ;i� �i <, 'i �r�'� �j' t7.!fv�S`� "::'i }`:t•}'� F�:�TJn S.i `i',a e t., , �r ta,� j•j. t ♦ ".;. srr� .7, yl,t.. J Z y .7 r , ,•Ar•st • misc. +,•' .. ? h•wr�3 r.ir , fit.. rs4 K;�+.: r1,., r3,j,1 4�„A,4 j" ,,t {.,.T .'Z.�11 ..h �' t•e, '. r 'i a1�.Fr t. y 1.,. , 1 X'1... *-. ` ,i�t;;�i . ��f•.i�f��, �Clt. TTL O r. `""A ��Q,�Q:'���:1.w►i,� :�%p�. i�%��/f�i'�b ����'�isy'ti+�f `'"r!v"�•' �• �r;,i :,,.! 13;II:ERTn►MCA?t.DQE3 1�+•ANEkt1,.,r7tYE�tO`OMf:?/►tf It tidl"sf:GYEltI�t:Nr�O A41 ,;TkR''p01.i RED.'.sEww hAml AV YY �7.t • ' COMPANIES AFFORDING CONSULTANTS, INC. t' -• • r •• 1 ' [ ON 5f:. 833-'0673.HARTFORD ACCIDENT INDEMNITY,.,. VAN r ASSOCIATES, r 1 P• it . •ht R• • , + •.. • • 92714 R4 ♦ • 1 ix ,y4t :.-Zi r 7 Z 4 trSrt � �lLj ;i n"• 1404 4. 'r �'tira.�!'i • ti 'y +�,;+�'�ti►�i••.:i'�t:j�Zi''��:��„�� tiT#yi���p, . r v+.-. } • ���it'{�'!'"i�dy��A�.�.S,li.'{,�•Q!�:',• +jt�� y�T t,ti� . Mtn • Y.µµx i� •r >+�� .. .'•iZ; M. rl� tt '+. r `.1t}.r,•}'4-� :♦.; .�{#b'st "n,.,,r,,;.. .a-s :t;t.,:.r.t.� r ;:t•w'tzs.{„'•}(.•!•eLtzR' :tav ert♦- rt.•rr.,+[-cr.a•!; +,v•+». �'tyw•� .7,ra,.t'u�t;7fFi5.+=�a�.t».)a.c►xtYtn•xr .1R.,.YS'n•y%.Ylh!%,i�tl: RSt+:.4 •,,.;�Sif.s5� t t�� r, Y 1, 1,!. :�. ��, Zf,. [ 'iCITY OF r BEACH Don Noble,• • • :Public• 1 •. 11 Main Street ti Beach, '92• i ngton • ii:�':1 ! .: t t; '.b.tt.e T,..r;.h t `•y�°!vt:•, a. .+•.iG !%1,,!; rn • '�+ ! ' ' .:',F' i 4....Y �II,i•, �1, i t�.'f S .�r 1.-.r,4.�r �::�.. �.t )+.,�,•'S .n,, .3 �'I�ff .. +.�'r,.4+1. �t[.2 tIZ ..e 1. �"s#tLS•37inuy'..itf•r�.:r{,s1i'^Y.,.t. i ,0 Y ,. - lip. t . ........ NAL#t AWj 'I A, .j W11E RWN�, i:A 9271,5 TEL Z".)6.06/3 ftAk4j ANQ AJA.,Pt'i 'I; -wj1 p ..VAN DELL -AND ASSOCIATES .� 17861 Urtwright Road Irvine, California 927' JA01 AS I CEhER AL LIABILITY A x x AUTOMOBILE IIABILIT A EXCESS LIARIL 17 V A vv Rp, ..PS COM FIE *4 SA I 7 .4 nJ PANOYERS'tIAB(LITV PROFESSIONAL A C 'LIABILITY is 't J Cancellation 1. 'jjr," vi�,, xxxxx�xxvv 1!'4 x) ­XXIxxxxx xx)t*xxkxxknxx*xxxxyxxxkxj(gxnx"RX"x'XXXMXX"XXXXXXXXXx b..­­ 7-1.1-..... C I TY OF'' HIMT I NGTON BEACH 'Att: 'Don, P.--ble, Contract Administrator Public'Works Department - ­4,f e I 200 Hain Str�et Z) I V f I A I J,, I ....-fluntinaton- Dealab.-Cal J forn ia.-,. 92648__.____,__j This erutarsement, etlective 5/4/86 . , forms a part of polity No. NA F 43 00 77 (12.01 A. M,, sljk d hTr) issued to Van Dell and Associates, Inc. by 'ihe Northern Assurance Company of�A� �rit:a I �Itr�eprt,rrt+ti.♦ Schedule Mime of Person or organization (Additional Insured) tocal►on of Covered Operations ' CITY OF. NUNTINGTON BEACH, It's elected and appointed boards, officers, agents and.,employees. INSURANCE IS PRIMARY Premium Bases Rates Want# Premium Bodily Injury t'ubild�r Cost $103 of cost $ 35.00 Property limite tiabil►ty Cost $100 of cost $ Inc 1 Total Advance Premium S 35.00 It is agreedlhal: ; 1. The "Persons Insured" provision is amended to include as an insured the person or arganizat►on named above (hereinafler called "additional insured"), but only with respect to liability arising out of I)) operations pttformtd (of the addd►orul insured by the named insured it the location dtsignaled above or (1) acts or cimissiors of the additional insured in connection mth his general supervision of such operations = ` 1 tone of the eadusions of the policy. rrctpt radusions (a), (t), (I), (t), (1), (1) and (m)• apply to this insurance. 3,'Addifional Et,clusiens This insurance does not apply ?a) to bodily injury 0 proptrly damatt occurring after (1) 23 work on the project (nlher than Service, maintenance at repass) to be ;'triormed by or on behalf of (he additional insurtl at the silt of the "covered operations has been completed or (1) Ihal portion of the named Insured's work out of %hith flit injury or damage Ansts has tten put to its intended use by any person or organization other than another contractor of subcontnciot engaged in performing operations lot a prmupa) as a part of the sane ptoitct;. (b) to bodily Injury of property damage arising out of any act or omission of the additional insured or An j of his employees, other than tenera[ supervision of work performed lot the additional insured by the turned insured; (e) to property damrigt to { (1) propefly o.ned or occupied by er rented to the additional insured, (1) property used by the additional insured, (3) proptrly In lhe'a►e, custody or control of the additional insured or as to which the additional insured is lot any purpose eaelcisirl physical conirat; or.,. "(4) wwk performed for the additional insured by the atrntd insured. i ,4• k1dillonat Dernrllon When t,std in reference to this insurance, ".cork" includes materials, parts and eciuipment (utnishtd in connection lhettteith. rev -._ .. .. � .;. ...� -. • ` _. _ .. �' :.tJ t• .,Y An&c 04-67396 :. /a/86. CAE '0364323 I ' Tltiscndorsemcnt,effc:ctirc , forcits "rnrt of'Policy No. ' '���iZ1. •• -VAN "DELL AND ,ASSOCIATES, . INC. ' Issue 'to .' by t le'insutance cot. ny indieaccd below by'an ® IhSUTANC[.Carl4hf -❑ hSUp'AhCICC04?AhYs' .0 Ih UMrNC[rCO�•IAht h.7 CGMIAhY Uf�AM[MSCAAhCL . ADDITIONAL INSURE IT IS AGREED AND UNDERSTOOD THAT 1}iE FOLLOWING IS ,tMED AS ADDITIONAL ,j. INSURED WITH RESPECT TO THEIR INTEREST IN THE OPERATIONS OF THE NA2 wD INSURED: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH It's elected and appointed boards, officers, agents and employees Insurance is Primary AAC : 3 md ISSUE: 7/I0/56 .g. Submitted to: i'onorrible .yflr. and City Council Sdbm(ttmd by: Crai•les '. 'f` ��sor,, -City Admnistratcr PrVarwi by: Paul E. Cook, Director of Public !..brks ��- �• "�" Feasibility Study for Assessment Dish -,:c : inarcing of Pro: town Subject: Ptritin Structure k •." Consistent vvitfi Council Policy? ( :1 Yes (j New Policy or Exception Statement of lssue, Recommendation, Analysis, Fundinq Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: Statemant of Issue: The Cite desires to study the possibility of funding -ut;:re dcawntawn parking stnictu.•-es through an assessrent district. aeccr.r:�ndat ion: Authorize the MA7or and the City Clerk to exec-.:te Ccr:sultant X rec-wnt Tan Dell and Asscciates for a :et rot to exceed :0,533.01' �^.zlvs:s On pure ? s; 1985, the Czty C:�uzcil ar:proved :,�.yy�,,�rc f _n&-cirg for the , : rst ►^ta r= ? � park-, .N Structure. �e LL"/.iltC,�ii Ua�''{ �IZt3 �t�..•G�r� . 6'•�J�E"�!'d ��: w =C tit.' Lcumc:.: _n k2gust, 1985 identified a needcr add.:t_cnal sty cvares and suggested tM possi- bil4tf of °undimg by assess;ent dstrict. PmccSa° j to =^'.'eSt_,Catt: t:e poS51b2' : ty of utilizing assess:Tent district f..narcinc for ---e desiggn and con.str.,ction fcr future park ng structures have beenrece.•:ed. F' mdir4 Source: G n r r 1 n. 'f �nI4. ' 7n «r. �-1.47� • In A 1ca.•i :rtr� :he unauo.coriate�� general fc.:.. bas�..ce �U _ e t. �cxrr_r>t ncf,.c•� per the proV 5 Dns GL the stand,ng q;-e , ve 3:;. �?E»� .` t t'=,(..., she C . and. e Ager y . Ar-taci.rents : . Agreemn Insurance Form CWr : PEC : LE : iw i ..4a' - s ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT : BETWEEN' THECITY 4F:,HUNTINGTON BEACH AND, VAN DELL -AND ASSOCIATES �It:C. rOR A -FEASIBILITY STUDY ;. TH..IS AGP•EEMENT, made and entered into this 11th day of July, 19661 by :and between the CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACh.. a municipal corporation of the State of California, nereinafter I eferred to as 'CITY,' and VAIN DELL AND ASSOCIATES, :,:C., a California corporation, hereinafter referrer to as 'C(?i:TRACTDr .' riii«R:.AS, CITY desires to engage the services of an enci nee: - ina consultant to prepare an assessment fEasinili_% Stacy for proposed downt�•�n pGr�;:n� structures n the Cit. of r,�;on lead;; . anc C0N'77' A'CTOt"' and rle#:_3 5eieC:-S C SirV Z S OW THE :.•,.r� REI :� G_rCC l :�\� ....*� ails. L�i•...`5. �' i • WORN S CONT:?AClOL snail prov:de a' enzinee: ng sE: ►.ce a descrioed in C:: 'S : eg"est -for rc: u_al and StG• :�: . i and Cont:::tor's ,=:!• ."Sal t�d)ifica-iDnsA'rIer1eli:t'_e rein'E. � :Ja :s atta:.•ned hereto an :r:coro:::tec :r tc referencN. Sail services S'all sots et i:r,es r;@: E:^a te: :e :elerred to as - CG::TR�,CTOi-. :�erer,}aesi;.r�a.es !•.. r:o:��rL :eN.s, �•:;o s;ra: :epresent it and oe its sale contact and aceni n all Cor.s:.ita- Lions with CITY during the performance of tnis Az:eenent. . L • CI TY .5':n: F ASSIS,AtyC« �✓ CITY shall assign a staff coordinator to wc�r�; oireL�t�y -'With CONTRACTOR in:.the prosecution of tnis Acreer:en- 1. .e of this harecr,en:.• Time i_ of ,the essen ^he services of the CONTRACTOR. are to commenze as soon as practicable after � the execution of t:,is Agreement and. all --asks :pecifiea in Exhibit 'h' shall oe completed nc, later tnan nines} 90 days a this ?,?reenjen�, �it.n an acdition..al unknown time' fra-MC :♦ors t'ne date of ` for all revisions.':nese t1T:,es clay Dte ex_c:,ced �itx, t e Mitten permission i,Z for ;,erformance Of .Cc �a�►;S .dentified in �xt..r:ic 'h' are centraliV :o E as S:;:.r. in =t:e 5 ope of service_ On _;, »Lr►. F'rac;�G;r,.:. .t-,: C ..e. •..1� schedule ;lea• be ..r�::yoc .c oetiefi_:,,L- . :`. r:;.._::a._,l C0fip.".At ..lei. ?% COi"t5►;1'�ra�..>T, :.+: ::f1C :r �,'i a:tL,�..::. ,.'1� :':,:.fiE•t:.i._ { _. ' ... ��L vi ve5 a e s c r AZ.ew in �`, C_t•Jr . C, .J�•. •., r.� •.+ V'.J•~� t _..% ►'.�'+�• 1. �..w i• :iIr,C1t�F a fee of.,_:,e _.,�::sa.,.., ..�L ...rl...•. _.. t-.. ct�lia:s t It , 533 i A. 5 ' : nanaes. fror� ►i1 �� �6.,: �• .. :�v.: .:J�u ♦:. .. J...: . _ 'h,' �. ,.ice J. .E •�zitten perr::ss:or. a�tr:c,ri�:;,a c,��.:'.:..:ria- .:�,;�. :._ ..•+�- ,fated nereitn, a $1.10 An ♦ Vo,-.;z nawr.vll .•. :.w♦♦ i-e ...a_•`~.+ .-'� .y. ��.. r C. Ill-k sL i oiir as l:. •ii a G w ♦ tC. .'1 w '• � fi ♦ "vim '�.. a i ii G rI At - r 6. METHOD OF. PAYMENT Y; ,o payments. A. �Ut�..T RACTUR shall UE entitled to progress p }ments toward the f ixed ' fez set Furth in Section 4 herein, in accordance w�ith.:the proaress and payment. schedules set forth in Exhinit `A•` B . Delivery of w'or }: pi odoict : A copy of every tecnni- Cal memo and .,report prepa rea oy CONTRACTOR shall oe scb;gifted to : CITY to•oemonstrate progress toward completion of tasks. =n the event C.T!' r.ejects or 1.3s comments on ary suc;, product, CI TY si-,ail identify specific rcqurr=rents for satisfactory completion. Any. such product wric:as no_ ot•cn farn,aliy accept _a Or re ECted by CITY stall ne dee, ed accepted. C. ':r:E C:'i•: lhC'iV: �.".�: �L'.,F`.i: to �.rit C'.Y a. fur cacri progress p:Ay'ent �ri�.e. .JL i i� .'� :CE :,C.1. ( Z Descr i:,;e t:.e se: i ces p1i r i or:: eU; the total am. -.int of -ne ;,a,,r:er,t c�::� `� .ncl'-:� a r er•.if ica%1.'!, :.��t2 : In`I ... .. o f :.: f �. ti �• • i, h �. • '..:', ' J f r !� :.:.a, . :,een in accordance .%e p.-v- L'I S:bnS G: hir(:E'mt!,,t; an . t5) FrJr a.11 ;:a;;,:erg:r 1nci;:rF a^ __r.a;e cf p. r centace L'pon s-,emission of a%y if ::':Y .s sati-- tied that CONTRACTOP, iE c►:,r,. sat lsfactory process toward cor.:- M rletIon 4f CBsi:£ lr't aCCC3:oar•�cA `sL:i this ?,creeimer+_ C TI' shai� prompt l y approve the invoice, :n which event payment shall oe V p-rformance_se6. forth in Exhibit `F.' shah tie suspended until the partlES.agree that last performance by CONTRACTOR is in, or has oeen brought into cotrpliance, or until tr.is Agreement is cPrminatea pursuant to Section I? hereof. Any billinas for ey:tr a work or adcltional se: ,* izes authorized ny the CITY stlall oe Invoiced separately to tr,e juCh lnv{.:cE srra.ii COnc.3iri cI► Gf ,e I n _r,:,.ic+, ec:.:1.E: ....Cer paragraph 6C, and ;n additionS:,a:: ::st the :,o:.:s exper,ded an hourly rate cna: -ec for such Such :n v.: c -_s Snai approved zy C; :1-7 if t:,e 'wor K i,E: fG:'i: : accu: aance N:...L t: extra work o: a6cltionai servict-s n :i Sd�2sf ied that the stater.ent of Z0ZZt-I- I ric: -;r : e . is accurate. Sucn appr oval s a1 ♦ fir ►)M aE 4, r.w.• M j wt...M J.i any ciS p4eer. _ :e par t ies CC).". n:::'= . a:. invoice shall ue trea.L-d as set,ara:F- and c:,art j: r;1 _;.E cirl:++�:r performance of the reimainaer of ,.Lis 7. C:iY ac►:tyo::iedoes that CUI•TF.P.C':�n'a pIans and spa:.:ii- cations are instrumen.s of profess:onal se:%':;.e; nev-r,.h It-ss CONTRACTOR agrees that all materials=,repo:ec r►a:eunaer, including all original.dra»ings, design., reports, both field he.turne'd over. to CITY -and shall become, its, property upon PROJECT completion 'o r earlier terriination of this Agreement. s, In. the event this Agreement is terminated, said materials may be i;se'd by CITY in the completion of PROJECT; however, CITY agrees to hold harinIess, indemnify and defend CONTRACTOR against all damaces, claims and losses, including defense costs, arising out o CITY'S re --use of CONTRACTOR'S plans and specifications, except in the completion of the YROJECi in the case of terniina- tion hereof, without CONTRACTOR'S prior written aut:aorization. . iI'DE 1.t'iF ICAi101', DEFENSE, HOLD 14'',Rt•L SS COt:TRACTOs? hereby agrees to cef enc, ince,,,nify and h rmless C:''Y, its of i 1Cer 5 ar er.r:o.. eES, `:Or-. a:1C a za:. a;,%• and all liability, .ea.�aces, costs, i05Ses, clal;,as and expe.^,SeS, nowever causes, arising I:oR, C';)NT A= 'S necl—ei ce or '.1i1:�:1 :.:isconouct in the oerfor.;�ance of this Agreement. Any concurrent. negligence or willful misconcuct of C:.Y, its officers and employees shall in no wa.: c::..inis:: CONTF.AC:'OF.'S orliar.ions Hereunder. 9. W0HKF, S' COh;z'EI:Sn ;tilt: CONTRACTOR snail comply with ..ii Lf tit prov1s.ons of the tivorr.ersl Corq)ensa;ion 115LranCe an:: Saf t;,; Arts Of of California, the app'_icaD_e provisions of Divisions 4 and �J :if ;he California tabor Cote and all amendments thereto; an all sirra1ar state or federal acts or laws applicable; and shall 1noemnify,, defend and hold harmless C17Y from and against all claims, demands, payments, slits, actions, proceedings and )udgmen_s of every nature and description, including atto:ney's 4 .� i fees and costs presented, brought or. recovered against CITY, for or on account of, any liability under any of said acts Nhich may. oe incurred, by reason o: any work. to be pE•riormod by CONTRACTOR Under this 'Agreement. 100 i 14SURA14C� In addition to the `porkers' Compensation :nsurance and ; CON'TR.ACi•Ok'S covenant to indemnity CITY, CONTRAC^OR shall obtain and fturnish to CITY the foio»ina insurance policies covering the PROJECT: A. General L.at:lity ir:s::rcnee. A policy of ceneral p�:olic liaoility .nsLrwnce, including motor ver::cle cov=_•:ace ;n a Cxr:.;:,rd sirtc,r _.r,;oC in]wry or property oa:,age c: Si,UUU,uoi Del. occurrence. Sa:C !o'z:cy S;":c? . nar.L, Y, 1 officers an(. employees as Ajditionz. ;nsurecs, a� d snal1 spEcif ! call rovide ;at any o`.i:E•r insurance coverace r`,a•: 3e al' ' i caol e to tr. Cr S :a:. :+<- CE.ME, EYE -:SS C0VEE 3Cc""= a„C tr3G C0::.RAC- .Crr'S :r,s:rar+cr st:a�. : e pr::..a: ti•, S. Professiona::n.:::• :ns.:.ar,ce. CON. 4ilall accu:ie a prOte<<:ona liar+ii.•}• in L:3r::.r policy C�►►�: ir::; the �Cl: p. r'E: forir:G4 : 1: undr; , in a : aro"nt. of riot Bess :t:ar, Y ; 5D UOc-. Ce.rtifica.es of Insurance fcr sa1a policies sr.ai: :ie approved in wri:inc t�;r :,E. Ci:.: A.tci:rjev p for to :.,•r cc�;r+r.er,�-�- men, of any. work nereunder. . All Certificates of :nsurance (arid the policies of .insurance or endorser+ents thereof) shall provide . l 5 "r that any such Certificates and policies shall not be cancelle"d or':reducd in coverage 'or limits other than payments of claims ��ithout thirty, 30)'days' prior written notice•to CITY. 11. INDEPENDENT. CONTRACTOR CONTRACTOR is, and shall be, a.:ting at all times in the performance oUthis Agreement as an independent contractor. COt'TR*CTOR shall secure at its expense, and be responsible for any and all'pa`yments of all taxes, social security, state dis- ability:insurance compensation, unemployment compensation and other payroll oeductior,s for CONTRACTOR an3 its officers, agents a,�d Employees and all :)usiness licenses, if and•, in connection with the services to oe performed hereunder. l2, i:.P.MINATION 0. AGREEY,:.::i All work required hereunder shah oe performed :n ..accordance witn the standards of the profession for similar professionals performing services in this area at this tine. CITY may terminate CUN'TRACTOR'S services hereunder at any time or without cause, and w7hether or not 1s fu11? complete. Any ter;of this nnreer..ent vy CM shall be made :in writing through the City Engineer, notice of whici: snall oe delivered to CONT?1,C.OR as provided in Section 16 n.re:n. 13. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBCONTRACTING This Agreement is a personal service contract an:: tnE supervisory work hereunder shall not be delegated oy CONTRACTOR to any other person or entity without the consent of CITY. E . • _ .. : .. • 14. COPYRIGHTS/PATEN"S CONTRACTOR shall not apply for a patent or copyright on' any item or.material produced as a result of this Agreement, as i set 'forth fn Ill: CFR 1-9.1. I: 15. CITY EMPLOYEES At:D OFFICIALS CONTRAf l--)R shall employ no CITY official nor any regular.CITY employee in the work performed pursuant to this Agreement. "No officer or employee of CI:'Y shall have any financial interest in this Agreement in violation of California government Code SS 1090, et seq. t:OTICI:S Any notices or special instructions required to be `given in writing under tnis Acreement small :>e given either oy personal delivery to CO;ITFtFCTOR'S noent ias designated in .t Section 1 hereinaoove) or to C.:Y'S Director of Puoiic Wor►,s, as the situation shall warrant, or by enclos:nc the sa,��e in a sealed envelope, postage prepaid, and depositing the sa,,,e :n the United -States Postal Service, addressed as follo-s: TO CITY: 70 CONSULTA::T: Paul Cook Van Deg: and Assoc.ates, Inc. Director of Public Works 17501 C3rt::riant Road City of Huntington Beach Irvine, CA 92714, 2000.Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92048 1 8. t. ' 2000xMAIN STREET 'CAL1FORNIA 826A8, P�u!{E. Cook Public worki Department Director April 18, 1986 (71 ) 63 5431 ASL Consultirig-Engineers 1261 East WN m' er Avenie _Santa AnN CA 92705 Subject: Assessment District Feasibility Study The City of Huntington Beach is in the process of 8 signif icant downtown revitalization pro rem. Development agreements for the construction of a pierside village retail aree ano a hotel on Pacific Coast Highway near Chain Street hive been e iproved by the City Council. The City is pmsenntly pursuing design of a 1,000 to 1,200 space ;)Rrking structure'to serve these developments. ln'addit;on to the parking structure now in preliminary design, the City has identified a need for up to three additional parking structures in the down town area which would accommodate 400 to 600 vehiclm. The City would like to investigate the possibility of utilizing assessment district financing for the design and constructic-n on the three future parking structures. We are presently soliciting proposals for the study a' the assessr-ient district financing method for the future parking structure;:. The anticipated study should include, as a,minimurn: 1. A survey of the use of assessment district financing for the purpose of financing parking structures in situations similar to the Huntington Beath Downtown Redevelopment ama. The survey should irx-lude an analysis of the success or failure of these assessment districts. 2 A preliminary analysis of zone of benefit and assessment jpread within the zonr based'on the proposed size and location of the parking structures and the uses perrnittedby the Downtown Specif is Plan. 3. Prepar6tion end presentation of the analysis described a!>ove to affected property owners and interested citizens. �� °Aisbkment bi`flif t FeasibEilty Study . April 181 1986 Psoe 2 evaluation of the precticaIIty of flnancing'the proposed parlany structures by a asiiment'dist'rict financing, �. r4th6do for'mking the assessment district method of financing more feasible. Pruposals`far this feasibility study are tcrbe submitted to my ettenticx� by May 71 1986 with the°notation "Assessment Feasibility Study" on the envelope. Each proposal should incl•.�de, as a`minimum the following item: 1. A statement of. the consultant's understanding of the scope of work. r 2. The methodology the consultant proposes to fulfill the study requirements. 3. The experience of the firm, and the individual preparing the study, in the preparation "of similar assessment districts. This statement should include a brief description of the project, the client agency, a contact person at the client agency, and the success or failure of the district. I: 4. An estimate'of time required to prepare the study. 5. The estimated fee to complete the study based on s time and materials billing, with a not `to exceed total fee. 6. An insurance accord form listing General Liability, Professional Liability (Errors d Omission) and Workers Compensution coverage. After the receipt of proposals, applicants will be rcreened relevant to: 1. Expertise and experience. 2. The methodology to be used as outlined in the proposal. .3. Ability. to complete the project in a timely and consistent manner. 4. Fessr 5. Ability to provide General LiabiIIty,'Professioral Liability and Worker; Compensation coverage. a f. Aasaramant Dirtr#ct ., �x • ,Faa�lbUitY:��dY r A rtl l 8� 1, 966 s Page .11 EXHIBIT A May 7 M.r. Les GEvans City Engineer C 4 H.v_n t i n gz c n Beach 2 0 00oMain''Sz.-eet- Huintingcon Beach, Cali o ran i a 92640 ASSESSMENT 'DISTRICT EF.XSIBILITY STUDY Dea., Mr Evans: ...Van Dell :and Associates, inc. (VA) is pleased to present thLs prcposal. to perform a parking structure Assessment District -evie-ed the C-4-z-v's RE"? and v- e �Jbil'zlv St1_udy- We have the mote.-,-. i a* sites and surroundina area. We believe we mow "hat the Clz,., needs for this study and !'eel we can best provide 1"cr these needs. We. have assembled a tea=-ol' experts 'n assessment d-st-.-,-,: 0Mulation a,rid-assessment soread-t-g for tl-*s project. Not only do these {ndivIduals 'ave 6.e necessar%, tec--.ical backcro-,m-4. Down' t 0'. rn also famil4a- *wLth t.-Ae Cltv of 1-:=.tingtor. Beach they are h. F Trans4z. and 4-ar Spec_ f_4 c Plan and Do-_­ntourn Park-ing, nclnc Study. As suc:z, thev are sensitive z.o fL,*-u-e bene"'ts which could be derived o m the park--nc structures}, as we!* as the o-AtIcal. ecologlcal . and `Inancial 'Issues invo"-ed. VA has an es-ablIshe-i rep; ­-.:at`o;-. :or %,49h =aal­y work it:: the City Beach. We planned and 4eslan.ed ­mnroven.,z -es or, Koledo Lane. a 1584 redevelopment pro'ect. me encourage vow to contact our asscssment district-r-alate-t reference .or furzher conr4r-at-lon o&' our rel_abillltq k vow 'or the c n - ru o p r ay) o s e on t s p r o e c an We tha. port* "'zy trust that the attached 4 or—matlon is complete. S-ou'd you *-awe C-,.n Y questions or. need r-ler information., please *.'eel Free to ..contact u. Very. truly .yours, VANA-ID -ID ABSOCiATr Ic . "MAL Van Dell; e ident- ;Pv s JEV:KLM:" d N ;. t. Mr.THODOLOGY:: our -methodology is presented in detail in the,fol?ow4ng section. nie following outlines this scope and includes a detailed listing of.proposed work tasks, methodology, and comments: 5:ryey%_.szf.�. :i,stina L4:js.-s =tom District Fjnan - This mask ill canvas Cities by telephone :: i t.n-A n the cenera , Sou :::ern Cali f orn�.a area to determine if an Assessment �'_s :-ict has been used or attempted to construct park :ng s4ructures similar to those proposed In riu.nzi.ngton Beach. so, a' cq•,!esc:.ornaire under City" of Huntington beach letterhead will be sent requesting such information as t;•pe or.' Assessment District%.ondina Ace used, date Gf District formation or public hearing, basis cf assessment panes and spread, typical mrolect costs and assessments, and forms and nur_. Der o f .protest, and concerns . }:.-)o•.; ledgable indl ••, dua3s ? ? be iden ti fi dd for fut::re reference. i ncomp le to or missing information wi11 be followed up by telephone or if corveni.ent °by vi.s:.t . the :)Ao ozed yeas _ �, S�L..r _ tabu` ate a in_orma;.ion received and ldentify any conciuslons available. .. .ti .a 1 y s Q f r RaC ti'T�+; nt� AcQ 2_ 5 new f t :ini�n, PCt'.fY:= Seve. 3 ..e. at__ 255E'.Ss:«E':�t T'+.~C'CeECi:)cS are available 10 'r nance the prOUCaSECt lav w? itt e5, .'.�)C� UC''_T1a the improve=en:. Act o f 191.1'. Municipal ir.pr o'-.►emen t Act Of 1913 , the Ve:Zi cl e Parking D.strict Lau oL 943, and the Mello -Roos Co unity, Eacillt_es Act of 1982. Though the details o: the proceed.ngs differ; the ilistricts all wden:ify parcels of land benef{ t:.ng fr om t:iE :aci"ti.es .and establish assessments based on the level oL benefit received. 1 . F t ' ' Th6 first task is to identify those parcels which will benefit from the `proposed improvements. These parcels will k define the' tentative boundaries ' o f the proposed Assessment District. The "Technical Memorandum No 1: parking Facility L'bcations" by ?arsons Bririckerhoff Quade and i5ouglas Inc. , Revised August, 1985 has identified the usage of the structureC as "mainly serving office and commercial uses." (p13) "from. the commercial land uses along train Street" Low-4) . �: ese parcels ::il_ form the nucleus of the District and the "perceived need.of add!.tional parking for these pa. s ki::l ceterc! me the success of the proaect. Once 'the boundary of the District has been tentatively identified as containing all parcels benefiting from the i mp:-ovemen is , the relative ve bene fi ;. of eac parcel must be 'determined. No specific guidelines, other than "ecu: tab?e benefit", are available to assist in the development of these assess :.:e:,ts. .r.is allogs he D:.strict to be taglore to the needs and nerce_ved bene A. "' is c f the ind_vidual r'* . District �.lt'.:ouc:.de=ai s of o;.: er n1strict proceedings and benefit spread formulas :. 1 be of .wrest and lend cred`_`hil-I ty to his prcject, the final dec-sion on the pro)ect will be deterc,ig ned by the ill_nness of the parcel • o:rners to accept the bene=:t spread concepts of this particular i,istrict. Several details which ,:.ig t be considered in developing t"ne assess=e.-z spread: are: a) differences cr si-m-` aritles in the proposed parking structures, in::udin, slte, access. cist, !and accruisition, s:�ec�ai construct::or. features, etc. b) . differE:n:.es or. s�mi.ar ities in the parcels of land r benef1 ::ing =rc:.. the-facil_ Iles, including existing sand use., proz)csed land use, sine,. location, building limits or res trip Liens, etc. ' c) differences cr si.:.i'_a. it:es in -he relationship of the land to the : parking facilities, including distance I, s visibiIitv,.etc: -- The benefits received by . any 'parcel is a . cor"..biriat�on cif the above azitd `other "factors, Conceivably there ,are as 'many ' ass �.,w cent subzones as °th•ere ars' parcels • however, every e�for.t ,needs to `be made to standardize' the assessment concepts .o the 'most ! tapor.tant and to`discount minor .differences of each'parcel and each assessment. An: un3erstandable and rational basis for the assessments will contribute greatly to the success of the District. one Feasibility Study proposed discuss the various assessment. proceedings available with a re-,mends-4 on _ar procedure based on discussion •.:it:: City staff aria a r eti,iew of -he Task . 1 Survef. 'i:7e study will establish a schedule oI key points in the Assessment District proceedings, iderai fy she recommended zones o f bare `i t , and list a 1 i _narcels within the nistrict with proposed assessment amounts. 4ne assessments wil: be based on planning esti:�a :es of 1,=nr ovene n w costs and estimates of inciden tat exmenses. Alzerna---re assessment concepts will be discussed with a nari•ati•: e" o f the wmcacts az;.:,cimatea or. the car cal assessments. 7ne Feas I bilit'j Study _►:.' 1 be nresented to C- t`staff f or rev' ew and co �::e^; . 'i:;e City. �: i th ass : sta:�cc b•;� the Consulta:,L, t:ie ; present the saucy an open. in format-onal worr.shcp foru.:.. 'Let.ers indica Lng the of the Distr,c;. an. adv'sync of the !nfcr =,ationai woi ksho: s will be se ,t to each prog�r t;,� o:.•ner. Acdre.ss labe_s or =ndow inserts for each property e%,rr,er, including the parcel number and est_Wa:.eci assessment, will be provided to the City to ass 4 s;: in the =ailings . Com.^ents will be solid: ea at the workshop an rev:evec to make the D!.s:.r4-- reflect. Z.r. equitable benefit to all parcels. �;Ye final'Feasibility Study will be. ava :.able for 'a forwal presentation to the City Council. ii. L� 1 @ ' •, { ;4 . ' �'L'.� 5: .�..S:Y yn f `A PS rent �i err r Fs nanri no The ioucor; e o l the workshop and t:te presentation -of the 414 nal,..Feaslbility Study uiI_ indicate the pract_ca_itf 06 continuing with the foi�atl on o: an Assessment Distri:--:.. One positive indication would be a petition to the City Council y the oar c el s in ~.'r,'e n-oposed Distract recuesting that the L str.ic t be formed. :,edit: ona? ? y, if 50% o f the area. so petz. ns :.he Counc+ 1, the r.ct p., eedings could be.�a_ved. Van D e I I and Associates, ? nc . is h: -h? y q�;ai ed to continue •.:_th tale assessment e^gineer:nc -squired to forty the assessment d:str:ct, hoaeve--, no such work erfcr� **-as been inc :uded :.^ ::lis proposal . S, T.'i T�'e�i nS? t'1 `is`.;�; �� 'PCa zi2L 7 1 S eve, —al d •.e ti E ..:5 4r:.: :: v^re fE'S:.AJ" le, _nCl u"dr.ny n CG:iS r...�..� w�i., `.CS r5 and pz-oportio:;ateiy :^ assess=er►ts; red,_c'ng :. clden,:al costs suc;: as :and a^ zu;.sl t: on, bond reserve fLLnds , etc. , c tn- parcels benef,_-. :. _ from the ^:strict resultn expand:^g in lower ccs..s per zarce'l ., or ce=reasi.-da te cost to assesswent :;' contr'_butI ons fro= t;:e C-t}'. ^e se comceDzs «lt.r II be de- ter ur'i. -he w^CaC: Cn :.`70 ►`�.rCr.:CSE' . asSE'SSa:,e':t:. i .t.:2 the '!:-,aa s1_1 ...j. ` R:. n_ .`. SIG .s .. ~.. I� nriI .. t. Y '�1x r . ASES ENT OLIS1C C. ['9opos oQy der :Sy'r ' 01 Tas.k%'Ncm" e Jun `86 0 Jun Jun Jun uc:►n 08 15 :22 20 40 i Stort pro jec; 002• Convcs Cities . . 005 4uesj'o ' EMcil QueSliOnal;- Ans�vi'er Ouestion ' 006 ; r ollow Up Ccl!s :007 nncl,sis Ques:n 008 t�eSrcn �Cnd Dc c 0 Q 9 Determine ddry . 010 Discussion 01`�2 input Rcw Dcto 0T..3 Set -Zones/r cc,rS. 014 � Discussion 01`6 ,Repot Review 01,7: ,Attend Worksboc ► ,0:i8.. -Set Wcrkshoc { l 0 i 9 ±nevi se "nea0r i 02)0 SLobr, rinol Rct ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ....• ...... .. F Y, 1��a7i1 CrItI�•cl .-... � l�;o ; . .. i rioct/IDelcy vrinisn L,)eicv i�r'�•ssic I C a .�G, Crit 1�iie .m = L.. ; f oc : { Crit Fin Delov Cr;t Unossian a s , a Resolution 4832, a Fiscal Impact Report has been As. requested t ed ufider,'the uth6rlty of prepared M 'lath r i14 and. submitted relative to the proposed loan by the City to the Redevelopment f studying ying the possibility of financing future downtown parking :Agency � or. purposes '6f tud' structures through an assessment districit. Anticipations by the requesting entity are that an appropriation of $9`533 a Wi uld be aAe4uate for this project. ...An af hi'ma,tive response by the City Council will reduce the balance of the City's unaudited, unappropriated General Fund to $1,873,795. oo '--; C)B COM NZI Chief Administrativ"ervices Departn'tent 00,