Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Psomas and SLF-HB Magnolia, LLC (Shopoff) - 2017-06-19
Dept. ID CD 17-005 Page 1 of 3 Meeting Date: 6/19/2017 0, _ CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR. CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6/19/2017 SUBMITTED TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY: Fred A. Wilson, City Manager PREPARED BY: Scott Hess, AICP, Director of Community Development SUBJECT: Approve and authorize execution of a 3-year Professional Services Contract with Psomas in the amount of $510,213 for preparation of the Magnolia Tank Farm Environmental Impact Report; approve and authorize execution of a Reimbursement Agreement with SLF - HB Magnolia, LLC (Shopoff) in the amount of $510,213; approve an increase in the Community Development Department's Professional Services listing authority by $510,213; and appropriate funds to be fully reimbursed Statement of Issue: Transmitted for your consideration are a professional services contract with Psomas for preparation of the Magnolia Tank Farm Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and a reimbursement agreement with SLF— HB Magnolia, LLC (Shopoff) to fund the EIR. Financial Impact: An appropriation of $510,213 from the General Fund to the Community Development Department Professional Services Account 10060201.69365 is required. These funds will be offset by the attached reimbursement agreement with the developer of the project, SLF — HB Magnolia, LLC. Recommended Action.- A) Approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a "Professional Services Contract Between the City of Huntington Beach and Psomas for the Magnolia Tank Farm Environmental Impact Report" in the amount of $510,213 as prepared by the City Attorney (Attachment No. 1); and, B) Approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a "Reimbursement - Planning - Agreement Between the City of Huntington Beach and SLF - HB Magnolia, LLC for Costs Incurred for the Magnolia Tank Farm Environmental Impact Report" in the amount of$510,213 as prepared by the City Attorney (Attachment No. 2); and, C) Approve an increase in the Community Development Department's professional services listing authority by $510,213 for the preparation of the Magnolia Tank Farm Environmental Impact Report to ensure compliance with Administrative Regulation Number 228, Section 7.1; and, D) Appropriate funds as revenues are received in the amount of$510,213 from the General Fund to the Community Development Department Professional Services Account 10060201.69365 for the Professional Services Contract between the City and Psomas, which is funded by a reimbursement agreement. Item 17. - I HB -218- Dept. ID CD 17-005 Page 2 of 3 Meeting Date:6/19/2017 Alternative Action(s): The City Council may make the following alternative motions: A. Deny the professional services contract between the City and Psomas. B. Deny the reimbursement agreement between the City and SLF — HB Magnolia, LLC. C. Continue the item and direct staff accordingly. Analysis: A. PROJECT PROPOSAL Applicant/ Property Owner: James M. O'Malley, SLF — HB Magnolia, LLC (Shopoff), 2 Park Plaza, Suite 700, Irvine, CA 92614 Location: 21845 Magnolia Street The request consists of a professional services contract and a reimbursement agreement to prepare and complete the environmental analysis for the development of the Magnolia Tank Farm site as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The environmental analysis would determine the potential environmental impacts associated with a proposal by the property owner for the following: - Request to amend the General Plan land use designation from Public to Commercial Visitor, Residential Medium Density, and Open Space-Park and Conservation; and - Request to rezone the property from Public-Semipublic to Specific Plan to allow for development of the 29-acre former Tank Farm site; and - Request for two proposed development scenarios: 1. Development of the site with a 211,000 square foot lodge with 175 guest rooms and guesthouse (lower-cost overnight accommodations) with 40 beds; 19,000 square feet of retail; 250 for sale residential units (at 15 units/acre); and open space. 2. Development of the site for residential-only, which includes 250 for sale residential dwelling units (there would not be any lodge, guest house, or retail components described under Scenario 1). The project will require various entitlements, including a General Plan Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment, Zoning Text Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment that will be acted on by the Planning Commission, City Council, and the Coastal Commission. B. STAFF ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION A professional services contract between the City and Psomas is necessary to prepare the required environmental analysis for the development of the Magnolia Tank Farm site. This contract will require an appropriation of funds by the City. Funding for the environmental analysis is included in the reimbursement agreement with the property owner. There have been many reimbursement agreements approved over the years for environmental analysis. This is an acceptable method to provide timely entitlement processing and environmental analysis. Staff recommends approval of the professional services contract, the reimbursement agreement, and the increase in the Community Development Department's professional services listing authority for the preparation of the Magnolia Tank Farm EIR. HB -219- Item 17. - 2 Dept. ID CD 17-005 Page 3 of 3 Meeting Date:6/19/2017 Consultant Selection Process The City received proposals from eight firms in response to a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the environmental analysis. Planning staff reviewed the proposals and selected Psomas based on a rating system that considered compliance with the RFP requirements, methodology, qualifications/experience, clarity, cost, and references. Staff rated Psomas higher than the other firms that submitted proposals for several reasons: depth of experience of the project manager working with communities and presenting to the public and decision makers; greater level of commitment from the principal staff member to attend meetings and hearings on the project; experience working in coastal communities; availability of staff resources to work on the EIR; expertise of technical staff and subconsultants; and previous experience working on environmental documentation for similar projects in Irvine, Newport Beach, and the County of Orange. Below is a comparison of costs amongst the eight proposals that were submitted. The variation in the proposal costs is due to differences in the scope of work proposed. The project applicant has received a copy of the draft contract and reimbursement agreement. A copy of the reimbursement agreement signed by the project applicant is provided in Attachment No. 2. Consultant Proposal Cost Environmental Science Associates $475,174 Psomas $463,830* Michael Baker $283,017 LSA $270,075 First Carbon Solutions $250,846 Infrastructure Engineering Corp. $217,451 Environmental Advisors $198,750 Stantec $108,695 *A 10 percent contingency has been added to bring the total cost to $510,213. Environmental Status: Projects over which public agencies exercise ministerial authority, such as the subject professional services contract and reimbursement agreement, are categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15300.1. Strategic Plan Goal: Strengthen economic and financial sustainability Attachment(s): 1. Professional Services Contract Between the City of Huntington Beach and Psomas for the Magnolia Tank Farm Environmental Impact Report 2. Reimbursement - Planning - Agreement Between the City of Huntington Beach and SLF - HB Magnolia, LLC for Costs Incurred for the Magnolia Tank Farm Environmental Impact Report Item 17. - 3 HB -220- ATTACHMENT # 1 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND PSOMAS FOR THE MAGNOLIA TANK FARM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Table of Contents 1 Scope of Services.....................................................................................................1 2 City Staff Assistance................................................................................................2 3 Term; Time of Performance.....................................................................................2 4 Compensation ..........................................................................................................2 5 Extra Work...............................................................................................................2 6 Method of Payment..................................................................................................3 7 Disposition of Plans, Estimates and Other Documents ...........................................3 8 Hold Harmless .........................................................................................................3 9 Professional Liability Insurance.............................................................................4 10 Certificate of Insurance............................................................................................5 11 Independent Contractor............................................................................................6 12 Termination of Agreement.......................................................................................6 13 Assignment and Delegation......................................................................................6 14 Copyrights/Patents...................................................................................................7 15 City Employees and Officials..................................................................................7 16 Notices.........................................................................................7 17 Consent ....................................................................................................................8 18 Modification.............................................................................................................8 19 Section Headings .....................................................................................................8 20 Interpretation of this Agreement..............................................................................8 21 Duplicate Original....................................................................................................9 22 Immigration...............................................................................................................9 23 Legal Services Subcontracting Prohibited................................................................9 24 Attorney's Fees..........................................................................................................10 25 Survival.....................................................................................................................10 26 Governing Law .........................................................................................................10 27 Signatories.................................................................................................................10 28 Entirety......................................................................................................................10 29 Effective Date.................................................................................I I PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND PSOMAS FOR THE MAGNOLIA TANK FARM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT THIS AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made and entered into by and between the City of Huntington Beach, a municipal corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as "CITY," and Psomas, a California Corporation hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT." WHEREAS, CITY desires to engage the services of a consultant to prepare an Environmental Impact Report for the Magnolia Tank Farm project; and Pursuant to documentation on file in the office of the City Clerk, the provisions of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code, Chapter 3.03, relating to procurement of professional service contracts have been complied with; and CONSULTANT has been selected to perform these services, NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by CITY and CONSULTANT as follows: 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES CONSULTANT shall provide all services as described in Exhibit "A," which is attached hereto and incorporated into this Agreement by this reference. These services shall sometimes hereinafter be referred to as the "PROJECT." CONSULTANT hereby designates Kathleen Brady who shall represent it and be its sole contact and agent in all consultations with CITY during the performance of this Agreement. 2. CITY STAFF ASSISTANCE CITY shall assign a staff coordinator to work directly with CONSULTANT in the performance of this Agreement. agree/surfnet/professional svcs mayor I Of 11 10/12 3. TERM; TIME OF PERFORMANCE Time is of the essence of this Agreement. The services of CONSULTANT are to commence on Zq , 20� (the "Commencement Date"). This Agreement shall automatically terminate three (3) years from the Commencement Date, unless extended or sooner terminated as provided herein. All tasks specified in Exhibit "A" shall be completed no later than three (3) years from the Commencement Date. The time for performance of the tasks identified in Exhibit "A" are generally to be shown in Exhibit "A." This schedule may be amended to benefit the PROJECT if mutually agreed to in writing by CITY and CONSULTANT. In the event the Commencement Date precedes the Effective Date, CONSULTANT shall be bound by all terms and conditions as provided herein. 4. COMPENSATION In consideration of the performance of the services described herein, CITY agrees to pay CONSULTANT on a time and materials basis at the rates specified in Exhibit "B," which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference into this Agreement, a fee, including all costs and expenses, not to exceed Five Hundred Ten Thousand Two Hundred Thirteen Dollars ($510,213). 5. EXTRA WORK In the event CITY requires additional services not included in Exhibit "A" or changes in the scope of services described in Exhibit "A," CONSULTANT will undertake such work only after receiving written authorization from CITY. Additional compensation for such extra work shall be allowed only if the prior written approval of CITY is obtained. 6. METHOD OF PAYMENT CONSULTANT shall be paid pursuant to the terms of Exhibit "B." abrcc/surfnct/professional Svcs mayor 2 of I I 10/12 7. DISPOSITION OF PLANS, ESTIMATES AND OTHER DOCUMENTS CONSULTANT agrees that title to all materials prepared hereunder, including, without limitation, all original drawings, designs, reports, both field and office notices, calculations, computer code, language, data or programs, maps, memoranda, letters and other documents, shall belong to CITY, and CONSULTANT shall turn these materials over to CITY upon expiration or termination of this Agreement or upon PROJECT completion, whichever shall occur first. These materials may be used by CITY as it sees fit. 8. HOLD HARMLESS CONSULTANT hereby agrees to protect, defend, indemnify and hold harmless CITY, its officers, elected or appointed officials, employees, agents and volunteers from and against any and all claims, damages, losses, expenses, judgments, demands and defense costs (including, without limitation, costs and fees of litigation of every nature or liability of any kind or nature) arising out of or in connection with CONSULTANT's (or CONSULTANT's subcontractors, if any) negligent (or alleged negligent) performance of this Agreement or its failure to comply with any of its obligations contained in this Agreement by CONSULTANT, its officers, agents or employees except such loss or damage which was caused by the sole negligence or willful misconduct of CITY. CONSULTANT will conduct all defense at its sole cost and expense and CITY shall approve selection of CONSULTANT's counsel. This indemnity shall apply to all claims and liability regardless of whether any insurance policies are applicable. The policy limits do not act as limitation upon the amount of indemnification to be provided by CONSULTANT. 9. PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY INSURANCE CONSULTANT shall obtain and furnish to CITY a professional liability insurance policy covering the work performed by it hereunder. This policy shall provide coverage for CONSULTANT's professional liability in an amount not less than One Million Dollars agree/surfneUprofessional svcs mayor J of 11 10/12 ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence and in the aggregate. The above-mentioned insurance shall not contain a self-insured retention without the express written consent of CITY; however an insurance policy "deductible" of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) or less is permitted. A claims-made policy shall be acceptable if the policy further provides that: A. The policy retroactive date coincides with or precedes the initiation of the scope of work (including subsequent policies purchased as renewals or replacements). B. CONSULTANT shall notify CITY of circumstances or incidents that might give rise to future claims. CONSULTANT will make every effort to maintain similar insurance during the required extended period of coverage following PROJECT completion. If insurance is terminated for any reason, CONSULTANT agrees to purchase an extended reporting provision of at least two (2) years to report claims arising from work performed in connection with this Agreement. If CONSULTANT fails or refuses to produce or maintain the insurance required by this section or fails or refuses to furnish the CITY with required proof that insurance has been procured and is in force and paid for, the CITY shall have the right, at the CITY's election, to forthwith terminate this Agreement. Such termination shall not effect Consultant's right to be paid for its time and materials expended prior to notification of termination. CONSULTANT waives the right to receive compensation and agrees to indemnify the CITY for any work performed prior to approval of insurance by the CITY. 10. CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE Prior to commencing performance of the work hereunder, CONSULTANT shall furnish to CITY a certificate of insurance subject to approval of the City Attorney evidencing the foregoing insurance coverage as required by this Agreement; the certificate shall: agree/surfnet/professional svcs mayor 4 of 11 10/12 A. provide the name and policy number of each carrier and policy; B. state that the policy is currently in force; and C. shall promise that such policy shall not be suspended, voided or canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice; however, ten (10) days' prior written notice in the event of cancellation for nonpayment of premium. CONSULTANT shall maintain the foregoing insurance coverage in force until the work under this Agreement is fully completed and accepted by CITY. The requirement for carrying the foregoing insurance coverage shall not derogate from CONSULTANT's defense, hold harmless and indemnification obligations as set forth in this Agreement. CITY or its representative shall at all times have the right to demand the original or a copy of the policy of insurance. CONSULTANT shall pay, in a prompt and timely manner, the premiums on the insurance hereinabove required. 11. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR CONSULTANT is, and shall be, acting at all times in the performance of this Agreement as an independent contractor herein and not as an employee of CITY. CONSULTANT shall secure at its own cost and expense, and be responsible for any and all payment of all taxes, social security, state disability insurance compensation, unemployment compensation and other payroll deductions for CONSULTANT and its officers, agents and employees and all business licenses, if any, in connection with the PROJECT and/or the services to be performed hereunder. 12. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT All work required hereunder shall be performed in a good and workmanlike manner. CITY may terminate CONSULTANT's services hereunder at any time with or without cause, and whether or not the PROJECT is fully complete. Any termination of this Agreement by CITY shall agree/surfnet/professional Svcs mayor 5 of 11 10/12 be made in writing, notice of which shall be delivered to CONSULTANT as provided herein. In the event of termination, all finished and unfinished documents, exhibits, report, and evidence shall, at the option of CITY, become its property and shall be promptly delivered to it by CONSULTANT. 13. ASSIGNMENT AND DELEGATION This Agreement is a personal service contract and the work hereunder shall not be assigned, delegated or subcontracted by CONSULTANT to any other person or entity without the prior express written consent of CITY. If an assignment, delegation or subcontract is approved, all approved assignees, delegates and subconsultants must satisfy the insurance requirements as set forth in Sections 9 and 10 hereinabove. 14. COPYRIGHTS/PATENTS CITY shall own all rights to any patent or copyright on any work, item or material produced as a result of this Agreement. 15. CITY EMPLOYEES AND OFFICIALS CONSULTANT 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 the applicable provisions of the California Government Code. 16. NOTICES Any notices, certificates, or other communications hereunder shall be given either by personal delivery to CONSULTANT's agent (as designated in Section 1 hereinabove) or to CITY as the situation shall warrant, or by enclosing the same in a sealed envelope, postage prepaid, and depositing the same in the United States Postal Service, to the addresses specified below. CITY and CONSULTANT may designate different addresses to which subsequent notices, certificates or agree/surfnct/profess ion al svcs mayor 6 of 11 10/12 other communications will be sent by notifying the other party via personal delivery, a reputable overnight carrier or U. S. certified mail-return receipt requested: TO CITY: TO CONSULTANT: City of Huntington Beach Psomas ATTN: Scott Hess ATTN: Kathleen Brady 2000 Main Street 3 Hutton Centre, Suite 200 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Santa Ana, CA 92707 17. CONSENT When CITY's consent/approval is required under this Agreement, its consent/approval for one transaction or event shall not be deemed to be a consent/approval to any subsequent occurrence of the same or any other transaction or event. 18. MODIFICATION No waiver or modification of any language in this Agreement shall be valid unless in writing and duly executed by both parties. 19. SECTION HEADINGS The titles, captions, section, paragraph and subject headings, and descriptive phrases at the beginning of the various sections in this Agreement are merely descriptive and are included solely for convenience of reference only and are not representative of matters included or excluded from such provisions, and do not interpret, define, limit or describe, or construe the intent of the parties or affect the construction or interpretation of any provision of this Agreement. 20. INTERPRETATION OF THIS AGREEMENT The language of all parts of this Agreement shall in all cases be construed as a whole, according to its fair meaning, and not strictly for or against any of the parties. If any provision of this Agreement is held by an arbitrator or court of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable, void, illegal or invalid, such holding shall not invalidate or affect the remaining agree/surinet/profess ion al Svcs mayor 7 of 11 10/12 covenants and provisions of this Agreement. No covenant or provision shall be deemed dependent upon any other unless so expressly provided here. As used in this Agreement, the masculine or neuter gender and singular or plural number shall be deemed to include the other whenever the context so indicates or requires. Nothing contained herein shall be construed so as to require the commission of any act contrary to law, and wherever there is any conflict between any provision contained herein and any present or future statute, law, ordinance or regulation contrary to which the parties have no right to contract, then the latter shall prevail, and the provision of this Agreement which is hereby affected shall be curtailed and limited only to the extent necessary to bring it within the requirements of the law. 21. DUPLICATE ORIGINAL The original of this Agreement and one or more copies hereto have been prepared and signed in counterparts as duplicate originals, each of which so executed shall, irrespective of the date of its execution and delivery, be deemed an original. Each duplicate original shall be deemed an original instrument as against any party who has signed it. 22. IMMIGRATION CONSULTANT shall be responsible for full compliance with the immigration and naturalization laws of the United States and shall, in particular, comply with the provisions of the United States Code regarding employment verification. 23. LEGAL SERVICES SUBCONTRACTING PROHIBITED CONSULTANT and CITY agree that CITY is not liable for payment of any subcontractor work involving legal services, and that such legal services are expressly outside the scope of services contemplated hereunder. CONSULTANT understands that pursuant to Huntington Beach City Charter Section 309, the City Attorney is the exclusive legal counsel for agree/surfnet/professional Svcs mayor 8 of 11 10/12 CITY; and CITY shall not be liable for payment of any legal services expenses incurred by CONSULTANT. 24. ATTORNEY'S FEES In the event suit is brought by either party to construe, interpret and/or enforce the terms and/or provisions of this Agreement or to secure the performance hereof, each party shall bear its own attorney's fees, such that the prevailing party shall not be entitled to recover its attorney's fees from the nonprevailing party. 25. SURVIVAL Terms and conditions of this Agreement, which by their sense and context survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement, shall so survive. 26. GOVERNING LAW This Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 27. SIGNATORIES Each undersigned represents and warrants that its signature hereinbelow has the power, authority and right to bind their respective parties to each of the terms of this Agreement, and shall indemnify CITY fully for any injuries or damages to CITY in the event that such authority or power is not, in fact, held by the signatory or is withdrawn. 28. ENTIRETY The parties acknowledge and agree that they are entering into this Agreement freely and voluntarily following extensive arm's length negotiation, and that each has had the opportunity to consult with legal counsel prior to executing this Agreement. The parties also acknowledge and agree that no representations, inducements, promises, agreements or warranties, oral or otherwise, have been made by that party or anyone acting on that party's behalf, which are not embodied in this agree/surfnet/professional Svcs mayor 9 of I I 10/12 Agreement, and that that party has not executed this Agreement in reliance on any representation, inducement, promise, agreement, warranty, fact or circumstance not expressly set forth in this Agreement. This Agreement, and the attached exhibits, contain the entire agreement between the parties respecting the subject matter of this Agreement, and supersede all prior understandings and agreements whether oral or in writing between the parties respecting the subject matter hereof. 29. EFFECTIVE DATE This Agreement shall be effective on the date of its approval by the City Council. This Agreement shall expire when terminated as provided herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by and through their authorized officers. aerce/surfnet/professional svcs mayor 10 Of I I l0/12 CONSULTANT, CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, a Psomas municipal corporation of the State of COMPANY NAME California W w77ayor h 14� print name Ci y Clerk 1141 fl'p) ITS: (circle one)Chairman/Presiden ice Presiders AND INITIATED SAND APPROVED: By. /L �`�-- - Director of Community Development print name ITS: (circle one) Secretary/Chief Financial Officer/Asst. Secretary-Treasurer/V6�—Pd���� REVIEW APPROVED: i Manager APPROVED AS 1W FORM: >ty Attorney agree/surfnet/professional Svcs mayor 11 Of 1 I 10/12 EXHIBIT "A" A. STATEMENT OF WORK: (Narrative of work to be performed) Psomas will prepare an Environmental Impact Report for the Magnolia Tank Farm Project. The scope of work dated April 12, 2017 is attached. B. CONSULTANT'S DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: See attached scope of work. C. CITY'S DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: See attached scope of work. D. WORK PROGRAM/PROJECT SCHEDULE: See attached scope of work. EXHIBIT A APPROACH between Psomas and the City are imperative steps in completing a successful project. There Problem-solving is a strength of our practice are multiple ways to maintain good lines of because we have a willingness to take on new communication, and we will work with the challenges and appreciate opportunities to City to establish a communication protocol strategize solutions in a team-based setting. and determine which format is suitable and This approach works best for the proposed preferred by the City. We acknowledge that Project given that the City encourages close we are working on the same goals and work coordination between the consultant and the a City staff. Psomas' goal is to establish long- together to create a high quality environmental J document. This will provide everyone with lasting,positive, and productive working a cooperative frame of mind throughout the relationships with our clients. In an effort to completion of each task. In light of the above best serve the needs of our clients,we strive to goal, Psomas will be readily accessible to the consistently deliver quality work by: City to allow for easy discussions and transfer of Ensuring consistency among data, information about the Project. assumptions for the Project description, and Legally Defensible Documentation. Our all topical issues and reports; objective is to be of service and value to the Coordinating with the Lead Agency to City and consider this to be one of our primary determine the appropriate analytic approach consulting responsibilities. Preparing adequately in order to be consistent with other similar scoped analyses with sufficient data and fact- projects; based substantiation are the cornerstones Conducting early consultation with applicable of successful CEQA documents. Psomas agencies (i.e., Coastal Commission) if there has an excellent track record of preparing are complex issues to be resolved; thorough CEQA documents that are capable Ensuring that mitigation measures are of withstanding legal challenges. Additionally, reasonable,practical, and enforceable; Psomas is accustomed to working closely with legal counsel, as desired by the Lead Agency, and Conducting site visits to identify all relevant maintains excellent working relationships with land uses and activities that may be adversely various legal firms to prepare legally defensible impacted in the neighborhood and city; I documentation. Soliciting and documenting views/input from In-House Quality Assurance/Quality Control. external stakeholders (i.e., utility and service providers, and adjacent cities) and internal Psomas is committed to providing technical documentation of the highest level of quality. stakeholders (i.e., project team members); and Conducting in-house quality assurance/quality Maintaining awareness of current regulatory control (QA/QC) reviews concurrent with the issues and trends that may affect the project. preparation of written technical documents is one method that we use to ensure the delivery of Good Communication and Partnership. We are committed to fostering trust-based client thoroughly comprehensive and legally defensible � environmental documents. An important initial relations that will last well beyond any single step of the QA/QC process is to assign staff project. Accessibility and open communication members that have the appropriate technical _..................._._...-.............................._..._........................ PSOMAS City of -;rti-e#or,3eadl,Jrange Cour r California vtagrolia.rank Farrn Proffer` expertise and experience to complete the work. units (12.25 dwelling units/acre) on 20.4 acres; a Prior to submitting any documents to the City, 2.7--acre coastal conservation area; and 3 acres of our in-house QA/QC review process will be parks. Both scenarios will include a total of 2.9 completed to ensure that task requirements have acres of miscellaneous roads and rights-of-way. been adequately addressed and that appropriate 5 technical standards have been met. All Site grading will be accomplished in a single documents will also be reviewed for technical phase, and Project construction is anticipated to begin in 2020 and take approximately ten accuracy, proper nomenclature, references, and � years. To accommodate the 2050 sea level rise methodological consistency. scenario, as established by the California Coastal Time Management Scheduling and Commission and in compliance with State and Accounting. With over 70 professional federal flood-control requirements and sea level staff members, Psomas will be able to meet rise guidance,the Project site will be raised the demanding schedules of concurrent from its current elevation, resulting in import of assignments. While each of the key staff 130,000 to 175,000 cubic yards of earth. members will have other company-wide project responsibilities, we ensure that each team Project implementation will require a number of member will have adequate availability to meet discretionary actions, including a General Plan the assigned project's requirements. Amendment (GPA); Zoning Map Amendment (ZMA);Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA);Local Additionally, Psomas uses a comprehensive Coastal Program Amendment to amend the system for tracking and reporting employee City's Local Coastal Program (LCP) pursuant to time and project costs. The Project Managers the GPA, ZMA, and ZTA;and an Initial Study will have real-time information regarding (IS) and EIR. The required entitlements would total authorized budget, total expended to include, at minimum, a tentative tract map, date, current monthly expenditures, and the coastal development permit, and condition use remaining balance. permit. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING ENVIRONMENTAL The proposed Magnolia Tank Farm Project ANALYSIS APPROACH (hereinafter referred to as"Magnolia Farm" or The City of Huntington Beach determined the"Project") proposes demolition of 3 empty that an EIR pursuant to the California 25--million-gallon,45-foot-tall aboveground oil Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the storage tanks (including ancillary structures, State CEQA Guidelines is required for the roads, and pipelines) and redevelopment of the proposed Project due to the potential for 29-acre site with the preferred plan (Scenario significant environmental impacts and the 1),which proposes a mixed-use development, discretionary approvals required to implement including a 211,000-gross-square-foot (gsf) the proposed development. Psomas concurs lodge with 175 guest rooms and a guesthouse with the City's determination that a Project- with 40 beds; 19,000 square feet of retail uses specific EIR would be the appropriate CEQA on 3.7 acres; a total of 250 for-sale residential document for the proposed Project and units (15 dwelling units/acre) on 16.7 acres; a proposes that the EIR"focus out"those topical 2.7-acre coastal conservation area as a buffer for issues and environmental checklist questions the adjacent wetlands; and 3 acres of parks. A that do not require detailed Project-specific residential alternative to the Project (Scenario evaluation. The EIR will focus on the remaining 2) is also proposed and will be analyzed at an topical issues that require detailed Project-level equal level of detail throughout the EIR. This analysis. alternative proposes a total of 250 residential ..__._.........._.. ..._._............................... _ _._........W__........_.._......................_..__. _....................................__...__._..__.__ ................................._._............_..__......................................_.. ........................... ................. .3 SOMAS :.;f-r.r:.tiruter: ea; ,:7Ear?ge t;, C'ali omia fir;:}li aaik i:;arrr rc,i:,c Additionally, Psomas understands that the Project Description, appropriate for an FIR, proposed Project site is included in the based on Project information provided by the Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan area City and the Applicant. Upon completion, draft and that the Southeast Coastal Redevelopment and final project description will be submitted Plan and associated FIR were prepared in 2007. to the City for review and approval prior to Psomas will review the 2007 FIR to identify any distribution to the Project Team to be used in cost-saving and efficiencies that can be achieved preparation of the technical studies and the IS/ by using the Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Notice of Preparation (NOP). Project EIR. Toth n i c a 11, dies SCOPESubtask 2.1 Proposed Technical Studies SERVICES A number of technical studies (i.e., Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Noise) will be Below is the Scope of Work for the proposed prepared by Psomas' in-house technical experts Magnolia Tank Farm Project FIR based on our in support of an adequate environmental understanding of the Project and the City's analysis in the FIR and consistent with CEQA Request for Proposal (RFP). The deliverables of requirements. Additionally, a Transportation/ the tasks in this Scope of Work are included in Traffic Study will be prepared by Linscott, Law& Table 1,Scope of Work Deliverables, at the end Greenspan,Engineers (LLG). Upon a thorough of the Scope of Work discussion. internal review by the Psomas Project Manager ,Tw� i [ li � I and senior technical experts for adequacy and quality assurance,the draft and final studies will Subtask 1.1 Kick-Off Meeting be submitted electronically and in hard copy to Psomas will attend a kick-off meeting with the the City for review/comment and approval prior City of Huntington Beach staff, the Applicant, to being incorporated into the EIR. One round and other team members, as appropriate. This of review/revision is assumed prior to being meeting will provide an opportunity to discuss incorporated into the EIR. and confirm the approach, Scope of Work, Subtask 2.1.1 Air Quality Project schedule, key community issues and concerns, and information needs. Psomas will develop an Air Quality Study which will provide discussions on the regulation and Subtask 1.2 Data Collection and Site Visit environmental settings, CEQA significance Psomas will prepare a Data Needs Request thresholds, quantifications of construction and operations phase emissions and mitigation to obtain data related to Project construction measures, if needed. The Projects construction and operations activities. Psomas will also and operational criteria pollutant emissions review existing City documents,including the � will be quantified on both a regional and General Plan; the Zoning Ordinance; Southeast localize basis using the South Coast Air Coastal Redevelopment Plan and associated Quality Management District's (SCAQMD's) EIR; and the Magnolia Tank Farm Draft recommended California Emissions Estimator Specific Plan, if available. Additionally, Psomas Model (CaIEEMod) for the preferred plan and will conduct a Project site visit to understand � the residential alternative at the Project site and the site,its context and surroundings, and compared with the SCAQMD's CEQA mass to photographically document the site and emissions thresholds. Project emissions will � surrounding conditions. also be evaluated for the potential to impact Subtask 1.3 Project Description sensitive residential uses to the south, east and Psomas will prepare an in-depth and detailed northeast of the project site through the use of _......._ .. ...... ......................................... __...... _._ ... ...__ .... .. PSOMAS �;i�y of�i €l,amn react,i;3r r ;),}ran y d au c u aQ nol_ a.,k( the USERNs AERMOD air pollutant dispersion Subtask 2.1.3 Noise model. Concentrations of criteria pollutants Psomas will visit the Project site to identify from construction activities will be shown in existing noise sources (traffic, nearby pollutant concentration contours at nearby commercial activity) and noise-sensitive sensitive residential uses. Once a construction receptors and to measure existing noise phasing is defined, it will be determined if a levels at up to 3 locations (the southeastern Health Risk Assessment (FRA) is required [Magnolia Street], northeastern and western (optional task). property boundary) for at least 24 hours for the During the operations phase, it is expected that evaluation of noise-land use compatibility for a screening calculation will demonstrate that the future residents. Psomas will analyze temporary Project would not generate traffic congestion at noise and vibration impacts from construction a major intersection at a magnitude that would activities and will also review the Project plans, cause a local carbon monoxide (CO) "hotspot" design, and traffic impact analyses to evaluate The Project is also not anticipated to result in operational noise impacts to existing and substantial amount of toxic air contaminants planned sensitive receptors, including noise during the operations phase of the Project from on-site stationary and mobile sources and consequently no HRA is proposed for the as well as noise increases due to Project- operations phase. The potential for odors will generated traffic on local roads. The analysis be addressed qualitatively. Additionally, the will compare noise impacts with the standards analysis will include an evaluation of Project in the City's CEQA Thresholds Guide, General conformity with the Air Quality Management Plan, and Section 8.4 of the Noise Ordinance. Plan for the South Coast Air Basin. Mitigation Mitigation measures that reduce construction measures that reduce construction and and operations phase impacts will be identified, operations phase impacts will be identified, as as necessary. It is assumed that detailed interior necessary. noise analysis for individual residential and commercial buildings will not be required. Subtask 2.1.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Psomas will prepare a GHG emissions analysis Subtask 2.1.4 Transportation/Traffic to assess potential Project-related contributions The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) report for to climate change. This study will include a the proposed Project will be prepared pursuant discussion of the regulatory and environmental to the requirements of the City of Huntington setting, assessment methods, and impacts based Beach and Caltrans Traffic Impact Analysis on project characteristicts. Psomas will calculate Guidelines as well as the current Orange County construction and operational GHG emissions Congestion Management Program (CMP). The concurrently with the air quality emissions TIA will document the potential traffic impacts using CalEEMod. Psomas will also determine that the proposed Project may have on the whether implementation of the Project would transportation/roadway network in the vicinity conflict with applicable State, regional, and City of the Project site, and will evaluate existing and plans,policies, or regulations adopted for the future (Opening Year and Year 2040 Buildout) purpose of reducing GHG emissions, including operating conditions at up to twenty-five (25) the relevant components of the City's Energy intersections within the Project vicinity as Action Plan and the Sustainability Action Plan well as the Project driveway(s). In addition, that is currently under development, as directed. conduct 24-hour daily tube traffic counts at up If there is a potential significant impact, Psomas to twenty(20) roadway segments to support will recommend measures to reduce GHG the Greenhouse Gas, Air Quality and Noise emissions. analyses. The TIA will analyze the preferred Project as well as an all residential alternative. ......... .................._ ..........................................._-.__.._........................ . ....... . ...... -.. _._. ....... .. _._......_e . PSOMAS of P uritincton 3e a& Ora' noun+Lair omia 41agrul a"a:k Farr F rojectR. Where necessary, the TIA will identify the = be no Project impact on a topic, that topic appropriate intersection improvements/ I will be focused out of the Draft FIR, and no mitigation measures to offset the proposed further technical analysis would be required. Project's significant traffic impacts. All conclusions and substantiating information will be documented in the IS. For other topical The TIA will also include traffic signal warrant analyses, site access analyses, CMP analyses, issues,there maybe specific checklist questions that would have no impact and could be focused and a construction traffic assessment. The out. The IS will identify these checklist questions TIA will summarize the analysis, findings and where no further analysis in the Draft FIR is conclusions, and will be suitably documented with tabular,graphic, and appendix materials. A necessary. review of the FIR Traffic/Transportation section The NOP will serve as a Scoping Meeting for accuracy and consistency with the TIA will Notice. Upon completion, screencheck and be conducted. Additionally, a VMT (AB 743) proofcheck copies of IS/NOP will be submitted analysis memorandum will be prepared. to the City for review and approval prior to the 30-day public review. Psomas will also prepare Subtask 2.2 Review of Existing Technical Studies a Notice of Completion (NOC) and Notice of As indicated in the City's RFP, a number Availability(NOA) of the NOR of technical studies (i.e., Geotechnical Investigation, Phase I and II Environmental Subtask 3.2 Scoping Meeting Site Assessment [ESA], Biological Resources Psomas will prepare for and attend one FIR Assessment, Cultural/Archaeological and scoping meeting. It is assumed that the City will Paleontological Resources Assessment, coordinate and organize the scoping meeting Hydrology and Hydraulic Report, Preliminary at a venue selected by the City. Psomas will Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), Sea prepare scoping meeting materials, including all Level Rise and Coastal Hazards Analysis, and graphics/exhibits,handouts, sign in sheets, and Visual Simulation Study) have been prepared by comment cards. Psomas and key team members the Applicant and will be provided for use in the will attend and participate in the meeting, as environmental analysis. However, as requested, appropriate. Psomas Principal will describe a peer review of these studies will be conducted the CEQA process to be followed in preparing by Psomas' technical experts for adequacy and the FIR for the proposed Project. Comments compliance with CEQA requirements. Upon and issues to be addressed in the FIR will be review of each of the above studies for adequacy, requested and input solicited from all meeting a Memorandum will be prepared summarizing attendees. Subsequent to the scoping meeting, the opinions of the technical experts. If Psomas will also prepare a brief summary of any of the studies is deemed inadequate,a the meeting for inclusion in the FIR and will recommendation for additional analysis will ensure that the issues raised at the meeting be included in the Memorandum. Additional are addressed in the Draft EIR document, as analysis and review thereof are not assumed in appropriate. this Scope of Work and cost. E Task " itial Study/ eti e of Env reep .-ann tal Impact Report Prey onion and Scoping Minting Subtask 4.1 First Screencheck Subtask 3.1 Initial Study/Notice of Preparation Environmental Impact Report Psomas, using the City's Environmental Psomas will prepare a First Screencheck FIR Checklist Form,will prepare a Draft IS/NOP in accordance with CEQA (Public Resources for review by the City and the Applicant. If it Code, Section 21000, et seq.), the State CEQA can be adequately documented that there would Guidelines (California Code of Regulations PSOMAS c y of i untington Beach,:'rare coup,,l ca-vo.rriia Magroi a"ank Farm Project [CCR], Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.), The topical issues that are expected to be and pertinent case law.The analysis will be evaluated in the respective EIR sections and the based upon the IS/NOP responses received; Scope of Work for this analysis, are identified community and agency input received at the below. scoping meeting; technical evaluation of the proposed Project; and available and pertinent Aesthetics. This topic will be evaluated in the data, including the Magnolia Tank Farm Specific Project EIR due to proposed changes to the visual quality and character of the site. The Plan. potential visual changes will be assessed in Executive Summary. Psomas will prepare the comparison with the existing views of the site. executive summary section upon completion The analysis will also include assessment of of all other EIR sections in order to present the the anticipated effects on public viewsheds and final and updated information. This section will light and glare associated with the proposed summarize the Project Description, impacts, Project. Photographs of the site will be taken and mitigation measures. It will also discuss the from different views and incorporated into the location, areas of controversy and issues to be discussion and analysis. The visual simulations resolved, and Project alternatives. described under Subtask 2.2 will be used and incorporated into the discussion and analysis Introduction. This section will include a in the EIR. If potential significant impacts are description of the purpose of the EIR, public identified, Psomas will recommend mitigation scoping and circulation, EIR focus and effects measures to address those impacts. found not to be significant, and required contents of the EIR. Project history and existing Agricultural and Forest Resources. The setting will also be described in this section. proposed Project site is designated as Urban and Built-Up Land on the California Project Description. Psomas will work closely Department of Conservation's Orange County with the City and Project Team members to Important Farmland Map. The site is not used prepare an in-depth description that articulates or zoned for agricultural purposes; it is not the characteristics and overall objectives of the subject to a Williamson Act contract; and it Project (see Task 1.3). The Project Description does not contain Prime Farmland or Farmland will also include, but not be limited to,the EIR/ of Statewide Importance. This topic will be fully Project approvals, Project location, Project analyzed in the IS and focused out of the EIR. characteristics, and Project goals and objectives. I Air Quality. An air quality section will be Environmental Analysis. Each topical EIR developed based on the findings of the Air section will contain a discussion of the existing Quality Study described in Subtask 2.1.2. The conditions on the site and in the Project vicinity; study will be included as an appendix to the a summary of the regulatory framework; EIR. identification of significant environmental Biological Resources.As described in Section effects anticipated for each environmental issue; 2.2 above, a peer review of the existing and mitigation measures, if required. Thresholds Biological Resources Assessment will be of significance will be stated in each topical conducted and Memorandum prepared. A section to enable the reader to understand the biological resources section will be developed analytical process used to identify potential based on the findings of the existing Project impacts. For each topical issue,the EIR assessment,which will be included as an will identify the level of significance prior to appendix to the EIR. and after mitigation, based on the established Cultural and Paleontological Resources.As thresholds. described in Section 2.2 above, a peer review 1 ..-.__..............._....... ..._............... _...__.._...__.... �._...._. PSOMAS Ci'.y f rti; for Beu h,Orar g Cour: aii`omia "Ltagr la`ask arm Prejeci f° of the existing Cultural/Archaeological and Land Use and Planning. Psomas will describe Paleontological Resources Assessment will be the existing on-site and surrounding land conducted and a Memorandum prepared. uses based on a site visit;review of aerial Additionally,if requested by the City, Psomas photographs; information available in the will prepare the letters for the City to initiate Draft Magnolia Tank Farm Specific Plan; Native American scoping pursuant to and existing land use policies and plans. This Assembly Bill (AB) 52 and Senate Bill (SB) 18. section will also include a full analysis of the proposed amendments to the General Plan, A cultural resources section will be Zoning Map,Zoning Text,and LCP. Psomas developed based on the findings of the will evaluate the proposed Project's consistency existing assessment and Native American with relevant local planning documents, consultation. The Cultural/Archaeological and Paleontological Resources Assessment will be including the City's General Plan and LCP. The project's consistency with the policies of other included as an appendix to the EIR. applicable planning and policy documents, Geology and Soils. As described in Section including the Southern California Association 2.2 above, a peer review of the existing of Governments' (SCAG's) regional planning Geological Investigations will be conducted documents,will also be analyzed. If potential and Memorandum prepared. A geology and significant impacts are identified, Psomas will soils section will be developed based on the recommend mitigation measures to address findings of the existing investigation,which those impacts. will be included as an appendix to the EIR. Mineral Resources. Based on the California Greenhouse Gas Emissions. A GHG Department of Mines and Geology(CDMG), emissions section will be developed based g Generalized Mineral Land Classification of on the findings of the GHG Emissions Study Orange County, California,the proposed described in Subtask 2.1.3. Project site and the surrounding area are Hazards and Hazardous Materials. As designated as MRZ-3,which identifies "area described in Section 2.2 above, a peer review containing mineral deposits the significance of the existing Phase I and Phase II will be of which cannot be evaluated from available conducted and a Memorandum prepared. A data': Additionally, according to the California hazards and hazardous materials section will Department of Conservation,Division of Oil, be developed based on the existing ESAs. Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) Hydrology and Water Quality. As described Well Finder, the Project site is underlain by the in Section 2.2, above, a peer review of the West Newport Oil/Gas field. There are three existing Hydrology and Hydraulics and oil/gas wells on site: two are plugged and one Preliminary Water Quality Management is active. It is assumed that the information on Plan (WQMP) will be conducted and a capping of the remaining will in compliance Memorandum prepared. A Hydrology and with DOGGR requirements will be provided by the Applicant. Based on information Water Quality section will be developed provided,we will assess with the City the based on the findings of the existing reports, avility to focus out this topic out of the EIR which will be included as an appendix to the EIR. Psomas will also conduct a review of the document. existing Sea Level Rise and Coastal Hazards Noise. A noise section will be developed based Analysis and prepare a Memorandum on the findings of the Noise Study described highlighting the review. The findings of the above under Subtask 2.1.4. The study will be analysis will be included in the Hydrology and included as an appendix to the EIR. Water Quality section of the EIR. .............._.._....._....................._..................._.........._......................................_.._. .._....._._.._........................................._.__..................._......................................._..__.._.._..........................._._......m.........................................................................................................._..................................... ....................._.__........ PSOMAS City of Hr ntington 3eact,Oraig e aunty Caffomia Magn ha ianK-arm Prej e � Population and Housing. Based on the If potential significant impacts are identified, proposed Magnolia Tank Farm Specific Plan Psomas will recommend mitigation measures land uses, Psomas will evaluate the direct to address those impacts. and indirect impacts that the proposed Transportation and Circulation.A uses could have on population, housing, transportation/traffic section will be developed and employment forecasts. Psomas will based on the Transportation/Traffic Study, conduct an analysis to evaluate potential prepared by LLG, and described above in impacts related to population, housing, Subtask 2.1.5. The study will be included as an and employment projections for the appendix to the FIR. Project area using the latest demographic data available,including the 2014 Orange Utilities. It is assumed that information County Projections (OCP), U.S. Census,the associated with water, sewer, and storm California Department of Finance (DOF), drain availability will be provided by the SCAG, the City of Huntington Beach General � City. Additionally, it is assumed that further Plan, the Southeast Coastal Redevelopment information on utility infrastructure plans and Plan, and other relevant documents. If studies, including identification of required potential significant impacts are identified, upgrades/improvements to serve the Project, Psomas will recommend mitigation measures � Fill be provided by the Applicant as part of the to address those impacts. Specific Plan. It is also assumed that a Water Supply Assessment (WSA) is not required Public Services. Implementation of the in light of the proposed intensity of uses. If proposed Project would directly and additional information is needed,Psomas will indirectly generate additional population coordinate with applicable utility providers and,therefore, the Project has the potential (local and regional) to obtain information on to increase the demand for public services existing capacity, supply, and future demand. (fire,police, schools, and libraries). Potential If potential significant impacts are identified, effects associated with implementation of Psomas will recommend mitigation measures the proposed Project can be related to the to address those impacts. provision of inadequate service levels and the need to upgrade and/or provide additional ALTERNATIVES facilities to serve the Project. Psomas will Psomas will provide an assessment of alternatives coordinate with service providers to identify to the proposed Project. A residential alternative existing public service facilities and to (Scenario 2), is proposed and will be analyzed determine whether the proposed Project can at the equal level of detail as the preferred be adequately served without any increase plan. This Scope of Work assumes that a No in personnel or expansion of existing Project Alternative and up to two additional resources (including facilities). If potential alternatives, will be defined based on identified significant impacts are identified, Psomas will significant impacts in compliance with the CEQA recommend mitigation measures to address i guidelines. those impacts. Recreation. Psomas will generate a list of CUMULATIVE IMPACTS recreational facilities, including parklands, In addition to the analysis of potential short-term near Project site. The EIR will evaluate and long-term Project-specific impacts and the potential impacts related to recreational analysis of direct and indirect impacts, Psomas facilities in accordance with the land use will conduct a cumulative impact analysis based scenarios of the Magnolia Tank Farm Specific on the provisions of Section 15130(b)(1) of the Plan and the anticipated population increase State CEQA Guidelines. Psomas will work closely associated with the proposed residential units. I with City staff and Project Team members to P S O A S __ _ Cite of a.n it orl Beach,„range Ceun y Califfornia Magnolia 3i1K FarF PrOiKt ensure that appropriate projects are evaluated. distribute copies to the County, State, and The evaluation method for cumulative projects federal agencies, in compliance with the State will vary depending on the technical issue to be CEQA Guidelines. In addition, 15 hard copies addressed. of the Executive Summary will be sent to the State Clearinghouse in accordance with their REQUIREDI I recommended guidelines. Psomas will also ENVIRONMENTAL distribute the document to the County, State, and QUALITYI federal agencies. The following CEQA-required sections will In addition,Psomas will prepare an NOC and be prepared as a part of the FIR: long-term an NOA of the Draft EIR. Screencheck and final impacts; significant irreversible environmental copies of both will be provided to the City for changes; significant unavoidable adverse review. impacts; growth-inducing impacts; references; aisle 5 Preparation the Environmental and preparers and contributors, agencies, and drnpact Report and l .1 t persons consulted. Technical studies/reports will be included as appendices to the EIR. Subtask 5.1 Response to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Subtask 4.2 Second Screencheck Following the 45-day public review period, Environmental Impact Report Psomas will review and organize all comments Upon receipt of comments from the City provided to the City on the Draft EIR from the on the First Screencheck EIR, Psomas will State Clearinghouse and other parties. Following review all comments; identify and resolve any the review of comments, Psomas will coordinate conflicting comments/direction from the City; with the City on the approach to preparing seek additional clarification from the City; the responses. Psomas will be responsible for and disseminate the comments to respective assigning responsibilities to team members. team members for response and revision, as necessary. Psomas will revise the EIR and Psomas,with assistance from the technical team incorporate revisions from the Project Team members,will prepare written responses to members into the EIR. The Second Screencheck comments that raise significant environmental FIR will be electronically submitted to the City issues. The revisions that result from the and the Applicant for review. comments on the Draft EIR will be included as errata to the Draft EIR. Given the nature Subtask 4.3 Proofeheek and Draft Environmental and location of the Project and a degree of Impact Report for Public Review controversy,this Scope of Work assumes that Psomas will review the comments received from Psomas will spend approximately 200 hours the City on the Second Screencheck EIR, and, of professional staff time on this task. Upon if necessary,will disseminate the comments completion of the responses, Psomas will provide to respective team members for additional the First Screencheck Responses to Comments response and revision. Psomas will revise the (RTC) for the City and Applicant review. Upon document and submit an electronic copy to the receipt of comments,Psomas will revise and City and the Applicant for a final review. It is prepare the Second Screencheck RTC and Final assumed that final comments will be editorial EIR for City and the Applicant review. Upon in nature and that no new and substantive receipt of second round of comments, Psomas comments/revisions will be provided. will prepare the Proofcheck RTC and Final FIR for a final review by the City and Applicant. Upon finalizing the Draft EIR for the 45-day public review, Psomas will produce and Psomas will mail the responses to commenting i agencies and parties at least ten days prior to ............................................................................_.... .._................................._...................................................................... _. _. P S O A S C i .c` urringtvn Bea&.,4rarge Councv caii ornia &vlagrc!'wa Tank Farm Project consideration of certification of the Final EIR, in occur during the 12-month CEQA process accordance with CEQA requirements. (including the approval process). Subtask 5.2 Final Environmental Subtask 6.2 Project Meetings Impact Report Related Documents Psomas will regularly meet with the City staff Psomas will prepare the Findings of Fact to discuss Project status, schedule, and issues and Statement of Overriding Considerations of concern. This task includes attendance at for the significant,unavoidable impacts of a total of 15 meetings with the City staff and the Project,pursuant to Sections 21081 and Project Applicant, as appropriate, and the Project 21081.6 of the California Public Resources Team, as necessary. These meetings will be in Code and Sections 15091 and 15093 of the State addition to the Project kick-off meeting (Subtask CEQA Guidelines. Psomas will also prepare a 1.1) and scoping meeting (Subtask 3.2). It is mitigation monitoring and reporting program assumed that the Project Manager will attend all (MMRP). In compliance with Section 21081.6 meetings and the Principal in Charge will attend of the California Public Resources Code, The up to 5 meetings (three hours each, including MMRP will be prepared in matrix format preparation and travel time). If additional and will provide the timing and responsibility meetings are deemed necessary, they will be on a for each mitigation measure. If the Planning time and materials basis. Commission or City Council modifies the Project and/or recommended conditions of Subtask 6.3 Study Sessions and Public Hearings approval/mitigation measures for the proposed In addition,Psomas will attend two Study Project,Psomas will revise the MMRP. However, Sessions (one Planning Commission and substantial modifications are not assumed in the one City Council) and four Public Hearings, fees for this Project. including two Planning Commission and City Council hearings. Psomas will be available Psomas will prepare the Notice of ° to address questions regarding CEQA; the Determination (NOD) for the Project, file environmental review process; and the findings the NOD with the State Clearinghouse and of the EIR analyses, as appropriate. Psomas County Recorder upon certification of the EIR. will prepare study session and public hearing It is assumed that the Applicant will provide a materials,including visual aids and handouts, check for payment of California Department of if necessary. This task assumes Study Sessions Fish and Wildlife filing fees and County Clerk and Public Hearings will be attended by both the Recorder processing fee at the time the NOD is principal in Charge and Project Manager, and the filed. Principal-in-Charge will present the Project and Task 6 `project Manet, ptis addressp questions. r� . Lw ni14� a s1 PROECT SCHEDULE Subtask 6.1 Project Management Psomas will work diligently and coordinate Psomas will be responsible for managing the closely with the City,the Applicant, and Project CEQA process,which would entail regular Team to ensure the EIR is prepared efficiently, communication to discuss Project status, on time, and within budget. All time-saving progress, and issues that may arise. Additionally, approaches will be utilized to speed up the Psomas will regularly coordinate with the schedule. However, Psomas will ensure that time- Project Team to ensure compliance with the saving approaches will not jeopardize the quality Scope of Work and schedule. This task also of the document. This Scope of Work assumes an includes internal administrative coordination approximate 12-month schedule,with a kick-off and invoicing tasks. Project management will date of May 15, 2017. .__..._...w..................................................._.................................................._................__.__.............................................-..._..._................................................_..........................................._._.................................................. ._.._._.............. ..._._..................... ........... P S O A S i:il?,of i i rfinoion 3eact;,,Drarge C'un v Cali ornia P.1 agnol a Taxi;Farrri f'rolec? TABLE 1 1 • ill;Ul 1 Y., •Kick-off meeting attendance Electronic copies of Draft and Final meeting minutes (if requested) Task 1: Project Initiation Data Needs Request Site visit Electronic copies of Draft and Final Project Description 5 hard copies and 1 electronic copy of Draft and Final Air Quality Study 5 hard copies and 1 electronic copy of Draft and Final Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study 5 hard copies and 1 electronic copy of Draft and Final Noise Study Task 2:Technical Studies 5 hard copies and 1 electronic copy of Draft and Final Traffic Study Memoranda discussing the CEQA adequacy of the Geotechnical Investigation, Phase I and II ESA, Biological Resources Assessment, Cultural/Archaeological and Paleontological Resources Assessment, Hydrology and Hydraulics, Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), and Sea Level Rise and Coastal Hazards Analysis 5 hard copies and 1 electronic copy of Draft and Final IS/NOP to the City in Microsoft Word and PDF (indexed and searchable by chapter) Electronic copy of the Distribution List 15 hard copies of the IS/NOP to the State Clearinghouse Distribution of hard copies of the IS/NOP to County, State,and federal agencies on the Distribution List Task 3: IS/NOP and &40 hard copies of the IS/NOP to the City for internal distribution and to groups Scoping Meeting within the City 5 hard copies and 1 electronic copy of the Draft and Final NOC and NOA to the City • Distribution of CDs of the NOC and NOA to County,State, and federal agencies •Scoping meeting attendance 0 Scoping meeting materials o 5 hard copies and 1 electronic copy of the First'Screencheck,Second Screencheck,and Proofcheck EIR to the City in Microsoft Word and PDF(indexed and searchable by chapter) Electronic copy of the Distribution List NOC, 15 hard copies of the Executive Summary,and CDs to the State Clearinghouse Task 4: Preparation of 5 hard copies and 1 electc©hiic copy of the Draft and Final NOC and NOA to the the Draft EIR City Distribution of CDs of the Draft EIR and technical appendices in addition to hard copies of NOC and NOA to the County,State,and federal agencies on the Distribution List. 0 40 bound copies and 1 unbound copy of the Draft EIR and 25 bound copies and 1 unbound copy of each technical appendix submitted to the City for internal a1 distribution and to groups within the City PSOMAS City of Huntington Beach,Orange County California Magnolia Tank Farm Project TABLE 1 (CONTINUED) SCOPEOF O• 0 Electronic copy of Screencheck Responses to Comments Q 10 hard copies of the Screencheck Responses to Comments 0 Copies of the Final Responses to Comments to be distributed to commenting parties and agencies a Electronic copy of Final EIR in Microsoft Word and PDF (indexed and searchable Task 5: Preparation of by chapter) the Final EIR and Related Documents 9 40 bound copies of the Final EIR plus 1 unbound, reproducible copy containing Responses to Comments and any other additional or revised EIR text a 2 hard copies of the Draft and 1 reproducible copy of the Final Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 4 hard copies of the Draft and 1 reproducible copy of Final MMRP 2 hard copies of the Draft and 1 reproducible copy of the Final NOD 10 meetings with the City staff, Project Applicant, and Project Team' Task 6: Project 2 study sessions(1 Planning Commission and 1 City Council) Management and 4 public hearings (2 Planning Commission and 2 City Council) Meetings Study Sessions and Public Hearings materials for the study sessions and public hearings TABLE 2 RESPONSIBILITIESCITY City will provide the following to the consultant: All information related to the site Copies of the General Plan, Zoning Code,and other City documents Information on water, sewer,and storm drain Vicinity map,General Plan land use map,zoning map, assessor's parcel map,aerial photos,and existing utilities City will be responsible for the following: Distribution of the NOC and NOA to area property owners and organizations within the City, publication in newspapers, and transmitting to the County for posting o Internal distribution of the Draft EIR and to groups located within the City of Huntington Beach. .._.._............I...........-_ —._..................... PSOMAS City of Huntington Beach,Orange County California j Magnolia Tank Farm Project TABLE 3 PROJECT SCHEDULE Task 1: Project Initiation Kick-off Meeting Week 1 .. Data Collection and Site Visit Week 1 Prepare Draft Project Description it ,` MU Week 2 City review of the Draft Project Description Week 3 Prepare Final Project Description Week 4 Task 2:Technical Studies Prepare Proposed Technical Studies Air Quality Greenhouse Gas Emissions Weeks 4 to 11 Noise Transportation/Traffic Analysis City Review of Technical Studies Weeks 12 to 14 Prepare Final Technical Studies Weeks 15 to 16 Review Existing Technical Studies *Geotechnical Investigation * Hydrology and Hydraulic Report i Preliminary WQMP * Phase I and II ESA Biological Resources Assessment ID Cultural/Archaeo/Paleo Assessment Q,Sea Level Rise and Coastal Hazards Analysis W Visual Simulation Study Task 3:IS/NOP and Scoping Meeting Prepare Screencheck IS/NOP Weeks 3 to 5 City Review of the Screencheck IS/NOP Weeks 6 to 7 Prepare Proofcheck IS/NOP, NOC,and NOA Week 8 City Review of the Proofcheck IS/NOP, NOC, and NOA Week 9 Finalize IS/NOP for Public Review, NOC, and NOA Week 10 IS/NOP 30-day Public Review Period Week 10-14 Public Scoping Meeting During IS/NOP public review period Task 4:Preparation of the Draft EIR tgyop a Prepare First Screencheck EIR Weeks 15 to 20 City Review of First Screencheck EIR $q�f����� Weeks 21 to 23 Prepare Second Screencheck EIR Weeks 24 to 25 City Review of the Second Screencheck EIR Weeks 26 to 27 W. �i .. . Prepare Proofcheck EIR, NOC, and NOA Week 28 City Review of Proofcheck EIR, NOC,and NOA Week 29 Prepare Draft EIR for public review Week 30 Draft.EIR Public Review-Mandatory 45 days Weeks 31 to 37 PSOMAS City of Huntington Beach,Orange County California I Magnolia Tank Farm Project TABLE 3 (CONTINUED) PROJECT SCHEDULE Task • „a Task 5:Preparation of the Final EIR and Related Documents LL Prepare First Screencheck RTC Weeks 38 to 40 City Review of the First Screencheck RTC Weeks 49 to 42 Prepare Second Screencheck RTC and Prepare Final EIR Week 43 City Review of Second RTC and Final EIR Week 44 Prepare Proofcheck RTC and Final EIR Week 45 Prepare Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Week 46 City Review of Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Week 47 Finalize Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Week 48 Prepare MMRP** Week 46 City Review of MMRP Week 47 Finalize MMRP Week 48 Prepare NOD** a = Week 49 City Review of NOD Week 48 Finalize and File NOD a Upon certification of the Final EIR Task 6: Project Management and Meetings Project Management Duration of the Project Project Meetings Ten Meetings are assumed, dates TBD PC and CC Study Sessions TBD Public Hearings (two PC and two CC Hearings) TBD **MMRP and NOD (preparation and review) can occur concurrently with preparation of Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations _._.. _.................. ...._....... _ PSOMAS City of Huntington Beach,Orange County California I Magnolia Tank Farm Project EXHIBIT "B" Payment Schedule (Hourly Payment) A. Hourly Rate CONSULTANT'S fees for such services shall be based upon the following hourly rate and cost schedule: B. Travel Charges for time during travel are not reimbursable. C. Billing 1. All billing shall be done monthly in fifteen (15) minute increments and matched to an appropriate breakdown of the time that was taken to perform that work and who performed it. 2. Each month's bill should include a total to date. That total should provide, at a glance, the total fees and costs incurred to date for the project. 3. A copy of memoranda, letters, reports, calculations and other documentation prepared by CONSULTANT may be required to be submitted to CITY to demonstrate progress toward completion of tasks. In the event CITY rejects or has comments on any such product, CITY shall identify specific requirements for satisfactory completion. 4. CONSULTANT shall submit to CITY an invoice for each monthly payment due. Such invoice shall: A) Reference this Agreement; B) Describe the services performed; C) Show the total amount of the payment due; D) Include a certification by a principal member of CONSULTANT's firm that the work has been performed in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement; and E) For all payments include an estimate of the percentage of work completed. Upon submission of any such invoice, if CITY is satisfied that CONSULTANT is making satisfactory progress toward completion of tasks in accordance with this Agreement, CITY shall approve the invoice, in which event payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice by CITY. Such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. If CITY does not approve an invoice, CITY shall notify CONSULTANT in writing of the reasons for non-approval and the schedule of performance set forth in Exhibit "A" may at the option of CITY be suspended until the parties agree that past performance by CONSULTANT is in, or has been brought into compliance, or until this Agreement has expired or is terminated as provided herein. 1 Exhibit B 5. Any billings for extra work or additional services authorized in advance and in writing by CITY shall be invoiced separately to CITY. Such invoice shall contain all of the information required above, 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 requested, and if CITY is satisfied that the statement of hours worked and costs incurred is accurate. Such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Any dispute between the parties concerning payment of such an invoice shall be treated as separate and apart from the ongoing performance of the remainder of this Agreement. 2 Exhibit B SECTION E Fee Proposal Table TABLE 5 r 1 1- 'I •I II �I III 117Subtask llllll Kick-Off Meeting 4 10 $2,840 Data Collection and Site Visit 8 6 $1,970 Project Description 4 40 4 4 $9.360 Subtask 2.1 Proposed Technical Studies Sublask2.1.1 Air Quality $ 40 50 8 10 1 2 $18,680 Subtask 2.1.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 8 16 28 4 6 1 2 $8,960 Subtask 2.1.3 Noise 6 24 50 4 6 2 $12,250 Subtask 2.1.4 Transportation/Traffic(LLG) $69,850 Subtask 2.2 Review of Existing Technical Studies 8 32 80 16 18 30 $30,550 r 7 «... .�- ... ;...:: � .. ......'. ..'_ „v_.... - Subtask 3.1 Screencheck Initial Study/Notice of Preparation 8 20 40 8 4 8 4 $13,180 Proofcheck Initial Study/Notice of Preparation 2 8 e $3,070 Notice of Availability/Notice of Completion 2 4 $8100 ------ --- -- Subtask 1.2 Scoping Meeting 8 16 16 2 2 $7,100 Subtesk 4.1 First Screencheck EIR 40 140 120 60 8 12 24 4 16 30 16 $69,080 Subtask 4.2 _ Second Screencheck EIR 20 too 40 40 4 4 4 1 8 8 20 $36,900 Subtask 4.3 Proofcheck and Draft EIR for Public Review 8 40 16 8 4 4 20 $14.660 �I M Subtask 5.1 First Screencheck Responses to Comments 40 100 1 40 24 2 24 4 4 8 4 24 16 �$47,360Second Screencheck Responses to Comments/Final EIR 20 40 $0 Proofcheck Responses to Comments/Final EIR 5 24 10 $7,085 Subtask 5.2 Final EIR Related Documents(Findings of Facts,MMRP,NOD) 12 20 40 16 1 16 14 $15,780 Subtask6.1 Project Management 20.. 104 $24,460 Subtask 6.2 Project Meetings(10 meetings) 15 50 $13,025 Subtask 6.3 Study Sessions/Public Hearings(2 study sessions/4 public hearings) 48 48 S20,400 INS.:?':; ,. :: •€ .:: ,:..:a 'kT1:€ ".F. '> itF "„ :I.l: x r' ,E Reprographics $18,000 Mailings/Defivenes $3,500 Mileage $260 Miscellaneous.: $500 ;ti^,p ,;,: ., .� ;� w �,.:. :'� ram.. s:;�.•, T%+..' ..�', �;.. Assumptions 1_A 12-month schedule is assumed for preparation of the EIR for the proposed Project. 2.The hours included in Subtesk 6.2 ere for ten(t0)Project meetings.It is assumed that Alfa,the PM will attend ell ten meetings,end Kathleen,the PIC will attend five meetings. 3 T stud ssions end four ublic h ri s m assumed.Both Alia(PM)and Kathleen(PIC)will attend the study s and public hearings;Kathleen will be presenting at the hearin s sessions e P S O M A S City of Huntington Beach,Orange County California Magnolia Tank Farm Project /� i Ate` ® CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE(MtVVDDNYYY) �-�'� F5/9/2017 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER,AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED,the policy(les)must be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED,subject to the terms and conditions of the policy,certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the i certificate holder in lieu of such endorsements. PRODUCER MAMEACT Robin Lee Dealey, Renton&Associates PHONE - - 0 FAX 714-427 6818 Lic.#0020739 714427681 P.O. Box 10550 E-MAIL,,,,,rlee@dealeyrenton.com Santa Ana CA 92711-0550 AFFORDING COVERAGE -�- NAIC# INSURERA:ACE American Insurance Company 22667 INSURED PSOMAS INSURER B: PSOMAS INSURER C: 555 South Flower Street, Suite 4300 Los Angeles CA 90071 INSURER D: INSURER E: INSURER F: COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER:823400192 REVISION NUMBER: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES.LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. INSR ADQLSUBR TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY EFF POLICY EXP LTR INSD WVD POUCYNUMBER MM/DD/YVYY MMIOD/YVYY LIMITS COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE $ AMAGE T RENTED CLAIMS-MADE D OCCUR PREMISES lEa occurrence $ MED EXP(Any one person) $ PERSONAL&ADV INJURY $ GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: APPROVED AS T FORM GENERAL AGGREGATE $ POLICY IER� LOC PRODUCTS-COMPIOP AGG $ OTHER: B : S �( JrD 1"� $ ' AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY MI HA L . LIMIT CITY ATTO EY (-Ea accident- — ...._ $ _....._.. ANY AUTO CITY OF HUNTING ON BEACH BODILY INJURY(Per person) $ ALL OWNED SCHEDULED AUTOS AUTOS BODILY INJURY(Per accident) $ HIRED AUTDS AUTO QED PR PERTY DAMA E $ Par accident $ UMBRELLA LIAR OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE $ _ EXCESS LIAB CLAIMS-MADE AGGREGATE $ DED RETENTION$ $ WORKERS COMPENSATION F PER OTH- AND EMPLOYERS'LIABILITY Y 1 N STATUTE IER ANY PROPRIETORIPARTNERIEXECUTIVE ❑ NIA E.L.EACH ACCIDENT $ OFFICERIMEMBER EXCLUDED? (Mandatory in NH) E.L.DISEASE-EA EMPLOYE $ If yes,describe under DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below E.L.DISEASE-POLICY LIMIT 1$ A Professional Liability G23638381008 10/15/2016 10/15/2017 Per Claim $1,000,000 Claims Made Annual Aggregate $1,000,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS/LOCATIONS 1 VEHICLES (ACORD 101,Additional Remarks Schedule,may be attached If more space is required) 30 Day Notice of Cancellation/10 Day notice for Non-Payment of Prem 3HUN010100, Magnolia Tank Farm Environmental Impact Report. CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE City of Huntington Beach THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN Attn:Ricky Ramos ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach CA 92648 AU HORIZED REPRESENTATIVE @ 1988-2014 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. ACORD 25(2014/01) The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD City Of Huntington Beach Business License Business Name/Service Address License Number A152814 PSOMAS t License Type Effective Date 03/01/2017 Professional/Other Services I Expiration Date 02/28/2018 Owner/Corporation PSOMAS Amount Paid $ 102.25 THIS LICENSE IS ONLY FOR THE BUSINESS AND TYPE SHOWN, IT IS FOR THE PERSON TO WHOM SIC 8712 ISSUED AND IS NON-TRANSFERABLE. RENEWAL IS DUE ON OR BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE. POST IN PUBLIC VIEW Consultants who were sent the Request for Proposal for the preparation of an EIR for the Magnolia Tank Farm project: 1. Environmental Science Associates 2. Psomas 3. Michael Baker 4. LSA 5. ICF City Of Huntington Beach ` � '`` ;. •' 2000 Main Street ® Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (714) 536-5227 ® www.huntingtonbeachea.gov Office of the City Clerk FEB. I),1904P� � Robin Estanislau, City Clerk June 21, 2017 Psomas ATTN: Kathleen Brady 3 Hutton Centre, Suite 200 Santa Ana, CA 92707 Dear Ms. Brady: Enclosed is a copy of the fully executed "Professional Services Contract Between the City of Huntington Beach and Psomas for the Magnolia Tank Farm Environmental Impact Report." Sincerely, 4��) �&4v4Jtetd Robin Estanislau, CIVIC City Clerk RE:pe Enclosure Sister Cities: Anjo, Japan ♦ Waitakere, New Zealand ATTACHMENT #2 REIMBURSEMENT - PLANNING - AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND SLF - HB MAGNOLIA, LLC FOR COSTS INCURRED FOR THE MAGNOLIA TANK FARM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT THIS AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made and entered into by and between the City of Huntington Beach, a municipal corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as "CITY," and SLF - HB Magnolia, LLC , a Delaware limited liability company hereinafter referred to as "DEVELOPER." WHEREAS, DEVELOPER is proposing to develop an area within the City of Huntington Beach known as the Magnolia Tank Farm site at 21845 Magnolia Street; and DEVELOPER is required to submit applications to CITY for approval of various discretionary matters, such as entitlements, zone changes, land use approvals and environmental assessments; and DEVELOPER desires that all entitlements, zone changes, land use approvals and environmental assessments be processed as soon as possible; and DEVELOPER desires to have CITY commit sufficient resources to enable the expeditious processing of applications and other necessary documentation; and Pursuant to California Government Code Section 87103.6, DEVELOPER is allowed to defray the cost of processing development applications and entitlements by reimbursing CITY for such costs, NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and agreements hereinafter made and exchanged, the parties agree as follows: 1. PAYMENT DEVELOPER agrees to reimburse CITY for its professional services as follows: g/agree/citywide/surfnet/reimburs3-07 1 of 7 A. Within ten (10) days following execution of this Agreement by CITY, DEVELOPER will make an initial payment to CITY in the amount of One Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($150,000) (hereinafter the "Amount of Deposit"). Thereafter, on the first day of each third month, DEVELOPER shall replenish the Amount of Deposit by paying to CITY an amount equal to the amount paid by CITY for professional services funded by this Agreement (the "Quarterly Payment"). The parties acknowledge that the Amount of Deposit will be used to pay the professional planning services funded by this Agreement, and if, prior to the payment of any Quarterly Payment, the Amount of Deposit is less than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000), DEVELOPER shall make the next Quarterly Payment within ten (10) days' notice from CITY. DEVELOPER acknowledges that the amount referenced in this Agreement is the CITY's best estimate of the costs for the services described herein, and that the actual cost of said services may be higher. In the event that the actual cost of said services exceeds the estimated costs, DEVELOPER agrees to pay the actual cost within ten (10) days after receiving CITY's invoice for same. In the event the actual costs of Reimbursement Services are less than the estimated costs, CITY will refund the difference between the actual and estimated costs. B. The estimated cost to cover twelve (12) months of professional services is Five Hundred Ten Thousand Two Hundred Thirteen Dollars ($510,213). C. A late payment fee of ten percent (10%) will be assessed if CITY receives any payment later than the thirtieth (301b) day after that payment is due but unpaid. In addition, one and one-half percent (1%) interest per month shall be added for each month the payment hereunder is due but unpaid. g/agree/citywide/surfnet/reimburO-07 2 of 7 2. STATEMENT OF INTENT The amounts reimbursed to CITY pursuant to this Agreement will help defray CITY's cost of the professional planning services required to process DEVELOPER's various development applications and entitlements as set forth herein. 3. EXCLUSIVE CONTROL BY CITY CITY will maintain exclusive control over the work described herein. Nothing in this Agreement: A. Shall be deemed to require CITY to approve any plan, proposal, suggestion, application or request submitted by DEVELOPER. B. Shall be deemed to limit, in any respect whatsoever, CITY's sole authority to direct and control the planner(s) assigned to DEVELOPER's various development projects. C. Shall be deemed to impose any liability on CITY different from any liability as may otherwise be established by law. 4. CITY EMPLOYEES AND OFFICIALS DEVELOPER 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 direct financial interest in this Agreement. 5. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE CITY agrees that time is of the essence for the performance of the work to be funded pursuant to this Agreement and therefore, thirty (30) days prior to each quarterly invoice, DEVELOPER shall submit a list of proposed activities to be performed by the CITY for approval by the Director of Community Development. g/agree/citywide/surfnet/reimburs3-07 3 of 7 6. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time with or without cause, upon ten (10) days' prior written notice to the other party. DEVELOPER shall be responsible for all costs incurred prior to termination, including any and all costs incurred after notice of termination has been given. 7. TERM This Agreement shall be effective on the date of its approval by the City Council of CITY. This Agreement shall expire when terminated as provided herein. 8. NOTICES Any notices, certificates, or other communications hereunder shall be given either by personal delivery to DEVELOPER's agent or to CITY as the situation shall warrant, or by enclosing the same in a sealed envelope, postage prepaid, and depositing the same in the United States Postal Service, to the addresses specified below; provided that CITY and DEVELOPER, by notice given hereunder, may designate different addresses to which subsequent notices, certificates or other communications will be sent: TO CITY: TO DEVELOPER: City of Huntington Beach SLF - HB Magnolia, LLC ATTN: Scott Hess ATTN: James M. O'Malley 2000 Main Street 2 Park Plaza, Suite 700 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Irvine, CA 92614 9. MODIFICATION No waiver or modification of any language in this Agreement shall be valid unless in writing and duly executed by both parties. g/agree/citywide/surfnet/reimburs3-07 4 of 7 10. SECTION HEADINGS The titles, captions, section, paragraph and subject headings, and descriptive phrases at the beginning of the various sections in this Agreement are merely descriptive and are included solely for convenience of reference only and are not representative of matters included or excluded from such provisions, and do not interpret, define, limit or describe, or construe the intent of the parties or affect the construction or interpretation of any provision of this Agreement. 11. INTERPRETATION OF THIS AGREEMENT The language of all parts of this Agreement shall in all cases be construed as a whole, according to its fair meaning, and not strictly for or against any of the parties. If any provision of this Agreement is held by an arbitrator or court of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable, void, illegal or invalid, such holding shall not invalidate or affect the remaining covenants and provisions of this Agreement. No covenant or provision shall be deemed dependent upon any other unless so expressly provided here. As used in this Agreement, the masculine or neuter gender and singular or plural number shall be deemed to include the other whenever the context so indicates or requires. Nothing contained herein shall be construed so as to require the commission of any act contrary to law, and wherever there is any conflict between any provision contained herein and any present or future statute, law, ordinance or regulation contrary to which the parties have no right to contract, then the latter shall prevail, and the provision of this Agreement which is hereby affected shall be curtailed and limited only to the extent necessary to bring it within the requirements of the law. 12. DUPLICATE ORIGINAL The original of this Agreement and one or more copies hereto have been prepared and signed in counterparts as duplicate originals, each of which so executed shall, irrespective of the g/agree/citywide/surfneUreimburs3-07 5 of 7 date of its execution and delivery, be deemed an original. Each duplicate original shall be deemed an original instrument as against any party who has signed it. 13. IMMIGRATION DEVELOPER shall be responsible for full compliance with the immigration and naturalization laws of the United States and shall, in particular, comply with the provisions of the United States Code regarding employment verification. 14. LEGAL SERVICES SUBCONTRACTING PROHIBITED DEVELOPER and CITY agree that CITY is not liable for payment of any subcontractor work involving legal services, and that such legal services are expressly outside the scope of services contemplated hereunder. DEVELOPER understands that pursuant to Huntington Beach City Charter Section 309, the City Attorney is the exclusive legal counsel for CITY; and CITY shall not be liable for payment of any legal services expenses incurred by DEVELOPER. 15. ATTORNEY'S FEES In the event suit is brought by either party to construe, interpret and/or enforce the terms and/or provisions of this Agreement or to secure the performance hereof, each party shall bear its own attorney's fees. 16. GOVERNING LAW This Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 17. SIGNATORIES Each undersigned represents and warrants that its signature hereinbelow has the power, authority and right to bind their respective parties to each of the terms of this Agreement, and shall indemnify CITY fully for any injuries or damages to CITY in the event that such authority or power is not, in fact, held by the signatory or is withdrawn. g/agree/citywide/surfn et/re imburO-07 6 of 7 18. ENTIRETY - This Agreement, and the attached exhibits, contains the entire agreement between the parties respecting the subject matter of this Agreement and supersedes all prior understanding and agreements whether oral or in writing between the parties respecting the subject matter hereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by and through their authorized officers on �(.c�)C �� , 20 . DEVELOPER, CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, a SLF - HB Magnolia, LLC., a Delaware limited municipal corporation of the State of liability company California By: ayor `5 t—tA'J - TL- uS'P print name ITS: ( t Cit Clerk 5J'Pl --tsgvGl-oP—tn �t.�� AND INITIATED AND,APPROVED: B / v y• - V Director of Community Development Vie`-Te� print name ITS. (cir_cie -one Secretary/Chief Financial Officer/Ass�etary'!�-Treasurer REVIEW D AND APPROVED AS TO CONT /&— C•tyranager APPROVED AS RM: ity Attorney g/agree/citywide/surfn et/re imburs3-07 7 of 7 City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street ♦ Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (714) 536-5227 o www.huntingtonbeachea.gov • u; _F Office of the City Clerk Robin Estanislau, City Clerk June 21, 2017 SLF — HB Magnolia, LLC ATTN: James M. O'Malley 2 Park Plaza, Ste. 700 Irvine, CA 92614 Dear Mr. O'Malley: Enclosed is a copy of the fully executed "Reimbursement— Planning —Agreement Between the City of Huntington Beach and SLF — HB Magnolia, LLC for Costs Incurred for the Magnolia Tank Farm Environmental Impact Report." Sincerely, �&�daa,&o Robin Estanislau, CIVIC City Clerk RE:pe Enclosure Sister Cities: Anjo, Japan ♦ Waitakere, New Zealand Esparza, Patty From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 7:50 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: City meeting agenda item 17 AGENDA COMMENT SUPPLEMENTAL From:Autumn Di Giovanni [mailto:autumndigiovanni@gmail.com] COMMUNICATION Sent: Sunday,June 18, 2017 9:22 PM Meeting Date:---A .rJ11017 To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: City meeting agenda item 17 Agenda Item No., _ /7 Dear Mayor Delgleize and Council Members, I am writing to OPPOSE Agenda Item 17 and request that you: 1) Deny approving the half-million dollar contract with Psomas for an EIR for the Magnolia Tank Farm proposed development. If they need an EIR, let them pay for it. We have far too many other pressing financial issues to be providing loans to developers. And 2), that you oppose ANY study other than Sub Item 2: Low Density single family homes compatible lot size to the adjacent neighborhoods. Mayor Delgleize, I know that you were in attendance when Shopoff did their first Community Outreach meeting at Eader Elementary School, and I know you saw a standing-room only crowd that was frustrated and angry at ANY proposal for ANYTHING other than a compatible use of low-density, single family homes. Most in the room favor open space, and while that would certainly be my preference, it is clear that Shopoff purchased the property intent to build. However, they took their own risk by expecting our community to roll-over and rezone this area to fit their appetite for high density development. Now it is incumbent on our city leadership to work on behalf of the people who elected you to protect us, the community and existing property owners. SE Huntington Beach is a quiet, suburban, family community and this is the only compatible use that should ever be considered for this site. Anything else would be completely irresponsible by our elected officials. Please Oppose Item 17 and limit only ONE DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO: #2-RESIDENTIAL ONLY, WHICH INCLUDES 14'fTO:EXCEED 250 FOR SALE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, NO LODGE, GUEST HOUSE OR RETIAL COMPONENT. Respectfully, Autumn DiGiovanni i Esparza, Patty From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 7:50 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: Agenda item 17 AGENDA COMMENT SUPPLEMENTAL From: nancy duremdes [mailto:hbduremdes2msn.com] �i� �U��°�°T' ON Sent:Sunday,June 18, 2017 8:21 PM Meetfing _ To: CITY COUNCIL; Fikes, Cathy '- �/� / Subject: Agenda item 17 Dear Mayor Delgleize and Council Members, Agenda Item No.. / 1 am writing to OPPOSE Agenda Item 17 and request that you: 1) Deny approving the half-million dollar contract with Psomas for an EIR for the Magnolia Tank Farm proposed development. If they need an EIR, let them pay for it. We have far too many other pressing financial issues to be providing loans to developers. And 2), that you oppose ANY study other than Sub Item 2: Low Density single family homes compatible lot size to the adjacent neighborhoods. Mayor Delgleize, I know that you were in attendance when Shopoff did their first Community Outreach meeting at Eader Elementary School, and I know you saw a standing-room only crowd that was frustrated and angry at ANY proposal for ANYTHING other than a compatible use of low-density, single family homes. Most in the room favor open space, and while that would certainly be my preference, it is clear that Shopoff purchased the property intent to build. However, they took their own risk by expecting our community to roll-over and rezone this area to fit their appetite for high density development. Now it is incumbent on our city leadership to work on behalf of the people who elected you to protect us, the community and existing property owners. SE Huntington Beach is a quiet, suburban, family community and this is the only compatible use that should ever be considered for this site. Anything else would be completely irresponsible by our elected officials. Please Oppose Item 17 and limit only ONE DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO: #2-RESIDENTIAL ONLY, WHICH INCLUDES NOT'aTT0 EXCEED 250 FOR SALE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, NO LODGE, GUEST HOUSE OR RETIAL COMPONENT. Respectfully, Nancy Duremdes 714-904-5287 i Esparza, Patty From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 7:49 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: City Council Meeting - Item 17 AGENDA COMMENT SUPPLEMENTAL From: Bill Gailing [mailto:Billg@socal.rr.com] COMMUNICATION Sent: Monday,June 19, 2017 7:08 AM To: CITY COUNCIL / Subject: City Council Meeting- Item 17 McWdng Date: (t� / _10 J Z Agenda item No.: 7 Dear Mayor Delgleize and Council Members, I write in OPPOSITION to Agenda Item 17 and request that you: 1) Deny approving the half-million dollar contract with Psomas for an EIR for the Magnolia Tank Farm proposed development. If they need an EIR, let them pay for it. We have far too many other pressing financial issues to be providing loans to developers. 2), that you oppose ANY study other than Sub Item 2: Low Density single family homes compatible lot size to the adjacent neighborhoods. Mayor Delgleize, I know that you were in attendance when Shopoff did their first Community Outreach meeting at Eader Elementary School, and I know you saw a standing-room only crowd that was frustrated and angry at ANY proposal for ANYTHING other than a compatible use of low-density, single family homes. Most in the room favor open space, and while that would certainly be my preference, it is clear that Shopoff purchased the property intent to build. However, they took their own risk by expecting our community to roll-over and rezone this area to fit their appetite for high density development. Now it is incumbent on our city leadership to work on behalf of the people who elected you to protect us, the community and existing property owners. SE Huntington Beach is a quiet, suburban, family community and this is the only compatible use that should ever be considered for this site. Anything else would be completely irresponsible by our elected officials. Please Oppose Item 17 and limit only ONE DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO: #2-RESIDENTIAL ONLY, WHICH INCLUDES NOT TO EXCEED 250 FOR SALE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, NO LODGE, GUEST HOUSE OR RETAIL COMPONENT. Respectfully, Bill and Elaine Gailing 505 17th St. i Esparza, Patty From: Dombo, Johanna SUPPLEMENTAL Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 10:17 AM To: Agenda Comment COMMUNICATION Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: MTF Meeting Date: �//r II AGENDA COMMENT 1`7 Agenda Item No.: -----Original Message----- From: JoEllen Pendergraft [mailto:joellenp4Pverizon.net] Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 10:09 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: MTF Hello Mayor Delgleize and City Council Members. I would like to express my full support for studying the Magnolia Tank Farm project. We know that there has been some community opposition to this project but I am part of a very large contingency who are in support of the Shopoff EIR study and project. Thank you for representing us. 7o Ellen Pendergraft joelkenp4@verizon.net Sent from my iPhone 1 Esparza, Patty From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 11:00 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: Oppose Agenda Item 17 AGENDA COMMENT From: rob.000l.oc@gmail.com [ma ilto:rob.pool.oc cz gmail.coml Sent: Monday,June 19, 2017 10:53 AM SUPPLEMENTAL To: CITY COUNCIL; Fikes, Cathy COMMUNICATION Subject:Oppose Agenda Item 17 Meeting Date: � `7 —d-0/7 Dear Mayor Delgleize and Council Members, Agenda Item No.:_ 1 am writing to you to oppose Agenda Item 17. The city of Huntington Beach should not be in the business of financing Environmental Impact Reports for developers. The fact that this process has been done before is irrelevant.This needs to change and this is as good a time to begin the change as any. We have many pressing issues that require our financial resources. As to any further analysis or study, I urge you to limit those discussions to Sub Item 2: "Development of the site for residential-only, which includes 250 for sale residential dwelling units (there would not be any lodge,guest house, or retail components described under Scenario 1)". When I first heard that the Magnolia Tank Farm was to be removed and housing placed on the site, I was naively in favor- naive because I wrongly assumed that the project would simply include residential of a similar nature to those in the neighborhood. I see now that Shopoff is proposing something completely different.This area should not be re-zoned to allow a lodge and retail establishments.Those types of development greatly increase traffic and "wear and tear" on our already impacted city streets. I appreciate you taking the time to read my concerns and, again, urge you to oppose Agenda Item 17. Respectfully, Rob Pool 1 Esparza, Patty From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 7:51 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: Agenda Item 17 - Magnolia Tank Farm EIR AGENDA COMMENT SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION From: Cari Swan [mailto:cswanie@aol.com] Sent: Sunday,June 18, 2017 5:22 PM /C,' ,�ol 7 Meetlng Date: _ ®� To: CITY COUNCIL Cc: Fikes, Cathy Subject:Agenda Item 17- Magnolia Tank Farm EIR Agenda Item No.: 2 Dear Mayor Delgleize and Council Members, I am writing to OPPOSE Agenda Item 17 and request that you: 1) Deny approving the half-million dollar contract with Psomas for an EIR for the Magnolia Tank Farm proposed development. If they need an EIR, let them pay for it. We have far too many other pressing financial issues to be providing loans to developers. And 2), that you oppose ANY study other than Sub Item 2: Low Density single family homes compatible lot size to the adjacent neighborhoods. Mayor Delgleize, I know that you were in attendance when Shopoff did their first Community Outreach meeting at Eader Elementary School, and I know you saw a standing-room only crowd that was frustrated and angry at ANY proposal for ANYTHING other than a compatible use of low-density, single family homes. Most in the room favor open space, and while that would certainly be my preference, it is clear that Shopoff purchased the property intent to build. However, they took their own risk by expecting our community to roll-over and rezone this area to fit their appetite for high density development. Now it is incumbent on our city leadership to work on behalf of the people who elected you to protect us, the community and existing property owners. SE Huntington Beach is a quiet, suburban, family community and this is the only compatible use that should ever be considered for this site. Anything else would be completely irresponsible by our elected officials. Please Oppose Item 17 and limit only ONE DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO: #2-RESIDENTIAL ONLY,WHICH INCLUDES NOT-TO EXCEED 250 FOR SALE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, NO LODGE, GUEST HOUSE OR RETIAL COMPONENT. Respectfully, Cari Swan Cell: (714) 287-6779 1 I' Esparza, Patty From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 7:51 AM SUPPLEMENTAL To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Subject: FW: Agenda Item#17i! Importance: High Meeting Date: Agenda Item No. / / AGENDA COMMENT From: Gary Tarkington [mailto:garytarkington@msn.com] Sent: Sunday,June 18, 2017 8:01 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject:Agenda Item #17!! Importance: High City Council... I have been a resident here for 19 years. Many things here have changed AND IN A GOOD WAY!! All of the HDD building has got to stop NOW!!! I OPPOSE ANYTHING but low-density on Agenda Item #17!!! The people of Huntington Beach has let you, the city council, know this many, many times!! It is time for you to LISTEN TO US!!! Ann Tarkington 92646 i Esparza, Patty From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:50 PM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: Opposition to Agenda Item 17 AGENDA COMMENT SUPPLEMENTAL From: Deanne Thompson [mailto:deannewthompson@gmail.com] COMMUNICATION Sent: Monday,June 19, 2017 1:49 PM Me@fing ®ate; d)©f To: CITY COUNCIL; Fikes, Cathy rf' Subject: Opposition to Agenda Item 17 Agenda Item Na: / 7 Dear Mayor Delgleize and Council Members - I am writing to express my disappointment and opposition to Agenda Item #17, authorizing an EIR for the Magnolia Tank Farm property. The scope of work for the firm recommended to conduct the EIR includes two options, one of which is unacceptable. Option number 1 under the proposed scope of work contemplates a hotel and retail space adjacent to suburban neighborhoods of single family homes. Option number 2 includes only single family homes and open space, which is the only reasonable and compatible use for this parcel. I urge you to reject Option 1 and authorize the EIR only for Option 2. Huntington Beach offers a suburban beach community that is unique in Southern California, and Southeast Huntington Beach exemplifies this suburban beach community ethos with single family homes, neighborhood schools and parks, and grocery stores and small businesses catering to residents. The Magnolia Tank Farm property is not an appropriate location for a hotel and retail catering to tourism. If Huntington Beach needs another hotel it should be located in a commercial district not in a residential neighborhood. Please amend agenda item 917 to authorize the EIR only for option 2, limiting development of the Magnolia Tank Farm property to single family homes and open space. Thank you for your consideration. Deanne Thompson 20802 Sparkman Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92646 z Esparza, Patty From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 7:50 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: Agenda Item 17 - Magnolia Tank Farm EIR AGENDA COMMENT SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION From: Linda Wentzel [mailto:lindamarieofhb@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday,June 18, 2017 7:32 PM Meeting Date: �L2 /� � � 7 To: CITY COUNCIL Subject:Agenda Item 17- Magnolia Tank Farm EIR Agenda Item tdo.• Dear Mayor Delgleize and Council Members, I am writing to you to OPPOSE Agenda Item 17 and request that you: 1) Deny approving the half-million dollar contract with Psomas for an EIR for the Magnolia Tank Farm proposed development. If they need an EIR, let them pay for it. We have far too many other pressing financial issues to be providing loans to developers. And 2), that you oppose ANY study other than Sub Item 2: Low Density single family homes compatible lot size to the adjacent neighborhoods. Mayor Delgleize, I know that you were in attendance when Shopoff did their first Community Outreach meeting at Eader Elementary School, and I know you saw a standing-room only crowd that was frustrated and angry at ANY proposal for ANYTHING other than a compatible use of low-density, single family homes. A majority in the room favor open space, and while that would certainly be my preference, it is clear that Shopoff purchased the property with intent to build. However, they took their own risk by expecting our community to roll-over and rezone this area to fit their appetite for high density development. Now it is incumbent on our city leadership to work on behalf of the people who elected you to protect us, the community and existing property owners. SE Huntington Beach is a quiet, suburban, family community and this is the only compatible use that should ever be considered for this site. Anything else would be completely irresponsible by our elected officials. Please Oppose„Item 17 and limit only ONE DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO: #2-RESIDENTIAL ONLY, WHICH INCLUDES N6T.:TO EXCEED 250 FOR SALE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, NO LODGE, GUEST HOUSE OR RETAIL COMPONENT. Respectfully, Linda Wentzel I indamarieofh bCa gmail.com (h) 657.204.9468 (c) 714.951.7463 1 i7 Es arza, Patty AA1 l From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 7:58 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: Item 17 - Environmental Impact Report AGENDA COMMENT From:jonathan estrella [mailto:ionathanestrella455@gmail.comI /Sent: Monday,June 19, 2017 5:03 PM To: Delgleize, Barbara; CITY COUNCIL Subject: Item 17 - Environmental Impact Report Greetings, I am Jonathan Estrella, I live at 9891 Silver Strand Drive in Huntington Beach. I have a daughter going into the tenth grade at Edison High School. I have had children attend this high school since 2010. I am writing you because I am unable to attend tonight's Council meeting. I am urging you to move forward with the approval of the Environmental Impact Report slated for the Tank Farm Project. I believe it is imperative to move forward with the study to gain a full understanding of what the development impacts are for the old Tank Farm property that is closely located to the high school. Once the study is completed. Then and only then can we fully understand what the implications are,positive or negative. I believe any sort of delay will prolong this eyesore in the community. We need more future thinking developments in the Huntington Beach Community to improve the quality of life and environment. This can only be achieved by conducting such studies as proposed in Item 17 of the Council Meeting Agenda. Thank you for your considerations and please feel free to contact me regarding my position as a concerned parent and citizen. Best Regards, Jonathan Estrella i Es arza, Pa From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 4:18 PM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: Support tank farm study AGENDA COMMENT -----Original Message----- From: Greg Angelovic [mailto:hbangelovic(@Bmail.com] k-'Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 3:52 PM To: Delgleize, Barbara Cc: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Support tank farm study Dear Mayor Delgleize and council members, I would like to ask the city council to please support the study looking at the tank farm removal and potential future development. I feel the responsible thing to do is to have a fair and thorough assessment of the positives and negatives of this project. My family and I have lived in and around this part of HB since the 1970s and those tanks have been an embarrassing eye sore for as long as I can remember. I would welcome a fair analysis of a project that could improve that area. I know a project like this brings with it lots of emotions on both sides, but I don't see the harm in doing your due diligence to get all the facts so the community can make an informed decision. I would have told you this in person at your meeting tonight? but I am currently in Chicago on business and I just found out about this agenda item. Thank you for your consideration on this matter. Sincerely, Greg Angelovic Sent from my iPhone i Es arza, Patty From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 4:52 PM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: Magnolia Tank farm project i AGENDA COMMENT From: Greg Howell [mailto:greg@skvviewhomes.com] Sent: Monday,June 19, 2017 4:46 PM To:CITY COUNCIL Subject: Magnolia Tank farm project Huntington Beach City Council members, I support the effort to clean up and development the Magnolia Tank Farm project. I support item 17 on tonight's agenda. We need the EIR to support any planned development and hope the city can recover the expense from the developer. Thank you & Best Regards, Greg Howell Office: (714)963-4600 Web Site: Sky View Designs Esparza, Patty From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 7:57 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: Agenda Item 17 AGENDA COMMENT From: Marilyn Cavener [mailto:mjcavener@gmail.comj ,,,"Sent: Monday,June 19, 2017 5:45 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject:Agenda Item 17 Dear Mayor Delgleize and Council Members, I am writing to OPPOSE Agenda Item 17 and request that you: 1) Deny approving the contract with Psomas for an EIR for the Magnolia Tank Farm proposed development. If they need an EIR, let them pay for it. 2),1 ask that you oppose ANY study other than Sub Item 2: Low Density single family homes compatible lot size to the adjacent neighborhoods. Mayor Delgleize, you were in attendance when Shopoff did their first Community Outreach meeting at Eader Elementary School, wi5th a standing-room only crowd that was frustrated and angry at ANY proposal for ANYTHING other than a compatible use of low-density, single family homes. Now it is incumbent on our city leadership to work on behalf of the people who elected you to protect us, the community and existing property owners. SE Huntington Beach is a quiet, suburban, family community and this is the only compatible use that should ever be considered for this site. Anything else would be completely irresponsible by our elected officials. Please Oppose Item 17 and limit only ONE DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO: #2-RESIDENTIAL ONLY, WHICH INCLUDES NOT TO EXCEED 250 FOR SALE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, NO LODGE, GUEST HOUSE OR RETIAL COMPONENT. i Esp arza Patty From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 7:57 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: Support for Item 17, EIR Study for Tank Farm project AGENDA COMMENT From: Chris Staller [mailto:chris@claritynewmedia.com] Sent: Monday,June 19, 2017 5:44 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Support for Item 17, EIR Study for Tank Farm project Unfortunately, I am unable to attend the city council meeting. I am an HB resident, Brookhurst and Adams, Park Huntington Tract, and I would like to see the City Council support this measure and have the EIR completed. As I understand it, this is a reimbursed expense anyway, and it simply makes sense to have the report completed and then debate the next steps. It does not make sense to not do it. Thank you, Christian Staller Owner, Strategist & Coach Office: 714.202.7502 Mobile: 714.418.7502 Schedule some time with me to Talk: https://calendly.com/claritynewmedia eMail & Skype Handle: chris@claritynewmedia.com Twitter: (a)ChrisStaller 1 III 6/20/2017 Edit/Add Request Information 7 Add/Edit Request l'pdate&Exit Update Print Audit Trait Cancel Assigned to:Agenda Alerts Request:30126 Entered on:06/19/2017 2:55 PM Long forrt Customer Information Create another request for customer Last Hendricks First Phone:9493074598 Alt Email:Hendrickskia@sbcglobal.net name: name. phone: Address: City: State:— zip -- code: Topic: City Council-Agenda&Public Hearing Comments Request type: Problem Entered via:rWeb Topic Item: Assigned to:Fgenda Alerts Leave blank forautomatic routing Status: Closed Priority Normal IP Address:104.52.225.22 Attachments.Add Attachments Description: Magnolia Tank Farm'projects'coming before you tonight are NOT desirable by most members in the community.We do not want more hotels and housing.The site should be cleaned up ANYWAY and how about some more open space for us residents?I urge you to vote NO on the three year,$510,213 agreement with Psomas.ENOUGH "g]DEVELOPMENT IN HUNTINGTON BEACH.Pacific City isn't even completed and already created a traffic,and air- Reason closed: Thank you for taking the time to send your thoughts to the City Council. A copy of your comments has been ` forwarded to the City Clerk to be included in the record on this item. Thank you very much for writing. Sincerely, flog Johanna Dombo Due Date:07/03/2017 Date Closed:06/19/2017 3:15 PM By:Johanna Dombo kjpdate&Evit Uitidate Cancel Collaboration Area(internal notes,email correspondence) To add notes or send emails about this Request, enter message below or insert message (Select message from list) then press the appropriate button. "zg — — Send to To add an internal note, or send a message to the customer or another employee about this request, Customer enter your message here (at least four characters) and the buttons to the right will enable. Then 'press one of the buttons. Add Internal Note Send to -- - Fmpioyee(s)... http://user.govoLrtreach.com/surfcity/editcase.php 1/1