Loading...
CONTRACT 7073 Reimbursement AgreementAgreement No. 7073 REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO AND GRIFFIN CAPITAL CATALYST DEVELOPMENT FUND, LLC This Reimbursement Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into as of Augusta ; 2024, by and between the City of El Segundo, a general law city and municipal corporation ("City"), and Griffin Capital Catalyst Development Fund, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("Applicant"). The parties agree as follows: Recitals. This Agreement is made with reference to the following facts and circumstances: a. The Applicant filed applications for Environmental Assessment No. 1371 for a proposed development of consisting of a 102,389 square -foot, three- story office building and a 384-space, six -level parking structure on an 85,111 square foot lot and prepare/review any updated CEQA documents for the proposed development at the southwest corner of Kansas Street and Grand Avenue (233 Kansas Street) within the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan area (the "Project"). b. The Project requires the retention of professional consultants; the costs of attorneys' fees; the costs of work performed by City staff to complete the number of tasks including drafting documents and environmental review; zoning review, plans review for compliance with City standards, building code compliance, preparation of reports, and project management duties; the reasonable processing costs related to review and inspection of the Project; and the costs of implementing the conditions of approval (collectively, "Project Costs") as indicated in Exhibits A and B (attached). C. City believes it is in the public interest for Applicant to pay for such Project Costs. Applicant understands that all work performed by the City related to the Project will be under the direction of City, but at Applicant's expense. 2. Ci Reimbursement. Applicant agrees to fully reimburse the City for the Project Costs. The City has estimated the Project Costs for processing as being approximately $105,000.00. However, the Applicant acknowledges that the actual amount of such costs and expenses may be different. Nonetheless, even though the actual amount of such Project Costs may be different, the Applicant agrees to reimburse the City for the full amount of such actual costs in the manner provided in this Agreement. City will provide Applicant with an accounting of the Project Costs on a monthly basis, which accounting shall include any City Administrative Costs (as discussed in Section 5 below), which accounting the Applicant agrees will be conclusive, in the absence of manifest error. The total of the costs of the Project, as disclosed by the accounting, is called the "Reimbursement Amount." 3. City has No Obligation to AUprove Proms, By signing this agreement, Applicant acknowledges and understands that this Agreement in no way obligates the City to approve any of the entitlements or environmental documents for the Project. The City and its elected and appointed officials retain sole discretion to either Agreement No. 7073 approve or deny any of the environmental documents or entitlements that are subject of this Agreement and need to effectuate the Project. awe$ a .. w a. Except as provided below, upon execution of this Agreement, Applicant agrees to deposit with City $105,000.00 ("Deposit Amount") which represents 100 percent of the estimated Reimbursement Amount for processing. Costs associated with the Project will be charged against the Deposit Amount. b. The Deposit Amount will be placed in a non -interest bearing trust account established by the City Manager. Applicant understands and agrees that City will not pay interest to Applicant on the Deposit Amount and Applicant will not seek such interest payments from City. C. Replenishment Deposit, Whenever the Deposit Amount balance falls below $5,000.00, the City may request in writing to the Applicant that it replenish the Deposit Amount ("Replenishment Deposit"). Applicant agrees to deliver a Replenishment Deposit to the City within 10 business days following the City's request. If a Replenishment Deposit is not received within 10 business days following the City's request, then all work on the project shall cease immediately. d. Should the actual Reimbursement Amount exceed the Deposit Amount, Applicant agrees to promptly pay City any difference. Should the Reimbursement Amount be less than the Deposit Amount, City will refund the Applicant any remaining Deposit Amount to applicant within 30 days after determining the Reimbursement Amount. 5. City Administrative Costs. Administrative costs incurred by City, including, without limitation, staff time, legal costs, fees and services, must be reimbursed on a time and materials basis based on current City reimbursement rates. Such costs will be deducted by City from the Deposit Amount on a monthly basis. 6. Applicant Default. Should Applicant fail to perform any of its obligations under this Agreement, then City may, at its option, pursue any one or more or all of the remedies available to it under this Agreement, at law or in equity. Without limiting any other remedy which may be available to it, if Applicant fails to perform any of its obligations under this Agreement, City may cease performing its obligations under this Agreement and may bring an action to recover all costs and expenses incurred by the City in completing the studies, together with interest thereon from the date incurred at the rate of 10% per annum. However, notwithstanding anything contained to the contrary herein, Applicant shall not be liable for any indirect, incidental, consequential, special or punitive damages of any nature or kind resulting from or in connection with this Agreement. 7. Term. This Agreement will terminate either: (i) 12 months from the date the Applicant's application is approved by the City; or (ii) when the Project is disapproved or the application is formally withdrawn. Disapproval of the Project or the Applicant's withdrawal of the application does not excuse Applicant from Agreement No. 7073 reimbursing the City for the Project Costs incurred up to such date of disapproval or withdrawal pursuant to this Agreement. 8. Compliange with Law„ Applicant will, at its sole cost and expense, comply with all of the requirements of all federal, state, and local authorities now in force, or which may hereafter be in force, pertaining to this Agreement. 9. Waiver of Breach. Any express or implied waiver of a breach of any term of this Agreement will not constitute a waiver of any further breach of the same or other term of this Agreement. 10. Insolvenc • Receiver. Either the appointment of a receiver to take possession of all or substantially all of the assets of Applicant, or a general assignment by Applicant for the benefit of creditors, or any action taken or offered by Applicant under any insolvency or bankruptcy action, will constitute a breach of this Agreement by Applicant, and in such event this Agreement will automatically cease and terminate if Applicant or its successor or assign cease or fails to timely pay any amount due and payable by Applicant (or its successor or assign) under this Agreement. 11. Notices. Except as otherwise expressly provided by law, all notices or other communications required or permitted by this Agreement or by law to be served on or given to either party to this Agreement by the other party will be in writing and will be deemed served when personally delivered to the party to whom they are directed, or in lieu of the personal service, upon deposit in the United States Mail, certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, addressed to: Applicant/ Developer at: Griffin Capital Catalyst Development Fund, LLC c/o Griffin Capital Company, LLC Griffin Capital Plaza 266 Kansas Street El Segundo, CA 90245 Attn: William Messori Email: wmessori@griffincapital.com Phone: 310-213-8512 With a copy to: Griffin Capital Company, LLC 790 Estate Drive, Suite 180 Deerfield, IL. 60015 Attn: Mary P. Higgins Email: mhi ins riffinca ital.com Phone: 847-267-1180 City at: City of El Segundo Attn: Eduardo Schonborn, Planning Manager 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 (310) 524-2312 Agreement No. 7073 Either party may change its address for the purpose of this Section by giving written notice of the change to the other party. 12. Acceptance of Electronic Signatures. The Parties agree that agreements ancillary to this Agreement and related documents to be entered into in connection with this Agreement will be considered signed when the signature of a party is delivered by electronic mail in "portable document format" (i.e., .pdf) form, or by facsimile transmission. Such signature will be deemed to be and treated in all respects as an original signature. 13. Governing Law, This Agreement is made in and will be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, and exclusive venue for any action involving this Agreement will be in Los Angeles County. 14. Partial Invalidity, Should any provision of this Agreement be held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be either invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Agreement will remain in effect, unimpaired by the holding. 15. Integration. This instrument and its attachments constitute the sole agreement between City and Applicant respecting the matters above and correctly sets forth the obligations of City and Applicant. 16. !Construction. The language of each part of this Agreement will be construed simply and according to its fair meaning, and this Agreement will never be construed either for or against either party. 17® Authority/Modification. The Parties represent and warrant that all necessary action has been taken by the Parties to authorize the undersigned to execute this Agreement and to engage in the actions described herein. This Agreement may be modified by written amendment. The City's manager, or designee, may execute any such amendment on behalf of City. 18. Counterparts, This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which will be an original, but all of which together will constitute one instrument executed on the same date. [Signatures on following page] Agreement No. 7073 IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed this contract the day and year first hereinabove written. CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, A municipal corporation. � d4 'A--,j1 City Manager ATTEST: Tracy Weaver, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Mark Hensley, City At ` rney GRIFFIN CAPITAL CATALYST DEVELOPMENT FUND, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By: Griffin Capital Catalyst Manager, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, its sole member By: Griffin Capital Private Equity, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, its sole member hields, Co -Chief Officer {If Corporation or similar entity, needs two officer signatures or evidence that one signature binds the company} Agreement No. 7073 lmffl�'jbg) k1� V,r:+ine! uJ�.,rt 6'I;�u��aiin„ M1!^�;kxSui miii�a�d �',sxviii,-�ruuuu�f_=��1_�C 2 i�c�k� August 9, 2024 EXHIBIT A City of El Segundo Attention: Eduardo Schonborn, AICP Planning Manager 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 900245 Via Email: eschonborn@elsegundo.org SUBJECT: Revised Proposal for Third Party Peer Review of the Class 32 CEQA Exemption Document for the Proposed Smoky Hollow South Building Project at 233 Kansas Street Dear Mr. Schonborn: On behalf of De Novo Planning Group, thank you for the opportunity to submit this revised proposal to provide third -party peer review of the Class 32 CEQA Exemption document and associated technical studies prepared by the Applicant Team. It is our understanding the Project proposes an approximately 102,000-square-foot, three story office building and six level parking structure on APN 4139-006-063 within the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan. Based on our review of the Project materials, discussions with City staff, and our experience providing peer review services and in preparing environmental compliance documents per the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), we are confident that we can meet and exceed the expectations of the City in providing the requested services. Our team understands that as Lead Agency, the City of El Segundo is responsible for approving the CEQA document. As prime consultant, De Novo will prepare the peer review to ensure the Class 32 CEQA Exemption document and supporting technical studies considers recent CEQA legislation and agency requirements. Our team is led by Principal Planner, Starla Barker, AICP. Starla will be the primary document reviewer, providing Principal -level attention to the Project. Starla will serve as the Project Manager and primary point of contact for the City. Starla has an extensive history of managing and preparing CEQA documents throughout southern California, including Class 32 Infill Exemptions. Starla is supported by Senior Planner Josh Smith who will also review the air quality assessment. Josh leads preparation of De Novo's technical studies, specializing in air 1,(6)d nc)vc,1,1„i 1)11,,;.f,onI E 1 91)', .,''h rS9."73 180 E 10') 1ra,, , ;ui1.r- 10R 1 11),,Iin, f / 0), /SO Agreement No. 7073 Mr. Eduardo schonborn, AICP August 9, 2024 Page 2 quality/greenhouse gas emissions modeling and management of CEQA documents. We are supported by Kittelson and Associates who will review the transportation analysis, for consistency with SB 743 requirements and the local transportation assessment, and by MD Acoustics who will review the noise study. We have prepared the following work plan in response to the City's request and our experience providing peer review services for CEQA documents. TASK 1.0: PROJECT INITIATION AND BACKGROUND REVIEW The De Novo Project Manager will meet virtually with City staff to initiate the peer review work program, including obtaining any background information relevant to the Project site and surrounding area, as well as Project materials. The meeting will provide the opportunity to discuss the proposed Project, peer review format, and schedule. TASK 2.0: CLASS 32 INFILL EXEMPTION PEER REVIEW The De Novo team will conduct a peer review of the applicant -prepared Class 32 CEQA Exemption document and technical studies prepared to support the Class 32 CEQA Exemption. A technical peer review of these studies for engineering purposes will not be conducted. Our approach to conducting the peer review will involve the following considerations: 1) compliance with the CEQA Guidelines; 2) technical accuracy of analysis in support of conclusions and findings of significance; and 3) internal consistency of the document. CEQA and technical specialists will conduct the review, with Ms. Barker serving as the primary CEQA reviewer. Our review will result in a consolidated Peer Review Memorandum providing a determination of compliance, along with any questions, comments, suggested edits or noted issues or areas of deficiency in the document. De Novo has teamed with Kittelson to provide peer review of the traffic impact study (TIS) anticipated to be prepared by Fehr & Peers. Kittelson will peer -review the TIS to ensure that the analysis is consistent with City of El Segundo methodologies and adequate for CEQA review. The peer review will be conducted by a licensed traffic engineer in the State of California. Currently, the level of VMT analysis is not currently known. For purposes of this scope of work, it is assumed the TIS will provide an evaluation for screening -out of the VMT analysis. If it is determined that the project does not meet the screening requirements, optional tasks have been provided to include either review of the VMT analysis using the City of.EI Segundo Sketch Planning Tool or VMT Analysis using SCAG Activity -Based Model (consistent with Fehr & Peers scope of work dated February 3, 2023). Agreement No. 7073 Mr. Eduardo Schonborn, AICP August 9, 2024 Page 3 Review of Methods and Assumptions and Local Transportation Assessment. Kittelson will review and provide comments on the methodologies and assumptions utilized to prepare the local transportation assessment, including the trip generation rates, thresholds of significance, a review of the intersection operational analyses, and mitigation measures. The review of the intersection analyses will be conducted for up to 8 intersections for existing and opening year without/with project conditions. A technical memorandum will be provided with comments on the traffic study identifying any issues and topics that would need to be clarified and revised. VMT Screening Level Analysis. The screening level VMT analysis is the first step of the VMT analysis and will determine if additional VMT analyses may be needed. Kittelson will confirm that the VMT screening -level analysis used appropriate methodologies to screen out VMT and will summarize the findings in the technical memorandum. If needed, a second round of review will be provided. If needed, the updated analysis will be reviewed to confirm comments from the initial review have been adequately addressed. De Novo has teamed with MD Acoustics (MD) to provide peer review services of the Noise Study. MD will review the project description, approach, methodology, calculations and findings and compare the results to the applicable City noise standards. Baseline noise readings and field sheets will be reviewed to determine proper baseline reading protocols were followed. Traffic noise calculations and modeling assumptions, including average daily traffic volumes, speeds, vehicle mix, classifications and other metrics will be reviewed for accuracy. Traffic noise projections will be verified and compared to the City's thresholds. Reference noise levels used for stationary noise modeling and the noise modeling, approach and methodology used for the on -site noise producing activities and equipment will be reviewed. The modeling approach will be reviewed to ensure adequacy. A technical memorandum will be provided with comments on the noise study identifying any issues and topics that would need to be clarified and revised. An electronic version of the Peer Review Memorandum will be provided to the City for review and transmission to the Applicant team. Following revisions to the Class 32 CEQA Exemption document by the Applicant team, the De Novo team will review the revised document and technical studies. We assume the revisions will be provided in track changes or highlighted and be accompanied by a comment matrix. The review will focus on ensuring the comments provided on the first review of the Class 32 CEQA Exemption document have been adequately addressed and resolved. Our scope of work assumes the project description will not have changed and that no new significant information or technical analysis will be introduced that was not part of the initial draft. Agreement No. 7073 Mr. Eduardo Schonborn, AICP August 9, 2024 Page 4 Deliverables: • One (1) electronic Draft Peer Review Memorandum — Class 32 CEQA Exemption document and Technical Studies • One (1) electronic Peer Review Memorandum confirming Class 32 CEQA Exemption document peer review comments have been adequately addressed or identification of outstanding issues. TASK 3.0: MEETINGS AND HEARINGS De Novo will participate in teleconference calls with City staff as needed. For budgeting purposes, a maximum number of hours have been assumed for teleconference calls to discuss the work program and progress, resolve any issues, and/or receive necessary direction from City staff. We do not anticipate in -person meetings; however, we can accommodate an in - person meeting if requested. In addition to teleconference calls, De Novo will prepare for and attend one (1) public hearing. We anticipate the De Novo Project Manager will be required for each meeting. We have not budgeted for additional technical support from other members of our team, including our subconsultants, to attend public hearings. Any additional technical support will be accommodated as necessary at time and materials. TASK 4.0: PROJECT MANAGEMENT/ADMINISTRATION This task involves the time necessary for management and administration of the project, including invoicing. TASK 5.0: OPTIONAL TASKS — VMT EVALUATION As noted above, if the Project is determined to be disqualified from map -based screening, a detailed VMT analysis will be prepared by the Applicant team either using the City's Sketch Planning Tool or the SCAG Activity -Based Model. The following tasks have been provided to account for the review of either analysis options, if needed. Task 5.1: Review of VMT Analysis Using Sketch Planning Tool This level of review will be needed if a VMT Analysis is required utilizing the City of El Segundo Sketch Planning Tool. Kittelson will review the applicability of the TREDLite tool, VMT calculations, and effectiveness of the recommended TDM measures. The findings will be summarized in the technical memorandum as part of Task 2. Task 5.2: Review of VMT Analysis Using SCAG Activity -Based Model This level of review will be needed if a VMT Analysis is required utilizing the SCAG Activity - Based Model. Kittelson will review the assumptions included in the travel demand model, VMT per service population, and City thresholds. The effectiveness of the recommended TDM Agreement No. 7073 Mr. Eduardo 5chonborn, AICP August 9, 2024 Page 5 measures will also be reviewed and the findings will be summarized in the technical memorandum as part of Task 2. ASSUMPTIONS This proposal is based on the following assumptions. We propose to peer review the environmental documents based on the body of statutes, guidelines, and case law that are in affect at the time the contract is executed. Technical peer review of technical studies beyond compliance and consistency with CEQA is excluded; the review will determine if the studies can suitably be relied upon for use in the Class 32 CEQA Exemption document in accordance with the requirements of CEQA. This scope excludes preparation of technical analysis by De Novo. All peer review memorandums will be submitted electronically. The revisions to all products requiring peer review will be done in track changes or highlighted and accompanied by a comment matrix. Any additional work that is requested by the agency that is outside of the scope of this proposal may require a contract amendment. Additional meetings not identified in this proposal are outside of the scope, but can be accommodated on a time and materials basis. STARLA BARKER, AICP Project Manager / Principal Planner / Primary Point of Contact Starla Barker, AICP, is a Principal Planner with De Novo Planning Group whose primary responsibilities are the management and preparation of environmental documents (Initial Studies, Negative Declaration, Environmental Impact Reports, and Environmental Assessments), as well as other planning documents including General Plans and Specific Plans. With over 20 years of professional planning experience Starla has successfully managed a wide range of projects with particular emphasis in General Plans, urban infill, downtown, and redevelopment projects. Utilizing her experience in community planning, Starla is regularly involved in land use and policy planning, including the development and implementation of community outreach programs, and frequently manages and prepares environmental clearance documents for citywide policy planning and redevelopment projects. Through her extensive experience in both policy and environmental planning, Starla is keenly aware of the interaction between the two and consistently takes a proactive and comprehensive approach to understanding planning and environmental issues and developing solutions. Agreement No. 7073 Mr. Eduardo Schonborn, AICP August 9, 2024 Page 6 JOSH SMITH, AICP, LEED AP Senior Planner Josh Smith, AICP, LEED AP, is a Senior Planner with De Novo Planning Group. He has over 12 years of experience and is responsible for the preparation of CEQA/NEPA documents (Initial Studies, Negative Declaration, Environmental Impact Reports, and Environmental Assessments), the development of air quality and greenhouse gas technical plans and reports, and climate change planning for local governments. Josh has extensive experience with air quality, greenhouse gas, and energy modeling, including criteria air pollutant and air dispersion modeling. Josh also has substantial experience developing Climate Action Plans, Energy Action Plans, and toxic air contaminant (TAC) Health Risk Assessments. He served as the primary technical analyst on the Pleasanton, Oakdale, and Hughson Climate Action Plans, and has managed EIRs such as the Manteca Annexation #1 EIR, Placer County RTP EIR, and Amador County RTP EIR. Josh has additional expertise utilizing best -practice standards for developing greenhouse gas (GHG) inventories and context -specific GHG mitigation measures, as well as developing custom air pollutant emissions calculators for complex projects. FERNANDO SOTELO, PE Associate Engineer, Kittelson Fernando Sotelo has extensive experience in CEQA and the technical aspects of transportation planning, including travel demand forecasting, traffic impact analyses, and parking demand studies. His professional experience with traffic and parking analyses includes several schools and a variety of land development uses, such as warehousing, mixed use, commercial, and recreation projects in southern and northern California. Fernando understands the complexities of transportation planning and has prepared transportation sections for EIRs for major projects such as general plan updates and specific plans. He focuses particular attention on issues such as vehicular circulation, site access, queuing, and pedestrian routes to school and safety. In addition to his experience in traffic, Fernando has prepared hundreds of technical studies for noise and air quality analyses on a variety of projects. MIKE DICKERSON JR., INCE Principal, MD Acoustics Mike has a passion for the science of sound and vibration and has worked professionally in acoustical engineering since 2002. He received his Bachelor of Science degree in Physics, emphasizing in acoustics from Brigham Young University in Utah. He is currently a member of the Institute of Noise Control Engineers (INCE). Motivated by professional growth and opportunity, Mr. Dickerson formed his own acoustical engineering firm, MD Acoustics in 2012. Agreement No. 7073 Mr. Eduardo schonborn, AICP August 9, 2024 Page 7 Mr. Dickerson's versatile experience includes leading and assisting in the design and review of many facets of acoustical engineering and air quality projects, including but not limited to air/noise assessments, ceiling/floor assembly design, architectural design, acoustical product design, vibration analysis and noise mitigation strategies. Prior to starting his own consulting firm, Mr. Dickerson worked for Sony Entertainment, Parsons, and RK Engineering. He has successfully completed over 2,200 acoustical/air quality assessment reports for various engineering companies, municipalities, and other agencies (both public and private). His strategic project planning and cost-effective management solutions enabled him to excel in the field of Acoustics and project management. R 1 The De Novo team will conduct the peer review of the Class 32 CEQA Exemption document and technical studies and deliver the Peer Review Memorandum within three (3) weeks of the Project initiation. It is assumed that electronic files of the Class 32 CEQA Exemption document and all technical studies, including appendices with modeling outputs will be provided at this time. Within one (1) week of receiving the revised Class 32 CEQA Exemption document and technical studies with revisions in track changes or highlighted and/or a response matrix, De Novo will review and provide confirmation that all comments have been adequately addressed (as appropriate). FEE The fee to provide the requested services is provided on the following page. We appreciate the City contacting us regarding this work program. Should you need anything else, please do not hesitate to contact me at (949) 396-8193 or sbarker@denovoplanning.com. Sincerely, DE NOVO PLANNING GROUP Starla Barker, AICP, Principal Planner De Novo Planning Group 233 Kansas Class 32 CE Peer Review TASK/ACTIVITY Principal Planner/ Project Manager _ hours $18S Senior Planner hours $150 De Novo Subtotpl TOTALS hours Fee Kittelson Transportation Analysis MD Acoustics Noise Study Direct Costs Printing, Postage, Filing Fees ACTIVITY TOTALS Fee 1.0 Project Initiation and Background Review 2 $370 $0 2 $370 $370 2.0: Class 32 Infill Exemption Peer Review 24 $4,440 12 $1,800 36 $6,240 $6,750 $3,200 $16,190 3.0: Meetings and Hearings 8 $1,480 $0 8 $1,480 $50 $1,530 4.0: Project Management/Administration 4 $740 $0 4 $740 $740 SUBTOTALI TOTAL• • .... 38 $ 7,030 _ 12'' $ 1,800 - 1 50 $ 8,830I - $6350 $3,200 $50 $18,830 1 5.1 Review of VMT Analysis Using Sketch Planning Tool y g g 2 $370 $0 2 $370 $1,250 $1,620 5.1 Review of VMT Analysis Using SCAG Activity -Based Model $$370 1 $0 2 $370 $1,750 $2,120 NOTES: Subconsultants and Direct Costs are billed at no markup. De Novo Planning Group reserves the right to reallocate budget between various consulting team members and between tasks, provided the overall project budget does not change. 0 Agreement No. 7073 3707 W. Garden Grove Blvd., Suite 100 Orange, CA 92868 Phone: 714.568.1010 Fax: 714.568.1028 CONSULTANTS Employee -Owned August 16, 2024 EXHIBIT B Eduardo Schonborn, AICP, Planning Manager City of El Segundo, Community Development Department 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 Re: Planning Services Proposal for Grand/Kansas South Site (Office -Parking) Project Dear Mr. Schonborn, www.csgengr.com Thank you for the opportunity for CSG Consultants (CSG) to present our proposal to provide Planning Services for the proposed Office and Parking Structure project located at the Grand/Kansas South Site. We understand that this project would provide Class A office space and a new parking structure within the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan area. The proposed project would require site plan review and Community Benefits Plan approvals from the Planning Commission. CSG's planning team brings specialized knowledge and highly experienced planning staff as well as the flexibility to adjust to the City's changing needs. Currently providing comprehensive municipal services to over 250 public agency clients, CSG excels at serving as a seamless extension of municipal staff in delivery of our planning services. Scope of Work The City has requested services for the comprehensive site plan review of a newly proposed office building of approximately 84,000 net square feet and a 130,684 square feet parking structure with 384 parking spaces of varying types. CSG previously provided Planning Services for the review of a larger, multi -site project involving this site and a site to the north. We understand that there will be a need for a critical review of the proposed site plan, environmental analysis, and the overall Community Benefits Plan to ensure compliance with the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the City's Municipal Code. CSG will provide these services with highly knowledgeable and experienced planning staff proposed herein. Cost A cost proposal has been established for this project (rates for additional available CSG planning roles are also provided). CSG is proposing a not to exceed amount of $4S,298.50, including contingency. Please see the spreadsheet provided as an Attachment. Proposed Personnel Ethan Edwards, AICP, Vice President of Planning Services will serve as contract manager and QA/QC for the City. Mr. Edwards will ensure the availability of adequate resources and provide oversight and quality control. His contact information is provided here. Ethan Edwards, AICP] I Vice President of Planning Services (714) 568-1010 office 1 (714) 699-4297 mobile I ethane cs en r.com Resumes of proposed staff can be provided upon request from the City. FOSTER CITY I PLEASANTONW N SAN ME I SAER ANWN ENWT 0 1 NEiIWMAN IPASOROBLESIR EM 1 0RAI;NGE, CSG CONSULTANTS Agreement No. 7073 CSG PROPOSAL TO THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO FOR PLANNING SERVICES Project Contact Bradley J. Misner, AICP, Director of Planning Services, will be the primary point of contact and provide direction to Jonathan Kwan, Senior Planner, who will serve as the lead planner for this project. Mr. Misner's contact information is provided here. Bradley J. Misner, AICP] I Director of Planning Services (714) 568-1010 office 1 (310) 308-7505 mobile I bradleya@csgengr.com We look forward to assisting the City of El Segundo with its planning needs. Should you have any questions regarding our proposal, please contact Mr. Misner. Sincerely, Cyrus Kianpour, PE, PLS President Agreement No. 7073 CSG COw`tSAA-TANTS Employee -Owned Project: Grand/Kansas South Site (Office -Parking) Project Entitlements Management Hourly Rates: Planning Manager: $215/hour Senior Planner: $175/hour r � glix Appticption and Pro�act Com Nonce Review - Site Plan/zoning Review 26 6 20 $4,790.00 General Plan/Specific Plan Compliance 14 4 10 $2,610.00 Community Benefits Compliance 10 2 8 $1,830.00 Subtotals 50 12 38 $9,230.00 PIT rr"ect m-ago e Applicant coordination 30 10 20 $5,650.00 Coordination with City Management 20 10 10 $3,900.00 Interdepartmental coordination 20 5 15 $3,700.00 Coordination with Environmental Review Consultant 20 5 15 $3,700.00 Public Communications 20 8 12 $3,820.00 Subtotals 110 38 72 $20,770.00 Public Hearing Ptte grgtion Staff Report and Resolutions 26 6 20 $4,790.00 Presentation Preparation 12 4 8 $2,260.00 Attendance at PC Hearing 6 3 3 $1,170.00 Attendance at CC Hearing 6 3 3 $1,170.00 Subtotals 50 16 34 $9,390.00 Subtotals 210 66 144 $39,390.00 15% Contingency $5,908.50 Totals: 210 $45,298.50 All hourly rates reflect costs including salaries, benefits, workers' compensation insurance, local travel and miscellaneous office expenses. Should the scope of work change, or circumstances develop which necessitate special handling, CSG will notify the City prior to proceeding. On each anniversary of the contract start date, CSG will increase hourly rates based on change in CPI for the applicable region. CSG will mail an invoice every month for services rendered during the previous month. Unless otherwise agreed, payment terms are 30-days from receipt of invoice.