Staff Report - September 18, 2001 - Agenda Item

The purpose of this report is to: 1) to present the results of the Design Development Phase for the South San Fernando Boulevard Streetscape Project and request authority to proceed with the Construction Documentation Phase with David Evans and Associates; 2) to provide an update on the Schematic Design Phase of the Robert R. Ovrom Park/Community School Project and request authority to proceed with the Design Development Phase; 3) to request authority to combine both projects under one Construction Manager and utilize a Guaranteed Maximum Price Delivery Strategy for both projects; 4) to approve an Indemnification Agreement and accept DTSC grant funding to complete a Preliminary Endangerment Assessment for the Ovrom Park/Community School site; and 5) to approve an amendment to a Professional Services Agreement with WLC Architects for additional design services for the proposed subterranean parking garage.

BACKGROUND

South San Fernando Boulevard Streetscape Project - The South San Fernando Boulevard Streetscape Project includes roughly a �-mile portion of the boulevard between Verdugo and Alameda Avenues. The Project is located in the South San Fernando Redevelopment Project Area and is an important component of the redevelopment of the area as this corridor is one of the primary gateways to the city and it serves as a direct link into Downtown Burbank. The project is designed (see Exhibit A) to provide an environment geared toward enhancing the economic base of the area, by improving the overall appearance and viability of the South San Fernando Boulevard corridor. The streetscape project supports implementation of the South San Fernando Redevelopment Plan and will further demonstrate the Agency�s commitment to revitalizing the blighted area and improving the infrastructure.

In September 2001, the Redevelopment Agency Board approved a Professional Services Agreement (�PSA�) with David Evans & Associates (DEA) for design services for the schematic design phase of the Project. The Schematic Design Phase included a variety of tasks, including: preparation of project area base maps; site analysis and data gathering; civil engineering evaluation; utility coordination; traffic engineering; conceptual streetscape plans; and preliminary construction cost estimates. Coordination with all affected City departments and meeting with the community were also included in the schematic design phase. The core project team included representatives from the following departments and divisions: Community Development Department, Redevelopment, Planning and Transportation Divisions; Public Works Department, Engineering and Traffic Engineering Divisions; Burbank Water and Power Department, Power Division; and Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department, Park Services Division. Also, the project team coordinated with the: Police Department; Fire Department; Burbank Water and Power Department, Water Division; the Field Services Division of the Public Works Department; and the Building Division of the Community Development Department. The design elements selected by the project team included enhanced treatments along the entire corridor with parkway and landscaped median improvements, roadway reconstruction, gateway elements and decorative crosswalks. These improvements did not alter the curb line or sidewalk widths and did not impact on-street parking anywhere along the corridor.

On July 30, 2002, the proposed schematic streetscape design was presented to the City Council and Redevelopment Agency Board, after which staff was directed to proceed with the Design Development Phase. At the July 30, 2002 meeting, the Agency Board expressed specific comments relating to lighting design and some of the proposed amenities in the schematic design. These comments have been incorporated into the Design Development Plan currently being presented to the City Council and Redevelopment Agency Board.

As part of the Schematic Design and Design Development Phases, staff held seven community meetings to gather input from residents, property and business owners in the area. The first streetscape community meeting occurred in May 2002. Subsequent to that meeting, the streetscape project was presented together with the Robert R. Ovrom Park project at community meetings held on August 2002, March 2003, April 2003 and June 2003. Also in April 2003, both projects were presented to the City Council and Redevelopment Agency Board. At that meeting, staff was directed to proceed with the Schematic Design Phase of the Ovrom Park Project and continue with the Design Development Phase of the streetscape project. The Agency Board also appointed the South San Fernando Community Park/School Oversight Committee to serve as the Oversight Committee for the South San Fernando Boulevard Streetscape Project. Since then, there have been two Oversight Committee meetings. These meetings were held on May 22, 2003 and October 9, 2003, and Committee comments have been incorporated into the latest streetscape design.

Robert R. Ovrom Park/Community School Project � The South San Fernando Redevelopment Project Area is comprised primarily of industrial and commercial uses; however, the area immediately surrounding the South San Fernando Corridor has a high residential concentration with no direct access to adequate open space and recreational facilities. For this reason, when the South San Fernando Redevelopment Project Area was formed in 1997, the Plan specifically recommended development of a 10-acre park facility. Since then, the City Council has dedicated funds from various sources for property acquisition in the South San Fernando Boulevard Area and, with the support of the Redevelopment Agency, a site for a community park and community school has been assembled.

The Burbank Unified School District (BUSD) took operational control of the existing community school from the County of Los Angeles in 1999. BUSD has also been seeking a permanent home for its community school. As the City began assembling a site for a community park, it became apparent that there was an opportunity to combine much-needed recreational amenities with the community school at a single location.

On April 22, 2003, the City Council generally accepted the recommended project and allowed staff to proceed with the Schematic Design Phase. The Schematic Design program as currently planned includes a raised two-story 16,973 g.s.f. steel moment-framed facility over a semi-subterranean garage, with program space for a joint-use neighborhood recreation center and a community day school to be separately operated by the Park, Recreation & Community Services Department and the Burbank Unified School District, respectively. The Project is proposed as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certified with the final certification level determined by the Project Team�s continued assessment of its cost and real long-term benefits.

Exhibits B, C, D, and E portray the current project design and include exterior building elevations, the site and park plan, the subterranean garage and floor plans, and the detailed space program. Programming includes:

Since the last report to the City Council on April 22, 2003, the project team has accomplished the following:

Both of these projects will be very instrumental to the revitalization to the South San Fernando Redevelopment Project Area as well as enhancing the quality of life for the surrounding community. The streetscape project, with the financial backing of the Agency, is expected to be the �backbone� for future utility upgrades as future projects are constructed (especially along the South San Fernando Boulevard corridor). The park project brings open space and recreation facilities as well as a community school to a neighborhood that has suffered for a long time due to a lack of such facilities.

This half-mile stretch of South San Fernando Boulevard functions as the southerly gateway into the city, and provides a link to Downtown Burbank. The impact of the proposed streetscape project is considerable in light of the fact that there are four projects either proposed or under construction along South San Fernando Boulevard between Verdugo and Alameda Avenues (including the park/community school project). The proposed streetscape improvements will set the design standards for the area and will help ensure aesthetic compatibility among the four current projects as well as future projects. The streetscape improvements may inspire the property owners along the corridor to upgrade their properties thereby assisting the Agency in its efforts to mitigate existing blighted conditions and to revitalize the area.

The proposed streetscape design was developed from community meetings, project team meetings and Oversight Committee meetings. The project team initially selected DEA as the projects architect and worked with them to develop three design schemes. After receiving direction from the City Council/Agency Board to focus on one design option, staff presented that draft plan to the neighborhood residents, property and business owners at three community meetings. The community�s input was mostly related to traffic and access issues. Prior to the final community meeting, an Oversight Committee meeting was held. The Committee selected the ornamental pedestrian lighting, tree grates and street furniture. In addition, drinking fountains and gateway signage were rejected by the City Council and Agency Board at the April 2003 meeting. Also included in the project is a wayfinding signage component, which will be designed in the future to maintain consistency with that of the Downtown wayfinding program.

Subsequent to the most recent Oversight Committee meetings, a final community meeting occurred in June 2003. The input from the Oversight Committee and all of the community meetings has been incorporated into the proposed streetscape design. The following is a summary of the final design.

The most notable component to the streetscape improvements will be installation of street medians along the South San Fernando Boulevard corridor. The medians will include low level landscaping, an irrigation system, 48-inch and some 60-inch box trees, landscape accent lighting and place holder pads for a public art component. The medians have been engineered to allow left-hand turn movements at all intersections. A two-inch thick asphalt layer is proposed for San Fernando Boulevard along the entire half-mile corridor.

The existing sidewalk and curb and gutter will be completely removed which will create an opportunity to upgrade the integrity of the corridor. The hardscape improvements will consist of acid-etched paving with a diagonal scoring pattern. While this will create a similar effect to stamped concrete, it will be easier to match in the future when projects require removal and replacement of certain sections of the sidewalk. 48-inch box street trees, decorative tree grates, benches and trash containers are also included in the parkway improvements. This will have an immediate positive visual impact since there are very few street trees at the present time. The proposed improvements also include four bicycle racks and five bus shelters.

The addition of pedestrian scale ornamental light standards is perhaps the most inviting component of the streetscape project. The proposed lighting shall consist of decorative, pedestrian scale fixtures that are both contemporary and classic in style. These fixtures shall replace the existing cobra standards that create unattractive vertical �soldiers� not conducive to creating a pedestrian friendly environment. The new fixtures shall be approximately 16� in height and shall light the pedestrian and vehicular corridors, providing ample lighting for safety while creating an ambient light that enhances the overall night time experience.

The proposed decorative light standards shall be placed approximately 75� on center and will meet all requirements for roadway and pedestrian lighting in

accordance with ANSI RP8 � luminance method, thus ensuring the appropriate level of light and brightness. Wayfinding signage and decorative banners can be attached to the light poles as desired. Landscape lighting will also be provided within the median to enhance the visual experience. Uplighting of trees, art components and signage shall also be provided, in addition to possible seasonal lighting for holiday events.

The proposed plant palette (see Exhibit F) for the San Fernando Boulevard Streetscape project offers varied texture, color and floral qualities. The softscape has been thoughtfully designed to provide maximum visual quality and interest.

PARKWAY TREES - The parkway landscaping includes two types of street trees, the Evergreen Pear as the dominant parkway tree, and Australian Willow trees which will help define the �conversation nodes� along the corridor on both sides of the street. The Australian Willow is evergreen and has a light and graceful appearance. The Evergreen Pear displays seasonal colors from shiny green foliage for most of the year, to yellows and maroons in the early winter, to completely deciduous for a brief couple of weeks, to a fully floral state in later winter and early spring, then finally back to a leafy condition. Both proposed parkway trees have non-invasive root systems and are ideal for planting along pedestrian access areas.

MEDIAN TREES � Six different types of trees are proposed for the center medians: the Chinese Flame tree; the fruitless American Sweet Gum tree; the Eastern Redbud tree; the Saucer Magnolia tree; the Arbutus �Marina� (no common name); and the Michelia �champaca� (no common name). The typical median planting pattern offers a symmetrical arrangement of trees ranging from small-scale accent trees at each end to tall-upright and broad-canopy growers at and near the centers of the medians. American Sweet Gum trees serve as the upright grower while Chinese Flame trees will help to create a canopy effect. Moving away from the center, clusters of Eastern Redbud trees and/or Michelia champaca with the Saucer Magnolia trees and/or Arbutus Marina for accent have been placed closest to the median apex. The Chinese Flame tree is deciduous with the leaves changing from green to a yellow-golden color then dropping in December and papery, colored capsules that appear in late summer to fall. The American Sweet Gum tree (Liquidambar styraciflua �Rotundiloba�) is also deciduous and displays a purplish fall color. The particular species proposed is fruitless and will not produce the annual crop of prickly balls, typically associated with the Liquidambar tree. The Eastern Redbud tree specified for this project (�Forest Pansy�) loses its leaves in the fall, followed by small rose-colored flowers appearing just after winter, then making way for purple foliage in late spring, the Saucer Magnolia (also deciduous) trees flower in the spring with white, pink or purplish-red showy blossoms. The Arbutus Marina is a medium scale, flowering evergreen flowering tree with dark green foliage and very showy copper-colored bark. The Michelia champaca is also an evergreen flowering tree that is an upright grower with light green foliage and small, highly fragrant creamy-light orange flowers.

SHRUBS � The propose palette of shrubs offers a variety in height, color, texture and flowering characteristics. Included in the design are the following plants (common names): Ivy Geranium; New Zealand Flax; variegated Society Garlic; dwarf Lily of the Nile; dwarf Bottlebrush; Bird of Paradise; Heavenly Bamboo; India Hawthorne; and a selection of Daylilies. The proposed planting patterns weave the strapped-leafed Flax with the finer textures of the Ivy Geranium and Society Garlic. The more rigid Bird of Paradise offers a nice contrast against the looser growth pattern of the dwarf Bottlebrush. Seven of the nine proposed shrubs are flowering in nature, providing a changing show of colors throughout the year. Proposed container planting choices will also utilize the shrub selections mentioned above.

As previously stated, the landscape design proposed for the South San Fernando Boulevard streetscape project offers a new level of quality for Burbank, which will not only create much needed improvement for the corridor, but is expected to set the standard for subsequent projects in the area.

Although not yet a part of the streetscape project budget, staff�s desire is to prepare the South San Fernando Boulevard corridor for utility infrastructure enhancement. Agency staff is working with Burbank Water and Power (BWP) staff on the feasibility of planning for utility undergrounding and accelerating the installation of reclaimed water lines to service not only the streetscape improvements, but future park and recreation facilities such as Robert Ovrom Park as well as future development projects. BWP�s preliminary estimates indicate that it will cost $310,000 to install this reclaimed water line. Additional utility costs are still being identified and will be refined during the Construction Document Phase.

Construction Documents

Initially, through a competitive proposal process, DEA was hired as the project landscape architect. DEA worked with the project team throughout the Schematic Design Phase. Once the Schematic Design Phase was complete, DEA continued working with the project team throughout the Design Development Phase. If the proposed Design Development Plans are approved and staff is directed to proceed with the Construction Document Phase, staff requests that the Agency Board approve a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with DEA (Exhibit G) for preparation of the construction documents for the streetscape project. Staff believes that it is in the best interest of the City and Agency to dispense with the bidding process and approve the proposed PSA with DEA to maintain continuity of landscape architectural services now that the project design is in the final design phase. The total cost of the PSA is $156,000. Funds have been budgeted and are available in the approved Capital Improvement Budget for the South San Fernando Redevelopment Project Area.

Budget

The schematic design of the streetscape project that was approved by the City Council/Agency Board in July 2002 was estimated to cost $3.0 million. However, in responding to the Council�s/Agency Board�s concerns over drinking fountains and gateway signage, the project team was able to reprogram a portion of the savings into more mature plant materials while reducing the overall project cost by roughly $200,000. As a result, the cost of the improvements currently being proposed is estimated to be $2.8 million (see Exhibit H) plus utility enhancements as previously mentioned.

Robert R. Ovrom Park/Community School - The current architecture proposed for the Schematic Design Phase for the Ovrom Park/Community School project resulted from a selection of appropriate forms and features to create a vision inspired by green building strategies, cultural diversity, and historic references borrowed from �downtown� San Fernando Boulevard. The architecture seeks to recognize the City�s unique and local contextual characteristics and provides a friendly and inviting joint-use facility and park addition to the community it serves.

Redevelopment concepts for the area reflect a spirit of renewal, and encourage new community identity with a selective assemblage of landscape, signage, lighting, and pavement treatments. The architectural composition of forms and features proposed for the project is derived from an interpretive response committed to sustaining the urban and landscape fabric that distinguishes South San Fernando from any other place. Materials of construction are predominately plaster surfaces and brick facades typical to the San Fernando Boulevard corridor and are purposefully selected to reflect sustainable products and resources and to reflect natural compositions that are comfortable, timeless, and textural.

Current Budget Development - Between January and October 2003, staff retained the project architect and the pre-construction services provider and worked collaboratively with project stakeholders and committees to develop and solidify the current design program, including a commensurate project schedule and budget. Several conceptual plans were presented to the Park, Recreation and Community Services Board, the City Council, the Board of Education, and the Planning Board for its parking determination, between April and June 2003 with unanimous acceptance of one conceptual plan and approval to proceed with the Schematic Design Phase.

The accepted conceptual plan was only slightly revised from historical concept plans with the primary deviation being the provision of an underground parking garage below a LEED certified two-story building. The Schematic Design phase documents, budget, and schedule were completed and the findings presented to the Steering and Oversight Committees for consideration on September 29, and October 9, 2003, respectively. Additional Steering and Oversight Committee meetings were held in November and December 2003 to report and discuss subsequent findings concerning design alternatives, value management considerations, and commensurate cost information. The current design, program development, and commensurate cost evaluations have resulted in a Schematic Design Phase Project budget of $9.2 million.

This budget overage prompted committee members to direct staff to segregate the total costs for including the garage, LEEDs, the serpentine or �s-roof� design that serves as an architectural feature and contributes to LEED certification, and the DTSC cost for further environmental investigations. In addition, the Committees requested alternative building elevations and a site plan to portray elimination of the garage, brick veneer skin, removal of the �s-roof�, and the commensurate change to the parking program if on-site surface parking were provided.

A cost investigation to consider a concrete masonry unit (CMU) and wood-framed structural framework and skin (core & shell) was performed and resulted in a $110,000 cost reduction. However, no further re-design efforts were performed to portray exterior building elevations for this structure type.

Exhibit I portrays alternative exterior building elevations if the facility were on grade without the semi-subterranean garage, exterior brick veneer, and the �s-roof�. Exhibit J is the site plan for the Exhibit I program and reflects approximately 15,000 s.f. allocated to 40 surface parking stalls (an average of 375 s.f. per stall including vehicular circulation). The Planning Board determined that forty parking spaces be provided on site, whether it is below grade, or surface parking. Surface parking will reduce the park program by 34% and severely impact the outdoor recreational amenities currently reserved for the public. This competing program element does not bode well in providing a recreational amenity currently designed to meet the needs for this under-served neighborhood and does not maximize the efficient use of the high cost for land.

Comparative Project Costs - Staff also evaluated the proposed SD Phase Budget by comparing completed WLC designed projects having similar scopes. These projects are listed below and compare reasonably well with the anticipated $259/s.f. project cost, excluding the park.[1]

Exhibit K is a summary comparison of the initial $6.0 million budget with the proposed $9.2 million SD Phase Budget. This comparison also identifies an alternative project budget without the semi-subterranean garage and a budget without the garage, the �s-roof�, LEEDs, and the DTSC involvement. Detailed cost support information is also attached as part of this exhibit. Pertinent informational highlights gleaned from Exhibit K include the following points.

Additional Property Acquisition � Staff�s previous inquiries to acquire the existing sound studio at 150 East Providencia Avenue were unsuccessful due in large part to an unwilling seller and the City Council�s decision not to utilize the eminent domain process.

While staff does not have the benefit of a real property appraisal or certified relocation cost estimate, staff estimates total acquisition costs (property purchase and tenant relocation) to range from $1.5 million to $1.7 million compared to the $1.3 million total cost currently attributed to constructing the proposed semi-subterranean parking garage that would accommodate 40 vehicles. In addition, the parcel size, including the immediately adjacent 15� wide alley, collectively account for 7,150 s.f. and would accommodate 22 surface parking spaces. However, the 50� wide by 110� deep parcel has the future potential for expanded park programming and/or additional surface parking should the parcel become available in the future.

From the very beginning, the Project�s programming and design development process has been, and continues to be, a matter of consensus building among project stakeholders. Stakeholders include: the Project�s Steering and Oversight Committees; the Burbank Unified School District; the general public through several community meetings; the Planning Board; the Parks, Recreation and Community Services Board; and the City Council. The Schematic Design program and commensurate budget presented in this report is the direct culmination of these concerted efforts.

The building�s design genesis focused on a quality and environmentally sound design to reflect the considerable public investment. After allowing the architect considerable design freedom and expression to convey a building design that would address unique program needs and to integrate the facility within the fabric of its historical neighborhood context yet express its own permanent identity, the committees� collaborative efforts ultimately modified the exterior design options for aesthetic and budgetary reasons. The collective input for the design evolution is reflected in the current proposal.

The currently proposed $9.2 million project budget prompted consideration of alternative exterior fa�ade and structural design considerations.[3] These considerations included architectural design elements such as the brick veneer skin and LEED functional and aesthetic serpentine roof, and core and shell considerations such as the structural support systems within the garage and two story building. In evaluating the latter, consideration of a steel versus wood frame support system was analyzed with steel being the most appropriate choice.[4]

Although staff does not have alternative exterior building elevation designs such as a concrete masonry unit (CMU) or tilt-up to present the City Council as a means of visual comparison, a cost investigation to consider a CMU skin wrapped around a wood-framed structure was performed and resulted in a $110,000 cost reduction. This seemingly modest cost savings is primarily attributable to the fact that CMU construction has increased considerably and the tripling of wood prices due to material shortages.

The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System represents the U.S. Green Building Council�s effort to provide a national standard for what constitutes a �green building.� Through its use as a design guideline and third-party certification tool, it aims to improve occupant well-being, environmental performance, and economic returns of buildings using established and innovative practices, standards, and technologies.

Green Building Commitment - The City of Burbank made a commitment early in the Phase I programming process to obtain a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)[5] Silver Rated Green Building. The City�s commitment to obtain a minimum Silver Rating for the neighborhood recreation center and community day school makes economic, environmental, and social sense and will represent the very first LEED building within city limits if the project is completed prior to the Development & Community Services Building.

Environmentally, a LEED certified facility reduces energy consumption, emissions, and the use of natural resources such as water and wood products. LEED certified facilities promote the use of alternative transportation means, innovative wastewater technologies, storage and collection of recyclable materials, use of natural lighting, reduces building material and mechanical system emissions, and improves indoor air quality.

General Strategy � Exhibit L represents the current LEED program summary that identifies six design guideline categories, required design consideration and potential credits, the probability and possibility of each credit, and the cost differential (cost premium) to implement the component. This LEED program summary also identifies the certification rating level, the estimated premium cost, and the LEED cost as a percentage of the construction cost.

The general strategy the Project Team adopted in creating a viable LEED program was to first identify those program elements that could be implemented without any project cost such as the project�s located within one-quarter mile of public transit facilities (Sustainable Sites � Credit 4.1). Secondly, to identify those program elements that could be incorporated with minimal incremental project cost such as installing a permanent temperature and humidity monitoring system with user controls (Indoor Environmental Air Quality � Credit 7.2). And finally, to identify those program elements that could be incorporated with reasonable incremental project cost and represented a tangible and highly beneficial result to building occupants and/or operational cost savings over the building�s economic life. Providing high efficiency irrigation technology for 50% of potable water reduction (Water Efficiency � Credit 1) can result in significant water consumption savings over the project�s life expectancy.

Consistent with prior City Council direction, staff will continue to pursue a minimum LEED Certified Silver Rating Level. The primary objective is to achieve the highest certification level at the least incremental cost exposure for components and/or systems that provide tangible and measurable benefits. At this time, staff is pursuing a certified gold level, representing a combined soft and hard cost of $182,373[6] or 2.0% of the project�s net value without LEEDs. Staff will continue to assess the real cost and benefits as the design progresses and more refined information becomes available. Staff will report back to City Council with a LEED strategy update during its presentation of the DD phase.

As previously indicated in April 2003, staff recommends that the South San Fernando Boulevard Streetscape Project and the Ovrom Park Project be combined due to the timing of their respective completion dates, size, complexity, and physical adjacency to one another. The impetus in combining these projects is single source accountability and economics. Although the projects are uniquely different in that the Streetscape Project is more of a public works endeavor and the Park Project is a capital improvement, single source accountability for construction execution and management oversight will result in real cost savings.

From a schedule, logistics, and construction management standpoint, these projects can rationally be combined without compromising project goals of quality, schedule, and budget. Savings that can be realized, though not specifically quantified herein at this time, include:

In the event construction commencement for either project is delayed or accelerated, there is sufficient schedule latitude in either project to continue with project consolidation. For example, at this time, the streetscape project is a six month endeavor and tentatively scheduled for a August 2004 construction commencement. Construction commencement for Ovrom Park is scheduled for March 2005 with the schedule slip due in large part to the involvement of the Department of Toxic Substances Control.

If the streetscape project is unexpectedly delayed, this closes the current seven month gap. Should Ovrom Park be delayed and the streetscape project remains on target, the two projects can be separated due to the uniqueness of their respective scope. Early construction activities for the Ovrom Park Project such as grading, excavation, ordering structural steel, and garage concrete work, can commence without further project costs. Staff will continue to closely monitor the progress for each project and take advantage of the opportunity to beneficially combine the projects.

In its land assemblage efforts, the City exercised the proper due diligence to identify and mitigate the presence of identifiable and potentially hazardous materials as a consequence of each parcel�s prior use. The City maintains the project site is environmentally free of hazardous materials and poses no environmental threats. However, since the project has a school element, there exists a stricter protocol mandated by the State to ensure that potential environmental issues have been appropriately addressed. For the subject project, this will include the State of California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC).

The DTSC�s role in the subject Project, including selective history of prior communications involving the City, BUSD, and the DTSC, is more fully discussed in detail in Exhibit M, �Environmental Activities and the Department of Toxic Substances Control�. Please note that there is no legal requirement for the City to engage the DTSC to oversee any further environmental investigations since the BUSD has not requested nor elected to receive state funds for its community day school. However, through discussion with the Oversight Committee and the Development Oversight Committee, it is deemed in the City�s best long-term interest to accept the DTSC�s recent grant funding to complete a Preliminary Endangerment Assessment[7] (PEA) since it will provide further and undeniable assurances that the project site is environmentally safe for all users.

In addition to the immediate and long-term benefits realized by the City and the BUSD to engage the DTSC in completing a PEA for the subject project, there are some side effects inherent to this decision � additional time and expense. The DTSC will complete the PEA process without any initial cost to the project. However, there is the potential for minor or even significant future City costs in the event the PEA report identifies the presence of on-site hazardous materials.[8]

The project schedule will also slip due to the DTSC�s involvement.[9] Since part of the California Department of Education�s (CDE�s) approval of the project is predicated on completion of the PEA and any subsequent environmental mitigation efforts, if any, for the DTSC to certify the site, final governmental agency approval will delay the project to the extent such approval(s) are on the critical path. Staff will manage the design development, review, and approval process concurrently to the extent possible to mitigate such delays but estimates that the PEA process, including any subsequent mitigation efforts, if any, may impact project completion by six months or more.

The Ovrom Park/Community School project�s final occupancy date slipped from August 2005 to May 2006 since last reported at the April 22, 2003 City Council meeting and is the result of five factors:

Regarding the South San Fernando Boulevard Streetscape project, the fiscal impact of proceeding with DEA for preparation of the construction documents is $156,000. Funds have been budgeted in the approved South San Fernando Redevelopment Project Area Capital Improvement Budget (Account No. 304-CD21A-70005-0000-13154). DEA has estimated the cost of the streetscape improvements to be $2.8 million plus the cost of utility enhancements which, as stated, are still being identified. The funding source for the improvements is the 2003 Tax Allocation Bond Issuance for the South San Fernando Redevelopment Project Area. Staff will return to the Agency Board for a budget appropriation for the streetscape improvements at the same time approval of a construction contract is sought.

Historically, the Ovrom Park/Community School project budget was established at $6.0 million based on a conceptual program that included 16,000 n.s.f. of program space for a neighborhood recreation center and a community day school within a one or two story facility, on-site surface parking for approximately 16 vehicles, and the balance of the site to be utilized for outdoor recreational amenities. The $6.0 million budget was founded in part on historical cost estimates provided by the BUSD, Hirsch & Associates (the landscape design architect previously on contract with the City), and the best, but generalized program information available at that time. Exhibit N represents the pre-program phase draft budget staff developed in December 2002 to allocate the $6.0 million across five primary cost categories.

In order to obtain a better appreciation for the $3.2 million gap between the historical $6.0 million budget and the proposed $9.2 million budget for the Schematic Design Phase, one must first eliminate those program elements that were not originally contemplated. These elements include the semi-subterranean parking garage, LEEDs, funding set aside to accommodate further environmental investigations, and a functional, aesthetic, and LEED-based serpentine roof. Collectively, these components account for approximately $1.8 million and reduce the proposed budget to $7.4 million. Therefore, the focus is the $1.4 million gap that represents a 24% increase over the original $6.0 million budget. We also note that there is no need to discuss the park program cost since the current and historical costs are deemed equivalent.

First, in reviewing the BUSD Probable Project Construction Cost, several cost items were not identified. These items and their representative current proposed cost include:

Collectively, these items represent $837,000 with the $563,000 balance of this $1.4 million gap being more than attributable to the disparity between the building unit pricing (approximately $147/s.f. for the historical budget and $259/s.f. for the current Schematic Design).

Appropriations and Potential Funding Sources - A recap of the Robert Ovrom Park (Ovrom Park) appropriations and potential funding sources for both Ovrom Park and the new soccer field project (formerly the Blanchard Trust Soccer Field) is listed below.

Total Potential Funding: $6,895,970

The following is a recap of budgeted project costs needed to complete Ovrom Park and a new soccer field:

The combined Ovrom Park and soccer field projects currently have a $1,020,612 shortfall as noted above. It is important to note that this shortfall assumes that YES Fund dollars for 03/04 will be used for this project. If 03/04 YES fund dollars are not used for this purpose, then the shortfall will be approximately $1.5 million. This funding shortfall could be funded from the $3.5 million project contingency fund established during the Subordinated Bond appropriation at the November 18, 2003 City Council meeting.

Finally, it should be noted further that ongoing operating costs for the Ovrom Park project are not currently known as the programming has not been fully developed. Any increase to the Park, Recreation, and Community Services budget will be addressed during future budget deliberations.

Grant Funding Applications - The Park, Recreation and Community Services Department (PRCS) recently submitted a $1.7 million grant application (Murray-Hayden Urban Parks and Youth Service Program) for consideration under the California Clean Water, Clean Air, Safe Neighborhood Parks and Coastal Protection Act to be applied 100% to the Ovrom Park Project. PRCS is in the process of submitting a second grant request for $2.4 million, although the amount has not been finalized as of December 15, 2003, under the Urban Parks Act of 2001 grant program. Grant award notifications will not be made until June 2004 with funding to be utilized by the end of June 2006. A cautionary note is that the project is scheduled for final occupancy in May 2006 and leaves little room to meet this grant funding condition.

Funding Shortfall Opportunities and Considerations - Based on the above funding source information, City Council has several options to consider as a means to bridge the funding gap if the decision is made to approve the $9.2 million Schematic Design Phase Budget. These options primarily include:

� Potential $4.1 million in grant funding awards � notifications in June 2004

Should City Council consider that design alternatives and/or modifications be the primary mechanism to reduce the overall budget, staff cites below, several opportunities that may be pursued.

Collectively, this represents $2,042,000 in project savings reducing the project to $7,158,000. The savings without eliminating the garage is $762,000 and represents an 8.3% reduction to the overall project cost.

Should the City Council approve the semi-subterranean garage as part of the project, staff will request a commensurate design services change to increase WLC�s PSA by $53,836. Exhibit O represents WLC�s PSA Amendment. This added design services cost is comprised of two elements 1) a $48,836 cost for all design services required to provide the semi-subterranean garage and representing 4.0% of the $1.23 million construction cost increase, and 2) a $5,000 cost for electrical design services for the park program. This latter cost was inadvertently left out from the design services scope when WLC�s PSA was first approved.

Staff recommends City Council approval of the Schematic Design and the commensurate $9.2 million SD Phase Budget for the following reasons.

Staff recommends the City Council: 1) adopt a resolution approving utilization of a Guaranteed Maximum Price Delivery Strategy for the South San Fernando Boulevard Streetscape Project and consolidation of the construction management oversight for both projects; 2) adopt a resolution approving a Cooperation Agreement between the City and the BUSD for preparation of the required PEA; 3) adopt a resolution approving an Indemnification Agreement between the City and DTSC and accepting DTSC grant funding for the PEA; 4) adopt a resolution approving a PSA amendment for WLC Architects to provide additional design services for the proposed subterranean garage; and 5) direct staff to proceed with the Design Development Phase of the Ovrom Park/Community School project.

Staff recommends the Redevelopment Agency Board: 1) direct staff to proceed with the Construction Documentation Phase of the streetscape project; and 2) adopt a resolution approving a Professional Services Agreement with David Evans and Associates for construction document preparation.

[1] These historical project costs have been adjusted upwards with an annual 2.5% escalation rate.

[2] The total real cost of each parking space based on other building requirements such as extended elevators and stairways and design costs raise the unit pricing to $32,000/space

[3] A more detailed discussion of the financial ramifications of some of these design considerations are presented in the Fiscal Impact section.

[4] A steel moment frame provides the lateral resistance to the primary superstructure. This system was a logical choice due to the positioning of the steel columns and floor beams since they integrate well with the proposed OPP-1 building architecture and make efficient use of necessary columns and floor beams required for vertical support. Structural steel was chosen for several factors. First, plywood shear wall design was considered but found to be inappropriate to the proposed architectural forms and features. Next, several substantial cantilevers required structural steel floor members to support offsets between the first and second floor framing. A steel moment frame system allowed the lateral system to be continuous to the building base without compromising usable habitable space in the vicinity of the lateral element. Finally, an all-steel system was selected because of the Division of the State Architect (DSA) best structural design practices, inherent cost efficiencies, and LEED building design advantages.

[5] As defined by the U.S. Green Building Council, LEED is a self-assessing system designed for rating new and existing commercial, institutional, and high-rise residential buildings. It evaluates environmental performance from a �whole building� perspective over a building�s life-cycle, providing a definitive standard for what constitutes a green building. The LEED criteria includes Sustainable Sites, Water Efficiency, Energy and Atmosphere, Materials and Resources, and Indoor Environmental Quality.

[6] The $108,310 cost differential amount cited in Exhibit 5 for the LEED Certified Gold Level is increased by $13,343 to account for GC cost premiums (general conditions, general requirements, fees, insurance, bonds, etc.) and $60,720 for commissioning agent and A-E design fees.

[7] A Preliminary Endangerment Assessment (PEA) is an investigation performed to determine whether current or past hazardous material management practices or waste management practices have resulted in a release or threatened release of hazardous materials, or whether naturally occurring hazardous materials are present, which pose a threat to children�s health, children�s learning abilities, public health, or the environment.

[8] The DTSC grant funding will cover the initial costs to review existing environmental documentation, develop a work plan to perform additional site reconnaissance, soil sampling, laboratory analyses, and completion of the PEA report. Any subsequent consulting, DTSC over-sight, and hazardous material mitigation to obtain final DTSC certification for a clean site will be at the Project�s expense if the decision is made to pursue the cost of such mitigation.

[9] The Governor of California recently placed a hold on the issuance of any new state contracts, including those that are federally funded. The DTSC is in the process of seeking an exemption since the PEA process is federally funded. The PEA process can commence once the exemption is approved.

Council Agenda - City of Burbank

Tuesday, January 13, 2004

Susan M. Georgino, Community Development Director/Assistant Executive Director

PURPOSE

BACKGROUND

Construction Documents

Budget

Total Potential Funding: $6,895,970