HomeMy WebLinkAboutWallace, Roberts, and Todd (WRT) - First Amendment to Agreement - 06.07.23FIRST AMENDMENT TO
AGREEMENT
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT (Amendment) made and entered into
as of this 7th day of June 2023, between the CITY OF FRESNO, a California municipal
corporation (City), and Wallace, Roberts, and Todd (WRT), a Limited Liability Company
(CONSULTANT).
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the CITY and CONSULTANT entered into an Agreement on April 28,
2022, (Agreement) to obtain professional planning and environmental planning services for
the Tower District Specific Plan Update (Project); and
WHEREAS, CITY and CONSULTANT desire to modify the Agreement to increase
the total contract amount by an additional $170,590. and
WHEREAS, with entry into this Amendment, the Consultant agrees it has no claim,
demand, or dispute against the City.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree that the aforesaid Agreement be amended
as follows:
The recitals to this Agreement are incorporated and made a part of this
Amendment.
2. The services of CONSULTANT shall be modified as defined in Exhibit A:
Tower District Specific Plan Update for additional scope and fee proposal, attached hereto
and incorporated herein by reference.
3. The fee as referenced in Exhibit A of $400,000 shall be increased by $170,590
for a total of $570,590.
4. In the event of any conflict between the body of this Amendment and any
Exhibit or Attachment hereto, the terms and conditions of the body of this Amendment shall
control and take precedence over the terms and conditions expressed within the Exhibit or
Attachment. Furthermore, any terms or conditions contained within any Exhibit or
Attachment hereto which purport to modify the allocation of risk between the Parties,
provided for within the body of this Amendment, shall be null and void.
5. Except as otherwise provided herein, the Agreement entered into by the City
and the Consultant on April 28, 2022, remains in full force and effect.
[Signatures follow on the next page.]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Amendment at Fresno,
California, the day and year first above written.
CITY OF FRESNO,
A California municipal corporation
By:
(��V__Oelx�_ —
Jenrr
K.' lark,
Dire of Planning & Development
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ANDREW JAN
City rr y;
By: L3
Bfancon M. Collet date
Senior Deputy City Attorney
ATTEST:
TODD STERMER, CMC
City Clerk
By: -�'6
Deputy- Date
Addresses:
CITY:
City of Fresno
Attention: Nadia Salinas
Project Manager
2600 Fresno Street, Rm. 3065
Fresno, CA 93721
Telephone No: (559) 621-8150
Attachment:
1. Exhibit A - Scope of Services
Wallace_ RnhertG and Todd_ LLC
Nan
Title:pri +i �'
(If corporation or LLC., Board Chair, Pres. or Vice
Pres.)
Title: N
(If core ration or I-LIC.,CrO., Treasurer, Secretary or
Assistant Secretary)
_215LIS
CONSULTANT:
WRT, LLC
Attention: Peter Winch, AICP
478 Tehama, Suite B
San Francisco, CA 974103
Phone: (415) 575-4722
E-mail: pwinch@wrtdesign.com
2
EXHIBIT A
WRT
April 20, 2023
Casey Lauderdale, Supervising Planner
City of Fresno I Planning and Development
2600 Fresno Street Room 3065
Fresno, CA 93721
Via email
Re: Tower District Specific Plan Update: Additional Services
WRT #8687.02
Dear Casey:
WRT is pleased to be working closely with the City of Fresno to update the Tower District
Specific Plan. This memorandum provides our scope and fee proposal in response to the
City's identification of four potential additional tasks that would augment the Specific Plan
and support successful implementation.
Summary of Proposed Tasks
On April 7, City Staff presented WRT with a summary of three proposed new tasks to
support the Tower District Specific Plan:
1. Entertainment District: Create consistent requirements for entertainment/late night uses
in the Tower District.
2. Design: Create objective Design Standards for the Tower District.
3. SIB 330 (Housing Crisis Act of 2019) Analysis: Ensure compliance with SIB 330.
In further discussion with Staff, we identified one additional task, based on a "scope
enhancement" from the original scope of work for the Specific Plan: the creation of a
comprehensive specific plan document. (The base scope for the project will result in a
separate Specific Plan Update document that does not incorporate the original Plan.)
WRT Team Proposal
WRT, together with our partners Zack Urban Solutions and LSA, has prepared a scope of
work and fee for the tasks above. These are provided in the pages that follow. The overall
work program, if approved as a package, would be a $170,590 effort including labor and
reimbursable costs.
WRT, INC I 478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B I San Francisco, CA 94103 James Stickley CA LA-4251
wrtdesign.com 1 415.575.4722 John Gibbs CA LA-4417
N \8000\8687 Fresno Tower District Specific Plan\1-Administranon\2-Agreements & Proposals\WRT Proposals\2023-04-20 Tower District Add Seances Memo docx
WRT
Sincerely,
Peter Winch, AICP
WRT Senior Planner
Attachments:
Scope of Work
Fee Spreadsheet
CC: Sophia Pagoulatos, City of Fresno; John Gibbs, WRT
Page12
Thursday, April 20, 2023
Tower District Specific Plan Update
WRT Proposed Scope of Work: Additional Services I April 20, 2023
The WRT Team, including WRT, Zack Urban Solutions (ZUS), and LSA, have prepared a scope and budget
to respond to the City's interest in adding three tasks to the Tower District Specific Plan Update project.
We look forward to discussing and prioritizing these enhancements with City staff.
TASK 1: ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT
Task 1.1: Review and evaluation of pertinent Fresno zoning code and programs; entertainment
district case studies
WRT and ZUS will review and evaluate relevant provisions in the Fresno zoning code, focusing on the
Commercial Main Street district and on citywide standards related to noise, hours of operation, and
parking. We will also do light case study analysis on up to three regulatory districts for entertainment
areas.
Task 1.2: Recommended best mechanism of regulation
WRT and ZUS will evaluate potential mechanisms of regulation for the Entertainment District including
the creation of an Overlay Zone District, adding language to the Development Code under Section 15
2744 and Section 15-2751, and any other potential mechanisms identified by the Team, and provide a
recommendation.
Task 1.3: Recommend boundaries for the application of Entertainment District regulations
WRT and ZUS will evaluate potential boundaries for the application of regulations, including but not
limited to certain zone districts (e.g., Commercial Main Street), the Specific Plan Area Boundary, select
corridors, etc., and provide a recommendation.
Task 1.4: Draft language to support the recommendations
WRT and ZUS will draft the necessary language to implement recommendations from task 1.2 and 1.3.
This may include but is not limited to use permit requirements; standards for parking, outdoor seating,
noise, and hours of operations; incentives for cultural/entertainment uses; and transfer of development
rights.
Task 1.5: Decision -maker meetings
WRT and ZUS will make up to two in -person presentations to decision -makers (Planning Commission and
City Council).
Note: We anticipate that the Team may present the Entertainment District and the ODDS at the same
Commission/Council working sessions and adoption hearings. A total of four decision -maker meetings
are covered in this scope.
Task 1.6: Conduct Environmental Analysis
Due to potential adverse environmental impacts related to noise and land use compatibility, LSA
anticipates the potential need for additional budget to complete additional tasks including, but not
limited to the following:
Collection of on -site noise measurements;
Page 1 of 4
■ Preparation of detailed noise analysis relative to site -specific sensitive receptors; and
• Preparation of detailed land use compatibility analysis relative to site -specific sensitive receptors.
Prior to initializing any work, LSA will prepare a final scope of work and budget which will include detailed
scopes of work for the technical studies, and the scope of work associated with the Proposed Additional
Scope described here. The final scope will identify all product deliverables, overall IS/MND schedule, and
the number of meetings and hearings that LSA staff will attend.
Task 1 Meetings:
• Decision -maker workshops and hearings (2)
Task 1 Deliverables:
■ Evaluation memo and presentation
• Recommendations memo and presentation
■ Draft Entertainment District regulatory language
• Additional CEQA analysis as needed
TASK 2: DESIGN
Task 2.1: Review and evaluation of existing development standards and design guidelines
WRT and ZUS will undertake a systematic review of the zoning code and the Tower District Design
Guidelines. To compare standards across zoning districts, tables will summarize allowable uses, building
envelope (setbacks, stepbacks, & height), residential density, floor area ratios, and parking ratios. We will
determine which standards, guidelines, and procedures are objective (independently verifiable) and
which are subjective guidelines (open to interpretation). We will also distinguish between subjective
guidelines that be easily rewritten to be objective, versus subjective guidelines that require interpretation
by City staff or decision -making body. We will also note topics associated with best planning practices
but not addressed.
Task 2.2: Update the Tower District Design Guidelines to reflect current information
ZUS will undertake an initial update of the Design Guidelines to ensure that they refer to current zoning
districts and other aspects of the physical and regulatory context.
Task 2.3: Update the Tower District Design Guidelines with objective standards
WRT and ZUS will collaboratively update the Design Guidelines so that they function as effective tool for
regulatory approval in the context of current State housing law. This will involve translating existing
subjective standards into objective standards, clearly distinguishing between standards and discretionary
guidelines, and defining how the standards and guidelines are to be used.
Task 2.4: Produce updated document: Tower District Design Standards
WRT, with review from ZUS, will produce a document incorporating the updates made from tasks 2.2 and
2.3. This document will be focused on a new suite of objective design standards that achieve the
community's goals for compatible urban form. The document may also include some areas where
guidance will remain "subjective" and therefore discretionary.
Task 2.5: Decision -maker meetings
Page 2 of 4
WRT and ZUS will make up to two in -person presentations to decision -makers (Planning Commission and
City Council).
Note: We anticipate that the Team may present the Entertainment District and the ODDS at the same
Commission/Council working sessions and adoption hearings. A total of four decision -maker meetings
are covered in this scope.
Task 2.6: Conduct Environmental Analysis
See Task 1.5. Additional environmental analysis may be needed to address potential impacts related to
either the Entertainment District or the Design Standards.
Task 2 Meetings.•
• Decision -maker workshops and hearings (2)
Task Deliverables:
• Summary memo evaluating existing provisions as noted (i.e. existing objective standards with
summary tables, subjective but easily translated, subjective and needing interpretation, and not
appropriate as developer requirement).
• Initial update of Tower District Design Guidelines for consistency with current zoning etc.
■ Recommended updates to meet State housing law requirements for objective design standards
• Draft and Final Tower District Design Standards
TASK 3: SIB 330 (HOUSING CRISIS ACT OF 2019) ANALYSIS
Task 3.1: Analyze impacts to housing capacity
WRT will analyze proposed changes to the Specific Plan and Design Standards for their impacts on
housing capacity. Should a net loss of housing capacity be found, we will propose solutions to bring the
capacity back to no net loss.
Task 3 Meetings.•
■ None
Task 3 Deliverables. -
SIB 330 Analysis and Recommendations Memo
TASK 4: COMPREHENSIVE SPECIFIC PLAN DOCUMENT
As an alternative option, WRT can provide a single, unified Specific Plan document that synthesizes
existing Specific Plan content that remains valid with new analysis, findings, goals, policies, maps and
graphics. As part of this effort, WRT would create a mark-up of the existing Plan, indicating content to be
retained and content to be removed or replaced. We would bring existing text and table content into a
new document template, and re-create maps, updating both the underlying data and the map style.
Narrative would be updated to reflect updated mapping and analysis.
Page 3 of 4
Task 4 Meetings.•
• No Additional Public Meetings
Task 4 Deliverables.•
• Admin Draft, Public Review Draft, and Final Draft Specific Plan Update (Unified Document)
CITY RESPONSIBILITIES
Provide feedback and respond to inquiries in a timely manner
Provide support for legal analysis where needed
Create informational materials (ex: Presentation slides) related to the Entertainment District and
Design Standards for purposes of communicating with the Steering Committee and members of
the public. Note: WRT recommends two meetings with the Implementation Committee for the
Entertainment District, and two for the Design Standards. Presentations should occur during the
analysis and recommendations stages to ensure that feedback can be brought into draft
regulatory language.
Page 4 of 4
Tower District Specific Plan Update: Additional Services
Subtask 1.1
Subtask 1.2
Subtask 1.3
Subtask 1.4
Subtask 1.5
Subtask 1.6
WRT Zack Urban Solutions LSA Team
Prime Consultant; Planning and Land Use & Zoning
Urban Design
Hours by Task Cost by Task Hours by Task Cost by Task Cost by Task Cost by Task
U
a
0
Hourly Rate
IReview and evaluation of pertinent Fresno zoning code and
programs; entertainment district case studies
Recommended best mechanism of regulation
Recommended district boundaries
Draft language to support regulations
Decision -maker working session and hearing (in -person) - 2 meetings
total
3=nvironmental analysis
Sub -Total
Review and evaluation of existing development standards and design
Subtask 2.1
guidelines
Update Tower District Design Guidelines to reflect current zoning
Subtask 2.2
[districts
Subtask 2.3
Update Tower District Design Guidelines with objective standards
Subtask 2.4
Produce updated Tower District Design Standards document
'Decision -maker working session and hearing (in -person) - 2 meetings
Subtask 2.5
-total
Subtask 2.6
Environmental analysis
Sub -Total
44
$ 6,860.00
12
$ Z460,00
20
$ 3,380,00
56
$ 10,040.00
46
$ 7,990.00
6
$ 1,230.00
184
S 31,960.00
28
$ 4,300.00
a
$ 1,640.00
180
$ 26,100.00
180
$ 26,100.00
46
$ 7,990.00
4
$ 820.00
410
S fi2,B50.00
4
$ 800.00
$
$ 7,660.00
$ 3,260.00
4
$ 800.00
$
4
$ 800.00
$
S 4,180.00
10
$ 2,000.00
$
$ 12,040.00
$ 11,190.00
16
$ 3,200.00
$
0
$ -
$ 15,000.00
$ 16,230.00
38
$ 7,600.00
S 15,000.00
$ 54,560.00
$ 6,300.00
10
$ 2,000,00
$
30
$ 6,000.00
$ -
$ 7,640.00
$ 32,100.00
$ 26,900.00
$ 11,590,00
30
$ 6,000.00
$
4
$ 800.00
$
18
$ 3,600.00
$
0
82
$ 16,400.00
S 79,050.00
Subtask 3.1 Anaty� impacts to housing capacity 48 $ 6,960.00 �O$
Sub -Total
48 $
6,960.00
0 $
S 6,960.00
I Comprehensive Specific Plan Document
Sublaak 4.1 iComprehensive Specific Plan Document
0 $
168 $
24,120.00
Sub -Total
0 S 0
$ 24.720A0
J M S
24.120.001
Labor Sub -Total $
125,690.00
Sub -Total $ 24,000.00 $ 15,000.00
$ 164,690.00
Reimbursables $
3,000.00
Reimbursables S 2,900,002,900.00 $ -
$ 5,900.00
FRESNO CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
REQUEST FOR LEGAL SERVICE (RLS)
CICGLIVIIIG I%L%".),IIVUlU UW ZOULAII1LLWLa LV auLJIIIGy.7`WUG.7IIv.Lwv
*Project Title (include address/names, etc.): Tower City Attorney Office Control No.:
District Specific Plan Update — First Amendment Contract �Z 3
Dept. Dalton Bennett Phone #: 621-8039
Contact:
Pick Up Contact: Nadia Phone #: 621-8150
Standard completion time is 10 business days. For submission deadlines for specific
Council meeting dates, please refer to the "Reports to Council Process Due Dates"
schedule provided by the City Manager's Office. All RUSH submittals require an original
signature from a Director or Assistant Director.
Description of Legal Service Being Requested: Requesting review of a time sensitive
Amendment to an existing contract for the Tower District in reference to the overall COF General
Plan.
Complete Sections Below:
Fund #: 10101 Project ID: PC BU:
Res
Org #: 400301 Activity ID: _ C.O.: Type:
Capital Improvement Project (CIP): Yes ❑ No ❑ (Response Required)
Time Keeping Required for Billing or Reimbursement: Yes ❑ No ❑ (Response Required)
The above numbers will be used to bill for costs incurred as a result of this request for legal service.
At the request of the City Manager, no legal service can be provided unless this form is completed.
If resubmitting documents, please attach a copy of this form and previous drafts.
Estimates from the City Attorney available on request to cover all legal services and costs. When
fee expenditures reach a certain level, a revised estimate for the completion of the project can be
provided.
I am authorized to request these services from the City Attorney and to identify the appropriate
funding source and CIP designation, as appropriate, in the Sections above. There are now and
W111 OU IVf UIC UUICIUVII VI LI11� [AUJU6L, *UIII%oICIIL IUIIUD III LII=. a%P%o%P IIIL.7 w
pay for the legal services requested.
epartm6 t Title
Department Title
Department Signature
Authorized Department Signature
/A,9-3
ate
Resubmitted
Date
*When calling for project status, please reference the Project Title language used on RLS.
Legal Services Request Form Rev January 2023 Page 1 of 1