HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 8.1 StrategicCommunVision CITY CLERK
File # ~---][~[~-~
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 1, 2004
SUBJECT: Consultant Services for a Strategic Community Visioning process
for future private development at Camp Parks
Report Prepared by: Kristi Bascom, Associate Planner ~
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution approving a Consulting Services Agreement in
the amount of $125,000 with RTKL Associates, Inc. (RTKL)
for work on a Strategic Community Visioning process for
future private development at Camp Parks
2. Consulting Services Agreement with proposal and fee
schedule attached as Exhibit A
3. Resumes for Project Managers from RTKL and Keyser
Marston
RECOMMENDATION: 1. Receive Staff Report.
2. Adopt Resolution approving a Consulting Services
Agreement in the amount of $125,000 with RTKL
Associates, Inc. (RTKL) for work on a Strategic Community
Visioning process for future private development at Camp
Parks and authorizing the Mayor execute the contract.
3. Provide direction to Staff on the preferred method of
involving the community in the proposed charrette planning
process by selecting one of the following alternatives:
a. Create a Camp Parks Master Planning Task Force;
b. Invite Key Stakeholders;
c. Invite City Council and Commissions; or
d. Another method as determined by City Council.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: The cost of consultant services for this project is $125,000, as
detailed in the attached contract and fee schedule. The cost of
consultant services for this project will be borne by the Project
Applicant, the U.S Army and their representative, the Staubach
Company.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Completion of the Camp Parks General Plan Amendment has been identified as a high priority in the City
Council Goals and Objectives for the Fiscal Year 2004/2005, and funds have been appropriated to support
this important project. Over the past several months, Staff has been working with the Project Applicant,
COPIES TO: Consultant
APplicants
In-House Distribution
G:~PA#~2003\03-015 Camp Parks GPA\Visioning Progrmn\CC StaffReport RTKL.doc ~
ITEM NO.
the U.S. Army and their authorized representative, the Staubach Company, to determine the most efficient
and effective manner in which to proceed with developing a land use plan for the 182-acre site. Staff and
the Applicants concluded that because of the size, scope, and community-wide importance of this
property, a comprehensive planning process should be employed to outline a vision for the future uses of
the land.
At the request of the Applicants, the City interviewed a planning, architecture, and design finn to guide
the community through a Strategic Visioning process. The visioning process will solicit community
input, analyze options and possibilities for land uses, and create master plan alternatives for review and
discussion. The proposed consultant, RTKL Associates, Inc., has completed community outreach and
visioning programs for several other cities as well as private sector clients throughout California and the
rest of the country. City Staff met twice with RTKL to discuss the firm's work in this field as well as its
proposal for the Camp Parks property in particular, and found that RTKL has the experience and technical
skills to complete a challenging process such as the one proposed and detailed below. Representatives
from the U.S. Army and Staubach also met with RTKL to discuss the proposed visioning process and
have indicated that they are confident RTKL can successfully complete the project.
prOposed Scope of Services
The RTKL Strategic Visioning process in its entirety is attached as Exhibit A to the Consulting Service
Agreement. Below is a condensed summary of the proposal's main components:
Step 1: Analysis
Includes gathering background documentation about the City and the region, conducting a field and
site survey, and preparing an economic market overview.
Step 2: Synthesize Opportunities and Constraints .
· Includes :creating a background documentation report about the site and the City to brief all those
· · involved in the process and preparing a questionnaire in order to interview community leaders
about key issues facing Dublin and the future of the 182-acre Camp Parks property in particular.
Step 3: Charrette
Includes a two-day workshop with community leaders to solicit, discuss, analyze, and evaluate
design alternatives for the property, development of a vision/summary report that will summarize
charrette conclusions, community recommendations, and potential alternatives.
Step 4: Develop and Refine Alternatives
Includes the preparation of 3-5 alternative plan concepts, preparing a financial analysis of
alternatives, and preparing an alternative concepts evaluation report which examines the pros and
cons of all the design alternatives considered.
Step 5: Present Alternatives to Charette Team
Includes a second, half-day public workshop with the original charrette participants to present the
alternative plan concepts for review and discussion.
Step 6: Present Alternatives and Charette Team input to City Council
Involves the presentation of the top design alternatives to the City Council for Council's review
and prioritization:'
Step 7: Prepare Final Report
Involves RTKL refining the development alternatives presented to the City Council based on their
feedback, preparing illustrations· which document the final direction given by Council, and
summarizing the City Council's desired development alternative(s). The final report and
illustrations will serve as the Master Plan for the Camp Parks site and will also be used by the
Applicant as the basis for an official development application for a General Plan Amendment.
Page 2
The Visioning Process as proposed by RTKL will last 12-14 weeks from start to finish, which is a very
ambitious timeframe given the number of questions that need to be answered to produce the desired result.
Throughout the 12-14 week process, there will be a Project Team comprised of members of Staff,
Consultants, and representatives from the U.S. Army that will meet frequently to receive status updates on
the progress of the process and to provide support and feedback at critical points. The Project Team will
serve to make sure the program stays on ~rack. In addition, Planning Staff will be intimately involved
with managing the program to ensure a successful outcome.
The RTKL proposal includes partnering with Keyser Marston, advisors in real estate, economics, and
redevelopment, to conduct the econOmic analysis portion of the project. Jerry Keyser, principal at Keyser
Marston, has worked with several municipalities in the Bay Area, and is very familiar with the economic
dynamics in the Tri Valley region. The City's meetings with RTKL to discuss their proposal for the site
have been successful and the RTKL's references from cities where similar work was completed have been
very favorable. John Gosling, Vice President at RTKL will be the lead person for the public charrette
component of the program and Nathan Cherry, Associate Vice President at RTKL, will be the lead person
for completion of the rest of the Scope of Services as outlined in Exhibit A to the Consulting Services
Agreement. Resumes for the above professionals are included as Attachment 3 to this staff report.
The RTKL Final Report and accompanying illustrations (as described in Step 7) will be the culmination of
the 12-14 week process and will serve to document the City's collective desires for the development of the
Camp Parks property. After the visioning process is completed, it will be up to the Project Applicant to
develop their General Plan Amendment and Planned Development Rezoning application in accordance
with the direction provided by the City Council and the community at large.
Community Involvement in the Strategic Visioning process
In RTKL's proposal, there are several opportunities for public involvement, including during Step 2 of the
process, where the consultants will be interviewing community and business leaders in order to gather
some background information about community concerns and oppommities. Staff will be providing a list
to the consultants of potential interviewees, including City Officials, City Department Heads, Staff and
Board Members of the Dublin Unified School District, Staff and Board Members of the Dublin San
Ramon Services District, interested business leaders, interested community-based organizations, and
neighboring property owners.
Another important opportunity for the public to be involved in the Strategic Visioning process is during
Step 3, which is the two-day charrette workshop with community leaders to solicit, discuss, analyze, and
evaluate design alternatives for the property. Staff is requesting that the City Council provide direction on
the following options for public involvement:
1. Creation of a Camp Parks Master Planning Task Force
Staff could advertise and solicit applications from the broad community for City Council
appointment to a citizen task force to serve as the charrette participants.
2. Key Stakeholders
Staff could provide invitations specifically to key stakeholders (including City Officials, City
Department Heads, Staff and Board Members of the Dublin Unified School District, Staff and
Board Members of the Dublin San Ramon Services District, interested business leaders, interested
community-based organizations, and neighboring property owners) to serve as the charrette
participants.
Page 3
3. City Council and Commissions
The City Council and its appointed commissions (Planning Commission, Parks and Community
Services Commission, Heritage and Cultural Arts Commission) could serve as the charrette
participants.
Staff recognizes that the issue of the future of development at Camp Parks is one that will garner much
interest from the community. However, the charrette process works best when the size of the group is
manageable and the participants dedicated to the success of the process. For this reason, defining in
advance who is best equipped to participate in the process is an important first step worthy of City
Council discussion and recommendation.
SUMMARY:
The City has a standard contract for consultant services that RTKL Associates has reviewed and accepted.
In addition, the Staubach Company, representatives of the U.S. Army and Project Applicants, has agreed
to the scope of the proposal and the costs associated with its implementation. Exhibit A to the contract is
the scope of services and fee schedule that shows a total contract amount of $125,000, all of which will be
paid for by funds available in a deposit account that the U.S. Army and Staubach have set up with the
City.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council receive the Staff Report, adopt a Resolution approving a
Consulting Services Agreement in the amount of $125,000 with RTKL Associates, Inc. (RTKL) for work
on a Strategic Community Visioning process for future private development at Camp Parks and
authorizing the Mayor execute the contract, and provide direction to Staff on the preferred method of
involving the community in the proposed charrette planning process by selecting one of the following
alternatives: (1) Create a Camp Parks Master Planning Task Force; (2) Invite Key Stakeholders; (3) Invite
City Council and Commissions; or (4) Another method as determined by City Council.
Page 4 %q
RESOLUTION NO. - 04
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING A CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $125,000
WITH RTKL ASSOCIATES, INC. (RTKL) FOR WORK ON A STRATEGIC COMMUNITY
VISIONING PROCESS FOR FUTURE PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT AT CAMP PARKS
WHEREAS, the City of Dublin is interested in engaging in a strategic visioning process for future
private development at Camp Parks; and
WHEREAS, the City of Dublin City Council has directed Staff to move projects expeditiously,
and hire consultant firms when services are needed; and
WHEREAS, RTKL Associates, Inc. has shown they have adequate ability to perform the
planning services required; and
WHEREAS, RTKL Associates, Inc. consultants will perform the work outlined in the Scope of
Services; and
WHEREAS, the Project Applicants, the U.S. Army and their authorized representative, the
Staubach Company, have reviewed and approved RTKL's proposal and have agreed to be financially
responsible for the cost of implementing the contract; and
WHEREAS, all costs will be charged to the Project Applicant's deposit account; and
WHEREAS, the contract has been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney's Office.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin does
approve the agreement with the above-mentioned firm.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor is authorized to execute the agreement.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of June, 2004.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
ATTACHMENT 1
CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND RTKL ASSOCIATES, INC.
THIS AGREEMENT for consulting services is made by and between the City of Dublin ("City") and
RTKL Associates, Inc. ("Consultant") as of June 1, 2004.
Section 1. SERVICES. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Consultant
shall provide to City the services described in the Scope of Work attached as Exhibit A at the time and
place and in the manner specified therein. In the event of a conflict in or inconsistency between the terms
of this Agreement and Exhibit A, the Agreement shall prevail.
1.1 Term of Services. The term of this Agreement shall begin on the date first noted above
and shall end on November 1, 2004, the date of completion specified in Exhibit A, and
Consultant shall complete the work described in Exhibit A prior to that date, unless the
term of the Agreement is otherwise terminated or extended, as provided for in Section 8.
The time provided to Consultant to complete the services required by this Agreement shall
not affect the City's right to terminate the Agreement, as provided for in Section 8.
1.2 Standard of Performance. Consultant shall perform all services required pursuant to this
Agreement in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent
practitioner of the profession in which Consultant is engaged in the geographical area in
which Consultant practices its profession. Consultant shall prepare all work products
required by this Agreement in a substantial, first-class manner and shall conform to the
standards of quality normally observed by a person practicing in Consultant's profession.
1.3 Assignment of Personnel, Consultant shall assign only competent personnel to perform
services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that City, in its sole discretion, at any
time during the term of this Agrbement, desires the reassignment of any such persons,
Consultant shall,' immediately upon receiving notice from City of such desire of City,
reassign such person or persons.
1.4 Time. Consultant shall devote such time to the perfOrmance of services pursuant to this
Agreement as may be reasonably necessary to meet the standard of performance
provided in Section 1.1 above and to satisfy Consultant's obligations hereunder.
Section 2, COMPENSATION, City hereby agrees to pay Consultant a sum not to exceed
$125,000.00, notwithstanding any contrary indications that may be contained in Consultant's proposal, 'for
services to be performed and reimbursable costs incurred under this Agreement. In the event of a conflict
between this Agreement and Consultant's proposal, attached as Exhibit A, regarding the amount of
compensation, the Agreement shall prevail. City shall pay Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this
Agreement at the time and in the manner set forth herein. The payments specified below shall be the only
payments from City to Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall
submit all invoices to City in the manner specified herein. Except as specifically authorized by City,
Consultant shall not bill City for duplicate services performed by more than one person.
Consulting Services Agreement between june 1, 2004
City of Dublin and RTKL Page 1 of 14
ATTACHMENT
Consultant and City acknowledge and agree that compensation paid by City to Consultant under this
Agreement is based upon Consultant's estimated costs of providing the services required hereunder,
including salaries and benefits of employees and subcontractors of Consultant. Consequently, the parties
further agree that compensation hereunder is intended to include the costs of contributions to anY pensions
and/or annuities to which Consultant and its employees, agents, and subcontractors may be eligible. City
therefore has no responsibility for such contributions beyond compensation required under this Agreement.
2.1 Invoices. Consultant shall submit invoices, not more often than once a month during the
term of this Agreement, based on the cost for services performed and reimbursable costs
incurred prior to the invoice date. Invoices shall contain the following information:
· Serial identifications of progress bills; i.e., Progress Bill No. 1 for the first invoice,
etc.;
· The beginning and ending dates of the billing period;
· A Task Summary containing the original contract amount, the amount of prior
billings, the total due this period, the balance available under the Agreement, and
the percentage of completion;
· At City's option, for each work item in each task, a copy of the applicable time
entries or time sheets shall be submitted showing the name of the person doing
the work, the hours spent by each person, a brief description of the work, and
each reimbursable expense;
· The total number of hours of work performed under the Agreement by Consultant
and each employee, agent, and subcontractor of Consultant performing services
hereunder, as well as a separate notice when the total number of hours of work by
Consultant and any individual employee, agent, or subcontractor of Consultant
reaches or exceeds 800 hours, which shall include an estimate of the time
necessary to complete the work described in Exhibit A;
· The Consultant's signature.
2.2 Monthly Payment. City shall make monthly payments, based on invoices received, for
services satisfactorily performed, and for authorized reimbursable costs incurred. City
shall have 30 days from the receipt of an invoice that complies with all of the requirements
above to pay Consultant.
2.3 Final PaYment. City shall pay the last 10% of the total sum due pursuant to this
Agreement within sixty (60) days after completion of the services and submittal to City of a
final invoice, if all services required have been satisfactorily performed.
2.4 Total Payment. City shall pay for the services to be rendered by Consultant pursuant to
this Agreement. City shall not pay any additional sum for any expense or cost whatsoever
incurred by Consultant in rendering services pursuant to this Agreement. City shall make
no payment for any extra, further, or additional service pursuant to this Agreement.
Consulting Services Agreement between June 1,2004
City of Dublin and RTKL Page 2 of 14
In no event shall Consultant submit any invoice for an amount in excess of the maximum
amount of compensation provided above either for a task or for the entire Agreement,
unless the Agreement is modified prior to the submission of such an invoice by a properly
executed change order or amendment.
2.5 Hourly Fees. Fees for work performed by Consultant on an hourly basis shall not exceed
the amounts shown on the following fee schedule:
2.6 Printing Expenses. Reimbursable expenses are listed in Exhibit A, the Scope of
Services, and shall not exceed $10,000.00. Expenses not listed in Exhibit A are not
chargeable to City. Reimbursable expenses are included in the total amount of
compensation provided under this Agreement that shall not be exceeded.
2.7 Payment of Taxes. Consultant is solely responsible for the payment of employment taxes
incurred under this Agreement and any similar federal or state taxes.
2.8 Payment upon Termination. In the event that the City or Consultant terminates this
Agreement pursuant to Section 8, the City shall compensate the Consultant for all
outstanding costs and reimbursable expenses incurred for work satisfactorily completed as
of the date of written notice of termination. Consultant shall maintain adequate logs and
timesheets in order to verify costs incurred to that date.
2.9 Authorization to Perform Services. The Consultant is not authorized to perform any
services or incur any costs whatsoever under the terms of this Agreement until receipt of
authorization from the Contract Administrator.
Section 3. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT. Except as set forth herein, Consultant shall, at its sole
cost and expense, provide all facilities and equipment that may be necessary to perform the services
required by this Agreement. City shall make available to Consultant only the facilities and equipment listed
in this section, and only under the terms and conditions set forth herein.
City shall furnish physical facilities such as desks, filing cabinets, and conference space, as may be
reasonably necessary for Consultant's use while consulting with City employees and reviewing records and
the information in possession of the City. The location, quantity, and time of furnishing those facilities shall
be in the sole discretion of City. In no event shall City be obligated to furnish any facility that may involve
incurring any direct expense, including but not limited to computer, long-distance telephone or other
communication charges, vehicles, and reproduction facilities.
Section 4. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS, Before beginning any work under this Agreement,
Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall procure "occurrence coverage" insurance against claims for
injuries to persons or damages to property that may arise from or in connection with the performance of the
work hereunder by the Consultant and its agents, representatives, employees, and subcontractors.
Consultant shall provide proof satisfactory to City of such insurance that meets the requirements of this
section and under forms of insurance satisfactory in all respects to the City. Consultant shall maintain the
insurance policies required by this section throughout the term of this Agreement. The cost of such
Consulting Services Agreement between June 1,2004
City of Dublin and RTKL Page 3 of 14
insurance shall be included in the Consultant's bid. Consultant shall not allow any subcontractor to
commence work on any subcontract until Consultant has obtained all insurance required herein for the
subcontractor(s) and provided evidence thereof to City. Verification of the required insurance shall be
submitted and made part of this Agreement prior to execution.
4.1 Workers' Compensation. Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, maintain
Statutory Workers' Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance for any
and all persons employed directly or indirectly by Consultant. The Statutory Workers'
Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance shall be provided with limits of
not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) per accident. In the alternative,
Consultant may rely on a self-insurance program to meet those requirements, but only if
the program of self-insurance complies fully with the provisions of the California Labor
Code. Determination of whether a self-insurance program meets the standards of the
Labor Code shall be solely in the discretion of the Contract Administrator. The insurer, if
insurance is provided, or the Consultant, if a program of self-insurance is provided, shall
waive all rights of subrogation against the City and its officers, officials, employees, and
volunteers for loss arising from work performed under this Agreement.
An endorsement shall state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by
either party, reduced in coverage or in limits, except after thirty (30) days' prior written
notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City.
4.2 Commercial General and Automobile Liability Insurance.
4.2.1 General requirements. Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall maintain
commercial general and automobile liability insurance for the term of this
Agreement in an amount not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00)
per occurrence, combined single limit coverage for risks associated with the work
contemplated by this Agreement. If a Commercial General Liability Insurance or an
Automobile Liability form or other form with a general aggregate limit is used,
either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work to be
performed under this Agreement or the general aggregate limit shall be at least
twice the required occurrence limit. Such coverage shall include but shall not be
limited to, protection against claims arising from bodily and personal injury,
including death resulting therefrom, and damage to property resulting from
activities contemplated under this Agreement, including the use of owned and non-
owned automobiles.
4.2.2 Minimum scope of coverage. Commercial general coverage shall be at least as
broad as Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability occurrence form
CG 0001 (ed. 11/88) or Insurance Services Office form number GL 0002 (ed. 1/73)
covering comprehensive General Liability and Insurance Services Office form
number GL 0404 covering Broad Form Comprehensive General Liability.
Automobile coverage shall be at least as broad as Insurance Services Office
Consulting Services Agreement between June 1,2004
City of Dublin and RTKL Page 4 of 14
Automobile Liability form CA 0001 (ed. 12/90) Code 1 ("any auto"). No
endorsement shall be attached limiting the coverage.
4.2.3 Additional requirements. Each of the following shall be included in the
insurance coverage or added as an endorsement to the policy:
a. City and its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be covered
as insureds with respect to each of the following: liability arising out of
activities performed by or on behalf of Consultant, including the insured's
general supervision of Consultant; products and completed operations of
Consultant; premises owned, occupied, or used by Consultant; and
automobiles owned, leased, or used by the Consultant. The coverage
shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to
City or its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers.
b. The insurance shall coVer on an occurrence or an accident basis, and not
on a claims-made basis.
c. An endorsement must state that coverage is primary insurance with
respect to the City and its officers, officials, employees and volunteers,
and that no insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City shall be
called upon to contribute to a loss under the coverage.
d. Any failure of CONSULTANT to comply with reporting provisions of the
policy shall not affect coverage provided to CITY and its officers,
employees, agents, and volunteers.
e. An endorsement shall state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided,
canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits, except after
thidy (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt
requested, has been given to the City.
4.3 Professional Liability Insurance. Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall
maintain for the period covered by this Agreement professional liability insurance for
licensed professionals performing work pursuant to this Agreement in an amount not less
than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) covering the licensed professionals' errors
and omissions.
4.3.1 Any deductible or self-insured retention shall not exceed $150,000 per claim.
4.3.2 An endorsement shall state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided,
canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits, except after thirty (30)
days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given
to the City.
Consulting Services Agreement between June 1, 2004
City of Dublin and RTKL Page 5 of 14
4.3.3 The policy must contain a cross liability or severability of interest clause.
4.3.4 The following provisions shall apply if the professional liability coverages are
written on a claims-made form:
a. The retroactive date of the policy must be shown and must be before the
date of the Agreement.
b. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be
provided for at least five years after completion of the Agreement or the
work, so long as commercially available at reasonable rates.
c. If coverage is canceled or not renewed and it is not replaced with another
claims-made policy form with a retroactive date that precedes the date of
this Agreement, Consultant must provide extended reporting coverage for
a minimum of five years after completion of the Agreement or the work.
The City shall have the right to exercise, at the Consultant's sole cost and
expense, any extended reporting provisions of the policy, if the Consultant
cancels or does not renew the coverage.
4,4 All Policies Requirements,
4.4.1 Acceptability of insurers. All insurance required by this section is to be placed
with insurers with a Bests' rating of no less than A:VII.
4.4.2 Verification of coverage. Prior to beginning any work under this Agreement,
Consultant shall furnish City with certificates of insurance and with original
endorsements effecting coverage required herein, The certificates and
endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized
by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The City reserves the right to
require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time.
4.4.3 Subcontractors. Consultant shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its
policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each
subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the
requirements stated herein.
4.4.4 Variation. The City may approve a variation in the foregoing insurance
requirements, upon a determination that the coverages, scope, limits, and forms of
such insurance are either not commercially available, or that the City's interests
are otherwise fully protected.
4.4.5 Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Consultant shall disclose to and
obtain the approval of City for the self-insured retentions and deductibles before
beginning any of the services or work called for by any term of this Agreement.
Consulting Services Agreement between June 1, 2004
City of Dublin and RTKL Page 6 of 14
During the period covered by this Agreement, only upon the prior express written
authorization of Contract Administrator, Consultant may increase such deductibles
or self-insured retentions with respect to City, its officers, employees, agents, and
volunteers. The Contract Administrator may condition approval of an increase in
deductible or self-insured retention levels with a requirement that Consultant
procure a bond, guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim
administration, and defense expenses that is satisfactory in all respects to each of
them.
4.4.6 Notice of Reduction in Coverage. In the event that any coverage required by
this section is reduced, limited, or materially affected in any other manner,
Consultant shall provide written notice to City at Consultant's earliest possible
opportunity and in no case later than five days after Consultant is notified of the
change in coverage.
4.5 Remedies. In addition to any other remedies City may have if Consultant fails to provide
or maintain any insurance policies or policy endorsements to the extent and within the time
herein required, City may, at its sole option exercise any of the following remedies, which
are alternatives to other remedies City may have and are not the exclusive remedy for
Consultant's breach:
· Obtain such insurance and deduct and retain the amount of the premiums for such
insurance from any sums due under the Agreement;
· Order Consultant to stop work under this Agreement or withhold any payment that
becomes due to Consultant hereunder, or both stop work and withhold any payment,
until Consultant demonstrates compliance with the requirements hereof; and/or
· Terminate this Agreement.
Section 5. INDEMNIFICATION AND CONSULTANT'S RESPONSIBILITIES. Consultant shall
indemnify, defend with counsel selected by the City, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers,
employees, agents, and volunteers from and against any and all losses, liability, claims, suits, actions,
damages, and causes of action arising out of any personal injury, bodily injury, loss of life, or damage to
property, or any violation of any federal, state, or municipal law or ordinance, to the extent caused by the
willful misconduct or negligent acts or omissions of Consultant or its employees, subcontractors, or agents,
by acts for which they could be held strictly liable, or by the quality or character of their work. The foregoing
obligation of Consultant shall not apply when (1) the injury, loss of life, damage to property, or violation of
law arises from the negligence or willful misconduct of the City or its officers, employees, agents, or
volunteers and (2) the actions of Consultant or its employees, subcontractor, or agents have contributed in
no part to the injury, loss of life, damage to property, or violation of law. It is understood that the duty of
Consultant to indemnify and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the
California Civil Code. Acceptance by City of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this
Agreement does not relieve Consultant from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause.
Consulting Services Agreement between June 1, 2004
City of Dublin and RTKL Page 7 of 14
This indemnification and hold harmless clause shall apply to any damages or claims for damages whether
or not such insurance policies shall have been determined to apply. By execution of this Agreement,
Consultant acknowledges and agrees to the provisions of this Section and that it is a material element of
consideration.
In the event that Consultant or any employee, agent, or subcontractor of Consultant providing services
under this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees
Retirement System (PERS) to be eligible for enrollment in PERS as an employee of City, Consultant shall
indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City for the payment of any employee and/or employer contributions
for PERS benefits on behalf of Consultant or its employees, agents, or subcontractors, as well as for the
payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions, which would otherwise be the responsibility of
City.
Section 6. STATUS OF CONSULTANT.
6.'1 Independent Contractor. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall
be an independent contractor and shall not be an employee of City. City shall have the
right to control Consultant only insofar as the results of Consultant's services rendered
pursuant to this Agreement and assignment of personnel pursuant to Subparagraph 1.3;
however, otherwise City shall not have the right to control the means by which Consultant
accomplishes services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Notwithstanding any other
City, state, or federal policy, rule, regulation, law, or ordinance to the contrary, Consultant
and any of its employees, agents, and subcontractors providing services under this
Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled to, and hereby agree to waive any and
all claims to, any compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by City, including
but not limited to eligibility to enroll in the California Public Employees Retirement System
(PERS) as an employee of City and entitlement to any contribution to be paid by City for
employer contributions and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits.
6.2 Consultant No Agent. Except as City may specify in writing, Consultant shall have no
authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an
agent. Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement
to bind City to any obligation whatsoever.
Section 7. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS.
7.1 Governing Law. The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement.
7.2 Compliance with Applicable Laws. Consultant and any subcontractors shall comply with
all laws applicable to the performance of the work hereunder.
7.3 Other Governmental Regulations. To the extent that this Agreement may be funded by
fiscal assistance from another governmental entity, Consultant and any subcontractors
shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations to which City is bound by the terms of
such fiscal assistance program.
Consulting Services Agreement between June '1,2004
City of Dublin and RTKL Page 8 of 14
7.4 Licenses and Permits. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant and
its employees, agents, and any subcontractors have all licenses, permits, qualifications,
and approvals of whatsoever nature that are legally required to practice their respective
professions. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant and its
employees, agents, any subcontractors shall, at their sole cost and expense, keep in effect
at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, and approvals that are
legally required to practice their respective professions. In addition to the foregoing,
Consultant and any subcontractors shall obtain and maintain during the term of this
Agreement valid Business Licenses from City.
7.5 Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity. Consultant shall not discriminate, on the
basis of a person's race, religion, color, national origin, age, physical or mental handicap or
disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, or sexual orientation, against any
employee, applicant for employment, subcontractor, bidder for a subcontract, or participant
in, recipient of, or applicant for any services or programs provided by Consultant under this
Agreement. Consultant shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws,
policies, rules, and requirements related to equal opportunity and nondiscrimination in
employment, contracting, and the provision of any services that are the subject of this
Agreement, including but not limited to the satisfaction of any positive obligations required
of Consultant thereby.
Consultant shall include the provisions of this Subsection in any subcontract approved by
the Contract Administrator or this Agreement.
Section 8. TERMINATION AND MODIFICATION.
8.1 Termination. City may cancel this Agreement at any time and withOut cause upon written
notification to Consultant.
Consultant may cancel this Agreement upon ten (10) days' written notice to City and shall
include in such notice the reasons for cancellation.
In the event of termination, Consultant shall be entitled to compensation for services
performed to the effective date of termination; City, however, may condition payment of
such compensation upon Consultant delivering to City any or all documents, photographs,
computer software, video and audio tapes, and other materials provided to Consultant or
prepared by or for Consultant or the City in connection with this Agreement.
8.2 Extension. City may, in its sole and exclusive discretion, extend the end date of this
Agreement beyond that provided for in Subsection 1.1. Any such extension shall require a
written amendment to this Agreement, as provided for herein. Consultant understands and
agrees that, if City grants such an extension, City shall have no obligation to provide
Consultant with compensation beyond the maximum amount provided for in this
Agreement. Similarly, unless authorized by the Contract Administrator, City shall have no
Consulting Services Agreement between June 112004
City of Dublin and RTKL Page 9 of 14
obligation to reimburse Consultant for any otherwise reimbursable expenses incurred
during the extension period.
8.3 Amendments. The parties may amend this Agreement only by a writing signed by all the
parties.
8.4 Assignment and Subcontracting. City and Consultant recognize and agree that this
Agreement contemplates personal performance by Consultant and is based upon a
determination of Consultant's unique personal competence, experience, and specialized
personal knowledge. Moreover, a substantial inducement to City for entering into this
Agreement was and is the professional reputation and competence of Consultant.
Consultant may not assign this Agreement or any interest therein without the prior written
approval of the Contract Administrator. Consultant shall not subcontract any portion of the
performance contemplated and provided for herein, other than to the subcontractors noted
in the proposal, without prior written approval of the Contract Administrator.
8.5 Survival. All obligations arising prior to the termination of this Agreement and all
provisions of this Agreement allocating liability between City and Consultant shall survive
the termination of this Agreement.
8.6 Options upon Breach by Consultant. If Consultant materially breaches any of the terms
of this Agreement, City's remedies shall included, but not be limited to, the following:
8.6.1 Immediately terminate the Agreement;
8.6.2 Retain the plans, specifications, drawings, reports, design documents, and any
other work product prepared by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement;
8.6.3 Retain a different consultant to complete the work described in Exhibit A not
finished by Consultant; or
8.6.4 Charge Consultant the difference between the cost to complete the work
described in Exhibit A that is unfinished at the time of breach and the amount that
City would have paid Consultant pursuant to Section 2 if Consultant had
completed the work.
Section 9. KEEPING AND STATUS OF RECORDS.
9.1 Records Created as Part of Consultant's Performance. All reports, data, maps,
models, charts, studies, surveys, photographs, memoranda, plans, studies, specifications,
records, files, or any other documents or materials, in electronic or any other form, that
Consultant prepares or obtains pursuant to this Agreement and that relate to the matters
covered hereunder shall be the property of the City. Consultant hereby agrees to deliver
those documents to the City upon termination of the Agreement. It is understood and
agreed that the documents and other materials, including but not limited to those described
Consulting Services Agreement between JUne 1,2004
City of Dublin and RTKL Page 10 of 14
above, prepared pursuant to this Agreement are prepared specifically for the City and are
not necessarily suitable for any future or other use. City and Consultant agree that, until
final approval by City, all data, plans, specifications, reports and other documents are
confidential and will not be released to third parties without prior written consent of both
parties.
9.2 Consultant's Books and Records. Consultant shall maintain any and all ledgers, books
of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, and other records Or documents
evidencing or relating to charges for services or expenditures and disbursements charged
to the City under this Agreement for a minimum of three (3) years, or for any longer period
required by law, from the date of final payment to the Consultant to this Agreement.
9.3 Inspection and Audit of Records. Any records or documents that Section 9.2 of this
Agreement requires Consultant to maintain shall be made available for inspection, audit,
and/or copying at any time during regular business hours, upon oral or written request of
the City. Under California Government Code Section 8546.7, if the amount of public funds
expended under this Agreement exceeds TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS {$10,000.00), the
Agreement shall be subject to the examination and audit of the State Auditor, at the
request of City or as part of any audit of the City, for a period of three (3) years after final
payment under the Agreement.
Section 10 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
10.1 Attorneys' Fees. If a party to this Agreement brings any action, including an action for
declaratory relief, to enforce or interpret the provision of this Agreement, the prevailing
party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees in addition to any other relief to which
that party may be entitled. The court may set such fees in the same action or in a
separate action brought for that purpose.
10.2 Venue. In the event that either party brings any action against the other under this
Agreement, the parties agree that trial of such action shall be vested exclusively in the
state courts of California in the County of Alameda or in the United States District Court for
the Northern District of California.
10.3 Severability. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any Provision of this
Agreement is invalid, void, or unenforceable, the provisions of this Agreement not so
adjudged shall remain in full force and effect. The invalidity in whole or in part of any
provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this
Agreement.
10.4 No Implied Waiver of Breach. The waiver of any breach of a specific provision of this
Agreement does not constitute a waiver of any other breach of that term or any other term
of this Agreement.
Consulting Services Agreement between June 1, 2004
City of Dublin and RTKL Page 11 of 14
10.5 Successors and Assigns. The provisions of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of
and shall apply to and bind the successors and assigns of the parties.
10.6 Use of Recycled Products. Consultant shall prepare and submit all reports, written
studies and other printed material on recycled paper to the extent it is available at equal or
less cost than virgin paper.
10.7 Conflict of Interest. Consultant may serve other clients, but none whose activities within
the corporate limits of City or whose business, regardless of location, would place
Consultant in a "conflict of interest," as that term is defined in the Political Reform Act,
codified at California Government Code Section 81000 et seq.
Consultant shall not employ any City official in the work performed pursuant to this
Agreement. No officer or employee of City shall have any financial interest in this
Agreement that would violate California Government Code Sections 1090 et seq.
Consultant hereby warrants that it is not now, nor has it been in the previous twelve (12)
months, an employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City:If Consultant was an
employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City in the previous twelve months,
Consultant warrants that it did not participate in any manner in the forming of this
Agreement. Consultant understands that, if this Agreement is made in violation of
Government Code §t090 et. seq., the entire Agreement is void and Consultant will not be
entitled to any compensation for services performed pursuant to this Agreement, including
reimbursement of expenses, and Consultant will be required to reimburse the City for any
sums paid to the Consultant. Consultant understands that, in addition to the foregoing, it
may be subject to criminal prosecution for a violation of Government Code § 1090 and, if
applicable, will be disqualified from holding public office in the State of California.
10.8 Solicitation. Consultant agrees not to solicit business at any meeting, focus group, or
interview related to this Agreement, either orally or through any written materials.
10.9 Contract Administration. This Agreement shall be administered by Kristi Bascom
("Contract Administrator"). All correspondence shall be directed to or through the Contract
Administrator or his or her designee.
10.10 Notices. Any written notice to Consultant shall be sent to:
Nathan Cherry
RTKL Associates, Inc.
333 South Hope Street
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Consulting ServiceS Agreement between June 1,2004
City of Dublin and RTKL Page 12 of 14
Any written notice to City shall be sent to:
Kristi Bascom
Community Development Department'
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
10.11 Professional Seal. Where applicable in the determination of the contract administrator,
the first page of a technical report, first page of design specifications, and each page of
construction drawings shall be stamped/sealed and signed by the licensed professional
responsible for the report/design preparation. The stamp/seal shall be in a block entitled
"Seal and Signature of Registered Professional with report/design responsibility," as in the
following example.
Seal and Signature of Registered Professional with
report/design responsibility.
10.12 Integration. This Agreement, including the scope of work attached hereto and
incorporated herein as Exhibit A, represents the entire and integrated agreement between
City and Consultant and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements,
either written or oral.
CITY OF DUBLIN CONSULTANT
Janet Lockhart, Mayor JohnRTKL .¢/l~ig;?/i~e P res '~e nt'~sso t ,~..~/.
Attest:
Kay Keck, City Clerk
Consulting Services Agreement between June 1,2004
City of Dublin and RTKL Page 13 of 14
Approved as to Form:
Elizabeth H. Silver, City Attorney
G:\PA#~003\03-015 Camp Parks GPA\Visioning Program\Contract for RTKL.doc
Consulting Services Agreement between June 1, 2004
City of Dublin and RTKL Page 14 of 14
5/18/2004 ;:
Sent via email:
kristi, bascom~ci, dublin.co, us
I TKL Mr. Richard Ambrose
City Manager
The City of Dublin, CA
100 Civic Center Plaza
94568
Baltimore RE: Revised Dublin Crossings Charrette Proposal
Chicago Mr. Ambrose:
Dallas
It was our pleasure to meet with you again on May 3rd and discuss how we can
~ondon collaborate on developing a vision for the Dublin Crossings property. The following
is our revised proposal to assist the City based upon our conversation.
Los Angeles
Madrid PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
Miami
Dublin is a highly successful suburban community witnessing intense development
Shanghai pressure. The City is interested in retaining a consultant team to prepare a
Tokyo visionary development plan for the 182-acre Dublin Crossings property; which is
underutilized land currently owned by the United States Army Reserve (USAR) and
Washington part of the Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area (Parks RFTA. The visioning
process will be completed prior to, and in anticipation of, USAR and Staubach
submitting a formal Application for a General Plan Amendment.
The property occupies a strategic locations linking the east and west sides of the
community and is within walking distance of an existing BART station. It is one of
the last large parcels of undeveloped land in the city, and as such, any development
plan for the property will attract intense public scrutiny. The city council is also
very interested to see developed a unique feature - either publicly or privately
owned - that enhances the image of the city, strengthens Dublin's position as a
destination, and further increases the quality of life for residents. It is therefore
important that the plan is based upon community input, a broad vision, and a
realistic assessment of market conditions.
A vision plan involves the collaboration of a range of diverse groups including: City
department heads, businesses, property owners, neighborhood associations, and the
USAR Development Team. The key will be to balance "quality of life" elements of
the plan such as the community need for parks and recreational and cultural
amenities, and the critical mass of revenue producing uses that can provide the
financial underpinning for a successful infill development. The development plan for
the area should take into consideration the 182 acres but also the impacts that
333 South Hope Street
Suite o200 development of the 182 acres may have on other areas of the city such as the
Los Angeles, CA 90071 downtown area and major shopping centers.
T213 627 7373
F 213 627 9815
www. rtkl. com
Mr. Richard Ambrose
The City of Dublin, CA
5/18/2004
The City and the Army/Camp Parks should be partners in ensuring a successful
outcome of the process and should have joint status meetings throughout the
process so everyone stays informed and involved.
I TI L
The process begins with a clear definition of project goals and a comprehensive
review of what information already exists. Based on this assessment, we will
establish a clear schedule of deliverables, and identify the time required for each
phase of the project and the level of participation required for all project team
members.
APPROACH
Our methodology breaks the planning process into several sequential steps that
follow a classic "systems approach" to complex problem solving. In this approach, a
process of research and analysis, visioning charrette, concept planning, plan development
and refinement produces a range of alternative solutions that are then evaluated
against goals and requirements established by policy makers and community
stakeholders. The feasibility and implementation strategy for each alternative is
assessed with the most suitable option(s) is then selected for further refinement.
The process begins with a clear definition of the development goals and
understanding of each person's role and responsibilities and the work to be
accomplished. The RTKL/KMA team manages this process by establishing and
maintaining a bi-weekly project schedule. It identifies the time required during each
phase of the project, and the level of participation required for all Project Team
members, and it provides an effective tool with which to control the timeframe of
the project.
RTKL has long understood the importance of public involvement and consensus
building in the planning process. The initial planning stages of any large project
inevitably involve a great variety of interest groups, from government agencies to
private sector players to the general public. To insure the success of any project,
the planner must attempt to give each interest group a stake in its origins, so that
all players feel some ownership for the initial concepts. The RTKIJKMA team will
orchestrate the public involvement component in three ways:
· First, we see the planning process being built on the consultants and city staff
working together as a Project Team. The purpose of this close working
relationship is to assure agreement and understanding on the form and substance
of the city's development strategy and consensus support for its adoption and
implementation by policymakers. A project team approach offers open lines of
communication, the free-flowing exchange of ideas, and consensus building
through active participation in the decision-making process. The Project Team
will be composed of an invited/appointed group of eight to ten individuals
including: City agencies, the USAR/Staubach, and RTKIJKMA.
The City of Dublin, CA
5/18/2004
· Second, public involvement and input is structured through three (3) t~ublic
workshops and charrettes. The charrette is an informal meeting of the minds.
Preliminary concept ideas are presented to start a dialog. Information obtained
is exploratory, rather than definitive or conclusive. Local, state, and federal
government agency staff can be invited to participate as active listeners, rather
I~TI(~I., than as officials. This provides an environment for dynamic, spontaneous and
creative interaction. The key aspects of the process are that (I) all interested
parties are requested to participate, and (2) a conclusion is reached. The second
public meeting is an opportunity to present the framework plan concepts and
evaluate community reaction.
· A final public meeting at which the RTKL/KMA team will present the final plan
and development strategy recommendations to city policy makers. RTKL has
found these steps to be extremely effective in defining innovative and feasible
development concepts and building a sense of community "ownership" of the
overall planning process. The outcome, a focused direction for the on-going
planning and design direction for the property making it less likely that the
wrong program direction or issues are studied in great detail to the detriment
of the overall strategic planning effort.
We propose the following seven-step work plan and a series of sequential tasks as
follows:
I. Analysis of Existing Conditions and Market Overview
2. Synthesize Opportunities & Constraints
3. Consolidate a Vision and Development Program
4. Develop Alternative Plan Concepts
5. Presentation to Community
6. Informal Presentations to Policy Makers
7. Army/Camp Parks/Staubach apply for General Plan Amendment
The work plan is allocated over a fourteen (14) week period and allows ample time
for Project Team interaction including five (5) project team meetings in Dublin
over the course of the assignment.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Task One: Analysis of Existing Conditions
This phase involves the preparation of large-scale maps, technical memoranda, and
diagrams identifying and documenting aspects of the study area's physical and
market conditions. While this data will be collected throughout the life of the
project, the bulk of necessary data should be collected and analyzed in the first few
weeks of this assignment. Therefore, continuous interaction between the
RTKL/KMA Team and City staff will be necessary during this period to arrive at a
collective understanding of development opportunities and constraints.
3
The City of Dublin, CA
5/I 8~2004
I. I Project Orientation (Project Team Meeting # I)
Immediately upon authorization to proceed, the RTKIJKMA Team will hold an
initial orientation meeting and interviews with City staff and department heads to
gather information and set parameters for the study. The purpose is to achieve a
complete understanding of project goals and objectives, and the roles and
responsibilities of all involved parties. The City will provide the P, TKL/KMA team
with all available background information and data including past planning studies,
marketing reports, and developer proposals, as well as all available aerial
photography of the site. Key opportunity sites and potential projects adjacent to
the study area will be identified. Prospective project interviewees will be specified.
The final work program, timetable, lines of communication, and degree of
community participation will be determined.
Deliverable: Participation in Project Orientation Meeting and refined scope and schedule as
necessary; MEETING MINUTES.
Client Input: Attendance and participation in Project Orientation Meeting; background
materials and studies; base-maI) material.
1.2 Assemble/Review Existing Background Data
The RTKL/KMA Team will assemble, review, and evaluate all pertinent and available
base maps and background data relevant to the study area. This will include: an
examination of previous and ongoing studies and plans conducted for downtown
Dublin; the BART Station area and a review and examination of the following:
The Dublin General Plan
The background site analysis prepared by Al
· Past traffic studies
· Past planning studies
· Analysis of the condition/capacity of existing utilities infrastructure
· Land and building inventories
1.3 Conduct Field Surveys
The RTKLJKMA Team members will. undertake field surveys and photographic
surveys of the study area and vicinity in order to review and examine existing
conditions and evaluate general land use, traffic framework, building occupancy, and
the condition of the public infrastructure. These field surveys will identify and
assess the impact of ongoing and planned development projects and capital
improvements. Particular attention will be placed on vehicular and pedestrian
access and circulation and interrelationships with existing centers of activity. The
photographs will also be employed at the charrettes to make points about the
existing conditions.
4
The City of Dublin, CA
5/I 8~2004
1.4 Prepare Market Overview
The RTKL/KMA Team will conduct a reconnaissance and a development potential
assessment utilizing both secondary and primary data documenting the broad range
of real estate and development issues affecting the study area and its vicinity. This
will include an analysis of economic, demographic, and land use trends affecting site
vicinity and provide the following information:
Market Supply
· Existing and proposed competitive projects both within downtown and the
site vicinity
* Prevailing rents/prices
· Vacancy and absorption
This assessment will rely primarily on past work by KMA in the Bay Area and in the
vicinity of the site and secondary sources, e.g., brokers, leasing agents, and other
real estate professionals.
Market Demand
The RTKL/KMA Team will use in-house GIS demographic mapping software to
evaluate local and regional trends including:
· Population/households
· Employment by sector
· Income and retail spending
· Retail salesby category
Forecasts
· Potential demand/absorption by types of use
· Address potential synergy among proposed uses, e.g., retail and housing,
retail with cultural/entertainment, etc.
The product of this task will include estimates of demand for each land use that
appear to have market justification for development, and recommendations as to
location, sizing, phasing, and orientation of each land use.
Deliverable: OVERVIEW MARKET REPORT
Client Input: Review and comment on OVERVIEW MARKET REPORT.
Task Two - Synthesize Opportunities & Constraints
2. I Summarize Opportunities and Constraints
The RTKL/KMA team will summarize findings of Step One in a memorandum and
submitted to the Project Team previous to the next step. The purpose of this task
is to summarize development opportunities and constraints. An important aspect of
the selection of preferred development strategy will be the identification of
development conditions required for implementation (i.e., what other activities and
5
The City of Dublin, CA
5/18/2004
developments are necessary, both public and private, in order to achieve the
preferred development program including the ability to reach the quality and scale
of investment required for new construction, and the need to maximize scheduled
public improvements).*
· Adjacent land uses, buildings and urban form
· Condition of streets and pavements and parking lots
· Regional and area traffic/transportation framework, and proposed city, state,
and county street and highway improvements
· Topography, existing vegetation and slope conditions
· Sightlines, views and solar orientation
· Utility easements, access easements and drainage ways
· Assessments of special land development restrictions (wetlands mitigation, flood
plains, or environmentally degraded areas, etco)
· Site access opportunities and limitations (curb cut spacing, traffic lights, etc.)
· Please note that the level of analysis described above may require the participation
of the Engineering and Traffic and Transportation consultants in those items related
to infrastructure and traffic / transportation (BKF and Omnimeans are the assumed
consultants, see pages 14-15). As necessary, RTKL and KMA will incorporate their
findings into reports and plan development.
Deliverable: BACKGROUND DOCUMENTATION, including base Map, and opportunities
and constraints analysis maps and diagrams, and supporting text as appropriate; to be
provided in I 1 ' x 17" report format (or other mutually agreed upon format).
Client Input: Review and comment on BACKGROUND DOCUMENTATION.
2.2. Conduct Stakeholder Interviews
Senior RTKL Team staff members will prepare a questionnaire and undertake a
series of confidential interviews with major institutional and business
representatives, realtors, developers, community leaders, City officials including City
Council members, City Staff, and other public agencies including the water/sewer
district and school district to get an idea of important community issues.
Deliverable: INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE and participation in interviews with key
stakeholders; interviews to be conducted on a single day as agreed to by client and
consultant.
Client Input: Review and comment on INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE; scheduling and
organization of Stakeholder Interviews.
2.3 Strategy Review (Project Team Meeting #2)
Deliverable: Participation in Strategy Review Meeting; MEETING MINUTES.
Client Input' Attendance and participation in Strategy Review Meeting.
The City of Dublin, CA
5/18/2004
Task Three: Consolidate a Vision (Community-Based Charrette)
3. I: Community Charrette
The RTKL's Team will manage and facilitate a two-day community visioning
I~TKL charrette. Senior planners together with select consultants will come together with
a community group that could include City Council and Commissions, as well as
representatives from the Army, Camp Parks, the School District, and Water/Sewer
District to discuss ideas and options. The two-day charrette will be broken up into
blocks of work as follows:
I. Discussion and PowerPoint presentation summarizing the site analysis
findings, land development issues, assessment of the development capacity
of the site, and economic constraints and opportunities.
2. Presentations on development economics (trends in mixed-use
development, the inclusion of cultural arts or sports/entertainment venues,
demand factors, tax benefits, affordable housing, development costs, price
points, etc.) affecting the development of the property.
3. A general discussion addressing items and issues including:
· What are the major activity generators within the area, and is there any
synergistic relationship between them
· To what degree can there be a breakdown of development project
boundaries, enhance pedestrian connections, encourage shared parking,
etc.
· BART, transit and other traffic mitigation options
· Range of potential land uses and likely absorption rates
· What are the "quality of life" amenities ("life-style" shops,
entertainment venues, fitness centers, daycare, cultural and community
arts, continuing education, etc.)
4. Short lunchtime presentation - tied into the morning's discussion and
priorities - leads directly into the table design sessions.
5. An interactive hands-on 'table design' planning session (first day afternoon
and second day morning) - where small groups work around maps
together, The session uses word-based exercises to create a vision, and to
discover and prioritize problems and opportunities. Some of the specific
items to be addressed during this task include the identification and location
of the following plan elements:
· Sites for future land uses and activity generators;
· Important traffic, pedestrian, hike and bike path links;
· Phasing strategies
· Urban form (densities, building height, lot coverage, etc.).
· Linkages to surrounding activities
6. Sixth; the participants regroup and summarize each table's ideas and
concepts worthy of refinement
7. Finally; a wrap-up evaluation by the RTKL/KMA team of the individual team
efforts, and a general consensus building discussion on the selection and
prioritization of those goals and objectives ideas and concepts worth
developing and including in the preferred plan concepts.
7
Mr. Richard Ambrose c~ ~
The City of Dublin, CA
5/18/2004
Deliverables: Participation and facilitation of two-day COMMUNITY CHARETTE; to include
a PowerPoint presentation of the Background Documentation.
Client Input: Scheduling, organization, and participation in COMMUNITY CHARETTE.
l rl liL 3.2 Draft Vision/Development Strategies
The RTKL/KMA team will prepare and circulate a summary memorandum that
contains a distillation of community recommendations identifying preferred
development program elements, community goals, and the urban design and
planning issues that will need to be addressed in greater detail as planning proceeds.
Deliverable: DRAFT VISION ! DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY REPORT, based on input
received at visioning charrette.
Client Input: Review and comment on: DRAFT VISION / DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY
REPORT.
3.3 Strategy Review (Project Team meeting # 3)
The RTKI_/KMA team will meet with the Project Team to review the
recommendations and collective goals and program/design concepts resulting from
the interviews, panel sessions, and the community vision charrette and select ideas
for incorporation in the conceptual plans.
Deliverable: Participation in Strategy Review meeting; MEETING MINUTES.
Client Input: Attendance and participation in Strategy Review Meeting.
Task Four: Develop Alternative Plan Concepts
4. I Prepare Alternative Plan Concepts
The RTKI_/KMA team will prepare three to five alternative plan concepts, i.e.:
alternatives depicting the options for the plan framework including streets/block
arrangements, key facility locations, general land use, pedestrian and vehicular
circulation, parks and open space concepts.
· Range of potential land uses including recreational space and civic/cultural
amenities
· Traffic/transportation and pedestrian circulation systems
· Treatment of buffer zones and transitional uses
· Potential centers of activity (opportunity sites for mixed-used development and
image upgrading)
· Development block layouts
This material would be prepared as poster-sized drawings at a scale (I/100" and
1/200"= I'-0") suitable for public presentations. It would also include charts
showing statistical data on density, parking counts, lot coverage, open space, traffic
generation, etc.
The City of Dublin, CA
5/I 8~2004
Deliverable: Schematic plans, drawings, diagrams, charts and tables as necessary to
describe a total of three (3) to five (5) ALTERNATIVE PLAN CONCEPTS; to be provided in
I/' x 17" format (or other mutually agreed upon format) for client review, and as poster-
sized drawings suitable for public presentation.
Client Input: Review and comment on ALTERNATIVE PLAN CONCEPTS.
4.2 Benefit/Cost Assessments
The RTKL/KMA team will assess:
Financial Feasibility
Based on experience with financial analysis of comparable development proposals in
other Bay Area cities, the RTKL/KMA Team will conduct a preliminary evaluation of
financial feasibility for uses with market support:
· Review market projections for each use
· Prepare generalized estimates of development costs
· Necessary public sector investments in infrastructure and site
improvements necessary for each alternative
· Supportable land prices for each proposed use
Traffic Impacts * · Assessments of peak morning and evening trip generation
· Assessment of impact on existing downtown traffic framework
· Assessment of traffic mitigation options
· Please note that this level of traffc impact analysis is recommended, but will require the
participation of the Traffic and Transportation Consultant (OMNIIVlEANS is assumed to be
consultant for this work). As necessary, RTKL and K/HA will incorporate their findings into
reports and plan development.
4.3 Evaluation of Alternatives (Project Team Nleeting # 4)
RTKIJKMA will meet with the Project Team to review and evaluate each
alternative against the community and policy makers' goals and objectives, and
select preferred options for further refinement. It is anticipated that some key
elements, such as potential land development costs, potential development
exactions by the city, and traffic impacts on surrounding neighborhoods, may be the
distinguishing traits among the alternatives. The general growth and development
policies of the city, and capital improvement program schedules would also need to
be considered. This task would assess economic impact and financial feasibility. A
formal evaluation matrix will be considered for use in the process, including:
· Strength of the "big idea"
· Creation of a sense of place and strong thematic identity
· Strength of market for proposed uses
· Ability to meet economic goals of the owner
Traffic and transportation compatibility
· Marketability of the plan
9
Mr. Richard Ambrose
The City of Dublin, CA
5/I 8~2004
Deliverable: ALTERNATIVE CONCEPTS EVALUATION REPORT with summary evaluation
of each Alternative Plan Concept; may include an evaluation matrix or other graphic means
of effectively portraying the results.
Client Input: Review and comment on ALTERNATIVE CONCEPTS EVALUATION REPORT.
llrl~l{L Task Five Presentation to Community
5. I Second Public Meeting
The RTKL/KMA team will present the development plan alternatives to the original
charrette participants (along with the economic pros and cons of each one) at a
half-day meeting for the group to discuss their preferences. They will be structured
to encourage a free flow of information between participants and the Project Team.
Deliverables: Participation and facilitation of half-day Community Meeting; to include
presentation of Alternative Plan Concepts and Alternative Concepts Evaluation.
Client Input: Scheduling, organization, and participation in Community Meeting.
5.2 Strategy Review (Project Team meeting # 5)
Deliverable: Participation in Strategy Review meeting; MEETING MINUTES
Client Input: Attendance and participation in Strategy Review Meeting.
Task Six: Informal Presention to Policy Makers
6. I Assist City Staff in Presentations to Policy Makers (Project Team
Meeting #6)
The RTKL/KMA team will assist city staff in presenting the framework plan
alternatives to policy makers. These meetings would be designed to fold policy
makers into the planning process, listen to their concerns, build consensus and
make plan/program adjustments as necessary. Each alternative will describe the
physical concept and extent of each plan component. The policy makers will
provide direction to the US Army Corp/Camp Parks on the preferred alternative
for their development application.
Deliverable: Participation in presentations to key policy / decision-makers; not to exceed
two (2) meetings for this task. Attendance at additional meetings will be provided on a
time and materials basis.
Client Input: Scheduling, organization, and lead participation / facilitation in Presentations
to Policy Makers.
Task Seven: Plan Refinement
It is intended that the materials prepared during these tasks, subject to any
refinements coming out of the policy maker presentations, will form the basis of an
official planning application to be prepared by US Army Corp/Camp Parks/Staubach
team.
10
~ Mr. Richard Ambrose ~
~: The City of Dublin, CA
5/18/2004
7. I Plan Refinements
I. Detailed illustrative site plans showing roof top plans of all building and
structures, generalized ground surface treatments, landscapes and planted areas,
thematic design elements such as fountains, plazas, and other special features
I~TIiL ~. Traffic and pedestrian/bike circulation plan
3. Open space plan
4. Parking plan
5. Three full color renderings illustrating general massing, form, thematic elements,
and general architectural character.
Deliverable: Illustrative plans, drawings and diagrams as necessary to portray the FINAL
DEVELOPMENT PLAN; to include an illustrative site plan and a maximum of three (3) full
color perspective renderings. Plans and drawings will be provided as poster size drawings
suitable for public presentation.
Client Input' Review and comment on FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
7.2 Final Nlaterials
The RTKL/KMA team will work with the various city departments in drafting up the
final revisions based on the outcome of the final reviews and prepare final
documentation composed of camera-ready material in an I I" x 17" format utilizing
reproductions of selected drawings, charts and diagrams prepared during the course
of the planning assignment, together with written summaries of the conclusions and
plan recommendations.
Deliverable: FINAL REPORT consisting of selected drawings, charts and diagrams, as well
as supporting narrative; to be presented in I I ' x 1 7" camera-ready format (or other
format mutually agreed upon by client and consultant).
Client Input: Copy and distribution of FINAL REPORT to appropriate parties.
SUMMARY OF KEY PROJECT DELIVERABLES:
I. MONTHLY REPORT - a project manual that will be updated monthly for
the duration of the project. The manual shall include written and graphic
exhibits prepared over the course of the project. (One hard copy original
to be provided to the City for copying/distribution)
2. MEETING MINUTES (for all Project Team meetings)
3. OVERVIEW MARKET REPORT
4. BACKGROUND DOCUMENTATION (of the site analysis findings,
including report and graphic exhibits)
5. INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE
6. COMMUNITY CHARRETTE
7. DRAFT VISION ! DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY SUMMARY REPORT
8. ALTERNATIVE PLAN CONCEPTS
9. ALTERNATIVE CONCEPTS EVALUATION REPORT
10. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
II. FINAL REPORT
II
The City of Dublin, CA
5/18/2004
PROJECT SCHEDULE
It is assumed the project schedule will take 12-14 weeks, depending upon start date
and efficient review and turn around of deliverables (see attached).
PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND TEAM ORGANIZATION
The RTKL/KMA team will commit its most experienced staff to this
assignment. Staff members have direct experience with community and
neighborhood redevelopment projects and have undertaken similar projects
in California, across the nation and abroad. This will assure a complete
understanding of economic development and market issues and will allow us
to formulate a development plan and vision with an eye toward realistic
project implementation.
Project Management and Planning
RTKL Associates, Inc. will responsible for overall project management, as well
as for the conceptual planning. The success of the management structure on
a complex multi-discipline planning project such as this, hinges on the central
authority of the primary consultant. As primary consultant, RTKL will be the
City's primary liaison, responsible for management of the consultant team
throughout the planning process. RTKL will manage the assignment from its
Los Angeles office. Mr. Nathan Cherry AIA AICP will be the day-to-day
project manager and senior planner responsible for plan development. He
will be assisted by Mr. John Gosling RIBA AICP the Director of the Planning
and Urban Design practice who will lead the public charrette process and
have the overall responsibility for planning strategy, and, as Principal-in-
Charge, responsibility for delivering the assignment on time and within
budget, and by Kurt Nagle AICP ASLA who will be responsible for site
analysis, and conceptual plan development.
The following individuals are key members of the proposed project team.
Each firm's detailed qualifications, relevant project experience, and key
personnel resumes are available upon request.
Principal-in-Charge
John Gosling RIBA AICP
Director of Planning and Urban Design
RTKL Associates Inc
Role: The success of the management structure on a complex consensus
building planning assignment, such as this, hinges on the central authority of
the project manager. Mr. John Gosling RIBA AICP, principal-in-charge, will
oversee the project and serve as the project's principal planning advisor
throughout the planning process in the areas of redevelopment programming,
conceptual planning and design, and plan evaluation and refinement. Mr. John
Gosling is firm wide head of the Planning and Urban Design Practice for
RTKL Associates Inc. In this role, he has been responsible for managing and
12
Mr. Richard Ambrose
The City of Dublin, CA
5/18/2004
developing some of the firm's most high profile urban design and planning
assignments in major cities around the nation and abroad, including the
Tower City Center, Cleveland, the State/Thomas Urban Housing District
Plan, Dallas, and Potomac Yards Redevelopment Plan, Alexandria.
Ilrl~l(L Project Manager
Nathan Cherry, AIA AICP
~ RTKL Associate Inc
Role; Direction of all planning and design activities and managing the process
and project schedule.
Senior Project Planner
Kurt Nagle, AICP ASLA
RTKL Associates, Inc.
Role: Support to John Gosling and Nathan Cherry for all aspects of land
use planning and urban design and management support, including day-
to-day coordination of all consultant activities, as well as project
scheduling and report preparation.
Project Market and Economic Feasibility
Keyser Marston Associates Inc will take the lead role in all areas related to
finance and economic development. They will develop a market overview
including projections of household expenditure potential for the community
and will address retail and service potential; office potential; and employment
generation potential. The product of this analysis will be a profile of target
economic opportunities for Dublin Crossing. They will also prepare an
overview feasibility analysis to identify supported land prices for the
proposed uses, and an initial funding strategy identifying sources and amounts
of public and private sector funds necessary for implementation.
Senior Economic Development Consultant A. Jerry Keyser
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Role: Direction of all activities related to demographics, economic, market
assessments, and project financing and implementation.
Research Consultant David Doezema
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Role'~ Support to Jerry Keyser on economic and market assessments, and
financing and implementation strategies
13
The City of Dublin, CA
5/18~2004
Civil Engineering
At the discretion of the City, a civil engineer could be retained to consultant on an
as needed based to support the RTKL/KMA team for all issues related to
public infrastructure and geotechnical issues. The civil engineer will assist the
project team to determine the impacts of the various design alternatives on
the City as they pertain to public infrastructure. Issues to be addressed
during the analysis phase include the location, condition and reserve capacity
of existing utilities infrastructure such as sanitary sewer systems; water
supply; gas mains; electrical supply; transmission lines and substations; storm
drainage systems; telephone and television cables.
The costs associated with the civil engineer are not included in this contract
and the scope of their services will be determined by the City's Public
Works Director on an as-needed basis.
Role: Management of all civil and environmental engineering taslcs, including
input on environmental health issues, and infrastructure analysis, traffic
engineering, and infrastructure cost estimating. Analysis and
recommendations related to environmental and recommendations
related to existing infrastructure and proposed infrastructure
improvements.
Traffic and Transportation
At the discretion of the City, a traffic engineer could be retained to serve as lead
consultant on an as-needed basis to support the RTKI_/KMA team for all
issues related to traffic and transportation. The traffic engineer will help to
determine the impacts of the various design alternatives on the City as they
pertain to traffic. During the initial analysis phase, the team will address
density and patterns of pedestrian and vehicular circulation; regional traffic
access; bus routes and transfer points; high accident and congestion areas;
im pact of proposed public improvements; inventory of major thoroughfares;
barrier-free ramps; conditions of pavements, curbs and gutters; and
proposed street and highway improvements.
The costs associated with the traffic engineer are not included in this
contract and the scope of their services will be determined by the City's
Public Works Director on an as-needed basis.
USAR Development Team Coordination
Along with the City of Dublin's staff, USAR's development team will
participate fully in this scope of work. USAR's development team is
responsible for the ultimate development of the property, and has compiled
information relating the site, which will be made available to the RTKL Team.
Additionally, beginning with Step Four (Develop alternative Plan Concepts),
USAR's development team members will work with the RTKL team to
ensure that the Dublin City Vision is correctly. Al, the design firm
14
The City of Dublin, CA
5/18/2OO4
responsible for the site plan to be submitted on behalf of the USAR team,
will be predominately responsible for Step 7, with the RTKL team reviewing
the design concepts to ensure consistency with the visioning process.
RTKL FEE PROPOSAL
RTKL Associates Inc is prepared to complete the scope of services outlined here
for a lump sum fees broken down as follows:
Fee for Professional Services:
RTKL Associates Inc $ 75,000.00
Keyser Marston Associates Inc: $ 35,000.00
Printing Expenses(not to exceed - see below) $10,000.00
Travel Expenses (not to exceed - see belowl $5,000,00
Total Fee Amount $125,000.00
(To be paid by City of Dublin)
Fee Payment Schedule (see Fee Breakdown, attached):
Upon completion of: Amount to be paid:
Task h $25,000.00
(RTKL I Ok, KMA 15k)
Task 2: $15,000.00
(RTKL 15k)
Task 3: $20,000.00
(RTKL 2Ok)
Task 4: $25,000.00
(RTKL 15k, KMA I Ok)
Task 5: $ I 0,000.00
(RTKL 5k, KA4A 5k)
Task 6: $ I 0,000.00
(RT~. Sk, P,J~A 5k)
Task 7: $5,000.00
(RTr, L Sk)
PRINTING EXPENSES
Costs of items such as Telephone; Telecopy; Fax, Postage and Delivery, Computer
Plotting, Airfare, Rental Car, Meals are included in the total cost of the contract.
Printing costs such as reproductions, photocopies, and the printing of graphic
illustrations shall be billed as a reimbursable amount not to exceed $ I 0,000 and
shall be incurred at the discretion of the City. Before substantial printing costs are
incurred, the City shall be consulted to determine the most cost-effective way of
producing the documents.
15
Mr. Richard Ambrose
The City of Dublin, CA
5/I 8~2004
Project Assumptions:
~ * The assignment will be completed over a twelve to fourteen (12 -14) week
period depending on the amount of time taken for reviews.
lJTKI, · The assignment includes one; two-day charrette; three (3) public meetings and
five (5) bi-weekly Project Team meetings in Dublin
· To keep costs under control the public meeting will be held on the same days
as Project Team meetings where possible.
· Additional presentations to the public or policy makers not stipulated in this
contract will be charged at the average hourly rates indicated on the attached
fee schedule,
· The City of Dublin or the USAR Development team will make available existing
base maps, topographical surveys, civil and traffic/transportation engineering
data and other background reports and statistical material relevant to the
assignment, and will assist RTKL in obtaining additional information, as required
· The City of Dublin will be responsible for all scheduling, media contacts,
logistics, advertising, and expenses associated with public meetings and other
meetings with stakeholders conducted for the assignment.
· The RTKL/KMA team will provide meeting agenda, preparation of meeting
content, facilitation of meetings, and the creation of all descriptive materials,
graphics, maps, etc.
If we can supplement this information or answer any questions, please call me at
(202) 833-4400, or Nate at 213 633-6084. We appreciate the opportunity to
submit this proposal and look forward to discussing this exciting assignment with
you in greater detail.
Sincerely,
RTKL ASSO I )~S
Director Plannin 'al~d Urban Design Associate Vice President
Agreed:
CITY OF DUBLIN
16
The City of Dublin, CA
5/I 8/2004
R TKL Associates Inc.
Professional Rate Schedule
~y Classification
Hourly Rate
Technical Assistant $ 45.00
Staff 60.00
Senior Staff Architect/Engineer/Planner 75.00
Project Architect/Engineer/Planner 90.00
Senior Project Architect/Engineer/Planner I I 0.00
Project Manager 125.00
Senior Project Manager 150.00
Vice President 225.00
Senior Vice President 250.00
NOTE: The above rates are subject to annual adjustments.
DUBLIN CROSSINGS FEE BREAKDOWN
RTKL
Scope Item Hours Rata Amount
1.1 12 150 $ 1,800
1.2 16 150 $ 2,400
1.3 8 150 S 1,200
1.4 2 150 S 300
50 100 S 5,000
TOTAL TASK 1 S 10,700.00
2.1 24 150 $ 3,600
2.2 16 150 $ 2,400
2.3 16 150 S 2,400
40 100 S 4,000
TOTAL TASK 2 S 12,400.00
3.1 32 150 S 4,800
24 25O S 6,OOO
3.2 24 150 S 3,600
3.3 12 150 $ 1,800
40 lO0 S 4,0OO
TOTAL TASK 3 S 20,200.00
4.1 32 150 S 4,800
4.2 8 150 S 1,200
4.3 16 150 S 2,400
50 100 S 5,000
TOTAL TASK 4 S 13,400.00
5.1 16 150 S 2,400
5.2 11 150 S 1,650
16 100 $ 1,600
TOTAL TASK 5 S 5,650.00
6.1 16 150 S 2,400
16 100 $ 1,600
TOTAL TASK 6 S 4,000.00
7.1 24 150 $ 3,600
7.2 51 100 S 5,050
TOTAL TASK 7 S 8,650.00
TOTAL HOURS AVG. HRLY RATE FEE BREAKDOWN
571.5 131.23 $ 75,000.00
MARKET ANALYSIS (KEYSER MARSTEN ASSOCS.) S 35,000.00
CIVIL CONSULTANT, TRAFFIC CONSULTANT NOT PART OF THIS CONTRACT
COPYING $ 10,000.00
TRAVEL (NOT TO EXCEED 10 PERSON TRIPS) S 5,000.00
TOTAL FEE S 125,000.00
(to be paid bytbe Cib/of Dublin, CA)
RESUME
John R. Gosling AICP, RIBA
VICE PRESIDENT
Mr. John Gosling is Vice President and Director of Planning and Urban Design. In ~hese roles, he has
been responsible for managing and developing some of the f~rm's most high-profile urban residential,
urban design and planning assignments in major c~es around the nation and abroad, including
State-Thomas Urban District Plan in Dallas, the Downtown Action Plan t'or Oklahoma C~, the
Center Area Plan in Nashville, the Tower City Center in Cleveland, the Coca-Cola Campus Plan in
Atlanta, and the Potomac Yards Master Plan in Alexandria, Virginia.
------l~rl~Kl~ A native Londoner, Mr. Gosling received
his architectural education at the Architectural Association
School of Archf~ecture in London, and is cert/fied as both an ,architect and registered planner. He
has been a practitioner of planning and urban design for over 25 years and his experience
encompasses a full range of tasks, including large-scale mixed-use development, downtown ac~an
planning, urban renewal, land use planning, as well as "new urbanisY' live-work district planning and
design.
Mr. Gosling is a Fellow of the In~tute for Urban Design, is actively involved in center thy
revitalization efforts, was past chairman of'the City of Dallas' Urban Design Advisory Committee, a
member of the Real Estate Council's Commun~y Development Assistance Corporation, and the
recipient of the ! 998 C~ of Dallas Kessler Award for Individual Achievements in Urban Design. He
recently completed teaching a graduate course on 'Rebuilding the American City" at the University of
Virginia and the "Advanced Residential Development Process Classes" at the Urban Land Inrdtute's
Real Estate School in Washington and San Francisco. Mr. Gosling joined RTKL in 1984 as Director
of Planning and Urban Design in the Dallas office, was named a principal in 1988, and relocat~d to
direct the Housing, Planning and Urban Design Group in RTI(L's Washington and l~a~more offices
in 1996.
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
Addison Circle Master Plan, mixed-use development planninF~ Addison, TX
Addison Comprehensive Plan, downtown rev'~alization planning` Addison, TX
Alto Macul new community planning, Santiago, Chile
American University in Cairo, campus master planning, Cairo, E~pt
Anacostia Town Center ~The Anacostia Economic Development Corporation), Principal-in-Charge,
planning and design guidelines for redevelopment of retail main street in the Anacostia neighborhood
of Washington, DC
Arlington Entertainment District, urban entertainment district p an, Arlington, TX
Arts District Mixed-Use Center, ciowntown revitalization planning, Dallas, TX
AtJantic City Gateway Proje~ urban entertainment district plan, Atlantic City, NJ
Baton Rouge Medical Campus Plan, Baton Rouge, LA
Bay Plaza, Waterfront Retail District Master Plan, St, Petersburg, FL
Bio-Technical Research Park, campus master planning, Oklahoma City, OK
Bishops Lodge, resor~ master planning, Santa Fe, NM
Blair Park Master Plan, Principal-in-Charge, plan and rezoning application for infill mixed-use development
on existing 25-acre parcel in Silver Spdng, MD
Brooke Army Medical Center Master Plan, San Antonio, TX
Browns Stadium and Entertainment District Plan, urban entertainment district plan, Cleveland, OH
Bryan Area and Cedars Area Plans, inner city redevelopment planning, Dallas, TX
Caves Beach Resort, resort master planning, New South Wales, Australia
Centennial Hill, Principal-in-Charge, planning study and development guidelines to evaluate the
introduction 'infill' urban housing and loft space into an existing neighborhood district, Atlanta, GA
Central Area Plan, downtown revitalization planning, Nashville, TN
Charlotte Transportation, mixed-use development planning, Charlotte, NC
Cinco Ranch, new community planning, Houston, TX
City of Wichita, downtown revitalization planning, Wichita, KS
Ciudad Mitras, new community planning, Nuevo Leon, Mexico
Cleveland Airport Business Pa~ campus master planning, Cleveland, OH
Columbia Heights (Somerset Development, Telisys), Principal-in-Charge, planning for 560 units of infill
housing for two parcels adjacent to Columbia Heights Metro Station, Washington, DC
DC Ranch New Community Town Center, new community planning, Scottsdale, AZ
Downtown Action Plan, downtown revitalization planning, Oklahoma City, OK
Downtown Development Plan. downtown revitalization plannir,g, Austin. TX
Downtown Redevelopment Plan, City of Lubbock TX
Dubuque Mississippi Riverfront Plan, waterfront development planning, Dubuque, lA
Dulles Station, Principal-in-Charge, planning and residential architecture for a 60-acre mixed-use
residential, retail and office community adjacent to the planned BRT/METRO Station at Route 28 on
the Dulles Toll Road in Fairfax County, VA. Client: Crimson Partners/Simmons Vedder
Euclid Avenue/Midtown Corridor, downtown revitalization planning. Cleveland, OH
Euro-Disneyland Housing Study, new community planning, Paris, France
Fairlie Poplar District Planning Study, inner city redevelopment planning, Atlanta, GA
Fieldstone Farms. new community planning, Franklin, TN
Franklin Square Urban Renewal District, inner city redevelopment planning, Sy~cuse, NY
Gateway Retail/Entertainment Center, downtown revitalization planning, Atlantic City, NJ
Gateway Tax Increment Financing District Plan, inner city redevelopment planning, Oakcliff. TX
Gateway Village (Nationsbank Real Estate Services). Principal-in-Charge, planning for a 2,000,000 SF ofi~ce
and residential urban mixed-use development on 14 acres in the Third Ward in Center City Charlotte,
NC
Granite Park Mixed-Use MaSter Plan, Piano, TX
Greater Greenspoint Redevelopment Plan, Houston, TX
Harbor Town Neotraditional Community, new community plar, ning, Memphis, TN
Hayashibara Mixed-Use Development, Okayama, Japan
Hollywood Casino, urban entertainment district plan, Dallas-based Riverboat Casino, Dallas, TX
Intercontinental Hotel Site Redevelopment Plan, Bangkok Thailand
Kingwood West High Tech Industrial/Business Park, campus master planning, Houston, TX
Lakewest Community, new community planning, Dallas, TX
Las Colinas Urban Center Plan, Irving. TX
Las Lomas, new community planning, Hermosillo, M~xico
Luquillo Beach Coastal Development Plan, resort planning, San .Juan, Puerto Rico
Makuhari Urban Housing, mixed-use development planning, Chiba City, Tokyo, japan
Market Square at Shady Grove, mixed-use development planning, Shady Grove, MD
Metro Center at The Woodlands, new community planning, Houston, TX
Millennium in Midtown, mixed-use development planning, Atlanta, GA
Mobil Research Park. campus master planning. Farmers Branch, TX
Moji Harbor Island, waterfront development planning, Kyushu, Japan
Naval Square, mixed-use development planning, Philadelphia. PA
New Town, new community planning, Guanajuato, M6xico
North Pier, new community planning, Jersey City, NJ
North Side Sports/Entertainment District Plan, urban entertainment distdct plan, Pittsburgh, PA
Obregon New Community, new community planning, Sonora, "lexico
Old Deep Ellum Historic Distdct, urban entertainment district plan, Dallas, TX
Old Farmers Branch Area Plan, downtown revitalization plannir,g, Farmers Branch, TX
Onondaga Waterfront Redevelopment Plan, waterfront development planning. Syracuse, NY
Paseo del Este, new community planning, El Paso, TX
Perimeter Center (Cousins Properties), Principal-in-Charge, recevelopment study for properties
surrounding Perimeter Mall, Atlanta, GA.
PGA West, resort planning, Palm Springs, CA
Pirates Stadium Master Plan (City of Pittsburgh), Principal-in-Charge, creation of new entertainment and
cultural district to link Allegheny River and downtown, Pittsburgh, PA
Potomac Yards (Commonwealth Atlantic), Principal-in-Charge, planning for a 300-acre mixed-use transit-
oriented development, Alexandria, VA
Quadrangle mixed-use development planning, Center, Dallas, TX
RAF Bentwaters Airfield Redevelopment Plan, Ipswich, England
Rancho Encantado, resort master planning, Santa Fe, NM
Richardson Comprehensive Plan, downtown revitalization planning, Richardson, TX
Richardson Technology Pan~ campus master planning, Richardson, TX
Ryman Mixed-Use Center, mixed-use development planning, Nashville, TN
Sahl Hashish Resort Development, Hagada, Egypt
Saltillo Civic Center Master Plan, inner city redevelopment planning` Saltillo, Mexico
Santa Lucia Riverwalk Master Plan, waterfront development planning` Monterrey, Mexico
Santa Martha New Community, new community planning, Hem,oSillo, Mexico
Severance Comers (Kolok Development), planning, development guidelines and zoning application for a.
new urban, mixed use community, Burlington, VT
Sheppard Pratt Hospital Property Utilization Study, Towson, Baltimore County, MD
Sheraton .South Padre Island Beach Resort, resort master planning, South Padre Island, TX
Sonora River Redevelopment Plan, waterfront development planning, Hermosillo, Mexico
South Padre Island, resort master planning, South Padre Island, -IX
South Shore Harbour, waterfront development planning, Clear _ake, TX
South Side Works Master Planning, inner city redevelopment planning, Pittsburgh, PA
SpringPark New Community, new community planning, Richardson, TX
State-Thomas/Uptown Urban Neighborhood Plan, inner city redevelopment planning, Dallas, TX
The Arkansas River Development, waterfront development planning, Wichita, KS
The Cowboy Center Business Campus Plan, mixed-use development planning, Irving, TX
The Town Center at the Meadowland, mixed-use developmem: planning, Meadowlands, NJ
Third Ward Redevelopment Plan, inner city redevelopment planning, Charlotte, NC
Tower City Center, mixed-use development planning, Cleveland, OH
Town Center Master Plan, mixed-use development planning, Rancho Mirage, CA
Town Center Master Plan, Rancho Mirage, CA
Twinbrook Commons (JBG), Principal-in-Charge, planning for a 26-acre mixed-use, transit-orientated
development including office space, housing, street-level retail and restaurant space, structured parking
and public open space adjacent to a METRO station, Rockville, MD
Union Plaza Special District Plan, downtown revitalization planning, El Paso, TX
University of Dallas, campus master planning, Irving, Texas
University of Maryland, campus master planning, College Park
University of Texas at Dallas, Synergy Park Campus Plan, Dallas, TX
University Plaza, campus master planning, Tempe, AZ
Uptown Urban Residential Distdct Plan, inner city redevelopment planning, Denver, CO
Urbana Alameda, mixed-use development planning, Mexico City, Mexico
Valley Ranch Repositioning Plan, Irving, TX
West*Gate Mixed-Use Master Plan, Tysons Comer, VA
Westchase Neo Traditional Master Plan, new community planning, Tampa. FL
Westport Today Urban Neighborhood Master Plan, inner city redevelopment planning, Kansas City, MO
White Flint (LCOR), Principal-in-Charge, planning for 32-acre mixed-use, transit-orientated development
including office space, housing, street-level retail and restaurant space, structured parking and public
open space adjacent to the White Flint METRO Station, White Flint, MD
Wisley Resort, resort master planning, London, England
EDUCATION
Architectural Association School of Architecture, London, .England, A~,. Final
Lecturer, University 0fVirginia, Rebuilding the American City, 1999
Adjunct Professor, University of Texas at Arlington, School of Architecture and Environmental Design
1977 - 1979
PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
American Institute of Certified Planners (A1CP)
Fellow of the Institute for Urban Design
Associate, Amedcan Institute of Architects (AIA)
Royal Institute of Bdtish Architects (RIBA)
American Planning Association (APA)
Full Member of the Urban Land Institute
Charter member, American Planning Association, Federal Install~ttion Planners Divisions
AWARDS
AIA Dallas Chapter Unbuilt Citation Award, Dallas Sustainable District, 2002
ASLA Texas Chapter Professional Merit Award, Dallas Sustainable District, 2003
AIA, PlA (Professional Interest Area) Award, Addison Circle, Dallas, Texas, 200 I
AIA, California Chapter New Urbanist Ahwahnee Award, Addison Circle, Texas, 1997
AIA, Tampa Bay Chapter Medt Award, Bay Plaza, South Core, St. Petersburg,
Florida, 199 I
AIA, Dallas Chapter Merit Award, State-Thomas Planning/Urban Design Guidelines, 1990
AIA, Dallas Chapter Merit Award, Tower City Center, Cleveland, Ohio, 1988
AtA, Dallas Chapter Honor Award, The Forum Office Park San Antonio, Texas, 1984
AIA, Dallas Chapter Merit Award, Flower Mound New Town Recreation Center, 1975
APA, Texas Chapter Merit Award for Master Plannin~ Addison Circle, Texas, 1996
APA, Dallas Chapter Excellence in Development Award, Addison Urban Center, Texas, 1995
APA, North Texas Chapter Outstanding Award for Strategic Planning, State-Thomas Urban
Neighborhood Master Plan, 1992
APA, Tennessee Chapter, Merit Award, Central Area Plan, Nashville, Tennessee
City of Dallas, Urban Design Advisory Committee Design Guideline Award, State/Thomas Residential
District. 1999
City of Dallas, Kessler Award for Individual Achievements in Urban Design, 1998
City of Dallas, Urban Design Advisory Committee Dream/Study Award, Dallas Housing Authority
Lakewest Plan, 1998
City of Nashville Chamber of Commerce Merit Award, Central Area Plan, Nashville, Tennessee, 199t
City of Dallas, Urban Design Advisory Committee Urban Desig~ Excellence Award, State/Thomas District
Plan, t989
International Downtown Association, Brownfield Redevelopment Award, St. Luke's Hospital Plan, Denver,
1998
National Home Builders Association Multi-Family Development of the Year, Addison Circle, Texas, 1998
Urban Land Institutes, Agar Award for Journalism, 1992
PUBLICATIONS / PRESENTATIONS
ULI Roundtable Panelist. "Smart Growth Solutions" - Development Around Transit, 2002
ULI Roundtable Panelist," Smart Growth Solutions" - Linking Land Use and Transportation, 2002
"Living Above the Shop" New Urban News, April 2002
"Points of View o Debating Densit)z', Urban Land, August 2001
Instructor "ULI Real Estate School 200 I- Advanced Development Process: Residential
Speaker "Trends In Multi-Family Housing", NAHB International Builders Show, Atlanta, GA, 2001
Speaker 'New Urbanism", NAHB and ULI Multi-Family Trends Conference, San Diego, CA, 2001
Judge, NAHB "Pillars of Industry Awards Committee," 2001
Instructor for the ULI Advanced Course on Residential Development, Washington DC, 2000
ULI Workshop on "Smart Growth Solutions - Reinventing America's Commercial Strips," Washington
DC. 2000
CUED Panelist, 'Reinventing Main Street Retail, Toronto, 1998
NACORE, Northern Virginia Chapter Presentation of'Trends i.q Town Center Design', 2000
Washington Press Club Presentation Panelist to Downtown Washington Development Committee -
'Trends in Downtown Retail'
"Exploring Career Options in urban Planning", John Hopkins Institute for the Academic Advancement of
Youth (IAAY), November/December 1998
"Patterns of Association in Live/Work Environments", Urban Land, October 1998
"Addison Circle Revisited", Urban Land, September 1998
"Urban Area Trends Create Opportunities for Retailers", Shopping Center Business, May I c)97
"Beyond New Urbanism", Urban Land, March, 1996
"Affordable Housing in Mexico", Urban Land, February 1995
"In-Town Housing Development", Urban Land, December 1991
"Downtown Dallas Revitalization", Dallas Business Journal, August 1991
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATION
AICP-Certified Planner, No. 4714
The Architects Registration Council of the United Kingdom, Serial No. 35080
PROFESSIONAL I~ACKGROUND
RTKL Start Date: August, 1984
Industry Start Date: 1968
I¥ L
RESUME
Nathan B. Cherry AIA AICP
ASSOCIATE VICE PRESIDENT
Mr. Cherry has over seventeen years of experience working on large-scale mixed-use projects in both
the US and abroad. He has worked extensively with multi-disciplinary teams, including developers,
public agencies and consultants. Mr. Cherry was promoted to Associate Vice President in 1997.
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Downtown Redevelopment.
Downtown Anaheim Redevelopment Masterplan, Anaheim, CA
Heart of the City Redevelopment Masterplan, Redondo Beach, CA
Little Tokyo Redevelopment Plan, Los Angeles, CA
l~.rl~l~IJ City of Pasadena Central District Specific Plan, Pasadena, CA
Staples Center/LA Entertainment Masterplan, Los Angeles, CA
City of Brea, downtown redevelopment plan, Brea, CA
San Jose Redevelopment Plan, San Jose, CA
Southport Town Center, West Sacramento, CA
Riverpark New Community, Oxnard, CA
Fresno Uptown Arts District Masterplan, Fresno, CA
City of Santa Monica Meritorious Signage Code, Santa Monica, CA
Cai State Channel Islands Town Center, Camarillo, CA
Burbank Water and Power Masterplan, Burbank CA
General Dynamics Keamy Mesa o New Century Center, San Diego, CA
Victorian Square Redevelopment Masterplan, Downtown Sparks, NV
The Resort at Green Valley Ranch Master Plan, Henderson, NV
Montecito Town Center, Las Vegas, NV
Harvard University Project 2000 Development Plan, Cambridge, MA
Radcliffe College Redevelopment Master Plan, Cambridge, MA
Tech.Sys Square Town Center, Richardson TX
City of Shanghai Central Boulevard Masterplan, Shanghai, China
Fuzhou Bund Garden Masterplan, Fuzhou, China
Guangzhou Pearl Riverside Area Concept Plan and Urban Design, Guangzhou, China
Johor Perdana Capital City Master Plan, Johor, Malaysia
Urban Housing
Paseo Colorado, Pasadena, CA
Downtown Bre~. Brea, CA
Downtown San Jose Mixed Use; San Jose, CA
RiverPark Urban Housing, Oxnard, CA
Grand Central Apartments, Fullerton, CA
Downtown Pomona Housing, Pomona, CA
Crossroads Mall Redeve~opment~ Boulder, CO
Mission Hills Urban Housing, San Diego, CA
Chula Vista Urban Housing, Chula Vista, CA
Urban Design Consulting
Los Angeles, CA (Community Redevelopmen: Agency)
Brea, CA
Burbank CA
Culver City, CA
Fresno, CA (Redevelopment Agency)
Pasadena, CA
Santa Monic~ CA
EDUCATION
Harvard University. Cambridge, MA, Naster of Architecture in Urban Design. 1993
Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, Bachelor of Architecture. t986
Institute for Architecture and Urban Studies. New York NY I985
PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
Chair, Los Angeles Central City Association Urban Design Committee
American Institute of Architects (State of New York Registatior,//024687)
American Institute of Certified Planners (Registration//115988)
AWARDS
River Park New Community, Best Community Site Plan- 100 Acres or More, Gold Nugget Grand
Award, 200 I
Fresno Uptown Arts District Masterplan- APA California Chapter Planning Project Award, 2001
City of Brea Downtown Redevelopment Plan- Gold Nugget: Award of Merit Redevelopment Site Plan
Award, 1999
APA California Chapter Planning Project Award, 1999
Ahwahnee Award, Government Adopted Plan, 1999
PUBLICATIONS
Bi~ ~oxe$ Go Downtown, Planning Magazine, January, 2004
ULI Planning Advisory Settees Repo~' San Antonio, Texas 2002
,4 Broad k/ix, Urban Land Magazine, May 2002
Restarting the Heart, Downtown Brea, Urban Land Magazine, October, 2000
Reconstruc-ting Suburbia In Bre~ California Planning and Development Report, 1998
Studio Works I, Harvard Graduate School of Design Press, 1993
PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND
RTKL Associates Inc., Los Angeles, CA, 1995-present
TAHS Consultants, Boston, MA, 1993- i 994
Harvard University Planning Group, 1991 -1992
Chan+ Mohney Architects, 1988-1990
James Stewart Polshek Architects, 1987
K EYSER M ARSTON A S S O CIATES I NC.
A. JERRY KEYSER
Key Role Infrastructure Finance
In the past twenty years, Mr. For clients such as Catellus and
Keyser has been at the center of Homart, Mr. Keyser has
many of the West's distinguished formulated business plans for land
and high impact developments developments that establish
including Horton Plaza in San program, infrastructure and
Diego, California Plaza in Los financing strategies.
Angeles and Yerba Buena Gardens
in San Francisco. His experience, Professional Credentials
knowledge and work with industry Mr. Keyser is a member of the
and professional groups combine Urban Land Institute, has chaired a
to give Mr. Keyser unique insight ULI Mixed Use Council and is
in real estate trends, what works in currently a member of the Public
real estate development, and Private Partnership Council of ULI.
contacts with the development and He has been a board member of
financial community throughout the Bay Area Economic Forum, an
Mr. Keyser, Chairman of the Board the United States. organization composed of leaders
of Keyser Marston, has spent his in business, education and
entire professional life in evaluating Real Estate Feasibility government to assist in the
the feasibility of real estate projects Analysis Speoialist region's growth, and a past board
and consulting on development.
He is a founding principal of Keyser Throughout his career, Mr. Keyser member of SPUR, a San Francisco
has been extensively involved in leadership organization formed to
Marston and is a recognized
analysis of and consultation on promote planning and government
authority in the real estate and multi-use projects. His most initiatives. Mr. Keyser holds a
redevelopment community.
recent focus is on the inclusion of master's degree in real estate and
new urbanism concepts in the finance from Columbia University,
repositioning of existing and a bachelor's degree in
developments. As an example, he economics and political science
consulted on behalf of the City of from Cornell University.
San Francisco and its
redevelopment agency on the
negotiation for a new
Bloomingdale's and related multi-
use development in San Francisco.
Other Areas of Specialization are:
Military Base Conversion
Mr. Keyser has worked on Fort Ord
in Monterey County, Hamilton Air
Force Base in Matin County,
Alameda Naval Air Station, and
the Presidio of San Francisco on
leasing, finance and related
strategies to assist in the transition
from military to civilian use.
Resumes2OOl~ajkl(w_header).doc; 4/20/2004
SELECTED KMA EXPERIENCE
BART STATION
DEVELOPMENT Bay Area development, of which three were Pleasanton station, followed by a
Rapid Transit designated as highest priority, oroperty tax and TOT estimate in
1999.
In 1982 BART selected a team Since the initiai analysis, KMA has
headed by KMA to undertake an provided ongoing services to guide Each station has its unique
analysis of development and BART in the development of circumstances-- market, political,
value capture opportunities for all several of its station properties, and otherwise-- and it is from the
the station properties For example the Pleasant Hill, diversity of these situations that
systemwide. The initial work Concord, Walnut Creek, and KMA has gained insight on
program entailed comparative Fruitvale stations have all invc Ived optimum strategies and processes
market evaluation of station active developer interest and for public agencies with transit
properties, financial feasibility, negotiation. Aisc, in 1998, KMA related real estate assets.
and evaluation of other factors in performed a land value analysis for
order to establish the appropriate the West Dublin/
time frame for the development
SANTA RITA PROPERTY, DOWNTOWN SAN RAMON BERNAL PROPERTY
County of Alameda RETAIL MARKET ANALYSIS, VALUATION AND
City of San Ramon DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
Analyzed a proposed plan for the City/County of San Francisco
development of a 600~- acre site KMA provided a market analysis
formerly occupied by the Santa Rita of existing retail in downtown KMA provided an analysis of
detention facility near Dublin. The San Ramon. We also estimated commercial and residential land
major issue was the financing of the expenditure potential to values for this 500-acre mixed-use
infrastructure for the plan and plan identify a retail program that will project in Pleasanton. The analysis
· variations, including a factor for the " complement planned civic uses included development costs, rental
opening of the Dublin / Pleasanton while minimizing competition rates, and vacancy levels in the Tri-
BART station, with the existing base. Our Valley area. The assignment
focus was on eating and drinking involved evaluating entitlement
establishments, specialty retail, issues, phasing of the project, and
and entertainment uses. development alternatives available
to the PUC of San Francisco.
SACRAMENTO ARENA SBC PARK,
City of Sacramento San Francisco Giants
· Serving as co-project manager
KMA, along with Goal Group KMA was integrally involved in for the Giants feasibility
Consulting LLC and the plans for a spectacular 42,000- assessment, prior to bringing
SportsEconomics, conducted an seat waterfront baseball stadium the project forward for voter
initial phase of a study to assess in downtown San Francisco. Our approval. KMA worked with
the feasibility of a new sports work included: national experts in sports
and entertainment district, finance and ballpark
anchored by a new arena and · An initial feasibility for a construction and design to
other destination-type baseball stadium/sports define a feasible project for the
attractions, in downtown arena combined with a major Giants, including a financing
Sacramento on property of the retail/entertainment plan, identification of additional
Union Pacific (UP) Railroads. complex. KMA studied uses to provide year round
The report contains six case virtually all signature revenues and defining a
study cities with comparable entertainment/retail and parking program.
developments, multi-venue sports/
entertainment retail facilities
Quals2000\041904_dublinquals.doc; 4/20/04 I
K EYSER M ARSTON A S SOCIATES I NC.
DAVID DOEZEMA
Mr. Doezema is an Associate in Selected Project Experience East Garrison Fiscal Impact
Keyser Marston Assodates' San Analysis, Formar Fort Ord,
Francisco office. He joined KMA in Alameda Point Naval Air Monterey County. Analysis of
2002 and has participated in real Station, Real Estate Feasibility, the impact on General Fund
estate feasibility analysis, fiscal Fiscal Impact, Tax Increment revenues and expenses from the
impact analysis, economic nexus Analysis and Financing Plan. development of this 1,400 unit
analysis, and economic benefits Integrated analysis of real estate residential development.
assessment, feasibility, fiscal impact to the City of
Alameda General Fund, and Tax Economic Nexus Analysis.
Increment projections for a mixed- Updated and restructured KMA's
use redevelopment plan for the proprietary jobs housing nexus
Alameda Point NAS. These model. The model calculates the
analyses support a financing plan for nexus between commercial
the conversion of the Alameda Point development and affordable
Nay'41 Air Station to civilian uses that housing demand by merging
satisfies the City's goals of fiscal local and national data on
neutrality, and construction of public occupations and wages by land
improvements and amenities, use. Nexus assignments have
Alameda Point includes an airfield, included the cities of San Diego,
and over 4.5 million square feet of St. Helena, Walnut Creek, and
existing structures that will be Napa County.
adaptively reused or redeveloped as
Economic Benefits
housing, retail, and office/R&D.
Assessments. Analysis of regional
economic benefits including
Las Lomas Fiscal Impact
Analysis, Los Angeles. Analysis economic output, employment,
of General Fund revenues and Police payroll and local tax impacts for
several private clients in support of
and Fire expenditures from
development of this new 550-acre public relations efforts and lease
mixed-use development, negotiations with public agencies.
Assignment included projections of Assignments have included analyses
for a'fixed base operator, a ship
jobs and employment benefits and an
allocation of retail sales tax among builder, and a liquid natural gas
municipalities, shipping terminal and power plant.
Professional Credentials
Mr. Doezema holds a master's
degree in urban planning and a
bachelor's degree in civil and
environmental engineering from
the University of Michigan, Ann
Arbor.
Resumes2002~dd3 resume.doc, 4/20/2004