RES 84151 - Laserfiche WebLink

SR 84:144 Page 15 VI. Staff Evaluation of Council Options A. Options for Conducting the General Plan Update 1. Retain Charidler Lee to update the General Plan. City staff has met with Mr. Lee to discuss his willingness to work for the City as a consultant to update the General Plan. The enclosed work program reflects his knowledge of the General Plan process and how he feels it can be most effectively conducted in Pleasanton. In addition to Mr. Lee's successful performance as consultant to the Industrial General Plan Review Committee, there are several advantages to contracting with him to conduct the General Plan update versus other options. Mr. Lee has been employed as a city planner for the past 10 years and has co-authored General Plans, Specific Plans and EIRs in more than 25 jurisdictions in California. His experience and skills were singled out by the IGPR Committee in its selection of him as their consultant over 250 other applicants and their recommendation to retain him in Pleasanton after the review was completed. The skills he showed in analyzing and condensing information, writing concise reports and working with people during the industrial review would be valuable to the completion of the General Plan update. Mr. Lee has a good knowledge of issues in Pleasanton arid has developed a working relationship with City staff, local consultants and the general. public. The advantages of contracting with Mr. Lee include his availability to work full-time as soon as he is needed, the cost savings to the City of retaining one person rather than an entire firm and the minimal amount of staff time he would require to complete the General Plan update. Mr. Lee is wi'l. ling to work full-time on the update starting on July 1, or as soon as Council has reviewed the IGPR Committee's recommendations. He has proven his ability to prepare a final document with little assistance and minimal overhead costs as evidenced by his completion of the IGPR Committee's report for $10,000 Less than was budgeted. His contract would cost no more to the Cit'~,' thorn a~ upper level emphoyee's salary and benefit package with the considerable advantage of lasting only 14 months, as opposed to a City umployee who would be pe;rmanent. Because of his knowledge of i ssues~ government operations and particularl}~. the recomnxendations of the [GPR Committee, he. would require less staff time to become familiar with Pleasanto~ than either a new employee or another consulting firm.