Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-019 r 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ~' Note:' Vote Page Has BeEQ ' + Corrected -THIS COPY SOPERCEDES ALL OTHER COPIES PREVIOUSLY DISTRIBUTED RESOLUTION NO. 1999-I9 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AWARDING AN AGREEMENT TO ULTRASYSTEMS ENVIRONMENTAL INCORPORATED TO PREPARE A JOINT NEPA/CEQA DOCUMENT FOR THE CASA RAMONA PROJECT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: SECTION L ULTRASYSTEMS ENVIRONMENTAL INCORPORATED'S proposal i and qualifications meet and exceed the requirements that were outlined in the Request for Proposal for preparing the environmental documents for the Casa Ramona Project. An Agreement is awarded accordingly to said Consultant in a total amount of $30,000.00 but such award shall be effective only upon being fully executed by both parties. All other proposals, therefore, are hereby rejected. The Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to execute said Agreement on behalf of the City; a copy of the Agreement is attached as Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein by reference as fully as though set forth at length. 171 1 SECTION 2. This Agreement and any amendment or modifications thereto shall not take effect or become operative until fully signed and executed by the parties and no party shall be obligated hereunder until the time of such full execution. No oral agreements, amendments, 21I modifications or waivers are intended or authorized and shall not be implied from any act or ~ course of conduct of any party. SECTION 3. This resolution is rescinded if the parties to the contract fail to execute it within sixty (60) days of the passage of the resolution. //// 26 //// 27 28 //// 1 ~~ 1999-19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AWARDING AN AGREEMENT TO ULTRASYSTEMS ENVIRONMENTAL INCORPORATED TO PREPARE A JOINT NEPA/CEQA DOCUMENT FOR THE CASA RAMONA PROJECT. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino at a ioint regulaz meeting thereof, held on the 2stt, day of Januazy , 1999, by the following vote, to wit COUNCIL MEMBERS: AYE NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT ESTRADA x LIEN x (VACANT) - 3rd Ward -vacant SCHNETZ x DEVLIN x ANDERSON x MILLER x ITY CLERK The foregoing Resolution is hereby approved January ,1999 City I VALLES, Mayor San Bernardino Approved as to form and legal content: JAMES F. PENMAN, City Attorney By: ~ G ~~~ CORRECTED COPY PROPERLY INDICATING THAT COUNCIL MEMBER ESTRADA DECLARED A CONFLICT OF INTEREST ON THIS MATTER AND EXCUSED HERSELF 2 1999-19 ~J~ /f! a'ir_/ AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this zsth day of .7anuar~ 1999, by and between the CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO and Ultrasystems Environmental Incorporated ("Consultant"). RECITALS 1. Purpose The purpose of this Agreement is to allow the City of San Bernardino to procure the services of an experienced professional environmental firm to prepare an environmental document pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality act (CEQA). The joint NEPA/CEQA document is required for the Casa Ramona Project which is a funded Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) project. The City will delegate the responsibility to administer this contract to the Director of the Development Services Department (Department). 2. Mission The City hereby retains the Consultant in the capacity as Consultant for provision of the services described in Attachment A. Consultant hereby accepts such responsibility as described herein. 3. Terms This Agreement shall commence as of the day and year first above shown and shall remain in full force and effect until the contract is completed or unless terminated earlier, as provided herein. The Director of Development Services is authorized to approve line item adjustments to the Agreement's program budget as long as such amendments are upon the same terms and conditions as specified herein. 4. Consultant Responsibilities Consultant shall complete the work program described in Attachments A and B which are incorporated herein by reference. Consultant commits the principal personnel listed below to the project for its duration: Consultant• DOUGLAS B. STROUP ULTRASYSTEMSENVIRONMENTALINCORPORATED Exhibit 1 Page 1 1999*19 5. Relacement of Named Personnel It has been determined that the individual named in this Agreement is necessary for the successful performance of this Agreement. No diversion or replacement of this individual shall be made by Consultant without written consent of the Department, provided that the Department may ratify, in writing, within ten (10) days of diversion or replacement and such ratification shall constitute the consent of the Department required by this clause. If the Department fails to respond to Consultant within ten (10) days of notification by Consultant, said personnel diversion or replacement shall be deemed approved. 6. Release of News Information No news release, including photographs, public announcements or confirmation of same, of any part of the subject matter of this Agreement or any phase of any program hereunder shall be made without prior written approval of the Director of Development Services. 7. ConSdentiality of Reports Consultant shall keep confidential all reports, information and data received, prepared or assembled pursuant to performance hereunder and that the Deparhnent designates as confidential. Such information shall not be made available to any person, firm, corporation or entity without the prior written consent of the Director of Development Services. 8. Compensation The CITY agrees to pay Consultant on a monthly basis. This amount will not exceed $30,000.00 for the total term of the Agreement. Invoices shall be submitted on a monthly basis. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice. Such payment shall be payable to (Consultant). 9. Department Support The Development Services Department shall provide Consultant with any plans, publications, reports, statistics, records or other data or information pertinent to the services to be provided hereunder which are reasonably available to the Department. 10. Independent Contractor Consultant shall perform the services as contained herein as an independent contractor and shall not be considered an employee of the City. This Agreement is by and between Consultant and the City, and is not intended, and shall not be construed, Exhibit 1 Page 2 11999-19 _ to create the relationship of agent, servant, employee, partnership, joint venture, or association, between the Consultant and City. 11. Conflict of Interest Consultant agrees for the term of this Agreement not to enter into any agreement that will inure to the detriment of the City of San Bernardino. 12. Successor and Assignment The services as contained herein aze to be rendered by Consultant whose name is as appeazs first above written and said Consultant shall not assign nor transfer any interest in this Agreement without the prior written consent of the Department. 13. IndemniScation Consultant agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City and their agents, officers and employees from and against any and all liability, expense and claims for damages of any nature whatsoever, including, but not limited to, bodily injury, death, personal injury, or property damages arising from or connected with Consultant's operations, or its performance under this Agreement. 14. Compliance with Laws The parties agree to be bound by applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations and directives as they pertain to the performance of this Agreement. 15. Non-Discrimination In the fulfillment of the program established under this Agreement, either as to employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination, rates of pay or other terms of compensation, selection for training, including apprenticeship or participation in the program or the receiving of any benefits under the program, Consultant agrees not to discriminate nor to allow any subcontractor to discriminate on the basis of age, race, color, creed, religion, natural origin, ancestry, sex, marital status or physical handicap. 16. Severability In the event that any provision herein contained is held to be invalid, void or illegal by any court of competent jurisdiction, the same shall be deemed severable from the remainder of this Agreement and shall in no way affect, impair or invalidate any other provision contained herein. If any such provision shall be deemed invalid due to its scope or breadth, such provision shall be deemed valid to the extent of the scope or breadth permitted by law. Exhibit 1 Page 3 1999'-19 17. Interpretation No provision of this Agreement is to be interpreted for or against either party because that party or that party's legal representative drafted such provision, but this Agreement is to be construed as if it were drafted by both parties hereto. 18. Entire Agreement This Agreement with Attachments A and B constitutes the entire understanding and agreement of the parties. 19. Waiver No breach of any provision can be waived unless in writing. Waiver of any breach of any provision shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other breach of the same or any other provision hereof. 20. Contract Evaluation and Review The ongoing assessment and monitoring of this Agreement is the responsibility of the Director of Development Services or his designee. 21. Termination The City or Consultant may terminate this Agreement for any reason at any time by mailing by certified mail 30 days prior written notice of termination to the other party. In this event, the Consultant shall be paid the reasonable value of services rendered to the date of termination. In the event of any such termination, Consultant shall provide to City, without charge, all documents, notes, maps, reports and data accumulated to the date of such termination. Consultant further covenants to give its good-faith cooperation in the transfer of the work to the City or to any other consultant designated by City following such termination, and to attend and participate in any meetings at no cost to City as shall be deemed necessary by the Director of Development Services to effectively accomplish such transfer. 22. Warranty Consultant expressly warrants that the project will be performed with care, skill, reasonable expedience, and faithfulness and that the deliverables and/or reports shall be fit and proper for their intended use. Consultant further warrants that all work required under this Agreement will be performed in accordance with generally accepted professional practices within the area of expertise of the consultant and sub- consultants. r c Exhibit 1 Page 4 1999-19 23. Liability/Insurance Consultant agrees to maintain throughout the term of this Agreement Comprehensive General Liability Insurance in the amount of $1,000,000 combined single limit for each occurrence and in aggregate; Automobile Liability Insurance and Worker's Compensation Insurance as required by law. 24. Notice Notices, herein shall be presented in person or by certified or registered U.S. mail, as follows: To Consultant: Douglas B. Stroup Ultrasystems Environmental Incorporated 6 Jenner, Suite 210 Irvine, California 92618-3811 To City: Michael E. Hays, Director Development Services Department City of San Bernardino 300 North "D" Street, Third Floor San Bernardino, California 92418 Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to prevent the giving of notice by personal service. Exhibit 1 Page 5 1999=19 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the day and year first above shown. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Approved as to form And legal content: 1 By: M or Judith Valles Approved as to program: CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, Development Services Department By: Direc r CONSULTANT By: ~ (Sig ure) Name:~~}~ .~. L/IUDs,4y Exhibit 1 Page 6 ATTAC~IlbIENT "A" August 20, 1998 Ms. Deborah Woldruff, Associate Planner City of San Bernardino Development Services Department 300 N. "D" Street San Bemardino, CA 92418 RE: Case Ramona Project Dear Ms. Woldruff: -- -- -- -'-,,_~72 ~, - !'. .- LD ~~ __ __ .,, ._r i ..__ Ultrasystems Environmental Incorporated (ti Itrasystems) is pleased to submit this technical proposal to the City of San Bemardino (City) in response to the City's recent Request for Proposals for Professional Environmental Services in connection with the Case Ramona Project within the City. Based on Ultrasystems' participation with several Cities using CDBG funds, our firm is uniquely qualified to assist the City in analyzins the potential environmental impacts associated with the pending Casa Ramona project. The accompanying proposal (attached) outlines the scope of services, which we presently believe to be required to prepare and process an EIS/EIR for the proposed project in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)/California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's implementing guidelines. In addition, Ultrasystems is awoman-owned. State-certified Small Business Enterprise (WBE/SBE), maintaining certification with several large public agencies (including the City and County of San Bernardino). We have a proven track record in preparing environmental documentation and obtaining discretionary permits to facilitate successful project completion. Also, Ultrasystems has recently opened an office within San Bernardino Counri at: 28200 Highway 189, Suite N-100. Lake Arrowhead, CA 92352. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING The project applicant (City's Development Agency), which administers the City's CDBG Program is the Lead Agency for the project. Casa Ramona. Inc., anon-profit social services provider, is proposing to demolish the historic Casa Ramona School building. The building is currently used as a community and senior-citizens center. The demolition of this structure will remove everything, except the front facade. Development will allow for the construction of a new and larger community and senior center. As indicated in the City's RFP, the em ironmental document will address potential impacts associated with the proposed demolition and to allow for the release of CDBG funds for preconstruction architectural and engineering plans. IDENTIFICATION OF KEY TEAM MEMBERS Based on the technical nature of this work effort. Ultrasystems has assembled a group of highly-trained individuals because of their experience and expertise in successfully completing similar assignments. Each CO RM~RATE F{F.d D~?C.1R7 ERA 6 Jenner, Suite 210. Irvine, Cnlifomia 9'_518-3811 • ~9i91 78A-19011 • Fas: 1919) 78f3-J901 IN[.n[vo EMPIRE: 1169 Pomona Road. Suite 111?, Comm, Calirornia 9 1 7111-7 1 i8 • (909) }{II--?}011 • Fax: 1'109) ?79-9609 1999-19 Ms. Deborah Woldruff, Associate Planner - City of San Bernardino August 20, 1998 Page Z individual is presently available to participate in the performance of assigned functions and will remain dedicated to assisting the Cih with all pending projects. Should additional personnel resources be required, Ultrasystems commits to allocating all corporate resources as may be required to complete project assignments on time and within budget. Presented below is an overview of Ultrasystems' team members. Additional information concerning the qualifications of our firm, including resumes of all assigned staff have been included in Attachment A (Statement of Qualifications -Ultrasystems Environmental Incorporated) and Attachment B (Statement of Qualifications -Archaeological Associates). Proiect Director -Environmental Betsy Lindsay, MURP, will serve as Project Director and has extensive experience in preparing and processing environmental documents for highly controversial projects and brings to the program team consulting experience involving redevelopment, planning, economic development, public/private financing and real estate development, including the preparation of financial feasibility studies and proforma analyses for development projects. i~h. Lindsay recently completed a comprehensive EIR for the largest privately- owned landfill in Los Anoelz; County (Sunshine Canyon). Ms. Lindsay was employed ~~ ith a multi-disciplinary consulting firm, providing redevelopment planning services and fiscal impact analysis to numerous local agencies, school districts, and private development firms. Ms. Lindsay has also worked for the County of Los Angeles (i.e., Community Development Comm fission) as Project Manager respons ible for several asset-managed and econom is development projects. In that capacity, Ms. Lindsay was responsible for site review, economic analysis, entitlement processing, environmental review and overal I project coordination on over fifteen industrial, commercial, and residential housing projects throuvhout Los Angeles, including the Lennox Revitalization Strategy, a 10-square mile redevelopment area adjacent to the Los Angeles International Airport; Pacific Concourse, a 30-acre mixed- usebusiness park consisting of 1.5 million square feet development; and Perez Place, a 6-acre light industrial site located within a redevelopment project area. Project Manager -Environmental Doug Stroup, MURP. Project Manager has over 15-years experience as a project manager or principal investigator in environmental planning services. During that period, he has prepared numerous environmental documents in compliance with NEPA/CEQA, including EIS's/EIR's, environmental assessments, and initial studies for Specific Plan projects, Master Plans for counties and cities, and infrastructure projects. Relevant project experience includes the preparation of a NEPA environmental assessment for phased development of a heavy industrial siting facility in Clark County, Nevada; managing a NEPA/CEQA document for a state highway widening project for an adopted Specific Plan and assisting in the preparation of the Master Plan for the City of North Las Vegas, Nevada. Recently he has been responsible for managing preparation of programmatic NEPA environmental assessments administered by both the cities of EI Monte and Orange County in support of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding from HUD. •1999-19 Ms. Deborah Woldruff, Associate Planner City of San Bernardino August 20, 1998 Page 3 Subconsultant -Historical Resources Archaeological Associates shall provide all subcontractins relative to historical resources. CONFLICT OF INTEREST Ultrasystems perceives no conflict of interest with respect to [he work described or presented in the RFP. SCOPE OF WORK/SCHEDULEBUDGET Refer to Attachment C (Scope of Work, Project Schedule, and Proposed Budget. When the City considers the merits ofour technical capabilities, the qualifications of assigned personnel, our firm's relevant experience, and the individual sub-consultant project team member, Ultrasystems feels that the City will share our opinion that we are uniquely qualified to undertake and complete all requisite tasks as may be required to demonstrate full compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)/California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), its implementing guidelines and all associated regulatory requirements. Should you have any questions regarding our proposal, please contact me at your earliest convenience Respectfully submitted, ;tea-a~._~:sa.i. Betsy A. Lindsay President BL:mm Enclosure: (5) 1999-19 Page 4 SCOPE OF SERVICES Ultrasystems recognizes that the project site is lies with an urbanized area. Due to its use as an existing community and senior center, the site no longer is reflective of a natural or undisturbed environment. Although limited in overall geoeraphic extent, the project area will require both a physical inspection and an analysis to a level adequate to demonstrate the City's full compliance with applicable environmental disclosure obligations. Ultrasystems scope ofservices has been carefully tailored to reflectthe proposed project. The work program in our proposal represents a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary approach to the preparation of the project's environmental review record (ERR) and associated activities required to demonstrate full compliance with NEPA, CEQA, and its corresponding implementing guidelines. This section outlines the work program that Ultrasystems will conduct to ensure the successful preparation of an EIS/EIR for the proposed project. These actions and the resulting documents will serve as the environmental basis for subsequent discretionary actions by the C ity, other responsible agent ies, and satisfies procedural requirements established for the obtainment of federal funds. Additionally, these actions will facilitate full public disclosure of the environmental consequences of both the proposed action and those alternatives addressed in the ERR and will serve as a vehicle for the solicitation and dissemination of public and agency comments. Maior Task 1.0: Ciri Coordination. Ultrasystems is committed to developing and maintaining effective communication with City staff and the project applicant throughout the term ofthis work assignment. These efforts are intended to finalize any outstanding issues concerning this work effort, facilitate ongoing support of City staff concerning various aspects of this project, and provide opportunities for the consultant's participation at public meetings and associated activities. The following work tasks have been included: Task 1.1: Project Initiation Meeting. Following contract award, a project initiation meeting (one (1) meeting) will be scheduled to finalize any outstanding issues concerning the work program with City Staff, identify materials in the possession ofthe Ciry relevant to the performance ofthis work assignment, establish working relationships between all project participants, clarify scheduling and budgetary issues, define avenues of communication between the environmental consultant, the project applicant and City staff, and to discuss other related matters conceming this proposed project. Task 1.2: Status/Update Meetings. In an effort to maximize interactions between the environmental consultant and City personnel, enhance opportunities for [he conveyance of information, and to provide a mechanism to address and resolve outstanding issues as they arise throughout this work effort, seven (7) additional meeting has been budgeted involving the project manager and City staff. To the extent feasible, meeting schedules shall correspond with draft deliverables or related milestone events and shall be preceded by the delivery ofdraft documents to the City for their review prior to the meeting date. Additional meetings beyond the number indicated would be compensated in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in our Standard Rate Schedule (see Statement of Qualifications). Task 1.3: Public Hearings. Ultrasystems will attend and participate in up to two (2) public meetings before the Planning Commission and City Council. Ultrasystems, in cooperation with City staff, shall prepare and present any materials that would be required and shall participate at such meetings to the extent determined appropriate by the City. [f environmental questions arise at those meetings requiring additional investigation(s) beyond the scope ofthis proposal, Ultrasystems will provide the City with recommendations concerning appropriate responses and, following the City's authorization, undertake additional studies that 1999-19 Page 5 may be required Task 1.4: Ongoing Consultation. Ultrasystems Project Director and Project Manager shall be available throughout the term of this work effort to respond to C ity staff requests for input concerning various aspects of the CEQA/NEPA process. At all stages, Ultrasystems will advise the City regarding relevant environmental issues, oversee all environmental compliance activities, and ensure that all work is performed in accordance with applicable CEQA/NEPA requirements. Major Task 2.0 -Prepare Screencheck Draft EA/IS [n recognition ofthe potential duplicated nature of the Environmental Assessment (EA) and Initial Study (IS) process, both NEPA and CEQA authorize the use of joint environmental documents developed for the purpose of satisfying the disclosure obligations of federal and State statutes. In accordance with that authority, Ultrasystems (working in cooperation with the City) will develop a single EA/IS format. The resulting analysis will stress the avoidance of significant environmental effects, where possible, and shall include the identification of feasible mitigation measures designed to avoid, reduce, or rectify identified effects. In fulfillment of this effort, this major task is broken down into four components (task assignments) which are individually discussed below: Task 2.1 - Scoping Activities. The broad-based solicitation of public and governmental agency comments (defined as "scoping") is an important element in the fulfillment of NEPA and CEQA obligation. At the project initiation meeting Task 1.1), Ultrasystems will assist the City in its preparation of the scoping program, including a list of local, State and federal agencies and key private organizations and individuals that should receive ongoing notification as part of the project's ERR. It is assumed that the City, will prepare and disseminate a Notice of Early Consultation (NOEC) soliciting input concerning the proposed project's potential environmental impacts, feas ible m itigation measures and alternatives far subsequent consideration. The NOEC will describe the project in detail and will seek pertinent information to each agency or group(s) specific area of regulatory involvement or expertise. [f necessary, informal scoping meetings may be conducted with those agencies, organizations, and individuals. Ultrasystems shall attend those meetings directed by City staff and would be compensated in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in our Standard Rate Schedule (see Statement of Qualifications). In preparing EAs, lead agencies must involve environmental agencies and the public to the extent practical (40CFR1501.4(b)). [n accordance with applicable NEPA/CEQA requirements, the City (as the lead agency) shall make diligent efforts to involve the public in the preparation and implementation ofthe environmental process. Ultrasystems shall work cooperatively with the City in the preparation and publication of those public notices specifically identified by statute. In all cases, the lead agency is obligated to mail notices to those parties who have requested formal notice. Additionally, Ultrasystems will provide the City with appropriate input and guidance concerning noticing requirements as established under NEPA/CEQA and if necessary will assist the City in its preparation ofthe notices or similar activities in support of those noticing obligations. Task 2.2 - Performance of Technical Studies. In order to determ ine the nature and significance of project- related impacts, a number offocused technical studies will be undertaken for inclusion in the EIS/EIR. Prior to the commencement of these investigations, Ultrasystems will obtain and review relevant (and available) documents which address the proposed project or provide general information concerning the project site and its environs. Relevant studies (or portions thereof) will be identified, informational deficiencies noted, and any additional technical analyses determined. 1999-19 Page 6 Presented below are a number of technical studies that will warrant inclusion during this project phase. Subtask 2.2.1 -Land Use. (Optional Task) Under this task assignment, Ultrasystems will describe onsite and proximal land uses, identify applicable land use policies (e.g., general plan and zoning designations) for the project site, including other alternative project sites (if any). Conceptual development plans will be analyzed in terms of use compatibility. Any potential hazards will be identified based on a review ofthe conceptual site plan, an analysis ofavailable engineering information, adjoining uses, and aerial topographic features. Additionally, Ultrasystems will review applicable Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood insurance studies and Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) covering the project area and any Phase I studies conducted on the project site. Subtask 2.2.2 - Air Quality. (Optional Task) It is recommended that the DEIS/DEIR include a detailed analysis ofproject-related air quality impacts, prepared in accordance with the established methodology of the SCAQMD. Since that agency may elect to submit comments in response to the City's outreach efforts and because the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) is designated as a "non attainment" area for certain criteria pollutants. Project-specific investigations will document whether short-term (construction) and/or long-term (operational) emissions exceed the SCAQMD's threshold criteria. This section will address: (1) short-term construction-related effects, including fugitive dust emissions; and (2) long-term emissions associated with operation and maintenance activities, including project-related energy consumption. A discussion ofproject consistency with the Air Quality Management Plan and the Southern California Association of Governments (SLAG) Growth Ntanagement Plan will be provided. Subtask 2.2.3 -Acoustical Analysis. (Optional Task) Noise-related impacts from project construction and project operational activities will be identified using City-accepted noise criteria. Acoustical measurements and modeling will be conducted, and any sensitive receptors in the project area will be identified. Applicable City noise standards will be examined to ascertain compliance with those regulations. In the event that project operations exceed established municipal criteria, mitigation measures will be formulated. Ultrasystems will prepare astand-alone technical assessment forthe topical issue ofnoise. Specifically, Ultrasystems will: (1) perform limited onsite ambient noise monitoring to develop a baseline noise characterization and to provide input data to prepare asite-specific calibration of the FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-77- l08); (2) develop a baseline noise exposure profile in terms ofthe CNEL noise metric urine the FHWA Model with the latest California vehicle noise curves (CaIVENO). The Caltrans microcomputer version of the FHWA Model, Version OFA will be used for this analysis; (3) prepare a No Project versus with-project mobile noise impact comparison including any viable project alternative development scenarios. Identify specific sensitive receiver locations where mobile source noise impacts may adversely affect area residents: (4) evaluate stationary noise impacts from temporary onsite construction noise sources; (5) relate project noise impacts to the Noise Element noise/land use compatibility guidelines in the City's General Plan Noise Element and other applicable noise exposure regulations; (6) develop a noise impact mitigation plan for any predicted noise impacts that exceed target noise exposure limits. Subtask 2.2.4 - Police and Fire Services. (Optional Task) The DEIS/DEIR will examine the potential effects of the proposed project in terms ofadditional police and fire responses, personnel, and equipment requirements. In addition, emergency services will be discussed and evaluated. Subtask 2.2.5 -Historical Resources. (Archeological Associates). Projects receiving federal assistance 1999-19 Page 7 are subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 USC 470) and its implementation regulations (36 CFR 800). Section 106 mandates that federal agencies with direct or indirect jurisdiction over afederally-assisted activity afford the State Office of Historic Preservation (SOHP) a reasonable opportunity to comment on a project's potential impacts on historic properties. This review procedure relates to affected properties involved withCDBG funded activities which are included on or eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. CDBG grant recipients must coordinate NEPA compliance activities under HUD regulations with the separate responsibilities of the National Historic Preservation Act and Executive Order 11593 (36 CFR 800) to ensure that historic and cultural properties are given proper consideration in the preparation of the EA. In order to complete that process, a Historic Property Survey Report (HPSR) will be required. The HPSR should include a detailed physical description of the project, a definition of the area of potential effect (APE), a map of the project site and adjoining areas with the APE delineated and a detailed evaluation of existing and potentially historic properties (pursuant to 36 CFR 800.4). In assessing project-related impacts on properties included on or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, the "Regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Governing the Section 106 Review Process" (36 CFR 800) requires that the project assessment include both the area directly impacted and the "area of potential effects" (APE). Pursuant to the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and State and local environmental protection statutes and policies, projects involving either federal assistance of permit obligations shall undertake a Section 106 review. The identification of APES typically focus upon both archaeologiGhistoric deposits and historic structures (and the real property thereon). Areas of potential effect usually include all properties within the project area and all properties contiguous with or directly impacted by the project. The proposed APE is then be submitted to the State Office of Historic Preservation (which has authority of Section 106 documents) who will approve or disapprove the proposed area of affect. Upon subsequent acceptance, a Historic Property Survey Report (HPSR) is prepared to provide the required documentation in support of a "Finding of No Adverse Effect," "Finding of Adverse Effect," or "Memorandum of Agreement." Upon receipt and subsequent review of comments from local, State and federal agencies, private organizations, and key individuals, Ultrasystems shall prepare and transmit a screencheck drafr EA/IS to the City. The screencheck draft EA/IS will include the following: 1. Forward -explains [hat the contents of the EA/[S has been independently reviewed and analyzed by the City and that the conclusions and discussions contained therein reflect the independentjudgment of the City to those issues evaluated in the EA/IS. 2. Introduction -discusses the purpose of and statutory authority for the EA/IS. 3. Effects Found Not to be Significant - a summary stating the City's rationale for those effects judged not to be significant will be presented. 4. Project Description - includes a description of the "preferred alternative," including the identification of its regional location and local context; presents an overview of both the purpose and need for this 1999 19 Page 8 undertaking; and describes physical and operational characteristics of the proposed improvements. Exhibits will be prepared to illustrate the project's location and conceptual site plan. 5. Alternatives -NEPA requires that alternatives to the proposed action must be considered and assessed. As required, project alternatives (including the "no action alternative") shall be identified and described in sufficient detail to facilitate comparative impact analysis. 6. Environmental Setting/Affected Environment - a description ofthe regional and local environmental setting shall be provided, including current conditions and trends ofelements ofthe human environment which have the potential to be affected by the proposed action and altematives. Environmental Anah~sis Checklist - utilizing a combined NEPA/CEQA checklist, critical elements of the human environment (subject to requirements specified in statutes, regulations and executive orders) will be identified. Those elements may include, but are not limited to: earth resources; air quality; noise; risk of upset; biological resources; land use; and the mandatory findings of significance. The environmental concerns of the local, State and federal agencies and the key groups and individuals will be reflected in the responses to the checklist questionnaire. 8. Impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternatives -direct, indirect and cumulative impacts of the affected environment will be analyzed to the extent necessary to determine whether impacts (if any) are significant. The environmental concerns of the local, State and federal agencies and the key private groups and individuals will be thoroughly described in this section. 9. Mitigation Measures -mitigation measures, representing recommended actions developed in response to impacts identified in the analysis of the affected environment, shall be identified. Post-mitigated effects will be re-evaluated to determine the level of signifcance which may exist after implementation of those actions. Factors to consider in determinins significance are set forth in 40 CFR 1508.22 To determine significance, impact predictions will be compared against established threshold standards clearly stated in the EA IS. 10. DeterminationWhetherImpactsareSignificant-if the post-mitigated impactsoftheproposedaction are determined to be significant, the action cannot be approved unless the action is further modified to avoid significant impacts. If the impacts of the proposed action, as proposed or as modified are determined to be insignificant a FONSI/ND can be prepared. Under this action, Ultrasystems shall provide (for the City's review and consideration) a draft determination of project significance based on the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures. 11. Appendix- appendices w ill be attached that include all letters received by Ultrasystems and/orthe City, each of the technical studies referenced above and any other pertinent information regarding this environmental evaluation. Task 2.3 -Submit screencheck Draft EA/IS. Two (2) screencheck copies of the screencheck drafr EA/IS will be submitted to the City for review and comment. Upon receipt of comments, the screencheck draft EA/IS will be revised by Ultrasystems and resubmitted to the City for its review. Comments received from the City will be incorporated into the screencheck draft EA.'IS. The draft EA/IS will then be reproduced and disseminated. 1999-19 Page 9 Major Task 3.0 -Prepare NOI/NOP - (Gifu Staffl A Notice of Intent/Notice of Preparation (NOI/NOP) will be prepared by City staff for the proposed project and legally noticed and distributed to all responsible agencies, local jurisdictions and key groups and individuals. NEPA requires that the NOI/NOP be published in the Federa[ Register. The NO[/NOP will request input from each responsible/cooperating agency requesting information within theirjurisdiction and issues of environmental concern to be addressed in the EIS/EIR. The purpose of the NOI/NOP is to ensure that all environmental concerns are addressed in the resulting EIS/EIR. The NOI/NOP will briefly describe the proposed project and the scoping actions which will be undertaken by the City. The public scoping meeting notice will be included in the NOI/NOP published in the Federal Register. This notice of the public scoping meeting must be published at least 15 days prior to the date of the meeting. Pursuant to CEQA requirements, the notice may also be published in a local paper of general circulation. All responsible and cooperating federal and State agencies, localjurisdictions, key groups (i.e., homeowner associations, chambers, etc.) and individuals will be notified of the meeting by certified mail by Ultrasystems. Maior Task 4.0 - Prepare Screencheck Draft EIS/EIR The Draft EIS/EIR (DEIS/DEIR) will address both the project, the "No Project Alternative," and a third alternative identified through consultation with the City. Each of these alternatives will receive the same level of analysis in the DEIS/DEIR, pursuant to NEPA requirements. This major task encompasses those activities required to prepare the DEIS/DEIR. Tasks are discussed below, include the following: Task 4.1 -Cover Letter. A cover letter (40 CFR 1 ~02.10[a]), will be prepared which contains: (I) the title of the proposed action and its location; (2) the document's applicable NEPA and CEQA designation; (3) identification of the lead agency and other responsible and cooperating agencies; (4) the name, address and telephone number of the lead agency contact person; (5) a one paragraph abstract; (6) a brief statement indicating whether the document is intended to serve other environmental review and consultation requirements pursuant to 40 CFR 1502.25(a); (7) the date the DEIS/DEIR is issued and the data by which comments are to be received; and (8) the name and title of the party responsible for preparing the document. Task 4.2 -Executive Summary. This section (a0 CFR 1502.10[b]) will identify the preferred alternative, a list ofdiscretionaryapprovalsandanoverviewoftheproject'shistory. The executivesummarywillfurther include a matrix that identifies each identified environmental impact, the mitigation measures designed to reduce or avoid that impact and a statement as to whether or not the impact was reduced to a level of less- than-significant (after mitigation). Task 4.3 -Introduction. This section will include a description of the purpose and need for the project (40 CFR 1502.10(d)), a narrative and graphic representation of the project location, the actions necessary to authorize the preferred project and alternatives (40 CFR 1502.25(b)), the scope and legislative authority of the DEIS/DEIR and the requirements of NEPA and CEQA, and other applicable environmental rules and regulations relating to the proposed action. Task 4.4-Alternatives Including the Proposed Action. This section, required under40 CFR 1502.10(e)), will describe the proposed action and alternatives, summarize the impacts and identify alternatives which were considered but subsequently eliminated from detailed analysis. The DE[S/DEIR will briefly explain the rationale for the selection of the preferred alternative, including those factors which influenced the selection process. This section will further describe both the "No Action Alternative" and a third alternative 199919 Page 10 which is to be addressed in the DEIS/DE[R. Task 4.5 -Affected Environment. This section (required under 40 CFR 1502.10(f)) includes a description of the human environment found in the project area, including the physical, historical, social and economic resources and conditions that would be affected by the alternatives considered. This section serves as a "baseline," showing conditions, including trends, as they exist prior to the initiation of the proposed action and alternatives. Task 4.6 -Environmental Consequences. This section includes a discussion of the assumptions and assessment guidelines used to analyze potential environmental consequences for each of the topical issues to be addressed, the potential environmental impacts that the proposed project and each project alternative (40 CFR 1502.10(g)) would have on the affected environment, the mitieation measures required to reduce or eliminate the impacts and a statement as to whether or not the stated measures reduce the impact to a level deemed to be less-than-significant. The content of the DEIS/DEIR is subject to the findings of the preliminary EA/IS, information obtained during the scoping process, and subsequent discussions with the City. Based on our prior experience with similar projects, Ultrasystems has assumed that the following topical issues will warrant consideration as part of this environmental analysis: Earth Resources. (Optional Task) The DEIS/DEIR shall include a discussion of geologic, geotechnical and seismic considerations as they may affect the proposed project. Information to be incorporated in this section will be based primarily on existing studies which encompass the project site and site-specific investigations (by the project applicant). Geologic structure and earth materials shall be identified and described both graphically and in a narrative format. Project area seismicity will be discussed. No subsurface investigations (e.g., drilling borings; laboratory testing of soil samples or site investigations) are proposed as part of this work effort. Air Quality. (Optional Task) The air quality analysis shall address both the short-term (construction- related) impacts on regional air quality and the long-term impacts associated with the operation of the project. The air quality investigation shall conform with the analytical methodology developed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and contained in the publication entitled CEQA Air Quality Handbook (1993). Noise. (Optional Task) The recommended noise analysis and technical information from the Noise Study presented under Subtask 2 2 3 (Acoustical Analysis) will be incorporated into the DEIS/DEIR. Land Use. (Optional Task) This section will provide a description of the overal I effect of the project (and alternatives) on land use patterns and community character in the project area, including the project's compatibility with existing and proposed land uses and adopted environmental plans and goals. Task 4.7 -Growth-Inducing Impacts. Project implementation may have the potential to induce additional development within the existing service area. As a result, this section will restate the intended project purpose and distinguish between "resource planning" and "growth-inducement." Pursuant to CEQA requirements, this section will further assess the potential of the project to induce economic or population growth, induce the construction of additional housing and retail/commercial activities (either directly or indirectly) in the surrounding area. An evaluation ofcompliancewith regional and local growth management policies (e.g., SCAG's Grouvl: ~Llanagemettt Plau) will be included. 1999-1J Page 11 Task4.8-CumulativeImpactAnalysis. This section will evaluatewhethertwoormoreindividualproject- related impacts are found to be considerable when viewed in combination. In addition, the DEIS/DEIR will discuss the potential of the proposed project to compound or increase adverse environmental impacts when added to other closely related past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects that may occur within [he project vicinity. Task 4.9 -Other NEPA and CEQA Required Sections. This section will contain other requisite components as required underNEPA and CEQA, including: (1) a discussion oftopical issues considered but eliminated from detailed analysis; (2) any irreversible commitment of resources which would result from the project should it be implemented; (3) list of preparers (40 CFR 1502.10[h]); (4) list of agencies, organizations and individuals receiving notice (40 CFR 1502.10[i]); (5) index (40 CFR 1502.10[j]); and (6) list of appendices (40 CFR I ~02.10[k]). Maior Task 5.0 -Prepare Draft EIS/EIR Following submittal of the Screencheck DEIS/DEIR to the City, a number of separate activities will be performed to formalize that document and undertake its public release. These activities include, but may not be limited to: Task 5.1-Submit and Revise Screencheck DEIS/DEIIi. Two (2) Screencheck DEI S/DEIR documents will be submitted to the City for review and comment. The Screencheck documents will be revised and a second Screencheck will be submitted to the City for review and approval. After the City's acceptance and authorization for publication, ten (10) copies of the DEIS/DEIR will be submitted. At the City's direction, Ultrasystems will undertake the distribution of the DEIS/DEIR. Task 5.2 - Preparation of Notice ofAvailability and Notice of Completion. (City staff) On actions which have the potential to induce impacts of national concern, a Notice ofdvailability (NOA) shall be published in the Federal Register. Pursuant to CEQA requirements, a Notice of Completion (NOC) will be filed with OPR at the time the draft document is released for public comment. Under this task assignment, City staff will prepare the NOA (if required) and NOC. Major Task 6.0 -Prepare Final EIS/EIR. The following activities encompass those tasks and associated events required to finalize the EIS/EIR Task 6.1 -Public Hearings on the DEIS/DEIR. Should the City elect to hold public meetings to receive comments on the DEIS/DEIR (40 CFR 1506.6[c ]), Ultrasystems will attend up to two (2) public hearings on the DEIS/DEIR. If pertinent environmental questions arise at the public hearings that require additional studies, Ultrasystems will either prepare the studies and written responses to these inquires or, if those activities are beyond the scope of this proposal, provide the City with recommendations concerning an appropriate response. Task 6.2 -Prepare Response to Comments on the DEIS/DEITi. Ultrasystems will prepare astand-alone Responses to Comments (RTC) document (up to 15 hours of personnel time allocated), providing written responses to all relevant written and oral comments received by the City as a result of the public circulation of the DEIS/DEIR, publication of notices concerning the availability of that document, and comments received at noticed public hearings. Upon completion of the Screencheck drafr RTC, two (2) copies of that document will be transmitted to The City for their review and comment. Any changes. as requested by the City, will be incorporated into a revised Screencheck draft RTC and resubmitted to the City. 1999-19' Page 12 Task 6.3 -Finalize Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program. [n response to public and agency comments (and in response to District directive), Ultrasystems will prepare a Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program (MRMP) for the project. The MRMP will include the task (how the impact is going to be mitigated), responsible party (by position and agency), timing (when the mitigation measure is to be implemented) and duration (how long implementation ofthe mitigation measure takes) for each monitoring activity. Task 6.4 -Preparation of FEIS/FEIR. Prior to finalizing the Final EIS/EIR (FEIS/FEIR), Ultrasystems will provide the City with a series of options concerning the format of that document. Two (2) copies of the screencheck draft FEIS/FEIR will be provided to the City for review and comment. Following acceptance and approval of its release, ten (10) copies of [he draft FEIS/FEIR will be provided to the City. Ultrasystems will assist the City in the proper legal noticing and filing of the FEIS/FEIR after it has been certified. In addition, Ultrasystems will provide the City with a draft Notice of Determination (NOD) as required by CEQA and (following execution) ensure its posting at the office of County Clerk. Task 6.5 -Prepare Record of Decision and CEQA Findings. (Optional Task) Decisions on an EIS are recorded in a concise public Record of Decision (ROD). As part of the project's environmental review record, Ultrasystems will prepare the required ROD (NEPA) and both the required Finding of Fact (Section 15091, CCR) and Statement ofOverridingConsiderntions (Section 15093, CCR), ifrequired, for the project under CEQA. Maior Task 7.0: NEPA/CEOA Processine Support Services. This major task includes those activities required to support the preparation of the EIS/EIR, comply with specific procedural obligations specified under CEQA, and represent that document before the City. Task7.LNEPA/CEQADocumentsandNoticesDistribution. (Citystaff)Thistaskincludesallactivities required to distribute (certified mail) those notices and other pertinent documentation to all Responsible Agencies, Trustee Agencies, the State Clearinghouse, pertinent local agencies, interested organizations, groups, and individuals. Task 7.2: Posting with the County Clerk. City staff shall ensure posting of the NOP, NOC, and NOD at the Office of the County Clerk. Payment of CDFG fees is not included herein. Task 7.3: Subconsultant Coordination. The success of any project is dependent, in part, upon clear lines ofcommunication between all parties, adherence to the program schedule by each ofthe project participants (e.g., subconsultants), and senior-level manaeement oversight of all work products. Ultrasystems is aware of the need to effectively m anage and mon itor the com pletion of al I work assignments by those subconsultan[ operating directly under our superv is ion and am technical third-party subconsultant which are under contract to the City. Task 7.4: Reprographic Support Services. This task facilitates the reproduction (photocopied) of the following documents in number indicated: (1) screencheck DE[S/DEIR - 15 copies; (2) DEIS/DEIR - 60 copies; (4) screencheck Response toComments - 4 copies; and (5) Response to Comments/FEIR- 60 copies. Any additional documents and/or copies will be provided to the City on atime-and-materials basis. Task 7.5: Other Direct Costs. This task includes all other incidental expenses related to the execution of this work program (e.g., travel: photo processing; postage/deliveries). 1999-19 Page 13 Major Task 8.0: Implementing the Mitigation Monitoring Program (Optionall. A mitigation reporting and monitoring program (MRMP) typically consists of two (2) distinct phases. During the first phase, conducted upon certification of the environmental document, the monitoring plan is prepared and adopted by the Lead Agency. In the next phase, which commences following that public action, site-specific and/or project-specific activities are then undertaken to document the applicant's compliance with those mitigation measures adopted as conditions of project approval. Three (3) easily identifiable checkpoints can be identified in the development phase of the project. These checkpoints or phases, representing reasonable milestone dates for the fulfillment of specific conditions of approval, include: (1) issuance of grading permits; (2) issuance of building permits; and (3) issuance of use and occupancy permits. Based on these phasing periods, a monitoring program will be developed utilizing a checklist technique for the determination of when compliance is to be examined. Once the MRMP is adopted by the City, both the City and other Responsible Agencies are then obligated to ensure that all conditions are fulfilled in the manner and in the time frame stated therein. Under this optional task assignment, Ultrasystems will support the City's monitoring and reporting requirements and shall independently verify the applicant's (or others) strict compliance with those obligations. Since the full extent of any monitoring obligations cannot be entirely known pending completion of the CEQA process, it is not possible to accurately specify the nature of any implementation actions (e.g., archaeological monitoring of grading activities) which may be subsequently adopted by the City. Following development of that monitoring plan (e.g., identifying and organizing all mitigation measures and appropriate timing and reporting procedures), implementation actions can proceed in accordance with that comprehensive framework. Implementation may necessitate some form of on-site monitoring for specified activities or tracking of progress and/or agency sign-offs for certain activities that may not be readily observable. Under this work assignment, a series of forms will be developed that will both inform the monitoring party of their responsibility and which will be utilized to verify that compliance has been obtained at each development or post-development phase. 7.0 PERFORMANCE SCHEDULE Ultrasystems is committed to the expeditious completion of the EIR process and will allocate all necessary manpower and associated resources as required to complete that document within the shortest possible time frame. In response to that commitment, Tables 1 and 2 (Performance Schedules) identifies the milestones and projected dates for specific components of this work program. As illustrated, the first screencheck DEIS/DEIR will be submitted to the City review within 60 days of project commencement. Public hearings on the FEIS/FEIR are scheduled to commence within 9 months, following the City's Notice to Proceed. Ultrasystems will effectively manage all work elements within its area of control. Much ofthe CEQA/NEPA process is defined by statutory review periods or internal agency review. This latter project component, which is critical to ensure the document's responsiveness to the needs of the City is beyond the control of Ultrasystems. Forthe purpose ofthis schedule, all internal City review periods have been assumed to require not more than seven (7) days from receipt of draft documentation from Ultrasystems. 8.0 NOT-TO-EXCEED COSTS 1999-19 Page 14 Based on that scope of services outlined herein, the total estimated not-to-exceed fee to prepare, process, produce, reproduce, and represent the DEIS/DE[R and FEIS/FEIR for the proposed project is $29,420. This price quotation will remain firm and irrevocable for a period of 120 days from the submission date of this proposal, but may be extended thereafrer through mutual agreement by all parties. This fee is based upon both those specific tasks and corresponding scope of work identified in the above described "Scope of Services." Individual costs for these activities are provided in Table 3 (Cost/Price Proposal Matrix). Ultrasystems reserves the right to internally adjust the project budget through the internal reallocation of assigned resources among the major tasks, tasks, and subtasks as outlined herein. The budgeted amount will, however, not be exceeded except through subsequent authorization by the City. Any and all expenditures incurred as a consequence of any project assignment shall be billed in accordance with those rates and terms as specified in Attachment A (Statement of Qualifications) herein. Ultrasystems will invoice monthly for all services rendered in response to this proposed project. Table 1 PRELIMINARY EA/IS PERFORMANCE SCHEDULE Milestone Task Duration as Project Duration` as Project Initiation Meeting (August 1Q, 1998) 1 1 Pre are Screencheck Draft EAiIS -- -- Sco ine Activities 30 3l Performance of Technical Studies in Su ort of Draft FONSIMD 60 61 Land Use _- -_ Air uali (O tional Task) -- -- Acoustical Anal sis (O tional Task) -- -- Prepare Screencheck Draft EA;IS 5 67 Submit Screencheck Draft EA,'IS I 68 Revise Screencheck Draft EA/IS in Response to City Comments 10 78 1999-14 Page 15 Table 2 EIS/EIR PERFORMANCE SCHEDULE Milestone Task Duration (Days) Project Duration' (Days). Prepare NOI/NOP 1 78Z Publish Notice in the Federal Register l0 88 30-day Circulation Period of the NOI/NOP 30 1 I S Public Scoping Meeting I 119 Prepare Screencheck Draft EIS.DEIR 45 164 Prepare Draft EIS/EIR - -- Submit Screencheck Drafr EIRB[R I 165 Revise Screencheck Draft EISBIR per District Comments 20 185 Submit Revised Screencheck DEIS/DEIR to District I 186 Preparation of Notice of Availability/Notice of Completion I 186 45-Day Circulation Period 45 231 Prepare Final EIS/EIR - -- Public Heazing on the Drafr EIS/EIR 1 232 Prepare Response to Comments on the Draft EIS~'E[R - -- Prepaze Screencheck Draft RTC 20 252 Revise Screencheck Drafr RTC in Response to City Comments 10 262 Finalize Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program -- -- Prepazation of Final E[S/EIR 5 267 Record of Decision and CEQA Findings 10 277 ' Following receipt by the environmental consultant of a Notrce to Proceed. - Assumed to commence at the completion of the Screencheck Draft EA/IS as indicated in Exhibit 1. 1999 19 Page 16 Table 3 COST/PRICE PROPOSAL MATRIX Major Task/Task Staffing Allocation (Hours) A B C D E Cast ($) F G H Major Task 1.0: City Coordination Task 1. L Project Initiation Meeting 2 2 - I - - 485 Task I?: Status/LJpdate Meetings 4 10 - - 4 - - 1,600 Task 1.3: Public Hearings 6 6 - - - 1,020 Task 1.4: Ongoing Consultation - 4 - 20 - - - 1,520 Major Task 2.0: Prepare Screencheck Draft EA/IS Task 2.1: Scoping Activities - 6 - 4 4 - 960 Task 2.2: Performance of Technical Studies - - - - - - - Subtask 2.2.1: Land Use (Optional Task) - 6 - 24 6 - - 2,250. Subtask 2.2.2: Air Quality (Optional Task) - - 4 - 2 - 2,460 2,870 Subtask 2.2.3: Acoustical (Optional Task) - - 4 - 2 - 1,68 2,090 Subtask 2.2.4: Police and Fire Services (Optional Task) 2 - 6 2 - - 630 Subtask 2.2.5: Historical Resources - - - - - - 4,500 4,500 Task 2.3: Submit Screencheck Draft EA/IS - I - 2 ] - 255 Major Task 3.0: Prepare NOI/NOP (City Staff) - - - - - - - - Major Task 4.0: Prepare Screencheck Draft E[S/EIR Task 4.1: Cover Letter 2 - - 2 - - 270 Task 4.2: Executive Summary - 8 - 6 4 - - 1,260 Task 4.3: Introduction - 2 - 2 2 - - 390 Task 4.4: Alternatives Including the Proposed Action - 12 - 20 6 - - 1,950 Task 4.5: Affected Environment 10 - 20 10 - - 1,950 Task 4.6: Environmental Consequences - 10 - 20 10 - - 1,950 Task 4.7: Growth-Inducing Impacts - - 4 4 - - - 560 Task 4.8: Cumulative Impact Analysis - 10 - 10 6 - - 1,770 Task 4.9: Other NEPAiCEQA Sections - - - 4 2 - - 330 199919 Page 17 Major Task/Task Staffing Allocation (Hours) A B C D E Cost ($) F C H Major Task 5.0: Prepare Draft EIS/EIR Task 5.1: Submit and Revise Screencheck DEIS/DEIR - 8 - 8 6 - - 1,470 Task 5.2: Preparation of Notice of Availability and Notice of Completion (City StafQ - - - - - - - - Major Task 6.0: Prepare Final FEIS/ FEIR Task 6.1: Public Hearings (See Task 1.3) - - - - - - - - Task 6.2: Responses to Comments - 2 - 9 4 - - 900 Task 6.3: Mitigation Monitoring Program - 4 - 18 4 - - 1,620 Task 6.4: Preparation of FEIS/FEIR 8 6 4 - - 1,260 Task 6.5: Prepae Record of Decision. and CEQA: Findings (Optional Task) - - - - - NB Major Task 7.0: CEQA Processing Support Services Task 7.1: Document Distribution (Optional Task) - - - - - - - Task 7.2: Posting with County Clerk (City Staff) - - - - - - - - Task 7.3: Subconsultant Coordination - - - - - 200 - 200 Task 7.4: Reprographic Support Services - - - - - - 3,000 3,000 Task 7.5: Other Direct Cost - - 200 - 200 Major Task 8.0: Implement Monitoring Plan (Optional) NB TOTAL NOT-TO-EXCEED COST 29 420 LEGEND: A: President ($130/hour); B: Senior Project Manager/Senior Environmental Engineer ($90/hour); C: Project Manager/Engineer/Scientist ($80/hour); D: Associate Planner($60/hour); E: Technician/Clerical Support ($45/hour); F: Other Direct Costs; G: Subconsultant; H: Subtotal; and NB: Not Bid * NOTE: Task 7.4 -Reprographics Support Services includes reproduction of the following documents: .1999=19 , Page 18 1. Screencheck DEIS/DEIR - 2 copies; 2. DEIS(DEIR - 10 copies; 3. Screencheck Response to Comments - 2 copies; and 4. Response to Comments/FEIS/FEIR - 10 copies. Any additional documents and/or copies will be provided on a cost-plus time-and-materials basis. i9s9-i9 ATTACHMENT "B" ~ www. ul[rasystems.com DEC 3 0 1998 CITY OF SAN BEANARDINO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT December 29, 1998 Ms. Deborah Woldruff, Associate Planner City of San Bernardino Development Services Department 300 N. "D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 RE: Casa Ramona Project -Revised Scope to Work Dear Ms. Deborah: U.S. MAIL Ultrasystems Environmental Incorporated (Ultrasystems) is pleased to submitthis revised scope ofwork and schedule in support of a contract to perform environmental services associated with the pendin, Casa Ramona project in the City of San Bernardino. This scope of work is consistent with the Major Tasks I.0 and 2.0 identified in Attachment C of our proposal submitted to the City on August Z0, 1998. As discussed previously the Casa Romano project has been divided into three phases: Phase I -Section 106 Documentation, NEPA/CEQA documentation in support historic resources evaluations; Phase H -Architectural Design for the Casa Ramona and land use permit processing; and Phase III -Demolition and Construction. The accompanying scope ofwork (attached) outlines the scope of services for preparing documentation for Phase I project development, which we presently believe to be required in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)/California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, and the City's implementing guidelines. Since the proposed project, as moditied to include three phases, is in the early stages of development and site-specific information is not currently available (e.g., the need and/or extent of demolition, construction requirements), we recommend preparation of a tiered Environmental Assessment/FONSI that satisfies [he requirements of _'4 CFR Part X8.15 (Tiering). The document would be prepared in accordance with Format I contained in the HUD publication "Enviranmenta/RevrewsuttheCornrnunitt-Level"(HUD-399-CPD). The revised scope ofwork is comprised oftwo primary elements: (l) Programmatic Environmental Assessment (EA) and Initial Study (IS): and ('_) Section 106 Documentation. At this time, it is our understanding thaC Environmental studies will focus on providing sufficient documentation to determine National Register eligibility of Casa Ramona School: CORPORATE HEAD QCARTERS: 6 Jenneq Suite 210, Irvine, California 92618-3811 • (949) 788-4900 • Eax: (949) 788-4901 INLAND EMPIRE: 1269 Pomona Road, Suite t02, Corona. California 917211-7158 • (909) 340-2300 • Fas: (909) 279-9609 ' X999.19 ~ ~ ~ ' _ Ms. Deborah Woldruff, Associate Planner City of San Bernardino December 29, 1998 Pnge 2 NEPA/CEQA documentation atthe programmatic level for Phase I. Focused environmental studies will be conducted in support of Phase II (design) and Phase III (demolition and construction) project development at a later date and may require separate environmental review. Based on a review of the potential direct and indirect effects of the proposed project, the project does not appear to constitute a "federal action" requiring preparation of an E(S, for the following reasons: • The proposed action does not approach or exceed thresholds established by HUD relating to construction, removal, or demolition of housing; The proposed action does not result in cumulative effects that may be considerable; and Provided that appropriate mitigation is implemented in consultation with the SHPO, the proposed action would not result in an "adverse effect determination" regarding the modification to the Casa Ramona School, in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. SCHEDULE Based on a review of the requested services, Ultrasystems expects to submit a screencheck draft environmental document and Section 106 documentation to the City within eight (8) weeks of notice to proceed. Should you have any questions regarding our scope of work, please contact me at your earliest convenience. Respectfully submitted, G' " ~ Dou;las B. Stroup Project Manager Enclosure: (l) cc: B. Lindsay' revised scope of work 12.?8.«pd ~~ 1999;19 Page 3 SCOPE OF WORK TO PREPARE PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INITIAL STUDY FOR THE CASA RAMONA SCHOOL BUILDING PHASE I SCOPE OF SERVICES: Environmental Assessment/Initial 5tudy Prepare programmatic tiered Environmental Assessment (EA)/[nitial study ([S) for Phase I project development. The environmental documentation will be prepared in accordance with 24 CFR Part 58 and will comply with the outline contained in the HUD publication "Em~ironmental Reviews at the Community Level"(HUD-399-CPD). The document would contain a qualitative analysis of: (1) air quality; (2) noise; (3) water quality, hydrology, and surface water; (4) biological resources, including threatened and endangered species and wetlands; (5) traffic and circulation; and (6) hazards and hazardous materials. An impact determ ination regarding these environmental resources will be based on review of existing literature, site review(s), and review of other environmental documents prepared in the vicinity of the project. The EA will contain the following elements: (1) Executive Summary; (3) Summary of Mitigation Measures and Findings; (3) Expanded Project Description; (4) NEPA Statutory Checklist; (5) Environmental Assessment; (6) Project Alternatives; and (7) Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Pro_ram Matrix. The IS will be appended to the EA and will be prepared in accordance with the City of San Bernardino's regulations implementing CEQA. Environmental impacts would be discussed in the environmental checklist format. 2. Scoping. Ultrasystems will participate in one (I) scoping meetine to discuss the range of issues to be examined in the EA,~IS. 3. Prepare documentation in supportofSectionl06compliancewiththeNationalHistoricPreservation Act of 1966. The documentation will be a narrative report following the guidelines of the Secretary of the Interior for Section 106 consultation. The purpose of Section 106 consultation is to provide the SHPO sufficient information in order to make a determination of National Register eligibility for the Casa Ramona School. d. Public Hearing. Ultrasystems will participate in up to four (4) public hearing(s)/meeting(s) before either the Planning Commission or the City Council. 5. Ultrasystems will review City-prepared documents (e.g., notices 1. Section 106 Consultation The study will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of both Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (36 CFR Part 800) and Appendix K of [he California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Unless otherwise directed, [he consultation will be coordinated through the office of the California State 1999119 Page 4 Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO). The data generated by this study will be adequate for incorporation to into the EA/IS. The effort required to produce the Section 106 Consultation with the associated Department of Parks and Recreation evaluation forms (DPR 523 Series) may be conveniently divided into the following three categories: 1. Research 2. Archaeological/Architectural Study 3. Report/Forms Each of these efforts is described in some detail below. 1. Research. The research element of the project will start with the procurement of a records search from the Archaeological Information Center at the San Bernardino County Museum. The records search will serve three purposes: (1) it will provide locations and descriptions of all previously recorded prehistoric and historic archaeological sites in the area. (2) it will provide identifications of any local structures which are included on the National Register of Historic Places and the California State Historic Resources Inventory and (3) it will list all local properties designated as California Historical Landmarks and California Points of Historic Interest. A review of the Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps housed in the California Room of the Feldheym Central Library will also be performed. These late l9th and early 20th century maps are invaluable for determining locations of potential historic importance in urban settings. Other map research will entail a review of all historic city plats as well as War Department and USGS topographic sheets. The map research will be supplemented by a thorough literature review of the project area. The purpose of this element is to glean both standard references and historic documents for information regarding locations of prehistoric and historic interest. Lastly, construction dates for the Casa Ramona School will be sought. This information will be obtained from either the San Bernardino County Archives or the San Bernardino Assessors Office. 2. Archaeological/Architectural Study. The study will include the following: (a) Perform awalk-over survey of the Casa Ramona grounds; (b) Prehistoric Archaeological Resources: In the event that previously unknown archaeological resources are discovered, they will be recorded on [he appropriate forms (DPR 523C), copies of which will be forwarded to the Information Center at the San Bernardino County Museum. The condition and integrity of each resource located during the survey will be assessed to the maximum extent that such an assessment is possible on the basis of surface observation. In the event that one or more sites are found which cannot be reliably assessed on the basis ofthe survey project, a specific program for acquiring the needed information will be recommended. In addition, the following task will be performed: (c) structures dating to 19-46 and earlier: The Casa Ramona School was constructed in 192 and therefore is of sufficient age to merit historical consideration. A determination ofeligibility for the National Register of Historic Places as well as forthe California Register of Historical Resources will be made as a component of this project. Furthermore, the structure will be recorded (or updated as the case may be) on DPR 5236 forms and photographed in black and white. A full ., 1999-19 ~ . r Page 5 description of the school will appear in the report. Additionally: (d) Later ?0th Century Structures (1947-present): All buildings less than 50 years old located on the school grounds will be listed together with their addresses, construction date (if available) and current uses. However, other than compiling an inventory of these buildings and structures, no additional information will be provided since they are too recent to be regarded as potentially important historic resources pursuant to government criteria. 3. Report/Forms. An illustrated narrative report will be compiled on the basis ofthe study. The final sections ofthe document will contain determinations of eligibility for the National Register and the California Register for the Casa Ramona School. Furthermore, all appropriate DPR Forms will be appended.