Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutArnel Retail Group - 1997-03-03CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CONNIE BROCKWAY CITY CLERK LETTER OF TRA.NS1NHTTAL OF ITEM APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL/ REDEVELOPAIENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH DATE: August 22, 2000 TO: Arnel Retail Group ]came 949 South Coast Drive, Suite 600 Street Costa Mesa, CA 92626. City, State, Zip ATTENTION: Rudy J . Baldoni DEPARTMENT: REGARDING: Amendment No. 2 to the Reimbursement Agreement for Planning Serv. See Attached Action Agenda Item E-t 9 Date of Approval 8-7-00 Enclosed For Your Records Is An Executed Copy Of The Above Referenced Agenda Item. Remarks: 4 aAdw;�— Connie Brockway City Clerk , Attachments: Action Agenda Page x CC: H. Zelefsky Agreement x RCA Planning x Name Department D. Bankey Planning Name Department Department Name Department Name Risk Management Dept. RCA x RCA RCA RCA Bonds Deed x Agreement x Agreement Agreement Agreement Insurance Other Insurance Other Insurance Other Insurance Other Insurance Ins=nce Other STetsphone: 714-53"227! n u jNi�'�; Council/Agency Meeting Held: Deferred/Continued to: pproved ❑ C nd i 8 inallA A roved ❑ Denie 3W,-fAy rk' Signature ouncil Meeting Date: August 7, 2000 Department ID Number: Pl_04-21 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR ACTION _-�- N - SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS SUBMITTED BY: RAY SILVER, City Administrator Gp PREPARED BY: HOWARD ZELEFSKY, Director of Planning SUBJECT: Approve Amendment No. 2 to the Reimbursement Agreement between the City of Huntington Beach and Arnel Retail Group For Professional Planning Services Statement of Issue, Funding Source, Recommended Action, Alternative Action(s), Analysis, Environmental Status, Attachment(s) Statement of Issue: Transmitted for City Council consideration is Amendment No. 2 to the Reimbursement Agreement between the City and Arnel Retail Group, which has been prepared by the City Attorney. Approval of Amendment No. 2 will allow Arnel to continue to help defray the City's cost of additional work, which could not have been reasonably foreseen at the time of the initial agreement, for completion of Environmental Impact Report No. 97-1 for the Crest View School Site. Funding Source: } f Amendment No. 2 to the Reimbursement Agreement between the City and Arnel requires the Developer to help defray costs incurred by the City for completion of the Crest View School Site EIR No. 97-1. The Developer, Arnel Retail Group, shall deposit funds in the amount of $20,341.26 with the Citywithin ten (10) days following adoption of this agreement by the City Council. Recommended Actions: Motion to: 1. "Approve Amendment No. 2 to the Reimbursement Agreement between the City of Huntington Beach and Arnel Retail Group in the amount of $20,341.26 to cover additional professional planning services to complete EIR 97-1 for the Crest View School Site, and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign." 2. "Appropriate funds in the amount of $20,341.26 to complete EIR No. 97-1 for the Crest View School Site." q 9REQUEST FOR ACTION 0 MEETING DATE: August 7, 2000 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL00-21 Alternative Actions: City Council may make the following alternative motions: "Deny the request for Amendment No. 2 to the Reimbursement Agreement between the City and Arnel Retail Group." 2. "Continue the item and direct Staff accordingly." Analysis: A. Background_ The focus of this RCA is to allow the City Council an opportunity to evaluate staffs request for approval of Reimbursement Agreement Amendment No. 2 between the City and Arnel Retail Group, which allows the Developer to continue defraying costs incurred by the City for completion of Environmental Impact Report No. 97-1 for the Crest View School Site. On March 3, 1997, the City Council approved a Contract between the City and PCR and a Reimbursement Agreement between the City and Arnel for preparation of Environmental Impact Reports for the Crest View School Site and the Rancho View School Site. The original Contract and Reimbursement Agreement covered environmental consulting services for both closed elementary schools; however, applications were submitted and work originally commenced only for the Crest View School Site. This RCA is also to advise the City Council that those sections of the original reimbursement agreement relating to Developer's reimbursement funds for the Rancho View School Site have been cancelled because the property owner, Ocean View School District, terminated its contract with Arnel Retail Group to develop the Rancho View School Site. Subsequent to City Council approval of the Original Contract and Reimbursement Agreement, PCR incurred an unanticipated level of inter -coordination between the City, Arnel, Arnel's subcontractors and PCR's own subcontractors. To cover PCR's increased costs associated with the preparation of an EIR for the Crest View School Site, the City Council, on June 1, 1998, approved Amendment No. 1 to the Contract between the City and PCR, and the Reimbursement Agreement between the City and Arnel. The City received 65 letters encompassing approximately 500 individual comments regarding the Draft EIR. Because public response was so prolific and technically focused, PCR required additional time and effort not originally anticipated to respond to comments and complete the Final EIR. In addition, the number of public hearings at the Planning Commission and City Council was more than originally anticipated since the project was continued a number of times. On July 17, 1998, PCR requested an additional Contract Amendment to cover associated costs in the amount of $20,341.26 for completion of EIR 97-1 for the Crest View School Site. (Attachment No. 3) B. Staff Recommendation: Arnel Retail Group, the project proponent, pre -approved, in writing, all additional expenditures by PCR necessary to complete the Crest View EIR ( Attachments No. 2, 3, 4 and 5), and agreed to help defray said expenditures by entering into Reimbursement Agreement Amendment No. 2 with the City. Staff PLOD-21 -2- 7124/00 11:55 AM *REQUEST FOR ACTION 0 MEETING DATE: August 7, 2000 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL00-21 recommends the City Council approve Reimbursement Agreement Amendment No. 2 between the City and Arnel Retail Group, and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign. C. Council Policy Renarding _Requests For An Appropriation_ Of Funds: As adopted by -the City Council in March 1998, all requests for appropriation of funds must meet one of the following criteria; 1) The request is for an unanticipated emergency, 2) The request is required to -implement labor negotiations, or 3) The request will be offset by related new revenues. The new appropriations being requested will -be offset by related new revenues from Amendment No. 2 ' to the Reimbursement Agreement between the City and Arnel Retail Group, the project proponent. Environmental Status: Projects over which public agencies exercise ministerial authority, such as an amendment to a Reimbursement Agreement are categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15300.1. Attachment: 1. Reimbursement Agreement Amendment No. 2 between the City of Huntington Beach and Arnel Retail Group for professional planning services associated with completion of EIR No. 97-1 for the Crest View School Site. 2. Letter from City to Arnel dated July 21, 1998. 3. ' Letter from City to Arnel dated October 26, 1998. 4. Letter from City to Arnel dated December 9, 1998. 5. Letter from City to Arnel dated December 29, 1998. 6. Fiscal Impact Report for the Reimbursement Agreement. RCA Author: Duane R. Bankey PL00-21 -3- 7124100 11:55 AM • 0 -11.1M.Ur .. . ...... . AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND ARNEL RETAIL GROUP FOR THE PREPARATION OF TWO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTS THIS AMENDMENT is made and entered into the 7th day of August , 2000, by and between the CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, a California municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City", and AR'vEL RETAIL GROUP, INC., a California corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Developer." WHEREAS, City and Developer are parties to that certain agreement, dated March 3, 1997, entitled "Reimbursement Agreement Between the City of Huntington Beach and Arnel Retail Group for the Preparation of Two Environmental Impact Reports," as amended, which agreeement shall hereinafter be referred to as the "Original Agreement;" and Since the execution of the Original Agreeement, City has incurred additional costs in the preparation of the Environmental Impact Report for Developer's Crest View Commercial Development Project, -and Developer has decided to not pursue the preparation of the Environmental Impact Report for the Rancho View Development Project; and Pursuant to the Original Agreement, Developer has agreed to reimburse the City for said costs; and City and Developer wish to amend the Original Agreement to reflect the additional costs to be reimbursed to the City by Developer, and the deletion of the preparation of the Environmental Impact Report for the Rancho View Commercial Development Project, NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by City and Developer as follows: 1. ADDITIONAL REIMBURSEMENT Developer has previously paid the amount of One Hundred Thirty-one Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy-six and 25/100 Dollars (S131,876.25). Within ten (10) days following the adoption of this Amendment No. 2 by the City Council, Developer shall pay the additional amount of Tweny Thousand Three Hundred Forty-one and 26/100 Dollars ($20,341.26). The new estimated cost for the preparation of the EIR for the Crest View Commercial Development Project shall be One Hundred Fifty-two Thousand Two Hundred Seventeen and 51/100 Dollars ($152,217.51). Developer has decided that it will not submit application for entitlement processing for the Rancho View Commercial Development Project, as discussed in the Original Agreement; therefore, no payment of the estimated cost of the EIR for the Rancho View project shall be required pursuant to the Original Agreement. g*2000-Agree:Amend 2 - Arnel rls 00-485 2. REAFFIRN IATION Except as specifically modified herein, all other terms and conditions of the Original Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed by their authorized officers on the date first above written. ARNEL RETAIL GROUP, INC. a Cali ja corp ration By: Its: ' cle one) By: Its: (circle one) CITY OF HUNTI GTON BEACH, a municipal corporation of the State of California Mayor or type name) eck�'. t ATTEST anlPresident ice President City Clerk - APPROVED $' APPROVED AS TO FO or type name) )Ychief Financial Officer,' l' + ity rn� xrG � ` `•��� oo R,y� � i etary-Treasurer gL►Li W Z"1 REVIEWED AND APPROVED: "Al A J "4 /..Yw Ah) - y Administrator 2 g:4:2000-AgrwAmend 2 - Arne[ rls 00-485 INITI TED AND APPROVED: it ctor of Planning • • ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California • County of SS. On before e, K - KeA (� (DATE) ' I • (NOTARY) personally appeared S[G1'ER(S) personally known to me - OR- ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory • evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) • is/are subscribed to the within instrument and • acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed • the same in his/her/their authorized • capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their • signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), • or the entity upon behalf of which the • person(s) acted, executed the instrument. KENNEDY WITNESS my hand and official al. • Comm. # 1128601 NOTARY PUBIIC•CALIFORNIA • Orange County • My Comm. Expires March 5, 2001 • NOTAR S SIGNATURE • • OPTIONAL INFORMATION • The information below is not required by law. However, it could prevent fraudulent attachment of this acknowl- edgment to an unauthorized document. • CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER (PRINCIPAL) DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT INDIVIDUAL Zk� CORPORATE OFFICER E��NNe t i TITLE OR TYPE ODO?_'01V_FEffr —' TITLP(S) ❑ PARTNER(S) • ❑ ATTORNEY -IN -FACT Z • ❑ TRUSTEE(S) NUMBER OF PAGES • ❑ GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR • ❑ OTHER: DATE OF DOCUMENT SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: tiA. E 4F PER aN( O E Y( 5) • OTHER APA 1/94 VALLEY -SIERRA, 800-362-3369 V I I &G' au LJ. L7 r1% 1 i '1 0.1 .+a v llia:•saUV0, r.0 Llf 6 WJ V V 1 City. of Huntington Beach 2ll00 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92649 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNTTY DEVELOPMENT BuITdkV 536.5241 Ptenn i&527/ July 2I, 1998 Greg McClelland Arnel Retail Group 949 South Coast Drive, Suite 4600 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 SUBJECT: CREST VIEW SCHOOL SITE - BUDGET Dear Greg. Tim", M4,-V", �Ak W3-11-4 - %S4o As you know, the City Council approved the contract amendment requested by PCR on June 1, 1998. To date we have not received payment from your office of the $25,455.00 to cover the cost of the additional professional services. Please submit payment of the contract amendment request immediately so that we may maintain the current public hearing schedule. The Contract Scope of Work discussed the fact that public reaction to the project would be unpredictable_ In the event that public responses were greater than expected, the contract specified that PCR and staff would discuss options and adjustments to the Final EIR work program. This letter is also to inform you that the number and complexity of comments received regarding the Draft EIR in combination with the scheduling time necessary to maintain the public hearing schedule results in a request by PCR for additional fuunds. PCR anticipates that the Response to Comments effort may generate a need for an additional $15,000.00 to adequately respond to more than 60 letters with approximately 500 individual comments received on the Draft EIR. PCR has assured staff that additional funds will only be billed if in fact the current budget is exceeded during this preparation time for the public hearings. In addition, Planning staff has requested attendance of the traffic engineer and the fiscal impact analyst at the Planning Commission and City Council public hearings. Since time for these subconsultants was not speicified in the original contract, PCR also requests additional funds to cover atteodance at the appropriate public hearings. Please assist staff in maintaining the current schedule by signing below in acknowledgement of the following issues: 07/22/98 15:25 FAX 1 7557 3129 AR.4'ELDEVELOPHENT 002 I, Greg McClelland, presenting Arnel Retail Group, acknowledge that payment of $25,455.00 shall forwarded to the Planning staff at the City of Huntington Beach irstmediately that PCR, the City's EIR consultant, requests additional payment (up to $15,000.00 o complete the Response to Comments portion of the Final EIR. The additional funds that may be billed are necessary due to the number and complexity of the public comments received on the project. In addition, supplementary funds will be necessary to cover the cost certain subconsultants during public hearing meetings.L o 6 - I-P— pY�,� o Signature: Date: �i 1 Gr g M elland, Arnel Retail Group It should be noted that staff has discussed this latest contract issue with PCR in detail and together we have adjusted workload and responsibilities in an effort to complete the Final EIR tasks within the existing budget. Although we have administratively shifted responsibility for some items PCR has identified the above request for contract amendment. A copy of the signed and executed Contract Amendment No. I as well as PCR's recent contract amendment letter has been attached for your review. As we arranged yesterday, copies of the comment letters received for the project will be available for pick-up shortly. Please sign and return the above letter by fax as soon as possible so that we may proceed with the current schedule. The funds approved under Contract Amendment No. 1 should be received in our office immediately. Please telephone me at (714) 536-5596 if you have any questions on the above issues. Sincerely, U Jane Madera Associate Planner cc: Ray Silver, Acting City Administrator Melanie S. Fallon, Community Development Director Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director David Biggs, Economic Development Director Herb Fauland, Senior Planner JoAnn Hadfield, PCR James Tarwater, OVSD 0 (&%cmtVielgpa971 nn) 0 e 'CirfI NP.el� ., f i.�d �f +�_ a7l - _r i ME FJ 1 _ __ b _ - Nf�ik�IW.B.- 10/26/98 16:07 FAX 1 714 557 3129 AR`ELDEVELOPMEN7 Dot 26 19 01:32p Ping Division 7140 4-1540 Z 002/003 P-2 04-4 Iff i f Huntington Beach City o � 2000 MA[N STREET CALIFORNIA 92MS DEPARTMENT of COMMUN17Y DEVELOPMENT Building US-5241 TNT"Ur 26, 199e"' Greg McClelland Arnel Retail Cnoup 949 South Coast Drive, Suite #600 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 ' SUB.TECT: CREST VIEW SCHOOL SITE - BUDGET Dear Greg: The previous budget augmentation requested by PCR was authorized by you on July 17, 1998 with the caveat that you approve attendance of subconsultants at upcoming Planning Commission and City Council meetings on a time and materials basis. Last week, I left you a voice mail message requesting authori2ation for Stan Hoffman's attendance at the October 27, 1999 Planning Commission meeting, however, I have not heard from you regarding this issue. In addition, since then we have requested Mr. Hoffman review the critique of his report submitted by Crest View United and be prepared to respond, if necessary, at the Planning Commission meeting. Please authorize attendance at the hearing and review of the independent fiscal study by signing and returning the below acknowledgment by fax. 1, Cheg McClelland, representing Arnel Retail Group, authorize Stanley R. Hoffman to review the independent fiscal study submitted by Crest View United in preparation to respond to questions by the Planning Commission. I also authorize Mr. Hoffman's attendance at the Planning Commission meeting of October �7, 1998. 1 understand that 1 will be billed on a time and materials basis for Mr. Hoffman's cost in reviewing the study and attending Denmeating. Signatwe: ' �-Date:g %cClalland. Arnel Retail Group Please note that in an effort to save expenditure of fiends we have not requested attendance of RK.TK• traffic cnnsultant at the next Planning, Commission meeting. Instead, we will have city staff in attendance to respond to all traffic questions. • 3 10/25/98 10:08 FAX 1 714 357 3128 ARNELDEVELOPHEN-r I@003/O03 �Ct 26 19 01:32p Plenin6 Division 714404-1540 P. 3- Please sign and return the above letter by fax as soon as possible so that we may proceed with the current schedule. You may telephone me at (714) 536.5596 if you have any questions on the above issues. Sincerely, rMte Planner cc: Ray Silver, Acting City Administrator Melanie S. Fallon, Community Development Director Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director David Biggs, Economic Development Director Herb Fauland, Senior Planner ;oAnn Hadfield, PCR James Taiwater, OVSD I (�•lcr�uviel�pa9 7 l sit i • I C x i 1 -� I n 1. 1 E Al l� 1 _r - �_il: 12/10/98 07:20 FAX 1 714 557 3129 AR\ELDEVELOPHEN7 Dec 09 go 1C:58a t�Rdminist;rati.on 91I74-1649 Q 002/003 P•2 City of Huntington Beach =0 AMA N STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNRY DEVELOPMENT BuOdinggg 53gau41 Pge' catsiber 9, 1998 - - / Greg McClelland Amel Retail Group 949 South Coast Drive, Suite #600 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 SUBJECT: CREST VIEW SCHOOL SITE —APPLICATION STATUS AND DVDGET Dear Greg: The EIR, General Plan Amendment, and your appeal of the Zoning Map Amendment have been scheduled for a special City Council meeting on December I4, I999. Since the Planning Commission denied the land use changes and never acted on the conditional use permit request for new construction, the Council meeting will be limited in scope. The City Council will only review the proposed land use amendments and EIR and not the development request for the Wal- Mart and three retnil/restaurant pads. The meeting will be it public hearing and the Crest View School is the only item on the agenda. Staff reports will be available through the City Clerk's Office on December 10, 1998. The previous budget augmentation requested by PCR was authorized by you on July 17,' 1998 with the caveat that you approve attendance of subconsultunts at upcoming Planning Commission and City Council mcetings on a time and materials basis. In late October, you approved Stan Hoffman's attendance at the October 27, 1998 Planning Commission4neeting, and his review of the critique of his report submitted by Crest View United. Since it is anticipated that the Council will focus on economic issues at the December 14, 1998 meeting, we are again requesting your authorization for Stan Hoffman's preparation work and attendance at the upcoming Council meeting. The City has requested that Mr. Hoffinan respond to additional economic questions and statements submitted by the public at recent Council meetings (see attached) and to provide a written explanation regarding the difference in economic projections between the Wc3untinster and Huntington Bench Wal-Marts. Mr. Hoffman requests that we allocate up to six hours for the written work requested in addition to the time of his attendance at the meeting. StatTalso requests that you authorize additional meeting time (approximately 2 hours) for JoAnn Hadfield regarding recent open space issues and to assist staff in coordinating uur council presentation. Please authorize the above additional expenditures by signing and returning the below acknowledgment by fax. 12/10/98 07:21 FAX . 1 T1 55't 3120 ARNELDEVELOPKENT• 74-i848 0003/003. Dec 09 Be 10:58a • fidministration .7 p.3' 1, Greg McClelland, representing Amel Retail Group, authorize Stanley R..Hotiman to review and respond to additional economic issues and questions, -to attend the City Council meeting of December 14, 1998, and I autlorize autrAnce by JDAnn Hadfield at one additional gaff meeting. 1 undeistand that I will bWilled on a time and materials basis. Dat : I1' TO Ielland, Arnel Retail Group Please note that staff` has been invoiced for the total amount of monies received from Amel, which includes the original contract amount and the first contract amendment We have also been invoiced for the additional $15,000 authorized by you to complete the Final EIR and Response to Comments as well as additional invoices for time and materials for preparation and attendance at Planning Commission meetings. It will be necessary to process a second contract amendment through the City Council in order to collect the additional S 15,000 plus additional time and materials expenditures authorized by you. Therefore, staff htts determined that it will be more time and cost effective to wait until the project nears completion and then request one contract amendment for the total additional cost of the projeut, In the meantime, we will continue to request authorization from Arne) for tiny additional costs lncurred to complete the project through the public hearing stage. Plcase sign and return the above letter by fax as soon as. possible so that we may proceed with the current schedule. You may telephone meat (114) 536 $596 if yuu have any questions on the above issues. Sincerely, ,lane Madera Associate Planner cc: Ray Silver, City Administrator Melanie S. Fallon, Assistant City Administrator Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director David Biggs, Econotaic Development Director Herb Fa,uland, Senior Planner JOAnn Hadfield, PCR James Tarwater, QVSD t (X'%&M1Md=pa9 T t n) 12/09/98 y .Is ENT.- 7 1. M 4. i j -yill i! i • City of Huntington Beach 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Building 636-5241 Planning 536%Wl December 29, 1998 Greg McClelland Arnel Retail Group 949 South Coast Drive, Suite #600 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 SUBJECT: CREST VIEW SCHOOL SITE —APPLICATION STATUS AND BUDGET Dear Greg: The EIR, General Plan Amendment, and your appeal of the Zoning Map Amendment were approved by the City Council on December 14, 1998. Since.the Planning Commission denied the' land use changes and never acted on the conditional use permit request for new construction, the Commission must now review and act on the proposed development. We have scheduled a public hearing before the Planning Commission on January 26, 1999. We also anticipate a brief status update report to the Planning Commission during a study session on January 12, 1999. In order to remain on schedule for the January 26, 1999 public hearing the following items need to be addressed: Although the City Council approved the Statement of Overriding Considerations for EIR No. 97-1 and stated that 10-20% would be a reasonable range for non-taxable sales items, staff continues to recommend that a maximum of 10% of the Wal-Mart's retail floor area be devoted to display of non-taxable sales items. Please contact us as early as possible if you wish to discuss this issue. Keep in mind that the Planning Commission subcommittee recommends that the business be limited to a maximum of 10% of retail floor area instead of gross floor area as in staff s recommendation. 2. Staff s position regarding processing of the Sign Code Exception remains the same. Since the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code prohibits off -site signs, the application can not be processed as currently submitted. The application currently on file is incomplete as an improved vehicular access to the Der Wienerschnitzel property is not part of the proposed site plan. If you plan on completing the application and proposing vehicular access to the Der Wienerschnitzel site, a revised site plan must be received in our office no later than January 7, 1999. Although the City Attorney's Office has indicated that the long- 5 term lessee, the Galardi Group, may authorize the sign application, it is advisable that you consult with the actual property owners since we have received written communication and testimony at recent public hearings regarding their concerns with the project. In addition; you must decide if you wish the signs to be analyzed as one integrated shopping center or four individual parcels, but not both. If you choose to pursue the freestanding sign on the adjacent parcel with an improved vehicular access, staff will analyze and process the signs as one integrated parcel. 3. Staff s position regarding all recommended conditions of approval -as outlined in the October 27, 1998 Planning Commission staff report remains the same. If you would like to submit any other information for consideration by staff or the Planning Commission please do so by January 7, 1999. 4. Due to the additional entitlement processing time now required by the actions of the Planning Commission and City Council, attendance at additional public hearings by PCR and their subconsultants is not covered by the current contract amendments. We anticipate requesting attendance at the upcoming Planning Commission meeting by Greg Broughton, JoAnn Hadfield, Bob Mantey - Noise Consultant, and RKJK, and we may request attendance by Stan Hoffman. There is also the possibility that the decision of the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council requiring an extended processing timeline. The City has now been invoiced for and has paid to PCR all of the money currently submitted by Amel. In addition, staff has received invoices from PCR for monies over the amount. currently received from Amel. AIthough Arnel previously agreed to pay approximately $15,000.00 to cover the cost of preparing the Final EIR and Response to Comments as well as authorized attendance at public hearings by certain subconsultants and review of additional fiscal material by Stan Hoffman, that money Vas not yet been requested by the City. In my previous communication to you, I indicated that it would be more time and cost effective to wait until the project nears completion and then request one contract amendment for the total additional cost of the project. However, in light of the new project schedule and to compensate PCR for work already performed, we would like to request a contract amendment that covers future attendance and tasks required to complete the EIR and project effort. Instead of waiting for the project to be completed, we would. like to request a contract amendment as soon as possible if this is acceptable to Arnel and the City Attorney's Office. With Arnel's approval, we will request one contract amendment without a certain dollar figure but will continue to obtain approval from Arnel for additional tasks and attendance at meetings not covered under the current contract. The City's intent is to return to the City Council with only one additional contract amendment, to collect payment from Amel promptly, and to compensate PCR for work completed in a timely manner. • (g:krestviel8pa471 uu) 2 12/29/98 'Y- I Please telephone me at (714) 536-5596 if you have any questions on the above issues or if you would like to schedule a meeting to further discuss the status of the project. Sincerely, Jane Madera Associate Planner cc: Ray Silver, City Administrator Melanie S. Fallon, Assistant City Administrator Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director David Biggs, Economic Development Director. Herb Fauland, Senior Planner JoAnn Hadfield, PCR James Tarwater, OVSD 0 C7 (gACMStviOIVa9?tUU) 3 12/29198 0 0 '71 ZTI. .., W-1 ME A&M lw�!' 2%.�! CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMUNICA TION To: Ray Silver, City Administrator From: John Reekstin, Director of Administrative Services Subject: FIS 2000-54 — Reimbursement Agreement Amendment with Arnel Retail Group Date: July 19, 2000 As required by Resolution 4832, this Fiscal Impact Statement has been prepared for "Approve Amendment No.2 to the Reimbursement Agreement between the City of Huntington Beach and Arnel Retail Group for Professional Planning Services". If the City Council approves this request (total appropriation $20,342) there will be no effect on the City's unreserved, undesignated General Fund Balance since the amount is funded by a reimbursement from the developer. 1//Z1 #hn Reekstin, Director of Administrative Services RCA ROUTING STiEET INITIATING DEPARTMENT: PLANNING SUBJECT: APPROVE AMENDMENT NO.2 TO THE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND ARNEL RETAIL GROUP FOR PROFESSIONAL PLANNING SERVICES COUNCIL MEETING DATE: August 7, 2000 '. ` RCA'_ATTACHMENTS :.STATUS1... Ordinance (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Not Applicable Resolution (wlexhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Not Applicable Tract Map, Location Map and/or other Exhibits Not Applicable Contract/Agreement (wlexhibits if applicable) (Signed in full by the City Attomey) Attached Subleases, Third Party Agreements, etc. (Approved as to fomn by City Attomey) Not Applicable Certificates of Insurance (Approved by the City Attomey) Not Applicable Financial Impact Statement (Unbudget, over $6,000) Attached Bonds (If applicable) Not Applicable Staff Report (If applicable) Not Applicable Commission, Board or Committee Report (If applicable) Not Applicable Findings/Conditions for Approval and/or Denial Not Applicable EXPLANATION:.iFOR!MISS ING ATTACHMENTS REVIEWED'._ = �., ,'RETU.RNED . :FORWARDED . Administrative Staff 7 Zg 6ur q L2{ } ( G ) Assistant City Administrator (Initial) ( ) { } City Administrator (Initial) ( ) { } City Clerk ( ) E°XPLANATIOW.'FO.R :RETURN:;OF ITEM RCA Author: HZ:SH:HF:JJ:DB REQUEST FOR LATE SUBMITTAL OF RCA Department: RCA A-yKLL Council Meetina Date: AAdVIAf 7, 10M Date of This Requeft JK1q 98, Z20V W W REASON ny Is this RCA being submitted late?): L"A 4e dbT**1a tT EXPLANATION Ony Is this RCA necessary to this agenda?): F-ZX Ar wv.4- gnitu" c nk q- WA& 1W CL 7kL 0 fb�i- Xtt Of- 4� Aid Poe �w AW - Ak, gouz CONSEQUENCES (How shall delay of this RCA adversely IMact the I �. #WY4 wqo-� OL- 4t ytk 4� YO Y��IkA-C Initials 1equired v RaSilver Approved 13 Denied 0 Approved [) Denied Michael Uberuaga 419 Y-v f`7% % orl gltul Council/Agency Meeting Held: ,�//,P 99 filed /`"� � 600.eo Deferred/Continued to: �c,,t.,�,'Je 'rr" 6a0•/0 Cmay.��,,, /q�} >n 4 ❑ Approved Conditionally ❑ Dema- 's Signature C*.�—tox.a4XV4c.�/aft � e Z Pouncil Meeting Date: May 18, 1998 Department ID Number: CD 98-14 moxoy,ffn 7 ° CITY OF H_UNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION r �l SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Qpm` SUBMITTED BY: RAY SILVER, Acting City Administratoreedv� D n '' cs 77 PREPARED BY: MELANIE S. FALLON, Community Development Direc,64�;� C� J SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT WITH PLANNING CONSULTANTS RESEARCH AND AMENDMENT TO THE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH ARNEL RETAIL GROUP FOR PREPARATION OF THE CREST VIEW SCHOOL SITE EIR Statement of Issue, Funding Source, Recommended Action, Alternative Action(s), Analysis, Environmental Status, Statement of Issue: Transmitted for your consideration is a request to amend the existing contract between the City of Huntington Beach and Planning Consultants Research (PCR) and the reimbursement agreement between the City and Arnel Retail Group (Amel) for preparation of the Crest View School Site Environmental Impact Report (EIR). PCR has requested the contract amendment for additional work for preparation of the EIR, which could not have been reasonably foreseen at the time of the initial proposal and contract execution. Staff has worked with PCR and the applicant in establishing an appropriate scope of work for preparation of the EIR and is submitting the contract amendment reflecting the additional work and associated costs, for City Council approval. The amendment to the contract is for additional services in an amount not to exceed $25,455.00 which when added to the original contract cost of $106,421.25, brings the total contract amount to $131,876.25. Funding Source: Consulting costs are to be borne by Arnel through approval of the amendment to the reimbursement agreement. Therefore, there will be no effect on the City's budget. R�QUEST FOR COUNCIL ACT& MEETING DATE: May 18, 1998 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 98-14 Recommended Action: Motion to: 1. "Approve Amendment No. 1 to the professional services agreement between the City of Huntington Beach and PCR for additional services in the amount of $25,455.00 to prepare the Crest View School Site Environmental Impact Report, for a total contract fee not to exceed $131,876.25. (Attachment No. 1); and; 2. Approve Amendment No. 1 to the reimbursement agreement between the City of Huntington Beach and Arnel Retail Group for additional consulting services in the amount of $25,455.00 to prepare the Crest View School Site Environmental Impact Report, for a total contract fee not to exceed $131,876.25. (Attachment No. 2)" Alternative Action(s): The City Council may makeithe following motion: "Deny the request for contract amendment and reimbursement agreement amendment and direct staff accordingly." Analysis: Arnel Retail Group submitted an application for approval of a general plan amendment, zoning map amendment, conditional use permit, tentative parcel map, and preparation of an environmental impact report (EIR) for the Crest View School Site. The proposed project consists of a request to amend the land use designations at the closed elementary school site and allow development of a Wal"Mart and three smaller retail pads. The project site is located on the south side of Talbert Avenue approximately 300 feet east of Beach Boulevard. On March 3, 1997, the City Council approved the contract between the City and PCR and the reimbursement agreement between the City and Arnel for preparation of the Crest View School Site EIR as well as preparation of the Rancho View School Site EIR. The original contract and reimbursement agreement covered environmental consulting services for both closed elementary schools, however, applications have been submitted and work commenced only for the Crest View School Site at this time, CD98-14 -2- 05106198 5:00 PM AUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTIN MEETING DATE: May 18, 1998 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 98-14 Since approval of the original contract and reimbursement agreement, PCR has incurred an unanticipated level of inter -coordination between the City, Arnel, Arnel's subcontractors, and PCR's own subconsultants. The additional coordination effort is primarily due to three reasons. First, the project description and technical studies necessary to supplement the EIR were not prepared and submitted to the City in an approvable form in a timely manner. Second, the original scope of work for the Traffic Study did not include analysis of construction related traffic impacts or a traffic signal progression analysis which were subsequently requested by the City. Finally, because of the unanticipated length of time to receive and process all technical studies, it has been necessary for PCR to perform additional project coordination and administration between the City, applicant, and subconsultants. PCR has prepared a request for contract amendment and detailed breakdown of the additional services and associated costs to address the unanticipated work effort, attendance at additional meetings, and overall project coordination not anticipated in the original contract. (See Attachment No. 4). Environmental Status: The selection of a consultant to prepare planning documents does not constitute a project under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and therefore is not subject to CEQA. However, the request to amend the land use designations and allow commercial development of the Crest View School Site will be subject to CEQA and will require preparation of an Environmental Impact Report. The EIR is in the process of being prepared in conjunction with the general plan amendment, zoning map amendment, conditional use permit, and tentative parcel ' map and will comply with the provisions of CEQA. CD98-14 -3- 05/06198 5:00 PM XQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTI6N MEETING DATE: May 18, 1998 City Clerk's Page Number DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 98-14 1. Amendment No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement between the City of Huntington Beach and Planning Consultants Research for Preparation of the Crest View School Site EIR. 2 Amendment No. 1 to the Reimbursement Agreement between the City of Huntington Beach and Arnel Retail Group for Preparation of the Crest View School Site EIR. 3. Insurance Certificates 4. Letter from Planning Consultants Research received and dated December 10, 1997 outlining the additional services and associated costs. 5. Letter from Arnel Retail Group received and dated January 30, 1998 indicating approval of the contract amendment request. CD98-14 -4- 05106/98 5:00 PM Page 8 - Council/Agencyonda - 06/01/98 ID (8) E-6. (City Council) (Deferred From 5/18/98) Amendment To The Contract With Planning. Consultants Research Inc. & Amendment To The Reimbursement Agreement With Arnel Retail Group For Pre aration Of The Crest View Site Environmental Im act Report - s1s Of Talbert Avenue, elo Beach Boulevard (600.10) - 1. Approve Amendment No. 9 to Agreement between the City of Huntington Beach and Planning Consultants Research, Inc. for Preparation of Two Separate Environmental Impact Reports For The Crest View School Site And The Rancho View School Site for additional services in the amount of $25,455.00 to prepare the Crest View School Site Environmental Impact Report for a total contract fee not to exceed $131,876.25 (Attachment No. 2). Submitted by the Community Development Director *** Communication from the Community Development Director dated 5/25/98 titled Draft EIR for Crest View School Site/RCA for PCR Contract Amendment and Arnel Reimbursement Amendment - includes a report on error discovered in the Draft EIR. Communication from the Community Development Director dated 5/29/98 transmitting a letter from PCR, consultant regarding the site plan error in the Draft Environmental Impact Report. [Approved 7-01 E-7. (City Council) Approval Of Final Tract Map- No. 14660 Of Tentative Tract Map No. 14660 With Bonds And Agreements Belmont PLC Land Company - We Corner Of Ellis & Gothard (Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Area) (420.60) -1. Approve Final Tract Map No. 14660 and accept the offer of dedication, improvements, and bonds pursuant to findings and requirements (Attachment No. 1 to the Request for Council Action dated 611/98), and 2: Approve Subdivision Agreement between the City and PLC Land Company and authorize execution by the Mayor and City Clerk. Submitted by the Community Development Director (Faithful Performance Bond, Labor & Material Bond No. 3SM91366900, Monument Bond 3SM91367000 - American Motorist Insurance Co.) ['Approved 7-01 E-8. (Cily Council Approve Final Tract Map No. 15531 Of Tentative Tract Ma No. 15531 With Bonds And Agreements (Cape Ann John Laing Homes -- s/e Corner Of Promenade Parkway And Seagate Drive(Holly Seacliff Specific Plan Area (420.60) --1. Approve Final Tract Map No. 15531 and accept the offer of dedication, improvements, and bonds pursuant to findings and requirements (Attachment No. 1 to the Request for Council Action dated 6/1198), and 2. Approve Subdivision Agreement between the City and John Laing Homes and authorize execution by the Mayor and City Clerk. Submitted by the Community Development Director. (Faithful Performance Bond, Labor & Material Bond #361549 and Monument Bond #3351550 - Seaboard Surety Co.) [Approved 7-0] (8) 0 0 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CONNIE BROCKWAY CITY CLERK CALIFORNIA 92648 LETTER OF TRANSIMITTAL OF ITEM APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL/ REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH DATE: TO:&?S&iZA—&M&2�ATTENTION: Nam � dd, d DEPARTMENT: sA n _ %d 4/ REGARDD;GAi`iWL))"e/>_7 - City, State, Zip See Attached Action Agenda Item —_!D Date of Approval Enclosed For Your Records Is An Executed Copy Of The Above Referenced Agenda Item. Remarks: Connie Brockway City Clerk Attachments: Action Agenda Page V Agreement V Bonds RCA Deed Insurance V Other Nam _ Dcpa nt . RCA f Asrccm Insu Name Ikpartment RCA Agreement Insurance Name Department RCA Agreemem Insurance Name y~ DepartmenRCA Agreement Insurance �a)t� `� Risk Management Dept. Insurance Other Olher Other Other Received by Name - Company Name ; Date GTollowup/coverltr ('relephone: 714.536.5227 ) 0 ��fl'.wr ��'�,�k�. ^ i"x�� .F` ' � € �° a � ,�•yik"� 4 �� �i�: r hi, ......, 0 i C� • AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND ARNEL RETAIL GROUP FOR THE PREPARATION OF TWO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTS THIS AMENDMENT is made and entered into the day of \.7vyj pi , 1998, by and between the CITY OF HUNTII`TGTON BEACH, a California municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City", and ARNEL RETAIL GROUP, INC., a California corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Developer." WHEREAS, City and Developer are parties to that certain agreement, dated March 3, 1997, entitled "Reimbursement Agreement Between the City of Huntington Beach and Arnel Retail Group for the Preparation of Two Environmental Impact Reports," which agreeement shall hereinafter be referred to as the "Original Agreement;" and Since the execution of the Original Agreeement, City has incurred additional costs in the preparation of the Environmental Impact Report for Developer's project; and Pursuant to the Original Agreement, Developer has agreed to reimburse the City for said costs; and City and Developer wish to amend the Original Agreement to reflect the additional costs to be reimbursed to the City by Developer, NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by City and Developer as follows: ADDITIONAL REIMBURSEMENT Developer has previously paid the amount of One Hundred Six Thousand Four Hundred Twenty-one and 25/100 Dollars ($106,421.25). Within ten (10) days following the adoption of this Amendment No. 1 by the City Council, Developer shall pay the additional amount of Tweny-five Thousand Four Hundred Fifty-five Dollars (S25,455.00). The new estimated cost for the preparation of the EIR for the Crest View Commercial Development Project shall be One Hundred Thirty-one Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy-six and 25/100 Dollars ($131,876.25). gA:98-Agree: amnd 1 am rls 98-132 :7 onIal"I V "I 1w, Except as specifically modified herein, all other terms and conditions of the Original Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed by their authorized officers on the date first above ,%NTitten. ARNEL RETAIL GROUP, INC. a California corporation By: 'DRv i D jbA (print or type name) Its: (circle one) Chairma Presiders Vice President ( LZBy jVto (print or type name) Its: (circle one creta >hief Financial Officer/ Asst. Secretary -Treasurer CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, a municipal corporation of the State of California Mayor ATTEST City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Aitornev p I f INITIATED AND APPROVED: Cit, Administrator Director of Com'qKunity Development 2 g*98-Agree:amnd l am rls 98-132 j 'jum u 0 g M+V., ;FAA, Loom 404"W—�_ December 8, 1997 Ms. Jane Madera Associate Planner CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Department of Community Development 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 9Z648 PLANNING CONSULTANTS RESEARCH ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING, POLICY It RESEARCH NEC— � r .DEC 10 1997 DEPARTMENT CF COMM Dr-VELCF;.;�;`JT RE: REQUEST FOR CONTRACT AMENDMENT FOR PREPARATION OF THE CREST VIEW SCHOOL SITE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) Dear Ms. Madera: This letter is to request a contract amendment for additional work for preparation of the Crest View EIR which could not reasonably have been foreseen at the time of our initial proposal and contract execution. Per your letter of September 25, 1997, the City has withheld payment of our July 1997 invoice pending resolution of budget issues. In particular, your letter expressed concern that, although the overall contract amount at that time had not been exceeded, a negative balance was indicated for two of the project tasks (Draft Elk IPCR, Task 5.01 and Draft EIR [RKJK, Task 5.0]) . We have not submitted subsequent invoices pending the resolution of these issues. We are now requesting a contract amendment in the amount of an additional $25,455. The largest portion of this additional cost was incurred due to an unanticipated level of inter -coordination between the City, Arnel, Arnel's subcontractors, and our subconsultants. This increased coordination level has stemmed from the fact that the project and its key supporting materials really were not ready at the time of kick-off for the EIR. Our original proposal was based on our understanding that a "fast -track" schedule was required, and that a detailed project description and the technical reports would be provided to us within a few weeks of project initiation.. Due to several factors, this project was not well-defined at the outset of PCR's involvement, and has been evolving ever since. The following discussion reviews project activities and work effort required beyond the scope of the original contract. Additional cost is specified by task. 233 WItSRIRE BOUtEVARO, SUITE 130 ONE VENTURE, SUITE 150 SANTA M0MICA, CAtIFORNIA 9Q401 1RVINE, CALIFORNIA 92618 TEL 310 451-4488 FAX 310 451-5279 TEL 714 753-7001 FAX 714 753-7002 E-MAIL: PCR@10T.IYET E-MA?E: PCR1@IoT,ku Ms. Jane Madera CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH December 8, 1997 - Page 2 Task 1.0 Project Initiation and Kick -Off Additional cost. $ 0 The Scope of Work completed for this task is consistent with our proposal, and therefore, no amendment is requested. Task 2.0 Data Gathering and Adequacy Assessment Additional cost. $ 0 Within this task description, our proposal (referenced as an Exhibit to the Contract) indicated our understanding that, among others, the following materials/information would be provided: By' Apglicant: • Geotechnical Report • Hydrology Technical Report Complete project description, including statistical summaries, infrastructure, building configuration, heights, materials, parking landscaping, and operational aspects By City,. • Park and Recreation Plan • Project design parameters • List of cumulative projects As discussed under subsequent tasks in this amendment request, several of these items were not provided in a timely manner, were incomplete, were revised one or more times during preparation of the EIR, or required extensive follow-up or independent research (such as project operation information) by PCR. The additional costs incurred due to project delays, and required revisions to EIR text and graphics, are included in the respective tasks which follow. Task 3.0 Project Description Additional Cost. $ I,500 Per our kick-off meeting with the City and Arnel Retail (Arnel) on 4/3197, Arnel was to provide a detailed project description to PCR by 4/18/97. As documented in letters to the applicant from the City, an adequate project description has not been available for PCR's preparation of the Notice of Preparation (NOP) and EIR. The City's letter to ArneI dated 7/2/97 indicates that at that time, -the General Plan Amendment (GPA) and Zoning Map Amendment applications could not be deemed complete, and that inadequate information was available for PCR to adequately Ms. Jane Madera CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH December 8, 1997 - Page 3 describe the project and analyze impacts. Moreover, that letter suggested that submittal of a complete Conditional Use Permit application would facilitate the analysis of the specific proposal in the EIR as opposed to the maximum development which could occur under the GPA. The CUP application was subsequently submitted to the City on 9/8/97. As of 10/7/97, the CUP application had still not been deemed complete by the City, and there are several design and operational aspects of the project to be resolved. The following items have required an additional work effort by PCR: • There have been three revisions to the site plan and statistical information which have been incorporated into the EIR (text and figures) dated 5/14/97, 6/19/97, and 9/4/97. • Inadequate and changing project operation information has required follow-up research by PCR, including: Hours of operation. The issue of whether the store is proposed to be open 24 hours and whether truck deliveries are proposed on a 24-hour basis has been ongoing. This information was not confirmed until submittal of the CUP application in September. Number of employees. It was necessary for PCR to follow up with Arnel and WalMart to obtain employee information. Number of deliveries. Since this information was not formally submitted to the City, it was necessary for PCR to follow up with Arnel 'and WalMart to obtain typical delivery information. Construction schedule and equipment information. Arnel, via Hall & Foreman, directed PCR to contact WalMart contractors to obtain typical construction information, which remains insufficient and has not been confirmed by Arnel. Task 4.0 NOP Scoping Additional Cost: $ 425 Our proposal anticipated that a standard public scoping meeting would be held within the first six weeks (mid -May 1997) after contract execution. After several interim scheduled dates, the meeting was held 9/4/97. Due to the controversy associated with this project, we worked with the City and MIG to review several alternate strategies to effectively obtain community input on the project. This effort included meeting with the City and a conference call with MIG to Ms. Jane Madera CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH December 8, 1997 - Page 4 evaluate three alternative methods' (typical public scoping meeting, open house, and hybrid formats), as well as participating in the selection of stakeholders to be interviewed, and review of those interviews. Additional fees for this task include additional coordination specific to scheduling, strategizing, and preparing for the scoping meeting. Time for additional meetings is included under Task 7.0. Task 5.0 Draft EIR There are several reasons we have incurred budget over -runs on tasks associated with preparation of the Screencheck EIR. This section documents past activities, unanticipated work effort required to respond to the City's comments on the Screencheck EIR, and additional work determined to be necessary to complete the Draft EIR based on decisions made at our meeting with the City on 11/25/97. Project Description Additional Cost. $ 0 Discussion regarding our difficulties in obtaining adequate information to complete the project description and associated cost is included under Task 3.0. Technical Studies from Applicant Additional Cost: $2, 600 Additional work has been required due to the delayed receipt of technical reports, subsequent revisions to these reports, and insufficient information in the reports. Based on the project kick- off meeting (4/3/97), the technical reports were to be provided to the City within 6 weeks of that meeting (approximately 5/16/97), and to PCR subsequent to an estimated 2-week review period by the City. We received the following reports: Geotechnical Report. Forwarded to PCR on 6/13/97, this report was incorporated into the EIR and was not subsequently revised. This report was minimal in scope and did not provide regional geologic and seismic information typically provided in an EIR-level report. Moreover, it did not provide information with regard to site -specific grading and potential export or import to sufficiently define the project and analyze the impacts of construction activities. This detail for the EIR is still pending and will require follow-up from PCR with Arnel and/or Hall and Foreman. Sanitary Seiver Capacity Study. Two versions of this study, 6/5/97 and 7/10/97, were received by PCR, and consisted of a cover memorandum to the City, calculations, and attached 81hxll" maps. A textual description of available system capacity, project 0 • Ms. Jane Madera CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH December 8, 1997 - Page 5 requirements, and peak flows was not included. To complete the Draft EIR, additional follow-up with the City and/or Hall and Foreman is required by PCR to interpret and document the findings of this report. Water System Study. Receipt of this study is still pending. Per our proposal, it is our understanding that in addition to water system requirements, this analysis will include the nature of groundwater supplies and water quality, and the potential impact of the project on these resources. - Drainage Report. PCR has received three versions of the drainage report, dated 6126/97, 8120/97, and 10/15197. Based on correspondence from the Department of Public Works to Hall & Foreman dated 11/7197, the report is still inadequate for incorporation into the EIR. Also, pursuant to our 11/25/97 meeting with the City, as of that date, the applicant has not sufficiently demonstrated that the detention basin is feasible. Additional follow- up, therefore, will be required to document the analysis and findings in the EIR. Hazardous Materials Report. PCR received this report in September 1997, which sufficiently addressed potential hazards related to existing materials at the site. Noise Analysis Additional Cost. $ 900 PCR completed the noise modeling and mitigation analysis (e.g., height of noise wall required) for two operational scenarios: truck deliveries limited to between 7:00 a.m. — 10:00 p.m., and deliveries which could occur 24 hours a day. These analyses were based on recommended operational constraints (e.g., maximum ten minutes idling per delivery and no more than one delivery per half hour) which corresponded to permitted decibel levels in the noise ordinance. Based on our 11/25/97 meeting with the City, we have now been requested to determine the wall height required to mitigate a third scenario under which no deliveries will be permitted between 10:00 p.m. and 7.00 a.m.,-and there will be no operation constraints (idling time, deliveries per hour, etc.) which would require enforcement by the City. Our proposal did not anticipate the evaluation of more than one scenario. Traffic Study Additional Cost (RKJK): $ 2,800 Additional Cost (PCR): $ 500 The scope of the traffic study was originally developed in consultation with the City's Traffic Engineer. The scope did not - include construction -related traffic impacts or a traffic signal progression analysis which is currently being requested by the City. RKJK will prepare the Ms. Jane Madera CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH December 8, 1997 - Page 6 traffic progression analysis utilizing the PASSER U program to analyze Opening Year 1999 with and without the project and Year 2020 with and without the project. The purpose of the analysis will be to determine whether the location of the proposed new traffic signal at the project entrance will adversely affect traffic progression along Talbert Avenue. A qualitative review of potential construction -related traffic impacts will also be conducted based on additional project information to be obtained from the project applicant (re: schedule, equipment, potential lane closures for infrastructure improvements, etc.) and incorporated into the EIR with appropriate mitigation measures. Alternatives Additional Cost. $850 Our proposal included the analysis of three (3) project alternatives in addition to the "No Project" alternative. At our meeting with the City and MIG on 10/21/97, three alternatives were selected for detailed analysis. Additionally, another five (5) alternatives were defined for discussion in the EIR at a lesser detail, providing the rationale for eliminating these from detailed consideration. Although it was expected that the EIR would include a discussion of alternatives "eliminated from detailed consideration," the scope of this discussion, number of alternatives in this category, and required graphics to adequately describe these alternatives exceeded our anticipated scope of work for this task. Task 6.0 Final EIR Additional Cost: $0 Per our contract, an allowance of $7,470 has been budgeted for preparation of the Final EIR, a Mitigation Monitoring Program,- and up to three (3) staff reports for public hearings. None of these tasks have been initiated, and the scope of work has not been altered for these tasks as proposed. This task could require more or less than this allowance depending upon the volume and nature of public comments on the Draft EIR. Task 7.0 Meetings/Hearings Additional cost. $0 Our scope of work for this task includes attendance at up to four (4) community workshops (inclusive of the scoping meeting) and attendance up to three (3) public hearings. No attendance has been requested or is anticipated which will be outside of this projected scope of work. Task 8.0 Fiscal Analysis Additional cost: $0 The draft fiscal analysis prepared by Stanley H. Hoffman and Associates was submitted to the City on 6/27/97. A total of $8,280 has been invoiced to this task, for which $8,600 was Ll Ms. Jane Madera CITY OF HUNUNGTON BEACH December 8, 1997 - Page 7 budgeted. A balance of $320 remains for Stanley Hoffman to respond to City comments on this. report (which have not been received as of this date). Pending receipt of comments from the City, this task will be completed within the anticipated scope of work, and no additional fees are requested at this time. Task 9.0 Tree Survey Additional cost: $0 This task has been completed within the allocated budget. Task 10.0 Notification/Certification Additional cost. $0 The work completed to date (Public Scoping Meeting notification assistance) and future work to complete this task is projected to be within the scope identified in our proposal. Task 11.0 Project Management/ Additional Cost (Project Management): $12,500 Coordination Additional Cost (Afeetings): $3,380 The original budget for this task of $6,250 included five (5) meetings with City staff and on -going regular telephone and correspondence contacts with the City through the duration of the project. The scope of work was based on the proposed schedule outlined in the City's RFP of approximately seven (7) months from project 'initiation to City Council approval. Moreover, the budget for this task was estimated based on limited coordination requirements, assuming that project information and technical reports would be available within the first few weeks after contract execution. Due to project delays which were out of PCR's control, based on our most recent schedule, the duration of the project has more than doubled (to approximately 15 months). The extended schedule and evolutionary nature of the project has resulted in a several -fold increase in required project coordination and administration, including the preparation of numerous project schedules, detailed monthly invoicing, and general coordination with the City, applicant, and subconsultants. The extended schedule has also resulted in costly "stop -and -go" on the project, requiring staff to reacquaint themselves with the project each time work resumes. To date, we have attended seven (7) meetings with the City: • 4/3/97 - Project Kick-off meeting . 5/7/97 - Meeting with City and MIG • 5/12/97 - Meeting with the City and Arnel • 6/23/97 - Meeting with the City and MIG • 9/24/97 -- Meeting with the City and MIG 0 4) Ms. Zane Madera CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH December 8, 1997 - Page 8 • 10/21/97 - Meeting with the City • 11/25/97 - Meeting with the City Additionally, we have participated in two conference call meetings: • 8/13/97 - With City and MIG re: results of stakeholder interviews • 8/25/97 - with City and MIG re: scoping meeting preparation Additional meetings can be anticipated to include a preparation meeting for an EIR workshop during public circulation of the document, and potentially, meeting(s) to prepare for the public hearings at the PIanning Commission and City Council. Our request for additional budget for this task includes attendance at an additional three (3) meetings in the future, and the cost incurred for an additional two meetings and two conference calls in which we have already participated. Only the future meetings which are required will be invoiced. . In conclusion; we are not requesting Arnel to absorb any costs other than those directly attributable to the factors detailed in this amendment request.' We have incurred some unbudgeted costs due to circumstances for which we were responsible, and we are not requesting reimbursement for these expenses. We would be happy to provide a cost breakdown of our actual costs to date should you be interested. We appreciate your consideration of this request and look forward to working with you to complete and process the EIR in a timely manner. Since we have not received payment since June 1997, and because our subconsultants are also anxious to be paid, we would appreciate your prompt consideration of this request. Upon approval of this amendment, we will be forwarding our outstanding invoices (August through November) in accordance with the revised fees by task as requested in this contract amendment. Please call JoAnn Hadfield at (714) 753-7001 with any questions you have regarding this request. Sincerely, PLANNING CONSULTANTS RESEARCH Gregory J. Broughton President Principal Planner • A -wl - W-z mi • RECEIVED January 28, 1998 J A N 3 0 1998 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOP :IE' Ms. Jane Madera Associate Planner Hard copy to follow CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 RE: CREST VIEW SCHOOL SITE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT_REPORT CONTRACT AMENDMEb Dear Jane: I'm in receipt of your letter dated December 19, 1997 requesting an amendment from Planning Consultants Research (" PCR") in the amount of $25,455. The purpose of this letter is to hereby approve the amendment to increase the contract by the amount referenced above. Please take the necessary action with the City Council to obtain their approval. Also, please forward any additional documentation which may be required by our company to amend the contract. . Jane, thank you in -advance for notifying us of any future modifications which may have to be made which could have a monetary impact on our budget for the Environmental Impact Report. Sincerely, Gre D McClelland GDM/srb 949 South Coast Drive • Suite 600 • Costa Mesa, California 92626 • 714 481-5000 • Fax 714 481-5083 • 1-1 • RCA ROUTING SHEET INITIATING DEPARTMENT: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: Amendment to the Contract with Planning Consultants Research and Amendment to the Reimbursement Agreement with Arne! Retail Group for Preparation of the Crest View School Site EIR COUNCIL MEETING DATE: May 18, 1998 RCA. ATTACHMENTS STATUS Ordinance (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Not Applicable Resolution (wlexhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Not Applicable Tract Map, Location Map and/or other Exhibits Not Applicable Contract/Agreement (w/exhibits if applicable) (Signed in full by the City Attomey) Attached Subleases, Third Party Agreements, etc. (Approved as to form by City Attomey) Not Applicable Certificates of Insurance (Approved by the City Attorney) Attached Financial Impact Statement (Unbudget, over $5,000) Not Applicable Bonds (If applicable) Not Applicable Staff Report (If applicable) Not Applicable Commission, Board or Committee Report (If applicable) Not Applicable Findings/Conditions for Approval and/or Denial Not Applicable EXPLANATION FOR MISSING ATTACHMENTS REVIEWED RETURNED. FO . DED Administrative Staff { ) } Assistant City Administrator (Initial) ( ) ( ) City Administrator (Initial) City Clerk ( ) EXPLANATION FOR RETURN OF ITEM:. From She E*fe Of :• 8- 3 -%laybrice 1. Henry Deputy City CCerk City of Huntington Beach To: Phone: (714) 536-5209 Fax: (714) 374-1557 Date: .S/719, ' P. D. Box lgo - 2000 .Main Street - Huntington Beach, CaCfornia 92648 9 0 0 0 0 9 RECEIVED FROM f AND MADE A PART OF THE RECORD �T THE COUNCIL MEETING OF IV -Ijy OFFICE OF THF-C-1T-Y-C`LERj( CONNIE 13AC)Cl(wAy, CITY CLERK Fire Station 6 - Edwards Huntington Beach Fire Department City Council Presentation Agenda Item F-2 May 18, 1998 Staff t ff Actions: ■ m Reduced Costs by Minimizing Upgrades ■ + Exterior scaled down ■ ■ * Interior spaces minimized * Equipment and Furnishings reduced ■ m Mailed Public Notices Property owners within 500 feet notified ■ ■ F-2 6 0 • • • .-a Fire Station d Edwards ■ - .: - Design Options ■ Option 1 ■ Option 2 ■ High Roof Design ■ Low Roof Design ' ■ ♦ Minimizes + Increased ■ Reservoir View Reservoir Visibility i ♦ Compatible with ♦ Not Compatible with • ■ Neighborhood Neighborhood n ■ Less Maintenance ■ Increased Required Maintenance Costs ■=_:_-: ■ Expandable ■ Expandable ■ Contingency Costs ■ Contingency Costs ' Fully Mitigated Within Project 'p ;V Budget Fire Station d - Edwards Project Funding ■ Developer's Fees of $96,312 Directly Offsets Funding Request ■ Fire Department Payments: + Second payment due 511199 delayed to ■ November 1, 1999; subsequent payments due ■ 1111 of each year ■ ■ ■ Fully recoverable from future budgets :. based on existing funding mechanism F-2 F 0 0 • • 67 Recommended Action ■ Motion to direct staff to proceed with ■ Option 1. ■ ■ Authorize a General Fund appropriation of $96,312 and redirect $123,949 from the Water Fund. ■ ■ Fire Station d - Edwards Huntington Beach Fire Department li City Council Presentation Agenda Item F-2 May 18, 1998 F-2 i 0 R=CE1VEQ CITY CLERK CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEA(gA ` I Y' A , CA INTER -DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION N98 MAY 21 © j: 40 HLNTINGTON REACH TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Melanie S. Fallon, Community Development Director'`' VIA: Ray Silver, City Administrator SUBJECT: DRAFT EIR FOR CREST VIEW SCHOOL SITE/ RCA FOR PCR CONTRACT AMENDMENT AND ARNEL REIMBURSEMENT AMENDMENT DATE: May 26, 1998 On May 18, 1998, the City Council voted to continue the Amendment to the Contract with Planning Consultants Research (PCR) and Amendment to the Reimbursement Agreement with Arnel Retail Group for Preparation of the Crest View School Site Environmental Impact Report. The item was continued to the June 1, 1998 City Council meeting to allow staff to address an error discovered in the Draft EIR for the project. aThe City of Huntington Beach released Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 97-1 (State Clearinghouse # 97081046) for a 45 day public review period commencing May 5, 1998 and ending June 19, 1998. On May 11, 1998 it was discovered that Figure 3 (Site Plan) inadvertently depicted a site plan analyzed as an alternative to the project and did not show the proposed site layout as submitted by the applicant. PCR has submitted a letter describing the events that occurred during the final printing of the document and resulting in the error with Figure 3 (See Attachment No. 1). The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not specify any requirements to correct errors in the Draft EIR during the public comment period. Rather, CEQA has established the notification, circulation, and review period process for EIR's to discover errors and refine the document. Errors that are discovered during the review of the Draft EIR are usually corrected in the Final EIR and distributed to the appropriate commenting agencies and interested parties. In this case, staff and PCR discussed the error and took action to correct the information as soon as possible to avoid future confusion with the proposed project. An Errata Notice depicting the corrected Figure 3 site plan was mailed to the City's Draft EIR distribution list of Responsible and Trustee Agencies and County and Local Agencies (See Attachment No. 2). The Errata Notice was also attached to documents available for review at City Hall and Huntington Central Library. Staff also extended the comment period by ten days, to June 29, 1998. to allow a full review of the document with the corrected site plan figure. Please refer to the following action chart for a full description of staffs and PCR's efforts to inform the public and interested agencies of the site plan error. CO a 0 0 In order to rectify the above noted error, staff and PCR took the following actions: • • DATE ACTION May 5, 1998 45-day public review period starts. May 11, 1998 Error discovered on Figure 3, Site Plan (Figure 3 depicts a site plan analyzed as an alternative to the project and not the site plan proposed by the applicant). May 14, 1998 PCR mailed an Errata Notice depicting the corrected Figure 3 site plan to the City's Draft EIR distribution list of Responsible and Trustee Agencies and County and Local Agencies (See Attachment No. 2). i May 15, 19 88 Errata Notice depicting the corrected Figure 3 site plan was placed in all copies of the (Fri.) - May 18, Draft EIR available for review at the City Clerk's Office and the Planning and Zoning 1998 (Mon.) Counter and for short-term check-out at the Huntington Central Library. May 20, 1998 Staff decided to extend the 45 day public comment period by nine days to cover the time period between the commencement of the public review (May 5, 1998) and the when the Errata Notice was distributed (May 14, 3 998). May 20, 1998 PCR recommended staff revise extension of the public review period to ten days so that the comment period would end on Monday, June 29, 1998 instead of Sunday, June 28, 1998. This recommendation was accepted by staff in order to give the public and interested agencies time to submit comments on a normal business day. May 2I, 1998 PCR sent FedEx transmittal of Notification to Extend Public Review Period to State Clearinghouse Office of Planning and Research. Transmittal included Errata Notice for distribution to appropriate State agencies by State Clearinghouse (See Attachment No. 3). May 21, 1998 Staff reproduces additional copies of the Draft EIR and Technical Appendices for distribution to public at no charge. May 21, 1998 PCR sent Notification to Extend Public Review Period as well as a second Errata Notice to City's Draft EIR Distribution List by Registered Return Receipt. June 8, 1998 Staff will continue to hold the Public Comment Meeting on this day as advertised to the public and commenting agencies. June 29, 1998 Written comments on the adequacy of the Draft EIR and the findings and conclusions reached in the document will be accepted until 5:00 PM this day. (598jm2) (gAcrestvioumcmo2) U 0 • RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the request for Amendment to the Contract with Planning Consultants Research (PCR) and Amendment to the Reimbursement Agreement with Arnel Retail Group for Preparation of the Crest View School Site Environmental Impact Report. The requested contract amendment covers additional work and associated costs for preparation of the EIR and does not request reimbursement for the actions described above. PCR is not requesting the contract amendment to cover costs associated with the Errata Notice and Notification to Extend the Public Review Period. Attachments: 1. Letter from PCR dated May 22, 1998 2. Errata Notice dated May 14, 1998 3. Notification to Extend Public Review Period for the Crest View School Site EIR, SCH 4 97081046 (598jm2) 3 (gacresivic'ccme=2) 05/22/98 16.31 May 22, 1998 &949 753 7002 s Ms. Jane Madera Associate Planner CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Department of Community Development 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 PCR Irvine 2002 PLANNING.CONSULTANTs RESEARCH E N V I A ON M F 5I AI PIA.\N1.4 G. POLICY Et RESEAA C9 RE: SITE PLAN ERROR IN DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL 12%1PACT REPORT (EIR) FOR CREST VIEW SCHOOL SITE PROJECT Dear Ms. Madera: PCR would like to apologize for our error in the Site Plan (Figure 3) included in the Draft EIR for the Crest View project. We realize this figure has resulted in confusion among some residents reviewing the document and has also been problematic for City staff. We take full responsibility for this unfortunate circumstance. As requested by the City, we have notified the State Clearinghouse, and thereby, responsible state agencies, of the 10-day extension in the public review period to enable review of the document in the context of the corrected Site Plan. As you are aware, an Errata Notice with the corrected site plan was forwarded to all entitities on the Draft EIR Distribution List on May 14, 1998. We would also like to briefly explain how the Alternative Site Plan (Alternative) was inadvertently included as the proposed Site Plan. The Alternative plan, which is evaluated in Section 6.0 of the Draft EIR (Alternative "A," Figure 26), represents an east -west reversal of the proposed site plan. As such, the original Site Plan graphic (Figure 3) was used as the basis to prepare the Alternative site plan. Appropriately, this base graphic provided the surrounding land uses which need to be considered in evaluating the Alternative plan. The software used to create both figures utilizes links to import scanned images. Inadvertently, the link to the alternative image (reversed site plan) was not deleted prior to our final printing of the figures. We printed a complete new set of original figures prior to reproducing the document. Since our previous originals had been a composite of the original graphics for all sections except the Alternatives section, and subsequently prepared Alternatives graphics, this error did not occur in Screencheck versions of the document. It was only when Figure 3 was reprinted for the final Draft that the erroneous figure was included. Unfortunately, we did not catch this error prior to publication. 233 WIIstim BOQ.EVA%D. SUIIE 130 SANIA M0N!CIt. CAI If0IN:A 90401 TEL 310 451-4480 FAx 310 451-5279 E-MAIL: PCR@10T.N1T ONE VEN-URE. Sum 150 I4YIN1. CALIFQANIA 92618 TEL 714 753-7001 FAX 714 753-7002 E-MAIL: PCR2@IO1.%E1 ATTACHMENT NO.. I • 05/22/98 16:32 `$949 753 7002 Ms. lane Madera CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH May 22. 1998 - Page 2 PCR Irvine i Q 003 PLANNING CONSULTANTS RESEARCH tNYIRORMEN-AI PLANNING, POLICY h RESEARCH As much as we regret this situation, we hope that the City and the public will consider this error in the context of the entire Draft EIR. Over the course of the last several months, the document has undergone a diligent review by the City, and PCR and our subconsultants have worked earnestly to address each of the issues identified in this review process. We feel that overall, the document is technically accurate, comprehensive, and legally defensible. Even so, the Final EIR does provide an opportunity to revise the Draft EIR, as appropriate, to correct errors identified as part of the review process. We have enjoyed our working relationship with the City and look forward to completing the environmental review process for the Crest View School Site project. Sincerely, PLANNING CONSULTANTS RESEARCH Gregory Brougton JoArm Hadfield President Principal Planner cc: Melanie Fallon, Ciry of Huntington Beach Herb Fauland, City of Huntington Beach ATTACHMENT NO. 1- 2- i � • • • r� L City of Huntington Beach 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Building 636-5241 Planning 536-5271 ERRATA NOTICE May 14,1998 Responsible and Trustee Agencies County and Local Agencies Interested Public and Groups Surrounding Property Owners CREST VIEW SCHOOL SITE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Crest View School Site Project was released on May 5, 1998. The Site Plan for the proposed project, included as Figure 3 of that document, inaccurately depicts an Alternative Site Plan (Alternative "A" as discussed in Section 6.0, Alternatives), and not the proposed project. Attached please find a copy of the corrected Figure 3, Site Plan. We regret any confusion and/or inconvenience this error may have caused. The correction to the proposed Site Plan will also be included in the Final Environmental Impact Report. We appreciate your continued interest in this project. Sincerely, (�O" uJi"L.- Jane Madera Associate Planner ATTACHMENT NO. �? ! May 21, 1998 PLANNING CONSULTANTS RESEARCH ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING, POLICY EL RESEARCH F1EECEIVE® Ms. Kathleen Pierce STATE CLEARLNGHOUSE MAY 2 21998 OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 DF?ARi?6E OF corrlra�til�r a���LoPME;ivT Sacramento, CA 95814 Re: Notification to Extend Public Review Period for the Crest View School Site Environmental Impact Report (EIR), State Clearinghouse (SCH) # 97081046 Dear Ms. Pierce: The City of Huntington Beach has requested that the Public Review period for the Crest View EIR be extended by 10 days. The previously -noticed, 45-day review period was to begin on May 5, 1998 and end on June 19, 1998. With the extension, the Public Review Period will end on June 29, 1998. The reason for this extension is to allow the public and responsible agencies adequate time to review the document in light of the corrected Site Plan (Figure 3) which was forwarded to the Draft EIR distribution list on May 14, 1998. The Public Information Meeting is still scheduled for June 8, 1998 at 6:30 p.m. at the Crest View School multipurpose room. We appreciate your assistance in forwarding the attached notices with copies of the Errata Notice to the appropriate state agencies. Please call me at (714) 753-7001 if you have any questions. Sincerely, PLANNING CONSULTANTS RESEARCH JoAnn C. Hadfield Principal Planner cc Melanie Fallon, City of Huntington Beach Herb Fauland, City of Huntington Beach Jane Madera, City of Huntington Beach Greg Broughton, PCR ATTACHMENT NO.--z -I _"` 233 WILSHIAE BOULEVARD, SUITE 130 ONE VENTURE, SUITE 150 SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA 90401 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92618 TEL 310 451-4488 FAx 310 451-5279 TEL 949 753-7001 FAx 949 753-7002 E-MAIL: PCR@IDT.NE! E-MAIL: PCR2@[DT.NET City of Huntington Beach 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA92648 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Building 536.6241 Planning 636-6271 NOTICE OF EXTENSION OF PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD May 21, 1998 Responsible and Trustee Agencies County and Local Agencies Interested Public and Groups Surrounding Property Owners RE: CREST VIEW SCHOOL SITE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) The City of Huntington Beach has extended the Public Review Period for the Draft EIR for the Crest View School Site Project by 10 days. The original 45{iay public review and comment period was to begin on May 5, 1998 and end on June 19, 1998. With the extension, the Public Review Period will end on June 29, 1998. The reason for this extension is to allow the public and responsible agencies adequate time to review the document in light of the corrected Site Plan (Figure 3) which was forwarded to the Draft EIR distribution list on May 14, 1998. A copy of the Errata Notice and corrected Site PIan is attached. Copies of the Draft EIR are available for review at the City of Huntington Beach, Department of Community Development, 2000 Main Street, 3rd Floor, and at the following locations: City of Huntington Beach, Office of the City Clerk, 2000 Main Street, 2nd Floor; and, Central Library, 7111 Talbert Avenue, Huntington Beach. The Technical Appendices to the DEIR, which comprise a second volume to the DEIR, are also available for review at these locations. The public meeting regarding the DEIR will still be held by the City of Huntington Beach on June 8, 1998 at 6:30 p.m. at the following address: Crest View School Multi -Purpose Room 18052 Lisa Lane Huntington Beach, California 92647 The public is invited to attend the meeting and provide verbal comments on the DEIR. Written comments on the DEIR will now be accepted through 5:00 p.m. on June 29, 1998 and should be addressed or hand - delivered to: City of Huntington Beach Department of Community Development Attn: Jane Madera 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 We appreciate your interest in this project. Sincerely, Jane Madera Associate Planner ATTACHMENT Na. tr. CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH'' Inter Office Communication Community Development Department TO. Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Melanie Fallon, Community Development Director y VIA: Ray Silver, City Administrator DATE: May 29, 1998 (0 SUBJECT: Late Communication for Item E-X for the June 1, 1998 City Council Meeting Attached is a letter from Planning Consultants Research, the City's consultant for the Crestview project site, regarding the site plan error in the Draft Environmental Impact Report. MSF Jr Attachment: Letter dated May 22, 1998 from PCR (598mn 5) a3 /g EmsJl��'s,E Yr1 m r. 3%DF- X M M&C-1ic, .Qc, A6t7n r. TD conrgW rari . Council/Agency Meeting Held: 3 j 91 Deferred/Continued to: r�Approved ❑ Conditionally Approved ❑ Denied G p0, rD 0 City Clerk's Signdure Council Meeting Date: March 3, 1997 Department ID Number: CD97-09 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS SUBMITTED BY: MICHAEL T. UBERUAGA, City Admini or PREPARED BY: MELANIE S. FALLON, Director of Community Development�l/.c.�_.... SUBJECT: Contract with Planning Consultants Research for Planning Consulting Services for Preparation of two Environmental Impact Reports (EIR) for the Proposed Development at the Crest View and Rancho View School Sites and the Reimbursement Agreement Between the City of Huntington Beach and Arnel Development Company for EIR Preparation Costs. Statement of Issue, Funding Source, Recommended Action, Alternative Action(s), Analysis, Environmental Status, Attachment(s) Statement_of Issue: Transmitted for your consideration are two contracts. The first is a contract between the City and Planning Consultants Research (PCR), for preparation of two Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs), for proposed commercial development at the Crest View and Rancho View school sites. Consulting costs consist of $106.421.25 for the Crest View EIR and $73,991.25 for the Rancho View School site EIR for a total contract amount not to exceed $180,412.50. This contract includes a request by PCR to waive the City's insurance deductible requirements to allow for a $25,000 deductible on their professional liability insurance. This issue is dicussed in greater detail in the Analysis section of this report. The second agreement is between the City and Arnel Development Company, the applicant for both projects, to reimburse the City for consulting services for preparation of the two EIRs. The requested action includes approval of a reimbursement agreement with Arne[ Development Company. Through this agreement, consulting costs are to be borne by Arnel Development, project applicants, through the deposit of $106.421.25 for the Crest View EIR and $73,991.25 for the Rancho View School site EIR (for a total of $180,412.50) with the 0 CJ City. The City will then draw from these funds to pay for consulting services specified in the attached contract. Therefore, there will be no effect on the City's budget. X•urtM-R•'• F--Tq•� Motion to: "A. Approve the professional services agreement with the firm of Planning Consultants Research, allowing a $25,000 deductible of the firm's professional liability insurance, for preparation of an EIR for the Crest View school site project and a separate EIR for the Rancho View school site projectat a total fee not to exceed $180,412.50, and B. Approve the reimbursement agreement between the City of Huntington Beach and Arnel Development for consulting costs associated with preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for the Crest View school site project and a separate Environmental Impact Report for the Rancho View school site project, at a total fee not to exceed $180,412.50." Alternative Action(sl: 1. Deny the request and direct staff to recirculate the Request for Proposal. i •QUEST FOR COUNCIL ACT UN MEETING DATE: March 3, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD97-09 Analysis: r.. I•WaRl• Arnel Development is proposing commercial development on two vacated school sites within the City of Huntington Beach. The school sites, Crest View Elementary School and Rancho View Elementary School, are owned by the Ocean View School District. Although both projects are located within the same school district and are proposed by the same developer, they are otherwise unconnected and considered two distinctly separate projects and will be processed as such, through the EIR process. It should be noted that no entitlement applications have been submitted to date. However, based upon discussions with the applicant, applications are in the process of being completed and will be submitted shortly. As a show of good faith, the applicant has submitted an their environmental assessment applications and paid the City's processing fees for initiating the consultant selection process. Due to the submittal of environmental processing fee and the expected submittal of entitlement applications, staff agreed to initiate the consulting contract approval process to facilitate processing once the entitlement applications have been submitted. Therefore, staff is bringing the agreements ahead for City Council action. Based upon preliminary discussions with the applicant, both projects will at minimum require separate, site specific, Zone Change, and Conditional Use Permit applications. The Crest View School Site project will also require a General Plan Land Use Designation amendment. The following is a general description of existing conditons on the site and potential entitlements required to allow for commercial development. A more definitive project description will be available upon submittal of applications by Arnel Development. Crest View School Site The project on the Crest View School site is expected to consists of a request to amend the General Plan Land Use and Zoning Designations on approximately 13.87 acres located at 18052 Lisa Lane (on the south side of Talbert Avenue approximately 200 feet east of Beach Boulevard) to allow for commercial development. Please refer to Attachment No. 7-Project Vicinity Map: The property currently has a General Plan Land Use designation of P(RL-7) (Public with an underlying land use designation of Low Density Residential - maximum 7.0 dwelling units/acre) and a PS (Public -Semipublic) Zoning designation. The site is presently occupied by several elementary school facilities. A portion of these facilities are currently used by a church, preschool and day care uses. CD97-09.DOC -2- 02119/97 3:26 PM • • REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: March 3, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD97-09 The project is anticipated to involve the following entitlement requests: (1) A General Plan Amendment to amend the General Plan Land Use Designation on the property from P(RL-7) (Public with an underlying land use designation of Low Density Residential - maximum 7.0 dwelling units/acre) to one of the City's CG (General Commercial) land use designations; and (2) A Zone Map Amendment to change the zoning designation on the subject propety from PS (Public -Semipublic) to CG (General Commercial); and (3) A Conditional Use Permit for development of the site. The project on the Rancho View School site is expected to consists of a request to amend the Zoning Designation on approximately 18 acres located at 16940 B Street (on the north side of Warner Avenue approximately 600 feet east of Beach Boulevard). Please refer to Attachment No. 7-Project Vicinity Map. The property currently has a General Plan Land Use designation of MV-F10-d-a (Mixed Use -Vertically Integrated Housing, at a maximum density of 25 dwelling units/acre, in conjunction with Commercial General, at a cumulative maximum floor area ratio of 1.50. The -d and -a suffixes also allow for special design standards and automobile district on the site) and a PS (Public -Semipublic) Zoning designation. The site is presently occupied by several elementary school facilities consisting of a former bus maintenance and parking yard and classroom buildings. The school operations were discontinued on the site and the facilities are currently occupied by training institute which may be displaced as a result of commercial development of the site. (Note: The bus maintenance/ parking yard is still in use and may be retained or may be eliminated and redeveloped as commercial; this issue is still be considered and will be resolved prior to formal project initiation.) The project will require a Zone Change from PS (Public -Semipublic) to CG (General Commercial) and Conditional Use Permit to allow for commercial development of the site. Processing of the project on the Crest View School site is expected to be initiated, shortly after approval of the consulting contract, pending submittal of entitlement applications. The application for the Rancho View School project is still in the formative phases and is expected to follow some time afterward. Processing of the environmental documents is anticipated to overlap, with the processing of Rancho View School site project beginning after that of the Crest View site. CD97-09.DOC -3- 02119/97 3:26 PM QUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTON MEETING DATE: March 3, 1997 Cons ultant_S-siection Process DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD97-09 The City has held preliminary meetings with Arnel Development to assist them in understanding the application process for development of the two closed school sites. Through these meetings it was determined that there may be some processing time savings and consulting cost reduction gained by having both EIRs prepared by the same consultant. To facilitate the processing of these applications, the City distributed a request for proposal (RFP) for preparation of EIRs for both school sites. Due to the current workloads and staffing constraints and the applicant's need to expedite processing of the project, the applicant has agreed to reimburse the city for the costs of having the EIRs prepared by a consulting firm. The consulting firm is to function as an extension of staff. The selection process followed to select the recommended consulting firm is described below. In order to prepare the EIR, the City of Huntington Beach sent out a Request for Proposal (RFP) to find a consultant team that has demonstrated experience in the preparation of environmental impact reports, and public facilitation skills. Staff distributed a Request for Proposal to six (6) qualified planning consulting firms. The following four (4) firms responded to the request by submitting packages detailing their experience, expertise, fee structure and scope of work for the project. • Jones & Stokes • Michael Brandman & Associates • P & DTechnologies • Planning Consultants Research Based upon the project approach, level of expertise and cost for services contained in their written proposals, staff interviewed two firms-- Planning Consultants Research (PCR) and Michael Brandman & Associates. Copies of the proposals by PCR and Michael Brandman & Associates and have been provided as Attachments 3, and 4, respectively. Ekto 1. Planning Consultants Research 2. Michael Brandman & Associates Cos $180,412.50 $168,724 After careful consideration, the staff determined that the firm of Planning Consultants Research offers the best combination of experience, expertise, project approach, accessibility, and price to meet the City's needs. CD97-09.DOC -4- 02/19/97 3:26 PM AQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTT MEETING DATE: March 3, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD97-09 UYLK - • • � OMOR.• - • 1 - The City requires that consultants carry professional liability insurance coverage in the amount of $500;000 per occurrence with no deductible. PCR carries professional liability coverage of 2,000,000 per claim but has a $25,000 deductible. They have submitted information that their insurance carrier does not offer professional liability insurance without a deductible and are requesting a waiver of the City's restrictions. PCR's request was reviewed by the City's Risk Management Department. The $25,000 deductible for a firm with $2,000,000 in coverage was not considered a risk to the City, but due to timing constraints was not able to be taken before the City's Settlement Committee prior to the City Council meeting. The attached contract includes a waiver of the City's deductible requirements and allows for the $25,000 deductible on the firm's professional liabiity insurance. Staff believes that the $25,000 deductible on a $2,000,000 policy for planning related environmental services will not expose the City to any significant risk and requests the City Council to approve the contract as drafted. In conclusion, PCR's project team has demonstrated experience with similar types of projects and provides the best approach to addressing the projects' issues. They are familiar with the City's concerns and have a working knowledge of both the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and environmental processing. Staff has met with the project team and believes that they have a clear understanding of the goals for the project and have proposed a scope of work that best addresses these needs. Environmental Status: The selection of a consultant to prepare planning documents does not constitute a project under the CEQA and therefore is not subject to the provisions of CEQA. However, the development projects will be subject to CEQA and will require preparation of EIRs, for which consulting services are being sought in this RCA. The EIRs shall be prepared and processed in conjunction with the Arnel Development Project and will comply with the provisions of CEQA. Attachment(s]: CD97-09. DOC 1 Contract Between the City of Huntington Beach and Planning Consultants Research for Preparation of the Crest View and Rancho View EIRs 2 Insurance Certificates 3 Proposal by PCR, Dated Sept. 13, 1996 with November 1996 amendments. 4x 4 Proposal by Michael Brandman & Associates, Dated 1012196.c, 5 Letter dated 12/19/96 from PCR requesting an insurance waiver -5- 02/19/97 :26 PM SQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACT UN CD97-09.DOC -6- 02/19/97 3:26 PM • MCITY OF HUNTII\ GTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CONNIE BROCKWAY CITY CLERK March 11, 1997 Mr. David Ball, President Arnel Retail Group, Inc. 950 South Coast Drive, Suite 200 Costa Mesa, California 92626 The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at the regular meeting held, March 3, 1997, approved execution of the enclosed agreement between the city and Arnel Retail Group for the Preparation of Two Separate Environmental Impact Reports for the Crest View School Site and the Rancho View School Site. Enclosed is a duly executed copy of the agreement for your records. Sincerely, J Connie Brockway City Clerk Enclosure: Agreement G:follomip:agrmtltr/CrVic%v/RanView./jc (Telephone: 7 1 4.536.5227) Ll • PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND PLANNING CONSULTANTS RESEARCH FOR PREPARATION OF TWO SEPARATE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTS FOR THE CREST VIEW SCHOOL SITE AND THE RANCHO VIEW SCHOOL SITE Table of Contents Section Page 1 WORK STATEMENT 1 2 CITY STAFF ASSISTANCE. 2 3 TIME OF PERFORMANCE . 2 4 COMPENSATION 2 5 EXTRA WORK 2 6 METHOD OF PAYMENT 3 7 DISPOSITION OF PLANS, ESTIMATES AND OTHER DOCUMENTS . 4 8 INDEMNIFICATION, DEFENSE, HOLD HARMLESS 5 9 WORKERS' COMPENSATION 5 10 INSURANCE. .6 11 CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE 6 12 INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR .7 13 TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT. 8 14 -_. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBCONTRACTING 8 15 COPYRIGHTS/PATENTS 8 16 CITY EMPLOYEES AND OFFICIALS 8 17 NOTICES 8 18 IMMIGRATION .9 19 LEGAL SERVICES SUBCONTRACTING PROHIBITED. 9 20 ATTORNEY FEES 9 21 ENTIRETY .10 03 ,LA/5?I� F4 047n r. rb 7 CDKrleftCrar y Council/Agency Meeting Held: 3 113 151 Deferred/Continued to: 111A�proved ❑ Conditionally Approved ❑ Denied 600.10 City Clerk's Sign ure Council Meeting Date: March 3, 1997 Department ID Number: CD97-09 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS SUBMITTED BY: MICHAEL T. UBERUAGA, City Admini or �, PREPARED BY: MELANIE S. FALLON, Director of Community Development- -� f4ze SUBJECT: Contract with Planning Consultants Research for Planning Consulting Services for Preparation of two Environmental Impact Reports (EIR) for the Proposed Development at the Crest View and Rancho View School Sites and the Reimbursement Agreement Between the City of Huntington Beach and Arnel Development Company for EIR Preparation Costs. Statement of Issue, Funding Source, Recommended Action, Alternative Action(s), Analysis, Environmental Status, Attachment(s) Statement of Issue: Transmitted for your consideration are two contracts. The first is a contract between the City and Planning Consultants Research (PCR), for preparation of two Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs), for proposed commercial development at the Crest View and Rancho View school sites. Consulting costs consist of $106.421.25 for the Crest View EIR and $73,991.25 for the Rancho View School site EIR for a total contract amount not to exceed $180,412.50. This contract includes a request by PCR to waive the City's insurance deductible requirements to allow for a $25,000 deductible on their professional liability insurance. This issue is dicussed in greater detail in the Analysis section of this report. The second agreement is between the City and Arnel Development Company, the applicant for both projects, to reimburse the City for consulting services for preparation of the two EIRs. The requested action includes approval of a reimbursement agreement with Arnel Development Company. Through this agreement, consulting costs are to be borne by Arnel Development, project applicants, through the deposit of $106.421.25 for the Crest View EIR and $73,991.25 for the Rancho View School site EIR (for a total of $180,412.50) with the City. The City will then draw from these funds to pay for consulting services specified in the attached contract. Therefore, there will be no effect on the City's budget. Motion to: "A. Approve the professional services agreement with the firm of Planning Consultants Research, allowing a $25,000 deductible of the firm's professional liability insurance, for preparation of an EIR for the Crest View school site project and a separate EIR for the Rancho View school site projectat a total fee not to exceed $180,412.50; and B. Approve the reimbursement agreement between the City of Huntington Beach and Arnel Development for consulting costs associated with preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for the Crest View school site project and a separate Environmental Impact Report for the Rancho View school site project, at a total fee not to exceed $180,412.50." 1 M, 1. Deny the request and direct staff to recirculate the Request for Proposal. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACAN MEETING DATE: March 3, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD97-09 Arnel Development is proposing commercial development on two vacated school sites within the City of Huntington Beach. The school sites, Crest View Elementary School and Rancho View Elementary School, are owned by the Ocean View School District. Although both projects are located within the same school district and are proposed by the same developer, they are otherwise unconnected and considered two distinctly separate projects and will be processed as such, through the EIR process. It should be noted that no entitlement applications have been submitted to date. However, based upon discussions with the applicant, applications are in the process of being completed and will be submitted shortly. As a show of good faith, the applicant has submitted an their environmental assessment applications and paid the City's processing fees for initiating the consultant selection process. Due to the submittal of environmental processing fee and the expected submittal of entitlement applications, staff agreed to initiate the consulting contract approval process to facilitate processing once the entitlement applications have been submitted. Therefore, staff is bringing the agreements ahead for City Council action. Based upon preliminary discussions with the applicant, both projects will at minimum require separate, site specific, Zone Change, and Conditional Use Permit applications. The Crest View School Site project will also require a General Plan Land Use Designation amendment. The following is a general description of existing conditons on the site and potential entitlements required to allow for commercial development. A more definitive project description will be available upon submittal of applications by Arnel Development. Great View School Site The project on the Crest View School site is expected to consists of a request to amend the General Plan Land Use and Zoning Designations on approximately 13.87 acres located at 18052 Lisa Lane (on the south side of Talbert Avenue approximately 200 feet east of Beach Boulevard) to allow for commercial development. Please refer to Attachment No. 7-Project Vicinity Map. The property currently has a General Plan Land Use designation of P(RL-7) (Public with an underlying land use designation of Low Density Residential - maximum 7.0 dwelling units/acre) and a PS (Public -Semipublic) Zoning designation. The site is presently occupied by several elementary school facilities. A portion of these facilities are currently used by a church, preschool and day care uses. CD97-09.DOC -2- 02/19197 3:26 PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACAN MEETING DATE: March 3, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD97-09 The project is anticipated to involve the following entitlement requests: (1) A General Plan Amendment to amend the General Plan Land Use Designation on the property from P(RL-7) (Public with an underlying land use designation of Low Density Residential - maximum 7.0 dwelling units/acre) to one of the City's CG (General Commercial) land use designations; and (2) A Zone Map Amendment to change the zoning designation on the subject propety from PS (Public -Semipublic) to CG (General Commercial); and (3) A Conditional Use Permit for development of the site. Rancho View School Site The project on the Rancho View School site is expected to consists of a request to amend the Zoning Designation on approximately 18 acres located at 16940 B Street (on the north side of Warner Avenue approximately 600 feet east of Beach Boulevard). Please refer to Attachment No. 7-Project Vicinity Map. The property currently has a General Plan Land Use designation of MV-F10-d-a (Mixed Use -Vertically Integrated Housing, at a maximum density of 25 dwelling units/acre, in conjunction with Commercial General, at a cumulative maximum floor area ratio of 1.50. The -d and -a suffixes also allow for special design standards and automobile district on the site) and a PS (Public -Semipublic) Zoning designation. The site is presently occupied by several elementary school facilities consisting of a former bus maintenance and parking yard and classroom buildings. The school operations were discontinued on the site and the facilities are currently occupied by training institute which may be displaced as a result of commercial development of the site. (Note: The bus maintenance/ parking yard is still in use and may be retained or may be eliminated and redeveloped as commercial; this issue is still be considered and will be resolved prior to formal project initiation.) The project will require a Zone Change from PS (Public -Semipublic) to CG (General Commercial) and Conditional Use Permit to allow for commercial development of the site. Processing of the project on the Crest View School site is expected to be initiated, shortly after approval of the consulting contract, pending submittal of entitlement applications. The application for the Rancho View School project is still in the formative phases and is expected to follow some time afterward. Processing of the environmental documents is anticipated to overlap, with the processing of Rancho View School site project beginning after that of the Crest View site. CD97-09.DOC -3- 02/19/97 3:26 PM ItQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACIOuN MEETING DATE: March 3, 1 997 Consultant Selection Proce s DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD97-09 The City has held preliminary meetings with Arnel Development to assist them in understanding the application process for development of the two closed school sites. Through these meetings it was determined that there may be some processing time savings and consulting cost reduction gained by having both EIRs prepared by the same consultant. To facilitate the processing of these applications, the City distributed a request for proposal (RFP) for preparation of EIRs for both school sites. Due to the current workloads and staffing constraints and the applicant's need to expedite processing of the project, the applicant has agreed to reimburse the city for the costs of having the EIRs prepared by a consulting firm. The consulting firm is to function as an extension of staff. The selection process followed to select the recommended consulting firm is described below. In order to prepare the EIR, the City of Huntington Beach sent out a Request for Proposal (RFP) to find a consultant team that has demonstrated experience in the preparation of environmental impact reports, and public facilitation skills. Staff distributed a Request for Proposal to six (6) qualified planning consulting firms. The following four (4) firms responded to the request by submitting packages detailing their experience, expertise, fee structure and scope of work'for the project. Jones & Stokes Michael Brandman & Associates P & DTechnologies Planning Consultants Research Based upon the project approach, level of expertise and cost for services contained in their written proposals, staff interviewed two firms-- Planning Consultants Research (PCR) and Michael Brandman & Associates. Copies of the proposals by PCR and Michael Brandman & Associates and have been provided as Attachments 3, and 4, respectively. Firm CO5 1. Planning Consultants Research $180,412.50 2. Michael Brandman & Associates $168,724 After careful consideration, the staff determined that the firm of Planning Consultants Research offers the best combination of experience, expertise, project approach, accessibility, and price to meet the City's needs. CD97-09.00C -4- 02/19/97 3:26 PM 91tiQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTTuN MEETING DATE: March 3, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD97-09 IVXRWMI 09112 .� -. . - •r r -r - The City requires that consultants carry professional liability insurance coverage in the amount of $500,000 per occurrence with no deductible. PCR carries professional liability coverage of 2,000,000 per claim but has a $25,000 deductible. They have submitted information that their insurance carrier does not offer professional liability insurance without a deductible and are requesting a waiver of the City's restrictions. PCR's request was reviewed by the City's Risk Management Department. The $25,000 deductible for a firm with $2,000,000 in coverage was not considered a risk to the City, but due to timing constraints was not able to be taken before the City's Settlement Committee prior to the City Council meeting. The attached contract includes a waiver of the City's deductible requirements and allows for the $25,000 deductible on the firm's professional liabiity insurance. Staff believes that the $25,000 deductible on a $2,000,000 policy for planning related environmental services will not expose the City to any significant risk and requests the City Council to approve the contract as drafted. In conclusion, PCR's project team has demonstrated experience with similar types of projects and provides the best approach to addressing the projects' issues. They are familiar with the City's concerns and have a working knowledge of both the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and environmental processing. Staff has met with the project team and believes that they have a clear understanding of the goals for the project and have proposed a scope of work that best addresses these needs. Environmental Status: The selection of a consultant to prepare planning documents does not constitute a project under the CEQA and therefore is not subject to the provisions of CEQA. However, the development projects will be subject to CEQA and will require preparation of EIRs, for which consulting services are being sought in this RCA. The EIRs shall be prepared and processed in conjunction with the Arnel Development Project and will comply with the provisions of CEQA. At a s: CD97-09.DOC 1 Contract Between the City of Huntington Beach and Planning Consultants Research for Preparation of the Crest View and Rancho View EIRs 2 Insurance Certificates �-`�- 3 Proposal by PCR, Dated Sept. 13, 1996 with November 1996 amendments. tic 4 Proposal by Michael Brandman & Associates, Dated 10/2/96. �--ic 5 Letter dated 12/19/96 from PCR requesting an insurance waiver -5- 02/19/97 :23 6 PM ItQUEST FOR COUNCIL AC7TUN MEETING DATE: March 3, 1997 6 7 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD97-09 Reimbursement Agreement between the City and Arnel Development Crest View and Rancho View school sites --Project Vicinity Map CD97-09.DOC -6- 02/19/97 3:26 PM I REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND ARNEL RETAIL GROUP FOR THE PREPARATION OF TWO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTS Table of Contents Section Page I Payment 2 2 Statement of Work to be Performed 2 3 Exclusive Control by City 3 4 Time Is Of the Essence 3 5 Termination of Agreement 3 b Notices 3 7 Term 4 8 Entirety 4 4/s:PCD:Agree:Arne1 RLS 96-822 2/14197 s • REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND ARNEL RETAIL GROUP FOR THE PREPARATION OF TWO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTS This Agreement is made and entered into this 3 r d day of March , 1997, by and between the City of Huntington Beach, a municipal corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as "City," and Arnel Retail Group, Inc., a California corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Developer." WHEREAS, Developer is developing an area within the City of Huntington Beach; and Developer requires the City to process and submit for approval various entitlements, zone changes, Iand use approvals and environmental assessments; and Developer desires that all entitlements, zone changes, land use approvals and environmental assessments be processed soon as possible; and Developer desires to have the City commit sufficient resources to enable the expeditious processing of applications and other necessary documentation; and Pursuant to California Government Code Section 87103.6, Developer is allowed to defray the cost of processing development applications and entitlements by reimbursing the City for such costs; and NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and agreements hereinafter made and exchanged, the parties agree as follows: Developer agrees to reimburse the City for its professional planning services as follows: 4/s:PCD:Agree:Ame1 RL5 96-822 2/14/97 0 • A. Within ten (10) days following the adoption of this Agreement by the City Council, Developer shall pay the amount of One Hundred Six Thousand Four Hundred Twenty-one and 25/100 Dollars ($106,421.25) which represents the estimated cost for the preparation of the EIR for the Crest View Commercial Development Project. B. Upon application for entitlement processing for the Rancho View Commercial Development Project, Developer shall pay to City the amount of Seventy-three Thousand Nine Hundred Ninety-one and 25/100 ($73,991.25), which represents the estimated cost of the EIR for the Rancho View Commercial Development Project. C. The amounts paid to City by Developer pursuant to this Agreement are non- refundable. Developer acknowledges that the amounts referenced in this Agreement are City's best estimate of the cost for the Reimbursement Services described herein, and that the actual cost of said services may be higher. In the event that the actual cost of the Reimbursement Services exceeds the estimated costs. Developer agrees to pay the actual cost within ten (10) days after receiving City's invoice for same. The amounts reimbursed to the City pursuant to this agreement will help defray the cost of the professional planning services required to prepare the EIR for the Crest View and Rancho View commercial projects. COMMEMMwoffulawel go I w• City wrill maintain exclusive control over the work described herein. Nothing in this Agreement: 2 4/s:PCD:Agree:Ame1 RLS 96-822 2/14/97 • 11 A. Shall be deemed to require the City to approve any plan, proposal, suggestion, application or request submitted by Developer. B. Shall be deemed to limit, in any respect whatsoever, City's sole authority to direct and control the planner assigned to the Developer's various development projects. C. Shall be deemed to impose any liability on the City different from any liability as may otherwise be established by law. ur MKOJON1011_ City and Developer agree that time is of the essence for the professional planning services to be funded pursuant to this Agreement. Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time with or without cause, upon ten (10) days prior written notice to the other party. Developer shall be responsible for all costs incurred prior to termination, including any and all costs incurred after notice of termination has been given. • ► •y"C61 Any notices or special instructions required to be given in writing under this Agreement shall be given either by personal delivery to Developer's agent (as designated herein) or to City's Director of Community Development, as the situation shall warrant, or by enclosing the same in a sealed envelope, postage prepaid, and depositing the same in the United States Postal Services, addressed as follows: To City: Ms. Melanie Fallon Director of Community Development City of Huntington Beach 3 4/sTMAgree:Arnet RLS 96-822 2/14/97 To Developer: Arnel Retail Group, Inc. 950 South Coast Drive, Suite 200 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 0 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 ".0 Attn: Tom Love The term of this Agreement is one year, beginning on the date of the adoption of this Agreement by the City Council of City. This document sets forth the entire Agreement between the parties concerning the subject matter hereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by and through their authorized officers the day, month and year first above written. ARNEL RETAIL GROUP. INC. a Cali orporation By: vid Ball, President By: ATTEST: City Clerk 4 4/s:PCD:Agree:Ame1 RLs 96-822 2/14/97 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, a California municipal corporation :�"`7rh Mayor 01119 7 APPROVY AS TO FORM: pity Aorney INITIATED AND APPROVED: Director of CommunjK Development =�•h,;'WAX I rr F•�, .>t R r �, s,,,"`' S?>� �+:jro r>+�'•� BSc J< < ll� r^. yt,-,r�tX`Lr TAN04 �5}. 'y7` far ��rY, , ]rfv i,�a'U' tiY:sk4 'xf�w, t y ,ran n. OR� ",F:•, � fum. MMM '0 RIO edie�'X`Y�iv'.pd^�'y�n �{ Y' ,i '..,+i �ril•' f ''i F1121 t 5 r V L JCY,i lygnM,y r Mat 07 ?Fit Ax A t t �� v�/ GV� 17d y �'• , �k,^w r y.y F s '' �f ok �i•�a'M� �Q t ' « WAto l. b� .t err �,L��tY � rw :'j�Y� +t�£ * a. �k r"p♦ �1, r "lv­ itO�+F. S■+ry���s�X, �` ',.� x42" � Y3i �ty,;� rCJ C.I.F�i��r'r, Aw .F`fram,- ��;%1 ��F� rE coor xi �,isya`...i i�."•4�as'�'„'s°,:rti+tb-'.''•:`*'�`�i<..'i:: � ^.4':.`.t. '.�� '^_`%7Rh1 _m4 .. , S _ _ s t Contract Scope -of Work, .Budget and Schedule for: . Environmental Impact Report for the Crest View Commercial Development Project Submitted to: City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 Submitted by: Planning Consultants Research 939 Glenneyre Street, Suite B Laguna Beach, California 92651 In Association with: RKJK, Irrc. MIG Communications James Barry Environmental Consulting November 1996 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. TECHNICAL SCOPE OF WORK .................................... 1 A. INTRODUCTION........................................1 B. ASSUMPTIONS AND DATA NEEDS ........................... 2 C. DETAILED WORK STATEMENT ............................. 2 Task 1.0 Project Initiation and Kick-off ........................ 2 Task 2.0 Preliminary Data Review ........................... 3 Task 3.0 Project Description ............................... 4 Task 4.0 Notice of Preparation and Project Scoping ................ 5 Task 5.0 Prepare Draft EIR................................ 5 Task 6.0 Final EIR and Staff Reports ......................... 19 Task 7.0 Community Meetings, Workshops, and Hearings .................... I ........... 21 Task 8.0 Fiscal and Competitive Impact Analyses .............. 21 Task 9.0 Tree Survey ................................ 25 Task 10.0 CEQA Notification and Staff -level Certification Documents . 25 Task 11.0 Staff Interaction & Project Management .............. 26 H. BUDGET................................................27 III. SCHEDULE..............................................28 IV. PROJECT TEAM ........................................... 29 Crest View Development Project EIR P4anning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page i November 20, 1996 I. TECHNICAL APPROACH A. INTRODUCTION Planning Consultants Research (PCR) will contract with the City of Huntington Beach to complete EIRs for both the Crest View and Rancho View school site commercial development projects. This section defines the scope of work, budget and schedule for the, Crest View EIR. A similar companion document provides the scope of work, budget and schedule for the Rancho View EIR. For technical work program purposes and budgeting, it is assumed that the processing time frame for these projects will not overlap and that the Crest View project will commence first. Nonetheless, much of the data baseline work for the Crest View project can and will be shared with the Rancho View project, should the latter move forward as discussed in the RFP. This means that the budget for the Crest View project technical tasks that would be shared with Rancho View will be proportionally greater for the former because of front -loaded work that must be done. Front -loaded work attributed to Crest View is most pronounced with respect to the traffic analysis. PCR will be responsible for EIR document preparation, project team management, and City liaison. RKJK (Robert Kahn, John Kain and Associates) will prepare the Transportation Impact Report for the project. RKJK will meet with the City Traffic Engineer and Planning Department staff to discuss the project and determine traffic study parameters. MIG Communications will serve as project community facilitator. James Barry Environmental Consulting will provide the tree survey; and Stanley R. Hoffman Associates will prepare the fiscal and competitive impact analyses. The above consultants will sub -contract to PCR. B. ASSUMPTIONS AND DATA NEEDS PCR assumes the following with regard to the Crest View Commercial Development Project EIR: Site -specific technical studies relating to the geotechnical, soils, hydrology, drainage, hazardous materials, water/sewer infrastructure will be provided by the project applicant, or the applicant's designated engineer. Crest View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 1 November20, 1995 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule Pertinent project description information, such as site plans, landscape plans, operational characteristics, building materials and design, will be provided by the project applicant and would be available at the time of project Kick-off and Initiation as described in Task 1.0 of the Work Statement. C. DETAILED WORK STATEMENT TASK 1.0 PROJECT INITIATION AND KICK-OFF PCR will meet with City staff (and applicant as appropriate) to discuss the Crest View project and assure a mutual understanding of the project and the scope of the environmental services to be performed. The focus of this meeting will be: (1) to refine the project description, scope of work and to finalize the issues to be included in the Draft EIR; (2) to confirm the tentative schedule for the environmental review process outlined in the Request for Proposal (RFP), setting specific due dates for deliverables; (3) to receive the list of related projects; (4) to conduct initial discussions with respect to alternatives; and (5) to receive and review other information and documents which are deemed appropriate by the Project Team. PCR will also identify any additional information requirements which may be necessary for successful completion of Task 1. Once PCR's contract has been initiated, we will initiate our sub -contracts with the sub - consultants. If any modifications to this scope of work will have been made in light of new project or scope information, as discussed above, these modifications will be discussed with City staff. Within the PCR team, the consultant staff will coordinate closely to follow through on the scope of work and to incorporate any expressed needs of the City or of the applicant as relayed through the City. PCR will bring project questions to the kick-off meeting and it is anticipated that most of the necessary project information will be obtained at that time, or in response to those questions. • Crest View Developmint Project EIR Planning Consultants Research city or Huntington Beach Page 2 Novem6er24, 1996 . Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule TASK 2.0 PRELIMINARY DATA REVIEW 2.1 Data Gathering 'and Adequacy Assessment In order to successfully perform the Earth Conditions and Drainage sections of the EIR, Geotechnical and Hydrology Technical Reports will be required. PCR understands that the applicant will have these reports prepared for the project site. The applicant should also furnish a complete project description including information and statistical summaries regarding site layout, infrastructure, building configuration, heights, materials, parking, landscaping, and operational aspects. The following information will also be required in order to complete the scope of work outlined above. 1. Base maps of the project area. 2. Existing land uses and zoning for each parcel contained within the project area. 3. Park and Recreation Plan 4. Tree Survey 5. Project design parameters. 6. A list of cumulative projects. 7. Previous studies prepared by the applicant and/or its consultants within for both of the project sites. 8. Any other studies applicable to the project site possessed by the project. 2.2 Base Map Preparation The follqwing base maps will be generated by PCR to serve as graphic bases to the EIR , document: • Regional Location Map • Vicinity Map • Site Plan - Illustrative Crest View Developrgent Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 3 November 20, 1996 •- 0 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule • Site Plan - Base • Existing General Plan Map • Existing Zoning Map Surrounding Area Base Map It is anticipated that these maps will be necessary to accompany the Notices of Preparation and will serve as the base maps for conveying site -specific information for analysis in the EIR. TASK 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION An EIR-level project description will be provided by PCR as an attachment to the Notice of Preparation (NOP) and will also be incorporated into the EIR. Project information, including proposed height, bulk, floor area ratios and conceptual site layout, etc. should be provided by the applicant. Upon receipt of this information, PCR will draft a written project description for review by both the applicant and City staff for accuracy. Upon confirmation that the project details are accurately represented, PCR will finalize the Project Description and initiate preparation of the NOP. The EIR will address each of the environmental issues of. concern identified in the Initial Study. The format of the EIR will follow the order of the Initial Study Checklist. In the scope of work below (Task 5.0), PCR has grouped some impact topics for discussion purposes only. Within each impact section, the analysis is currently anticipated to include the following subsections: Setting, Significance Threshold, Project Impact, Cumulative Impact, Mitigation Measures, and Adverse Effects. All project impacts will be measured against a significance threshold, which identifies the point at which an effect on the environment passes from being less than significant to significant. Where significant project impacts are identified, they will individually be matched to' mitigation measures which will be specifically designed to reduce or eliminate those impacts. For the evaluation of impacts after mitigation is applied, PCR will establish whether the mitigations reduce impacts to below the significance threshold mark. The structure of the impact analysis can be refined as necessary to suit City staff. Crest View Developrgent Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 4 November 20, 1996 •- • Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule TASK 4.0 NOTICE OF PREPARATION AND PROJECT SCOPING 4.1 Initial Study/Notice-of Preparation PCR will prepare an Initial Study providing an explanation for the responses to each environmental question on the City's Initial Study Checklist. This is particularly important for issues which are not to be addressed in the EIR, so that a decision not to address an issue is backed by a thoughtful and reasonable explanation. Based on the EIR sections identified in the RFP, the preliminary Initial Study conclusions have been assumed; however, it is possible that upon more detailed project information and further scrutiny, PCR will identify different or fewer environmental impacts. PCR will also provide any additional documentation necessary for City circulation of the Notice of Preparation (NOP). Upon finalization of the Project Description, a NOP will be prepared by PCR for signature by the City. PCR will then coordinate with the City in developing a list identifying the interested parties, property owners, and proper agencies for distribution of the NOP and prepare up to 50 copies of NOP packages which PCR will mail out. Notification labels and radius maps would be provided by the applicant or by PCR at the applicant's separate expense for all aspects of noticing. 4.2 Scoping Meeting PCR will attend and participate in one scoping meeting for the Crest View EIR to solicit community and agency input on issues to be addressed in the EIR. TASK 5.0 PREPARE DRAFT EIR The EIR will address each of the environmental issues of concern identified in the Initial Study, and the format of the EIR will follow the order of the Initial Study Checklist. The scope of work below identifies the components of the EIR documentation and process. 5.1 Summary and Introduction The Summary is intended to encapsulate the entire EIR in order to provide a synopsis of the project's predicted impacts. It will identify, in an overview fashion, the project under consideration, its objectives, and design features which will be implemented to obviate potential adverse impacts. The Summary will also identify and briefly discuss, as mandated by CEQA, the impacts (whether beneficial or adverse, significant as well as nonsignificant), and proposed Crest View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 5 November 20, 1996 ! 0 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule mitigation associated with project implementation and will contain a summary analysis of the alternatives to the proposed plans. The Summary_ will also include a table identifying all of the issues evaluated, along with conclusions regarding project impacts, the recommended mitigation measures, and a statement of the level of significance after mitigation. Project alternatives, including the environmentally superior option, will be summarized and identified in this section. The Introduction will provide: 1. Relevant background information regarding the conversion of the former Crest View school site to commercial uses and the City's and applicant's goals in this regard; 2. Disclose the public involvement process, including participation in public hearings and workshops and the submittal of comments to the Notice of Preparation and regarding the Draft EIR. Identify areas of public controversy and concern. 5.1.2 Project Description The Project Description will lay the groundwork for the environmental analyses and, as such, PCR will ensure that sufficient project information is provided to support the environmental analyses. Related projects will also be included for the purpose of examining the possible cumulative impacts of these and similar projects. The focus of the analysis will be to evaluate proposed land use and zoning within, and in the vicinity of, the project areas, and identify any land use constraints that may exist for the project sites. This section shall be composed of three subsections: Location and Boundaries, Statement of Objectives, and Project Characteristics. 5.1.2.1 Location and Boundaries This subsection will provide a description of the size, location, and boundaries of the Crest View project site. The site's location within the southern California region relative to the City of Huntington Beach, the City's business districts, residential districts, communities and surrounding cities will be -described and illustrated. This subsection will also contain a description and illustration of general plan land uses and designated zoning. A brief description of the general characteristics of the Crest View project area will be included. This description will utilize maps Crest View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington beach Page 6 November 20, 1996 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule and other graphics, including regional and neighborhood location maps, and will show the precise location and boundaries of the project on a United States Geological Survey or other suitable base map. The location of the project will also appear on a regional map. 5.1.2.2 Statement of Objectives A Statement of Project Objectives regarding the manner in which the applicant proposes to develop the Crest View site will be developed in coordination with the applicant and City staff. These objectives will generally be planning -oriented, environmental and socioeconomic. Based on court decisions regarding alternatives, the Statement of Objectives can be expected to play an important role in the EIR process. This discussion will set the framework for the selection of a range of alternatives to be evaluated within the EIR. 5.1.2.3 Project Characteristics This subsection will commence with an overview of the project components and the history of the site. The general information contained within the overview will be presented and illustrated in computer -generated graphics where appropriate. Included in this subsection will be the following: • General description of technical, economic, environmental characteristics • Intended uses of EIR, including list of agencies expected to use EIR and list of discretionary approvals • Environmental Setting • Regional Setting, with an emphasis on rare or unique environmental resources 5.2 Impact Analysis 5.2.1 Earth Conditions Utilizing the Geotechnicai Analysis to be provided by the project applicant, PCR will summarize the general and site specific grading and seismic information included in the Analysis into this section. Setting information may also be supplemented by information obtained from the City's General Plan and any . other relevant studies. A summary of the. findings and recommendations of the Geotechnical Analyses will also be provided in this section. Based on information from this study, construction and operational project impacts will be quantified and Crest View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City orHuntington Beach Page 7 November20, I996 i- • Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule analyzed for the Crest View site. Mitigation measures will be proposed in response to conclusions of significant project impacts. Potential air quality and noise impacts related to construction activities will be addressed in the Air Quality and Noise sections, respectively. 5.2.2 Air Quality PCR will prepare the Air Quality Technical Analysis for the Crest View project. Setting information may be supplemented by information obtained from the City's General Plan, General Plan EIR, and any other relevant studies. This air quality analysis will consists of the following five components: (1) general information, (2) construction emissions, (3) stationary emissions, (4) regional mobile source emissions, and (5) local mobile source emissions. All quantitative analyses will be conducted in accordance with procedures set forth by the California Air Resources Board and the SCAQMD. The air quality analysis will consist of the following components: • & lgu atory Setting, which will discuss all pertinent air quality statutes and regulations, including national Ambient Air Quality Standards and the Regional Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP); • Existing Air Quality Conditions, including regional meteorology and local conditions as measured by the SCAQMD. • Constructign Emissions, including emissions from construction equipment, earthmoving operations, construction worker and delivery trips and the application of architectural coatings and building materials which release volatile organic compounds (VOCs). All emissions will be calculated on a daily and quarterly basis. • ]regional Mobile Source Emissions, including quantification of. emissions from project - generated traffic, using regional travel characteristic data obtained from SCAG and the SCAQMD and the EMFAC7F1.I emission factor model. • &egional_Stationary-Source Emissions, consisting of quantification of emissions from electricity production and natural gas consumption. • , consisting of analysis of traffic impact on localized carbon monoxide concentrations in terms of exceeding Federal and State ambient one - hour and eight -hour carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations at up to three receptor locations, with and without the impact of project development, utilizing the CALINE 4 model. Additional locations may be optionally modeled, for a time and materials fee. Crest View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach page 8 Novcmher 20, 1996 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule •Conformity witb the Region]a s e P , conducted in accordance with the procedures set forth by SCAG. All quantitative analyses will be conducted in accordance to procedures set forth by the. California Air Resources Board and the SCAQMD and compared to the significance thresholds established by SCAQMD or, in the case of CO, the 1-hour and 8-hour ambient air quality standards. Mitigation measures will be proposed in response to conclusions of significant project impacts. Mitigation measures for air quality and traffic impacts are closely related. PCR will coordinate mitigation programs with existing and anticipated City policies with respect to trip reduction techniques and guidelines and with other mitigation programs in effect near the project site, as applicable. 5.2.3 Drainage Utilizing the Hydrology Analysis to be provided by the project applicant, PCR will summarize the general and site specific hydrologic and drainage characteristics of the project sites. Based on calculations from these studies, project impacts related to increased runoff and the reduction of permeable surfaces will be quantified and discussed in the EIR by PCR within the context of the area surrounding the site. Potential impacts with respect to storm drain infrastructure and associated flooding conditions will be discussed in the EIR, based upon the Hydrology Analysis. Drainage problems are anticipated on- and off -site and methods to reduce or eliminate these problems will be included as mitigation in the EIR. 5.2.4 Water/Natural Resource Energy Impacts It is anticipated that the applicant will have a water analysis performed regarding the nature of groundwater supplies and water quality. This information will be analyzed to determine the effect, if any, implementation of the proposed project would have on the groundwater system, including any underground aquifers. Criteria will be developed to determine if the development could potentially affect underground aquifers. Mitigation measures will be proposed in response to conclusions of significant project impacts. 5.2.5 Aesthetics PCR will prepare the Aesthetics section of the EIR, including a synopsis of the tree survey. Aspects of urban design will also be addressed, such as the loss of unpaved open space, the character and role of the public realm, and transitions in scale between uses and properties. Crest View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 9 November 20, 1996 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule Impacts regarding nighttime lighting will be addressed. City codes regarding signage will also be analyzed. Other potential aesthetics impacts include on -street parking and the placement of loading docks and trash bins. Possible mitigation programs include the need for alternative project design standards and replacement requirements for existing trees, if appropriate, will be included in this section. 5.2.6 Noise Noise may be a significant issue to the community at the Crest View site, as there are residences adjacent to the property. PCR will analyze the potential ambient noise impacts associated with the proposed project by calculating the anticipated noise levels to be encountered within the areas adjacent to the site, in particular the residential areas. These impacts will be compared to the existing ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project and City noise guidelines to determine the impacts of construction and traffic. In order to establish a baseline for noise analyses, PCR will undertake a noise monitoring program in the surrounding neighborhoods. Temporary noise impacts from construction will be discussed in terms of information on proposed construction schedules and equipment utilization available from the developer and/or construction manager. Potential operational noise sources, such as loading dock areas, fast food drive -through speaker systems, and traffic, will be identified and distance -based attenuation estimates used to project impacts to the surrounding uses. Noise impacts will be evaluated relative to the post -construction occupancy and operation of the proposed project, as well as the noise impacts associated with project -related incremental increase in vehicular traffic. Mitigation measures will be proposed in response to conclusions of significant project impacts. 5.2.7 Light and Glare Light and glare may be a significant community issue at the Crest View site, as there are residences adjacent to the property. PCR will review the existing conditions in the immediate vicinity with regard to reflective light and nighttime illumination. A description of potential light and glare impacts on the surrounding land uses, in particular where residential areas are adjacent or nearby, will be included. Mitigation measures will concentrate on focusing lighting on -site and will be consistent with City policies. Crest View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 10 November 20, 1996 Contract Scope of Work,. Budget & Schedule Impacts regarding nighttime lighting will be addressed. City codes regarding signage will also be analyzed. Other potential aesthetics impacts include on -street parking and the placement of loading docks and trash bins. Possible mitigation programs include the need for alternative project design standards and replacement requirements for existing trees, if appropriate, will be included in this section. 5.2.6 Noise Noise may be a significant issue to the community at the Crest View site, as there are residences adjacent to the property. PCR will analyze the potential ambient noise impacts associated with the proposed project by calculating the anticipated noise levels to be encountered within the areas adjacent to the site, in particular the residential areas. These impacts will be compared to the existing ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project and City noise guidelines to determine the impacts of construction and traffic. In order to establish a baseline for noise analyses, PCR will undertake a noise monitoring program in the surrounding neighborhoods. Temporary noise impacts from construction will be discussed in terms of information on proposed construction schedules and equipment utilization available from the developer and/or construction manager. Potential operational noise sources, such as loading dock areas, fast food drive -through speaker systems, and traffic, will be identified and distance -based attenuation estimates used to project impacts to the surrounding uses. Noise impacts will be evaluated relative to the post -construction occupancy and operation of the proposed project, as well as the noise impacts associated with project -related incremental increase in vehicular traffic. Mitigation measures will be proposed in response to conclusions of significant project impacts. 5.2.7 Light and Glare Light and glare may be a significant community issue at the Crest View site, as there are residences adjacent to the property. PCR will review the existing conditions in the immediate vicinity with regard to reflective light and nighttime illumination. A description of potential light and glare impacts on the surrounding land uses, in particular where residential areas are adjacent or nearby, will be included. Mitigation measures will concentrate on focusing lighting on -site and will be consistent with City policies. Crest View Developme t Project EIR Planning Consultants Research Ciry of Huntington Beach Page 10 November 20, 199b •- i Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule 5.2.8 Land Use Compatibility A General Plan Land Use amendment as well as Zone Change and Conditional Use Permit will be required for this site and will be analyzed in this section. PCR will provide the analysis for issues related to land use. Setting information may be supplemented by information obtained from the City's General Plan, zoning regulations, and other relevant studies and contact with the City Department of Community Development. The impact of the proposed project in improving circulation and linkages and the quality of life perceptions in the project area will be components of this analysis. The required entitlement for the proposed uses on the two site will be evaluated in order to determine whether the proposed uses for the project site are compatible with existing and projected land uses as well as the goals, objectives and policies of the City of Huntington Beach General Plan. The ability of the project to provide mitigation for any potentially incompatible impacts (e.g., traffic, parking on- and off -site, pedestrian/traffic interface) will be addressed in detail in the issue chapters of the EIR, and summarized in the land use section. Development of mitigation programs, including the need for identification of design guidelines, if appropriate, will be included in this evaluation. Based on PCR's previous experience in preparing environmental documentation and obtaining entitlement for home improvement stores, day laborers can be an issue. PCR will address this issue if it is determined by the City that this would be required. 5.2.9 Population and Housing It is expected that the Crest View development will generate substantially more new employees than the existing uses. PCR will analyze the impacts of these population and employment gains, utilizing background data from numerous sources, including City of Huntington Beach graphic data, the 1990 U.S. Census, and Southern California Association of Governments forecasts. Potential housing demand impacts�created by employees working at the developed site will be addressed. Given the residential land use currently designated by the General Plan, the impact on the City's housing goals of a General Plan Amendment to substitute commercial use for residential use will be evaluated. Mitigation measures will be proposed in response to conclusions of significant project impacts. Crest View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page I 1 November 20, 1996 • Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule 5.2.10 Traffic/Circulation RKJK will prepare a Transportation/ Circulation Technical Report, to be attached as an Appendix to the Draft EIR and summarized within the EIR, as follows: The traffic study will address the proposed project site for the following time frames: • Existing conditions • Existing plus 5 years of growth including other cumulative projects • Existing plus 5 years of growth plus cumulative projects • Build out conditions without the project • Build out conditions with the Crest View project Traffic signal warrant analysis would be required at three locations as defined below. Additionally, left turn warrant analysis would be required at four locations along Newland Street as identified below. A total of three intersections would have to be reviewed in the study area for both Crest View and Rancho View projects, including the following: Existing Traffic Signal Locations - Slater Avenue (NS) at: • Gothard Street (EW) • Beach Boulevard (EW) • Newland Street (include left turn warrants) (EW) The following Scope of Work is proposed: • Field review existing conditions in the study area, including the number of travel lanes and traffic control at twelve (12) study area intersections. • Obtain A.M./P.M. peak hour traffic counts at the twelve (12) 'study area intersections. Obtain 24-hour daily traffic counts at up to fifteen (15) highway links. • Determine existing level of service based upon the ICU (Intersection Capacity Crest View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research city or Huntington Beach Page 12 November20, 199b •- • Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule Utilization) methodology at the twelve (12) study area intersections. • . Determine the project trip generation, trip distribution and traffic assignment to the adjoining roadway system for the approved uses, the proposed project and two alternative projects. • Determine other cumulative project trip generation, trip distribution and traffic assignment for the five-year cumulative analysis. • Establish a five year growth rate estimated to be between 2-3 %, based upon preliminary discussions with dim Otterson, City of Huntington Beach Traffic Engineer. • Determine existing plus five years of growth plus cumulative approved projects' traffic volumes without the project and level of service at the twelve (12) study area intersections. • Determine existing plus five years of growth plus cumulative approved projects with each of the projects separately and together traffic volumes, and level of service at the twelve (12) combined study area intersections. • Identify traffic improvements necessary to meet minimum City level of service standards for existing plus five years of growth plus cumulative approved project plus the project impacts. • Determine left turn traffic signal warrants analysis at up to four study intersections in the study area. • Determine traffic signal warrants analysis at three intersections in the study area. • Determine Build out traffic projections and level of service without the project at the twelve (12) study area intersections in the study area, using RKJK Tranplan Model. • Determine Build out traffic volumes and level of service with each of the projects separately and together at the twelve (12) study area intersections using RKJK Tranplan Model. • Identify Build out traffic improvements necessary at the twelve (12) study area intersections. • Review internal circulation for the conceptual site plan especially with respect to truck access. Crest View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research city or Huntington Beach Page 13. November 20, 1996 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule • Identify traffic recommendations including additional lanes, access control, traffic control, etc. • Summarize the results 'of the study- in. a traffic impact report for the project. Separate documents will be prepared for both the Crest View and Rancho View sites, at the appropriate time. Ultimately, the analysis for each project will be linked together. • Respond to comments from the City. Other potential issues include the pedestrian/traffic interface and on- and off -site parking. All supporting traffic count data and intersection Level of Service calculations will be provided in the Technical Report. For inclusion in the Draft EIR, a summary of the findings and recommendations of the Technical Report (including traffic and parking impact evaluations) will be provided. The report will include appropriate text, tables and graphics to allow critical review by the public. Appropriate mitigation measures will be recommended. A total of twelve (12) intersections will be reviewed in the Crest View study area including the following. Note: Study limit - between Warner and Slater Avenue • Gothard Street (EW) • Beach Boulevard (EW) • Newland Street (include left turn warrants) (EW) • Magnolia Street (EW) • Bushard Street (EW) • Brookhurst Street (EW) • I-405 (S) On Ramp (EW) • Beach Boulevard (EW) • Newland Street (include left turn warrants) (EW) Crest View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City or Huntington Beach Page 14 November 20, 1996 • - 0 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule New Traffic Signal Warrant Study Crest View School site near East Property line ("T" intersection) Beach Boulevard at Taylor Street (local access to Crest View site) 5.2.11 Recreation The proposed project may reduce the number of potential park sites for the future within the City of Huntington Beach, resulting in an impact on the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities. The increase in employee population could create an impact on the parks in the vicinity. PCR will review the City's Open Space Element to assist in determining whether the City has a deficiency in park space and what impact the proposed projects will have on the City's parks and recreation. The potential impact of the project on youth sports facilities through the loss of open space field areas will also be evaluated. Mitigation measures will be proposed in response to conclusions of significant project impacts. 5.2.12 Public ServicesfUtilities The Crest View project site is located within an urbanized setting with developed networks of public services. Based on information provided by the City, other agencies, and the applicant, PCR will identify the service and utility providers for the area and in coordination with these service providers, provide an inventory of existing public facilities and services and an assessment of the impacts of both the proposed project and cumulative growth upon the delivery of fire, police, park, school and Iibrary services in the project area. This inventory of existing public facilities and services will include an assessment of existing demand, level of service, and the quantity, adequacy and location of facilities serving the proposed project site. Assessments of the adequacy of facilities and levels of service will be based upon the judgment of the service provider. Assessments of the adequacy of existing infrastructure will reflect the judgments of the service providers. PCR will estimate the projected demand for these services and evaluate, in conjunction with the cognizant utility provider, the capacity of existing infrastructure to accommodate future growth within the area. There is a potential for increased police and fire activity due to the increased activity within the proposed development. The need for additional infrastructure will be established, if any. Incorporation of conservation technologies and/or use Crest View Developmerlt Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 15 November 20, 1996 i - 0 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule restrictions will be discussed. PCR will review policies and programs of the City and other service providers and recommend mitigation measures consistent with these programs. 5.2.13 Sewage/Solid Waste Disposal The project site is located within a fully urbanized setting with extensively developed infrastructure systems. Based on information provided by the City and other relevant agencies, PCR will identify the agencies that provide sewage and solid waste service for the area and, in coordination with these service providers, provide an inventory of existing public facilities and services, a discussion of the adequacy of the infrastructure systems, and an assessment of the impacts of the project and cumulative growth upon the delivery of sewage and solid waste disposal service in the project area. Mitigation measures will be developed as required consistent with the policies and programs of the City and other public service providers. 5.2.14 Hazardous Materials/Risk of Upset Potential risk of upset issues for both sites include the potential for accidents created by an increased pedestrian/traffic interface, -and the potential -for annoying odors emanating from trash bins or delivery -service related operations, in particular for those residents Iocated adjacent to the Crest View site. Mitigation measures will be proposed in response to conclusions of significant project impacts. 5.2.15 Cumulative Impacts PCR will work with City staff in creating an appropriate list of related projects that will potentially have cumulative impacts. The cumulative impact of these related projects will then be addressed with regards to each impact category. 5.3 Project Alternatives Analysis CEQA requires the consideration of alternatives to proposed projects. These alternatives will be established in discussions between PCR, the applicant, and/or City staff during the initial coordination meetings. For the purposes of this proposal, a total of three alternatives in addition to the mandatory no -project alternative will be considered in this section of the EIR. Consideration of additional alternatives will require modifications to the project budget. Crest View Development project EIR Planning Conauitants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 16 November 20, 1995 i- 0 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule The EIR will include an analysis of these alternatives based on CEQA guidelines and PCR's understanding of current CEQA practice addressing the appropriate approach and level of detail for the analysis of alternatives. For each alternative, a description of the alternative, consideration of the alternative's feasibility in relation to the program's basic objectives, and a comparative analysis of the environmental impacts attributable to the alternative versus those associated with the proposed project for each of the environmental categories discussed above will be provided. Project alternatives will be tested in a somewhat more qualitative manner than the project analysis described above. PCR will work closely with the applicant to establish the relationship of each alternative to the project's basic objectives. 5.4 Other CEQA Mandated Sections PCR will prepare the remaining three CEQA-required analysis sections within this chapter of the EIR: (1) Relationship between Local Short -Term Uses and Long -Term Productivity, (2) Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes, and (3) Growth -Inducing Impacts. 5.4.1 Impacts Found Not to be Significant The impacts listed on the Initial Study that were found not to be significant will be identified in this section of the EIR. An explanation of why they were not considered significant in the Initial Study process will be included. 5.4.2 Growth Inducing Impacts PCR will prepare a discussion of the Crest View project growth -inducing impacts. The project relationship to area growth will be explored and analyzed. The stimuli for growth will be presented and discussed in terms of the project's capacity for growth -inducement. In addition, the section will contain a broad overview discussion of the projects' consistency with the City of Huntington Beach policies in this regard. 5.4.3 Significant and Unavoidable Impacts PCR's analysis of significant irreversible changes will consider the use of non-renewable resources, commitments of future generations to proposed uses, and irreversible environmental changes associated with the two proposed projects. The analysis may include such topics as: (1) irreversible changes to the visual character; (2) the project's overall relationship to regional air Crest View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 17 November 20, 1996 ! 0 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule quality; (3) irreversible changes to biological resources; (4) resources consumed by the project; and (5) demand/commitment of public services and infrastructure. 5.4.4 Long-Term/Short-Term Impacts PCR will prepare an analysis which evaluates the short and long-term considerations implied in the committal of resources, both natural and man-made, when a project is implemented versus the short-term and long-term socio-economic benefits derived from that commitment. The analysis will contain discussions on such issues as conversion of natural open space, development of infrastructure, fiscal impacts (See Task 8), construction and operational impacts, and Iong-term demand for public services. 5.5 Draft Mitigation Monitoring Program PCR will submit the Draft Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) to the City as soon as possible after the mitigation measures in the Screencheck Draft EIR have been subjected to City review and comment. The MMP will contain a compilation of mitigation measures presented in the EIR, listed by impact category, with agency responsibility and monitoring phase identified for each measure. These mitigation measures and the established monitoring program will be fully consistent with City policies and program. The Draft Mitigation Monitoring Program will be included in the DEIR as a Technical Appendix. 5.6 Draft EIR Document Production PCR will submit three (3) screencheck copies .of the Crest View EIR Initial Study and Notice of Preparation to the City. Subsequent to the Internal Team review and the City's review of the Draft EIR data base, PCR will incorporate revisions identified by the City's review. In addition, a final camera-ready version of the Draft EIR will be provided to the City for approval prior to printing and public distribution. PCR will complete changes to the Draft EIR following submission of the Draft EIR data base and will publish the Draft EIR. Budgeted time is based on the assumption that staff comments will be primarily editorial and -that no additional analysis will be required. For budgeting purposes, it is assumed that PCR will produce ten (10) screencheck copies of the Draft EIR, one unbound, reproducible original copy, produce and distribute up to 100 bound copies of the Public Draft EIR and 100 bound copies of the Technical Appendices on behalf of the City. In addition, a computer data disk containing the written text and tables, charts, and graphics formatted for Microsoft Word for Windows 6.0 will be provided to the City. It is Crest View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 18 November 24, 1996 i Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule assumed that the Crest View Draft EIR will be circulated for public comment for the standard 45- day review period. TASK 6.0 FINAL EIR AND STAFF REPORTS At the conclusion of the public review period, the City will forward all comments received on the Draft EIR to PCR. In consultation with City staff, the PCR team will prepare a draft Response to Comments. The Responses to Comments document is the primary component of the Final EIR. It generally constitutes the bulk of the Final EIR and is reviewed by the City prior to the completion of the Final EIR. This document will respond to all written comments received from the general public, responsible agencies and other interested parties during the public review period, as well as all comments received at any public hearing on the Draft EIR held during the public review period. PCR understands that City practice includes distribution of the Responses To Comments document to commentators prior to completion of the Final EIR as a separate processing task. For budgeting purposes, it is assumed that three (3) copies of the Crest View EIR Draft Responses to Comments will be submitted to the City for review. PCR will also produce and distribute up to 75 copies of the Draft EIR Response To Comments to commentators, per City practice. Based upon the comments received on the Draft EIR, PCR will prepare a Final EIR which incorporates revisions to the Draft designed to address the issues raised from the review of the Draft EIR. It is understood that the Crest View project has received opposition from the surrounding neighborhoods. Depending upon the potential controversy of the project, general economic and social conditions in the area, and other factors which are wholly unpredictable and beyond the control of either the City or PCR at this juncture, public reaction to the Draft EIR could range from moderate to strong opposition. In the event that the public responses to the Draft EIR is greater than expected, PCR would meet with City staff to discuss solutions and develop adjustments to the Final EIR work program and budget as necessary. Upon incorporating the review comments received from -City staff on the Screencheck Final EIR, PCR will prepare the Public Final EIR. Simultaneously with preparation of the second draft Final EIR, PCR will prepare a Final Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP), reflecting changes in mitigation measures as a result of continents received on the Screencheck Final EIR. Crest View pevelopmcnt Project El Planning Consultants Research City or Huntington Beach Page 19 November 20, 1996 r - ! Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule In addition, the revised FOR will incorporate all revisions to the Responses to Comments, as well as the Revised Summary, and Additions and Corrections to the DEIR. PCR will incorporate all of the revisions to the Draft Responses to Comments which are requested by the City into the revised Final Responses to Comments. The Final Responses to Comments shall be included as an appendix to the Final EIR, when that document is completed. 6.1 Final EIR Document Production and Distribution A minimum of three (3) screencheck copies of the Response to Comments will be submitted to the City by PCR. Subsequent to the internal team review and the City's review of the Draft EIR data base, PCR will incorporate requested revisions. PCR will work with the City to provide sufficient copies of the FEIR for distribution to commenting agencies at least 10 days prior to certification of the Final EIR. A minimum of ten screencheck copies of the Final EIR data base shall be submitted to the City. City staff review/approval of the camera-ready FEIR shall be obtained prior to final publication. PCR will complete all changes resulting from City staff review of the Final EIR data base and will publish and distribute the Final EIR. PCR will publish and distribute up to 100 bound copies of the Crest View Final EIR, including Responses to Comments and Corrections and Additions and one unbound, reproducible, original copy for the City, once .the document has received final approval. In- addition, PCR will submit one computer data disk of the Final EIR to ,the City, including the Response to Comments and Corrections and all tables, charts, and graphs, formatted for Microsoft Word for Windows 6.0. It is assumed that revision and/or reproduction of the Draft EIR will not be required at this point. A minimum of three (3) screencheck copies of the Certification Documents and one (1) reproducible final copy of the Certification Documents shall be provided by PCR to the City. 6.2 Staff Reports PCR will produce three (3) staff reports for the Crest View EIR public hearings at the Planning commission and 'City Council. City staff will provide PCR with format and other necessary guidance to assure that PCR can efficiently produce staff reports in accordance with City practice. PCR will produce a minimum of three (3) screencheck copies and one unbound, reproducible copy of the Planning Commission and City Council Staff Reports to the City. In addition, PCR will submit one computer data disk of the Staff Reports, including all tables, charts, and graphs, formatted for Microsoft Word for Windows 6.0. It is assumed that City staff will produce copies of the Staff Reports for decision -maker and community distribution. Crest View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research c4 or Huntington Beach Page 20 November20, 1996 9 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule TASK 7.0 COMMUNITY MEETINGS, WORKSHOPS, AND HEARINGS PCR will attend up to four (4) community workshops, inclusive of the scoping meeting and the facilitated community workshops. PCR will attend up to three (3) public hearings with the Planning Commission/City Council for the Crest View EIR. 7.1 Community Meetings MIG Communications will provide specialized community facilitation services for the Crest View project. MIG has budgeted up to three meetings for the Crest View project and has prepared a unit cost proposal for each meeting ($2,980.001 meeting) as follows: 7.1.1 Pre -Meeting Preparation MIG will confer with project team by telephone on the strategy and -objectives for each meeting. The discussions will include the agenda, logistics coordination, and any background materials to be used or presented at the meetings. 7.1.2 Meeting Facilitation and Graphic Recording MIG will provide a facilitator (Daniel Iacofano) and a graphic note taker to support each community meeting. 7.1.3 Preparation of Meeting Summary Report MIG will prepare a written summary of verbal and written comments received during the meetings. MIG will provide one copy to the City and PCR for photocopying and distribution. I TASK 8.0 FISCAL AND COMPETITIVE IMPACT ANALYSES Stanley R. Hoffman and Associates (SRHA) will prepare the fiscal and competitive impact analyses for the Crest View EIR. Crest View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City or Huntington Beach Page 21 November 20, 1996 Contract Scope of Work, Budget c& Schedule 8.1 Fiscal Impact Analysis 8.1.2 Project Description This task includes the definition of the proposed project and one alternative as for land use, improvement and land valuation, retail orientation or residential product mix (depending on the alternative), taxable sales generation, population/employment generation, and other development information as required. A very important factor will the determination of retail orientation and estimation of potential tenant mix and sales generation by retail category (shopper goods, building materials, eating and drinking, etc.). Sales generation assumptions will also be used in Task 7.3 in the determination of competitive impacts. 8.1.3 Derivation of Revenue and Cost Factors This task consists of budget analysis and interviews with key City staff leading to the formulation of fiscal factors for projecting recurring revenues and costs. Revenue factors will be developed to estimated incremental property tax, sales and use tax, state subventions (where applicable), fines and forfeitures, utility franchises, business license fees, property transfer tax, one-time building permit fees, and other revenues as identified. Cost factors will be developed for police protection, structural fire protection, road maintenance and other public works costs, community services, and relevant citywide overhead. Revenue and cost factors will be derived using either the multiplier or case study method. 8.1.4 Projection of Fiscal Impacts The consultant's fiscal model will be used to project recurring revenue and costs to the City at build out of the proposed uses and the alternative uses. Sales taxes, a significant component for the retail scenario, will be adjusted to reflect only the net increase, taking into account potential competitive impacts on existing retailers, If a. residential alternative is defined, a purchasing power component from new households will be included as supporting retail sales in the City, and a portion will be credited as incremental sales tax to Huntington Beach. 8.2 Competitive Impact Analysis This task is included to address the City Council's concern regarding competitive impacts of "big box" or high -volume discount retailers on existing retail establishments in Huntington Crest View Development'Projcct EIR Planning Consultants Rtscarch City of Huntington'Beach Page 22 Novemher20, 1996 0 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule Beach. Since the tenant mix for the proposed retail use is not yet finalized, the specific identification of impacted businesses is premature. Rather, a quantitative approach is proposed to determine the marginal citywide impact. 8.2.1 Definition of Trade Area This task will involve defining the relevant trade area for purposes of analysis. The trade area will encompass a five -mile ring surrounding the site, and.will include portions of the Cities of Huntington Beach and Fountain Valley. The trade area will be defined in coordination with the project team and will be based on the location of major arterials, population concentrations and competitive retail centers and establishments. The trade areas will consist of census tracts to facilitate data assembly and to segment the market demand into specific locations for input into the retail gravity model. 8.2.2 Estimation of Retail Demand Demographic information will be quantified to estimate household purchasing power in the primary and secondary trade areas, incorporating household income, retail propensities to spend segmented by income group, and distribution of demand across retail goods and services likely to be offered by tenants in the proposed project. Similarly, SCAG's forecasts of household growth at the census tract level, supplemented with City data, will be used to determine future demand within the trade area. 8.2.3 Estimated Sales Capture In this task, the total sales generated on site will be distributed across the likely market area. The consultant's - GIS-based retail gravity model will be employed to estimate this distribution under two alternative tenant mixes --(I) a high -volume discount orientation with a high -profile anchor; (2) a neighborhood shopping center consisting of a supermarket and in -line shops. -The model uses a distance -decay function io simulate the inverse relationship between distance from the site and potential capture from a block of households in a particular census tract. Sales capture will also be segmented to show purchases made by households within the City and by households located outside the City limits. Crest View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 23 November 20, 1996 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule 8.2.4 Determination of Marginal Impact The analysis of demand and supply in the previous tasks will be combined for an evaluation of the potential impact of the proposed center on the City of Huntington Beach. The impact analysis will focus on the net benefit to the City taking into account any potential impacts on other retailers. Key issues will include the balance of supply and demand and the likely leakage from existing stores to a proposed center in both the short and long-term. The net benefit, expressed in taxable sales per square foot, will be used as the basis for the estimation of incremental sales tax in the fiscal analysis. 8.3 Management, Documentation and Meetings 8.3.1 Documentation The results of SRHA's analysis and all data assumptions will be documented in report form suitable to the City's needs. An executive summary will also be presented that will be directed toward decision -makers. A draft report will be prepared for review and comment and modified as appropriate. Ten copies of the final report plus a camera ready copy will be provided. 8.3.2 Meetings and Coordination Meetings and coordination are assumed for the preparation and presentation of the draft and final reports. Major public workshops and public hearings will be attended, as authorized on a time and materials basis. TASK 9.0 TREE SURVEY James Barry Environmental Consulting, a certified arborist, will provide site -specific tree surveys for the Crest View project site. The tree survey will,be performed entirely in the field. The trees will be individually evaluated and a number assigned to each tree on the map. . The survey will involve gathering of - limited physical information on the tree, specifically the trunk diameter, estimated height and spread. The focus will be on present condition of each tree. Because the potential for preservation depends on the ability to control a tree's root system, this factor will also be considered. Crest View Development Project El Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 24 November 20, 1996 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule Photographs will be taken of significant tree features, especially potential limb hazards. The report will list the notable information for each tree, with the survey keyed to the project map. If preservation is feasible, a preservation plan will be prepared. The plan will discuss construction protection measures and root mitigation. More specific recommendations would be made in light of subsequently identified site development issues. TASK 10.0 CEQA NOTIFICATION AND STAFF LEVEL 'CERTIFICATION DOCUMENTS 10.1 CEQA Notification In addition to the NOP discussed in Task 4.1, PCR will prepare and distribute all other CEQA notification documents on behalf of the City in accordance with CEQA procedures. These include the Notice of Determination, Notice of Completion, and distribution of documents to the State Clearinghouse. 10.2 Certification Documents Utilizing samples of similar documents to be provided by City staff, PCR will prepare and distribute the relevant certification documents to accompany the public review and decision process. These are anticipated to include: • Scoping meeting related to Task 4.2 • Public meeting notices related to Task 7.0 • Public meeting agendas related to Task 7.0 • Staff Report on EIR to Planning Commission • Staff Report on EIR to City Council • Statement of Findings and Fact • Statement of Overriding Considerations • Draft Resolutions • Finalize Mitigation Monitoring Program Crest View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City orHuntington Beach Page 25 November 20, 1996 0 • Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule TASK 11.0 STAFF INTERACTION AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT PCR will function as an extension of City staff in its preparation and distribution of. the EIR and supporting documentation by maintaining an open and continual dialogue with City of Huntington Beach Community Development and other Departments, as appropriate. This will involve an initial kick-off meeting, regular contacts by telephone and meetings as reasonably necessary for the City to relay comments to PCR following staff review of PCR's work (five meetings assumed with City staff for the Crest View project). PCR will send regular (either weekly or bi-weekly) interface/status updates to the City staff. PCR is prepared to adhere to the proposed schedule outlined in the City's RFP. Crest View Developmed Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Fluetington Beach page 26 November 20, 1996 • II. BUDGET Major Task PCR* RKIK MIG** SRHA Barry Arborist Total 1.0 Proj. Init. 885 540 0 0 0 1,425.000 2.0 Data Rev. 3235 0 0 0 0 3,235.000 3.0 Proj. Des. 825 0 0 0 0 825.000 4.0 NOP/Scp. 1675 0 0 0 0 1,675.000 5.0 Draft EIR 36500 14285 0 0 0 51,325.000 6.0 Final EIR 7470 2175 0 0 0 9,645.000 7.0 Com. Mtg. 3900 0 8940 0 0 12,940.000 8.0 Fisc.Anayl. 0. 0 0 8280 0 8,280.000 9.0 Tree Surv. 0 0 0 0 700 700.000 10.0 Not./Cent. 3190 0 0 0 0 3,190.000 11.0 Proj. Mgt. 6250 0 0 0 0 6,250.000 Labor Subtotal 63,930.000 17,000.000 8,940.000 8,280.000 700.000 99,390.000 Direct Cost Subtotal 5661.25 Cost + 10% 1,050.00 320.00 0 7,031.250 Total 69,591.250 17,000*** 9,990.000 8,600.000 700.000 5106.42I 25 Notes: " PCR tasks are given as fixed fees except for Task 6 (Final EIR) subject to the specific assumptions in the proposal and the information provided in the RFP itself. Since the actual level of technical analysis and community input and attendant complexity cannot be reliably predicted or controlled by the City or PCR, Task 6 is given as an allowance that would be reviewed for fee adequacy to address actual conditions going forward from the completion of the Drq ft F1R. Noe -to -exceed Cost- S2, 980.00/meeting +•" plus costs@ 10% Crest View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 27 November 20, 1996 i • III. SCHEDULE Given the assumptions included in the Scope of -Work, and that information and commentary needed by PCR are provided in a timely fashion and that document circulation periods and timely public hearing schedules are adhered to, PCR expects that it can complete the Crest View EIR in the approximate seven -month period depicted in our proposal dated September 13, 1996, However, the proposal schedule assumed a start date of early October 1996. PCR assumes a project initiation of early January 1997 for this contract. Crest View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City or Huntington Brach November 20, 1996 Page 28 — • - 0 IV, PROJECT TEAM The Crest View Project Team will consist of the following key individuals the majority of whose qualifications were presented in PCR's original proposal: • Greg Broughton: Principal-in-Charge--CEQA strategy and public presentations. • Greg Vail: Principal -in -Charge --project management liaison, and local point of contact. • Stephanie Eyestone or Rick Harter: Project Manager --Documentation management and preparation; quality assurance and control. Depending upon actual start date of the Crest View program, either Ms. Eyestone or Mr. Harter will be assigned as project manager. • Robert Hilman: Assistant Project Manager --Technical analysis and synthesis. Mr. Hilman's qualifications were presented in PCR's Ocean View Home Depot EIR proposal and are replicated as follows: Robert Hilman has over five years of experience in private and public sector planning, with expertise in environmental documentation, programmatic development, and land use planning. Mr. Hilman has prepared and processed numerous CEQA and NEPA documents, including Environmental Impact Reports and Statements, Initial Studies, Notices of Preparation, Environmental Assessments, Mitigated Negative Declarations and Findings of No Significant Impact. Mr. Hilman has also undertaken third -party review of environmental documentation, crafted General Plans and Specific Plans, and has prepared and processed applications for land use entitlement. Mr. Hilman has drafted various sections of the Universal City Specific Plan EIR, including the project description, land use, geology, natural and artificial light, hydrology, and hazardous materials sections; crafted sections of the Westlake/Pico Union No. 2 Recovery Program EIR, including land use and- altdrnatives; formulated responses to comments for the Lincoln Place Redevelopment Project EIR; managed the preparation and processing of the environmental documentation for the Palm Springs General Plan Update, the Palm Springs Classic Specific Plan, and the Shadowrock Planned Development District for the City of Palm Springs. Mr. Hilman holds a B.A. in Geography from Humboldt State University and an M.A. in Planning from CalPoly San Luis Obispo. Crest View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City or Huntington Beach Page 29 November20, 1996 , � •1 > :+vG. A S`Sr 'yy +rY yi, 3K,' C x�rC '? r, r Nw��r�'.'i Y, 1 = >3e'4L13H; i hk � 5 • �y �S �'v i`4� ' tMrh'�'W :"k rx 2r i+ T' i+i, 3 r'r ¢ �t �' -'"w y ' A L K• Y � „y. �rl �+€` •r t���I, � IA �,►.i �e.. �,pv, ;� r �,�,1 ` ©/�.� y ' �n,k'�,;y6�,"�y�°. � .� � y j t• .+ • �i',�rL,i� 4ry t {�} �. � i Sp �y �• . S,d n I �, !. e � etif 1+I '1 ^'7F '4 s5'A".�r.e "»'w, �ll� yF!r � fy,, .��� � y� ` � �r � +i ,r. 1 •rIF i K t •• �•' 1 ' ' A 1 ' r a�'•�'«. 4J ' Q]' ' Vi rir L ! s3? aak.:' a4'.k;, i• i iAe . i•E# `M1' �t�?'� " r,. ' �r '� �+ !. v � _,.J � Ti � ' �'i .r! M+ � 5' 4 � i'• Si '�, �' ' S� t r,yR' . {L R� 7�+"FiY �� � " t �. S :I s'F- lL3Q � v � � � fr fif y; �t���i/ !•:, ,s' e^ s'� 0. t, ��, � r`�..s.f; `Srh' � !. 'x�'r1 , �.'; l Fkli ,,Y'ir O`, � "r74:., fi S�°� � y cY /���11 > �'i� ,�- = ;Y .t .►. k ���y�'��. t, Ay ��i� ly r i 1,= r � i'S,4• t � �:'+� # � a �,L e "Rid wo A Oyu>;� rei/r *Y,,,r r, � ;����ii,'Fr4/�a r;i5%.;}D��e�,r�r� , r�'4i � c �,y�, Y•w. ZI Axy '� ...�k'ei�aY„ i'S 'e firSjy.A� 7 5< riwZ' �4s.z e+y 1yI ty �_'Yl' aC CrY�11 , G,� t a „ � } � � � �T��� �.,a � r r ,s, � t {�t�{' �+r�,3�#.rF S +ice [y, T �_ �'•r'v+ . 'r t�I too 41 coots ". \V /e� „O'C! t J f G ! fy�,a _� t .si -y.•• �'Li &L= 1. t + 1: ',', �4.1 '' ': �+ ,� +"r ,L�r,x } q ' " } ��3{"�a+ttt5'G,x,.�' i• 1'r'i i t, �'�� K"� y, L�.,j.'� �`� r o�' } • � "� s s }'.� � G.1 r,.,•{? � �. r. � } � � r `4`'t A �� ht'"' V Y"'•~ I�d"�L'4'L �°'�`''!:F i �' ' s, Lr' i �,'��G E � Q • ' �► '• � 3'�L"s�,, ? ��, � 2 �' �' t /_�,,,\k ) t�,},��"'` `�i'��.."W,;•��a k� d '�+T,,�"j'.i gt "yx �y .�'x.� ��`',�x��� .• •`i�i • '"Q �{r y F i.,r • }w�: ++ t ,4 qY} {R`q W I . "' r'^hrt° v(1' ip� fa 'n �, q' � memo" m o9 �Irl�•R�� n Y ':;� �• a ���},5 ° ',�;r �s .�Y,. ?�'A � y�!,e r'�h�,FY�, 6+ ,.,V'>R, m � V �C.%`: •4J qj s'L r` d <, ',',� `• �y Gyy'�A" C ii� ^ \�� y s� ?I„t)C3. Y4�L�,�ti�t'i.; 4� �' t 1, Ni ; ., t „s'„•4 X!'r;r t', . MZ�. t L 777TTT""`yry�jk''{•�i�L :� 7" fir >t f; {'\' .V � � 5 3 1 �L�` � ;XY� � �5},/ � ' 'F � 4�1���L4��'���„.\�Fi lil� i• .II � h o ?? r�•+c� 's vJ �,�:: �•. i L{ r f c j�`�w•c hk 1�C !''� a �K ire Y x x +3r 7 5 w.� ti'-tV f -'i�a'R S r� x : � + '1`3 n 4 x,{ t �,H `� r Y' '�" .r''ns. Y'? S•�`,q' r f S 1 G' Ryt, rq •L•r >< i4 r A G ; c 4�G x'; . F < vit it c{� 4 is t a t'' ``Sr'ID"•., �,+e. � � Q �>, r ',1^4i1"�r�r� Y�Ya Ni {� J �} 5�'c}." Z ���r�Y r��iy2t�/y �,�i �•� �r �fn kJ � , r C r t is i 4, � } r'� �� � S tY t S { r'+ ,. ';i. } tiL•5���,ft•dy � ,� sr�"iq 5 0 - • a t R t a4ncho e-w Contract Scope of Work, Budget and Schedule for: Environmental Impact Report for the Rancho View Commercial Development Project Submitted to: Cily of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 Submitted by. - Planning Consultants Research 939 Glenneyre Street, Suite B Laguna Beach, California 92651 In Association with: RKJK, Inc. MIG Communications James Barry Environmental Consulting November 1996 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. TECHNICAL SCOPE OF WORK .................................... 1 A. INTRODUCTION........................................1 B. ASSUMPTIONS AND DATA NEEDS ........................... 2 C. DETAILED WORK STATEMENT ............................. 2 Task 1.0 Project Initiation and Kick-off ........................ 2 Task 2.0 Preliminary Data Review ........................... 3 Task 3.0 Project Description ............................... 4 Task 4.0 Notice of Preparation and Project Scoping ................ 4 Task 5.0 Prepare Draft EIR................................ 5 Task 6.0 Final EIR and Staff Reports ......................... 18 Task 7.0 Community Meetings, Workshops, and Hearings ................................ 20 Task 8.0 Fiscal and Competitive Impact Analyses ................. 21 Task 9.0 Tree Survey ................................... 24 Task 10.0 CEQA Notification and Staff -level Certification Documents ... 25 II. BUDGET................................................27 III. SCHEDULE..............................................28 IV. PROJECT TEAM ........................................... 29 I Rancho View Development Project EIR Planting consultants Research city or Huntington Beach Page i November 20, 1996 - 0 I. TECHNICAL SCOPE OF WORK A. INTRODUCTION Planning Consultants Research (PCR) will contract with the City of Huntington Beach to complete EIRs for both the Rancho View and Crest View school site commercial development projects. This section defines the scope of work, budget and schedule for the Rancho View EIR. A similar companion document provides the scope of work, budget and schedule for the Crest View EIR. For technical work program purposes and budgeting, it is assumed that the processing time frame for these projects will not overlap and that the Crest View project will commence first. Nonetheless, much of the data baseline work for the Crest View project can and will be shared with the Rancho View project. This means that the budget for the Rancho View project technical tasks that would be shared with Crest View will be proportionally less for the former because of front -loaded work that must be done for Crest View. PCR will be responsible for EIR document preparation, project team management, and City liaison. RKJK (Robert Kahn, John Kain and Associates) will prepare the Transportation Impact Report for the project. RKIK will meet with the City Traffic Engineer and Planning Department staff to discuss the project and determine traffic study parameters. MIG Communications will serve as project community facilitator. James Barry Environmental Consulting will provide the tree survey; and Stanley R. Hoffman Associates will prepare the fiscal and competitive impact analyses. The above consultants will sub -contract to PCR. B. ASSUMPTIONS AND DATA NEEDS PCR assumes the following with regard to the Rancho View Commercial Development Project EIR: Site -specific technical studies relating to the geotechnical, soils, hydrology, drainage, hazardous materials, water/sewer infrastructure will be provided by the project applicant, or the applicant's designated engineer. Pertinent project description information, such as site plans, landscape plans, operational characteristics, building materials and design, will be provided by the project applicant and would Rancho View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 1 November 20, 1996 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule be available at the time of project Kick-off and Initiation as described in Task 1.0 of the Work Statement. C. DETAILED WORK STATEMENT TASK 1.0 PROJECT INITIATION AND KICK-OFF PCR will meet with City staff (and applicant as appropriate) to discuss the Rancho View project and assure a mutual understanding of the project and the scope of the environmental services to be performed. The focus of this meeting will be: (1) to refine the project description, scope of work and to finalize the issues to be included in the Draft EIR; (2) to confirm the tentative. schedule for the environmental review process outlined in the Request for Proposal (RFP), setting specific due dates for deliverables; (3) to receive the list of related projects; (4) to conduct initial discussions with respect to alternatives; and (5) to receive and review other information and documents which are deemed appropriate by the Project Team. PCR will also identify any additional information requirements which may be necessary for successful completion of Task 1. Once the portion of PCR's contract for the Rancho View project has been initiated, we will initiate our sub -contracts with the sub -consultants. 'If any modifications to this scope of work will have been made in light of new project or scope information, as discussed above, these modifications will be discussed with City staff. Within the PCR team, the consultant staff will coordinate closely to follow through on the scope of work and to incorporate any expressed needs of the City or of the applicant as relayed through the City. PCR will bring project questions to the kick-off meeting and it is anticipated that most of the necessary project information will be obtained at that time, or in response to those questions. TASK 2.0 PRELIMINARY DATA REVIEW 2.1 Data Gathering and Adequacy Assessment In order to successfully perform the Earth Conditions and Drainage sections of the EIR, Geotechnical and Hydrology Technical Reports will be required. PCR understands that the applicant will have these reports prepared for the project site. The applicant should also furnish a complete project description including information and statistical summaries regarding site layout, infrastructure, building configuration, heights, materials, parking, landscaping, and Rancho View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach page 2 November 20, 1996 • 0 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule operational aspects. The following information will also be required in order to complete the scope of work outlined above. 1. Base maps of the project area. 2. Existing land uses and zoning for each parcel contained within the project area. 3. Park and Recreation Plan 4. Tree Survey 5. Project design parameters. 6. A list of cumulative projects. 7. Previous studies prepared by the applicant and/or its consultants within for both of the project sites. 8. Any other studies applicable to the project site possessed by the project. 2.2 Base Map Preparation The following base maps will be generated by PCR to serve as graphic bases to the EIR document: • Regional Location Map • Vicinity Map • Site Plan - Illustrative • Site Plan - Base • Existing General Plan Map • Existing Zoning Map • Surrounding Area Base Map It is anticipated that these maps will be necessary to accompany the Notices of Preparation and will serve as the base maps for conveying site -specific information for analysis in the EIR. Rancho View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City or Huntington Beach Page 3 November 20, 1996 • Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule TASK 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION An EIR-level project description will be provided by PCR as an attachment to the Notice of -Preparation (NOP) and will also be incorporated into the EIR. Project information, including proposed height, bulk, floor area ratios and conceptual site layout, etc. should be provided by the applicant. Upon receipt of this information, PCR will draft a written project description for review by both the applicant and City staff for accuracy. Upon confirmation that the project details are accurately represented, PCR will finalize the Project Description and initiate preparation of the NOP. The EIR will address each of the environmental issues of concern identified in the Initial Study. The format of the EIR will follow the order of the Initial Study Checklist. In the scope of work below (Task 5.0), PCR has grouped some impact topics for discussion purposes only. Within each impact section, the analysis is currently anticipated to include the following subsections: Setting, Significance Threshold, Project Impact, Cumulative Impact, Mitigation Measures, and Adverse Effects. All project impacts will be measured against a significance threshold, which identifies the point at which an effect on the environment passes from being less than significant to significant. Where significant project impacts are identified, they will individually be matched to mitigation measures which will be specifically designed to.reduce or eliminate those impacts. For the evaluation of impacts after mitigation is applied, PCR will establish whether the mitigations reduce impacts to below the significance threshold mark. The structure of the impact analysis can be refined as necessary to suit City staff. TASK 4.0 NOTICE OF PREPARATION AND PROJECT SCOPING 4.1 Initial Study/Notice of Preparation PCR will prepare an Initial Study providing an explanation for the responses to each environmental question on the City's Initial Study Checklist. This is particularly important for issues which are not to be addressed in the EIR, so that a decision not to address an issue is backed by a thoughtful and reasonable explanation. Based on the EIR sections identified in the RFP, the preliminary Initial Study conclusions have been assumed; however, it is possible that upon more detailed project information and further scrutiny, PCR will identify different or fewer environmental impacts. PCR will also provide any additional documentation necessary for City circulation of the Notice of Preparation (NOP). Upon finalization of the Project Description, a Rancho View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 4 November 20, 1996 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule NOP will be prepared by PCR for signature by the City. PCR will then coordinate with the City in developing a list identifying the interested parties, property owners, and proper agencies for distribution of. the NOP and prepare up to 50 copies of the NOP packages which PCR-will mail out. Notification labels and radius maps would be provided by the applicant or by PCR at the applicant's separate expense for all aspects of noticing. 4.2 Scoping Meeting PCR will attend and participate in one scoping meeting for the Rancho View EIR to solicit community and agency input on issues to be addressed in the EIR. TASK 5.0 PREPARE DRAFT EIR The EIR will address each of the environmental issues of concern identified in the Initial Study, and the format of the EIR will follow the order of the Initial Study Checklist. The scope of work below identifies the components of the EIR documentation and process. 5.1 Summary and Introduction The Summary is intended to encapsulate the entire EIR in order to provide a synopsis of the project's predicted impacts. It will identify, in an overview fashion, the project under consideration, its objectives, and design features which will be implemented to obviate potential adverse impacts. The Summary will also identify and briefly discuss, as mandated by CEQA, the impacts (whether beneficial or adverse, significant as well as nonsignificant), and proposed mitigation associated with project implementation and will contain a summary analysis of the alternatives to the proposed plans. The Summary will also include a table identifying all of the issues evaluated, along with conclusions regarding project impacts, the recommended mitigation measures, and a statement of the level of significance after mitigation. Project alternatives, including the environmentally superior option, will be summarized and identified in this section. The Introduction will provide: 1, Relevant background information regarding the conversion of the former Rancho View school site to commercial uses and the City's and the applicant's goals in this regard; Rancho View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 5 November 20, 1996 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule 2. Disclose the public involvement process, including participation in public hearings and workshops and the submittal of comments to the Notice of Preparation and regarding the Draft EIR. 3. Identify areas of public controversy and concern. 5.1.2 Project Description The Project Description will lay the groundwork for the environmental analyses and, as such, PCR will ensure that sufficient project information is provided to support the environmental analyses. Related projects will also be included for the purpose of examining the possible cumulative impacts of these and similar projects. The focus of the analysis will be to evaluate proposed land use and zoning within, and in the vicinity of, the project areas, and identify any land use constraints that may exist for the project sites. This section shall be composed of three subsections: Location and Boundaries, Statement of Objectives, and Project Characteristics. 5.1.2.1 Location and Boundaries This subsection will provide a description of the size, location, and boundaries of the Rancho View project site. The site's location within the southern California region relative to the City of Huntington Beach, the City's business districts, residential districts, communities and surrounding cities will be described and illustrated. This subsection will also contain a description and illustration of general plan land uses and designated zoning. A brief description of the general characteristics of the Rancho View project area will be included. This description will utilize maps and other graphics, including regional and neighborhood location maps, and will show the precise location and boundaries of the project on a United States Geological Survey or other suitable base map. The location of the project will also appear on a regional map. 5.1.2.2 Statement of Objectives A Statement of Project Objectives regarding the manner in which the applicant proposes to develop the Rancho View site will be developed in coordination with the applicant and City staff. These objectives will generally be planning -oriented, environmental and socioeconomic. Based on court decisions regarding alternatives, the Statement of Objectives can be expected to play an important role in the EIR process. This discussion will set the framework for the selection of a range of alternatives to be evaluated within the EIR. Rancho View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 6 November 20, 1996 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule 5.1.2.3 Project Characteristics This subsection will commence with an overview of the project components 'and the history of the site. The general information contained within the overview will be presented and illustrated in computer -generated graphics where appropriate. Included in this subsection will be the following: • General description of technical, economic, environmental characteristics • Intended uses of EIR, including list of agencies expected to use EIR and list of discretionary approvals • Environmental Setting • Regional Setting, with an emphasis on rare or unique environmental resources 5.2 Impact Analysis 5.2.1 Earth Conditions Utilizing the Geotechnical Analysis to be provided by the project applicant, PCR will summarize the general and site specific grading and seismic information included in the Analysis into this section. Setting information may also be supplemented by information obtained from the City's General Plan and any other relevant studies. . A summary of the findings and recommendations of the Geotechnical Analyses will also be provided in this section. Based on information from this study, construction and operational project impacts will be quantified and analyzed for the Rancho View site. There is a potential for soil contamination on this site which is addressed below in the Hazardous Materials section. Mitigation measures will be proposed in response to conclusions of significant project impacts. Potential air quality and noise impacts related to construction activities will be addressed in the Air Quality and Noise sections, respectively. 5.2.2 Air Quality PCR will prepare the Air Quality Technical Analysis for the Rancho View project. Setting information may be supplemented by information obtained from the City's General Plan, General Plan EIR, and any other relevant studies. This air quality analysis will consists of the following five components: (1) general information, (2) construction emissions, (3) stationary emissions, Rancho View Develdpment Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City or Huntington Beach page 7 Piovember 20, 1996 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule (4) regional mobile source emissions, and (5) local mobile source emissions. All quantitative analyses will be conducted in accordance with procedures set forth by the California Air Resources Board and the SCAQMD. The air quality analysis will consist of the following components: • Regulatory Setting, which will discuss all pertinent air quality statutes and regulations, including national Ambient Air Quality Standards and the Regional Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP); • Existing Air Quality Conditions, including regional meteorology and local conditions as measured by the SCAQMD. • Construction Emissions, including emissions from construction equipment, earthmoving operations, construction worker and delivery trips and the application of architectural coatings and building materials which release volatile organic compounds (VOCs). All emissions will be calculated on a daily and quarterly basis. • Regional Mobile Source Emissions, including quantification of emissions from project - generated traffic, using regional travel characteristic data obtained from SCAG and the SCAQMD and the EMFAC7F1.1 emission factor model. • RegionaLStatimaly Source -Emissions, consisting of quantification of emissions from electricity production and natural gas consumption. • Lacal_Mobile_Source_Emissions, consisting of analysis of traffic impact on localized carbon monoxide concentrations in terms of exceeding Federal and State ambient one - hour and eight -hour carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations at up to three receptor locations, with and without the impact of project development, utilizing the CALINE 4 model. Additional locations may be optionally modeled, for a time and materials fee. • Conformity with the Regional Air nay Management Plan (AQMPI, conducted in accordance with the procedures set forth by SCAG. All quantitative analyses will be conducted in accordance to procedures set forth by the California Air Resources Board and the SCAQMD and compared to the significance thresholds established by SCAQMD or, in the case of CO, the 1-hour and 8-hour ambient air quality standards. Mitigation measures will be proposed in response to conclusions of significant project impacts. Mitigation measures for air quality and traffic impacts are closely related. PCR will coordinate mitigation programs with existing and anticipated City policies with respect to trip reduction techniques and guidelines and with other mitigation programs in effect near the project site, as applicable. Rancho View Development Project ElR Planning Consultants Research City or Huntington Beach Page 8 November 20, 1996 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule 5.2.3 Drainage Utilizing the Hydrology Analysis to be provided by the project applicant, 'PCR will summarize the general and site specific hydrologic and drainage characteristics of the project sites. Based on calculations from these studies, project impacts related to increased. runoff and the reduction of permeable surfaces will be quantified and discussed in the EIR by PCR within the context of the area surrounding the site. Potential impacts with respect to storm drain infrastructure and associated flooding conditions (especially those related to the project proximity to an Orange County flood control channel) will be discussed in the EIR, based upon the Hydrology Analysis. Drainage problems are anticipated on- and off -site and methods to reduce or eliminate these problems will be included as mitigation in the EIR. 5.2.4 Water/Natural Resource Energy Impacts It is anticipated that the applicant will have a water analysis performed regarding the nature of groundwater supplies and water quality. Three is a potential for groundwater contamination which is addressed below in the hazardous materials section. This information will be analyzed to determine the effect, if any, implementation of the proposed project would have on the groundwater system, including any underground aquifers. Criteria will be developed to determine if the development could potentially affect underground aquifers. Mitigation measures will be proposed in response to conclusions of significant project impacts. 5.2.5 Aesthetics PCR will prepare the Aesthetics section of the EIR, including a synopsis of the tree survey. Aspects of urban design will also be addressed, such as the loss of unpaved open space, the character and role of the public realm, and transitions in scale between uses and properties. Impacts regarding nighttime lighting will be addressed. City codes regarding signage will also be analyzed. Other potential aesthetics impacts include on -street parking and the placement of loading docks and trash bins.. Possible mitigation programs include. the need for alternative project design standards and replacement requirements for existing tz:ees, if appropriate, will be included in this section. Because this project is surrounded by residential neighborhoods on all sides, potential aesthetic issues may be more intense at this site and will be addressed accordingly. Rancho View Development Project FIR PlannIng Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 9 November 20, 1996 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule 5.2.6 Noise Noise may be a significant issue to the community at the Rancho View site, as there are residences adjacent to the property. PCR will analyze the potential ambient noise impacts associated with the proposed project by calculating the anticipated noise levels to be encountered within the areas adjacent to the site, in particular the residential areas. These impacts will be compared to the existing ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project and City noise guidelines to determine the impacts of construction and traffic. In order to establish a baseline for noise analyses, PCR will undertake a noise monitoring program in the surrounding neighborhoods. Temporary noise impacts from construction will be discussed in terms of information on proposed construction schedules and equipment utilization available from the developer and/or construction manager. Potential operational noise sources, such as loading dock areas, fast food drive -through speaker systems, and traffic, will be identified and distance -based attenuation estimates used to project impacts to the surrounding uses. Noise impacts will be evaluated relative to the post -construction occupancy and operation of the proposed project, as well as the noise impacts associated with project -related incremental increase in vehicular traffic. Mitigation measures will be proposed in response to conclusions of significant project impacts. 5.2.7 Light and Glare Light and glare may be a significant community issue at the Rancho View site, as there are residences adjacent to the property. PCR will review the existing conditions in the immediate vicinity with regard to reflective light and nighttime illumination. A description of potential light and glare impacts on the surrounding land uses, in particular where residential areas are adjacent or nearby, will be included. Mitigation measures will concentrate on focusing lighting on -site and will be consistent with City policies. 5.2.8 Land Use Compatibility A Zone Change and Conditional Use Permit will be required for the Rancho View Site and will be analyzed in this section. PCR will provide the analysis for issues related to land use. Setting information may be supplemented by information obtained from the City's General Plan, zoning regulations, and other relevant studies and contact with the City Department of Community Development. The impact of the proposed project in improving circulation and linkages and the quality of life perceptions in the project area will be components of this analysis. The required entitlement for the proposed uses on the two site will be evaluated in order to determine whether the proposed uses for the project site are compatible with existing and projected land uses as well as the goals, objectives and policies of the City of Huntington Beach General Plan. The ability of the project to provide mitigation for any potentially incompatible impacts Rancho View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 10 November 20, 1996 0 - 0 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule (e.g., traffic, parking on- and off -site, pedestrian/traffic interface) will be addressed in detail in the issue chapters of the EIR, and summarized in the land use section. Development of mitigation programs, including the need for identification of design guidelines, if appropriate, will be included in this evaluation. 5.2.9 Population and Housing -It is expected that the Rancho View development will generate substantially more new employees than the existing uses. PCR will analyze the impacts of these population and employment gains, utilizing background data from numerous sources, including City of Huntington Beach graphic data, the 1990 U.S. Census, and Southern California Association of Governments forecasts. Potential housing demand impacts created by employees working at the developed site will be addressed. Mitigation measures will be proposed in response to conclusions of significant project impacts. 5.2.10 Traffic/Circulation RKJK will prepare a Transportation/Circulation Technical Report, to be attached as an Appendix to the Draft EIR and summarized within the EIR, as follows: The traffic study will address the proposed project site for the following time frames: • Existing conditions • Existing plus 5 years of growth including other cumulative projects • Existing plus 5 years of growth plus cumulative projects • Build out conditions without the project • Build out conditions with the Rancho View project Traffic signal warrant analysis would be required at three locations as defined below. Additionally, left turn warrant analysis would be required at four locations along Newland Street as identified below. A total of three intersections for both the Rancho View and Crest View projects would have to be reviewed in the study area including the following: Rancho View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 11 November 20, 1996 0 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule Existing Traffic Signal Locations Slater Avenue (NS) at: • Gothard Street (EW) • Beach Boulevard (EW) • Newland Street (include left turn warrants) (EW) The following Scope of Work is proposed: • Field review existing conditions in the study area, including the number of travel Ianes and traffic control at ten (10) study area intersections. • Obtain A.M./P.M. peak hour traffic counts at the ten (10) study area intersections. Obtain 24-hour daily traffic counts at up to fifteen (15) highway links. • Determine existing level of service based upon the ICU (Intersection Capacity Utilization) methodology at the ten (10) study area intersections. • Determine the project trip generation, trip distribution and traffic assignment to the adjoining roadway system for the approved uses, the proposed project and two alternative projects. • Determine other cumulative project trip generation, trip distribution and traffic assignment for the five-year cumulative analysis. • Establish a five year growth rate estimated to be between 2-3 %, based upon preliminary discussions with Jim Otterson, City of Huntington Beach Traffic Engineer. • Determine existing plus five years of growth plus cumulative approved projects' traffic volumes without the project and level of service at the ten (10) study area intersections. • Determine existing plus five years of growth plus cumulative approved projects with each of the projects separately and together traffic volumes, and level of service at the ten (10) study area intersections. • identify traffic improvements necessary to meet minimum City level of service standards for existing plus five years of growth plus cumulative approved project plus the project impacts. • Determine left turn traffic signal warrants analysis at up to four study intersections Rancho View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 12 November24, 1996 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule in the study area. • Determine traffic signal warrants analysis at three intersections in the study area. • Determine Build out traffic projections and level of service without the project at the ten (10) study area intersections in the study area, using RKJK Tranplan Model. • Determine Build out traffic volumes and level of service with each of the projects separately and together at the ten (10) study area intersections using RKJK Tranplan Model. • Identify Build out traffic improvements necessary at the ten (10) study area intersections. • Review internal circulation for the conceptual site plan especially with respect to truck access. • Identify traffic recommendations including additional lanes, access control, traffic control, etc. • Summarize the results of the study in a traffic impact report for the project. Separate documents will be prepared for both the Rancho View -and Crest View sites, at the appropriate time. Ultimately, the analysis for each project will be linked together. • Respond to comments from the City. Other potential issues include the pedestrian/traffic interface and on- and off -site parking. All supporting traffic count data and intersection Level of Service calculations will be provided in the Technical Report. For inclusion in the Draft EIR, a summary .of the findings and recommendations of the Technical Report (including traffic and parking impact evaluations) will be provided. The report will include appropriate text, tables and graphics to allow critical review by the public. Appropriate mitigation measures will be recommended. A total of seven intersections; plus the three Slater Avenue intersections ,doted above, would have to be reviewed in the Rancho View study area including the following: Note: Study limit - between Slater and Talbert Avenue Rancho View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach page 13 November 20, 1996 0 - 0 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule • Beach Boulevard (EW) • Newland Street (EW) Warner Avenue (NS) at: • Gothard Street (EW) • Beach Boulevard (EW) • Newland Street (include left turn warrants) (EW) • Magnolia Street (EW) • I-405 (S) On Ramp (EW) New Traffic Signal Warrant Study Rancho View School site at Rotterdam Lane (Standard 4-way intersection) 5.2.11 Recreation The proposed project may reduce the number of potential park sites for the future within the City of Huntington Beach, resulting in an impact on the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities. The increase in employee population could create an impact on the parks in the vicinity. PCR will review the City's Open Space Element to assist in determining whether the City has a deficiency in park space and what impact the proposed projects will have on the City's parks and recreation. The potential impact of the project on youth sports facilities through the loss of open space field areas will also be evaluated. Mitigation measures will be proposed in response to conclusions of significant project impacts. 5.2.12 Public ServiceslUtilities The Rancho View project site is located within an urbanized setting' with developed networks of public services. Based on information provided by the City, other agencies, and the applicant, PCR will identify the service and utility providers for the area and in coordination with these service providers, provide an inventory of existing public facilities and services and an assessment of the impacts of both the proposed project and cumulative growth upon the delivery of fire, police, park, school and library services in the project area. This inventory of existing public facilities and services will include an assessment of existing demand, level of service, and Rancho View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 14 November 20, 1996 • � i Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule the quantity, adequacy and location of facilities serving the proposed project site. Assessments of the adequacy of facilities and levels of service will be based upon the judgment of the service provider. Assessments of the adequacy of existing infrastructure will reflect the judgments of the service providers. PCR will estimate the projected demand for these services and evaluate, in conjunction with the cognizant utility provider, the capacity of existing infrastructure to accommodate future growth within the area. There is a potential for increased police and ' fire activity due to the increased activity within the proposed development. The need for additional infrastructure will be established, if any. Incorporation of conservation technologies and/or use restrictions will be discussed. PCR will review policies and programs of the City and other service providers and recommend mitigation measures consistent with these programs. 5.2.13 Sewage/Solid Waste Disposal The project site is located within a fully urbanized setting with extensively developed infrastructure systems. Based on information provided by the City and other relevant agencies, PCR will identify the agencies that provide sewage and solid waste service for the area and, in coordination with these service providers, provide an inventory of existing public facilities and services, a discussion of the adequacy of the infrastructure systems, and an assessment of the impacts of the project and cumulative growth upon the delivery of sewage and solid waste disposal service in the project area. Mitigation measures will be developed as required consistent with the policies and programs of the City and other public service providers. 5.2.14 Hazardous Materials/Risk of Upset Potential risk of upset issues for both sites include the potential for accidents created by an increased pedestrian/traffic interface, and the potential for annoying odors emanating from trash bins or delivery -service related operations, in particular for those residents located adjacent to the Rancho View site. In addition, mitigation measures will be proposed in response to conclusions of significant project impacts. Because previous Rancho View site uses include a bus maintenance and parking yard, hazardous materials conditions may exist on the property which have not yet been. completely characterized. A site assessment, including a characterization of existing conditions of contamination and any associated health risk assessments is anticipated to be undertaken by the Rancho View Nveto ment Project EIR Planning Conaultante Research City of Huntington Beach Page 15 November 20, 1996 • - 0 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule applicant's sub -consultant. This assessment will be summarized in the Hazardous Materials section. Appropriate mitigation measures will be proposed for any significant impacts. If necessary, future actions with respect to contamination characterization or a remediation program for the site will be included. It will be necessary to establish that development of the project will not impede or otherwise interfere with planned or ongoing remediation activity, if it is required. PCR suggests that the strategy for approaching this issue be developed jointly with the project applicant and city staff with mitigation measures structured to implement the chosen strategy 5.2.15 Cumulative impacts PCR will work with City staff in creating an appropriate list of related projects that will potentially have cumulative impacts. The cumulative impact of these related projects will then be addressed with regards to each impact category. 5.3 Project Alternatives Analysis CEQA requires the consideration of alternatives to proposed projects. These alternatives will be established in discussions between PCR, the applicant, and/or City staff during the initial coordination meetings. For the purposes of this proposal, a total of three alternatives in addition to the mandatory no -project alternative will be considered, in this section of the EIR. Consideration of additional alternatives will require modifications to the project budget. The EIR will include an analysis of these alternatives based on CEQA guidelines and PCR's understanding of current CEQA practice addressing the appropriate approach and level of detail for the analysis of alternatives. For each alternative, a description of the alternative, consideration of the alternative's feasibility in relation to the program's basic objectives, and a comparative analysis of the environmental impacts attributable to the alternative versus those associated with the proposed project for each of the environmental categories discussed above will be provided. Project alternatives will be tested in a somewhat more qualitative manner than the project analysis described above. PCR will work closely with the applicant to establish the relationship of each alternative to the project's basic objectives. 1 5.4 Other CEQA Mandated Sections PCR will prepare the remaining three CEQA-required analysis sections within this chapter Rancho View Develol5ment Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 16 November 20, 1996 • Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule of the EIR: (1) Relationship between Local Short -Term Uses and Long -Term Productivity, (2) Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes, and (3) Growth -Inducing Impacts. 5.4.1 Impacts Found Not to be Significant The impacts listed on the Initial Study that were found not to be significant will be identified in this section of the EIR. An explanation of why they were not considered significant in the Initial Study process will be included. 5.4.2 Growth Inducing Impacts PCR will prepare a discussion of the Rancho View project growth -inducing impacts. The project relationship to area growth will be explored and analyzed. The stimuli for growth will be presented and discussed in terms of the project's capacity for growth -inducement. In addition, the section will contain a broad overview discussion of the projects' consistency with the City of Huntington Beach policies in this regard. 5.4.3 Significant and Unavoidable Impacts PCR's analysis of significant irreversible changes will consider the use of non-renewable resources, commitments of future generations to proposed uses, and irreversible environmental changes associated with the two proposed projects. The analysis may include such topics as: (1) irreversible changes to the visual character; (2) the project's overall relationship to regional air quality; (3) irreversible changes to biological resources; (4) resources consumed by the project; and (5) demand/commitment of public services and infrastructure. 5.4.4 Long-Term/Short-Term Impacts PCR will prepare an analysis which evaluates the short and long-term considerations implied in the committal of resources, both natural and man-made, when a project is implemented versus the short-term and long-term socio-economic benefits derived from that commitment. TIfe analysis will contain discussions on such issues as conversion of natural open space, development of infrastructure, fiscal impacts (See Task 8), construction and operational impacts, and long-term demand for public services. Rancho View Develo went Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beath page 17 November24,1996 • Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule 5.5 Draft Mitigation Monitoring Program PCR will submit the Draft Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) to the City as soon as possible after the mitigation measures in the Screencheck Draft EIR have been subjected to City review and comment. The MMP will contain a compilation of mitigation measures presented in the EIR, listed by impact category, with agency responsibility and monitoring phase identified for each measure. These mitigation measures and the established monitoring program will be fully consistent with City policies and.programs. The Draft Mitigation Monitoring Program will be included in the DEIR as a Technical Appendix. 5.6 Draft EIR Document Production PCR will submit three (3) screencheck copies of the Rancho View EIR Initial Study and Notice of Preparation to the City. Subsequent to the Internal Team review and the City's review of the Draft EIR data base, PCR will incorporate revisions identified by the City's review. In addition, a final camera-ready version of the Draft EIR will be provided to the City for approval prior to printing and public distribution. PCR will complete changes to the Draft EIR following submission of the Draft EIR data base and will publish the Draft EIR. Budgeted time is based on the assumption that staff comments will be primarily editorial and that no additional analysis will be requited. For budgeting purposes, it is assumed that PCR will produce ten (10) screencheck copies of the Draft EIR, one unbound, reproducible original copy, produce and distribute up to 100 bound copies of the Public Draft EIR and 100 bound copies of the Technical Appendices on behalf of the City. In addition, a computer data disk containing the written text and tables, charts, and graphics formatted for Microsoft Word for Windows 6.0 will be provided to the City. It is assumed that the Rancho View Draft EIR will be circulated for public comment for the standard 45- day review period. TASK 6.0 FINAL EIR AND STAFF REPORTS At the conclusion of the public review period, the City will forward all comments received on the Draft EIR to PCR. In consultation with City staff, the PCR team will prepare a draft Response to Comments. The Responses to Comments document is the primary component of the Final EIR. It generally constitutes the bulk of the Final EIR and is reviewed by the City prior to the completion of the Final EIR. This document will respond to all written comments received from the general public, responsible agencies and other interested parties during the public review Rancho View Develogiment Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 18 November 20, 1996 0 - 0 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule period, as well as all comments received at any public hearing on the Draft EIR held during the public review period. PCR understands that City practice includes distribution of the Responses To Comments document to commentators prior to completion of the Final EIR as a separate processing task. For budgeting purposes, it is assumed that three (3) copies of the Rancho View EIR Draft Responses to Comments will be submitted to the City for review. PCR will also produce and distribute up to 75 copies of the Draft EIR Response To Comments to commentators, per City practice. Based upon the comments received on the Draft EIR, PCR will prepare a Final EIR which incorporates revisions to the Draft designed to address the issues raised from the review of the Draft EIR. It is understood that the Rancho View project has received opposition from the surrounding neighborhoods. Depending upon the potential controversy of the project, general economic and social conditions in the area, and other factors which are wholly unpredictable and beyond the control of either the City or PCR at this juncture, public reaction to the Draft EIR could range from moderate to strong opposition. In the event that the public responses to the Draft EIR is greater than expected, PCR would meet with City staff to discuss solutions and develop adjustments to the Final EIR work program and budget as necessary. Upon incorporating the review comments received from City staff on the Screencheck Final EIR, PCR will prepare the Public Final EIR. Simultaneously with preparation of the second draft Final EIR, PCR will prepare a Final Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP), reflecting changes in mitigation measures as a result of comments received on the Screencheck Final EIR. In addition, the revised FOR will incorporate all revisions to the Responses to Comments, as well as the Revised Summary, and Additions and Corrections to the DEIR. PCR will incorporate all of the revisions to the Draft Responses to Comments which are requested by the City into the revised Final Responses to Comments. The Final Responses to Comments shall be included as an appendix to the Final EIR, when that document is completed. 6.1 Final EIR Document Production and Distribution A minimum of three (3) screencheck copies of the Response to Comments will be submitted to the City by PCR. Subsequent to the internal team review and the City's review of the Draft EIR data base, PCR will incorporate requested revisions. PCR will work with the City to provide sufficient copies of the FEIR for distribution to commenting agencies at least IO days prior to certification of the Final EIR. A minimum of ten screencheck copies of the Final EIR Rancho View Devc1opinent Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 19 November 20, 1996 • 0 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule data base shall be submitted to the City. City staff review/approval of the camera-ready FEIR shall be obtained prior to final publication. PCR will complete all changes resulting from City staff review of the Final EIR data base and will publish and distribute the Final EIR.- PCR will publish and distribute up to 100 bound copies of the Rancho View Final EIR, including Responses to Comments and Corrections and Additions and one unbound, reproducible, original copy for the City, once the document has received final approval. In addition, PCR will submit one computer data disk of the Final EIR to the City, including the Response to Comments and Corrections and all tables, charts, and graphs, formatted for Microsoft Word for Windows 6.0. It is assumed that revision and/or reproduction of the Draft EIR will not be required at this point. A minimum of three (3) screencheck copies of the Certification Documents and one (1) reproducible final copy of the Certification Documents shall be provided by PCR to the City. 6.2 Staff Reports PCR will produce three (3) staff reports for the Rancho View EIR public hearings at the Planning commission and City Council. City staff will provide PCR with format and other necessary guidance to assure that PCR can efficiently produce staff reports in accordance with City practice. PCR will produce a mir imum of three (3) screencheck copies and one unbound, reproducible copy of the Planning Commission and City Council Staff Reports to the City. In addition, PCR will submit one computer data disk of the Staff Reports, including ' all tables, charts, and graphs, formatted for Microsoft Word for Windows 6.0. It is assumed that City staff will produce copies of the Staff Reports for decision -maker and community distribution. TASK 7.0 COMMUNITY MEETINGS, WORKSHOPS, AND HEARINGS PCR will attend up to four (4) community meetings, inclusive of the scoping meeting and the facilitated community workshops. PCR will attend up to three (3) public hearings with the Planning Commission/City Council for the Rancho View EIR. 7.1 Community Meetings MIG Communications will provide specialized community facilitation services for .the Rancho View project. MIG has budgeted up to three meetings for the Rancho View project and has prepared a unit cost proposal for each meeting ($2,980.00/ meeting) as follows: Rancho View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 20 November 24, 1996 • 0 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule 7.1.1 Pre -Meeting Preparation MIG will confer with project team by telephone on the strategy and objectives for each meeting. The discussions will include the agenda, logistics coordination, and any background materials to be used or presented at the meetings. 7.1.2 Meeting Facilitation and Graphic Recording MIG will provide a facilitator (Daniel Iacofano) and a graphic note taker to support each community meeting. 7.1.3 Preparation of Meeting Summary Report MIG will prepare a written summary of verbal and written comments received during the meetings. MIG will provide one copy to the City and PCR for photocopying and distribution. TASK 8.0 FISCAL AND COMPETITIVE IMPACT ANALYSES Stanley R. Hoffman and Associates (SRHA) will prepare the fiscal and competitive impact analyses for the Rancho View EIR. 8.1 Fiscal Impact Analysis 8.1.1 Project Description This task includes the definition of the proposed project and one alternative as for land use, improvement and land valuation, retail orientation or residential product mix (depending on the alternative), taxable sales generation, population/employment generation, and other development . information as required. A very important factor will be the determination of retail orientation and estimation of potential tenant mix and sales generation by retail category (shopper goods, building materials, eating and drinking, etc.). Sales generation assumptions will also be used in Task 2 in the determination of competitive impacts. 8.1.2 Derivation of Revenue and Cost Factors This task assumes that revenue and cost factors were developed for the Crest View site. Rancho View Developlhent Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beaeh Page 21 November 20, 1996 • 0 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule This task will consist only of verifying the factors for use in the Rancho View site. This task will incorporate budget analysis and interviews with key City staff conducted for the Crest View site, Ieading to the formulation of fiscal factors for projecting recurring revenues. and costs. 'Revenue factors will be developed 'to estimated incremental property tax, sales and use tax,' state subventions (where applicable), fines and forfeitures, utility franchises, business license fees, property transfer tax, one-time building permit fees, and other revenues as identified. Cost factors will be developed for police protection, structural fire protection, road maintenance and other public works costs, community services, and relevant citywide overhead. Revenue and cost factors will be derived using either the multiplier or case study method. 8.1.3 Projection of Fiscal Impacts The consultant's fiscal model will be used to project recurring revenue and costs to the City at build out of the proposed uses and the alternative uses. Sales taxes, a significant component for the retail scenario, will be adjusted to reflect only the net increase, taking into account potential competitive impacts on existing retailers. If a residential alternative is defined, a purchasing power component from new households will be included as supporting retail sales in the City, and a portion will be credited as incremental sales tax to Huntington Beach. 8.2 Competitive Impact Analysis This task is included to address the City Council's concern regarding competitive impacts of "big box" or high -volume discount retailers on existing retail establishments in Huntington Beach. Since the tenant mix for the proposed retail use is not yet finalized, the specific identification of impacted businesses is premature. Rather, a quantitative approach is proposed to determine the marginal citywide impact. It is expected that part of the Crest View competitive impact analysis will be incorporated into this study, resulting in a cost savings for this portion of the budget. 8.2.1 Definition of Trade Area This task will involve defining the relevant trade area for purposes of analysis. The trade area will encompass a five -mile ring surrounding the site, and will include portions of the Cities of Huntington Beach and Fountain Valley. The trade area will be defined in coordination with the project team and will be based on the location of major arterials, population concentrations and competitive retail centers and establishments. The trade areas will consist of census tracts to Rancho View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 22 November20, 1996 0 - 0 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule facilitate data assembly and to segment the market demand into specific locations for input into the retail gravity model. 8.2.2 Estimation of Retail Demand Demographic information will be quantified to estimate household purchasing power in the primary and secondary trade areas, incorporating household income, retail propensities to spend segmented by income group, and distribution of demand across retail goods and services likely to be offered by tenants in the proposed project. Similarly, SCAG's forecasts of household growth at the census tract level, supplemented with City data, will be used to determine future demand within the trade area. 8.2.3 Estimated Sales Capture In this task, the total sales generated on site will be distributed across the likely market area. The consultant's GIS-based. retail gravity model will be employed to estimate this distribution under two alternative tenant mixes--(l) a high -volume discount orientation with a high -profile anchor. (2) a neighborhood shopping center consisting of a supermarket and in -line shops. The model uses a distance -decay function to simulate the inverse relationship between distance from the site and potential capture from a block of households in a particular census tract. Sales capture will also be segmented to show purchases made by households within the City and by households located outside the City limits. 8.2.4 Determination of Marginal Impact The analysis of demand and supply in the previous tasks will be combined for an evaluation of the potential impact of the proposed center on the City of Huntington Beach. The impact analysis will focus on the net benefit to the City taking into account any potential impacts on other retailers. Key issues will include the balance of supply and demand and the likely leakage from existing stores to a proposed center in both the short and long-term. The net benefit, expressed in taxable sales per square foot, will be*used as the basis for the estimation of incremental sales tax in the fiscal analysis. Rancho View Developtnent Project E1R Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 23 November 20, 1996 i - 0 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule 8.3 Management, Documentation and Meetings 8.3.1 Documentation The results of our analysis and all data assumptions will be documented in report form suitable to the City's needs. An executive summary will also be presented that will be directed toward decision -makers. A draft report will be prepared for review and comment and modified as appropriate. Ten copies of the final report plus a camera ready copy will be provided. 8.3.2 Meetings and Coordination Meetings and coordination are assumed for the preparation and presentation of the draft and final reports. Major public workshops and public hearings will be attended, as authorized on a time and materials basis. TASK 9.0 TREE SURVEY James Barry Environmental Consulting, a certified arborist, will provide site -specific tree surveys for -the Rancho View project site. The tree survey will be performed entirely in the field. The trees will be individually evaluated and a number assigned to each tree on the map. The survey will involve gathering of limited physical information on the tree, specifically the trunk diameter, estimated height and spread. The focus will be on present condition of each tree. Because the potential for preservation depends on the ability to control a tree's root system, this factor will also be considered. Photographs will be taken of significant tree features, especially potential limb hazards. The report will list the notable information for each tree, with the survey keyed to the project map. If preservation is feasible, a preservation plan will be prepared. The plan will discuss construction protection measures and root mitigation. More specific recommendations would be made in light of subsequently identified site development issues. Rancho View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 24 November 20, 1996 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule TASK 10.0 CEQA NOTIFICATION AND STAFF -LEVEL CERTIFICATION DOCUMENTS 10.1 CEQA Notification In addition to the NOP discussed in Task 4.1, PCR will prepare and distribute all other CEQA notification documents on behalf of the City per CEQA. These include the Notice of Determination, Notice of Completion, and distribution of documents to the State CIearinghouse. 10.2 Certification Documents Utilizing samples of similar documents to be provided by City staff, PCR will prepare and distribute the relevant certification documents to accompany the public review and decision process. These are anticipated to include: • Scoping meeting related to Task 4.2 • Public meeting notices related to Task 7.0 • Public meeting agendas related to Task 7.0 • Staff Report on EIR to Planning Commission • Staff Report on EIR to City Council • Statement of Findings and Fact • Statement of Overriding Considerations • Draft Resolutions • Finalize Mitigation Monitoring Program TASK 11.0 STAFF INTERACTION AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT PCR will function as an extension of City staff in its preparation and distribution of the EIR and supporting documentation by maintaining an open and continual dialogue with City of Huntington Beach Community Development and other Departments, as appropriate. This will involve an initial kick-off meeting, regular contacts by telephone and meetings as reasonably necessary for the City to relay comments to PCR following ' staff review of PCR's work (five Rancho View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Hun 11ngton He Page 25 November 20, 1996 0 0 Contract Scope of Work, Budget & Schedule meetings assumed with City staff for the Rancho View project). PCR will send regular (either weeldy or bi-weekly) interface/status updates to the City staff. PCR is prepared to adhere to the proposed schedule outlined in the City's RFP. a Rancho View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 26 November 20, 199b • C. : . 11. BUDGET Major Task PCR* RKJK MIG** SRHA Barry Arborist Total 1.0 Proj. Init. 895 540 0 0 0 1,425.000 2.0 Data Rev. 1140 0 0 0 0 1,140.000 3.0 Proj. Des. 742.50 0 0 0 0 742.500 4.0 NOP/Scp. 1425 0 0 0 0 1,425.000 5.0 Draft EIR 21550.50 6000 0 0 0 27,550.500 6.0 Final EIR 5097 1460 0 0 0 6,557.000 7.0 Com. Mtg. 3900 0 8940 0 0 12,840.000 $.0 Fisc.Anayl. 0 0 0 5760 0 5,760.000 9.0 Tree Surv. 0 0 0 0 550 550.000 10.0 Not./Cent. 3000 0 0 0 0 3,000.000 11.0 Proj. Mgt. 6150 0 0 0 0 6,150.000 Labor Subtotal 43,890.000 8,000.000 8,940.000 5,760.000 550.000 Direct u Cost SubtotalTotal 5661.25 Cost +10% 1,050.00 140.00 0 :L6,85IJ.25O 49,551.250 8,000*** 9,990.000 5,900.000 550.000 ►►ylm— • PCR tasks are given as fixed fees except for Task 6 (Final EIR) subject to the specyic assumptions in the proposal and the information provided in the RFP itself. Since the actual level of technical analysis and community input and attendant complexity cannot be reliably predicted or controlled by the City or PCR, Task 6 is given as an allowance that would be reviewed for fee adequacy to address actual conditions going forward from the completion of the Drnft EIR. • * Not -to -exceed Cost= $2,980.001meeting •�• plus costs (V10% Rancho View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 27 November 20, 1996 III. SCHEDULE The actual start date of the Rancho View project has not been determined. If project initiation occurs during the time frame of the Crest View EIR work, PCR believes thafthe time required for completion of tasks for the Rancho View EIR as depicted in our proposal dated September 13, 1996 could be met, subject to all of the relevant assumptions in the proposal and subsequent proposal modifications requested by the City. Rancho View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 28 November 2D, 1996 W. PROJECT TEAM The Rancho View Project Team will consist of the following key individuals the majority of whose qualifications were presented in PCR's original proposal: • Greg Broughton: Principal-in-Charge--CEQA strategy and public presentations. 19 Greg Vail: Principal -in -Charge --project management liaison, and local point of contact. • Stephanie Eyestone or Rick Harter: Project Manager --Documentation management and preparation; quality assurance and control. Depending upon actual start date of the Rancho View program, either Ms. Eyestone or Mr. Harter will be assigned as project manager. • Robert Hilman: Assistant Project Manager --Technical analysis and synthesis. Mr. Hilman's qualifications were presented in PCR's Ocean View Home Depot EIR proposal and are replicated as follows: Robert Hilman has over five years of experience in private and public sector planning, with expertise in environmental documentation, programmatic development, and land use planning. Mr. Hilman has prepared and processed numerous CEQA and NEPA documents, including Environmental Impact Reports and Statements, Initial. Studies; Notices of Preparation, Environmental Assessments, Mitigated Negative Declarations and Findings of No Significant Impact. Mr. Hilman has also undertaken third -party review of environmental documentation, crafted General Plans and Specific Plans, and has prepared and processed applications for land use entitlement. Mr. Hilman has drafted various sections of the Universal City Specific Plan EIR, including the project description, land use, geology, natural and artificial light, hydrology, and hazardous materials sections; crafted sections of the Westlake/Pico Union No. 2 Recovery Program EIR, including land use and alternatives; formulated responses to comments for the Lincoln Place Redevelopment Project EIR; managed the preparation and processing of the environmental documentation for the Palm Springs General Plan Update, the Palm Springs Classic Specific Plan, and the Shadowrock Planned Development District for the City of Palm Springs. Mr. Hilman holds a B.A. in Geography from Humboldt State University and an M.A. in Planning from CalPoly San Luis Obispo. Rancho View Development Project EIR Planning Consultants Research City of Huntington Beach Page 29 - November 20, 1996