Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
EIP ASSOCIATES - 1999-06-07
0CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CONNIE BROCKWAY CITY CLERK LETTER OF TRANSINHTTAL OF ITEAI APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL/ REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH DATE: August 14, 2000 TO: EIP Associates NYe601 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 1440 Street Los Angeles, CA 90025 City, State, Zip ATTENTION: DEPARTMENT: REGARDING: Amendment No. i - Preparation of focused EIR - Northam House Project. See Attached Action Agenda Item E-4 Date of Approval 8-7-00 Enclosed For Your Records Is An Executed Copy Of The Above Referenced Agenda Item. Remarks: 4 4� �� Connie Brockway City Clerk Attachments: Action Agenda Page X Agreement CC: H. Zelefsky Name D. Bankey Name Name Name C. Mendoza RCA Planning Department Planning Department Department Deparanent x Risk Management Dept X Bonds Insurance X Deed Other x x X RCA Agreement Insurance Other x X X RCA Agreemeat Insurance Other RCA Agreement Insurance Other RCA Agreement Insurance Other x Insurance (Telephone: 714-536-5227 ) Council/Agency Meeting Held: FS -_7 -- 00 ( 60e. i 17 Deferred/Continued to: Approved ❑ Con itionglly Approved ❑ Denie Ty Wj . bt rk's Signature ouncil Meeting Date: August 7, 2004 Department ID Number: PL40-20 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR ACTION SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS r SUBMITTED BY: RAY SILVER, City AdministratorX& PREPARED BY: HOWARD ZELEFSKY, Director of Planning SUBJECT: APPROVE CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 1 WITH EIP ASSOCIATES FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO COMPLETE PREPARATION OF A FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE NORTHAM HOUSE PROJECT Statement of Issue, Funding Source, Recommended Action, Alternative Action(s), Analysis, Environmental Status, Attachment(s) Statement of Issue: Transmitted for City Council's consideration is a request to amend the existing Contract between the City of Huntington Beach and EIP Associates for professional services to complete a Focused Environmental Impact Report for the Northam House Project. The original contract was for an eight (8) month period of time beginning on April 12, 1999, and expiring on December 11, 1999. However, due to delays which could not have been reasonably foreseen at the time of the initial proposal and contract execution, the project has not been completed. Approval of Amendment No. 1 will allow extending the time frame of the contract by an additional thirty-two (32) months, and will be retroactive to the expiration of the original contract. Funding Source: The Contract Amendment is for an extension of time to complete the Focused Environmental Impact Report for the Northam House Project. Therefore, there is no change in the financial structure of the original contract and the funding source section is not applicable. Recommended Action: Motion to: "Approve Amendment No. 1 to the Professional Services Contract between the City of Huntington Beach and EIP Associates to extend the contract, for preparation of the Focused EIR for the Northam House project, by an additional thirty-two (32) months retroactive to expiration of the original contract, and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign. REQUEST FOR ACTION MEETING DATE: August 7, 2000 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL00-20 Alternative Action(s): The City Council may make the following motion: 1. "Deny the request for Contract Amendment No. 1 between the City and EIP Associates." 2. "Continue the item and direct Staff accordingly." Analysis: A. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: PLC, the Northam House project proponent, proposes to subdivide 4.82 acres of land into 17 single- family residential lots located at 2110 Main Street (North side of Yorktown Avenue, east of Main Street). Implementation of the project, as proposed by the developer, requires the demolition of the remains of the Northam Ranch House, a locally significant historic structure, and removal of 134 mature, healthy trees. In June 2000, the Planning Commission certified the EIR but denied the Tentative Tract Map and Conditional Use Permit. PLC Land Company has appealed the Planning Commission's denial of the project. Because of PLC's appeal, EIP Associates will be required to attend additional meetings before the Planning Commission. Because of additional time required by EIP Associates to attend these meetings and prepare additional documentation, the original contract time must be amended to allow for payment of the additional services rendered. Staff recommends the City Council approve Amendment No. 1 to the contract, and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign. Environmental Status: Projects over which public agencies exercise ministerial authority, such as an amendment of a contract to prepare environmental review documents, are categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15300.1. Attachment(s): 1. Amendment No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement between the City and EIP Associates for Completion of the Northam Ranch House Focused EIR. i I 2. 1 Certificates of insurance I RCA Author: Duane R. Bankey PLOD-44 -2- 7124100 2:51 PM ATTACHMENT 1.. . . ..... AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND EIP ASSOCIATES FOR THE PREPARATION OF A FOCUSED ENVIRONMEI\TAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE 1\ORTHAM HOUSE PROJECT 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 EIP ASSOCIATES, a California corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT." WHEREAS, CITY and CONSULTANT are parties to that certain agreement, dated June 7, 1999, entitled "Professional Services Contract Between the City of Huntington Beach and EIP Associates for the Preparation of a Focused Environmental Impact Report for the Northam House Project," which agreement shall hereinafter be referred to as the "Original Agreement," and Since the execution of the Original Agreement, CITY has requested additional time be allotted to complete the scope of work from CONSULTANT and CONSULTANT has agreed to perform such work within the additional time; and CITY and CONSULTANT wish to amend the Original Agreement to reflect the additional time allotted to complete the scope of work to be performed by CONSULTANT, NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by CITY and CONSULTANT as follows: 1. AMENDMENT OF SECTION 3 OF THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT ENTITLED "TIME OF PERFORMANCE" Section 3 of the Original Agreement, entitled "Time of Performance, is hereby amended to read as follows: 4-s:4-2000 Agree: Amend 1-EIP Assoc. RLS 00-0229 3'2300 3. TIME OF PERFORMANCE Time is of the essence of this Agreement. The services of the CONSULTANT are to commence as soon as practicable after the execution of this Agreement and all tasks specified in Exhibit "A" shall be completed no later than thirty-two (32) months from the date of this Agreement. These times may be extended with the written permission of the CITY. The time for performance of the tasks identified in Exhibit "A" are generally to be shown in the Scope of Services on the Work Program/Project Schedule. This schedule may be amended to benefit the PROJECT if mutually agreed by the CITY and CONSULTANT. 2. REAFFIRMATION 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. CONSULTANT: EIP ASSOCIATES a California corporation By: Its: , Ice By It C REVIEWED AND APPROVED: City A inistrator 4 s:4-2000 Agree: Amend I-rIV Assoc. RLS 00-0229 3'2300 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, a municipal corporation of the State of Cali forma ATTES City Clerk APPROVED AS TOO FORM: City �tomeyy �,,,•- - 24,256'r INITI TED ND APPROVED:S I3' irml ,Fx h/ti17L 7� 1JWe ch meh¢ f Pnposal to Prrpare the Northam Ranch House Focused EIR 5. Scope of Work RIP will take responsibility for project initiation and organization, preparation of an CEQA notices, data compilation, impact assessment, development of mitigation measures, report compilation and distribution (if necessary), monitoring and review for CEQA adequacy, attendance at public meetings and hearings, response to public comments, coordination between City staff and the project team, the preparation of a mitigation monitoring plan, and preparation of a .Statement of Overriding Considerations and Findings of Fact. Report format and content will be in full compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines (as amended through January 1998), and the City's environmental guidelines. General EIR organization wzlhinclude a discussion of existing conditions, impacts, and mitigation measures for each focused issue area. Text will be supplemented with graphics and summary tables, as necessary, to present information in a concise and easily understood format. Work products will consist of professionally photocopied reports in comb bindings, unless other presentation, formats are requested by the City. The proposed scope of work has been organized into major tasks. Refinements to the scope of work, budget, and project schedule will be discussed during the initial task; if needed. TASK 1: PROJECT INITIATION AND ORGANIZATION Purpose The objectives of this task are to compile the relevant background data and reports, define the proposed project, identify project alternatives, identify all discretionary actions, establish early communication among various project team members, and familiarize the EIP project team with the issues and concerns that the City wishes analyzed in the environmental document and technical reports. Following a written notice to proceed from the City, the Project Direct and Project Manager will meet with the City to develop and refine the proposed schedule, outline key milestones, and identify due dates of the major deliverables. EIP will work with the City to compile all relevant information des ailing the proposed project and the project site, including a detailed site plan, land use data, project characteristics, project objectives, site photographs, aerial photographs, previously -prepared reports and/or data describing the project site (such as A Historic Reraurres ImpactAn4& of the Northam Ranch House and Site, prepared by Joseph J. Milkovich & Associates, August 1997) and previously -prepared documents that relate to City requirements (such as the City's Environmental Guidelines). In addition, EIP will work with the City to develop three project alternatives sufficient for use in the alternatives section of the EIR, such as an alternative site, an alternative land use, and the no project alternative. A detailed description of the project alternatives that would be considered is provided on Page 7 of this Scope of Work. With the assistance of the City, EIP will also identify all discretionary actions required for project approval. EIP will coordinate a "kick-ofF' meeting with the City, EIP, and Greenwood & Associates to �aa�srs�vs�s�r:v,�t�nrretie�wc�*,oc 1 Scope of Mork Pmporal to Pnparr the Northam Ranch House Focused EIR disseminate relevant project information, including technical reports, background data, project description, scope of work budget, schedule, and project alternatives. This meetingwill also be used as a forum for discussing the key issues and concerns that confront the proposed project. EIP will also prepare a Table of Contents for the Focused EIR and establish a sample format for the EIR technical sections. These products will be provided to the City for review, comment, and refinement prior to commencingwork an the Administrative Draft Focused EIR. Products 1. One (1) "kick-off' meeting with the City (the budget for this meeting is provided under Task 11, Project Management, General Coordination, and Meetings). 2. Refined scope of work, if necessary. 3. Refined cast, if necessary. .4. Refined schedule, if necessary. 5. List of all available documents. G. List of contact information for all project team members, including names, roles and responsibilities, addresses, phone numbers, and facsimile numbers. 7. Table of Contents and sample format for the Focused EIR technical sections. TASK 2: PREPARE INiTI L STUDY Prnpose As required by CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, an Initial Study/Notice of Preparation (IS/NOP) will be prepared and distributed to public agencies and private individuals. _Jy mwh It is assumed that the City will prepare and distribute the IS/NOP to responsible agencies, trustee agencies, transportation planning agencies, and any other private citizens desired by the City. EIP will provide guidance prior to the City's preparation of the IS/NOP and will review the City's Draft IS/NOP when completed. In addition, if requested, EIP will informally consult by telephone with other responsible and affected agencies to better define issues of concern for inclusion in the Focused FM . After receipt of IS/NOP responses, EIP will identify issues for which no significant impacts will occur (to be described as effects found not to be significant in the Focused EIR) and identify potentially significant impacts that will require further evaluation in the Focused EIR. It is assumed that effects found not to be significant will be consistent with the City's findings in the IS/NOP. I. Attend one meeting with the City to provide guidance regarding the scope and content of the IS/NOP. 2_ Provide comments on the City's Draft IS/NOP. %\R2-L.,�.M�„SnSWVAI-=I\MLA , M\NCP.TXx 2 Scepe of Work Pmporal to Pnpan the Northam Ranch Norge Forured EIR TASK3: PRErApx ScREENmEcr,DRAFT Focusm EIR Pxrpare The objective of this task is to prepare a comprehensive, accurate, and objective Focused EIR for the Northam Ranch House Project in a manner that fully complies with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. ,Approach The EIP team will prepare the Administrative Draft Focused EIR in accordance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the City's Environmental Guidelines. The Administrative Draft Focused EIR will%include the following sections: a Table of contents; Summary of impacts and mitigation measures; -0 Project description (project objectives, project location, project characteristics, scope oEproject, and discretionary approvals); • Effects found not to be significant; • Environmental setting; • Environmental impacts (short-term, long-term, direct, and indirect); • Mitigation measures; • Project alternatives; • Organizations and persons consulted, • A list of preparers of the Focused EIR; • Refertnces; and • Technical appendices. The main purpose of the Administrative Draft Focused EIR will be to thoroughly and accurately analyze the environmental impacts of the proposed project. The documnentwill be free of jargon so that the information it contains is accessible to decision makers and the public. The methodology and criteria used for determining the impacts of the project will be clearly and explicitly described in each section of the Focused EM, including any assumptions, models, or modeling techniques used in the analysis. Tile determination of impacts will be based on thresholds of significance developed in accordance with CEQA requirements and the City's Environmental Guidelines. Each significant impact will be numbered, and the corresponding mitigation measures will be correlated. The effectiveness and feasibility of mitigation measures will be discussed, and the level of significance after mitigation' will be identified. The Summary section of the Focused EIRwill be in table format, and will briefly describe the impacts, level of significance of impacts, recommended mitigation measures, and level of significance after the recommended mitigation measures are incorporated. The following issue areas will be discussed in the Focused FIR for the Northam Ranch House Project %WW_r A\=Xvsa SWVAi-=nTPJXS \NQRrA= 3 Scope of Work Proposal to Prepare the Northam Ranch House Focused EIR Cultural Resources Greenwood & Associates (G&A) will be responsible for preparation of a cultural resources technical report to formally evaluate the significance of the historic Northam Ranch property and provide to mitigate any unavoidable impacts caused by implementation of the proposed development. To accomplish the above -stated objectives, G&A will conduct background research, perform a field evaluation, and prepare . -a technical report summarizing the results of the evaluation. Research will begin with a record search at the South Central Coastal Information Center at UCLA, and will incorporate all prior documentation accomplished by JJM&A (1997), the historic resources survey done in 1986, Ahlering (1973), and other reference materials compiled in the local libraries, City Planning Department, and other sources. Field inspection and documentation will be conducted by Dana N. Slawson, M.A., a certified architectural historian. He will prepare the State Form 523 with. attachments and photographs; this constitutes the prirnary record, and is the first step toward nomination to the California Register of Historic Places. From the material made available to G&A, the record should include the board and batten garage, wooden water tower, as well as the ranch house itself. Since the house has been in place since the 1890s, the immediate vicinity will also be considered as a potential archaeological site, since it may have had awed, privies, trash disposal features, other outbuildings, or other features which may constitute an archaeological resource. The technical report will provide the methods and results of all work regarding the evaluation of significance, including assessment of Criteria C and D (National Register) related to the architecture and archaeological potential. Assuming that the house will be found eligible, as all prior studies have concluded, a series of alternatives will be discussed, including retention and preservation in place, relocation, or demolition. G&A is not estimating or including services for the historical landscape evaluation or structural engineering; however, they may become necessary depending on the alternative chosen. Biological Resources The proposed project site contains significant areas of mature trees, although urban in nature. Project developmentwill require the removal and/or relocation of approximately 126 mature trees; however, implementation of the City's two -to -one mitigation ratio is expected to result in a net gain of trees throughout the project site and/or in landscaped neighborhood park4. The loss of original_onsite non- native trees would not result in a significant impact to biological resources unless sensitive faunal species, such as raptors, are known to inhabit the trees. Furthermore, a survey of the California Natural Diversity Database for the project site slid no reveal the known presence of any state or federally designated sensitive species (either flora or fauna). Therefore, a key focus of the biological resources technical appendix is to conduct a raptor survey to determine the extent and/or likelihood of the trees to support sensitive raptor species. EIP wM conduct a biological assessment of the project site, which will include a literature survey, field survey, and a technical report. The literature review will include: (1) sensitive species' fists from the CDFG and USFWS; (2) the most recent Federal Register listing package for each federally listed k1rI�cxsxuss\NvOaansraeuaaarrinoe 4 Scope f Work Proposal to Prrpare the Northam Ranch House Focused EIR endangered or threatened species potentially occurring within the project area; (3) the CDFG Annual Report on the status of California's listed threatened and endangered plants and animals; and (4) other biological studies conducted in the vicinity of the project site. The field survey will include plant community mapping; which will serve several purposes, such as: (1) describing the extent and distribution of various plant communities within the project site: (2) identifying and delineating sensitive plant communities; (3) describing the component plant species within each plant community; and (4) defining areas within the project site that would be subject to intensive searches for sensitive plant and animal species, if necessary. General surveys for plants, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals will be conducted simultaneously with the plant community mapping. A representative listing of flora and fauna species that occurs in the study area will be corppiiled from field notes and observations made during the plant community mapping and general plant and wildlife surveys. Furthermore, the description of mature onsite trees will rely heavily on the arborises report that was recently prepared for the Project Applicant. Focused surveys for sensitive plant and wildlife species are not included within this task; however, the documentation of the above survey efforts will make recommendations as to which, if any, species require additional surveys based on the concerns of state, federal, or local resources agencies and the presence of suitable habitat within the project site. The information from the literature review, field surveys, and impact analysis and mitigation planning will be compiled into a biological resource technical report to support the EM The report will describe: (1) the methodology used to conduct the biological surveys; (2) the existing plant communities and associated animal resources within the project site, and (3) provide an appendix containing flora and fauna inventory lists, data forms, and other pertinent data. All information developed from completion of this scope of work will be reported according to accepted scientific and technical standards, consistentwith the requirements of the USFWS, CDFG, and the City of Huntington Beach. The potential direct and indirect impacts on the biological resources as a result of demolition will be identified, based on the results of the above tasks. In addition, unavoidable adverse impacts on plant and wildlife resources will be enumerated. For purposes of the biological impact analysis, direct impacts will be assessed for all areas within the limits of grading or other direct alteration. Indirect effects Will be analyzed for areas adjacent to the project limits that may be affected by the constructiorl acid long- term use of the project. Significant impacts on biological resources also will be assessed in accordance with significance thresholds of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The actual or potential occurrence of biological resources within the study area will be correlated with the threshold criteria stated above to determine whether or not project impacts on these resources would be considered significant. Potential impacts on sensitive and non -sensitive plant and wildlife resources will be evaluated in terms of habitat loss, habitat fragmentation, changes in species' presence and abundance, and plant and anima! displacement of wildlife. Potential impacts on wildlife movement corridors will be eval=ed regarding the actual removal of habitat or landscape features that serve as wildlife movement corridors, the level of interference of the proposed project to known or suspected local movement corridors, and the effects on current linkages between large open space areas. %%""%=%oSBXsuNvA=nrxuasVMLV4CR U= 5 . Scope of Work Proposal to Prepare the Northam Ranch House Focused EIR Mitigation measures will be developed that address the significant project impacts on biological resources. Mitigation planning will include measures to avoid sensitive biological resource areas and reduce, if possible, significant project impacts on plants and wildlife to a less than significant level. Nfstigation planning also will include descriptions of potential localities within the study area where habitat restoration, conservation planning, or habitat enhancement may be feasible. Aesthetics The visual character and viewsheds of the project site will change as a result of demolition of the Northam Ranch House. However, based upon a recent, though cursory, review of the project site, it appears that there are no public viewsheds of the site's structures. Therefore, the focus of the site's character and viewshed impacts will be on the removal of mature landscaping. Largely, this will be accomplished by the use of graphics that clearly convey before and after conditions. The site's existing visual characteristics, such as topography, vegetation, structures, and open spaces will be textually described and illustrated with photographs. General Plan policies and standards pertaining to the visual character of open spaces and development in Huntington Beach will be listed. Additionally, pertinent requirements from City ordinances and other policy documents affecting the visual character of the site will be identified. The characteristics of the visual changes and impacts will be textually described This will discuss how development is integrated with and maintains or deviates from the site's natural character (topographic form, and landscape type and coverage) and is visible from surrounding area (prornineace/visibility of structures, protection of hilltops, scale of demolition activities, and vegetative corer and color characteristics). Consistency of these changes with the City's plan policies and ordinances will be assessed. Short-term construction impacts on visual quality will also be evaluated Largely, these will address the visual character of vegetation removal and grading operations. Additionally, the amount of time for post -development landscape to mature will be identified. Measures will be identified to mitigate potential significant visual impacts. Strategies may encompass grading modifications, the re -siting of structures, and/or landscape modifications. Any mitigation measures will be reviewed with City staff to confirm their feasibility and appropriateness. Traffic/Circulation At this point, it is not anticipated that the proposed project would result in any significant traffic or paring impacts. If any potentially significant impacts are discovered during the course of the analysis, it is expected that these impacts would be easily mitigable with standard traffic and parlar►g measures. UP will conduct an analysis to determine the impacts of the proposed project on traffic and pariiing conditions in the project vicinity. The analysis will rely heavily on information from the City's General Plan and General Plan EIR. It is assumed that the City will provide baseline traffic data, and traffic counts and calculations to EIP for preparation of the Traffic/Circulation section of the EIR. The specific tasks for the traffic impact analysis would include: %%=: AWMU=esVMA=r MLQUMVroMU= 6 Scope of Work Pmporal to Prepare flat Northam Ranch House Focused FIR Exrang Conditions. Conditions on the streets and intersections that serve the site will be described based on information provided by the City. This will include a description of physical roadway characteristics (such as the number of lanes, location of on -street parking, and type of traffic control devices) as well ass, description of existing traffic conditions (peak hour traffic volumes, average daily traffic volumes, and intersection levels of service during the morning and afternoon peak periods). It is assumed that the City would provide traffic counts for intersections potentially affected by the proposed project, and as such new traffic counts by UP will not be required. In addition, the City would provide information on the intersection levels of service, which is assumed to be determined by using the Highway Capacity Manual delay -based methodology. This methodology calculates the average delay per vehicle, the volume/capacity ratio, and the level of service at each intersection. Public transit service, on and off-street parking facilities, and pedestrian circulation in the study area will also be described by the City. ■ Future Bare§tne Conditions Without Pr ect The future baseline conditions will be developed by using traffic volume and level of service information from the City. Future traffic conditions will then be determined by calculating the average vehicular delay, volume/capacity ratio, and level of service for potentially affected intersections. PrVett Impacts. The City will provide information on the potential impacts of the project by quantifying the level of traffic that would be generated by the proposed project, geographically distributing this traffic onto the street network EIP would then use this information to conduct a before -and -after analysis of traffic conditions. EIP will compare average daily traffic volumes, peak hour volumes, and intersection levels of service for future conditions with and without the project. The volume of traffic that would be generated by the proposed project will be estimated by using trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers Tip Generation Manual (bth Edition, 1997). EIP will analyze project impacts in terms of the significance criteria outlined the City's General PIan and General PIan EM Such issues as access, on -site circulation, pedestrian circulation, bus service impacts, parking adequacy, and consistency with the General Plan Circulation Element will also be addressed qualitatively in the EIR Mitsgatian Measurer. Potential measures for mitigating any traffic impacts will be recommended for locations with identified significant project inxpacts and/or locations where adverse but less than significant impacts are anticipated. Such measures will be developed through close coordination with the City s Traffic Engineer. Air Quality EIP will describe regional air quality and local air quality in the vicinity of the proposed project based on existing data, such as that collected at the Costa Mesa Air Monitoring Station or the El Toro Air Monitoring Station (for PM,,J. Local meteorological conditions with the potential to affect air pollutant transport and dispersion will also be described. Air emissions of particulates (PLflJ, reactive organic gases (ROG), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOS, and sulfur oxides (SO, associated with construction (short-term) and operational activities (long-term) will be quantified using California Air Resources Board (CARB)-approved models and recognized emission factors and %uW.a\sYS%UMS\NVA=E\ LANsMWCK.xnoc 7 Stvpe of Aork Propord to Pr pare the Northam Ranch House Focused EIR emission quantification methods. EIP will estimate emissions associated with short-term demolition/construction activities at the proposed project site. These activities could include debris loading, site grading, aggregate loading/stockpiling, truck hauling, and architectural surface coating activities. Emissions from these activities will be quantified using emission factors presented in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook prepared by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Operational motor vehicle exhaust emissions generated by the proposed project will be quantified using melitods required by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Data supplied by the City regarding project trip generation will be used along with SCAQMD default assumptions for trip length, vehicle speed, and hot/cold start percentages. Results of this modeling analysis will be compared to the SCAQMD's regional emission thresholds to determine if significant air quality impacts may occur. The proposed project is not expected to create a significant air quality impacts due to the project's size, the low background levels ofpoQutants in the City, and the overall air quality conditions in the project area_ Regional emissions for a project of this size should be well below SCAQMD thresholds of significance for all pollutants. However, the project may have the potential to exceed SCAQ1+lD significance thresholds for demolition/construction emissions, which is a common occurrence for most construction activities in non -attainment zones. The purpose of the air quality analysis, therefore, will be to (1) document that the project has no significant regional or local air quality impacts; (2) identify potential construction emissions consistent with City and SCAQMD guidelines; and (3) recommend mitigation measures Cif necessary) to ensure that emissions do not exceed significance thresholds and do not cause a nuisance to nearby residential sensitive receptors. Noise Areas of potential noise impacts will be identified, using the City's General Plan and General Plan FA land use information, preliminary design information, and a field reconnaissance. The primary noise impact is expected to result from short-term and temporary demolition/construction activities. As such, it is expected that this impact can be reduced to a less than significant level with the implementation of State and City standards (Le., the City Noise Ordinance). In addition, this project is not expected to result in unmitigatable significant operational noise impacts due to the fact that the project does not have noise -intensive, unique . operational characteristics. Furthermore, the California Office of Noise Control, in "Gsude&nes for the Prowrrd= and Content of Noise Ekwents of the Genera! Plan", provides guidance for the acceptability of projects within specific L,I„ contours. The noise analysis in the EIR will rely heavily on data provided in the Citr's General Plan and General Plan EM Public Senices and Utilities EIP will coordinate with City staff and affected public service and utility purveyors to assess potential impacts of the proposed project The following services systems wM be analyzed: �u� ra rnus�sur4ar�=�rn�rns�u�axsrrsoc 8 Scope of Work PV raf to Pnpm the Northam Ranch House Focused EIR ■ Schools 0 Fire Protection • Police Protection M Solid Waste Disposal V Water Supply ■ Sewer/Wastewater • Parks/Recreation Electricity and Natural Gas The additional capacity, services, or personnel required to meet projected needs will be described. Anticipated impacts will be assessed, 2nd appropriate mitigation measures will be recommended, if nec,psaxy. OTHER Focusm) EIR SECTION'S Although the City only requires the Focused EIR for the proposed project to address cultural resources, biological resources, aestbets, traffic/circulation, air quality, noise, and public services and utilities, other issue areas discussed in the Initial Study wM also be summarized in the Focused EIR This will provide an objective, pet Urnited e`-luation of issues "focused out in the NOP process" to emphasize the City's conclusion that other potential impacts are less than significant. EI-P Will rely upon existing and available information, such as the NOP for the proposed project and the City's General Plan to the maximum extent possible; no new analysis will be conducted. It is important to emphasize that the scope of work for "Other Focused EIR Sections" is to ensure compliance with CEQA, and to provide a cursory third -party assessment of the City s findings for this project. Summary The Summary section of the Focused ER will be in table format; and will briefly, describe the impacts, level of significance of impacts, recorn<neaded mitigation measures, and level of significance after the recommended mitigation measures are incorporated. Cumulative Impacts/Inevem'ble Significant Effects/Growth Inducing Impacts As required by Section 15178(e) of the CEQA Guidelines, a focused environmental impact report may be utilized only if the lead agency finds that the analysis in the master environmental impact report of cumulative impacts, growth -inducing 'impacts, and irreversible significant effects on the environment is adequate for the subsequent project .If the analysis is no longer adequate for the subsequent project,. the subsequent project is no longer elpble for the limited environmental review available under the Master EIR process and shall instead be renewed according to Article 7 of Section 15080, which governs the preparation of standard EIRs. Therefore, it is assumed that the analysis of cumulative impacts, irreversible significant effects, and growth -inducing impacts will be taken from the City's General Plan EIR. Altemadves The Focused EIR will include an alterrntivrs section to qualitatively address the environmental impacts that would result from a different project or the proposed project at a different site. EIP will work \\BV,u\srnuSUSOMA�anrR�g-'M=\NCKTX--= 9 Scope of Werle Prooposal to Prrpers the Northam Ranch Haute Focused EIR closely with City staff to develop a reasonable range of alternatives. EIP will address up to three alternatives to the proposed project, including. (1) one alternative use (such as restoration of the Northam House in -situ, with a reduced density of new dwelling units); (2) an alternative site (which will include three sub -alternatives, such as a 'land swap', whereby the Applicant is given an alternate property for development of the proposed project and the City is given title of the subject property; the City's purchase of the subject property, and relocation of the Northam House to another property owned by the City); and (3) the no -project alternative. The alternatives will be provided in sufficient detail for comparison with the proposed project Each alternative will be evaluated with respect to each key impact category. Graphic exhibits of alternadves will be presented, if available from the City. The advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and the reasons for rejecting or recommending the g1ternative will also be discussed, and the environmentally superior alternative will be identified. A summary of the alternatives and the associated impacts mill be provided in the Focused EIR summary. During the course of the environmental analysis, minor variations to the proposed project that could have the effect of reducing or eliminating environmental concerns may become apparent, these variations will be implemented, where feasible. Productr 1. Ten (10) copies of the complete Administrative Drab Focused EIR. TAsx 4: PREPARE DRAFT' FOCUSED EIR Purpose The purpose of this task is to respond to City staff comments on the Administrative Draft Focused EIP, complete necessary revisions, and publish the Draft Focused EIR for public review. Approach EIP will obtain all comments on the Administrative Draft Focused EIR from the Citj s project coordinator, who wM compile one set of unified City, comments for use in revising the document EIP will complete revisions to the Administrative Draft Focused EIR in conformance with the City's comments and the agreed upon scope of work EIP wM ensure that the Notice of Completion and the Draft Focused EIR are filed with the State Clearinghouse. EIP will also prepare and post the Notice of Ara'labilu'ty, which announces the public hearing and the availability of the Focused E f� at up to five locations within the City. Producer 1. Thirty (30) copies of the Draft Focused EIR for public review (this number includes 10 copies of the Draft Focused EIR that are submitted to the State Clearinghouse) 2 One (1) clean reproducible original of the Draft Focused EIR 3. Notice of Completion MMV- a►\sMuSMU%bMA=r\-T u.%MM\80Vd7U c 10 Scope of Work Proposal to Prrpam the Northam Ranch House Focused EIR TAsg 5: ATTEND PUBLIC HEARINGS ON DP—kFT FocusFm EIR PROM The objective of this task is to participate in the public hearing process on the Draft Focused EIR. EIP will attend a Public Hearing on the Draft Focused EIR (held before the City's Planning Commission). The RIP Project Director or Project Manager will be available to present the findings of the Draft Focused Elm answer technical questions regarding the Draft Focused EIR, answer general questions regarding the environmental review process, and make note of significant comments raised by the interested public.' It is assumed that the City will either formally record verbal testimony (and later transcribe the testimony) or request that all public comments are also submitted in writing. Furthermore, it is assumed that presentation graphics will be made available to EIP by either the Project Applicant or the City. EIP will consider the comments collected by the City at the public hearing during preparation of the Final Focused EIR Praducts I. Attend one Draft Focused EIR Public Hearing. TAsg 6: PRF-PARE A.DmimsTRATrm Fw FOCUSED EIR (RESPONSE To DRAFT Focusm EIR COMMENTS) Pstpose This task will result in the preparation of an Administrative Final Focused EIR, which will contain a list of comrnentors, continent letters, and responses to comments on the Draft Focused EIR The City's project coordinator will compile and transmit all written comments on the Draft Focused EIR to EIP as one unified set of comments. EIP will confer with City staff to review written comments on the Draft Focused EIR, including comments from public meetings and hearings, to develop a general strategy for preparation of responses. The format of the Final Focused EIR Will be as a stand-alone document of responses to comments on the Draft Focused EIR.. The Administrative Final Focused EIR wM be submitted to City staff for review and comment. Responses that are within this proposal's scope of work and budget consist of explanations, elaborations, or clarifications of the data contained in the Draft Focused EIR If new analysis, issues, alternatives, or substantial project changes need to be addressed, or if the effort exceeds the budget amount of 40 hours because of the number or comple3dty of responses, a contract amendment may be needed. Produds IV�tr►usxmaxx++r�sa�uaoussaoc 11 Smpe Of Work Proposal to Prparr the Northam Roach House Focused EIR 1. Ten (10) copies of the Administrative Final Focused EIR. TASK 7: PREPARE FINAL. FOCUSED FIR Purpose The objective of this task is to prepare a Final Focused EIR that incorporates City comments on the Administrative Final Focused EIR A proach I EIP will obtain one unified set of comments from the City s Project Coordinator on the Administrative Final Focused EIR EIP will revise the Administrative Final Focused FIR and produce a Final Focused EIR The Final Focused EIR will be submitted to the City for. distribution ten daps prior to the Focused EUL certification hearing. It is assumed that EIP will prepare the Notice of Determination (NOD) and the City will file it With either the County Clerk or the Office of Planning and Research. As with all notices, it is assumed that the City wt7l be responsible for all filing fees. Pmductr 1. Thirty (30) copies of the Final Focused EIR (as an addendum to the Draft Focused EIR) for use at the Planning Commission certification hearing- 2 Three (3) copies of the Certified Final Focused EIP, 3. One (1) clean reproducible original of the Certified Final Focused EIR. 4. One (1) clean reproducible original of the Notice of Determination. S. One (1) Microsoft Word compatible disk containing the contents of the Final Focused EIR TASK 8: ATTEND PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL HEARINGS Pxrpose The objective of this task is to attend the Planning Commission and City Council hearings. •., The EIP Project Manager will be avahble at the Planning Commission and City Council hearings to present the findings of the Final Focused EIR, answer technical questions regarding the Final Focused EIR, and answer general questions regarding the environmental review process. It is assumed that presentation graphics wM be made available to EIP by either the Project Applicant or the City. Products I. Attend one (1) Planning Commission and one (1) City Council hearing for the Final Focused EIlL �t�r:htsrn ssurv,�eaannux: uroRrxnx 12 SMPf of Wark Pmposal to Prepare the Northam Ranch House Focured EIR TASK 9: PREPARE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Purpose The objective of this task is to ensure compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, as mandated by Assembly Bill 3180 (Cortese 1988), which requires a Lead Agency to adopt a mitigation monitoring program (I1rIl1rIP) at the time a Focused EIR is certified. Approach EIP wM prepare a draft Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) concurrently with the preparation of the #Administrative Final Focused EIR. The MMP will be designed to ensure compliance with all adopted mitigation measures during project implementation. The MMP will be iri table format, and will specify mitigation measures, standards of success, parties responsible for implementation and monitoring, fimding sources, timing, and provisions for remedial measures {if the success standards are not achieved) The .NL EMP will be designed to fit into the City's existing entitlement and project review process. A Drab MNIP -FwM be provided to the City with the Administrative Final Focused EUL After review and comment on the Draft MMP, EIP will revise the MMP, according to the comments provided, and will submit the Final MMP to the City with the Final Focused EIR. Products 1. Ten (10) copies of the Draft MMP. 2. Thirty (30) copies of the Final MMP. TASK 10: PREPARE STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND FINDINGS OF FACT Pxrpase The objective of this task is to prepare the written findings for each significant effect identified in the EIR, pursuant to Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines (Section 21081 of CEQA), and the Statement of Overriding Considerations, pursuant to Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines. EIP will prepare draft findings for each significant effect identified in the FIR and prepare a Statement of Overriding Consideratons, if unavoidable significant impacts occur. As required by the State CEQA Guidelines, one of three findings must be made for each significant effect and must be supported by substantial evidence in the record. The Statement of Overriding Considerations will rely on input from the sty regarding the benefits of the project. The EIP Project Manager wit consult with City staff to review and finalize the findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the City's ultimate adoption. �� r.+�s,mc -u�u�n �r�oAzxooc 13 Scope e Fork Pmposa! to Preparo the Nardham Ranch House Focuied EIR Pradurtr 1. Fifteen (15) copies of the draft findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations. 2. One (1) clean, reproducible original of the findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations. TASK 11: PROJECT MANAGEMENT, GENERAL COORDINATION, AND MEETINGS Purpose Thespurpose of this task is to manage the EIP project team, manage the Focused EIR preparation effort and maintain close communication between City staff and project team members. This task is also intended to ensure that the project is running on time and within budget, and that all work products are of the highest quality. 4pmarh The W Project Manager will communicate, as necessary, with project team members and City staff to ensure compliance with the schedule, scope of work, and budget. The Project Manager will coordinate the team's work and provide management liaison between the project team and the City for communication of issues, transmittal of comments, financial mmagement, and other project management matters. El? will attend a maximum of five (5) project coordination meetings by two EIP staff members during the approximately 29 week Focused EIR schedule; or, it includes a total of 40 hours of staff time, assuming an avefiage length of four hours per meeting per person. Other meetings may be attended on a time -and -materials basis, additional to the proposed price and with prior authorization by the City. Products 1. Attendance at up to 5 project coordination meetings (by two EIP staff members) or -a total of 40 hours of staff time, whichever occurs first. It is anticipated that one of these meetings will be the project "kick-off' meeting. X=-LA% rnLrAMs%rr nt=n \NCXU = 14 Scope of Work REVISED PROPOSED COSH' EMMATE FORTHE NORTIIAM HOUSE FOCUSED MR I I I 1 I 11 " I r I I Task 1 Pm)eat ktltlft and Omvft tlal ondL wt-off w4) 4 9 12 22 $ 1,660 6 1,46D 2 Prepare Mr-bW 4 12 12 3 Prepare Daft EIR a 10 1a 24 40 40 12 152 S 9,19n s 2%240 Amoolm Reaomaea a 32 2 40 S 3" TndWK kcLda§M 16 2 Atr Qw ft 4 36 2 Nolae 4 36 2 Aesthsaes a a 24 2 40 s %= CWMmal Resat m a 40 2 50 S 3AM Pub0a Swvkes end LIMIes to 2 AUffAgvee 10 2 24 6 24 72 s 5" Otter EtR Setd wm 1t" nets Id boMM4 12 a a 5 36 $ 4140 4 Prgmn Omit Ent 24 2 40 a 6 6 40 t6 6 12 182 s 1 t,310 s 11,310 5 APWA Pak mawbv an Draft EIR 4 4 8 s 740 3 740 a Pmpsn I I 1 11 md3cvwmbKk Fkal BR: 16 4 32 4 4 a 32 18 1 12 129 s ken s 11"a T Pnpm Flag! EIR a m 32 4 76 s 5ma s km 8 AIWd PWm*V Camm haian and Cor Catmo l Hmubp a a to s 1,4a0 s IIAW 9 Prepam Aewft 14onmAv Pmwmn a a 24 38 S Z6)0 s Zem t0 Prep"vswarostdcIOwrtldi cwAwln w 6 24 30 s Zion s 2,190 11 Pro sa maaa emem pamtft aw 32 24 6 64 t = s e" TOW Hum 194 24 290 26 42 as 258 76 49 50 936 Hmtrty Rob s 125 S 125 S 1B s a6 3 a6 s 75 S so S tin s 50 s 35 TOTAL EIP LABOR s 24,sso i 3,0W i 1s,i0a s 2ma s 3,i7a s M s 1Maa s 3,60a 1 s 2: s 1,7i0 is a,= s MAN Eapauaaa •- Re a-hovaa s Ike . s 606 oe s raa Phdaat3ra s 150 suppa-s 60 MteaCaaeaua s 100 10% adndatstra" fie s 360 sabbala) • - s 16a TOTAL EIP BUDGET s rkmo Oroom vmd & Aaaoclates s s" 10% admbdstradm fee 692m sublatal.Tecbnkw awl@% s -M GRAND TOTAL : ma 0uw seccom an assurrra to to -affects faum aat w to stpn No tna+a>S aeaoato elsaomm namm a)umtopr am water 4n9: popumm am ==I& area a um am sg=;m ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California • County of 5�� SS. On before me, (DATE) persona fly a peared Jrl- 5 ��- .� (\OTARY} �/✓b &1 E SIGNER(S) ❑ personally known to me - OR- proved to me on the basis of satisfactory • evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) • , <are subscribed to the within instrument and • acknowledged to me that heMm/they executed • the same in hirer/their authorized •��wr capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their PAUL L. DAVIS �1 N -�Y" "•:_ signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), Ln = T COMM. # 1188770 n • — NOTARYPU&IIC- CA,IFCFNiA X or the entity upon behalf of which the • 'AhFRAiWiSCOCCRgre MY Comm. Ezp:rasJul 24, i�02 � person(s) acted, executed the instrument. i ' 1 y hand and official seal. Z • S tGNATU RE • 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 ❑ LNDIVIDUAL. ❑ CORPORATE OFFICER TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT TITLE(S) PARTNER(S) ❑ ATTORNEY -IN -FACT NUMBER OF PAGES • • ❑ TRUSTEE(S) • ❑ GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR DATE OF DOCUMENT • ❑ OTHER: i OTHER RIGHT THUMBPRINT L SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: OF o NAME of PERSON(S) OR ENMUY(IES) SIGNER 0 o • APA 5/97 VALLEY -SIERRA, 800-362-3369 _ _TTA - EN .:4: Agency Name and Address: Professional Practice Insurance Brokers,Inc. 10 California Street Red%vood City, CA 94063-1513 Insureds Name and Address: EIP Associates 601 Montgomery St., Suite 500 San Francisco, CA 94111 Certificate of Insurance 1 of 1 #SI09531 46437 ITHIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF i INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES 4 II (NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED THE POLICIES LISTED BELOW. Companies Affordin Policies: A -American Motorists Insurance B.Continental Casualty Company c. D. E. F. COVERAGES: THIS'$ TOCERT.FY TI-AT POLUGIES OF INS JRANCE L STED B=L0 HAVE BEEN. ISSjED TC TPE INSURED NA'IED A2O'VE FOR ThE POLICE PERIOD INDICT;-ED. NOT"Y ThSTANDING ANC REQUIREMENT TERh1 OR CONDITION Cr ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DCCUMENT'vViTh R=SPECT TO %NHIGH TH'S CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN_ THE--.NSURANCE AFFORDED BY ThE POL.C.IES DESCRIBED HEREIN I$ SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLJSIONS, AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. Description of Operation s/1.ocationslVehicles/Restrictions/Special items: ALL OPERAT'ONS OF THE NAMED INSURED INCL.D.NG PRO. ECT: NORTHAM HOUSE. SEE ATTACHED ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMEN-. *Written at aaorenate limits of liability not less than amount shown Certificate Holder: THE AGGREGATE LIMIT IS THE TOTAL INSURANCE AVAILABLE FOR CLAIMS PRESEENTED WITHIN THE POLICY FOR AL'_ OPERATIONS OF THE INSURED. CANCELLATION: SHOLLD ANY OF THE .ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICES BE CANCELED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION City of Huntington Beach DATE THEREOF THE ISSUING COMPANY. ITS AGENTS OR REPRESENTATwES V11L'- :MAIL 30 2000 Main Street DAYS :NRITTEN NOTIC2 TO THE CERT FICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE LEFT. EXCEPT IV Huntington Beach, CA 92648 THE EVENT OF CANCEL_AT.0.4 FOR `RCN-PAYh4 F PREMIUM IN WhICH CASE 1C DAYS Attn: Duane Banke NOTICE WILL B= GIVEN. A�:ro-ze3 Represerm::.e: 051 CC: AMERICAN MOTORISTS INSURANCE COMPA BLANKET ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSMENT ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS PROGRAM °rn THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY POLICY for: Named Insured: EIP Associates Policy Period: 9/01/99 — 9/01/00 Policy No. 7KQ40900202 ADDITIONAL INSURED - OWNERS, LESSEES, LOSS PAYABLE OR P%e%LITr%A/►Te%Mf% r'O%r%RM rf VLI\ 11\RV 1 VI\V 1 WINIVI LJ ADDITIONAL INSURED — BY CONTRACT, AGREEMENT OR PERM J City of Huntington Beach, its agents, officers and employees. CITY By Clt9 ,tt,rne,• Any person or organization to whom or to which you are obligated b virt ntten contract, agreement or permit to provide such insurance as afforded by t is policy is an insured, but only with respect to liability arising out of: a. "your work" for that insured by you, including work or operations performed on your behalf for that insured; b. permits issued by state or political subdivision for operations performed by you; or c. premises you own, rent, occupy or use. This provision does not apply unless the written contract or agreement has been executed, or the permit has been issued, prior to the "bodily injury," " property damage," "personal injury" or "advertising injury." This provision does not apply to any person or organization included as an insured under Additional Insured —Vendors. TYPE OF OPERATION All operations of the Named Insured, including a specific project 1 job listed on the attached Certificate of Insurance. Authoriz4d esentative [ NOTE: MEETS OR EXCEEDS CG 20 10 11 85 ] ISSUED: May 23, 2000 650- PROFESSIONAL PRACTIC 964 PO4 MAY 25 '00 14:12 IQMPER. WORKERS COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS LIABILITY INSURANCE POLICY WAIVER OF OUR RIGHT TO RECOVER FROM OTHERS ENDORSEMENT -- CALIFORNIA (The information below is required only when this endorsement is issued subsequent to preparation of the policy.) Endorsement Effective 09/01/1999 Policy No. 1CW 143916-13 Endorsement No. Insured Premium EIP ASSOCIATES A CORPORATION Insurance Company AMERICAN MOTORISTS INSURANCE COMPAI Countersigned by SCHEDULE Person or Organization job Des ANYONE FOR WHOM THE NAND INSURED HAS AGREED TO FURNISH THIS WAIVER MINIMUM PREMIUM: $100 THE PREMIUM FOR THIS COVERAGE WILL BE DETERMINED AND BILLED AT AUDIT. We have the right to recover our payments from anyone liable for an injury covered by this polity. We will not enforce our right against the person or organization named in the Schedule. (This agreement applies only to the extent that you perform work under a written Contract that requires you to obtain this agreement from us.) You must maintain payroll records accurately segregating the remuneration of your employees while engaged in the work described in the Schedule. The additional premium for this endorsement shall be 2.00% of the California workers c-mlpeniation premium otherwise due on such remuneration. THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANCES THE POLICY TO WHICH IT IS ATTACHED AND IS EFFECTIVE ON THE DATE ISSUED UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. WC 04 03 D6 (Ed. 04 84) Printed in U.S.A. 650- PROFESSIONAL PRACTIC Certificate of Insurance 356 P02 JUL 28 '00 14:50 19 Insureds Name and Addrass: Companies A rdin PiAcies: EIP Associates A -American Motorists InsuranCC-t tOmpany 601 Montgomery St., Suite 500 e. Continental Casualty Company C. San Francisco, CA 94111 D wear rcn,n,n.,n¢,N¢VNAN4rI'ArrmMucu¢T1"c INIlaVWWi TOAAL 717E TL'NM3,tzx66V6,VND.ANUG;UM f1N.1N0gl-UuLHPVLIE;IEa- TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER EFF,DATE EXP.DATE POLICY'LIMITS A GENERAL LIBILITY 7KW900202 09/01109 0WOVO0 ® Commercial General Liability ❑ Claims Made ® Occurrence ❑ Owner's and Contractors Protective 10 A AUTO LIABILITY © Any Automobile IKW4119W202 09/01/99 0911)1100 ❑ An Owned Autos ❑ Scheduled Autos.tp KIMd Autos V. r'Y3 Non -owned Autos ❑ Garage Liability t: EXCESS LIABILITY ❑ Umbrella Form ❑ Other than Umbrella Form A WORKERS' 7CW14381613 09r0U99 09/01/01) COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYER'S LIABILITY B PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY' AERrA312779 07125100 07125/02 General Aggregate: $21000,OW Products-Corr4OPs Aggregate: $2,000,000 Personal and Adv. Injury: 51,000,OW Each Occurrence: $110001000 Fire Dmg. Zany one tire): s 500,000 Combined Single Limit SI,ODW,11011 Bodily lNury►peraon: s0 Bodily Injurylawdent. SO Property Damage: SO Each Occurrence: Aggregate; Statutory Llmits Each Accident: S110001W0 Dlsease►Pollcy Limit: $1.000.000 me"Gemployes- 31,OMIOW Per Claim S1,000,000 agate - $1.000,000 s0 Description of OperationslLoeationsNehicies/RestrictionslSpeclal items: ALL OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED INCLUDING PRQJSCT: NORTHAM I40u8E. SErc ATTACHED ADOrTlONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENT. 'WrHfan at annranatA limit* AF linhiliiv nn4 Ioee than mmna,n+ ahnurn Certificate Holder: THE AGGREGATE LIMIT IS THE TOTAL INSURANCE AVAILABLE FOR CLAIMS PRSSSNTED WITHIN THE POLICY FOR ALL OPERATIONS OF rmi 94LIR&D. CANCELLATION: City of Huntington Beach SHOULD ANY OF T146 ABOVE DESCRISED POLICIES 86 CANCELED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE IBSUWO CoMrANY, ITS AGENT$ OR REPRWENTAnVES W LL NIAIL 30 2000 Main Street DAYS WRITTHN NOTICE TO THE CERTVICATS 1401.13E4 NAMED To THE LEFT. ExCE PT W Huntington Beach, CA 92648 THE EVENT OF CANCELLATION FOR NONAAYMENT OF PREMIUM IN WHIch CASE'g DAYS Nonce WILL an GIv&N. Yftmea A6pr41rw1Iw+ - 07128/00 cc 650- PROFESSIONAL PRACTIC 350 P03 JUL 20 '00 14:50 AMERICAN MOTORISTS INSURANCE COMPANY BLANKET ADPITIONAIL INSURED fNDOR9MENT ] ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS PROGRAM This blanket endorsement modifies insurance provided under the fallowing COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY POLICY for: •Nsmevl Insured: EIP Associates Policy Period: 09iollft-09rolroo Policy No. TKO40200202 TYPE OF OPERATION All operations of the Named Insured, including a specific project 1 job listed on the attached Certificate of Insurance. WHO IS AN INSURED (section 11) is amended to Include as an insured The Additional Insureds; Owners, Lessees or Contractors listed below, but only with respect to liability arising out of "your work" performed for that Insured by or for you. AE1011-I0NAt_ INfiURtl?D—OWNS" LE89 M$:LGSS:PAYAJILEtOR- 3 'R1ki:YOj1 -FDn iA-B- rhiR Clly of Hurilkigton Beach 1t'S offft:els, allicials. agehts, ropresentatives, em&yalifa, and V01(l leafs. PRINfARx COVERAGE --- With respect to cleims arising out of the operations of the Named insured, such insurance as afforded by this policy is primary and is not additional to or contributing with any other insurance carried by or for the benefit of the Additional Insureds.. QSOBfi LIABILIIY CL&U_Sg -- The flaming of more. then one person. firm or corporation as insured$ udder this policy shall not. for that reason alone, extirigulsh any rights of the insured against artother, but this endorsement, and the naming of multipie insureds, shalt not Increase the total Vabiiity of the Company under this policy. CANGF&L-ALION 1. It we cancel this policy for any reason ottrer than non-payment of premium, we will mail written notice at least 30 days before the effective date of cancellation to the Additional Insureds on File with the Company. 2. If we cancel this policy for non-payment: of premium. we will mall wi<itten notics at least 1-0 days before the-efti9ctive date of cancellation to the Additional Insureds on file with the Company. O aC O -- Appllcable to Coffin oFelal General Liability Coverage: if -the Insured has rights to recover all or part of any payment we rtave made under tt►is policy, those rights are transferred to us. This insurance shall not be invalidated should the Named Insured waive in writing, prior to a loss, any or all, rights of recovery against any party for a foss occu ring. However, the insured must do nothing after a loss to impair these rights. 'At our request, the insured will bring "suit" or transfer those rights to us and help us enforce them. This condition does not apply to Medical Expenses Coverage. Autho ized We'Oreadhiative I NOTE: MEETS OR EXCEEDS Ca 20 io 11 851 1331JED: July 28. 21300 RCA ROUTING SHEET INITIATING DEPARTMENT: PLANNING SUBJECT: APPROVE CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO.1 FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO COMPLETE PREPARATION OF A FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE NORTHAM HOUSE PROJECT COUNCIL MEETING DATE: August 7, 2000 `. RCA.ATTACHMENTS STATUS,. . Ordinance (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Not Applicable Resolution (w/exhibits & 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 Attorney) 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 FORMISSING ATTACHMENTS ...;REVIEWED, RETURNED FORWARDED' Administrative Staff a M ( ) { } Assistant City Administrator (Initial) ( ) City Administrator (Initial) City Clerk ( ) EXPLANATION -FORAETURN DFITEM: .ZP1C,CSKd-J 1,Z,q !/9 _NK, %less- P14n4�n� ✓oe�eeN- �/� �i �i/n Council/Agency Meeting Held: 7rred/Continued to: rov d ConditionallyAp raved ❑ Denied 6111 y lerk's Signature Council Meeting Date: June 7, 1999 Department ID Number: CD 99-19 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS SUBMITTED BY: RAY SILVER, City AdministratQ''� PREPARED BY: HOWARD ZELEFSKY, Planning Directory--7/��-�' :_ r SUBJECT: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH EIP ASSOCIATES FOR THE PREPARATION OF A FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE NORTHAM HOUSE PROJECT Statement of Issue, Funding Source, Recommended Action, Alternative Action(s), Analysis, Environmental Status, Attachment(s) Statement of Issue: Transmitted for City Council's consideration is a request to enter into a Professional Planning Services Contract with EIP Associates to prepare a Focused Environmental impact Report for the proposed Northam House Project. Funding Source: The funding source will be an initial deposit of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) placed with the City by PLC, the project proponent, and the remaining Sixty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty -Eight Dollars ($68,758.00) is to be paid in subsequent monthly payments, as billed by the City, until the completion of the project. Thus, there will be no fiscal impact. Recommended Action: Motion to: 1. "Approve the Professional Services Contract, in the amount of Seventy Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty -Eight and 00/100 Dollars ($78,758.00), as prepared by the City Attorney, between the City and EIP Associates, subject to mutual agreement by the City and EIP Associates, and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign." "Appropriate funds in the amount Seventy Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty -Eight and 00/100 Dollars ($78,758.00) for the Professional Services Contract between the City and EIP Associates which the developer will fully reimburse to the City." 3. "Approve the waiver from the City's zero Professional Liability Insurance deductiblePmount as recommended by the Settlement Committee." J� REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: June 7, 1999 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 99-19 Alternative Action(s): The City Council may make the following alternative motions: 1. "Deny the Professional Services Contract between the City and EIP Associates." 2. "Continue the item and direct staff accordingly." Analysis: A. BACKGROUND: PLC, the Northam Ranch House project proponent, is proposing to develop a 17-unit subdivision on site consisting of single-family dwelling units. The proposed development will necessitate the demolition of the Northam Ranch House which is a potentially historic structure and the removal of existing vegetation, including mature trees. The Focused EIR will address all the relevant environmental issues directly influenced by the proposed project. B. SCOPE OF WORK: EIP Associates will be responsible for all studies and documentation necessary to comply with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as well as conducting an impact assessment, development of mitigation measures, review for CEQA adequacy, attendance at public meetings and hearings, responses to public comments, coordination between City staff and the project team, and the preparation of a mitigation monitoring plan necessary to prepare and adopt the document. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The key objective in undertaking this Focused Environmental Impact Report is to analyze the potentially significant environmental impacts of the proposed project and identify mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate these impacts. To realize these objectives, a Professional Services Contract between the City and EIP Associates will have to be entered into. This Contract will require an appropriation of funds by the City, and pursuant to City Council requirements, as adopted in March 1998, this appropriation must be off -set by related new revenues. PLC, the project proponent, has agreed to deposit sufficient funds with City to cover expenses related to the preparation of this Focused Environmental Impact Report. Staff recommends the City Council approve the Contract, and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign. Environmental Status: Projects over which public agencies exercise ministerial authority, such as this agreement contracting for the preparation of a Focused Environmental Impact Report, are categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15300.1. CD99-19 -2- 05/13/99 1:36 PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: June 7, 1999 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 99-19 Attachment(s): 1. Professional Services Contract between the City and EIP Associates. 2. Insurance Certificates. 3. Fiscal Impact Statement. 4. EIP's Focused Environmental Impact Report Proposal dated February 12, 1999. CD99-19 -3- 05/131991:36 PM CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CONNIE BROCKWAY CITY CLERK CALIFORNIA 92648 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL OF ITENT APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL/ REDEVELOPNIENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH DATE: e 3 9 TO: - 10 1�sSOL'1a S ATTENTION: T-rktl Name DEPARTMENT: Sv t qq Xn e-/,eS /00A--j- REGARDI\['G: -,E4 City, State, Z' See Attached Action Agenda Item iE —J5 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 Agreement Bonds RCA /Deed / CC: .z2%FoxI — k rAI r ✓ Name De men RCA Agre= py�anment 2- Ag eemgnt Name Department RCA Ageemem TFis �— h 2M Department Risk Management Dept. Insurance Other Insurance Oth/ Ins0[her rInsce Other RCA AgrCCment Insurar Other Insurance Received by Dame - Company Name - Date G:Follouuplcoverly 1 Telephone: 714-536.5 227 ) fill' pjt,Im "A 21 S ON& . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND EIP ASSOCIATES FOR THE PREPARATION OF A FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE NORTHAM HOUSE PROJECT Table of Contents Work Statement CityStaff Assistance.................................................................................................I Timeof Performance................................................................................................2 Compensation...........................................................................................................2 ExtraWork................................................................................................................2 Methodof Payment...................................................................................................2 Disposition of Plans, Estimates and Other Documents............................................4 HoldHarmless..........................................................................................................4 Workers' Compensation............................................................................................4 Professional Liability Insurance...............................................................................5 Certificates of Insurance..........................................................................................5 IndependentContractor............................................................................................6 Termination of Agreement.......................................................................................6 Assignment and Subcontracting..............................................................................7 Copyrights/Patents...................................................................................................7 City Employees and Officials..................................................................................7 Notices.............................................................. ...................7 .................................... Immigration..............................................................................................................8 Legal Services Subcontracting Prohibited...............................................................8 AttorneyFees...........................................................................................................8 Entirety........................................................................................................... ....9 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND EIP ASSOCIATES FOR THE PREPARATION OF A FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE NORTHAM HOUSE PROJECT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 1999, by and between the City of Huntington Beach, a municipal corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", and EIP Associates, a California corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT." WHEREAS, CITY desires to engage the services of a consultant to prepare a Focused Environmental Impact Report for the Northam House Project in the City of Huntington Beach; and Pursuant to documentation on file in the office of the City Clerk, the provisions of HBMC Chapter 3.03 relating to procurement of professional service contracts has been complied with; and CONSULTANT has been selected to perform said services, NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by CITY and CONSULTANT as follows: WORK STATEMENT CONSULTANT shall provide all services as described in the Scope of Work (hereinafter referred to as Exhibit "A"), which is attached hereto and incorporated into this Agreement by this reference. Said services shall sometimes hereinafter be referred to as "PROJECT." CONSULTANT hereby designates Terri S. Vitar who shall represent it and be its sole contact and agent in all consultations with CITY during the performance of this Agreement. 2. CITY STAFF ASSISTANCE CITY shall assign a staff coordinator to work directly with CONSULTANT in the performance of this Agreement. 4/sgA-99Agree_EIP-031 S RLS 99-179 3/ 1 Si99 3. TIME OF PERFORMANCE Time is of the essence of this Agreement. The services of the CONSULTANT are to commence as soon as practicable after the execution of this Agreement and all tasks specified in Exhibit "A" shall be completed no later than eight (8) months from the date of this Agreement. These times may be extended with the written permission of the CITY. The time for performance of the tasks identified in Exhibit "A" are generally to be shown in the Scope of Services on the Work Program/Project Schedule. This schedule may be amended to benefit the PROJECT if mutually agreed by the CITY and CONSULTANT. 4. COMPENSATION In consideration of the performance of the services described herein, CITY agrees to pay CONSULTANT on a time and materials basis at the rates described in Exhibit "A" a fee not to exceed Seventy-eight Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty-eight and no/100 Dollars ($78,758.00). 5. EXTRA WORK In the event CITY requires additional services not included in Exhibit "A," or changes in the scope of services described in Exhibit "A," CONSULTANT will undertake such work after receiving written authorization from CITY. Additional compensation for such extra work shall be allowed only if the prior written approval of CITY is obtained. 6. METHOD OF PAYMENT A. CONSULTANT shall be entitled to progress payments toward the fixed fee set forth herein in accordance with the progress and payment schedules set forth in Exhibit "A". B. Delivery of work product: A copy of every technical memo and report prepared by CONSULTANT shall be submitted to the CITY to demonstrate progress toward completion of tasks. In the event CITY rejects or has comments on any such product, CITY shall identify specific requirements for satisfactory completion. Any such product which has not been formally accepted or rejected by CITY shall be deemed accepted. 2 41sgA-99A9ree: E 1P-0318 RI_S 99-179 3118/99 C. The CONSULTANT shall submit to the CITY an invoice for each progress payment due. Such invoice shall: 1) Reference this Agreement; 2) Describe the services performed; 3) Show the total amount of the payment due; 4) Include a certification by a principal member of the CONSULTANT's firm that the work has been performed in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement; and 5) For all payments include an estimate of the percentage of work completed, or a task -by -task basis. Upon submission of any such invoice, if CITY is satisfied that CONSULTANT is making satisfactory progress toward completion of tasks in accordance with this Agreement, CITY shall promptly approve the invoice, in which event payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice by CITY. Such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. If the CITY does not approve an invoice, CITY shall notify CONSULTANT in writing of the reasons for non -approval, within seven (7) calendar days of receipt of the invoice, and the schedule of performance set forth in Exhibit "A" shall be suspended until the parties agree that past performance by CONSULTANT is in, or has been brought into compliance, or until this Agreement is terminated as provided herein. D. Any billings for extra work or additional services authorized by CITY shall be invoiced separately to the CITY. Such invoice shall contain all of the information required above, and in addition shall list the hours expended and hourly rate charged for such time. Such invoices shall be approved by CITY if the work performed is in accordance with the extra work or additional services requested, and if CITY is satisfied that the statement of hours worked and costs incurred is accurate. Such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Any a `sgA-99Agrec: E1P-0319 RLS 99-179 3!18:99 dispute between the parties concerning payment of such an invoice shall be treated as separate and apart from the ongoing performance of the remainder of this Agreement. DISPOSITION OF PLANS, ESTIMATES AND OTHER DOCUMENTS CONSULTANT agrees that all materials prepared hereunder, including all original drawings, designs, reports, both field and office notices, calculations, maps and other documents, shall be turned over to CITY upon termination of this Agreement or upon PROJECT completion, whichever shall occur first. In the event this Agreement is terminated, said materials may be used by CITY in the completion of PROJECT or as it otherwise sees fit. Title to said materials shall pass to the CITY upon payment of fees determined to be earned by CONSULTANT to the point of termination or completion of the PROJECT, whichever is applicable. CONSULTANT shall be entitled to retain copies of all data prepared hereunder. 8. HOLD HARMLESS CONSULTANT shall protect, defend, indemnify and hold harmless CITY, its officers, officials, employees and agents from and against -any and all liability, loss, damage, expenses, costs (including without limitation costs and fees of litigation of every nature) arising out of or in connection with performance of this Agreement or its failure to comply with any of its obligations contained in this Agreement, except such loss or damage which was caused by the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the CITY. 9. WORKERS COMPENSATION CONSULTANT shall comply with all of the provisions of the Workers' Compensation Insurance and Safety Acts of the State of California, the applicable provisions of Division 4 and 5 of the California Labor Code and all amendments thereto; and all similar state or federal acts or laws applicable; and shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY from and against all claims, demands, payments, suits, actions, proceedings and judgments of every nature and description, including attorneys' fees and costs presented, brought or recovered against 4 4.' sg:4-994ree-E [N-031 B RI_S 99-179 3]8,99 CITY, for or on account of any liability under any of said acts which may be incurred by reason of any work to be performed by CONSULTANT under this Agreement. 10. PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY INSURANCE CONSULTANT shall furnish a professional liability insurance policy covering the work performed by it hereunder. Said policy shall provide coverage for CONSULTANT'S professional liability in an amount not less than $$1,000,000 per occurrence and in the aggregate. A claims made policy shall be acceptable if the policy further provides that: The policy retroactive date coincides with or precedes the professional services contractor's start of work (including subsequent policies purchased as renewals or replacements). 2. CONSULTANT will make every effort to maintain similar insurance during the required extended period of coverage following project completion, including the requirement of adding all additional insureds. 3. If insurance is terminated for any reason, CONSULTANT agrees to purchase an extended reporting provision of at least two (2) years to report claims arising from work performed in connection with this Agreement. 4. The reporting of circumstances or incidents that might give rise to future claims. Under no circumstances shall this insurance contain a self -insured retention, or a "deductible" or any other similar form of limitation on the required coverage in oa excess of $ ��- Sb, ova 11. CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE Prior to commencing performance of the work hereunder, CONSULTANT shall furnish to CITY certificates of insurance subject to approval of the City Attorney evidencing the foregoing insurance coverages as required by this Agreement; said certificates shall: Provide the name and policy number of each carrier and policy; b. shall state that the policy is currently in force; and 4!Sg:4--99Agree: E I P-0318 RLs 99-179 3?18199 GG C. shall promise to provide that such policies shall not be-sospeHde , -Vaffld�-ddL m er canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty days prior written notice; however, ten days prior written notice in the event of cancellation for nonpayment of premium. CONSULTANT shall maintain the foregoing insurance coverages in force until the work under this Agreement is fully completed and accepted by CITY. The requirement for carrying the foregoing insurance coverages shall not derogate from the provisions for indemnification of CITY by CONSULTANT under the Agreement. CITY or its representative shall at all times have the right to demand the original or a copy of all said policies of insurance. CONSULTANT shall pay, in a prompt and timely manner, the premiums on all insurance hereinabove required. 12. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR CONSULTANT is, and shall be, acting at all times in the performance of this Agreement as an independent contractor. CONSULTANT shall secure at its expense, and be responsible for any and all payment of all taxes, social security, state disability insurance compensation, unemployment compensation and other payroll deductions for CONSULTANT and its officers, agents and employees and all business licenses, if any, in connection with the services to be performed hereunder. 13. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT All work required hereunder shall be performed in a good and workmanlike manner. CITY may terminate CONSULTANT's services hereunder at any time with or without cause, and whether or not PROJECT is fully complete. CONSULTANT may terminate this Agreement upon thirty (30) days prior notice to CITY. Any termination of this Agreement by CITY or CONSULTANT shall be made in writing, notice of which shall be delivered to CITY or CONSULTANT as provided herein. b 4hg:4-99Agrcc: GIP-031 S Rl_S 99-179 3!1 W99 14. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBCONTRACTING This Agreement is a personal service contract and the supervisory work hereunder shall not be delegated by CONSULTANT to any other person or entity without the consent of CITY. 15. COPYRIGHTS/PATENTS CONSULTANT shall retain all rights to any patent or copyright on any work, item or material owned by CONSULTANT and used in the performance of this Agreement. 16. CITY EMPLOYEES AND OFFICIALS CONSULTANT shall employ no CITY official nor any regular CITY employee in the work performed pursuant to this Agreement. No officer or employee of CITY shall have any financial interest in this Agreement in violation of the applicable provisions of the California Government Code. 17. NOTICES Any notice or special instructions required to be given in writing under this Agreement shall be given either by personal delivery to CONSULTANT's agent (as designated in Section 1 hereinabove) or to CITY's Director of Public Works 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 Service, addressed as follows: TO CITY: City of Huntington Beach Attn: Planning Director 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 7 4/sgA-99Agree: EIP-03 l 8 RLS 99-179 3/1 899 TO CONSULTANT: Terri s. Vitar EIP Associates 11601 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1440 Los Angeles, CA 90025 1 S. IMMIGRATION CONSULTANT shall be responsible for full compliance with the immigration and naturalization laws of the United States and shall, in particular, comply with the provisions of the United States Code regarding employment verification. 19. LEGAL SERVICES SUBCONTRACTING PROHIBITED CONSULTANT and CITY agree that CITY is not liable for payment of any subcontractor work involving legal services, and that such legal services are expressly outside the scope of services contemplated hereunder. CONSULTANT understands that pursuant to Huntington Beach City Charter Section 309, the City Attorney is the exclusive legal counsel for CITY; and CITY shall not be liable for payment of any legal services expenses incurred by CONSULTANT. 20. ATTORNEY'S FEES In the event suit is brought by either party to enforce the terms and provisions of this agreement or to secure the performance hereof, each party shall bear its own attorney's fees. Balance of page intentionally left blank. 41sg:4-99Agree: El1'-0318 RLS 99.179 3 18.,99 21. ENTIRETY The foregoing, and Exhibit "A" attached hereto, set forth the entire Agreement between the parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by and through their authorized offices the day, month and year first above written. EIP ASSOCIATES, a California corporation Name / LAN (T W c or print) Its (circle one): (i) Chairman of the Board (ii) President QLrAny Vice President AND By: .—. J Name: Oe 'j . ACC r '- (Type or print) Its (circle one): (i) Secretary ii A Assistant Secretary; (iii ief financial Officer (iv) Any Assistan re REVIEWED AND APPROVED: City dministrator 4 sgA-99Agrec:E1P-0319 RLS 99-179 3. I &99 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, a municipal corporation of the State of California Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk V,231? 4 APPROVv F� AS TO FOILM- $ City Attorney INITIATED AND APPROVED: " - �a� , Director of PIVining. E Certificate of Insu"'"`��"' ~ MAR 1 R room Agency Name and Address: PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE INSURANCE BROKERS, INC. 10 CALIFORNIA STREET REDWOOD CITY CA 94063-1513 tirn. THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSiUEDFASIA;MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO'RIGH-WUPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED THE POLICIES LISTED BELOW. (653)369-6900 Fax: (650)366-'455 Insureds Name and Address: /%q/�k EIP ASSOCIATES C. L ,, // i mo • Companies Affording Policies: A AMERICAN MOTORISTS INSURANCE CO. - SF B: AMERICAN MOTORISTS INSURANCE CO. - SF 601 MONTGOMERY ST., SUITE 500 &gyp c SAN FRANC ISCO CA 94111 D AMERICAN MOTORISTS INSURANCE CO. - KSA E: CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY F: COVERAGES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACTOR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS. EXCLUSIONS. AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER EFF. DATE EXP. DATE GENRRAL LIABILITY _ ki Commerciai General Liabiiit 7KO409002-0-1 9/1i98 9/1i99 ❑ Claims Made A Occurrence ❑ Owners and Contractors Protective r AUTO LIABILITY Any Automobile 7KW409002-01 9/1/98 9/1199 — All Owned Autos Scheduled Autos B —Wi Hired Autos Non -owned Autos CI Garage Liability r— EXCESS LIABILITY C _ —. Umbrella Form L Other than Umbrella Form WORKERS' D COMPENSATION 7CW143816-12 9/1198 9/1199 AND EMPLOYER'S LIABILITY E PROFESSIONAL AEN 00-431-27-79 7/25/98 7125100 LIABILITY F POLICY LIMITS General Aggregate: $2,000,000 Products-Com/Ops Aggregate: $2,000,000 Personal and Adv. Injury $1,000.000 Each Occurrence: $1,000,000 Fire Dmg. (any one fire): S50,000 Combined Single Limit: $1,000,000 Bodily Injury/person: SO Bodily Injury/accident: SO Property Damage: $0 Each Occurrence: Aggregate: Statutory Limits Each Accident: S1,000,000 Disease/Policy Limit: S1,000,000 Disease/Employee: $1,000,000 Per Claim $1,000,000 Ago regate $1,000,000 Description of Operations/LocationsNehicles/Restrictions/Special Items: All operations of the Named Insured. General liability only: City of Huntington Beach, its authorized agents, officers and employees are named as Additional Insureds but only as respects liability arising out of the Named Insureds' operations in Northern Ranch EIR, Project # 10262. r01IRll0.E AS TO PC'-_Fl!a ;j� '. o-.' t`-A L i1 ,r, �l^i i City iS��t-to ney �7:: Derwtuy Cwt;y kt;,orze 31r�lti� Certificate Holder: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 ATTN: DUANE BANKEY, PLANNING DEPT. THE AGGREGATE LIMIT IS THE TOTAL INSURANCE AVAILABLE FOR CLAIMS PRESENTED WITHIN THE POLICY FOR ALL OPERATIONS OF THE INSURED. CANCELLATION: SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF. THE ISSUING COMPANY, ITS AGENTS OR REPRESENTATIVES WILL MAIL 30 DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE FIT, I T IN HI VEryT OF CANCELLATION FOR NON- PRYMENTOF PREMIUM WHIC - AS '' DA N ICE WILL BE GIVEN. Authorized 3/12199 yw Cc: AMERICAN MOTORISTS INSURANCE ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS PROGRAM ENDORSEMENT THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following BUSINESSOWNERS/GENERAL LIABILITY POLICY for: Insured: EIP ASSOCIATES Policy: 7KQ409002-01 Effective: 91/98-9/1/99 ADDITIONAL INSURED - OWNERS, LESSEES OR CONTRACTORS FORM B City of Huntington Beach, its authorized agents, officers, and employees. TYPE OF OPERATION Northern Ranch EIR, Project # 10262 (If no entry appears above, information required to complete this endorsement will be shown in the Declarations as applicable to this endorsement.) WHO IS AN INSURED (Section C) is amended to include as an insured the person or organization shown in the Schedule, but only with respect to liability arising out of your work performed for that insured. AUTHOR �Dl PR 5E ATIVE March 12, 1999 r `E� Y. ?,1 ioi°.ref �y:; :t)eputy City A-ttorney f �- 1�1R1 • 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. CITY OF HUN'TTAGTON BEACH APPLICATION FOR INS[]R.A_NCE REQUIRENiE-%-rS WAIVER OR MODIFICAT1ON Name/TitlejDepanment of Requesting StaffNfemberDwA,Je- Date of Request Y(& L-7 Name of ContractorlPerrainee f7i is Description of Work to be Lenr',h of Contract_ I0_� Type of Insurance Waiver orModification Request (a) Limits: (b) Covera Reason for Request for Waiver or Reduction of Linu Identifi• the risks to the City if this request for wSiver or modifications granted _ a , Department Head (This section to he completed by the Risk Manager) Recommendation: t� Appro;•e 1---' Deny Risk Nfamger's Signature.,Da (This section to he completed by the City Attorne)} Recommendation: c�c� Approl•e ✓ Deny City Artomey's Signature:D t e' Settlement Cc.-� it,,= appro at [is [is :got] regsir•, fc, ::pis Waiver. If SetLemert Cwaunittte appr •il is Mq ired, submit form to Anorne}°'s ice to be placed on the agenda. Recommendation: Approv, en) City Council s aired for this %;•aicer. If City Council approval is required, attach this form to the RCA after consideAauiv�e S ement Committee. This insurance waiver (is) (is not] on Cite Council agenda. jrnpWr esoutiorLA,nsr egry111197 7 f. A4 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH =1 INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMUNICATION To: Ray Silver, City Administrator From: John Reekstin, Director of Administrative Services Subject: FIS 98-30 Professional Services Contract with EIP Associates for the Preparation of a Focused Environmental Impact Report for the Northam House Project Date: April 2, 1999 As required by Resolution 4832, this Fiscal Impact Statement has been prepared for "Professional Services Contract with EIP Associates for the Preparation of a Focused Environmental Impact Report for the Northam House Project." If the City Council approves this action, (total appropriation $78,758 ), there will be no effect on the City's unappropriated, undesignated General Fund Balance since the developer is advancing all of the funds for the proposed expenditure. &�j- .Yohn Reekstin, Director of Administrative Services RCA ROUTING SHEET INITIATING DEPARTMENT: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH EIP ASSOCIATES FOR THE PREPARATION OF A FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE NORTHAM HOUSE PROJECT COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JUNE 7, 1999 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 (wlexhibits if applicable) (Signed in full by the City AHome Attached Subleases, Third Party Agreements, etc. _(Approved as to form by City AHome Not Applicable Certificates of Insurance (Approved by the City Attorney) Attached Financial Im act Statement Unbud et, over $5,000 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 I Not Applicable EXPLANATION FOR MISSING ATTACHMENTS REVIEWED RETURNED FOR RDED Administrative Staff Assistant City Administrator Initial City Administrator Initial City Clerk EXPLANATION FOR RETURN OF ITEM: r NoRTHAm RANCH HOUSE FOCUSED EIR PROPOSAL Pr pared for. City of Huntington Beach Community Development Department 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Prepared by: EIP Associates 11601 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1440 Los Angeles, CA 90025 (310) 268-8132 Table of Contents Section 1........................................................... Scope of Work Section2.................................................................. Budget Section 3.................................................................Schedule Section .......................................................... Schedule of Fees Section 5................................................................. Resumes r Section 1 Scope of Work Proposal to Prepare the Northan Ranch House Focused EIR Introduction/Project Understanding This proposal is submitted to the City of Huntington Beach by EIP Associates (EIP) for preparation of a Focused Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to assess impacts resulting from implementation of the Northam Ranch House Project. This proposal has been prepared in strict accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the- CEQA Guidelines (as amended through January 1999). In addition to our knowledge of City gained through recent past and ongoing projects in Huntington Beach, the EIp project team has undergone other research efforts to better understand the key issues related to this particular project. This research has included: On -foot survey, of the project site and adjacent area; ■ A photographic survey of the site and the existing Northam Ranch House from various vantage points; and ■ Several discussions with Planning Staff regarding the proposed project and the scope of the environmental analyses to be included in the Focused EIR; and In our preparation of the Focused EIR, we will approach the proposed project with the following issues in mind: ■ The demolition of a potentially historic structure (i.e., the Northam Ranch House), and the potential impacts of the demolition as they relate to historic/cultural resources in the City; ■ The addition of a 17-unit subdivision on -site consisting of multi -family dwelling units; ■ Potential demolition-, construction-, and operation -related traffic, air quality and noise impacts; ■ Evaluation of the site's existing aesthetic value and potential aesthetic impacts upon completion of the 17-unit residential units; and ■ Potential project impacts on on -site vegetation and City services. 1. Scope of Work EIP will take responsibility for project initiation and organization, preparation of all CEQA notices, data compilation, impact assessment, development of mitigation measures, report compilation and distribution (if necessary), monitoring and review for CEQA adequacy, attendance at public meetings and hearings, response to public comments, coordination between City staff and the project team, the preparation of a mitigation monitoring plan, and preparation of a Statement of Overriding Considerations and Findings of Fact. Report format and content will be in full compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines (as amended through January 1999), and the City's environmental guidelines. General EIR organization 2 Sco of iY/ork Proposal to Prepare the Northam Ranch House Forwed EIR will include a discussion of existing conditions, impacts, and mitigation measures for each focused issue area. Text will be supplemented with graphics and summary tables, as necessary, to present information in a concise and easily understood format. Work products will consist of professionally photocopied reports in comb bindings, unless other presentation formats are requested by the City. The proposed scope of work has been organized into major tasks. Refinements to the scope of work, budget, and project schedule will be discussed during the initial task, if needed. TASK 1: PROJECT INITIATION AND ORGANIZATION Purpose The objectives of this task are to compile the relevant background data and reports, define the proposed project, identify project alternatives, identify all discretionary actions, establish early communication among various project team members, and familiarize the EIP project team with the issues and concerns that the City wishes analyzed in the environmental document and technical reports. Approach Following a written notice to proceed from the City, the Project Direct and Project Manager will meet with the City to develop and refine the proposed schedule, outline key milestones, and identify due dates of the major deliverables. EIP will work with the City to compile all relevant information describing the proposed project and the project site, including a detailed site plan, land use data, project characteristics, project objectives, site photographs, aerial photographs, previously -prepared reports and/or data describing the project site (such as A Historic Resources Impact Analysis of the Nartharn Ranch House and Site, prepared by Joseph J. Milkovich & Associates, August 1997) and previously -prepared documents that relate to City requirements (such as the City's Environmental Guidelines). In addition, EIP will work with the City to develop three project alternatives sufficient for use in the alternatives section of the EIR, such as an alternative site, an alternative land use, and the no project alternative. A detailed description of the project alternatives that would be considered is provided on Page 7 of this Scope of Work. With the assistance of the City, EIP will also identify all discretionary actions required for project approval. EIP will coordinate a "kick-off' meeting with the City, EIP, and Greenwood & Associates to disseminate relevant project information, including technical reports, background data, project description, scope of work, budget, 6chedule, and project alternatives. This meeting will also be used as a forum for discussing the key issues and concerns that confront the proposed project. EIP will also prepare a Table of Contents for the Focused EIR and establish a sample format For the EIR technical sections. These products will be provided to the City for review, comment, and refinement prior to commencing work on the Administrative Draft Focused EIR. Products 1. One (1) "kick -oft" meeting with the City (the budget for this meeting is provided under Task 11, Project Management, General Coordination, and Meetings). 2. Refined scope of work, if necessary. 3. Refined cost, if necessary. Scope of Work Proposal to Prepare the Northam Ranch House Focused EIR , 4. Refined schedule, if necessary. 5. List of all available documents. 6. List of contact information for all project team members, including names, roles and responsibilities, addresses, phone numbers, and facsimile numbers. 7. Table of Contents and sample format for the Focused EIR technical sections. TASK 2: PREPARE INITIAL STUDY Aulpore As required by CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, an Initial Study/Notice of Preparation (IS/NOP) will be prepared and distributed to public agencies and private individuals. Approach It is assumed that the City will prepare and distribute the IS/NOP to responsible agencies, trustee agencies, transportation planning agencies, and any other private citizens desired by the City. EIP will provide guidance prior to the City's preparation of the IS/NOP and will review the City's Draft IS/NOP when completed. In addition, if requested, EIP will informally consult by telephone with other responsible and affected agencies to better define issues of concern for inclusion in the Focused EIR. After receipt of IS/NOP responses, EIP will identify issues for which no significant impacts will occur (to be described as effects found not to be significant in the Focused EIR) and identify potentially significant impacts that will require further evaluation in the Focused EIR. It is assumed that effects found not to be significant will be consistent with the City's findings in the IS/NOP. Products 1. Attend one meeting with the City to provide guidance regarding the scope and content of the IS/NOP. 2. Provide comments on the City's Draft IS/NOP. TASK 3: PREPARE SCREENCHECK DRAFT FOCUSED EIR Purpa.ie The objective of this task is to prepare a comprehensive, accurate, and objective Focused EIR for the Northam Ranch House Project in a manner that fully complies with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. .Approach The EIP team will prepare the Administrative Draft Focused EIR in accordance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the City's Environmental Guidelines. The Adnrunistxative Draft Focused EIR will include the following sections: Table of contents; Summary of impacts and mitigation measures; • 3 Smpe of Fork Proposal to Prepare the Northam Ranch Hourt Focused EIR • Project description (project objectives, project location, project characteristics, scope of project, and discretionary approvals); • Effects found not to be significant; • Environmental setting; • Environmental impacts (short-term, long-term, direct, and indirect); • Mitigation measures; • Project alternatives; • Organizations and persons consulted; • A list of preparers of the Focused EIR; • References; and • Technical appendices. The main purpose of the Administrative Draft Focused EIR will be to thoroughly and accurately analyze the environmental impacts of the proposed project. The document will be free of jargon so that the information it contains is accessible to decision makers and the public. The methodology and criteria used for determining the impacts of the project will be clearly and explicitly described in each section of the Focused EIR, including any assumptions, models, or modeling techniques used in the analysis. The determination of impacts will be based on thresholds of significance developed in accordance with CEQA requirements and the City's Environmental Guidelines. Each significant impact will be numbered, and the corresponding mitigation measures will be correlated. The effectiveness and feasibility of mitigation measures will be discussed, and the level of significance after mitigation will be identified. The Summary section of the Focused EIR will be in table format, and will briefly describe the impacts, level of significance of impacts, recommended mitigation measures, and level of significance after the recommended mitigation measures are incorporated. The following issue areas will be discussed in the Focused EIR for the Northam Ranch House Project. Cultural Resources Greenwood & Associates (G&A) will be responsible for preparation of a cultural resources technical report to formally evaluate the significance Qf the historic Northam Ranch property and provide to mitigate any unavoidable impacts caused by implementation of the proposed development. r To accomplish the above -stated objectives, G&A will conduct background research, perform a field evaluation, and prepare a technical report summarizing the results of the evaluation. Research will begin with a record search at the South Central Coastal Information Center at UCLA, and will incorporate all prior documentation accomplished by JJM&A (1997), the historic resources survey done in 1986, Ahlering (1973), and other reference materials compiled in the local libraries, City Planning Department, and other sources. Field inspection and documentation will be conducted by Dana N. Slawson, M.A., a certified architectural historian. He will prepare the State Form 523 with atrachments and photographs; this constitutes the primary record, and is the first step toward nomination to the California Register of Historic Places. From the material made available to G&A, the record should include the board and batten garage, wooden water tower, as well as the ranch house itself. Since the house has been in place since the 1890s, the immediate vicinity will also be considered as a potential archaeological site, since 4 S�npe of Work Proposal to Pmparr the Nortbam Ranch House Focused EIR it may have had a well, privies, trash disposal features, other outbuildings, or other features which may constitute an archaeological resource. The technical report will provide the methods and results of all work regarding the evaluation of significance, including assessment of Criteria C and D (National Register) related to the architecture and archaeological potential. Assuming that the house will be found eligible, as all prior studies have concluded, a series of alternatives will be discussed, including retention and preservation in place, relocation, or demolition. G&A is not estimating or including services for the historical landscape evaluation or structural engineering; however, they may become necessary depending on the alternative chosen. Biological Resources The proposed project site contains significant areas of mature trees, although urban in nature. Project development will require the removal and/or relocation of approximately 126 mature trees; however, implementation of the City's two -to -one mitigation ratio is expected to result in a net gain of trees throughout the project site and/or in landscaped neighborhood parks. The loss of original onsite non- native trees would not result in a significant impact to biological resources unless sensitive faunal species, such as raptors, are known to inhabit the trees. Furthermore, a survey of the California Natural Diversity Database for the project site did no reveal the known presence of any state or federally designated sensitive species (either flora or fauna). Therefore, a key focus of the biological resources technical appendix is to conduct a raptor survey to determine the extent and/or likelihood of the trees to support sensitive raptor species. ETP will conduct a biological assessment of the project site, which will include a literature survey, field survey, and a technical report. The literature review will include: (1) sensitive species' lists from the CDFG and USFWS; (2) the most recent Federal Register listing package for each federally listed endangered or threatened species potentially occurring within the project area; (3) the CDFG Annual Report on the status of California's listed threatened and endangered plants and animals; and (4) other biological studies conducted in the vicinity of the project site. The field survey will include plant community mapping, which will serve several purposes, such as: (1) describing the extent and distribution of various plant communities within the project site: (2) identifying and delineating sensitive plant communities; (3) describing the component plant species within each plant community; and (4) defining areas within the project site that would be subject to intensive searches for sensitive plant and animal species, if necessary. General surveys for plants, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals will be conducted simultaneously with the plant community mapping. A representative listing of flora and fauna species that occurs in the study area will be compiled From field notes and observations made during the plant community mapping and general plant and wildlife surveys. Furthermore, the description of mature onsite trees will rely heavily on the arborist's report that was recently prepared for the Project Applicant. Focused surveys for sensitive plant and wildlife species are not included within this task; however, the documentation of the above survey efforts will make recommendations as to which, if any, species require additional surveys based on the concerns of state, federal, or local resources agencies and the presence of suitable habitat within the project site. The information from the literature review, field surveys, and impact analysis and mitigation planning 5 Scope of Work Proposal to Prepare the Northam Ranch House Focused EIR will be compiled into a biological resource technical report to support the EIR. The report will describe: (1) the methodology used to conduct the biological surveys; (2) the existing plant communities and associated animal resources within the project site; and (3) provide an appendix containing Elora and fauna inventory lists, data forms, and other pertinent data. All information developed from completion of this scope of work will be reported according to accepted scientific and technical standards, consistent with the requirements of the USF\VS, CDFG, and the City of Huntington Beach. The potential direct and indirect impacts on the biological resources as a result of demolition will be identified, based on the results of the above tasks. In addition, unavoidable adverse impacts on plant and wildlife resources will be enumerated. For purposes of the biological impact analysis, direct impacts will be assessed for all areas within the limits of grading or other direct alteration. Indirect effects will be analyzed for areas adjacent to the project limits that may be affected by the construction and long- term use of the project. Significant impacts on biological resources also will be assessed in accordance with significance thresholds of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The actual or potential occurrence of biological resources within the study area will be correlated with the threshold criteria stated above to determine whether or not project impacts on these resources would be considered significant. Potential impacts on sensitive and non -sensitive plant and wildlife resources will be evaluated in terms of habitat loss, habitat fragmentation, changes in species' presence and abundance, and plant and animal displacement of wildlife. Potential impacts on wildlife movement corridors will be evaluated regarding the actual removal of habitat or landscape features that serve as wildlife movement corridors, the level of interference of the proposed project to known or suspected local movement corridors, and the effects on current linkages between large open space areas. Mitigation measures will be developed that address the significant project impacts on biological resources. Mitigation planning will include measures to avoid sensitive biological resource areas and reduce, if possible, significant project impacts on plants and wildlife to a less than significant level. Mitigation planning also will include descriptions of potential localities within the study area where habitat restoration, conservation planning, or habitat enhancement may be feasible. Aesthetics The visual character and viewsheds of the project site will change as a result of demolition of the Northam Ranch House. However, based upon a recent, though cursory, review of the project site, it appears that there are no public viewsheds of the site's structures. Therefore, the focus of the site's character and viewshed impacts will be on the removal of mature landscaping. Largely, this will be accomplished by the use of graphics that clearly convey before and after conditions. The site's existing visual characteristics, such as topography, vegetation, structures, and open spaces will be textually described and illustrated with photographs. General Plan policies and standards pertaining to the visual character of open spaces and development in Huntington Beach will be listed. Additionally, pertinent requirements from City ordinances and other policy documents affecting the visual character of the site will be identified. The characteristics of the visual changes and impacts will be textually described. This will discuss how development is integrated with and maintains or deviates from the site's natural character (topographic form, and landscape type and coverage) and is visible from surrounding areas (prominence/visibility Sape of Work Proposal to Prepare the Northam Ranch House Focused EIR of structures, protection of hilltops, scale of demolition activities, and vegetative cover and color characteristics). Consistency of these changes with the City's plan policies and ordinances will be assessed. Short-term construction impacts on visual quality will also be evaluated. Largely, these will address the visual character of vegetation removal and grading operations. Additionally, the amount of time for post -development landscape to mature will be identified. Measures will be identified to mitigate potential significant visual impacts. Strategies may encompass grading modifications, the re -siting of structures, and/or landscape modifications. Any mitigation measures will be reviewed with City staff to confirm their feasibility and appropriateness. Traffic/Circulation At this paint, it is not anticipated that the proposed project would result in any significant traffic or parking impacts. If any potentially significant impacts are discovered during the course of the analysis, it is expected that these impacts would be easily mitigable with standard traffic and parking measures. EIP will conduct an analysis to determine the impacts of the proposed project on traffic and parking conditions in the project vicinity. The analysis will rely heavily on information from the City's General Plan and General Plan EIR. It is assumed that the City will provide baseline traffic data, and traffic counts and calculations to EIP for preparation of the Traffic/Circulation section of the EIR. The specific tasks for the traffic impact analysis would include: Existing Conditions. Conditions on the streets and intersections that serve the site will be described based on information provided by the City. This will include a description of physical roadway characteristics (such as the number of lanes, location of on -street parking, and type of traffic control devices) as well as a description of existing traffic conditions (peak hour traffic volumes, average daily traffic volumes, and intersection levels of service during the morning and afternoon peak periods). It is assumed that the City would provide traffic counts for intersections potentially affected by the proposed project, and as such new traffic counts by EIP will not be required. In addition, the City would provide information on the intersection levels of service, which is assumed to be determined by using the Highway Capacity Manual delay -based methodology. This methodology calculates the average delay per vehicle, the volume/capacity ratio, and the level of service at each intersection. Public transit service, on and off-street parking facilities, and pedestrian circulation in the study area will also be described by the City. Futum Base,6ne Conditions Without Pmject. The future baseline conditions will be developed by using traffic volume and level of service information from the City. Future traffic conditions will then be determined by calculating the average vehicular delay, volume/capacity ratio, and level of service'for potentially affected intersections. Project Impacts. The City will provide information on the potential impacts of the project by quantifying the level of traffic that would be generated by the proposed project, geographically distributing this traffic onto the street network. EIP would then use this information to conduct a before -and -after analysis of traffic conditions. EIP will compare average daily traffic volumes, peak hour volumes, and intersection levels of service for future conditions with and V. 7 ssvpe of Work Pmposal to Prepare the Northam Ranch House Focused EIR without the project. The volume of traffic that would be generated by the proposed project will be estimated by using trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual (6th Edition, 1997). EIP will analyze project impacts in terms of the significance criteria outlined the City's General Plan and General Plan EIR. Such issues as access, on -site circulation, pedestrian circulation, bus service impacts, parking adequacy, and consistency with the General Plan Circulation Element will also be addressed qualitatively in the EIR. ■ Miti,gation Measutrs. Potential measures for mitigating any traffic impacts will be recommended for locations with identified significant project impacts and/or locations where adverse but less than significant impacts are anticipated. Such measures will be developed through close coordination with the City's Traffic Engineer. Air Quality EIP will describe regional air quality and local air quality in the vicinity of the proposed project based on existing data, such as that collected at the Costa Mesa Air Monitoring Station or the El Toro Air Monitoring Station (for PM,o�. Local meteorological conditions with the potential to affect air pollutant transport and dispersion will also be described. Air emissions of particulates (PM,o), reactive organic gases (ROG), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NL OJ, and sulfur oxides (SOJ associated with construction (short-term) and operational activities (long-term) will be quantified using California Air Resources Board (CARB)-approved models and recognized emission factors and emission quantification methods. EIP will estimate emissions associated with short-term demolition/construction activities at the proposed project site. These activities could include debris loading, site grading, aggregate loading/stockpiling, truck hauling, and architectural surface coating activities. Emissions from these activities will be quantified using emission factors presented in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook prepared by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQIv1D). Operational motor vehicle exhaust emissions generated by the proposed project will be quantified using methods required by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Data supplied by the City regarding project trip generation will be used along with SCAQMD default assumptions for trip length, vehicle speed, and hot/cold sfart percentages. Results of this modeling analysis will be compared to the SCAQN11Ys regional emission thresholds to determine if significant air quality impacts may occur. The proposed project is'not expected to create a significant air quality impacts due to the project's size, the low background levels of pollutants in the City, and the overall air quality conditions in the project area. Regional emissions for a project of this size should be well below SCAQMD thresholds of significance for all pollutants. However, the project may have the potential to exceed SCAQMD significance thresholds for demolition/construction emissions, which is a common occurrence for most construction activities in non -attainment zones. The purpose of the air quality analysis, therefore, will be to (1) document that the project has no significant regional or local air quality impacts; (2) identify potential construction emissions consistent with City and SCAQMm guidelines; and (3) recommend mitigation measures (if necessary) to ensure that emissions do not exceed significance thresholds and do not cause a nuisance to nearby residential sensitive receptors. 8 Svpe of Work Proposal to Pnparr the Northam Ranch House Focused EIR . Noise Areas of potential noise impacts will be identified, using the City's General Plan and General Plan EIR, land use information, preliminary design information, and a field reconnaissance. The primary noise impact is expected to result from short-term and temporary demolition/construction activities. As such, it is expected that this impact can be reduced to a less than significant level with the implementation of State and City standards (i.e., the City Noise Ordinance). In addition, this project is not expected to result in unmitigable significant operational noise impacts due to the fact that the project does not have noise -intensive, unique operational characteristics. Furthermore, the California Office of Noise Control, in "Guidelines for the Preparation and Content of Noise Elements of the General Plan", provides guidance for the acceptability of projects within specific La„ contours. The noise analysis in the EIR will rely heavily on data provided in the City's General Plan and General Plan EIR. Public Services and Utilities EIP will coordinate with City staff and affected public service and utility purveyors to assess potential impacts of the proposed project. The following services systems will be analyzed: ■ Schools ■ Fire Protection ■ Police Protection ■ Solid Waste Disposal ■ Water Supply ■ Sewer/Wastewater ■ Parks/Recreation ■ Electricity and Natural Gas The additional capacity, services, or personnel required to meet projected needs will be described. Anticipated impacts will be assessed, and appropriate mitigation measures will be recommended, if necessary. OTHER FOCUSED EIR SECTIONS Although the City only requires the Focused EIR for the proposed project to address cultural resources, biological resources, aesthetics, traffic/circulation, air quality, noise, and public services and utilities, other issue areas discussed to the Initial Study will also be summarized in the Focused EIR. This will provide an objective, yet limited evaluation of issues "focused out in the NOP process' to emphasize the City's conclusion that other potential impacts are less than significant. EIP will rely upon existing and available information, such as the NOP for the proposed project and the City's General Plan to the maximum extent possible; no new analysis will be conducted. It is important to emphasize that the scope of work for "Other Focused EIR Sections" is to ensure compliance with CEQA, and to provide a cursory third -party assessment of the City's findings for this project. Summary The Summary section of the Focused EIR will be in table format, and will briefly describe the impacts, level of significance of impacts, recommended mitigation measures, and level of significance after the recommended mitigation measures are incorporated. 9 Scope of Work Proposal to Purr the Northam Ranch House Focused EIR Long -Term Implications: Cumulative Impacts/Irreversible Significant Effects/Growth Inducing Impacts As required by Section 15178(e) of the CEQA Guidelines, a focused environmental impact report may be utilized only if the Iead agency finds that the analysis in the master environmental impact report of cumulative impacts, growth -inducing impacts, and irreversible significant effects on the environment is adequate for the subsequent project. If the analysis is no longer adequate for the subsequent project, the subsequent project is no longer eligible for the limited environmental review available under the Master EIR process and shall instead be reviewed according to Article 7 of Section 15080, which governs the preparation of standard EIRs. Therefore, it is assumed that the analysis of cumulative impacts, irreversible significant effects, and growth -inducing impacts will be taken from the City's General Plan EIR. Alternatives The Focused EIR will include an alternatives section to qualitatively address the environmental impacts that would result from a different project or the proposed project at a different site. EIP will work closely with City staff to develop a reasonable range of alternatives. EIP will address up to three alternatives to the proposed project, including (1) one alternative use (such as restoration of the Northam House in -situ, with a reduced density of new dwelling units); (2) an alternative site (which will include three sub -alternatives, such as a "land swap", whereby the Applicant is given an alternate property for development of the proposed project and the City is given title of the subject property; the City's purchase of the subject property; and relocation of the Northam House to another property owned by the City); and (3) the no -project alternative. The alternatives will be provided in sufficient detail for comparison with the proposed project. Each alternative will be evaluated with respect to each key impact category. Graphic exhibits of alternatives will be presented, if available from the City. The advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and the reasons for rejecting or recommending the alternative will also be discussed, and the environmentally superior alternative will be identified. A summary of the alternatives and the associated impacts will be provided in the Focused EIR summary. During the course of the environmental analysis, minor variations to the proposed project that could have the effect of reducing or eliminating environmental concerns may become apparent; these variations will be implemented, where feasible. Products Ten (10) copies of the complete Administrative Draft Focused EIR. TASK 4: PREPARE DRAIFT FOCUSED EIR Purpose The purpose of this task is to respond to City staff comments on the Administrative Draft Focused EIR, complete necessary revisions, and publish the Draft Focused EIR for public review. 10 Scope of Work Proposal to P195ace the Northam Ranch House Focused EIR Approach EIP will obtain all comments on the Administrative Draft Focused EIR from the City's project coordinator, who will compile one set of unified City comments for use in revising the document. EIP will complete revisions to the Administrative Draft Focused EIR in conformance with the City's comments and the agreed -upon scope of work. EIP will ensure that the Notice of Completion and the Draft Focused EIR are filed with the State Clearinghouse. EIP will also prepare and post the Notice of Availability, which announces the public hearing and the availability of the Focused EIR, at up to five locations within the City. Products 1. Thirty (30) copies of the Draft Focused EIR for public review (this number includes 11 copies of the Draft Focused EIR that are submitted to the State Clearinghouse) 2. One (1) clean reproducible original of the Draft Focused EIR 3. Notice of Completion 4. Notice of Availability TASK 5: ATTEND PUBLIC MEETINGS ON DRAFT FOCUSED EIR Purpose The objective of this task is to participate in the public hearing process on the Draft Focused EIR. Approach EIP will attend a Public Meeting on the Draft Focused EIR. The EIP Project Director or Project Manager will be available to present the findings of the Draft Focused EIR, answer technical questions regarding the Draft Focused EIR, answer general questions regarding the environmental review process, and make note of significant comments raised by the interested public. It is assumed that the City will either formally record verbal testimony (and later transcribe the testimony) or request that all public comments are also submitted in writing. Furthermore, it is assumed that presentation graphics will be made available to EIP by either the Project Applicant or the City. EIP will consider the comments collected by the City at the public hearing during preparation of the Final Focused EIR. Products 1. Attend one Draft Focused EIR Public Meeting. TASK 6: PREPARE ADMINISTRATIVE FINAL FOCUSED EIR (RESPONSE To DRAFT FOCUSED EIR COMMENTS) Purpose This task will result in the preparation of an Administrative Final Focused EIR, which will contain a Est of commentors, comment letters, and responses to comments on the Draft Focused EIR. 11 Scope of Work Proposal to Prrpam the.Northam Ranch House Focused EIR Approach The City's project coordinator will compile and transmit all written comments on the Draft Focused EIR to EIP as one unified set of comments. EIP will confer with City staff to review written comments on the Draft Focused EIR, including comments from public meetings and hearings, to develop a general strategy for preparation of responses. The format of the Final Focused EIR will be as a stand-alone document of responses to comments on the Draft Focused EIR. The Administrative Final Focused EIR will be submitted to City staff for review and comment. Responses that are within this proposal's scope of work and budget consist of explanations, elaborations, or clarifications of the data contained in the Draft Focused EIR. If new analysis, issues, alternatives, or substantial project changes need to be addressed, or if the effort exceeds the budget amount of 40 hours because of the number or complexity of responses, a contract amendment may be needed. Products 1. Ten (10) copies of the Administrative Final Focused EIR. TASK 7: PREPARE FINAL FOCUSED EIR Purpose The objective of this task is to prepare a Final Focused EIR that incorporates City comments on the Administrative Final Focused EIR. Approach EIP will obtain one unified set of comments from the City's Project Coordinator on the Administrative Final Focused EIR. EIP will revise the Administrative Final Focused EIR and produce a Final Focused EIR. The Final Focused EIR will be submitted to the City for distribution ten days prior to the Focused EIR certification hearing. It is assumed that EIP will prepare the Notice of Determination (NOD) and the City will file it with either the County Clerk or the Office of Planning and Research. As with all notices, it is assumed that the City will be responsible for all Fling fees. Products 1. Thirty (30) copies of the Final Focused EIR (as an addendum to the Draft Focused EIR) for use at the Planning Commission certification hearing. 2. Tbree (3) copies of the Certified Final Focused EIR. 3. -One (1) glean reproducible original of the Certified Final Focused EIR. 4. One (1) clean reproducible original of the Notice of Determination. 5. One (1) Microsoft Word compatible disk containing the contents of the Final Focused EIR. L *. 12 Scope of Work Proposal to Prepare the Northam Rancb Horse Focused EIR TASK 8: ATTEND PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL HEARINGS Purpose The objective of this task is to attend the Planning Commission and City Council hearings. Approach The EIP Project Manager will be available at the Planning Commission and City Council hearings to present the findings of the Final Focused EIR, answer technical questions regarding the Final Focused EIR, and answer general questions regarding the environmental review process. It is assumed that presentation graphics will be made available to EIP by either the Project Applicant or the City. Products 1. Attend one (1) Planning Commission and one (1) City Council hearing for the Final Focused EIR. TASK 9: PREPARE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Purpose The objective of this task is to ensure compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, as mandated by Assembly Bill 3180 (Cortese 1988), which requires a Lead Agency to adopt a mitigation monitoring program (MMP) at the time a Focused EIR is certified. Approach EIP will prepare a draft Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) concurrently with the preparation of the Administrative Final Focused EIR. The MMP will be designed to ensure compliance with all adopted mitigation measures during project implementation. The.MMP will be in table format, and will specify mitigation measures, standards of success, parties responsible for implementation and monitoring, funding sources, timing, and provisions for remedial measures (if the success standards are not achieved) The MMP will be designed to fit into the City's existing entitlement and project review process. A Draft MMP will be provided to the City with the Administrative Final Focused EIR. After review and comment on the Draft MMP, EIP will revise the MMP, according to the comments provided, and will submit the Final MMP to the City with the Final Focused EIR. Products 1. Ten (10) copies of the Draft MMP. 2. Thirty (30) copies of the Final MMP. 13 Scope of Work Pmposal to Prepare the Northam Ranch Hoare Focused EIR TASK 10: PREPARE STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND FINDINGS OF FACT Purpose The objective of this task is to prepare the written findings for each significant effect identified in the EIR, pursuant to Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines (Section 21081 of CEQA), and the Statement of Overriding Considerations, pursuant to Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Approach EIP will prepare draft findings for each significant effect identified in the EIR and prepare a Statement of Overriding Considerations, if unavoidable significant impacts occur. As required by the State CEQA Guidelines, one of three findings must be made for each significant effect and must be supported by substantial evidence in the record. The Statement of Overriding Considerations will rely on input from the City regarding the benefits of the project. The UP Project Manager will consult with City staff to review and finalize the findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the City's ultimate adoption. Products 1. Fifteen (15) copies of the draft findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations. 2. One (1) clean, reproducible original of the findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations. TASK 11: PROJECT MANAGEMENT, GENERAL COORDINATION, AND MEETINGS Purpose The purpose of this task is to manage the EIP project team, manage the Focused EIR preparation effort and maintain close communication between City staff and project team members. This task is also intended to ensure that the project is running on time and within budget, and that all work products are of the highest quality. Approach The EIP Project Manager will communicate, as necessary, with project team members and City staff to ensure compliance with the schedule, scope of work, and budget. The Project Manager will coordinate the team's work and provide management liaison between the project team and the City for communication of issues, transmittal of comments, financial management, and other project management matters. EIP will attend a maximum of five (5) project coordination meetings by two EIP staff members during the approximately 29-week Focused EIR schedule; or, it includes a total of 40 hours of staff time, assuming an average length of four hours per meeting per person. Other meetings may be attended on a time -and -materials basis, additional to the proposed price and with prior authorization by the City. -- - — 14 — TO of W/w. Proposal to Pnpa►r the Nodh m Ranrb Hour, Fo-,,d EIR Pmduas Attendance at up to 5 project coordination meetings (by two EIP staff members) or a total of 40 hours of staff time, whichever occurs first. It is anticipated that one of these meetings will be the project "kick-off' meeting. 15 Srnp, of W64 Section 2 Budget REMSED PROPOSED COST ES77MATE FOR THE NORTHAM HOUSE FOCUSED SIR . d Task r 1 Pf*d h babon end OrOen udon (Ind Kick-off -W.) 4 e 12 22 s 1,580 s 1,580 2 Pagan mm 4 12 12 3 Pnpan Dial! EIR 0 10 18 24 40 40 12 152 s 9,190 s 28.240 f3lolopicel Remmas 8 32 2 40 s 3,540 TralfwJCbcubdIGn .Air 18 2 Q+aMy 4 36 2 NOW 4 36 2 Aesthetics 6 6 24 2 40 s 3,260 Ce+4rral Resources 8 40 2 50 $ 3,470 Pub0c Sarvkxs end IJtilltks 18 2 AIWDa;ves 16 2 24 6 24 72 S 5,640 Other E0i SOCOOM (sae ni a a2 bottom) 12 8 B 8 36 s 3,140 4 Prapua Drelt EIR 24 2 40 8 6 8 40 18 8 12 162 S 11.310 s 11,310 5 Anand Pub5o HeatLp an Draft EIR 4 4 8 s 740 s 740 6 Pfepen Admtrrlatrativefftreanchock Final EM 18 4 32 4 4 8 32 18 1 12 129 s 8,890 i B,B90 7 Prepme Fhre1 EIR B 32 32 4 78 s 5.040 $ 5.040 B AMvW ftmft Gmunkskm and Clry Council FMutng 6 e 16 $ 1.480 5 1,480 9 Pnpars Mltfpadon lulonkoft Program 6 8 24 38 s Z670 s Z670 10 Pnpen Sbt mwdof OverridlV CorrsfWKfi rgs B 24 30 s 2,190 s Z190 11 rretrrdes five 32 24 8 64 3 5 920 s 5 920 TobdHours 194 24 200 28 42 88 258 76 49 50 935 R� $ 125 s 125 $ so s 85 s 85 i 75 s 60 s 50 s 50 s 35 TOTAL EIPLABOR t 242M i 3X0 s 16,000 16 2210 t 3,570 s 6.45015 15.48016 3,= 18 2.450 rs 11,760 t se.m t ts,fx0 penses R urtfon 44musa i Z300 mosaw s 500 s 700 Photosnm s 150 Su i 50 ARsceOanaaus s 100 10% admtrdstratl m he s 380 subtotal - rases s 4,180 TOTAL OP BtJDGET $ 72y40 Greenwood fl. Aucclatss i 11'!5 10% edndnhdn dive rue 1 592.50 subtow - Technical studies $ 6 1s GRAM] TOTAL t 7s,758 QI?W aecmm en assumed to be 'effects found not to be &%pW card' and Include: poo o o resources, hazards, hydrdog7 and wmer grmW. poprdauon OW hm sM. and lane use and planning Section 3 Schedule to Pnpam the NoiYhaw Ranch Howe Famird EIR EIR SCHEDULE OF DELIVERABLES . ............. . ....... .. ... ....... ....... . ...... .. .. ..... .... ....... ... .. ...... .......... ...... ........ . .. ...... .. .. .... ....... t............ .. ... .. . .......... ...... P Y Y. Notice to Proceed (NM NIA I Project Kick -Off Meeting NIA w/in 1 week of NTP EIP and City to Attend 1 Draft Project Schedule, Table of Contents, Sample 1 w/mi 1 week of NTT' ✓ Format for EIR technical sections, and Project Contact (at Kick-off mtg.) List I City Comments on schedule, TOC, Document Format, I w/In 1 week of Kick-off mtg. ✓ etc. City to Prepare 3 Draft IS/NOP 1 W/In 3 weeks of NIT 3 Comments on Draft IS/NOP 1 w/in 1 week of receipt of Draft ✓ IS/NOP 4 Final IS/NOP NIA w/in I week of receipt of City to Distribute Draft IS/NOP 4-7 IS/NOP 30-Day Public Review Period [dates TBD] 4 Draft Project Description and Alternatives Description 1 w/in 4 weeks of NTP ✓ 5 City Comments on Draft Project Description and 1 w/in I week of receipt of Draft ✓ Alternatives Description PD/Alts. 15 Screencheck DEIR 10 ADEIRs w/in 8 weeks of end of ✓ Scoping Comment Period 17 City Comments on Screencheck DEIR 1 Set w/in 2 weeks of receipt of ✓ Screencheck DEIR 18 Draft EIR to Blair Graphics for repro. I Camera Ready w/in 1 week of receipt of City To Blair Graphics for Repro. comments on Screencheck DEIR 19 DEIR to City I Camera -Ready w/in 10 days of receipt of ✓ 30 Bound City comments on Screencheck DEIR Sdiedule Empar!d to Prrpam rhL Northam Ranch House Focused EIR ...... ... .... ... . .. .... .... ...... ... ...... . ?4 ...... .... .. ..... . ....... .. ...... .... . .. Week ...... . ro U -A .... .... . ..... ... :jm: Conics, :....:.Cogs . .... .0 .;E1 aty.:... 19 Notice of Completion (NOC) and Notice of Availability NOC to SCH w/ 11 submitted W/ DEIR ✓ (NOA) copies of DEIR 4 NOA's (dates TBD] 19-25 45-DayDEIR Public Review/Comment Period 22, DEIR Public Meeting/Hearing 1 Meeting/Hearing Midway through DEIR Public ETP and City to Attend Review Period 26 Public Comment Letters and Hearing Transcripts to EIP I Set w/ in 1 week of end of 13EIR for Review and Assignment Public Review Period 29 Screencheck Final EIR (Response to -Comments) 10 w/ in 4 weeks of end of ✓ DEIR Public Review Period 29 Draft NIMP 10 submitted w/ Screencheck ✓ • FEIR 30 Ciry Comments on Screencheck Final EIR I Set W/ in 1 week of receipt of ✓ Screencheck FEIR 30 City Comments on Draft NIMP 1 Set W/ comments on Screencheck ✓ FEIR To Blair Graphics for Repro. 31 Final ETR to Blair Graphics for repro. I Camera Ready w/ in 1 week of receipt of City comments on Screencheck FEIR 32 Final EIR to City I Camera Ready w/in 10 days of receipt of ✓ I Electronic FOR City comments on 30 Bound RTC Screencheck FEIR 3 Bound Full FOR 32 Final MMP I Camera Ready submitted w/ FOR 30 Bound w/ RTC 32 File Notice of Determination (NOD) I Camera Ready Submitted w/ FEIR ✓ Attend City Council Hearing and Planning Commission Hearing 2 Meetings T*BD I EIP to Attend Schedmit Section 4 Schedule of Fees Proposal to Pare the Northam Ranch House Focused EIR 4 Schedule of Fees Hourly Billing Rates and Job Classifications for EIP Associates Principal $ 160/hour Principal II S 125/hour Senior Associate I 5 115/hour Senior Associate II $ 105/hour Associate $ 95/hour Senior Professional 85/hour Professional $ 75/hour Professional II 65/hour Technician I $ 60/hour Technician II 50/hour Technician III 35/hour Mileage is charged at .30/mile Photocopies are charged at $ .15/page Direct costs (.e., travel, meals, lodging, auto rentals, printing, graphic materials, etc.) and subcontractor fees are subject to a 10% administration charge. 1. This schedule is effective through May 31, 1999, and subject to revision thereafter. 2. Invoices will be submitted by Consultant monthly. Client will notify Consultant, in writing, of any objections to an invoice within ten (10 days) of the date of invoice. Otherwise, the invoice shall be deemed acceptable by the Client Amounts indicated on invoices are due and payable immediately upon receipt. The Client's account will be considered delinquent if Consultant does not receive full payment within thirty (30) days after the invoice date. 3. A service charge will be applied at the rate of 1.5 percent per month (or the maximum rate allowable by law) to delinquent accounts. Payment thereafter will be applied first to accrued interest and then to the principal unpaid by the Client. 4. EXPERT TESTIMONY. For situations requiring expert testimony, services will be provided at 1.5 times the standard hourly rates listed, with a minimum of four hours. Time spent in preparation and review of testimony will be charged at standard rates. S/PILOJECI-5110262-00 NULTH" EnVPROPdhAL/N0XTJiSOWDOC 1 SCheduiee of Fee; Section 5 Resumes _E I R --_ A S S O C f A T E S TERRI S. VITAR Regianal Managrr/Af-&Autipbnag Speciafut Terd VntaS Regional Manager of EIP Associates' Los Angeles Office, is a multidisciplinary specialist with more than 14 years experience in CEQA and NEPA documentation, transportation planning, natural resources management, and water resources planning. She has a broad background in the physical sciences, including both academic training and tield experience in transportation planninpy wedand delineations, biological evaluations, and hydrology. She specializes in the integration of CEQA/NEPA with ocher environmental statutes, such as Section 404 of tits Clean Water Act, the State and federal endangered species acts. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, Section 1600 of the Calduruia Fish and Game Code, and the California Coastal Act. TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES Ms. Vicar is thoroughly familiar with CEQA/NEPA compliance and other pertinent federal and state regulations. She specializes in those projects that require the integration of CEQA/NEPA with other relevant environmental statutes and guidelines, such as Sections 401, 402, or 404 of the Clean Water Act, RCRA, CERCLA, and the state and federal Endangered Species Acts. Ms. Vitar has managed, or is in the process of managing, many high profile and controversial projects that require the preparation of state and federal environmental documents and/or wedand restoration plans. These projects have included the Hollywood Water Quality Improvement Project, Dana Point Headlands EIR the Santa Barbara Aquarium EIR, the Pico -Union Block 6 Redevelopment Program EIR, the San Gabriel Discount Superstore EM the Seven Oaks Dam EIS, the Ballona Lagoon Restoration Project, and the restoration plan for the Bolsa Cbica lowlands. • Ms. Vicar has obtained both a Traffic Engineering Certificate from the University of California, Berkeley, and an Urban Mass Transit Certificate from the Federal Highway Administration. EDUCATION AND AFFILIATIONS BA, Chemistry and Mathematics, Hood College, Frederick, IMaryland USACE Wetlands Delineations Methods, Wetland Training Institute Land Use Law Update, University of California, frvine Environmental Consultation and Permitting Requirements for CEQA/NEPA Projects, UCLA Traffic Engineering Certificate, UC, Berkeley UrbanMass Transit Certificate, Federal Highway Administration Southern California Water Committee, Member Society of Wetland Scientists, Member Association of Environmental Professionals, Member American Planning Association, Member Institute of Transportation Engineers, :Member SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCE Envrronrnental Studies and Redevelopment Projects Culver City Redevelopment Program Subsequent EIR, City of Culver City Pico -Union Block 6 Redevelopment EIR, City of Los Angeles Community Redevelopment Agency Dana Point Headlands ETR, City of Dana Point Santa Barbara Aquarium EIR, City of Santa Barbara Waterfront Development Addendum, City of Huntington Beach Peter j. Pitchess Honor Rancho Mitigated Negative Declaration, County of Los Angeles, Sheriff s Department Transmission Line, Reservoir, and Pump Station Mitigated Negative Declaration, Castaic Lake Water Agency Discount Superstore EIR, City of San Gabriel Biryde/Pedesrrian Path Mitigated Negative Declaration, City of San Clemente East Garden Grove-Wintersburg/Oceanside Channel System (COS/CO6) Flood Control Improvement Project EIR, County of Orange Puente Hills Waste Management Facilities EIR, Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts Holiday Inn Express Focused EIR, City of San Gabriel Lake Perris Recreation Area Mitigated Negative Declarations, State of California, Department of General Services NEPA Studies Seven Oaks Dam EIS, USACE (Riverside County) Tucson Arroyo Flood Control Project EIS, USACE (Tucson, AZ) On Cal! Services Environmental Consulting Services for the City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (Hollywood Water Quality Improvement Project) Environmental Consulting Services for the Koll Real Estate Group (Bolsa Chica Project) Restoration Planning and Biological Consulting Services for the Califomia Coastal Conservancy (Ballona Lagoon Restoration Project, Calleguas Creek Flood Control Improvement and Restoration Project, and Ventura River Wildlife Monitoring and Maintenance Project) Biological and Environmental Consulting Services for the County of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works (Various Projects) A S S O C I A T E S TraiEc Studies Woodbridge Mixed -Use Commercial Development, Orange County Parker. Hanni£t<t's Lakeshore Towers, Orange County Brea Marketplace/Brea Corporate Place, Orange County Technical Engineering Studies Preliminary Engineering for Moulton Niguel Water District's Water Reclamation System Expansion, Aliso Water Management Agency and Southeast Regional Reclamation Authority Basins, Orange County Hydraulic Analyses for Mission Viejo and Aliso Viejo Planned Communities, Orange County Jurisdictional Wedands Delineations/Permitring Programs 6,000-ate Aliso Viejo 30-year Development Permitting Program 10,000-acre Mission Viejo Master Development Permitting Program Wetland Violation Permitting, Ballona Lagoon Wetland P�ermitt g, Hollywood Water Quality Improvement Project Wetland Permitting, 2,000-ame Las Flores Planned Development Wetlands delineation, 2,500-acre parcel in Rancho Cucamonga Wetlands delineation, 43-2cre Religious Retreat in San Bernardino Mountains Wetlands delineation, 800-acres within the proposed extension of Puente Hrlls Landfill Ngesaol Resort Peninsula Resort, Republic Of Palau Foothill Ttansportatiion Cocridor--South EIS/Supplemental EIA, Orange County Antonio Parkway Extension Project, Orange County Wetlands delineation, 30-Acre Waste Management/ Recycling Facility on the La Post& Indian Reservation Wetlands delineation, 2,500-acre Daley Ranch site in eastern San Diego County Wetlands delineation, 2,000-acre Tesoro del Valle site in Los Angeles County Wedands delineation, 30-acre proposed residential development in Adelanto for Lewis Homes Restoration Planning Ballona Lagoon Restoration Project, City of Los Angeles Balsa Chica Wetlands Restoration Project, Orange County Calleguas Creek Restoration Project, Ventura County Hollywood Water Quality improvement Project, City of Los Angeles Aliso Creek Wildlife Habitat Enhancement Project, Orange County Altemafives Analysis Pacific Gateway Retail Center, Orange County Aliso Creek Retarding Basin and Pacific Park Drive Roadway, Orange County Biological Studies Slender -horned Spineflower Surveys, Cosmowodd, Los Angeles County Aliso Creek Wildlife Habitat Enhancement Project (Mitigation Bank), Orange County Biological Survey of Bolsa Chica, Orange County A S S 0 C t o E s ELWOOD C. TESCHER, AICP Dinrrlor of Urban Plaguing and Design Mr. Tesrher brings more than 25yeaza of large scale process design and implementation and planning experience to EIP. Mr. Tescher has received myriad awards from state and local agencies, associations and jurisdictions in recognition of his facilitation and planuitig skills. He has fadin d groups of all sizes in a wide variety of venues. He mites a deep and well-grounded understanding of land use matters with a warm and sincere persona. He is able to foster participation from the most reticent stakeholder, and is a master at interjecting humor and anecdote at important moments. His grasp of the theory and practice of process design and facilitation is apparent by the success of the many complicated planning processes he has designed and successfully implemented. Most recently, Mr. Teacher managed the General Plan Framewodt for the City of Los Angels, which received the California Chapter of the American Planning Association's Award of Excellence in Comprehensive Plans --Large Jurisdiction. Additionally, he managed the preparation of Santa Monica', Third Street Promenade Specific Plan. TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES Mr. Teacher ovetsees all urban planning and design programs for EIP Associates throughout California. He is recognized for advancing the state-of-the-art in the development and application of planning and design approaches that achieve community visions and enhance the livability of neighborhoods and vitality of commercial and community centers, including pedestrian -oriented, transit - oriented, mired, live/work, and traditional residential developments. • He is paxdculady stalled in the fomtulation of planning and design documents that are effectively and persuasively implemented by public and private clients. • Mr. Tew1wr is an experienced and stalled facilitator of public involvement programs drat reconcile the often conflicting objectives of residents, developers, and property owners. • Consistently, he is involved in the coordination of multi- disciplinary teams in challenging complex planning and design assignments. EDUCATION AND AFFILIATIONS Master. of Architecture, Urban Design, University df California, Los Angeles Ba6rlor of Architecture, University of Southern California r American Institute of Certified Planners American Planning Association California Planning Roundtable USC Architectural Guild AWARDS AND HONORS 1997 Outstanding Planning Achievement for Comprehensive Planning for the City of Los Angeles General Plan Framework, CCAPA 1997 Outstanding Planning Achievement Award for Comprehensive Planning for the City of Huntington Beach General Plan, Orange Section, APA 1997 Focused Issue Planning Award for the Long Beach East Village Arts District Guide for Development, Los Angeles Sections, APA 1994 Outstanding Planning Achievement Award for Comprehensive Planning for the San Clemente General Plan, Orange Section, APA 1992 Distinguished Planner Award, CCAPA 1990 Westside Prize for the Santa Monica Third Street Promenade, Westside Urban Forum 1989 Outstanding Planning Achievement Award for Comprehensive Planning for the City of West Hollywood General Plan, CCAPA Award of Merit for the Montezuma Transmission Condor Environmental Assessment for Pacific Gas and Electric Corridor, APA PROJECT EXPERIENCE Public Involvement and ConQiet Resolution City of Los Angeles General Plan Framework City of Santa Monica Third Street Promenade Specific Plan City of Ontario Sphere of Influence General Plan Taylor Yazd Planting and Design Worltshup Boyle Heights Los Angeles Design Action Planning Team Workshop Regional Urban Design Assistance and Team Workshops for Downtown Hemdon, Virginia and Thousand Oaks Boulevard Genetal Plans City of Los Angeles General Plan Framework West Hollywood General Plan Huntington Beach General Plan San Bernardino General Plan Ontario Sphere of Influence General Plan Redondo Beach General Plan San Clemente General Plan American Canyon General Plan Lancaster General Plan Westlake Village General Plan Palmdale General Plan Arroyo Grande Central Plan Specific Plana City of Santa Monica Third Street Promenade Specific Plan City of Inglewood International Business Park Specific Plan City of Big Bear Moonridge Specific Plan City of Beverly Hills Industrial Area Plan Kern Couuty-Ciry of Bakersfield Casa Loma Specific Plan and Enterprise Zone Application City of Los Angeles Cuasral Transportation Curridur Specific Plan Los Angeles County Malibu Center Specific Plan City of Los Angeles Port Area Integrated land use - Transportation Specific Plan -E. -1 P,_ A S S O C I A _.£ S City of Fontana Southwest and Juivpa Industrial Parks Specific Plan Redevelopment/Revitafization Long Beach East Village Arts District Guide for Development l3evedy-Fairfax Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Downtown Manhattan Beach Strategic Action Plan Agoura Hills Agoura Village Vision Plan Buena Park Central Business District Redevelopment project West Altadena Community Redevelopment Project San Pedro Central Business District Revitalization Project Bakersfield Downtown Redevelopment Element Lancaster Central Business District Redevelopment Project Eaat Compton Redevelopment Project Hemdon Town Center Plan Ntlghborhood and Community Plans Glendale "Model" Neighborhood Planning Program Altadena Community Plan Castaic Corridor Plan Regional Plans Policy Documents for the Los Angeles Sub -Region for SCAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan Comprehensive Plan for North Los Angeles County (Antelope and Santa Clarity VaQeys) Development Master Plans Howard Hughes Center Master Plan Playa del Rey Bluffs Development Plan Hearst Ranch Master Plan Baldwin H31s Master Plan Bolsa Chica New Town Master Plan Tres Hezmanos Ranch Master Plan City of Commetce Master Plan Urban Design San Bernardino Uptown Redevelopment Project Urban Design Plan and Architectural Design Standards San Pedro CBD Revitalization Project Beverly -Fairfax Neighborhood Revitalization Project Buena Park CBD Revitalization Project West Hollywood General Plan San Bernardino General Plan Planning Studies Santa Barbara Downtown Transitional Areas Rezone Study Regional Conservation Element for Fresno County Conservation and Urban Space Elements for the City of Palmdale Land Use and Environmental Components for the Aseawide Water Quality Management Plan for Ladmet and Weld Counties, CO Environmental Impact Reports/Assessments Pacific Gas and Electric Company Environmental Systems ELR A 5 S O C I A T E S NEGAR VAHIDI Environmental Plan ner/Pn� jeer Manager his. Vahidi is an environmental planner with over 7 years of experience preparing a variety of state and federal environmental, planning, and analytical documents for large scale infrastructure projects. Ms. Vabidi brings the experience of being both a public and private sectur planner, specializing in the integration and completion of CEQA and NEPA documentation. Her areas of focus have included laud use, socioeconomic and public policy analysis, environmental justice analysis, and public and communiry involvement programs. Her diversity can be shown through a sample of her projects listed below. TECHNICAL. CAPABILITIES • Ms. Vahidi is highly -experienced in CEQA/NEPA document preparation for pipeline, transmission line, flood control, energy, and shore protection projects. • his. Vabidi has proven analytical skills required for completion of technical studies, consensus documents, and large scale mitigation plans. • Ms. Vahidi is particularly skilled in the development and implementation of public participation programs, allowing her to facilitate the often -conflicting interests revealed in the environmental planning process. Ms. Vahidi specializes in the integration of CEQA and NEPA with other local, state, and federal statutes, such as air toxics regulations, Section 4(0, Executive Order 12898 on Environmental Justice, and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. • Ms. Vahidi has considerable experience in the preparation and evaluation of environmental restoration/mitigation projects, including the integration of such projects with other compatible uses (recreational amenities, scientific uses, and interpretive centers). EDUCATION AND AFFILIATIONS Master of Public Administrations, University of Southern California, 1993 1992-93 Recipient, Southern California Association of Public Administrators (SCAPA) "M- erit Scholarship" B.A. Political Science, University of California, Irvine, 1991 (graduated with highest honors) American Planning Association, Member r Association of Environmental Professionals, Member SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCE Environmental Str,dies Santa Fe Pacific Pipeline Project EIR, Carson to Norwalk, CA Pacific Pipeline Project EIR, Santa Barbara to Los Angeles, CA Pacific Pipeline Project EIS aad'Subsequent EIR, Kem County to Los Angeles, CA Yellowstone Pipeline EIS, Lolo National Forest, Montana Calnev Power Line and Substation Project IS/L'Ilv'D, Colton, CA Six Flags Power Line and Substation Project ISA-WD, Santa Clarita, CA Altums Transmission Line Project EIR/EIS, Alturas, CA Imperial Beach Shore Protection EIR/EIS, Imperial Beach, CA U.S. Food and Drug Administration Laboratory EIR/EIS, Irvine, CA Airspaces Restrictions EA, FCIswitr, CA National Guard Armory Budding'E.�, Los Angeles, CA EA for Area Lighting, Fencing, and Itoadways at the International Border, San Diego, CA Border Patrol Checkpoint Station EA, San Clemente, CA Specific Plans, Development, and Redevelopment Projects Wes Thompson Ranch Development Project EIR, Santa Clatita, CA Cabrillo Plaza Specific Plan EIR, Santa Barbara, CA Culver City Redevelopment Plan and Merger EIR, Culver City, CA Dana Point headlands Specific Plan EIR, Dana Point, CA Seaview Court Condominiums IS/MND, Santa Monica, CA 20dn Street & Arizona Avenue Four -Story Hotel IS/1CND, Santa Monica, CA Watefront Development Project Section 108 Loan Guarantee EA, Huntington Beach, CA St. Francis Medical Office Project Focused EIR, Santa Barbara, CA Triangle Gateway Project EIR, Beverly Hills, CA Pico Union I Block 6 Residential Development Project EIR, Los Angeles, CA Culver City Redevelopment Project Program EIR, Culver City CA Public Involvement Projects Pacific Pipeline Project EIS and Subsequent EIR, Kern County, Santa Barbara County, and Los Angeles County, CA Thousand Palms Public Involvement Services Contract, Thousand Palms, CA Alturas Transmission Line EIR/ EIS, Alturas, CA Water and Wastewater Facilities San Antonio Dam EIS, Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties, CA Whitewater/Thousand Palms Flood Control Project, Thousand Palms, CA San Antonio Creek Bridges Project, Vandenberg Air Force Base, CA Lower Santa Ana River Operations and Maintenance EA, Orange County, CA Miscellaneous Studies Pacific Pipeline Mitigation Monitoring, Compliance and Reporting Program, Kem and Los Angeles Counties, CA Technical Support to NEPA Lawsuit, Angeles National Forest, CA Industrywide Survey for the South Coast Air Quality Management District, Various Counties, CA Resource Management Upper Newport Bay Environmental Restoration Project, Newport Beach, CA Rio Salado Environmental Restoration EIS, Phoenix and Tempe, AZ Fr. Irwin Expansion tiiingation Plan, Mojave Desert, CA Supplemental EA for the Seven Oaks Danz Woolly Star Land Exchange, San Bernardino County, CA Sauna Cruz River Watershed Plan, Tucson, AZ A 5 5 0 C[ A 'r E s SCOTT DEBAUCHE Enrimnmenlal Planner Scott Debauche is a versatile urban and environmental planner with over 5 years experience preparing a variety of environmental, planning, and'analytical documents for large scale specific plans, comprehensive plans, infrastructure projects, -and development projects. Mr. Debauche brings the experience of being both a public and private sector planner, specializing in the integration and completion of CEQA and NEPA documents. Mr. Debauche has particular experience in economic and demographic analysis, noise studies, and traffic studies. His dhenity can be shown through a sample of his projects including an Environmental Impact Statement and Federal Record of Decision for new runway construction at Minneapolis/Saint Paul International Airport, Culver City Redevelopment Program Environmental Impact Report, and the completion of an Environmental justice Report of national precedence for the Federal Aviation Administratiou- TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES ,Mr. Debauche is experienced with CEQA/NEPA document Preparation for approval of transportation, development, infmstructure, and water/wastewater projects. -Mr. Debauche has proven analytical dulls required for completion of technical studies, consensus documents, and large scale mitigation plans. •Mr. Debaoche bangs the experience of being both a public and private sector planner, giving him the unique ability to understand public and private perspectives. *Mr. Debauche specializes in the integration of CEQA and NEPA with other local, state, and federal statutes, such as Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, the State and Federal Endangered Species Acts, Section 4(f), Executive Order 12898 on Environmental justice, ISTEA, and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. EDUCATION AND AFFILIATIONS M.S. Candidate Urban and Regional Planning, University of Minnesota B.S. Urban and Regional Planning, University of Minnesota Cum Iaude American Planoirlg Association, Member Association of Environmental Professionals, Member PROJECT EXPERIENCE EAvnonmenlal Skve&s St. Francis Medical Hospital Focused EIR, City oaf Santa Barbara 11-Unit Condominium Project IS/MND, City of Santa Monica Wes Thompson Ranch Development Project EIR, City of Santa Clarita Cabrillo Plaza Specific Plan Amendment EIR, Santa Barbara, CA Minneapolis/Sairkt Paul International Airport New Runway 17-35 EA, Draft and Final EIS, ROD Dana Point Headlands Specific Plan EIR, Dana Point, CA Culver City Redevelopment Program EIR, Culver City, CA Waterfront Hotel EIR Addendum (Redevelopment Area), Huntington Beach, CA Interstate 29 Expansion EIS, Eau Claire, WI Runway 4-22 Extension EIS, Sydney, Australia Peshtigo River Hydroelectric Station EIS, Peshtigo, WI Green Bay Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion EIS, Green Bay, WI Pavilion Office Towers EA, Minneapolis, MN Bloomington Interceptor EA/FONSI, Bloomington, MN General Plan#SperifirPlans El Segundo Downtown Vision Plan - Phase I, City of El Segundo City of Richfield Comprehensive Plan Update, Ricbfelld, 1*1l Stevens Square Specific Plan, Minneapolis, MN Broadway Avenue Specific Plan, Green Bay, WI Tmnsporralion Studies I-494 Corridor Study, Minneapolis, ;t-; Highway 41 Corridor Study, Milwaukee, WI I-29 Corridor Study, Eau Claire, WI 2020 Highway Development Consensus Document, Minneapolis, MN Water and LiVarlewaterPaaaetr Solids Handling Facility Study/Predesign-Minneapolis/St Paul Metro WWT, St. Paul, MN Incineration Alternatives Study -Green Bay Metropolitan WWI?, Green Bay, WI Thickening and Dewatering Study -Blue Lake and Seneca WWI?, Eagan, MN Door County Lift Station Analysis, Door County, WI Economic Studies Alternative Terminal Development Concepts Economic Analysis, Minneapolis, MN Stevens Square Commercial Redevelopment Analysis, Minneapolis, MN Property Value/Noise Effects Economic Analysis, Minneapolis, MN Ruarnrr Management Documentation for Consultation on Section 4(F) Impacts to the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge, Minneapolis. -.L i Souddands Christian Church Biological Assessment, Walnut' CA _,E .1_P ..:.—_ A S S O C I A T F. NEILL E. BROWER EnrmonmenlalAna,ki Mr. Brower is a broadly experienced environmental analyst who provides technical assistance and project management foe a variety of environmental documentation, natural resources, and urban planning projects, including highly visible and controversial projects, such as the Dana Point Headlands Specific Plan EIR. In addition, Mr. Brower is a cultural resources specialist, having earned a baccaleaureate degree in Anthropology from UCLA, where he specialized in Southern California archaeological field studies and analysis. Mr. Brower has been involved iri archaeology and environmental planning since 1991, in both the academic and professional fields. TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES • Archaeological experience in the Southern California region. Familiar with the wide range of cultural resource investigations, and has participated in projects within the public and pavan sectors, including environmental management, planning, and engineering firths, and city and state agencies. • Skilled in research, writing and illustration, mapping, field survey, test excavation, site monitoring, materials analysis, and collections management - Particular interest in California coastal regions, with an emphasis on the pre- and protohistoac periods. Research interests and technical specializations in hunter -gatherer studies, human osteology, zooarchaeology, and lithic analysis --primarily obsidian hydration and source determination. EDUCATION AND AFFILIATIONS B.A. in Anthropology, 1996, summa nrm laude, University of California, Los Angeles Forensic Sciences Seminar Series, San Diego Museum of Man Society for American Archaeology Society for California Archaeology PROJECT EXPERIENCE Envimnmentallmpart Repow and Afitigakd Ntgahve Derlaraeions UCLA Academic Health Center Facilities Reconstruction Plan Program EIR, City of Los Angeles Mission Bay Redevelopment Plan Subsequent EIR, City of San Francisco Culver City Redevelopment Program Subsequent EIR, City of Culler City Dana Point Headlands Specific Plan Program EIR, City of Dana Point Cabrillo Plaza Specific Plan Amendment EIR, City of Santa Bubara Claremont Village West Specific plan Program EIR, City of Claremont Triangle Gateway Specific Plan EIR, City of Beverly Hills Waterfront Development EIR Addendum, City of Huntington Beach Soutbiands Church Expansion Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, County of Los Angeles J-risdirtronal Pernrithag P-gromr/AhernakvarAnalyses Tesoro Del Valle Altemativea Analysis and Environmental Pcmaitdug, County of Los Angeles Southlands Church International Jurisdictional Delineation and Environmental Pemvrting, County of Los Angeles Urban Plans University Community Concept Planning Process for the University of California, Merced City of Arroyo Grande Comprehensive General Plan Update Histo it Resumh Historic Research for the Academic Health Center Westwood Campus Facility Reconstruction Project, the University of California, Los Angeles Cahunrl Rarownw Srnveps Phase I Cultural Resources Survey of Camp Big Pines, Angeles National Forest, Los Angeles County Phase I Cultural Resources Survey of the Proposed Shadow Pines Residential Development Area, Los Angeles County Phase I Cultural Resources Survey of the Proposed Lindero Canyon Park, Westlake Village, Los Angeles County Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Proposed Adelanto Wastewater Facility, Adelanto, San Bernardino County Arrhaeologiral Data Remvery and Anafjuis Phase III Archaeological Investigations for the California Department of Forestry Facility (CA-CAlr1633), Murphys, Calaveras County A S S O C I .t T E S MICHAEL D. BUMGARDNER Director Biological Resources Mr. Bumgaf&er has over 15 years of experience with terrestrial vertebrates, invertebrates and porn in ecosystems of North, Central and South America and wesoem Europe. He also has over 9 years of expm erience in the management and preparation of environmental documents which comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Tahoe Regional Planning Agency WA). Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA), and California Endangered Species Act (CESA). He has particular experience in the coordination and preparation of biological resource assessments, management plans, mitigation programs, and permitting associated with threatened and endangered species. TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES Agency Consultation. Mr. Bunigardner is experienced in formal and informal consultation and coordination with local, static, and federal regulatory agencies. Endangered Species. Mr. Bumgardncr is experienced in the collection and analysis of data for the preparation of biological assessments for state and Federal threatened and endangered spaces and other special -status species. He is also knowledpeable in the statutory requirements and guidelines for ederal Endangered Species Act Sections 7 and 10(a) incidental take permits and California Endangered Species Act Section 2081 Management Agreements. WNdiife. Mr. Bumgutiner is skilled in die identification, habitat requirements, and ecology of terrestrial and aquatic vertebrates and invertebrates of the western United States. He is knowledgeable of established survey protocols and d ar conducted special -status wildlife species surveys for biological assessments and environmental documents He has conducted and managed surveys for a wide variety of species including red - legged frog, Califomna tiger salamander, foothill yellow -legged frog, southwestern arroyo mad, San Joaquin kit fox, American marten, Swainson's hawk, burrowing owl, norther goshawk, California gnatcatcher, southwestern willow flycatcher, California clapper tail, least Bell's vireo, yellow -billed cuckoo, vernal pool invertebmtes, and valley elderberry longhom beetle. Hehw also implemented mitigation programs for many of these species. CEQA/NEPA/TRPA. Mr. BunVudner is experienced in the t and preparation of environmen documents that mrmp with CEQA, NEPA, and the TRPA Rules of Procedure. He is particularly experienced with impact analyses involving sensitive habitats and special -status species, designing feasible mitigation measures to reduce significant impacts on biological resources, and resolving project conflicts with these resources. EDUCATION, REGISTRATIONS AND AFFILIATIONS B.S., 7mlogy, June 1980, University of California at Davis, Califomii Rgiontiasr Federal Fish and Wildlife Threatened S�ecies Permit Nor PRT'-785564 for California Gnatcateher Po6aptdla mCforndra-hforndea), Southwestern Willow Fl =[chef (Empddonaxirni&adi=4 and California Clapper Rail Ralkrt lon8rrw its obrolrtrrs) State of California, Aepartment of Fish and Game Scientific Collector's Permit #1630 Afj£fiatdon t American BirdingAssociation Societyry for Conservation Biology The CC'rldlife Society PROJECT EXPERIENCE State and Federal Eedasdmd Sprrder Rd Compliann • Turk Anticline 3-D Seismic Exploration Project Endangered Spec;es Impact Avoidance Program for the I3nron Oil and Gas Company to the southern San Joaquin Valley. • Preliminary surveys for special -status wildlife habitat on the Stewart Tract in the Sacramento/San Joaquin River Delta, agency coordination, assistance with focused species-ssppecific surveys, mitigation, and preparation of a California Fish and Game Code Section 2081 Habitat Management Plan for Sis,aiwom's Hawk. • Facilitation of agency negotiations for the development and implementation of a mitigation plan for an existing SA*XVn',t Hi iwk nest site for Sweetwater Enterprises in the City of Woodland. Mitigation program for Smw n,ron's Hawk as a response to comments on the City of Woodland Southeast Specific Plan Area Final EIR. • Oceanic Properties, Inc. Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) and Section 2081 Management Agreement for San Jaagxin Kit Fax and Toton's Kampme Rat • Surveys for San Jaaguin Kit Fox and Barmwdnd Owl burrows, excavation of burrow systems, and monitoring of excavated and backfilied burrows fora variery of projects as required by es.rn County to comply with US "take" avoidance guide in Drpartnrrrrl of Drfrntr Pmjrra Inventory of avian species for Brooks Air Force Base in San Antonio, Texas under contract to the US Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE). • Pest Management, Fish and Wildlife t and Threatener] and Endangered Species Management for the Hohenfels (Germany) Combat Maneuver Training Center Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP) under contract to the US Army Europe (USAREUR). • Biological inventory of sensitive species located at Andrews Air Force and the Davidsonvi!!e and Brandyy��ane at Sites in Maryland under contract to AFCEE. Mitigation mcnitorin$ framework and adaptive martage rent strategy for the air quality, water quality, human health, soils and vegeration. threatened and endangered species, and biolog+.� indicators monitoring programs associated with the WC relocation of the US Army Chemical School and Military Police School m Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. • Surveys for US Fish and Wildlife Service world -fisted species and species listed by the Portuguese government at Lajas Field in the Azores under contract to AFCEE. An INRMP that addressed these species, as well as a nesting colony of Cory'r SbamngJa on the seaclifEs at the end of the installation's runway, was also prepared under contract to the US Air Force Air Combat Command (ACC). Threatened and Endangered Species, Fish and Wildlife, and Outdoor Recreation Component Plans For an Ti 1R.MP for Dyess Air Force Base in Abilene, Texas under contract to the ACC- • Biologcal Assessmaht for new fiber optic cable route for Spart Missile Command at Vandenberg Air Force Base. A 5 5 0 C I a f a • Preliminary aasessment of habitat suitability for the federallyy- Biological resources surveys, Biological Evaluation, annual listed Sitphen's Kangamo Rai, Cahfenda Gnauatcher, and LAwt Bell c monitoring program for Pine Afarten, and biological resources Vino on the US Marine Corps Camp Pendleton for the section of the Heavenly Ski Resort Master Plan EIR/EIS/EIS. proposed relocation of Basilone Road and the Case Springs Access Road and identification of potential impacts, Wildh& surveys and biological resources section of the Shotgun development of mitigation and an assessment of the cost of Creek Estates EIR in Tuolumne County. mitigation. • Golden Bear Park Master Plan EIR/EIS in the Lake Tahoe Tmnrpartatian Prvj k Basin. • ]unsdictional wetlands delineation and impact assessment Natuaa] F,rtvirbnment Study, and Biological Assessment for the Biological Evaluation for the US Forest Service LTBMU's US Highway 101 Auxiliary Lanes Project to San Mateo County. transfer of the Hamotunian Trust to El Dorado County foe use as a regional park. Biological resources section of the Final EIS for the Sacramento South Corridor Project as well as supporting documentation for the Final EIS, including a wetlands delineation, Valley Elderberry Longhom Beetle Survey Report, Biological Issues Summary and Mitigation and Monitoring Plan. Natural Environment Study and Biological Assessment for the 1-205 Widening Project in San Joaquin County. • Sensitive Wildlife Survey Methodologies and Results Report for the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) proposed rehabilitation and reconstruction of California Forest Highway 137. • Biological resources sections of the Southside Corridor FIR and State Route 58 Extension EIR for the Kern County Council of Governments, Utility and Infrattrrralw Prr'rar Passive Bxrmndng Owl relocation program for the Santa Clara Valley WaterDistrsces Milpitas Recycled Water Pipeline Project • Biological Evaluation for the Paiute Natural Gas Pipeline near Kings Beach in the Lake Tahoe Basin. Responsibilities also included preparation of a Biological Biological Assessment for the Santa Rosa Subregional Long - Term Wastewater Project in Sonoma and Marin counties. • Biological Assessment for the Southern Nevada Water Authonty's roject to bring additional water from Lake Mead to the cities of�Las Veils, North Las Vegas, and Henderson. Other responsibilities included preparation of the biological resources section of the EIS. • Biological Evaluations for it varic7 of South Tahoe 'Public Utility District (SIPUD) projects on national Forest lands in t12e Lake Tahoe Basin. Surveys for .AnVe Southweatarn Toad, L.aart Belli Vireo, and Soathwatern U'iNow Flyrauher along the San Gabriel River and its tribuoiries downstream from San Gabriel Dam to respond to US Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game comments on the Draft EIR/EIS for the proposed San Gabriel Canyon Sediment Management Plan. Echo Lake Dam Stabilization Environmental Assessment for the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). • In-house CEQA consulting }ervices for PG&E on the Rock Creek -Crests Sediment Management Project on the North Fork of the Feather River in Plumas County. Natxml Resomrre Management Projrra • Environmental baseline (particularly biological and marine resources) for a comprehensive plan that addresses 280+ petroleurn-related protects in the Oriente (eastern third) of Venezuela over the next 10 years. Getchell Mina's Hansen Creek Biological Monitoring Program in northern Nevada. Biological baseline database for the Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL). Biological resources section of the Spreckels Sugar Company Annexation EIR and coordination of negotiations between the Spreckels Sugar Company, City of Woodland, California Department of Fish and Game and local conservation organizations to develop performance standards for recreated wetland wildlife habitat. Spring and surruner biological surveys as a response to coininents on the Siskiyou Lake 1Iighlands Final EIR in Siskiyou County, California. Croftwood Subdivision EIR for the City of Rocklin. • Sensitive Species Assessment for the Ball Ranch Specific Plan in Fresno County, California. • Vernal pool, vemal pool invertebrate, and avian surveys of the Tiechert/Granite aggregate mining site in Sacramento County, California. Other Rrhsted Experience • Natural history tours of California and Nevada for special interest groups such as the World Wildlife Fund, Smithsonian Institute Associates Travel Program, Wildlife Preservation Trust and various zoological societies from around the United States for Betchart Expeditions. Geaduatr Studies involving California Clgpprr Rail and Black Rai! Inventories along San Francisco Bay; Prey Utilization by Leng- mW Ondand Gnmt-homed Owl at Mono Lake; Light footed Clapper Rail inventories in the Tijuana River Estuary and San Diego Bay; inventory of Ca y&mia Liao Tart at Border Field State Park; and population density and dynamics of Dual Iguanas near Thousand Palma. Other CFQA/NEPA/7RPA Pmjedr , CMrdCWUMVjtAe 1999 DANA N. SLAWSON Architectural Historian Greenwood and Associates Office Address: 725 Iacon Way Pacific Palisades, CA 90272 Telephone: (310) 454-3091 Education: State University of New York at Buffalo -1993 B.A. in Anthropology (cum kutde) State University of New Yovk at Buffalo -1989 M. Arch., Architecture professional Memhetship: Society of Architectural Historians, Southern California Chapter Los Angeles Conservancy California Preservation Foundation Preservation Coalition of Erie County (New York) American Institute of Arclutecnue Students National Trust for Historic Preservation Research Interests and Expertise: American Historic Architecture Vernacular Architecture of the Northeast California Vernacular Architecture Historic Industrial Sttnctarres Historic Preservation and Adaptive Reuse Architecture of the Early Twentieth Century Atchitecdrre and Cultic al Diffusion Related SM., Architectural Surveys Architectural Assessment and Dating National Register Nominations Historic American Buildings Survey Drawings and Documentations Historic American Engineering Record Documentation Ceriificatiom: C.ettified under Secretary of the Intujoes Standards, for History and Architectural History CaItrans accredited Architectural Historian References: Profesaional and academic references well be pmvided upon request. d WdOT:S SEET "LT 'dSS T60£17StrOT£ : 'ON mid . --- SMbIMSSti " g00r9N3MJ : W IA D. Slam Page 2 Professional Employments 1993-present Architectural Historian Greenwood and Associates. Pacific Palisades California. Responsible for the description and analysis of historic structures and architectural remains, Department of Parks and Recreation Historic Resources Inventory, Calms Architectural Inventory, primary and secondary source research, HAGS and HAER recordation, management and supervision of field crews, preparation of historic strictures reports, graphic and photographic documentation, land use histories. Archaeological Survey of the State University of New York at Buffalo 1986-1993 Field Supervisor Responsible for the management and supervision of archaeological survey crews and laborawry staff, development of project budgets, coordination with property owners, state and local officials, analysis of recovered data, writing and production of project reports. 1985-1993 Architectural Historian, Blustrator .. Responsibilities included description and analysis of historic structures, NYS Historic Preservation Office building inventory, primary and secondary source research, photographic and graphic documentation, preparation of project area craps, excavation and artifact drawings. 1983-1986 Archaeological Field Assistant Archaeological testing and excavation, laboratory work. 1983,1985 Archaeological Fkld Assistant Dean 8t Barbour Associates, Buffalo, New York. Archaeological testing and excavation. 1984 Archaeolagieal Field As6stant Mark Rosenzweig Archaeology, Amherst, New York. Archaeological testing and excavation. 1983-1994 ArchWlegical Fkld Assistant Ecology tit Environmeat, Cheektowaga, New York. Archaeological testing and excavation, laboratory work. Dec. 1990 ArchiteMral Histary Consultant Hanun and Associates, Grand Island, New Yock. Dest:dption and analysis of historic structures included in a cultural resources survey in Westfield, New York. Spring 1988 Darwin D. Martin House (Frank Lloyd Wright) Buffalo. New York. Prepared measured drawings and a preliminary study of the house's interior millwork in preparation for restoration activity. A a L114nT:S SESL'ZL'd3S L60£vStraTT : 'ON BNQHci SaLUtarS GNH finnmN�:!;6n : LnN4 D. Slawson Page 3 Cultural Resource Management Reports: Greenwood and Associates 1998 1997 Historic Structures Report. The Rocco Garbani Homestead Documentation of a late -nineteenth century Italian -Swiss ranch complex in Riverside County, CA. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. 1998. Cultural Resources Survey for the Proposed Inland Empire Utilities Agency Wastewater Treatment Plant - Regional Plant Number S. Albert A. Webb & Associates. 1999. Historic Architectural Survey Report (HASR) for the State Route 22AVeat Orange County Connection Project Parsons Brinekerhaff. 1998. Architectural Evaluation of St. Rafael's Catholic Church "Old Hall,* in Goieta, California. County of Santa Barbara Planning Department. 1997. 1-5 Corridor Improvement Project Major Investment Study. Evaluation of Historical Properties along a 12-mile segment of the 15 encompassing eight municipalities. Parsons Brinckerhoff. 1997. Historic Resources Survey for the Terminal Island Treatment Plan Advanced Wastewater Treatment Facility Phase I Pipeline. City of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works. 1997. Forster City. Archival and field research to document the location of a brief nineteenth century development on what is now Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton. Caltrans, TCA, and Michael Brandman Associates. 1997. Cultural Resources Technical Report for the Proposed South Campus Student Recreation Center. Historical research, documentation, assessment, and recomttte datians for mitigation for standing s n==s on the campus of University of California, Irvine, including early buildings of the Irvine Ranch. Psomas. 1997. Historic Architectural Survey Report (HAM for the FoothM TrrrnsporEVion Corridor - South, including historical research and architectural documentation for numerous structuxes in the San Clemente area, including La Casa Paafaa, former residence and "Western White House" of President Richard M.Nixon. Caltrans, TCA, and Michael Brandtnan Associates. 1996. Documentation and DPR Forms 523 for two historical str =res on Mahn Street< Ventura. Architectural documentation of 15 buildings of the Hughes Aircraft Company, including the executive offices, testing and research and development laboratories, first assembly structure, paint shop, fire station. and others, including the masaive wooden hangar where the Spruce Goose was 6 d WdTT :5 866T 'Zt 'aS T60£tG40TZ : 'ON SNOHd S31tl10OSSa GNti GOOMN23360 : XaJ D. Slawson Page 4 1995 1994 built. Historic American Engineering Record (HAER). Maguire Thomas Partners. HAER documentation of Prado Dam. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District. Architectural Recordation of Los Angeles Chinatown Heritage & Visitors Canter, 411 and 415 Bernard Street, Los Angeles, California. Nomination for City Historical Landmark. Architectural History of 1057 King Street, Redlands, California Included in Cultural Resources Study and Evaluation for the Proposed Redlands High School No. 2 Location, San Bernardino County, California. (with Roberta S. Greenwood and A.G. Toren) Prepared for Redlands Unified School District Archaeological Survey Report for the Proposed Pomona Regional Transit Center Project. Prepared for JKA, Inc. Cultural Resources Technical Report. Historic Map Review, Metro Rail Red Line. Segment 3, North Hollywood Station. Prepared for Metropolitan Transportation Authority. Cultural Resources Technical Report: Land Use History and Archaeological Evaluation. Metro Rail Red Lint, Segment 3. Hollywoo&Htghland Station. Prepared for Metropolitan Transportation Authority. Historical and A rchireemml Evaluation, Los Angeles County Drainage Area Project. Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Prepared for Woodward-Ciyda Consultants for submission to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Architectural Evaluation of Structures Adjacent to the Proposed Metro Rail Red Line Construction Staging Area, Segment 3, HollywoodWighland Station. Submitted to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority. Architectural History of the Nicolson Adobe and Rwch Buildings (CA-RiVA62W. Included in History and Hfatorical Arcfraeology of the Domenigoni VaUey, Testing and Evaluation Report No. 6- Mud Stone. Rock and water. Utilization in the Domenigoni Valley. (with John M. Foster, Daniel L. Landis. Gwendolyn Romani, R. Paul Hampson, and Vicki Solheid) Submitted to Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Lewis Road/{1.S. Route 1011nterchange Historic Architectural Survey Report. Prepared for Michael Brandman and Associates for submission to Caltsans. Third Supplemental Historic Architectural Survey Report 7.10 Freeway Gap Closure Project (07- LA 710, 26.5/R32.7 ,EA 07-020090 Vol. IV: Berkthire Crwjlsman and Revival Bungalow District (with Carson Anderson) Prepared with Micheal Brandman and Associates for submission to Caltrans. Historic Resources Inventoryfor Three Structures, 234-254 Santa Clara Strew. Ventura, Ventura County Courthouse Project Prepared for Hall, Moore and Company. nr� ,.i�2r•c o.'GT •�r''1a� T�A4trC[nTc 'C1N �I.�Y"4 ��I �T111� i_IT(1C1C1N�aN�i Lk7?Id D. Slawson Page 5 1993 Archaeological Monitoring of Excavation for Proposed Railroad Passenger Loading and Waiting Platform, San Juan Capistrano, California. Prepared for The City of San Juan Capistrano, Departmogt of Engineering and Building. Archaeological Monitoring of Ten Boring at Depot Parking L0; San Juan Capistrano, California. Prepared for Law/Crandall, Inc., Engineering and Environmental Services. Archaeological Monitoring of Test Baring for Sewer Crossing of Trabuco Creek San Juan Capistrano. California Prepared for the City of San Juan Capistrano, Department of Engineering and Building. Reports of the Archaeological Survey (RAS), Department of Anthropology, State University of New York at Buffalo. 1993 1992 Cultural iResoursces Survey for PIN 5012.24. the Reconstruction of Broadway Avenue (N.Y Route 130), front Union Road to Transit Road Village of Depew and Town of Cheektowaga, Erie County. New York. (with James Hartner and Cynthta Jackson) RAS Vol. 25, No. 27. Cultural Resources Investigation for PIN 4014.22.101, the Reconstruction of New York Routes 19 and 20A, Village of Warsaw, Town of Warsaw, Wyoming County, New York (with Lyn Cowan and James Hartner) RAS Vol. 25, No. 10 Cultural resources Investigation for PIN 5034.83. the Widening and Resurfacing of New York Route 5, Village of Farnham, Towns of Brant and Evans, Erie County, New York. (with Lyn Cowan and James Hartner) RAS Vol. 25. No. 8 Cultural Resources Invesdgadon jbr PIN 5018.03, the Reconstruction of New York Route 249, Village of Farnham and Town of Brant; Erie County, New York (with Lyn Cowan and James Hartner) RAS Vol. 25, No, 4 Cultural Resources Investigation for PIN 4117.14.101, the Reconstruction of New York Route 98, Village of Elba, Town of Elba; Genesee County, New York (with Lyn Cowan and James Hamner) RAS Vol. 25, No. 3 Cultural Resources Investigation for PIN 5452.06.101, the Reconstruction of New York Route 353. Villages of Cattaraugus and Link Valley, Towns of New Albion, Mandfield and Little VaIW Cattaraugus County, New York (Vol. 1-3). (with Lyn Cowart and James Harmer) RAS Vol. 25, No. 1 Cultural Resources Investigation for PIN 5383.00.121. the Reconstruction of Marble Springs Road (CR 73), from Lime Lake Road (CR 21) to California Road (CR 90), Town of Freedatn. Cattaraugus County, New York. RAS Vol. 24, No. 27 Cultural Resources Investigation for PIN 5307.71.121, the U.S. Route 62 fBailey Avenue) Bridge aver West Shore A venue and Conroe{ BIN 2-02844-0, City of Buffalo. Erie County, New York. TT-1 I.f.JiT'C PAr.L *l i 'riiS----.- =A=Nq : WOH-A D. Slawson Page 6 1991 (with Elaine Herold) RAS Vol. 24, No. 23 Cultural Resources Investigation for PIN 5307.74, the Reconstruction of U.S. Routt 62 and N.Y. Route 39, Village of Gowanda, Towns of Collins and Persia, Erie and Cattaraugus Counties, New York (Parts I and 21. RAS Vol. 24, No.19 Cultural Resources Investigation for PIN 5012.14, tits; Reconstruction and Widening of Broadway Avenue (N.Y. Route 130). Village of SloaA Town of Cheekaowaga and City of Buffalo, Erie Counry, New York. (with Lyn Cowart and lames Hamner) RAS Vol. 24. No. I I Cultural Resources Investigation for PIN 5460.24, the Reconstruction of Delaware Avenue (N.Y. Route 384) from Nottingham Terrace to West Delavan Avenue, Including the Bridges over Scajaquada Creek (BIN 2-04724-1 and BM 2-04724-2), City of Buffalo, Erie County, New York. RAS Vol. 24, No. 9 Cultural Resources Investigation for PIN 5111.55.121, the Reconstruction of Clinton Street and Transit Road, Towns of Cheektowaga, West Seneca, Elora, and Lancaster, ,Erie County, New York RAS Vol. 24, No. 4 Cultural Resources Investigation for PIN 5307.70, the Reconstruction of Niagara Falls Boulevard (U.S. Route 62). from Arnold Drive to the North Tonawanda North City Line, Including the Bridge over Sawyer Creek (B)741.02852). City of North Tonawanda and Town of Wheatfteld, Niagara Country, New York RAS Vol. 24, No. 2 Cultural Resources Investigation for PIN 5753.04.101, the Bunting Spring Road Bridge over Lisle Indian Creek; Cattaraugus Indian Reservation, Town of Perrysburg. Canaraugus County, New York RAS Vol. 23, No. 26 Cultural Resources Investigation for PIN ST0.366, Route 31(Saunder's Senlentem Road) from Walmore Road to Chew Road, Town of Lewiston. Niagara County, New York RAS Vol. 23, No. 24 ' Cultural Resources Investigation far PIN 5NEW.654, Sevin Culvert Replacements in the Town of Collins in Erie County, and the Towns of Westfield Sherman and harmony in Chautauqua Counts New York RAS Vol. 23, No.12 Cultural Resources Investigation for PIN 3079.04.101, Forst Avenue front Washington Street (North -South A►terlal) to the South Ciry Line, City of Jamestown, Chautauqua County, New York RAS Vol. 23, No. Cultural Resources Investigation for PIN 5940.39.102 (Addendum One), the orangeport Road Bridge over the I4ew York State Barge Canals Town of Royalton. Niagara County. New York RAS Vol. 23, No. 1 ZTd Wd2T:S 85ST ILT'd35 160£tSn9T£ : 'ON 3NOHd S31d1XS5ti QNd Q00MN3_='d9 : WM-1 D. $1&Rson Page 7 1990 Cultural Resources Investigation for PIN 4026.04. 101,Route 261 (Manitou Road) Bridge over 19" 1997 1986 Black Creek. Towns of Parma and Greece, Monroe County, New York. RAS Vol. 22, No. 29 Cultural Resources Investigation for PIN 4014.18, Route 19 (Lake Road) Bridge over Mooman Creel; Town of Clarkson, Monroe County, New York RAS Vol. 22. No. 22 Cultural Resources Investigation for PIN 5753.02.101, Broadway Avenue from Fillmore Avenue to Bailey Avenue, City of Buffalo, Erie County, New York RAS Vol. 22, No. 21 Stage I Archaeological Survey of the Proposed Borrow Pit at Hopkins Road Town of Amherst Erie County, New York RAS Vol. 22, No. 8 Cultural Resources Investigation for PIN 5008.06, New York Route 76 (State Street) Reconstruction, Town of Ripley, Chautauqua County, New York (with James Harmer and Lyn Cowan) RAS Vol. 22, No. 6 Cultural Resources Investigation for PIN 5545.09.101, New York Route 75 (Lake Street and Camp Road), Village and town of Hamburg, Erie Counry, New York. RAS VoL 22, No. 5 Cultural Resources Investigation for PIN 4751.05.102 (1029). Stutson Street, City of Rochester, Towns of Irondequoit and Charlotte, Montne County, New York. (with Lyn Cowan) RAS Vol. 22, No. 2 Cultural Resources Investigation for State Touring Route 98 (Oak Orchard Road) over Marsh Creek, Town of Carlton, Orleans County, New York RAS Vol. 21, No.14 Cultural Resources Investigation for -the Mitchel! Road Bridge over the Erie Barge Canal Town of Pittsford, Monroe County, New York. PIN 4751.29. (with Lisa Spaulding) RAS Vol. 19, No. 25 Cultural Resources Investigation for PIN 6751.74. South Main Street Bridge over Dyke Creek, Village of Wellsville, Allegany County, New York. RAS Vol. 19, No. 23 Cultural Resources Investigation for the NYS Route 14 (Geneva Street) Bridge over the Clyde RiverlNew York State Barge Canal; Village of Lyons, Wayne County, New York RAS Vol. 18, Na. 22 Y� GttFmwom ANt) AssoCtATI s 72S JAcoN WAY PACIFIC PALISADES, C %MGRMA "272 HisTURIC STRUCTURE AND ARCHITECTURAL DOCUMENTATION Himric American Engineering Record (IL4ER) The largest HAER documentation to date in the west - 3 Southern California Edison powerhouses and their systems. Recorded the entire system necessary to capture and transport water, generate electricity, and transmit power, including: intakes, dams, flumes, tunnel, penstocks, waterwheels, generators, switch racks, transformers, transmission lines, and employee housing facilities. Other services performed included extensive historical research into construction methods and technology, photodocumentation of the powerhouses and facilities, reproduction of historic engineering drawings, one technical report and one popular report for public dissemination. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1992-1993. Howard Hughes Tndustrial ComplM HAER documentation. Documentation of 15 buildings associated with the Howard Hughes lndusftW Complex, including the executive ofi icas, testing facilities, research and development laboratories, the first assembly structure,and the massive wooden hangar where the Spruce Goose was built_ MoA compliance. Maguire Thomas Partners. 1995. HAER documentation of Prado Dam, including the massive earthen dam, spillway, control house, i maintenance and discharge monitoring structures. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1996. ` Historic Anwricun Baff&ng Survey (h%4BS) NABS recordation at Los Angeles Union Station. Metropolitan Transportation Authority. 1999. HAGS documentation of historical landscape at MacArthur Park. Metropolitan Transportation Authority. I991. Historic Suucturer Evaluation of the Mission San Auenaves4hwa Aqueduct t967. Tnvestigation and Field Test of Cultural Resources on the Hawkins-Ivimmock Slusher Property, including Historical and Architectural Evaluation. City of Santa Fe Springs. 1979. Field Test and Evaluation of Mission Santa Yves Aqueduct Solvang. Environmental Research Associates. 1980. Evaluation of Mission Aqueduct; Santa Barbara County. 1990. Cultural Resources Assessment of the Arundell House, associated outbuildings. and surrounding grounds. Filmore. 1980. a .� 13-pw I AAA T ,A3S TGX_KV0TZ : -ON 9NnH8 SO1tjjXSSU OM 4OOMN99�!e : XNJ Cultural Resource Investigation of Ex -Mission Property, I4937 San Fernando Mission Blvd., Los Angeles County_ Creative Structures. 1984. Archaeological Investigation of the Olivas Adobe. Gilbert Sanchez, A.T.A./Venturn Department of Parks and Recreation. 1996. Santa Ana Watershed/Woodcrest Water Supply Project, Riverside County. Site identification, rrcording, monitoring, compliance services. Engineering -Science, Inc. 1997. Survey, Historic Structures Report, and EIR, East Third Street and W. Wooley Road, Oxnard. Earth Metrics. 1987. Historical and Architectural Evaluation of the Hitchcock Ranch, Santa Barbara. George Hanscrarimo Properties. 1988. Mitigation of Construction Impact to Mission San Buenaventura Aqueduct. City of Ventura. 1989. Koreatown Project, Architectural Evaluation. Chuen Associates. 1989. CuItural Resources Investigation, Route 91 EIS, Riverside County (archaeology, history, and architectural I evaluation). Michael Brandman Associates. 1990. Test Excavation of the Catalina Street Site, and Assessment of Structures, Redondo Reach. City of Redondo Beach. 1990. Cultural Resources Investigation, Route 18 Realignment, San Bernardino County (archaeology, history, and historical architecture). Michael Brandman Associates. 1990. I Study of Subfloor Architecture at the Yorba Slaughter Adobe. County of San Bernardino. 1992. Technical Report for History, Architecture, and Archaeology re Proposed Los Angeles Police Department j Driver Training Facility. Engineering -Science, Inc. 1992. Historic Resources Inventory for Three Striiz=, 234-254 Santa Clara Street, Vaaura, Ventura County Courthouse Project. Prepared for Hall, Moore and Company. 1992. r History, Architecture, and Archaeology at the Proposed Liturgical Center, Mission San Luis Rey. Marvin FerrellAan Luis Rey Parish. 1993. Archaeological and Historical Architectural Survey Report for the Proposed Flood Channel Improvements Along Santa Paula Creek, Ventura County. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District. 1993. Architectural History of the Nieolson Adobe and Ranch Buildings (CA-RIV-4629AR). Metropolitan Water 1 District of Southern California. 1994. j 2 c a We4) S:C tit '1 I 'e4=1r, iF,0 tPQPfltrL : 'ON 34OHd Sn1tiI-WESU QNtl COOMNanNO : WOad Ar+chiuctural Evaluation of Structures Adjacent to the Proposed Metro Rail Red Line Construction Staging Area, Segment 3, HollywoodlHighland Station. Submitted to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority. 1994. Historic Properties Management Plan for the Hans= Dam Flood Control Basin. Los Angeles County. U.S. ! Army Corps of Engineers. 1994. I Architectural Recordation of Los Angeles Chinatown Heritage & Visitors Center, 411 and 415 Bernard Street, Los Angeles, California. Nomination for City Historical Landmark. 1995. Architectural History of 1057 King Street, Redlands, California. Included in Cultural Resources Study and Evaluation far the Proposed Redlands High School No. 2 Location, San Bernardino County, California. Prepared for Redlands Unified School District 1995. Wester Construction. Cultural Resource Monitoring and Survey at 5th and 6th Streets, Santa Monica. 1996. Assessment of Historical Structures, Historical Landscape, and Archaeological Potential for Proposed Developments on the Campus of University of California„ Irvine. Psomas. 1997. 1 Documentation of Historical Structures along the I-5 Corridor. Parsons Brinckerhoff. 1997. Architectural and Archaeological Survey and Assessment of Properties on Terminal Island. Los Angeles City Bureau of Engineering. 1997. Archasolo History, and Architecture: Cultural Resource Services for the State Route 2Z/West Orange 8Y, rY, g County Connection. Parsons Brinckherhoff. 1997-1998. Assessment of Architectural and Archaeological resources for Regional Plant No. 5, Inland Empire Utilities Agency. Albert Webb & Associates. 1998. Historic Structures Report: Stone Dwelling and Associated Granary. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. 1998. Cultural Resource Services during Improvements to Street Median. City of Culver City. 1998. TRA,%spoRTATim RTLATF.D PRoncTs Br&ges Historical and Architectural Evaluation, Henry Ford (Badger Avenue) Bridge, Los Angeles Harbor. P&D Environmental Services, San Diego. 1993. 3 fi ., 1.I-inn-C MAT •,T •a=lS rr-acr-crate : •nw =wuA SaIHrvxc.H aNW._JTfinmw=1aNr! : WnN4 Historical and Architectural Evaluation of Bridges for the U.S. Corps of Engineers (partial): Old Pacific Electric, Santa Ana River Bridge Santa Fe, Santa Ana River Bridge, #171.00 Southern Pacific Santa Ana River Bridge, 0514.00 Southern Pacific Santiago Creek Bridge, #515.13 Seven Oaks Dam Bridges: Greenspot Road Bridge; Mill Creek Bridge; Plunge Creek Bridge, and the Francis Cuttle Weir Dam/ Old Orange Avenue Bridge A.T. & S. F. Bridge, #139.11/2nd Sub. Main Street Bridge, #53-C-I010 Southern Pacific Bridge, B-492.5211ad Cr. Sixth Street Viaduct, #53-595S Seventh Street Viaduct, #53C-1321 Union Pacific Bridge, Mile Post 241-A Washington Boulevard Bridge A.T. & S. F. Bridge, #143.513rd Sub. Cahran Related Projects (partial only) Greenwood and Associates has worked directly for Caltrans, or as subcontractor on state highway projects in Shasta, Napa, Santa Barbara, Placer, Ventura, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, San Diego, and Los Angeles counties. Tasks have included historical and site archival research, research designs, field surveys, test excavations of site significance, design and implementation of data recovery programs (mitigation), and documentation related to Section 106, 4f, and other regulatory processes. Listed below area few selected projects to illustrate the breadth and nature of such studies. • Foothill Transportation Corridor EIRIEIS Archaeology, history, and paleontology. Orange and San Diego Couaties. Michael Brandman Associate&7WHA. 19MI996. • Pomona Regional Transit Center Project Archaeological Survey Report. JKA, Inc. 1995. • 710 Freeway Gap CIosure Research, documentation, and assessment of 67 Hisiork Structures. Michael Brandman and AssocLwWCALTRANS. 1994. r • Lewis Road Interchange Survey, archaeology, and architectural evaluation. Ventura County. 1993. • Route 101 Archaeology, history, historical architecture, survey and evaluation, Cuesta Grade, San Luis Opisbo Coubty. De Leuw Cather. 1992. • Route 74 Realignments Survey and assessments, Riverside County. Engineering -Science. 1991. �_irOfa • C R�� T ' 1 T 'ate[ i�GS'tC I L [7r]f uhM:VD cI : L[nA 4 —qmw- J�4 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER -DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH Connie Brockway, City Clerk Office of the City Clerk Date:_S-- a? S(--9 GJ Meeting Date: -�7 Agenda Item: proposed City Council AgendaItems: The City Clerk's Office, G+t-y must return your agenda item due to the following requirements that have not been met. 1Nlv'hen your Agenda Item is ready to resubmit, please return to: P , City Administrator's Office. PEJ-E 6 l'M-jr" Se.4lot, A-n,41ys r I. I Signature(s) Needed A On RCA B On Agreement C Other 2. Attachments A Missing See h,1, re `I of- Q enc,r• - Ai .. lis t- ,'t o B Not identified 1 S C Other Exhibits Missing Not identified Other C' J yn cL�tti'G , i , insurance Certificate (Proof Of lnsl �� v 1.��� Not attached Not approved by City Attorney's Offi Signed form notifying City Clerk that de 8 Wording On Request For Council Action (RCA) Unclear Recommended Action an RCA not complete gyp 1 }a t „LI,, 'Jitt,oar 0t- lns,__, 1 4 w(p, , 3. A B C 4. 1 A B C 5. A B Clarification needed on RCA C Other 6. City Attorney Approval Required 7. I Agreement Needs To Be Changed A Page No. 8. Other G apandWmisdrCarorm E