HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1985 0318 CC REG ITEM 12F0
MOORPARK
ALBERT PRIETO
Mayor
JAMES D. WEAK
Mayor Pro Tem
THOMAS C. FERGUSON
Councilmember
DANNY A. WOOLARD
Councilmember
LETA YANCY- SUTTON
Councilmember
DORIS D. BANKUS
City Clerk
JOHN C. GEDNEY
City Treasurer
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: Niall Fri , Director of Community Development
DATE: March 18, 1985
SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO CONSULTANT CONTRACT TO PREPARE
AN EIR & PROVIDE STAFF SERVICES FOR GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT FOR CARLSBERG & CAREN
PROPOSED ACTION:
ITEM- JZ
Approve revision to Exhibit A of the approved contract with
McCelland Engineering.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
STEVEN KUENY
City Manager
CHERYL J. KANE
City Attorney
NIALL FRITZ
Director of
Community
Development
R. DENNIS DELZEIT
City Engineer
JOHN V. GILLESPIE
Chief of Police
On February 4, 1985 your Council approved a contract with McClelland
Engineering for the subject project. The Council authorized the
Mayor to sign the contract after the submission to the City of
all required funds by the applicants. Since all funds have not
been received, the contract is yet unsigned. Mr. Bulmer, who's
component was for change from "Rural Low to "Low Density" for 349
acres located adjacent to and west of Walnut Canyon Road, has
decided to withdraw his General Plan Amendment rather that proceed
at this time. This necessitates a change to the contract to reduce
the total over all cost, and also increase expenses of the remaining
two parties -- Carlsberg and Caren. Both parties have agreed
to the changes in the contract cost.
SUGGESTED MOTION:
Authorize the Mayor to sign an amendment to the contract with
McCelland Engineers upon receipt of all required funds.
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529 -6864
ALBERT PRIETO
Mayor
JAMES D. WEAK
Mayor Pro Tern
THOMAS C. FERGUSON
Councilmember
DANNY A. WOOLARD
Councilmember
LETA YANCY - SUTTON
Councilmember
DORIS D. BANKUS
City Clerk
JOHN C. GEDNEY
City Treasurer
MOORPARK
March 21, 1985
McClelland Engineers, Inc.
2140 Eastman Avenue
Ventura, California 93003
Re: Amendment to Contract for Preparation of EIR
and Provide Staff Services for GPA for
Carlsberg and Caren
Gentlemen:
__�a
STEVEN KUENY
City Manager
CHERYL J. KANE
City Attorney
NIALL FRITZ
Director of
Community
Development
R. DENNIS DELZEIT
City Engineer
JOHN V. GILLESPIE
Chief of Police
At its regular meeting of March 18, 1985, the City Council
authorized an amendment to the Contract with you for
services to be rendered for General Plan Amendment for
Carlsberg, Bulmer and Caren. This amendment has the effect
of removing Mr. Bulmer as a part of the General Plan Amend-
ment, and the scope of work to be performed is as outlined in
the Exhibit dated March 13, 1985, attached to the Amendment,
which Exhibit was submitted by you.
Enclosed are two copies of the Amendment, and we ask that
you execute both copies and return them to this office. We
will cause them to be executed by the proper city officials
and will return one completely executed copy to you for your
files.
Very truly yours,
cxsl
DORIS D. BANKUS
City Clerk
encls.
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529 -6864
AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT FOR SERVICES
THIS AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT FOR SERVICES, made and
entered into this day of March, 1985, between the CITY OF
MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, a municipal corporation, hereinafter
referred to as "CITY ", and McCLELLAND ENGINEERS, INC., an
independent contractor, hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR ";
-- WITNESSETH --
IT IS HEREBY AGREED BETWEEN THE PARTIES:
1. That "EXHIBIT A" of that certain Contract for
Services between the City and Contractor, made and entered into
on the 4th day of February, 1985, for the performance of certain
services specified for General Plan Amendment for Carlsberg /Bulmer/
Caren is amended as set forth in "Proposal to Provide Contract
Planning Services and an Environmental Impact Report for a General
Plan Amendment ", dated March 13, 1985, from McClelland Engineers, Inc.
(Contractor), which said Proposal is attached hereto and designated
as "EXHIBIT A ".
2. That in all other respects said Contract for
Services shall remain in full force and effect.
EXECUTED in duplicate at Moorpark, California on the
date and year first hereinabove written.
CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA
a municipal. corporation
by
ATTEST:
McCLELLAND ENGINEERS, INC.
LIN
Title
C O N T R A C T O R
(Notarial Certificate Attached)
Its Mayor
City Clerk
C I T Y
(SEAL)
CERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
(Corporation)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF VENTURA ) SS.
On this day of , 19
before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said
State, personally appeared
personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory
evidence to be the
(title)
of ,
(name of corporation)
and whose name is subscribed to the within strument, and
acknowledged to me that the corporation executed it.
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL.
Notary Public in and for said
County and State
(SEAL)
McClelland engineers, inc. /environmental services
2140 Eastman Avenue. Ventura. California 93003, Tel. (805) 644 -5535, Telex 659 -241, Telecopier (805) 642 -4791
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Attention: Niall Fritz, Planning Director
Proposal to Provide Contract Planning
Services and an Environmental Impact
Report for a General Plan Amendment
Dear Mr. Fritz:
March 13, 1985
We are pleased to submit this proposal to the city of Moorpark
to provide planning and environmental services. This proposal
includes a description of our scope of work, cost estimate, sched-
ule, and resumes of personnel to be assigned to the project.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Our proposed scope of services includes both permit processing
and preparation of an EIR for a General Plan Amendment. These are
described below:
1. Permit Processing
To process the General Plan Amendment, we will provide a land
use planner to work under the supervision of the Planning Director.
This person will be responsible for preparation of initial studies,
staff report, and all legal notices required for the General Plan
Amendment and /or EIR. In addition, he will be available to meet
with the applicant, other agencies, and the general public, as
determined to be needed by the Planning Director.
Our staff planner will be available to the city of Moorpark on
a time and expenses basis at a rate of $35 per hour. Because the
amount of time that this person will be used will be determined by
city needs, a precise cost estimate is not possible. However, we
recommend that two thirds of one person -month be budgeted (115.3
hours @ $35 = $4,036) plus an additional 10 percent ($404) for
expenses. Using this preliminary assumption, we would not exceed a
total cost for permit processing of $4,440 without prior written
ANCHORAGE • DALLAS • HOUSTON • LITTLE ROCK • LOS ANGELES • NEW ORLEANS • SAN DIEGO • SAN FRANCISCO
QT I n]IIQ • %IF AITIIDA rIARA \A A AA . -Ii AI - 11 A. it AV _ I.- r, r. - .- ur.. - - (. I - - ..
City of Moorpark March 13, 1985
Mr. Niall Fritz Page two
authorization from the city. This total cost results in a charge of
$2,220 for processing each General Plan Amendment component. The
amount of time our staff planner spends on processing each component
will be closely monitored. Each component will be billed only for
the amount of time spent on its processing. We will notify you
immediately should charges made to a component reach 80 percent of
$2,220 or $1,776.
2. Environmental Impact Report
Attachment 1 is a preliminary outline of the scope of work for
the General Plan Amendment EIR. The components of the General Plan
Amendment EIR are to include:
Carlsberg - 50 acres from "L" (Low Density 1 to 1.6 DU /acre)
to "I -1" (Light Industrial).
Caren - 1.4 acres from "I -1" (Light Industrial) to "C -2"
(General Commercial).
We will prepare the report so that the issues relative to each
component are clearly described and differentiated from the others.
Attachments 2 and 3 are cost breakdowns to prepare the EIR. We
will complete the EIR scope of work for $15,246, which includes the
draft and final EIR's, and attendance at up to two public hearings.
Our schedule for completion of the EIR scope of work is as
follows:
Administrative Draft EIR (5 copies) - 45 calendar days after
notice to proceed
Draft EIR (50 copies) - two weeks after receipt of staff
comments on administrative draft.
Final EIR (35 copies) - Two weeks after receipt of all comments
on draft EIR.
PERSONNEL
The project supervisor will be Mr. Mel Willis, Program Manager,
Planning and Environmental Services. He will be responsible for
overall supervision of the project and coordination with the city.
Contract planning services will be provided by Mr. Chris
Stabenfeldt, Staff Planner. he will be under the direct supervision
of Ms. Julie Bulla Hunt, Senior Planner.
City of Moorpark
Mr. Niall Fritz
March 13, 1985
Page three
EIR preparation will be under the direction of Mr. J. Duane
Vander Pluym, Senior Environmental Scientist. Resumes of all
personnel who will work on the EIR are attached to the proposal.
If you have
not hesitate to
this project.
any questions regarding this proposal, please do
call me. We look forward to working with you on
Very truly yours,
McCLELLAND ENGINEERS, INC.
W L -
Mel Willis
Program Manager
Planning and Environmental Services
Attachments:
1. Scope of Work Outline
2. Cost Breakdown
3. Resumes
MRW:dc
ATTACHMENT 1
SCOPE OF WORK
1. GENERAL
The EIR for the General Plan Amendment will address both site- specific
and cumulative impacts, in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines. Primary
project issues to be addressed by the EIR include the following:
o Traffic /Circulation
o Public Services
o Land Use /Policy Analysis
Secondary issues include:
o Geologic Processes /Drainage
o Air Quality
o Aesthetics
o Biologic Resources
o Cultural Resources
o Noise
o Schools
o Parks
The following subsections describe the general content of the EIR, and
our proposed approach to addressing each issue. Impact analysis will be
based on a "worst case" or full buildout scenario under the proposed
amendment requests. The cumulative impacts discussion will include consider-
ation of the Griffin Development Company's 254 acre amendment request.
Identification of issues relevant to each project, is contained in Section
Two.
A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project description sections of the EIR will be based upon informa-
tion furnished by the applicants. This will be incorporated into the EIR
utilizing the city's EIR format. Information contained in the project
description will include, but will not necessarily be limited to:
o Project Site Location and Legal Description: This section will
describe the project location, list the Assessor's Parcel Num-
ber(s), and provide regional and local vicinity maps of the project
site. ,
ENVMK6 /Z -1
• Existing General Plan Designation: A description of the permitted
buildout under the existing General Plan designation will be
included in this section of the EIR.
• Description of Proposed Project: This section will clearly de-
scribe the proposed projects and intended uses given approval of
the specific land use entitlements requested. Development densi-
ties and land form alterations will be referenced in relation to
zoning regulations and city development policies.
o Project Objectives: The project objectives section will be based
upon a statement provided by the applicants. Topics of concern
include development theme; project amenities and architectural
renderings; project phasing; requisite extension of services; and a
statement of why the proposed development is appropriate at this
time. Land use entitlements necessary to achieve project objec-
tives will also be discussed.
o Project Characteristics: This section will include estimates of
population for the types of units proposed. The dimensions of
proposed structures, number and types of uses proposed, circulation
provisions, drainage system improvements, utility easements, and
public service agencies will also be identified in this section of
the EIR.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
This section will include:
o Land Use and Zoning: This section will describe current land use
and zoning of the site as well as surrounding land uses and zoning.
o Applicable Plans and Policies: This section will list all applica-
ble land use plans and policies pertaining to the project site.
o Public Utilities and Services Provided to Site:
o Related Projects: Any projects that have been recently completed,
approved, proposed, or probable in the project area will be iden-
tified in this section (from County or City files - list and map to
be provided). These projects will be analyzed for cumulative
project impacts as they pertain to cumulative traffic flow condi-
tions, and availability of public services.
C. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Each issue evaluated in this portion of the
tory paragraph explaining the methodology used
Impacts will be quantified, where possible, and
cance will be made and substantiated.
ENVMK6 /Z -2
EIR will have an introduc-
in assessing the impacts.
a determination of signifi-
Mitigation measures will be identified for each impact. An analysis of
each measure will include degree of effectiveness, secondary impacts, person/
agency proposing measure, responsible parties, and methods of implementation.
No cost estimates for necessary public improvements will be included in the
EIR, unless provided by appropriate public agency.
The scope of analysis for each of the impact sections of the EIR is in
the following sections.
1. Traffic and Circulation
This section of the EIR will involve review of existing data and contact
with local agencies, supplemented by limited turning movement traffic counts
to establish the existing circulation setting. Manual counts will be limited
to critical locations along the project access road system to identify peak
period timing movement patterns and to update earlier machine counts. This
data will be reviewed to determine peak traffic flow characteristics that
will serve as the baseline for environmental impact analysis. The focus of
this analysis will be to determine project specific as well as potential
cumulative traffic impacts as a result of local areawide buildout. Where
applicable, consideration of impacts generated by completion of Highway 23
and Highway 118 will be incorporated into the analysis.
Special attention will be directed toward the identification of planned
roadway improvements and other mechanisms that are available to maintain
existing levels of service. The environmental setting for the traffic
section of the EIR will include:
o ADT, peak -hour counts, roadway geometrics and capacities, existing
levels of service for roadways in the project vicinity;
o Identification of existing roadway deficiencies and traffic im-
pacts;
o Discussion of planned roadway improvements for the project area,
particularly Highway 118 and Highway 23;
o Discussion of existing traffic safety hazards based on sight
distance /approach speeds and available accident data; and
o Discussion of existing and proposed rapid transit service and
ridership.
The traffic impact analysis will address the following:
o Calculation of daily and peak -hour traffic generation for the
proposed project;
o Summary of traffic distribution;
o Project - specific and cumulative traffic impacts for roadways and
intersections impacted by the proposed project;
ENVMK6 /Z -3
o Other previous studies addressing cumulative traffic impacts (as
appropriate);
o Calculation of trip generation associated with other planned
projects in the immediate vicinity;
o Resultant levels of service, ADT, and peak -hour volumes after
completion of the proposed project;
o Relationship (e.g., timing) of project and cumulative project
generated road fees and the implementation of roadway improvements;
o Peak -hour impact to freeway ramps and overpasses;
o Sight distance analysis to determine ingress /egress and safety
hazards;
o Alternative transportation systems (bicycle, bus, pedestrian), and
potential impacts to such systems.
Mitigation measures for traffic impacts may include the following:
o Identify measures necessary to mitigate project impacts at local
streets and intersections (e.g., LOS C or better);
o Level of service (degree of effectiveness) after implementation of
improvements;
o On and off -site improvement necessary to ensure acceptable traffic
flow and safety; and
o Alternative trip reduction methods.
2. Public Services
This section of the EIR will provide a project- specific and cumulative
assessment of public service impacts addressing water, wastewater disposal,
schools, parks and recreation, law enforcement, fire projection, and solid
waste disposal. The research effort for this section will involve contact
with public service agencies and literature search of relevant documents.
General information to be included in this section follows:
o Description of service provided, identification of jurisdictional
boundaries;
o Discussion of existing facilities, including their location,
capacities, staffing levels and existing service capabilities;
o Identification of existing service deficiencies;
o Existing projection of cumulative demands.
ENVMK6 /Z -4
The impact analysis will specifically address the following issues:
o Project - related demands for additional service and /or additional
facilities;
o Identification of public service impacts relative to cumulative
development within the facility service area;
o Discussion of project - related impact on existing and proposed
public service facilities.
3. Land Use /Project Consistency with Locally Adopted Plans and Policies
Literature search and field inspection will be conducted to gather base
data for this section. Correspondence with local and responsible agencies
will be initiated at commencement of the research effort. Issues of concern
include project consistency with all locally adopted plans and policies, land
use compatibility, agricultural impacts and secondary /cumulative impacts to
existing and proposed land uses in the project vicinity. The land use
setting description will include the following:
o Map and description of surrounding land uses;
o Discussion of all locally adopted plans, policies and ordinances
pertaining to site development;
The land use impact analysis will specifically address all of the
following:
o Project consistency with all locally adopted plans, policies and
ordinances;
o Project conflicts with adjoining land uses and resources in the
project vicinity;
• Precedent- setting impacts of project approval;
• on -site and regional agricultural impacts.
Mitigation measures to be evaluated may include:
• Measures to reduce land use incompatibility;
• Measures to reduce precedent- setting impacts; and
• Measures to reduce project's inconsistency with plans, policies,
and goals.
The growth- inducement analysis will be related to precedent - setting
impacts, and any needed extensions of services that remove obstacles to
growth. General growth trends in the site vicinity will be discussed.
Cumulative development will be related to growth- inducing impacts. Critical
limits of any public services and facilities that were investigated in the
ENVMK6 /Z -5
EIR will be summarized in this section. A discussion of the project's
influence on the amount, location or timing of growth for the site area will
be included.
4. Aesthetics
This section will involve site reconnaissance and photo documentation of
affected viewing corridors in the site vicinity. Issues of particular
concern include consistency with development policies, and project visibility
from adjoining and nearby uses. The degree to which the proposed project
obstructs views will be presented by superimposing the proposed development
concept onto photographs taken from nearby residential areas, and /or public
viewing locations.
ing:
A general description of the visual setting of the project will include:
• Views of project site (photo- documentation);
• Discussion of development policies pertaining to the project site;
and
o Visual characterization of the project site and general vicinity.
The assessment of visual impacts will specifically address the follow-
0 Identification of viewing corridors affected by the proposed
projects;
o Project impact to representative viewing corridors (photo documen-
tation); and
o Discussions of project impact on visual character of the general
vicinity.
5. Geologic Processes /Drainage
Existing on -site geologic and hydrologic information will be obtained
from the County's Seismic Safety and Safety Elements, the U.S. department of
Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, and site - specific soil investigations.
These information sources will be reviewed and impacts of site development
evaluated. Supplemental data will be obtained through correspondence with
the County Public Works Department.
The description of general geologic conditions of the project site will
include:
o Discussion of existing geologic conditions (e.g., seismic capabil-
ities, soils, subsurface structure, landform, etc.);
o Identification of potential on -site geologic and flooding hazard
(e.g., liquifaction, high groundwater table, shrink - swell, erosion,
etc.) and regional seismic characteristics.
ENVMK6 /Z -6
The geologic impact analysis will specifically address the following:
o Discussion of the proposed grading concepts and landform alter-
ations;
o Evaluation of the effect of on -site geologic hazards on project
development (e.g., liquifaction, seismic, erosion, high ground-
water, etc.);
o Discussion of onsite and offsite impacts on local drainage pat-
terns;
o Determination of the adequacy of existing soils data with regard to
project design.
If necessary, mitigation measures may include:
• Measures to mitigate on -site geologic and flooding hazards;
• Alternative grading concepts;
• Additional soil analysis that may be necessary to ensure adequate
mitigation of geologic hazards;
o Evaluation of mitigation measure effectiveness.
6. Noise
The noise section will involve a review of the area (one mile radius)
for noise sensitive uses, noise measurements, projection of noise contours
after project implementation, and measures to reduce or mitigate impacts.
A general description of the noise setting will include:
o Identification of sensitive uses within a one mile radius;
o Identification of existing noise problems.
The assessment of noise impacts will specifically address the following:
• Post - project noise levels;
• Itemization of any noise problems related to the project;
• Review of development areas as they relate to projected noise
levels;
o Discussion of human perception of noise level increases (e.g.,
perceived as a doubling, three -fold increase etc.).
ENVMK6 /Z -7
Potential mitigation measures may include:
o Site planning /design methods to reduce noise levels and acoustical
impacts;
o Alternative routes for construction vehicles;
o Analysis of the effectiveness of proposed mitigation.
7. Air Quality
The air quality impact analyses will be prepared in accordance with the
Ventura County APCD Guidelines for the Preparation of Air Quality Impact
Analyses.
A general description of the noise setting will include:
• Reference the County AQMP planning policies that pertain to site
development;
• Discuss methodology for AQMP consistency determination;
• Existing air emissions inventory relative to state standards and
number of days exceeding adopted standards.
The assessment of air quality impacts will specifically address the
following:
o Calculate air emissions (mobile and stationary) resulting from
maximum buildout;
o Calculate short -term construction impacts;
o Determine consistency with the County AQMP;
o Identify project related air quality impacts based on County and
State Air Resources Board criteria.
Potential mitigation measures may include:
o Identify measures to alleviate impacts of the proposed project (if
available);
o Incorporate mitigation measures indicated in the AQMP into the EIR.
8. Cultural Resources
This section of the EIR will involve literature review only. No archae-
ologic investigation of the project sites is proposed. The purpose of the
analysis will be to identify known archaeologic resources that may be affect-
ed by the projects, and the potential for archaeologic resources on each
site. Subsequent, more detailed, surface investigations may be necessary at
the development permit stage.
ENVMK6 /Z -8
e
9. Bioloqic Resources
This will involve a very cursory visit by a staff biologist to determine
the potential for significant biologic resources at each site. In addition,
previous studies of the sites will be used to determine the potential for
significant impacts on biologic resources.
SUMMARY OF UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS
Unavoidable adverse impacts will be summarized separately for the
proposed project as well as for cumulative impacts. This section will
compile all of the significant unavoidable adverse impacts identified for the
subject areas into one section, thereby highlighting significant residual
impacts.
IRREVERSIBLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES
The irreversible impacts of each project component will be addressed
separately as well as cumulatively. Irreversible impacts will be summarized
from other sections of the document. Uses of non - renewable resources during
the initial and continued phases of development will be briefly discussed.
LONG -TERM VS. SHORT -TERM IMPACTS
The short -term versus long -term impacts of the project will be itemized
separately as well as cumulatively. An evaluation of the cumulative and
long -term effects of the project which may adversely affect the environment
will be discussed including impacts which narrow the range of beneficial uses
of the environment or pose long -term risks to health and safety. Addition-
ally, the reasons the project is believed by the sponsor to be justified,
rather than as an option for future alternatives, will be explored.
ALTERNATIVES
The alternatives section of the EIR will be prepared in accordance with
the State CEQA Guidelines and will focus on alternatives capable of elimi-
nating or reducing significant adverse environmental effects. In addition,
this section will identify the "environmentally superior" alternative. If
the environmentally superior alternative is determined to be the "no project"
alternative, the EIR shall identify the environmentally superior alternative
among the other alternatives analyzed. The EIR will address the following
alternatives:
o No project;
o Alternative location for the proposed projects;
o Existing General Plan designations;
o Alternatives appropriate for specific project sites.
ENVMK6 /Z -9
2. SITE SPECIFIC
The following section is intended to specifically identify those issues
to be addressed for each project and to briefly discuss issues we perceive to
be most critical. Existing documents and information sources relevant to
each site will be incorporated wherever possible and are identified for each
project. All three projects will include a thorough discussion of their
consistency with local goals and policies.
A. CARLSBERG
o Traffic /Circulation
o Public Services
o Land Use
o Geology /Drainage
o Air Quality
o Aesthetics
o Biology
o Cultural Resources
o Noise
Cumulative impact analysis will be based on information contained in the
Moorpark General Plan Update EIR prepared in 1979. This information will be
updated to reflect current conditions. Two EIRs have been prepared on the
site. These are the PC4 EIR, prepared in May of 1963, of which the amendment
is a component, and the Tract No. 2964, Zone Change No. 2621 EIR prepared in
June of 1981. Additional traffic information is available in the DP 301
Traffic Study prepared for an adjacent parcel.
Because of the proximity of the Highway 23 right -of -way and the volumes
of traffic generated at peak hours by industrial uses, particular attention
will be given to project generated impacts on the local circulation pattern.
when expansion of the freeway is completed, the proposed industrial site will
be below grade to a major highway, necessitating a careful evaluation of
noise impacts.
Extensive grading will be required to prepare the site for development
with both geotechnical and aesthetic impacts likely to be generated. Grading
plans, if available, will be reviewed to determine potential visual and
geologic impacts and mitigation measures designed to minimize these impacts
will be recommended.
ENVMK6 /Z -10
B. CAREN
o Traffic /Circulation
o Public Services
o Land Use
Cumulative impact will be based on the Moorpark General Plan Update EIR
prepared in 1979. Additional site specific information is contained in the
DP 205 EIR prepared in 1978. These information sources will be reviewed and
updated where necessary. Existing information will be used whenever possible
to improve efficiency and minimize cost.
The site is already developed with the current use being light indus-
trial. Consequently, impacts are likely to be limited to the change in
traffic patterns associated with conversion from industrial to commercial.
As previously stated, a thorough analysis of the projects consistency with
local goals and policies will be included.
ATTACHMENT 2
EIR COST BREAKDOWN
*Additional meetings will be attended on a time and expenses basis. The
estimated cost per meeting is $900, assuming two persons in attendance.
4905BA/E -1
Work Task
Cost
1.
Project Management /Agency Coordination
$ 800
2.
Project Description
308
3.
Environmental Impact Analysis
a. Traffic /Circulation
2,260
b. Public Services
1,046
c. Land Use /Plan Consistency /Growth Inducement
765
d. Geology /Drainage
880
e. Air Quality
540
f. Aesthetics
540
g. Biology
540
h. Cultural Resources
540
i. Noise
450
4.
Alternatives
560
5.
Draft EIR Preparation
990
6.
Final EIR /Response to Comments
852
7.
Word Processing
1,000
8.
Graphics
775
9.
Printing
Draft EIR (50 copies)
412
Final EIR (35 copies)
288
10.
Miscellaneous (supplies, travel, etc.)
300
11.
Public Hearing Attendance (2)*
1,400
TOTAL
$ 15,246
*Additional meetings will be attended on a time and expenses basis. The
estimated cost per meeting is $900, assuming two persons in attendance.
4905BA/E -1
ATTACHMENT 3
COST BREAKDOWN BY PROJECT
$15,246 = EIR $12,250 $2,996
$4,440 = Permit $ 2,220 $2,220
*Additional meetings will be attended on a time and expense basis. The
estimated cost per meeting is $900, assuming two persons in attendance.
49058A/F -1
Carlsberg
Cost
Hours
Caren
Cost
Hours
Project Management
$ 400
8
$ 400
8
Project Description
220
5
88
2
Traffic
1,710
31
550
10
Public Services
980
28
66
2
Land Use
540
12
225
5
Geology /Drainage
880
16
-
-
Air Quality
540
12
-
Aesthetics
540
12
-
-
Biology
540
12
-
-
Cultural Resources
540
12
-
-
Noise
450
10
-
-
Alternatives
560
16
-
-
Draft Preparation
810
18
180
4
Final EIR
720
16
132
3
Word Processing/
1,500
46
275
11
Graphics
Printing
470
-
230
-
Miscellaneous
150
-
150
-
Public Meetings (2)*
700
12
700
12
$15,246 = EIR $12,250 $2,996
$4,440 = Permit $ 2,220 $2,220
*Additional meetings will be attended on a time and expense basis. The
estimated cost per meeting is $900, assuming two persons in attendance.
49058A/F -1