HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1990 0502 CC REG ITEM 08Ll^'al
MOORPARK �TEM�
PAUL W. LAWRASON, Jr. STEVEN KUENY
Mayor CityManager
SCOTTMONTGOMERY CHERYLJ. KANE
Mayor Pro Tam City Attorney
ELOISE BROWN -,e C PATRICK RICHARDS, A.LC.P.
Councilmember Director of
CLINT HARPER, Ph.D. o Community Development
Couricllmember5 R. DENNIS DELZEIT
BERNARDO M. PEREZ City Ereineer
Councllmember JOHN V. GILLESPIE
LILLIAN KELLERMAN Chief of Police
City Clerk RICHARD T. HARE
CityTreasurer
MEMORANDUM
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Development
DATE: April 18, 1990 (CC Meeting of 5/2/90)
SUBJECT: EIR AND PLANNING SERVICES CONTRACTS FOR WESTLAND COMPANY
AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT
Background
At the City Council's meeting of February 7, 1990, the Council
directed staff to: 1) Accept applications for the proposed Westland
Company General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Planned Development
Permit and Tentative Map; 2 ) Develop the scope of work for an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and proceed with the selection
of a consultant that will prepare the EIR and provide planning
services; and 3) Return the consultant contract and agreement for
preparation of the EIR and provision of planning services to the
City Council for approval.
Discussion
Staff has selected the Planning Corporation of Santa Barbara as the
consultant who will prepare the EIR and provide planning services.
Attached is a copy of the proposed EIR and Planning Services
Agreements. (These agreements will be attached to the standard City
contract.) The EIR cost is identified as $75,988.75 and the
Planning Services cost is identified as $29,594.00.
The Westland Company has already filed their applications for a
General Plan Amendment and Zone Change and have deposited the
current fee amounts for these entitlement requests as well as a
$5,000 deposit to assist in the creation of an affordable housing
agreement. The Planning Corporation has already circulated a
Notice of Preparation of an EIR to interested agencies, and the
comment period for that Notice is over. Approval of the attached
contract agreements is needed to keep the project moving ahead.
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529-6864
Honorable City Council
April 20, 1990
Page 2
Recommendation
Staff is recommending that the City Council approve the Planning
Corporation of Santa Barbara as the selected consultant and
authorize the Mayor to sign the EIR and Planning Services contracts
after Westland Company has deposited the identified contract
amounts.
PJR/DST
Attachments:
1. Proposal to Prepare the Westland Company Affordable &
Market Rate Housing EIR
2. Planning Services Agreement for Westland Project
MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA
City Cou it Meet(ng
of 199-0
ACTION:_L�?��%�Ci'
PROPOSAL TO PREPARE THE
WESTLAND COMPANY AFFORDABLE & MARKET
RATE HOUSING EIR
FOR THE
CITY OF MOORPARK
Submitted to: City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, California 93021
(805) 529-6864
Submitted by: The Planning Corporation of Santa Barbara
122 E. Arrellaga Street
Santa Barbara, California 93101
(805) 962-2124
FAX # (805) 564-8473
Revised Date: April 20, 1990
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1. Contract Responsibilities........................................................................................................1
2. Statement of Work..................................................................................................................5
3. Cost Proposal.........................................................................................................................17
4. Schedule..................................................................................................................................20
5. Offer........................................................................................................................................22
6. EIR Document Style Guide.................................................................................................24
1.0 CONTRACT RESPONSIBILITIES
-1-
1.0 Contract Responsibilities
This statement of work outlines the tasks and methodologies to be used by The Planning Corporation in
preparing the Draft and Final EIRs on the Westland Company Affordable Housing & Market Rate Housing
Project for the City of Moorpark. This document will be prepared in conformance with amended CEQA
and State and City of Moorpark Guidelines for EIR Preparation.
1.1 Subject and Scope
The proposed project is an application for a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative Map, and
one or, more Planned Development Permits. The applicant proposes to construct both affordable
townhouses and market rate single family dwellings.
The proposed residential mix for this project is:
0 100 market rate single family detached residential units. However, the applicant
would like to provide 5 additional units if design opportunities will allow;
0 10 affordable single family detached units available to moderate (120% of
Median) income households with a sale price of $180,000. These 10 units shall not
be less than 1,400 square feet;
0 90 market rate multi -family attached townhouse units; and
0 90 affordable multi -family attached townhouse units with a target sales price of
approximately $120,000 shall be made available to lower (80% of Median) income
households.
The primary environmental issues of significance are related to impacts on the traffic circulation system
serving the City. Potential project specific and cumulative impacts are anticipated at a number of
intersections in the immediate project vicinity. In addition, the design capacity of several road segments
serving the project may be exceeded with the addition of project and/or cumulative traffic. Water demand
and sewage treatment requirements may contribute to cumulative problems for municipal service providers.
A number of environmental concerns are potentially significant but can potentially be mitigated through
careful planning. These issues include noise, flood hazards, geologic hazards, biological and botanical
resource impacts. Impacts anticipated to be insignificant include effects on cultural resources and hazardous
materials remediation.
Based on the information contained in the Initial Study for this project, a determination was made that an
EIR is required. The following subjects will be addressed in the EIR:
o Land use and planning considerations
o Transportation and circulation
o Air quality
o Noise
o Flood hazards and flood control planning
o Geology and soils
o Aesthetics and visual resources
0 Public services (water and sewer).
-2-
Impacts associated with hazardous materials, cultural resources, and other public services (police, fire,
recreation) are projected to be insignificant. The EIR will contain the following mandated CEQA sections:
o Summary of Cumulative Effects
o Irreversible Environmental Effects
o Short Term versus Long Term Productivity
o CEQA Mitigation Monitoring Plan
o Alternatives.
The format for this EIR will conform to the City's current Guideline requirements. The document will be
thorough and succinct. The body of the EIR will be preceded by an executive summary which will be
organized according to the level of findings (e.g., significant unavoidable impacts, impacts subject to
mitigation, insignificant impacts). An impact matrix will be prepared to summarize the EIR findings and to
avail decision makers of a brief, complete overview of the document.
This proposal includes a work program and not -to -exceed cost estimate to produce the proposed Westland
Company EIR through the Final document. The Planning Corporation will prepare a certifiable Final EIR.
This offering includes Planning Corporation staff time to review and respond to up to 60 pages of public
comment on the draft document and to produce the Final EIR. If more than 60 pages of comments are
received, reponse to the additional comments will be included in a contract revision. If new studies beyond
the scope of this contract need to be performed to answer questions raised during the public review process,
these additional study items would be subject to a contract renegotiation.
1.2 Data Sources
The data sources which will be used for each element of the work program are discussed in Section 2. In
general, library sources, agency archives, existing studies and data on file with the applicant and public
agencies will provide baseline information for most sections of the EIR. Supplemental field work may be
necessary for some of these sections.
13 Graphics and Public Presentation
For purposes of clear and informative public presentation, at a minimum, the following graphics will be
included in the EIR: project location, site plan, elevations of structures, and significant physical impacts
which can be mapped (view corridor effects, traffic constraints, etc.). Land use and zoning maps will also be
provided. Graphics will be produced on an AutoCAD (Computer aided design) plotter (8 1/2 x 11 or 11 x
17" formats) to assure maximum accuracy and clarity.
1.4 Consultant/City Relationship
All work directly related to the EIR preparation such as field reconnaissance, literature search, consultation
with agency personnel, and library research, will be the responsibility of The Planning Corporation, its
associates, and staff.
It will be the City's responsibility to provide The Planning Corporation with reasonable access to relevant
files and documentation pertaining to the proposed project. It is also requested that the City assist as
necessary in obtaining additional project description details from the applicant that may be necessary to
complete the EIR, and in seeking the cooperation of City departments and other agencies in the preparation
of the document.
-3-
1.5 Changes in Scope of Work
The following Statement of Work outlines the scope and depth of analysis proposed by The Planning
Corporation for completion of the Westland Company Affordable & Market Rate Housing EIR. Any
changes in the project description or unanticipated changes in the Scope of Work will constitute grounds for
contract renegotiation.
1.6 Meetings
Orientation and Progress Meetings: The Planning Corporation and all subcontractors will attend meetings
with City of Moorpark planning staff and City Manager if needed to review the proposed project, provide
initial staff comments and evaluations, and other concerns, to ensure timely, accurate, and cost effective
document preparation. Periodically during the preparation City Planning staff will be updated regarding
progress on the EIR.
Pre -Public Hearing Conference: The Planning Corporation will attend three (3) pre -public hearing
conferences with City of Moorpark staff to finalize the Draft and to prepare and coordinate hearing
presentations.
Public Hearines: The Planning Corporation will attend three (3) public hearings to present the fmdings
described in the Draft EIR document. At the discretion of the Community Development Director, selected
subcontractors may be required to attend public hearings.
1.7 Conflict of Interest Warranty
The consultant recognizes and agrees that it is a public official subject to the Political Reform Act of 1974
and further agrees and warrants that it has no financial interests, directly or indirectly, which may be
materially affected by the project for which the EIR is being prepared. The consultant further warrants that
the principal of the Planning Corporation has reviewed the Political Reform Act of 1974 and the Fair
Political Practices Commission regulations, including but not limited to, Chapter 7 to Title 2 of the
California Administrative Code, Section 187GO et seq., in order to ascertain whether any conflict of interest
would require the consultant to refrain from participating in the making or in any way attempting to use its
official position to influence the governmental decisions underlying the subject EIR.
2.0 STATEMENT OF WORK
Work Program Contents
2.0 General Approach
2.1 Introduction, Summary and Impact Matrix
2.2 Project Description and Cumulative Projects
2.3 Environmental Setting
2.4 Land Use and Planning Considerations
2.5 Transportation and Circulation
2.6 Air Quality
2.7 Noise
2.8 Flood Hazards and Flood Control Planning
2.9 Geology and Soils
2.10 Aesthetics and Visual Resources
2.11 Biological and Botanical Resources
2.12 Public Services Impacts
2.13 Insignificant Impacts
2.14 Other CEQA Sections
2.15 Project Alternatives
-5-
2.0 Work Program: General Approach
The preparation of this EIR will involve staff of the Planning Corporation as well as subcontractors. The
consultant has guided the selection of subcontractors which have been retained by the applicant to perform
studies which are currently in preparation including:
o Soils and seismic analysis - Buena Engineers
o Noise evaluation - Walker & Celano
All other specialized studies (tree survey, aesthetics, cultural resources, and biological resources) will be
performed by Planning Corporation staff.
2.1 Introduction, Summary, and Impact Matrix
The introduction will briefly describe the subject and format of the EIR. The use of CEQA Section 15150
(incorporation by reference) will be discussed. The data base used for impact analyses will be described.
The executive summary will provide a succinct written synopsis of the EIR findings in clear, non -scientific
terminology. This summary will describe significant impacts for each impact level including significant
impacts which cannot effectively be mitigated, significant impacts which can be reduced to acceptable
levels through mitigation, and insignificant impacts which will require no mitigation.
An impact matrix table will also need to be prepared which will display the various categories of unavoidably
significant and significant impacts, together with recommended mitigation measures. In addition,
insignificant impacts and recommended optional mitigations will be presented. The alternatives to the
proposed project will also be displayed in this summary table.
This initial summary will also contain a brief review of the City's guidelines for implementing CEQA. The
summary will also define Responsible and Trustee Agencies and list required approvals.
2.2 Project Description and Cumulative Projects
The purpose of the Project Description is to present a comprehensive overview of the proposed project and
its relation to development trends in the region (cumulative project description). The applicant will provide
most of the information relevant for the Project Description and the City will assist the consultant in
deriving the description of cumulative projects and regional development trends. A cumulative project list
will be assembled in consultation with City staff. The legal requirements for cumulative analysis will also be
provided in this section.
This section will contain all CEQA required components typical of EIRs prepared for the City (e.g., physical
setting, surrounding land use, existing conditions, development trends in the vicinity, lead and trustee
agencies, permits applied for, discretionary approvals sought, etc.). A project synopsis will also be provided.
The project description will contain the following items: a thorough synopsis of the project summarizing the
project title, proposed objective, location, legal description, applicant/landowner, current landowners
adjacent to the proposed project, engineer, current use, zoning, General Plan designation, status of permits
applied for or issued, and approvals required or recommended.
A complete description of the project characteristics and objectives will be written based on data provided
by the applicant. Appropriate descriptive graphics will be prepared including regional and site vicinity maps,
project plans, and photographs of the existing physical environment in the project vicinity.
_ -6-
The cumulative analysis will be based both on a list approach and a consideration of buildout under the
ongoing General Plan update. The potential use of the property under the proposed General Plan update
will be described and compared to the project.
Because the applicant has already made some project revisions in response to City concerns, this section will
include a review of the original project concept and a summary of modifications already incorporated into
the project design. Design consultations will be held with the applicant and City staff early in the planning
process to satisfy agency concerns regarding layout, circulation, landscaping, and aesthetics.
23 Environmental Setting
A summary of the affected environment will be presented which will provide an overview of the physical,
natural and cultural environment in the vicinity of the proposed project. This section will address:
o the natural environment;
o major landforms and relation to surrounding topography;
o the natural environment (biology, botany, hydrology, soils, geology);
o the cultural environment (attributes of the existing population, concerned ethnic
groups and historic land use in the vicinity of the project); and
o recent major modifications to the environment.
The environmental setting would review prior development of the area, and describe the natural and cultural
resource .setting within the project area. Contributions from specialized studies (tree survey, cultural
resource evaluation etc.,) will be incorporated into the Project Description.
2.4 Land Use and Planning Considerations
The land use analysis for the EIR will emphasize presenting the full range of anticipated changes in land use
which would result from the proposed project. To this end, the following components will be treated in
detail:
o The present land uses in the project vicinity will need to be mapped and described.
A table summarizing the traffic trip generation, population composition and land
use density within adjacent zones will be provided. Cumulative growth in the
region (ten year trend) will also need to be documented and discussed briefly. A
summary of the status of the capacity of major elements of local infrastructure
(schools, sewage disposal, roads, water supply, etc.) will be included to lay the
foundation for the growth inducement discussion.
o Plans and Policies Summary: Plan and policies governing land use within the
project boundaries will be reviewed and summarized. The text of pertinent
policies will be presented and discussed. A table will be prepared which will
display potential project consistency and inconsistency with adopted environmental
goals and policies which govern the project. A discussion of the general
compatibility of the project with surrounding land uses will be based on a
comparison of project plans to planning guidelines. Pertinent resource protection
policies and planning guidelines in the General Plan will be cited where
appropriate. Any potential project conflicts with local, State, or Federal law or
policy will also be discussed in this section. Permits that will need to be issued by
Trustee Agencies will be identified and consultation procedures for each agency
-7-
will be summarized. The relationship between this project and the City's
Residential Growth Management Ordinance will be clarified. The consistency of
the project with the housing element will be discussed.
o Physical Impacts of Land Use Changes: CEQA requires that full consideration be
given to the specific physical changes which would result from a proposed project.
Translating proposed land use changes into specific physical impacts on the
environment is the objective of the impact analysis for land use considerations.
Temporary and long term impacts will be analyzed in this section. Land use
impacts to be considered include land use conversion, potential loss of unique
biological resources, extension of services, property loss risks associated with
geological, slope and soil problems, and potential impacts to view corridors.
The growth inducement evaluation will focus on CEQA required components
including extension of services, economic and population growth and direct and
indirect effects.
o Mitigation Measures: Mitigation of land use incompatibilities will emphasize
modifications and alternatives to the proposed project which could feasibly lessen
or alleviate land use impacts while still achieving basic development objectives.
2.5 Transportation and Circulation
The transportation analysis will be completed by Kaku Associates, Santa Monica, California. This firm
provided the following response to the RFP:
Task 1 - Data Collection
All available data related to the project and necessary to conduct the traffic study will be
assembled. This includes an inventory of streets and highways in the vicinity, proposed roadway
improvements which could affect traffic circulation in the study area, traffic control devices, traffic
volume counts, and adjacent land uses. Data on relevant other proposed developments and traffic
study documentation will be reviewed to the extent available.
Morning and evening peak hour traffic volumes will be needed at the following intersections:
1. New Los Angeles Avenue & Spring Road
2. Los Angeles Avenue & Moorpark Avenue
3. Los Angeles Avenue & Tierra Rejada/Gabbert Road
4. Spring Road & High Street/Los Angeles Avenue
5. Los Angeles Avenue & Maureen Lane
6. Los Angeles Avenue & Goldman Avenue
7. Los Angeles Avenue & Shasta Avenue
8. Los Angeles Avenue & Liberty Bell Road.
24-hour traffic volume data will also be needed for the following locations:
1. Los Angeles Avenue w/o Tierra Rejada Road/Gabbert Road
2. Los Angeles Avenue between Goldman Avenue and Shasta Avenue
3. Los Angeles Avenue w/o Moorpark Avenue
4. Los Angeles Avenue between Millard Street and Spring Road
5. New Los Angeles Avenue c/o Spring Road
6. Tierra Rejada Road s/o Los Angeles Avenue
7. Moorpark Avenue n/o Los Angeles Avenue
8. Spring Road n/o New Los Angeles Avenue
9. Spring road s/o New Los Angeles Avenue
10. Los Angeles Avenue e/o High Street.
Task 2 - Existing Traffic Conditions
An assessment will be made of existing operating conditions and constraints within the study area.
Peak hour levels of service will be quantified at the intersections identified in Task 1. Existing
traffic operational problems and congested areas will be identified.
Task 3 - Forecast Future Traffic Conditions
A series of traffic projections will then be developed, as follows:
o Existing plus Cumulative conditions
o Existing plus Cumulative plus Project
o Existing plus Cumulative plus Project plus buildout of anticipated major
generators.
As part of the above projections, the future traffic generation from the projected land uses within
the study area will be forecast and assigned to the street system. The future base conditions will
include traffic expected to be generated by other projects either currently under construction or
approved for development within the study area. It is assumed that the list of major traffic
generators and cumulative developments will be supplied by the EIR consultant as coordinated
with the City of Moorpark Community Development and Public Works departments. A
cumulative project table will be assembled which will partition future growth as directed by
Moorpark Planning staff. The treatment of filed General Plan Amendment requests in this
cumulative list will be resolved in consultation with City staff and the City Engineer.
As necessary, Kaku Associates will also work with the City Traffic Engineer and others as
appropriate to determine the methodology for forecasting future traffic volumes in the study area,
whether this be by modifying Caltrans or City projections, or generating new estimates.
Task 4 - Traffic Impact Analysis
The likely impact of project traffic on peak hour traffic conditions will be assessed. This will be
based on a methodology and standards, agreed upon with the City Traffic Engineer, which
identifies the locations where project traffic has a significant impact. It is expected that the ICU
or similar methodology will be used for intersection capacity analysis. This assessment will
concentrate on impacts at the major intersections and streets listed above, as well as at the
proposed site access points. Overall circulation east and west of the project site will be considered
in the impact evaluation. The potential for creating a collector or local street connector which
would parallel Los Angeles Avenue will be considered.
The forecast traffic conditions at site ingress/egress points will also be evaluated within the
context of traffic accident potential.
W
Task 5 - Mitigation Measures
Possible mitigation measures will be identified where a significant project impact is projected.
The analyses of mitigation alternatives shall include the following:
o Physical mitigation (e.g., street widening or restriping) will be evaluated at
appropriate locations.
o Warrants for traffic signal installation will be evaluated at up to four intersections
and the appropriate.location for a future signal (either Maureen or Goldman) will
be discussed.
Up to four alternative site access plans, such as direct access to Los Angeles
Avenue or access to Maureen Lane and/or Liberty Bell Road.
The projected improvement in traffic operations from such mitigation will be quantified.
Potential mitigation measures will be examined to determine their physical and operational
feasibility and effectiveness, and a recommended plan will be developed. Recommended physical
improvements will be evaluated from a conceptual planning perspective only (preliminary
engineering drawings are not included as part of this work scope). Any unavoidable impacts will
be identified.
Task 6 - On -Site Circulation Review
The proposed site plan will be reviewed to determine the adequacy of proposed internal lane
widths, parking supply, and intersection designs. This review will be conducted with the
perspective and objective of identifying "fatal flaws," to insure that the proposed project meets
City of Moorpark and/or other generally accepted traffic engineering standards. Where
necessary and feasible, alternative designs will be suggested to mitigate anticipated deficiencies.
Task 7 - Documentation
The results of our analysis will be documented in a report which will be appropriate for
incorporation into the EIR as a technical appendix and submitted for review. If necessary, the
draft report will be revised and then finalized. We will also assist the EIR consultant as needed to
summarize the findings within the EIR. The traffic study will be consistent with City Guidelines
for Preparing Traffic Circulation Studies.
Task 8 - Response to Comments
Upon close of the public review period, we will assist the environmental consultant as needed in
responding to comments related to the work products prepared by our office. This work will
include clarification of points covered in this scope of work. Addressing additional issues raised
which are not within our scope of work may require a contract amendment.
We estimate that the work can be completed within 6 to 7 weeks. Since you have already
authorized us to proceed, we will commence work immediately.
Our fee for completion of the study will be $15,900.00, plus $3,400.00 in direct costs for traffic
counts. This budget includes completion of the traffic study and up to three meetings during
preparation. This budget also assumes that data on cumulative developments can be obtained in a
timely manner. Our staff will also be available to provide support at additional meetings or
subsequent public hearings, if necessary, with such work to be billed for time & materials
required.
-10--_
2.6 Air Quality
The air quality impacts of the proposed project will be evaluated for both long term and short term effects.
The consultant will use the recently adopted 1989 Air Quality Impact Guidelines prepared by the County of
Ventura in computing impacts. The following tasks will be completed by the consultant:
o Using the County Guidelines, the impacts from additional vehicle use resulting
from approval of the project will be computed.
o Required mitigation measures will be identified including computation of the per
unit fee for offsite mitigation required under revised County Guidelines.
o The construction emissions associated with development of the project will be
computed. These computations will address both construction vehicle emissions
and the generation of particulate matter.
o Construction emissions mitigation measures will be conceived using recently
adopted Guidelines.
2.7 Noise
The accoustic engineering firm Walker-Celano will analyze the noise impacts of the project and provide
guidance on mitigation design.
The noise evaluation will consist of the following activities:
o Visit the project site and area and obtain acoustic data and concurrent traffic
counts during representative times of day and night.
o Obtain traffic flow and projection data from Caltrans for Highway 118 and from
City or County transportation departments for other roadways in the area.
o Based on the measurements and Caltrans/City/County information, compute
existing and future noise contours (CNEL) on the project site. Assess noise
impacts on indoor and outdoor project areas relative to State and local noise
exposure criteria.
o Based on results of traffic studies for the project, compute noise increments on
surrounding roadways which will result from project generated traffic. Assess
noise impacts relative to State, local and FHWA traffic noise criteria.
o Recommend noise control measures as required to mitigate any significant noise
impacts.
o Prepare a report which presents all findings and recommendations in a form
suitable for the purpose of incorporation into the EIR for the project.
o Attend and testify at hearings as required.
2.8 Flood Hazards and Flood Control Planning
The drainage channel located immediately adjacent to the project is improved along its entire segment.
However there are a number of outstanding questions which need to be resolved regarding the capacity of
this channel. The following work needs to be accomplished to complete flood control planning:
-11-
o The County of Ventura Flood Control Department will be consulted to determine
if the flood design flows planned for the segment adjacent to the project can
accommodate increased flows from the project runoff.
o The County will be consulted to determine if any downstream effects would result
from approval of this project. Any improvements required in the channel will also
be established by the County.
o An existing Corps of Engineer easement traverses the boundary of the project.
The significance of this easement and any associated constraints will be identified.
o A schematic drainage plan will be prepared and any issues - of significance
associated with this plan will be identified by the City's consulting engineer and the
County. The established flood limit lines for the adjacent arroyo will be placed on
the drainage plan and mitigation measures required to diminish flood hazards will
be determined.
o Any effects on surface or groundwater quality associated with discharging urban
runoff into the adjacent arroyo will be identified.
The applicant's civil engineer (Hawks and Associates, Carl Rowley) is responsible for obtaining the data
required to answer questions related to flood control planning. The consultant will be relying primarily on
the engineering judgement of the County Flood Control agency in the preparation of this section. The
consultant will retain an independent civil engineer to review the calculations and the mitigation plan
submitted by the applicant.
2.9 Geology and Soils
Based on existing data, no known faults traverse the project. Sewer discharges have increased groundwater
topography to the degree that there is some possibility high groundwater conditions exist within the project
boundary. There is also limited potential for amplification of seismic waves in the event of an earthquake.
A certified and registered engineering geologist will evaluate soil conditions, depth to groundwater, and
seismic design criteria for the project and the results of this analysis will be included in the EIR. The
engineering consultants, Buena Engineers, provided the following work proposal:
"The scope of services for the Reconnaissance Engineering Geology and Geotechnical
Engineering Report will include the following:
A. We will explore the subsurface site conditions and materials by drilling and
sampling approximately ten (10) borings. The maximum planned drill depth is
forty-one (41) feet. Depth to groundwater will be recorded. Relatively
undisturbed samples will be taken from the borings and sealed in containers, and
bulk samples from the auger cuttings will be secured in bags. The samples will be
returned to our laboratory for testing. A geologist will supervise the field
investigation.
B. Laboratory testing of soil samples considered reasonably representative of the
materials obtained from the field exploration will be done to help identify and
evaluate subsurface site characteristics. Tests should include, but will not be
limited to, in -place moisture and density, maximum density -optimum moisture,
direct shear, consolidation, expansion index and grain size analysis.
-12-
C. An Engineering Geologist will analyze the seismicity of the region within which
the project is located. Seismic design criteria will be provided for use by the
Structural Engineer based on this analysis.
D. Once field and laboratory tests are complete, the data will be organized and
analyzed by a member of our professional staff in order to develop conclusions
and recommendations relevant to site development feasibility as we understand it.
Particular attention will be paid to evaluating the potential for liquefaction and
how it may affect feasibility of the proposed subdivision.
E. General recommendations pertinent to site development feasibility and
construction will be set forth in a written report based on evaluation of the data
obtained from the exploration and testing programs, and on experience and
judgment. Recommendations provided typically relate to anticipated foundation
types, estimated ranges of bearing pressures and vertical and lateral earth
pressures, and criteria for grading."
The content of this section will be coordinated with and reviewed by the City Engineer. No additional
engineering review will be provided by the consultant.
2.10 Aesthetics and Visual Resources
The aesthetics and visual resources section of the EIR will be prepared in close cooperation with City staff.
In the early stages of EIR preparation, the consultant will coordinate design review of the project in
consultation with City staff and the applicant. The ultimate objective of the aesthetic section will be to
derive a set of design guidelines to assure that the project includes adequate urban landscaping, open space,
and design consistency which emphasizes the regional architecture in the Moorpark area. Issues related to
light and glare that may be generated by the project will be discussed in consultation with City staff.
The visual resource evaluation will consider view corridor impacts, visual compatibility and dominance, and
general effects on the semi -rural landscape. General mitigation planning will be provided for significant
effects (e.g., landscaping screening recommendations, building height construction limitations, height
setback ratios, etc.). The applicant will be consulted about integrating consultant suggestions into the
ultimate design configuration for the project.
The Planning Corporation visual resources and design specialist, C.A. Rowley, will prepare this section. Mr.
Rowley is an expert in visual analysis. In addition to photographic renderings of view corridor effects,
several AutoCAD three dimensional renderings may be prepared using an AutoCAD program and artist
renderings. The need to prepare three dimensional renderings is based on the significance of the effects
that may result from the development. These renderings would be an extra work item which would be
funded through a contract amendment at the discretion of the Community Development Director.
The primary standards used to evaluate the visual resource impacts will be County General Guidelines,
aspects of the City of Moorpark's Downtown Study, and professional standards for visual resource analysis.
The consultant will discuss aesthetic considerations with the Community Development Director prior to
undertaking the visual resource analysis. The existing conditions portion of the analysis will contain:
o a review of the general landscape and scenic character of the area under
consideration --to the extent necessary, the project area could be partitioned into
subunits and ecological types;
o recent landscape modifications will be described;
-13-
the on -street and surrounding hillside view corridors will be described and
illustrated --an inventory will be made of all developed areas that may be impacted
by the project;
potentially relevant regulations and policies will be described and summarized --at
a minimum, the State Department of Parks and Recreation, State Department of
Transportation, and Ventura County visual resource policies will be enumerated
and any conflicts with these policies will be specified.
A series of black and white and two color photos (photo offset quality) will be presented to illustrate existing
conditions. These same photos will again appear in the impact analysis section with accurately rendered
view corridor effects.
The impact analysis will be preceded by a clarification of the significance thresholds applicable to visual
analysis. Then, impacts will be described both in text and photographically. The types of impacts to be
evaluated include:
o elimination of scenic resources;
o impacts associated with project visibility from all impacted view corridors;
o visual dominance effects on residential, trail, highway, and open lands;
o visual compatibility with existing land uses;
o impacts to the historic landscape character;
o adverse visual effects on existing communities.
Mitigation measures will be conceived for significant effects. Mitigation planning will also be done to
minimize the adverse effects of project traffic on existing residences. The character and landscape detailing
at project entrance points will be considered and mitigating the effects of increased traffic on the
neighborhood from an aesthetics standpoint will be considered.
2.11 Biological and Botanical Resources
The sensitivity of the foothills and riparian corridors in the project vicinity have been defined in prior
environmental documents. A general biological base line inventory has been obtained as a result of prior
studies and the type of raptors using the area are well known. All existing biological inventory data will be
mapped.
The baseline data will be assembled to focus on the following issues:
o An accurate characterization of the habitat values present within the project
boundary will be presented and an assessment of the degree to which this habitat
has been degraded will be provided.
o Several specimen trees and relatively senile native and introduced species are
present on the perimeter of the project. An inventory of existing trees and shrubs
will be prepared and a soundness evaluation will be made only of mature specimen
trees.
-14-
o The existing arroyo appears to be a completely degraded environment. The extent
to which this arroyo satisfies the definitions of a wetland in County General Plan
policies will be clarified.
Once this inventory is completed, an impact assessment will be performed which focuses on the following
issues (assuming biological habitats are determined to be significant):
o Construction impacts from tree removal, clearing, grubbing, materials assembly,
parking and transportation, footing construction, and utility line installation;
o Indirect or secondary effects of increased access to remote habitats in the
surrounding area will be evaluated as well as general effects from increased
human presence and recreational activities;
o Impacts to raptors from changes in habitat and forage will be evaluated;
o Changes in stream gradients, erosion, siltation, and other grading related
problems will be evaluated; and
o Secondary effects (ancillary construction, recreation, etc.) will be reviewed.
Mitigation planning will emphasize construction timing, offsets to improve habitats; erosion control and
revegetation, and long term monitoring activities. Emphasis will be placed on arranging some aspects of the
site plan around the existing mature trees.
2.12 Public Service Impacts
With exception of road networks, public infrastructure appears to be adequate to meet the demands of the
project. The consultant will review both the project specific and cumulative effects of regional growth on
sewer capacity, school capacity, and long term water supply. Based on the ongoing General Plan update,
there appears to be some potential for capacity constraint of the regional sewer system with full cumulative
buildout. This issue in particular needs to be discussed in the EIR. The local Moorpark Unified School
District and regional Community College capacities will be determined. Long term water supply will be
discussed in consultation with the Calleguas District. The water supply section will describe the extent to
which this provider is dependent on local versus regional water sources.
2.13 Other Impacts
Several impacts have been determined to be minor or are likely to be insignificant based on the results of a
field evaluation conducted in preparation of the Initial Study. These impacts only need to be discussed
briefly.
Issue 1: Hazardous Materials
A Phase II hazardous materials assessment was conducted of this property by Lockman and Associates
(January 1990). The results of this study indicate that less than 10 yards of contaminated soil are present on
the property. A remedial plan has been conceived for the disposal of this material. A brief discussion of the
assessment and proposed mitigation measures will be included in the EIR.
Issue 2: Cultural Resources
The project is located in an area with some potential for prehistoric cultural deposits. Although an initial
inspection of the property did not yield evidence of Native American occupation, a Phase I archaeological
evaluation of the property will be conducted and the results of this survey will be incorporated into the EIR.
-15-
2.14 Other CEQA Sections
This section will address the following topics:
o Summary of Cumulative Effects
o Irreversible Environmental Effects
o Short Term Uses versus Long Term Productivity
o CEQA Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Growth inducement and cumulative effects will be discussed in other portions of the document where
relevant. In this section of the EIR, the consultants will assemble and review cumulative and growth
inducing effects and discuss how these two issues are related.
A mitigation monitoring plan will be recommended. This section will summarize all mitigation measures in
a matrix and define what types of monitoring are recommended for each measure.
2.15 Project Alternatives
The alternatives analysis will be based on a review of the constraints maps for the project and the
identification of critical environmental problems. Retaining existing trees will be given special consideration
in the alternatives analysis. Several alternative development scenarios will be described and illustrated.
Although the alternatives cannot be defined with certainty at this time, probable alternatives to be included
will be:
o No project,
o Reduced density in either the affordable or market rate portions of the project,
o Redesign of the project configuration without a change in density,
o Redesign of the project configuration with a change in density,
o Mixed one and two story development in the single family residential portions of
the project with a zero lot line configuration in some portions of the project to
create additional open space,
o Phased development of various portions of the project linked to improvement of
traffic conditions at critical intersections,
o Alternative locations.
The probable environmental effects of each alternative will be described in a summary manner. The
alternative analysis will be preceded by a brief review of case law concerning alternatives. The consultant
will describe at least one environmentally superior alternative to the project.
The Alternatives analysis will begin with a review of what project specific impacts need to be mitigated to
reduce effects to insignificance. A summary of cumulative effects will also be provided at the beginning of
this section.
The structure of the alternatives analysis will enable the comparison of the effects of the proposed project
and at least three of the most viable alternatives. In cases where impacts can be quantified (levels of service,
air quality impacts, public service demands, etc.), numerical impact evaluation will be provided in a
summary table to enable easy comparison of the project with several viable alternatives.
-16-
3.0 COST PROPOSAL
-17-
3.0 Cost Proposal
Fee Proposal
This offering is a proposal to prepare this document through completion of the Final EIR.
Activi
Hours
Rate
2.1
Introduction
5
$88.00
Summary Narrative
4
$88.00
Impact Matrix
16
$88.00
2.2
Project Description
12
$88.00
Cumulative Projects
16
$88.00
2.3
Environmental Setting
8
$88.00
2.4
Land Use and Planning Considerations
12
$88.00
2.5
Transportation and Circulation
22
$88.00
(incorporation into the EIR)
Kaku Subcontract
Traffic counts
2.6
Air Quality
12
$88.00
2.7
Noise
9
$88.00
(incorporation into the EIR)
2.8
Flood Control Planning
9
$88.00
(incorporation into the EIR)
Peer review by engineer
16
$110.00
2.9
Geology and Soils
9
$88.00
Cost
$440.00
352.00
1,408.00
1,056.00
1,408.00
704.00
1,056.00
1,936.00
15,900.00
3,400.00
1,056.00
792.00
792.00
1,760.00
792.00
2.10 Aesthetics and
13
$88.00
1,144.00
Visual Resources
40
$50.00
2,000.00
2.11 Biological and Botanical Resources
20
$88.00
1,760.00
Field Survey/Background
12
$50.00
600.00
Certified Arborist
950.00
2.12 Public Services
2.13 Other Impacts
2.14 Other CEQA Sections
2.15 Project Alternatives
Subtotal
16 $88.00
1,408.00
14 $88.00
1,232.00
9 $88.00
792.00
10 $88.00
880.00
$43,618.00
-18-
Other Direct Labor
AutoCAD Programming/Data Base Assembly
30
$60.00
$1,800.00
Graphics
65
$40.00
2,600.00
Word Processing
110
$35.00
3,850.00
Subtotal
$8,250.00
Revisions/Comments/Responses to Comments
Activi
Hours
Rate
Cost
Revisions to ADEIR
45
$88.00
$3,960.00
Revisions to Screen Check EIR
13
$88.00
1,144.00
Revisions to Draft EIR
55
$88.00
4,840.00
Revisions to AFEIR
13
$88.00
1,144.00
Final EIR Comments & Responses
45
$88.00
3,960.00
Subtotal $15,048.00
Publication Costs
Draft EIRs ... 65 @ $30.00/copy $1,950.00
Final EIRs ... 45 @ $40.00/copy 1,800.00
Moorpark staff ... 12 @ $30.00/copy 360.00
12 @ $40.00/copy 480.00
Screen check ... 15 copies @ $35.00/copy 525.00
Subtotal $5,115.00
Other Charges
Meetings with City Staff - 20 hours @ $88.00/hr.
$1,760.00
FAX Charges, 200 pages @ $2.50 per page
500.00
Cover Photos, 115 @ $2.25 each
258.75
Hearings (8 hours @ $88.00/hr.)
704.00
Travel Expenses (2,000 miles @ $.28/mile)
560.00
AutoCAD CPU Plot Charge
175.00
Subtotal $3,957.75
TOTAL PREPARATION COSTS $75,988.75
-19-
4.0 SCHEDULE
-20- �.
4.0 Schedule of Deliverables and Payments
Deliverable Products
The deliverables for this EIR include:
o A preliminary Administrative Draft for staff review;
o A pre-print screen check draft to enable staff to confirm all requested changes and
response to Administrative Draft comments;
o Public Draft EIR;
o Preliminary Administrative Final EIR and response to comments for staff review;
0 A pre-print screen check Final EIR to enable staff to confirm all required changes
and response to comments; and
o A public Final EIR.
The consultant will also submit to the City all computer files, traffic model outputs, graphics, one
reproducible hard copy and one 31/2" computer diskette containing the EIR, and all materials loaned to the
consultant during the preparation period. IBM compatibile Word Perfect 5.0 software will be used for
word processed submittals to the City.
4.1 Administrative Draft EIR, Screen Check EIR, Draft EIR (DEIR), and Final EIR
Timeline
Ten (10) copies of the Administrative Draft EIR will be prepared, published and delivered to the Moorpark
Community Development Department within about fifteen weeks of receipt of a contract and a formal
notice to proceed from the City. Within ten (10) working days of receipt of City staff comments, three (3)
copies of the screen check Draft EIR will be prepared, published and submitted to the City upon approval of
the screen check draft, 60 copies of the Public Draft will be published and delivered to the City. The
submitted documents will be v_elo or spiral bound. After responding to comments on the Draft and after the
final review of the screen check document is completed, sixty (60) copies of the Final EIR will be published
and delivered to the City. One unbound Draft and Final EIR will be provided to the City.
4.2 Payment
The schedule of payments shall be as follows:
0 Progress billings not to exceed 60% after contract value until submission of the
ADEIR to the City for review;
0 15% of the contract value upon publication of the Draft EIR; and
The remaining 25% shall be paid per City contract.
-21-
5.0 OFFER
-22- ;__
5.0 Offer
5.1 This statement of work constitutes The Planning Corporation proposed scope of work and
deliverables. It represents a firm offer to provide the services described on the time lines indicated
at a cost not to exceed $75,988.75. This offer is valid for a period of thirty (30) days from this date
(April 20, 1990).
5.2 Significant changes in the project description or unanticipated changes in the Scope of Work
required by the City shall constitute grounds for contract renegotiation.
53 The persons authorized to represent The Planning Corporation are:
Steven Craig, President
122 E. Arrellaga
Santa Barbara, CA 93101
(805) 962-2124
Steve Craig, President
-23-
6.0 EIR DOCUMENT STYLE GUIDE
THE PLANNING CORPORATION OF SANTA BARBARA
Revised: JANUARY 1990
Title and Author
Please title your section so it is consistent with the attached EIR Outline. And be certain to follow the
document title with your name, relevant academic qualifications, and/or title.
Sections
Please utilize the following three section headings in your report. The headings should be all caps, bold
print.
Existing Conditions
This section should include a description of all relevant baseline data relating to the project site in its
presently existing physical condition. This discussion should include an historical literature search where
appropriate to identify factors or events which may assist in determining levels of project impacts for the
following section.
The Existing Conditions section should also include a review of thresholds of significance or other standards
that will be used to determine levels of impact (avoidable, unavoidable, etc.). The baseline data provided in
this section should review the relevant physical, social, or economic attributes of the site. Any field
measurements made to define baseline conditions (ie., acoustic measurements, archaeological or biological
surveys, etc.) should be summarized. If appropriate, more detailed technical information should be
provided in a technical report which should accompany and support your EIR text.
Impacts
This section should include a detailed discussion of predicted environmental impacts resulting from the
proposed project. The consultant should identify all project related direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts
and determine whether they are thought to be significant or insignificant. In many disciplines, such as traffic
assessment and water quality, there are generally accepted standards from which to quantify "thresholds of
significance". In others, such as archaeology and biology, the determination of significance is made by the
independent judgement of the qualified consulting professional. The impact description should include all
relevant threshold data (ie., State, County, or City Guidelines, professional engineering standards, etc.) and
technical observations, and should reflect the sound reasoning which led to the consultants' conclusion.
Any unavoidable impacts, (that is, an impact for which you believe there is no adequate mitigation), must be
separately identified in the conclusion of your impact analysis. This concluding section should also clearly
state what mitigations were ruled out as infeasible; this information is necessary to conclude an impact was
unavoidable.
o All conclusive statements regarding determination of significance or insignificance
should be in bold print.
o Provide a summary list of all project impacts.
o Highlight impacts by indenting with bullets as demonstrated in this section.
-24-
Mitigations
For any impacts which are determined to be significant, some form of reasonable and implementable
mitigation measure must be provided. Multiple mitigation measures can and should (where possible) be
conceived for each impact. Please identify the source for the mitigation concept (ie., statutory and required
by law, departmental guidelines, CEQA mandated, conceived by the consultant, etc.). If any impact is
determined to be insignificant, be sure your conclusion is defensible and logical. Please prepare a summary
pairing impacts and mitigations to prevent oversights in your analysis.
1. Provide a summary list of all recommended mitigation measures at the end of the
section.
2. Highlight mitigation measures by numbering and identifying them.
EIR Text Length and Style
The text length for the EIR sections should not exceed 15 pages, single spaced. The EIR should be a
summary of your technical report. The text must be readable, brief, and to the point. Reference should be
made, where necessary, to your technical report which will be published in a separate volume.
Technical Report
In addition to the EIR text, each consultant shall be responsible for producing a technical memorandum
describing the time and date of field work, fully documented existing condition information, summary of
background research, all relevant computations, graphs, statistical analyses, etc. The report should be
prepared to meet the standards and guidelines for technical reports prepared within your discipline. This
report should be submitted at the same time as the EIR text. This report will not be altered or edited so be
sure it is clean, clear, and complete. Technical reports with significant errors or omissions will be returned
to the consultant for revisions.
Editing, and Final EIR Text: Subcontractor Review
The content of your EIR text, after editing, review, and comment, will be returned for your review and
comment.
Tables, Figures and Maps
Please indicate date, source, scale, and north arrow, where appropriate.
Order of Headings
DOCUMENT TITLE -- Centered, all caps, bold.
FIRST HEADING (EXISTING CONDITIONS, IMPACTS, MITIGATIONS) -- All caps, bold.
Second Heading -- Cap/lower case, bold.
Third Order of Headine -- Underlined, cap/lower case, no bold.
Fourth Order of Heading -- Cap/lower case, no bold.
-25-
ATTACHMENT TO PLANNING SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR WESTLAND
PROJECT
The following information should be included in the scope of services for the case planning work to be
provided for the Westland Company project:
1.0 Staff Reports, Resolutions/Ordinances, and Meetings
1.1 Prepare separate staff reports and Conditions of Approval for the single-family
and multi -family residential projects for Planning Commission and City Council
consistent with the City Community Development Department standard format.
1.2 Prepare Planning Commission and City Council resolutions for the EIR and
Mitigation Reporting and monitoring Program and for the entitlement requests.
1.3 Prepare City Council Ordinance for Zone Change.
1.4 Prepare public hearing notices and mail notices to all residents within 1,000 feet of
project boundaries for each scheduled public hearing.
1.5 Attend meetings with the Planning Department staff to discuss design (4), and
with the applicant (4, if necessary).
1.6 Attend and make presentation at Planning Commission (3), and City Council (2)
hearings.
2.0 Project Design Review and Analysis
2.1 Analyze the project in accordance with sound planning principles, and make
recommendations to City and applicant regarding appropriate design for site
plans, elevations, floor plans, colors and materials, and conceptual landscaping and
lighting plans.
2.2 Analyze the project to determine consistency with the City's General Plan, Zoning
Code, and policies.
2.3 Analyze the project to determine application completeness. Make
recommendation to City regarding any items determined necessary to complete
application. Prepare letter to applicant for Community Development Director's
signature identifying any information which must be submitted to complete
application.
2.4 Work with applicant to finalize application. Prepare letter to applicant for
Community Development Director's signature when application is determined to
be complete.
2.5 Work with City Engineer's Office to determine appropriate onsite and off -site
circulation. Work with the County Flood Control District to coordinate
appropriate design of any necessary flood control improvements.
2.6 Work with applicant to ensure that EIR suggested mitigation measures are
incorporated into the project design where feasible.
2.7 Work with the applicant to save as many on -site trees as possible.
2.8 Prepare Conditions of Approval, review these conditions with City staff, present
proposed Conditions of Approval to City Council, and prepare final Conditions.
2.9 If the RPD Permit and Tentative Tract Map are approved by the City Council,
work with the applicant to obtain compliance with conditions of approval as
needed to allow City Council approval of a Final Map and Community
Development Department approval of a Zoning Clearance for the residential
units.
2.10 Mitigation Monitoring: Monitor the implementation of conditions during the
preliminary grading and site development stage. When the project is near
completion, monitor all requirements specified in the Conditions of Approval to
determine if requirements have been met. Ensure enforcement of all conditions
through negotiation and report noncompliance to the City as necessary. At the
conclusion of the project, prepare mitigation monitoring report to the City.
3.0 Timing, Processing, and Noticing
3.1 Make recommendation to Director of Community Development regarding
application completeness three weeks after initial or any subsequent RPD and
Tentative Tract Map application submittals are received by the City.
3.2 Complete and mail letter identifying whether application is complete or
incomplete prior to the 25th day after any application submittal is received by the
City.
3.3 Provide draft Conditions of Approval to the City six weeks prior to the first
Planning Commission hearing, and to the applicant three weeks prior to the first
Planning Commission hearing.
3.4 Provide draft Planning Commission Staff Report one month prior to the first
hearing.
3.5 Initiate EIR circulation 30 days prior to first Planning Commission hearing.
3.6 Provide Planning Commission public hearing and EIR circulation Public Notice
Form to City three weeks prior to initiation of EIR circulation.
3.7 Notify applicant to post the project site six weeks prior to the first Planning
Commission hearing and three weeks prior to any subsequently scheduled public
hearings. City policy requires sign to be posted on the site three weeks prior to
initial public hearing and two weeks prior to any subsequent public hearing.
3.8 Mail the Public Notice Form to all residents within 1,000 feet of the project
boundaries at least two weeks prior to any scheduled public hearing.
3.9 Provide Final Staff Reports to City two weeks prior to any scheduled Planning
Commission or City Council hearing.
-2-
4.0 Additional Services
4.1 Provide the City of Moorpark with 3.5-inch diskettes using IBM compatible, Word
Perfect 5.0 software for all staff reports, public notices, resolutions, ordinances,
and other written project correspondence as requested by the Community
Development Department.
4.2 Provide staff support services as directed by the City.
5.0 Budget
The Planning Corporation of Santa Barbara will
complete the Scope of Services on a time -and -
materials basis for a not -to -exceed fee of $29,594.00, including expenses. The estimated itemized
costs for each activity are provided below:
1.1
$1,960.00
1.2
540.00
1.3
350.00
1.4
800.00
1.5
2,640.00
1.6
1,320.00
Subtotal
$7,610.00
2.1
$1,450.00
2.2
990.00
2.3
425.00
2.4
352.00
2.5
880.00
2.6
1,650.00
2.7
725.00
2.8
1,600.00
2.9
1,625.00
2.10
3,800.00
Subtotal
$13,497.00
3.1
$312.00
3.2
85.00
3.3
760.00
3.4
1,500.00
3.5
125.00
3.6
220.00
3.7
85.00
3.8
800.00
3.9
1,200.00
Subtotal
$5,087.00
4.1
$400.00
4.2
800.00
Subtotal
$1,200.00
Word Processing
2,200.00 �C�'VED
TOTAL
$_29,594.00
APR 2 3 1990
-3- �_ Clty of Moorpark
6.0 Project Personnel
The individuals participating in this work include:
Steve Craig, Ph.d.c.,
Lisa Knox Burns, M.A., AICP
C. A. Rowley, B.A.
Rita Tacadena.
Steve Craig will be primarily responsible for the staff support described in this contract. Lisa Burns,
who has had ten years experience in both comprehensive planning and current planning functions in
several Southern California jurisdictions, will participate in the preparation of staff reports and in
assuring that all activities proceed on schedule. C.A. Rowley, the Planning Corporation design
consultant, will assist in project design review and analysis and in mitigation monitoring. Word
processing related tasks will be completed by Rita Tacadena.
7.0 Statement of Offer
7.1 This statement of work constitutes The Planning Corporation proposed scope of
work and deliverables. It represents a firm offer to provide the services described
on the time lines indicated at a cost not to exceed $29,594.00 which should be
deposited with the City of Moorpark. This offer is valid for a period of sixty (60)
days from this date (April 19, 1990).
7.2 Significant changes in the project description or unanticipated changes in the
Scope of Work required by the City shall constitute grounds for contract
renegotiation.
7.3 The persons authorized to represent The Planning Corporation are:
Steven Craig, President
122 E. Arrellaga
Santa Barbara, CA 93101
(805) 962-2124
-4-