Agenda packet — Foster City City Council, February 7, 2022 (part 1 of 2)

CITY OF FOSTER CITY/

ESTERO MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT

THIS MEETING WILL BE CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54953 (AS AMENDED BY AB 361) WHICH AUTHORIZES TELECONFERENCED MEETINGS UNDER THE BROWN ACT DURING CERTAIN PROCLAIMED STATES OF EMERGENCY.

THE GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA PROCLAIMED A STATE OF EMERGENCY RELATED TO COVID - 19 ON MARCH 4, 2020. THIS TELECONFERENCED MEETING IS NECESSARY SO THAT THE CITY CAN CONDUCT ESSENTIAL BUSINESS AND IS PERMITTED UNDER GOVERNMENT CODE 54953 IN ORDER TO PROTECT PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY OF ATTENDEE S. MEMBERS OF THE

PUBLIC THAT WISH TO ATTEND AND/OR PARTICIPATE IN A MEETING MAY DO BY JOINING THE

ZOOM MEETING
HTTPS://FOSTERCITY-ORG.ZOOM.US/J/82295970069 PUBLIC COMMENTS WILL BE ACCEPTED VIA ZOOM MEETING. ANY EMAILS SENT TO
[email protected] HAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL PRIOR TO THE MEETING.

Consistent with Government Code Section 54953, this City/District Meeting will be held via teleconference. City Councilmembers/District Board and staff will attend in person or via teleconference.

To maximize public safety while still maintaining transparency and public access, members of the public can observe the meeting from home. Below is information on how the public may observe and participate in the meeting.

To Observe the Meeting via Teleconference/Video Conference:
• To access the meeting by computer / smartphone, go to: https://fostercity-org.zoom.us/j/82295970069

• To dial-in via phone:
1-669-900-6833 or
1-408-638-0968
And enter Webinar ID: 822 9597 0069

To Participate in the Meeting by Providing Public Comment via Teleconference/Video Conference:
• During the Meeting: Live verbal public comments may be made by members of the public joining the meeting via Zoom. Zoom access information is provided above. Use the “raise hand” feature (for those joining by phone, press *9 to “raise hand”) during the public comment period for the agenda item you wish to address. The Zoom Host will call on people to speak by name provided or last 4 digits of phone number for dial -in attendees. Please clearly state your full name for the record at the start of your public comment.

Before the Meeting: Written public comments for the record may be submitted in advance by 4:00 p.m. the day of the meeting by email to: [email protected] and will be made part of the written record but will not be read verbally at the meeting. Written public comments submitted by email should adhere to the following:
• Clearly indi cate the Agenda Item No. or specify “Public” in the Subject Line for items not on the agenda
• Include the submitter’s full name (Recommended but not required)

Written public comments received by 4:00 p.m. the day of the meeting will be provided in their entirety to the City Council prior to the meeting and will be made part of the written record but will not be read verbally at the meeting. Written public comments will be posted to the City’s website for review prior to the meeting.

1 AGENDA

Monday, February 7, 2022 6:30 PM

REGULAR MEETING AS CITY COUNCIL/EMID BOARD OF DIRECTORS

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

3. ROLL CALL

Councilmembers/ex officio EMID Directors Jon Froomin, Sanjay Gehani, Sam Hindi, Patrick Sullivan, and Mayor/President Richa Awasthi

4. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS

4.1. A Proclamation Recognizing February 2022 as Black History Month

5. PUBLIC

Government Code Section 54954.2 E (3) precludes the City Council from discussing or acting upon any topic initially presented during the “Public” portion of the agenda. Information may be received, placed on a future agenda, or referred to the appropriate City staff. FCMC 2.08.240 Addressing the Council.

"...Each person desiring to address the Council shall step up to the public rostrum after being recognized to speak by the presiding officer, shall state his/her name and address for the record, state the subject he/she wishes to discuss, state who he/she is re
presenting if he/she represents an organization or
other persons and, unless further time is granted by majority vote of the Council, shall limit his/her remarks to three minutes. The City Council may vary the time limit for any speaker, if it deems this necessary." Speakers may join the Zoom meeting via the meeting link and using the “raise hand” feature and the Zoom host will call on people.

6. CITY/EMID CONSENT CALENDAR

All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine by the City Council/EMID Board of Directors and will be enacted by one motion unless removed by a member of the Council/Board, staff, or public. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a citizen or a Council/Board member so requests. If discussion is required, that item will be removed from the Consent Calendar and will be considered separately after approval of the remaining items on the Consent Calendar. Vote may be by roll call. 2 6.1. City/EMID Minutes

6.1.1. City/EMID Regular Meeting of January 18, 2022

6.2. City/EMID Resolutions for Adoption (First City Resolution Number to be used tonight is 2022-8 and EMID Resolution Number to be used tonight is 3236)

6.2.1. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Foster City Approving the Purchase of Traffic Signal Poles, Mast-Arms, and Luminaire Arms for the New Traffic Signals at Various Locations Project (CIP 301-681) from Azco Supply, Inc. in the Amount of $244,320.78
a) Staff Report
b) Adopt Resolution

6.2.2. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Foster City Approving the Plans and Specifications and Authorizing the Call for Bids for the Sport Court Resurfacing Project (CIP 301-701) a) Staff Report
b) Adopt Resolution

6.2.3. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Foster City Authorizing the Mayor to Execute an Agreement with Urban Planning Partners Inc. for the Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to Meet the Requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act for the Update of the Housing and Safety Elements of the General Plan and Appropriating $380,912 in the General Plan Maintenance Fund Account Number 128- 0845-419-4251 for the EIR Consulting Services – Citywide – EA2021-0004
a) Staff Report
b) Adopt Resolution

6.2.4. a) A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Foster City Approving an Agreement with Koff & Associates, a Division of Gallagher Benefit Services, Inc., in the Amount Not to Exceed $60,390 for Compensation Study Services; and
b) A Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Estero Municipal Improvement District Approving an Agreement with Koff & Associates, a Division of Gallagher Benefit Services, Inc., in the Amount Not to Exceed $60,390 for Compensation Study Services c) Staff Report
d) Adopt Resolutions

3 6.3. City/EMID Other

6.3.1. Cancel the July 5, 2022 and September 6, 2022 Regular Meetings of the City Council/EMID Board of Directors of the City of Foster City/Estero Municipal Improvement District

6.3.2. By Minute Order, Approve Foster City Council Liaisons List, Dated February 7, 2022

6.3.3. By Minute Order, Appoint Caroline Grafft (representing Hudson Pacific Properties) as Business Member of the Levee Bond Oversight Committee to Replace Business Member Krista
Dixon (representing Hudson Pacific Properties)
a) Staff Report

7. COMMUNICATIONS

7.1. City/District Warrants of Demands were Processed and Issued on January 5, January 13, 2022, and ACH were Processed on January 5, January 13, 2022
a) Information Item Only
b) No Action Required

8. CITY/DISTRICT MANAGER REPORTS, COUNCIL/BOARD STATEMENTS

AND REQUESTS, AND COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS

City/District Manager and Council/EMID Board Members report on their various assignments and liaison roles and Council/EMID Board requests for scheduling future items.

9. CLOSED SESSION

9.1. Public Employee Appointment (Government Code §54957) Title: City Manager

9.2. Report Out from Closed Session

10. ADJOURNMENT

The public is invited to attend.

Any attendee wishing special accommodations at the meeting should contact the City Clerk’s Department at (650) 286-3250 at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting.

4 Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council or EMID Board regarding any item on this agenda after the agenda packet was distributed will be made available for public inspection in the City Clerk Department at City Hall located at 610 Foster City Boulevard during normal business hours and at the meeting.

City Council meetings on FCTV on Comcast Channel 27 and AT&T Channel 99:

LIVE every 1st and 3rd Monday of the month
REPLAY next day at 1:00 pm (that week only)
REPLAY Saturday at 5:00 pm (only on Saturday the week the actual meeting occurs)

City Council meetings on https://www.fostercity.org/community/page/fctv-live-stream :

STREAMED LIVE every 1st and 3rd Monday of the month

City Council meetings on-demand:
https://www.fostercity.org/agendasandminutes

5 Proclamation
of the City of Foster City, California

Recognizing February 2022 as “Black History Month”

WHEREAS, the history of democracy in the United States is one of struggle and triumph. Equality and freedom, denied from the beginning to African Americans, we re only made truer as our country marched forward to realize our founding ideals. Black History Month seeks to rightfully center the efforts of African Americans in our national narrative; and

WHEREAS, the theme for 2022 focuses on the importance of Black Health and Wellness. This theme acknowledges the legacy of not only Black scholars and medical practitioners in Western medicine, but also other ways of knowing (e.g., birthworkers, doulas, mid wives, naturopaths, herbalists, etc.) throughout the African Diaspora; and

WHEREAS, in order to foster good health and wellness, Black peo ple have embarked on self- determination, mutual aid and social support initiatives to build hospitals, medical and nursing schools and community clinics; and

WHEREAS, clinics were established by individuals, grassroots or ganizations and mutual aid societies, such as the African Union Society, National Associat ion of Colored Women and Black Panther Party, to provide spaces for Black people to counter the economic and health disparities and discrimination that are found at mainstream institutions; and

WHEREAS, initiatives to help decrease disparities have focused on several outcomes, including having more diverse practitioners and representation in all segments of medical and health programs; and

WHEREAS, the observance of Black History Month calls our attention to the continued need to battle racism and build a society that lives up to its democratic ideals; and

WHEREAS, this Black History Month, let us draw inspiration and courage from the heroes who came before us, as we continue the work towards fairness in eve ry aspect of life – health care, housing, education, criminal justice and more.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, RICHA AWASTHI, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF FOSTER CITY, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY COUNCIL, officially recognize February 2022 as “ Black History Month”, honor the great and necessary work by Black Americans to improve our country, s tate, and city, and encourage all residents to celebrate Black heritage and culture and continue the effort to create a world that is more just, peaceful, and prosperous for all.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my
hand and have caused the official seal of the City of
Foster City to be affixed this seventh day of February, two thousand twenty two, A.D.

RICHA AWASTHI, MAYOR

6 CITY OF FOSTER CITY/

ESTERO MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 18, 2022

MINUTES

CALL TO ORDER OF CITY COUNCIL/EMID BOARD OF DIRECTORS
The Regular Meeting of January 18, 2022 of the City Council of the City of Foster City, sitting as said Council and as ex officio the Board of Directors of the Estero Municipal Improvement District (EMID), was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Mayor/President Richa Awasthi.

Pursuant to Governor Newsom’s Executive Order N-29-20, as amended through Order N-08-21, the meeting was held as a hybrid meeting.

ROLL CALL
The Communications Director/City Clerk/District Secretary called the roll:

PRESENT: Councilmembers/ex officio Directors Sanjay Gehani, Sam Hindi, Patrick Sullivan, and Mayor/President Richa Awasthi.

ABSENT: Vice Mayor/Vice President Jon Froomin.

STAFF PRESENT: Kevin Miller, Interim City/District Manager, Denise Bazzano, Assistant City Attorney; Jennifer Phan, Interim Deputy City Manager; Edmund Suen, Finance Director; Marlene Subhashini, Community Development Director; Maria Saguisag-Sid, Human Resources Director; Tracy Avelar, Police Chief; Louis Sun, Public Works Director; Rob Lasky, IT Manager; Frank Fanara, Parks Manager; Tiffany Oren, Recreation Manager; Yelena Cappello, Deputy City Clerk; Francine Magno, Senior Engineer; Julie Paping, Interim Principal Management Analyst; Vanessa Brannon, Management Analyst; Kevin Ortiz, Management Coordinator; Shuli Chen, Video Technician and Priscilla Schaus, Communications Director/City Clerk/District Secretary.

SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS

PRESENTATION FROM HIP HOUSING ON ANNUAL CALENDAR PROJECT FOR 2022.

HIP Housing Board President Shelley Pavela and Board Member LaTisa Brooks presented the HIP Housing Annual Calendar Project for 2022, and Laksh M. presented Foster City’s winning entry.
7 PRESENTATION FROM SAN MATEO COUNTY LIBRARIES ON FISCAL YEAR 2020- 2021 ANNUAL REPORT.

Foster City Library Branch Manager Julie Finklang gave a presentation regarding the San Mateo County Library Fiscal Year 2020-2021 Annual Report.

PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING JANUARY 2022 AS HUMAN TRAFFICKING PREVENTION MONTH.

Mayor Awasthi presented the proclamation recognizing January 2022 as Human Trafficking Prevention Month to Beverly May, Director of Governmental Affairs, Human Trafficking and IT for the California Massage Therapy Council.

CONSENT CALENDAR
Motion by Councilmember/Director Hindi, seconded by Councilmember/Director Gehani, and carried by roll call vote, 4-0-0, Vice Mayor/Vice President Froomin absent, approving the following items on the City/District Consent Calendar:

City/EMID Consent Calendar

1. Minutes of Regular Meeting of December 6, 2021;

2. Minutes of Special Meeting of December 13, 2021;

3. City Resolution No. 2022-1, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Foster City Authorizing the Sea Cloud Snack Shack Agreement with Piccadilly Catering & Event Solutions at Sea Cloud Park from March 1, 2022 through December 31, 2024 with Optional Extensions Through December 31, 2026;”

4. City Resolution No. 2022-2, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Foster City Authorizing the Issuance of a Request of Proposals for Video Technician Services;”

5. City Resolution No. 2022-3, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Foster City Approving the Parks and Recreation Department 2022 Fundraising Plan;”

6. City Resolution No. 2022-4, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Foster City Amending the Donation Policy and Sponsorship Policy;”

7. EMID Resolution No. 3629, “A Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Estero Municipal Improvement District Amending the Donation Policy and Sponsorship Policy;”

8. City Resolution No. 2022-5, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Foster City Extending the Proclamation of the Existence of a Local Emergency Caused by the Threat of the Novel Covid-19 Virus, and Proclaiming the Continuing Need for the City Council, Planning Commission and Committees to Meet by Teleconference;”

9. EMID Resolution No. 3630, “Proclaiming the Continuing Need for the Estero Municipal Improvement District Board of Directors, Planning Commission, and Committees to Meet by Teleconference;”
8 10.City Resolution No. 2022-6, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Foster City Upgrading the Office Assistant II Position to Administrative Assistant II Position and Eliminating the Part-time Accounting Specialist Position in the Financial Services Department;” and

11.EMID Resolution No. 3631, “A Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Estero Municipal Improvement District Upgrading the Office Assistant II Position to Administrative Assistant II Position and Eliminating the Part-time Accounting Specialist Position in the Financial Services Department.”

REPORTS
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE 2021 YEAR END REPORT, REVIEW OF MISSION STATEMENT, AND GOALS FOR 2022. MINUTE ORDER NO. 1824.

Parks and Recreation Committee Chair Doris Duncan presented the report.

Discussion ensued.

Motion by Councilmember Gehani, seconded by Councilmember Sullivan, and carried by roll call vote, 4-0-0, Vice Mayor Froomin absent, adopting Minute Order No. 1824, to receive and accept the Parks and Recreation Committee 2021 Year End Report, Review of Mission Statement, and Goals for 2022.

AUDIT COMMITTEE 2021 YEAR END REPORT, REVIEW OF MISSION STATEMENT, AND GOALS FOR 2022. MINUTE ORDER NO. 1825.

Audit Committee Chair Cindy Wang presented the report.

Discussion ensued.

Motion by Councilmember/Director Gehani, seconded by Councilmember/Director Sullivan, and carried by roll call vote, 4-0-0, Vice Mayor/Vice President Froomin absent, adopting Minute Order No. 1825, to receive and accept the Audit Committee 2021 Year End Report, Review of Mission Statement, and Goals for 2022.

UPDATE ON STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS INITIATIVES AND GOALS FOR 2022.

MINUTE ORDER NO. 1826.

Communications Director/City Clerk Schaus presented the staff report.

Discussion ensued.

Motion by Councilmember Sullivan, seconded by Councilmember Gehani, and carried by roll call vote, 4-0-0, Vice Mayor Froomin absent, adopting Minute Order No. 1826, to receive and accept the report on Strategic Communications Initiatives and Goals for 2022. 9 LEVEE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (CIP 327-657) - MONTHLY GENERAL UPDATE.

MINUTE ORDER NO. 1827.

Public Works Director Sun and Senior Engineer Magno presented the staff report.

Discussion ensued.

Motion by Councilmember Gehani, seconded by Councilmember Sullivan, and carried by roll call vote, 4-0-0, Vice Mayor Froomin absent, adopting Minute Order No. 1827, to receive and accept the report.

GEESE POPULATION MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE (PROGRESS ON OUTREACH AND PERMITS). MINUTE ORDER NO. 1828.

Interim Deputy City Manager Phan presented the staff report.

Discussion ensued.

Motion by Councilmember Gehani, seconded by Councilmember Hindi, and carried by roll call vote, 4-0-0, Vice Mayor Froomin absent, adopting Minute Order No. 1828, to receive and accept the report on the Geese Population Mitigation Plan.

RESOLUTIONS FOR ADOPTION
AUDITED FISCAL YEAR 2020-2021 ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT (ACFR) AND THE FISCAL YEAR 2020-2021 WARRANT REGISTERS IN THE FORM OF THAT ACFR. CITY RESOLUTION NO. 2022-7. EMID RESOLUTION NO. 3632.

Finance Director Suen presented the staff report.

Discussion ensued.

Motion by Councilmember/Director Hindi, seconded by Councilmember/Director Gehani, and carried by roll call vote, 4-0-0, Vice Mayor/Vice President Froomin absent, adopting City Resolution No. 2022-7, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Foster City Ratifying and Approving the Audited Fiscal Year 2020-2021 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) and the Fiscal Year 2020-2021 Warrant Registers in the Form of that ACFR” and EMID Resolution No. 3632, “A Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Estero Municipal Improvement District Ratifying and Approving the Audited Fiscal Year 2020-2021 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) and the Fiscal Year 2020-2021 Warrant Registers in the Form of that ACFR.”

COMMUNICATIONS
CITY/DISTRICT WARRANT OF DEMANDS. NO ACTION TAKEN.
10 City/District Warrant of Demands were Processed and Issued on December 28, 2021 and ACH December 28, 2021.

COUNCIL/BOARD STATEMENTS AND REQUESTS, COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS,

AND CITY/DISTRICT MANAGER REPORTS
Interim City/District Manager Miller stated that the January 31 City Council special meeting will include agenda items on the Recreation Center, Minimum Wage, and a review of action items from the Vision and Policy Summit. He stated that walking tours of the Levee will be scheduled for the City Council on February 22 and 23. He mentioned a joint meeting with the Planning Commission may take place in March to discuss Land Use. He stated that City staff continues to monitor impacts of COVID-19. He encouraged the City Council to read and share an email from Recology outlining the impacts of COVID-19. He stated that the Title Report from Mariner’s Point on ownership has been ordered. He also stated the City Manager Recruitment is in progress, and the application deadline is on January 23.

Councilmember/Director Gehani thanked staff and stated he looks forward to another successful year. He attended the Parks and Recreation Committee meeting on January 4, and they discussed the completion of the Sea Cloud Park renovations, letters to Santa, and the youth winter camp program. He reminded the public that winter recreation programs have begun, Foster City calendars are now on sale at fostercity50.org and at the Recreation Center, and senior trips are on hold due to COVID-19 concerns. On January 6, he met with San Mateo-Foster City School District Board Trustee Alison Proctor to discuss installation of a traffic light and school-specific signage.

Councilmember/Director Hindi stated he attended the Technical Working Group Subcommittee meeting of the SFO Community Roundtable on January 18 and they discussed the Ground-Based Augmentation System (GBAS) implementation. He also attended the Peninsula Clean Energy (PCE) meeting on January 18, and they authorized the Chief Executive Officer to enter into agreements for energy storage. He also stated he attended the Vision and Policy Summit on January 12.

Councilmember/Director Sullivan encouraged the public to watch the Vision and Policy Summit held on January 12, available on fostercity.org. He thanked Interim City Manager Miller and Vice Mayor Froomin for their timely response to his questions regarding the Levee Project. He stated he will attend training on the 2022 One Day Homeless Count in San Mateo County.

Mayor/President Awasthi stated she attended the San Mateo Consolidated Fire Department Board Meeting on January 12 and Interim Fire Chief Kent Thrasher was appointed Fire Chief. On January 13, she attended the City Council Association of Governments (C/CAG) meeting and they approved the Annual C/CAG Legislative Policies for 2022 and a one-time membership fee increase for the Fiscal Year 2022-2023 and viewed a presentation on the San Mateo Countywide Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) 11 Estimation Tool. She encouraged the public to view agenda items and documents at ccag.ca.gov for more information. She thanked everyone for their contribution to the Vision and Policy Summit on January 12 and thanked Interim City Manager Miller for his leadership.

CLOSED SESSION
Mayor/President Awasthi recessed the meeting into Closed Session for:

1. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)) One Case: Aloma Pericolosi v. City of Foster City (and related cross actions), San Mateo County Superior Court Case No. 20-CIV-05017; and

2. Report Out from Closed Session.

Meeting recessed into Closed Session at 8:34 p.m. and reconvened at 9:10 p.m.

Assistant City Attorney Stock/District Legal Counsel Bazzano reported that no action was taken in Closed Session.

ADJOURNMENT
Hearing no objection from the City Council/EMID Board, Mayor/President Awasthi adjourned the meeting. Meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m.
12 DATE: February 7, 2022

TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council

VIA: Kevin Miller, Interim City Manager

FROM: Louis Sun, Public Works Director

SUBJECT: NEW TRAFFIC SIGNALS AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS PROJECT (CIP 301-681) PURCHASE AUTHORIZATION OF SIGNAL

POLES, MAST-ARMS, AND LUMINAIRE ARMS

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving a purchase order in the amount of $244,320.78 to AZCO Supply, Inc. to purchase traffic signal poles, mast-arms, and luminaire arms for the New Traffic Signals at Various Locations Project (CIP 301-681).

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CIP 301-681 continues the City's program of improving its roadway safety and accessibility for its residents, business owners and their employees, and visitors who walk,bike, and drive in the City. CIP 301-681 is comprised of new traffic signals and related work at the following intersections:
Shell Boulevard and Beach Park Boulevard
Beach Park Boulevard and Gull Avenue (North)
Foster City Boulevard and Polynesia Drive
Edgewater Boulevard and Port Royal Avenue (North)
13 CIP 301-681 has an approved project budget of $3,882,500 that is funded by SB1, Gas Tax, and the General Fund. The traffic signal poles, mast-arms, and luminaire arms currently have a long lead time. For the construction to begin in the summer, the City is pursuing the procurement of long lead equipment prior to the award of the construction contract to minimize construction delays. The recommended action by the City Council authorizes staff to purchase the signal poles and arms. Construction is anticipated to begin this spring.

BACKGROUND
CIP 301-681 includes improvements identified in the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Intersection Evaluation Study (CIP 301-664 – “Study”), as well as input received from the City Council at the February 5, 2018, meeting when the Study was adopted.

At its June 17, 2019 City Council Meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2019-59 authorizing the issuance of a Request for Proposal for Engineering Services for the project.

At its November 18, 2019 City Council Meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2019-108 authorizing the award of a design contract to Traffic Patterns for the signal installation at four intersections. The four intersections are:

1.Beach Park Boulevard and Gull Avenue (North)

2.Foster City Boulevard and Polynesia Drive

3.Edgewater Boulevard and Port Royal Avenue (North)

4.Shell Boulevard and Beach Park Boulevard
The scope of the project includes the installation of new crosswalks, ADA ramps, and signage.

ANALYSIS
CIP 301-681 is part of the City’s ongoing effort to improve roadway safety and accessibility throughout the City of Foster City. Foster City has identified these four intersections as the best candidates for improvement at this time based on past studies and City Council input. The project will help make the intersections ADA compliant and, in some cases, add additional crossings for better pedestrian movements. Along with pedestrian movements, vehicles 14 will also have safer movements at locations where the intersections were previously uncontrolled.

As part of the design process, the pole locations were identified and potholed to avoid any conflicts during the construction phase. The City has already been working with PG&E to power the new signals and will continue to work with adjacent properties during the construction phase.

Based on past trends and the current demands, the signal poles, mast-arms, and luminaire arms have a long lead time. If the contractor were to order the products, it could set the project back an additional 4-6 months. Therefore, the City is requesting to purchase the long lead equipment prior to the advertisement and award of the construction contract to minimize construction delays.

The City has worked with the design consultant to identify the critical products and requested bids. The City received the following three responses for the requested products:

Company AZCO Supply

Jam Services
Inc.

Nor Cal Signal
Supply LLC

Total Bid
Including
Shipping
$244,320.78

$325,084.38

No Bid

Ordering from a supplier directly also reduces the cost of the items since the contractor will not be marking up the products. The results from the bids came in favorable and less than the engineer’s estimate of $330,000.

Plans and specifications for CIP 301-681 are 90% complete and are scheduled for approval at the next City Council Meeting in February. Construction is anticipated to begin in Spring 2022 and will take approximately three (3) months to complete. The project schedule is as follows:

Approval of Plans and Specifications
and Authorization to Call for Bids
February 22, 2022
Bid Opening March 17, 2022
Award of Construction Contract April 18, 2022
Construction Spring/Summer 2022
15 Project Notice of Completion October 2022

FISCAL IMPACT
Funding in the amount of $3,882,500 has been budgeted from SB1, Gas Tax, and the General Fund. Additionally, the school district has funded its fair share of the design costs and will be funding 50% of the intersection improvements at Beach Park and Shell Boulevard. Staff will collect the District’s portion of the construction costs following receipt of bids. There is adequate funding in the current approved budget for the purchase of the poles and signage.

CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREAS
This item is in alignment with the “Facilities and Infrastructure” Value/Priority Area in that this project addresses recommendations identified in the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Intersection Evaluation Study completed in 2018 which studied intersections and identified improvements to improve traffic operations and safety and accessibility for bicyclists and pedestrians.

Attachment:
Attachment 1 - Resolution
Attachment 2 - Azco Supply Inc. Submitted Bid
16 RESOLUTION NO. ___________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOSTER CITY

APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLES, MAST-ARMS, AND

LUMINAIRE ARMS FOR THE NEW TRAFFIC SIGNALS AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS PROJECT (CIP 301-681) FROM AZCO SUPPLY, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $244,320.78

CITY OF FOSTER CITY
WHEREAS, funding in the amount of $3,882,500 is available in the approved project budget for CIP 301-681; and
WHEREAS, based on the Engineer’s Estimate, adequate funding is available in CIP 301-681 to fully fund the purchasing of long lead items consisting of traffic signal poles, mast-arms, and luminaire arms; and
WHEREAS, out of three bids received, AZCO Supply, Inc. submitted the lowest responsible and responsive bid in the amount of $244,320.78.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Foster City does hereby approve a purchase order in the amount of $244,320.78 to AZCO Supply, Inc. to purchase traffic signal poles, mast-arms, and luminaire arms for the new traffic signals at various locations project (CIP301-681).

PASSED AND ADOPTED as a resolution of the City Council of the City of Foster City at the regular meeting held on the 7th day of February 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

RICHA AWASTHI, MAYOR
ATTEST:

PRISCILLA SCHAUS, CITY CLERK
17 City of Foster City
New Traffic Signals at Various Locations
CIP: 301‐681
Description of Work:

City of Foster City is interested in procuring traffic signal pole standards for up to four (4) intersections that the City plans to release for bid in Q1 of 2022 to help reduce material procurement time during construction. The City plans to procure poles for at least one (1) (1) intersection, Beach Park Blvd & Shell Blvd but the City is also soliciting bids for the three (3) additional intersections to determine if pole procurement for the entire four (4) intersection project is of interest to the City Council.

Notes to Bidders:
‐ All pole and mastarm E13costs should include the anchor bolts and pole caps. ‐ Fill in all items in Red color.
‐ Reference Draft 95% plans as needed.
‐ Submit bids by email to: Justin Lai, City of Foster City, [email protected] by Wed., 12‐22‐2021, 3:00 pm Item Intersection Name Pole Type / Signal Mastarm / Luminaire Mastarm Quantity A Beach Park Blvd & Shell Blvd
24‐4‐100 1 $9,267.00 $9,267.00
26‐4‐100 3 $10,161.00 $30,483.00
15TS 2 $2,590.00 $5,180.00
35‐FT Signal Mastarm 1 $3,040.00 $3,040.00
40‐FT Signal Mastarm 3 $3,294.00 $9,882.00
12‐FT Luminaire Arms 6 $797.00 $4,782.00
B Beach Park Blvd & Gull Ave (N) Unit Price Extension
19‐4‐100 1 $8,236.00 $8,236.00
24‐4‐100 1 $9,267.00 $9,267.00
26‐4‐100 1 $10,152.00 $10,152.00
15TS 2 $2,590.00 $5,180.00
35‐FT Signal Mastarm 1 $3,034.00 $3,034.00
45‐FT Signal Mastarm 1 $4,211.00 $4,211.00
12‐FT Luminaire Arms 5 $797.00 $3,985.00
C Foster City Blvd & Polynesia Dr Unit Price Extension
29‐5‐100 2 $16,831.00 $33,662.00
19‐4‐100 2 $8,236.00 $16,472.00
15TS 1 $2,590.00 $2,590.00
25‐FT Signal Mastarm 1 $2,378.00 $2,378.00
30‐FT Signal Mastarm 1 $2,491.00 $2,491.00
50‐FT Signal Mastarm 2 $4,829.00 $9,658.00
12‐FT Luminaire Arms 5 $797.00 $3,985.00
D Edgewater Blvd & Port Royal Dr Unit Price Extension
17‐3‐100 3 $8,251.00 $24,753.00
15TS 3 $2,590.00 $7,770.00
20‐FT Signal Mastarm 3 $2,713.00 $8,139.00
12‐FT Luminaire Arms 6 $797.00 $4,782.00
Summary: $223,379.00
Vendor: AZCO SUPPLY Est. Taxes: 9.375% $20,941.78
KAI SIMS Est. Shipping: $0.00
2250 STEWART ST. #9 Bid Total:
$244,320.78
STOCKTON, CA 95205
209‐943‐2452
[email protected]
Unit Price Extension
ATTACHMENT 2
18 DATE: February 7, 2022

TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council

VIA: Kevin Miller, Interim City Manager

FROM: Louis Sun, Public Works Director

SUBJECT: SPORT COURT RESURFACING PROJECT (CIP 301-701) -

APPROVAL OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND

AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the Plans and Specifications and authorizing the call for bids for the Sport Court Resurfacing Project (CIP 301-701).

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CIP 301-701 consists of tennis, pickleball, and basketball court paving, crack filling, resurfacing, acrylic surfacing, and line striping. The City Council action at this time will allow staff to advertise the project for bidding. Funding in the amount of $200,000 is available in the approved project budget. Construction is anticipated to take approximately thirty (30) calendar days.

BACKGROUND
This project consists of the rehabilitation of basketball and tennis courts at Edgewater Park, basketball and pickleball courts at the Recreation Center/Vibe, and basketball and tennis courts at Catamaran Park.

The tennis, pickleball, and basketball courts are typically resurfaced every five 19 (5) to seven (7) years. To ensure that each court is safe to play on and aesthetically pleasing, an annual site inspection and court condition assessment is performed. The Parks Division’s routine maintenance program for the courts includes blow cleaning the courts on a weekly basis, washing the courts on a monthly basis, and replacing nets and rims as needed.

Upon staff evaluation of the identified courts, staff recommends that the courts be resurfaced as a component of parks infrastructure improvements in Fiscal Year 2021-2022.

ANALYSIS
The Plans and Specifications for CIP 301-701 are complete and ready for bidding. The design of the project was performed in-house by Parks and Public Works staff.

Construction is anticipated to begin in May 2022 (dependent on weather) and will take approximately thirty (30) calendar days to complete. The overall project management will be provided in-house by Engineering, and daily inspection will be provided by Parks staff. The project schedule is as follows:
February 7, 2022 – Approval of Plans and Specifications and Authorization to Call for Bids
February 16 and 23, 2022 – Advertisement
March 8, 2022 – Bid Opening
April 4, 2021 – Award of Contract
May 2022 – Construction
July 2022 – Notice of Completion

FISCAL IMPACT
The Engineer’s Estimate for the construction is approximately $130,000. The total project estimate of $167,500 includes a 25% construction contingency and miscellaneous costs, as shown below.

Aproved Budget - FY 2021/2022 $200.000.00
Engineer's Estimate of Construction $130,000.00
Construction Contingency - 25% $ 32,500.00
Miscellaneous costs (advertising, production
of plans and specs, etc.)
$ 5,000.00
20 Total Estimated Project Cost $167,500.00
Based on the Engineer's Estimate, adequate funding is available to fully fund construction.

City Council approval of the attached resolution will allow staff to advertise the project for bid. A hard-copy of the Plans and Specifications is available for review in the City Council’s office or electronically via:
https://www.fostercity.org/sports_court_plans_specs.

CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREA
This project aligns with the City Council’s adopted "Facilities and Infrastructure" Value/Priority area. The key outcome is to continually provide maintenance of the City’s park infrastructure.

Attachment:
Attachment 1 - Resolution
Link to the Plans and
Specifications: https://www.fostercity.org/sports_court_plans_specs 21 RESOLUTION NO. ___________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOSTER CITY

APPROVING THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING THE CALL FOR BIDS FOR THE SPORT COURT RESURFACING PROJECT (CIP 301-701)

CITY OF FOSTER CITY
WHEREAS, based on City sport court maintenance schedules and per City staff inspection, the identified sport courts are due for resurfacing; and WHEREAS, Plans and Specifications for the Sport Court Resurfacing Project (CIP 301-701) are complete and are ready for bid; and
WHEREAS, funding in the amount of $200,000 is available in the approved budget for CIP 301-701; and
WHEREAS, based on the Engineer’s Estimates, adequate funding is available in CIP 301-701 to fully fund construction.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Foster City does hereby approve the Plans and Specifications for the Sport Court Resurfacing Project (CIP 301-701) and authorize the call for bids.

PASSED AND ADOPTED as a resolution of the City Council of the City of Foster City at the regular meeting held on the 7th day of February, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

RICHA AWASTHI, MAYOR
ATTEST:

PRISCILLA SCHAUS, CITY CLERK
22 DATE: February 7, 2022

TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council

VIA: Kevin Miller, Interim City Manager

FROM: Marlene Subhashini, Community Development Director

SUBJECT: AGREEMENT WITH URBAN PLANNING PARTNERS INC. FOR

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES REGARDING PREPARATION OF

AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) FOR THE

HOUSING ELEMENT AND SAFETY ELEMENT UDPATES AND
APPROPRIATION OF $380,912 FROM THE GENERAL PLAN
MAINTENANCE FUND 128 – EA2021-0004

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution:

1. Authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement with Urban Planning Partners Inc. (UPP), in an amount not to exceed $346,284 for professional contract services regarding preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the updates to the Housing and Safety Elements of the General Plan (“project”); and

2. Authorize a contingency amount of ten percent (10%) of the agreement in the amount of $34,628 with authority given to the City Manager to execute contract amendments up to the contingency amount; and

3. Authorize an appropriation of $380,912 in the General Plan Maintenance Fund Account No. 128-0838-419-4251 for FY 2021-2022 and to carryover the unspent appropriation to FY 2022-2023 for the EIR consulting services.
23 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The proposed project includes preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the update of the Housing and Safety Elements of the General Plan. Due to the scope and nature of the proposed project, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be completed to comply with the provisions of CEQA.

Subsequent to City Council authorization to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) on December 13, 2021, staff issued an RFP on December 14, 2021 to eight (8) environmental consulting firms, soliciting responses to the scope of work for environmental services related to the proposed project. The RFP was also posted on the City’s RFP webpage on December 14, 2021. One response to the RFP was received, from Urban Planning Partners Inc. (UPP).

City staff has reviewed and evaluated the proposal, including the submitted scope of work, schedule, and budget, and recommends that the City Council execute an agreement with UPP for preparation of the EIR for the proposed project. The agreement includes a cost of $346,284. Staff recommends a 10% project contingency in the amount of $34,628 for a total project cost not to exceed $380,912. Staff is also requesting an appropriation of $380,912 from the General Plan Maintenance Fund Account No. 128-0838-419-4251 for FY 2021-2022 and to carryover the unspent appropriation to FY 2022- 2023 for the EIR consulting services.

BACKGROUND

Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65583, the Housing Element of the General Plan is required to be updated every eight (8) years.

The City’s current Housing Element was adopted on February 2, 2015 for the 2015-2023 planning period. Housing Elements for the next cycle (cycle 6) for the San Francisco Bay Area region are required to be adopted by January 31, 2023. The Housing Element identifies and addresses housing needs by including goals, policies, and programs to preserve, improve, and develop housing for all economic segments of the community. This includes identifying housing sites to provide capacity for the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for the 2023-2031 planning period of 1,896 units. Government Code Section 65864 requires that a Housing Element provide adequate sites so that at all times throughout the planning period its remaining unmet share of the RHNA can be accommodated including consideration of a buffer. On December 16, 2021, the ABAG Executive Board approved the Final RHNA plan. Following ABAG’s approval, on January 12, 2022, the California 24 Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) issued a letter approving ABAG’s RHNA plan, marking the final step of a two-year collaborative process. The letter noted that “In updating their Housing Elements, local governments may take RHNA credit for new units approved, permitted, and/or built beginning from the start date of the RHNA projection period, June 30, 2022.”

The analysis for the EIR will be at a “program” level and will assume a wide distribution of the housing units. Per State law, the Safety Element of the General Plan is required to be updated concurrently with the Housing Element. The Safety Element assesses risks and vulnerabilities to hazards and includes goals, policies, and programs to reduce these risks to acceptable levels. Consistent with Government Code Section 65302(g), the Safety Element must address the following topics: seismic hazards; tsunami, seiche, and dam failure; slope instability; subsidence; liquefaction; flooding, wildland and urban fires; and climate change. The Safety Element update will rely heavily on the recently adopted Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) and will also address recent State requirements related to climate change and evacuation planning. The City intends to use the streamlining/tiering provisions of CEQA to the maximum feasible extent, so that future environmental review of specific development and infrastructure projects are expeditiously undertaken, eliminating redundancy.

For a complete background, refer to City Council Staff Report dated December 13, 2021 (Attachment 3).

ANALYSIS

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Requirements

The City of Foster City, as the lead agency, will prepare a Program EIR for the proposed project in accordance with CEQA, implementing the CEQA Guidelines, relevant case law, and City procedures. The Foster City 6th Cycle Housing Element Update, Safety Element Update, and associated Zoning Amendments is considered a “project” under CEQA and is therefore subject to CEQA review. As policy documents, the proposed project provides guidance and sets standards for several areas of mandatory environmental review for later “projects” that would be undertaken by local government and the private sector.

The Program EIR will evaluate potential environmental impacts associated 25 with adoption and implementation of the proposed project. The Program EIR will disclose potential impacts of the proposed project, propose mitigation measures to avoid and/or reduce impacts deemed potentially significant, identify reasonable alternatives, and compare the environmental impacts of the alternatives to the proposed project’s impacts. Pursuant to Section 15063(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, no Initial Study will be prepared. The Program EIR will evaluate the full range of environmental issues contemplated under CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.

The proposed project must comply with the requirements of CEQA (Section 21000 et. seq. of the California Public Resources Code and California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Sections 15000 et. seq.). The purpose of CEQA is to inform decision-makers and the public about the impacts of a proposed project prior to granting approval. To that end, a lead agency is required to disclose a project’s potentially significant environmental effects to the community, decision makers and responsible agencies, identify and implement measures that will limit such detrimental impacts, and consider project alternatives.

As part of the review process, the selected consultant will prepare a Draft EIR. Public notices will be published and mailed, advising the public of the availability of the document for review and the opportunity to submit comments prior to, or during, the Public Hearing. The Planning Commission will subsequently review the Draft EIR and make recommendations to the City Council. Responses to Comments (RTC) related to the Draft EIR which are received prior to the stated deadline will be included in the Final EIR; the City Council will render the final decision regarding certification of the EIR.

To initiate the environmental assessment process, a Request for Proposals (RFP) was sent on December 14, 2021 to eight (8) environmental consulting firms including posting the RFP on the City’s webpage, soliciting responses to the anticipated scope of work for environmental services related to the proposed project. One response to the RFP was received from UPP.

UPP is a land use planning firm that was established in 2009 located in Downtown Oakland and 100-percent woman-owned. City staff has reviewed and evaluated the proposed scope of work, schedule, and budget submitted by UPP. Staff has found the submittal to fulfill the City’s standards and requirements.

UPP has garnered extensive experience in preparing EIRs for projects in 26 Foster City, including, most recently, EIR for the Hotel project at the vacant Visa lot, the Levee Protection Planning and Improvements Project, and, previously, for Foster Square, Lincoln Centre Life Sciences Research Campus, Chess Hatch, Pilgrim Triton EIR addenda, and Gilead Sciences Integrated Corporate Campus Master Plan EIR addenda. The firm’s Principal Lynette Dias has exhibited demonstrable success in environmental analysis and holds in-depth knowledge of legislative requirements, jurisdictional standards, and geography of the local area, having worked on projects in Foster City since 1995. UPP’s Housing Element and related CEQA work clients include the City of Saratoga, Town of Portola Valley, City of Antioch, and Town of Paradise.

The Urban Planning Partners’ team for the EIR for the Update of the Housing and Safety Elements of the General Plan will be directed by Lynette Dias, President, managed by Carla Violet, Associate Principal/Planning Manager.

Technical expertise will be provided by Leslie Carmichael, Principal Planner.

Leslie Carmichael is currently supporting the City’s efforts on the 6th Cycle Housing Element Update and Safety Element Update, with assistance from Carla Violet and Alyssa Chung.

Leslie managed preparation of Foster City’s Housing Element updates in 2001, 2010, and 2015 including assessment of needs, public outreach, site analysis, and development of policies and implementation measures. Leslie prepared municipal code amendments to implement various aspects of the Foster City Housing Element, including reasonable accommodation, tenant anti-discrimination based on source of income, emergency shelters, and density bonus. Carla also has extensive experience working in Foster City as both a contract planner and managing several environmental review projects including some of the projects noted above such as the Lincoln Centre Life Sciences Research Campus, the Levee Protection Planning and Improvements EIR, New Hotel at Metro Center GDP Area EIR, to name a few. As such, UPP is very familiar with the City’s process and requirements and would be able to dive straight into the environmental review process given their extensive knowledge working on the update to Housing and Safety Elements along with City staff and 21 Elements.

As prime consultant, UPP would manage the contract for the Housing and Safety Elements Update EIR and be responsible for the accuracy and quality of all technical documents and represent the team at all public hearings. UPP has assembled a knowledgeable and experienced team of subconsultants as 27 listed below, all of whom have previous experience working for the City with the exception of Sherwood Engineers:
BASELINE Environmental Consulting: Air Quality; Greenhouse Gas Emissions; Energy, Hazards; Hydrology and Water Quality; Geology and Soils; Noise and Vibration
Fehr & Peers: Transportation and Traffic
Maddaus Water Management: Water Supply Assessment
Sherwood Engineers: Wastewater/Sewer Capacity Study
UPP and the assembled team of subconsultants to be overseen by City staff will coordinate to conduct a defensible, reasoned, and cost-effective analysis which will ensure that the project complies with the requirements of CEQA.

The total cost of $346,284, has been deemed a reasonable cost for preparation of the EIR. The additional 10% contingency amount of $34,628 would be expended only if approved through express written authorization by the City.

Scope of Work

As part of preparation of the EIR, the consulting team will conduct environmental analysis on a variety of resource topics as identified in the proposal. The scope of work of environmental analysis includes three sequential phases: (1) Project initiation, (2) Draft EIR, and (3) Response to Comments (RTC) document/Final EIR. The subtasks for each of these phases are further outlined below.

Phase 1: Project Initiation
Project initiation
Scoping Meeting
Review of NOP Comments/Work Program Refinement
Phase 2: Draft EIR
Effects found to be less than significant
Setting, impacts, standard conditions of approval, and mitigation measures
CEQA required assessment conclusions
Alternate analysis
28 Standard Conditions of Approval (SCOAs)/Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) and findings
Draft EIR
Draft EIR hearings
Phase 3: Response to Comments Document/Final EIR
Response to comments document/final EIR
EIR certification hearings
For a detailed description of the above tasks, please refer to UPP’s proposal (Attachment 4).

Project Timeline
Urban Planning Partners proposes to complete the EIR in approximately nine (9) months from the date of initiation of the contract. Such a timeline would tentatively allow for EIR review and certification by the City Council in November 2022.

FISCAL IMPACT

The costs for the EIR consulting services for the preparation of the EIR for the project will be charged to the General Plan Maintenance Fund (Account No. 128-0845-419-4251), a fee charged to building permits for such purposes. As of December 31, 2021, the fund balance is $1,703,990.66.

NEXT STEPS

Once the City Council has authorized the Agreement for Professional Services and has executed the contract with UPP to prepare the EIR, a kick- off meeting attended by staff and the consultant team will be held for review of the project scope of work and timeline to initiate preparation of the Draft EIR.

A Notice of Preparation of an EIR (NOP) was published and mailed on January 26, 2022 requesting input from reviewing agencies and the public regarding the proposed scope of the EIR (Attachment 5). The NOP public review period will begin on January 26, 2022 and end on February 25, 2022.

An Environmental Scoping Session at a Planning Commission public meeting will be held on February 17, 2022 to receive comments on the scope of the 29 environmental analysis.

CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREAS

This action aligns with the City Council adopted Mission & Vision and Strategic Priorities for 2022 as by undertaking work of environmental analysis including conducting investigations, assessments, evaluations, surveys, and technical studies (including VMT, LOS study, water supply assessment and sewer study) related to preparation of the EIR for the proposed project, City will ensure that the decisions are based on environmental factors and a sustainable environment.

Attachments:
Attachment 1 – Resolution
Attachment 2 - Draft Agreement for Professional Services: Urban Planning Partners, Inc.
Attachment 3 – City Council Staff Report dated December 13, 2021 Attachment 4 – Urban Planning Partners Inc. Proposal
Attachment 5 – Notice of Preparation
30 RESOLUTION NO.____________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOSTER CITY AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH URBAN PLANNING PARTNERS INC.

FOR THE PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) TO MEET

THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FOR THE

UPDATE OF THE HOUSING AND SAFETY ELEMENTS OF THE GENERAL PLAN AND APPROPRIATING $380,912 IN THE GENERAL PLAN MAINTENANCE FUND ACCOUNT NUMBER 128-0845-419-4251 FOR THE EIR CONSULTING SERVICES – CITYWIDE – EA2021-0004

CITY OF FOSTER CITY
WHEREAS, the City of Foster City as the ‘lead agency’ has determined that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required to analyze the potential environmental impacts for the proposed City of Foster City 6th Cycle Housing Element Update, Safety Element Update, and Associated Zoning Amendments (collectively referred to as the “proposed project”) in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS, on December 13, 2021, the City Council of the City of Foster City authorized issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP) to solicit proposals for the preparation of an EIR for the update of the Housing and Safety Element of the General Plan; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received one (1) response from Urban Planning Partners (UPP) Inc. to the RFP for the preparation of the EIR for the proposed project; and
WHEREAS, City staff has reviewed and evaluated the proposed scope of work, schedule, and budget submitted by UPP and has found the submittal to fulfill the City’s standards and requirements; and
WHEREAS, UPP’s proposed budget for the preparation of an EIR for the proposed project is $346,284; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends a 10% contingency amount of $34,628 with authority given to the City Manager to execute contract amendments up to the contingency amount such that the total project cost does not exceed $380,912; and WHEREAS, staff is requesting a budget appropriation of $380,912 in the General Plan Maintenance Fund Account Number 128-0845-419-4251 (Contractual Professional Services) for FY2021-22 and to carryover the unspent appropriation to FY2022-23 for the EIR consulting service; and
WHEREAS, on January 26, 2022, the lead agency issued a Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report to solicit comments from agencies and the public regarding the scope of the environmental impact report.
31 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Foster City does hereby authorize:

1. the Mayor to execute an agreement with Urban Planning Partners Inc. dated February 7, 2022 for contractual professional services for the preparation of an EIR for the update to the Housing and Safety Element of the General Plan in an amount of $346,284; and

2. a 10% contingency in the amount of $34,628 with authority given to the City Manager to execute contract amendments up to the contingency amount; and

3. an appropriation of $380,912 in the General Plan Maintenance Fund Account Number 128-0845-419-4251 for FY2021-22 and to carryover the unspent appropriation to FY2022-23 for the EIR consulting services.

PASSED AND ADOPTED as a resolution of the City Council of the City of Foster City at the regular meeting held on the 7h day of February 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

RICHA AWASTHI, MAYOR
ATTEST:

PRISCILLA SCHAUS, CITY CLERK
32 1 Updated 2/7/2022

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
FOR

PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PURSUANT TO THE

REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)

FOR THE UPDATE OF THE HOUSING AND SAFETY ELEMENTS

OF THE GENERAL PLAN

This Agreement is made and entered into as of the 7th day of February 2022 by and between the City of Foster City hereinafter cal led "CITY " and Urban Planning Consultants Inc. hereinafter called "CONSULTANT".

RECITALS

This Agreement is entered into with reference to the following facts and circumstances:

A. That CITY desires to engage CONSULTANT to provide professional services in the CITY;

B. That CONSULTANT is qualified to provide such services to the CITY and;

C. That the CITY has elected to engage the services of CONSULTANT upon the terms and conditions as hereinafter set forth.

1. Services. The services to be performed by CONSULTANT under this Agreement shall inc lude those services set forth in Exhibit A, which is, by this reference, incor porated herein and made a part hereof as though it were fully set forth herein.

Performance of the work specified in said Exhibit A is hereby made an obligation of CONSULTANT under this Agreement, subject to any changes that may be made subsequently heret o upon the mutual written agreement of the said parties.

Where in conflict, the terms of this Agreement supersede and prevail over any terms set forth in Exhibit A.

2. Term; Termination. (a) The term of this Agreement shal l commence upon the date hereinabove written and shall expire upon completion of performance of services hereunder by CONSULTANT . (b)
Notwithstanding the provisions of (a) abov e, either party may terminate this Agreement without cause by giving written not ice not less than ten (10) days prior to the effective date of termination, which date shall be included in said notice. In the event of such termination, CITY shall compensate CONSULTANT for services rendered, and reimburse CONSULTANT for costs and expens es incurred, to the date of termination, calculated in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 3.

In ascertaining the services actually rendered to the date of termination, consideration shall be given both to completed work and work in process of completion. Nothing herein contained shall be deemed a limitation upon 33 2 Updated 2/7/2022
the right of CITY to terminate this Agreement for cause, or otherwise to exercise such rights or pursue such r emedies as may accrue to CITY hereunder.

3. Compensation; Expenses; Payment . CITY shall compensate CONSULTANT for all services performed by CONSULTANT hereunder in an amount based upon CONSULTANT ’s hourly rates during t he time of the performance of said services. A copy of CONSULTANT ’s hourly rates for which services hereunder shall be performed are set forth in CONSULTANT’s fee schedule marked Exhibit “B” hereof, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the combined total of compensation and reimbursement of costs payable hereunder shall not exceed the sum of three hundred forty-six thou sand, two hundred eighty four dollars ($ 346,284), plus a 10% contingency in the amount of thirty four thousand, six hundred twenty eight ($34,628) with au thorization given to the City Manager to exec ute contract amendments up to the cont ingency amount for a total amount of three hundred eighty thousand, nine hundred twelve ($380,912). Invoices for amounts in exc ess of three hundred eighty thousand, nine hundred twel ve ($380,912) shall not be paid unless the performance of services and/or reimbursement of c osts and expense s in excess of said amounts have been approved in advance of performing such services or incurring such costs and expenses by the City Manager (for contracts less than $50,000) or City Council (for contracts $50,000 or more) evidenced by motion duly made and carried and a written contract amendment having been executed.

Compensation and reimbursement of costs and expenses hereunder shall be payable upon monthly billing therefor by CONSULTANT to CITY, which billing shall include an itemized statement, bri efly describing by task and labor category or cost/expense items billed.

4. Additional Services . In the event CITY desires the performance of additional services not otherwise included within the s ervices described in Exhibit A, such service s shall be aut horized in advance of the performance thereof by the City Manager (for contracts less than $50,000) or City Council (for contracts $ 50,000 or more) by motion duly made and carried. Such amendment to this Agreement shall include a description of the services to be performed thereunder, the maximum compensation and reimbursement of costs and expenses payable theref or, the time of performance thereof, and such other matters as the parties deem appropriate for the accomplishment of such services. Except to the e xtent modified by written amendment, all other terms an d conditions of this Agreement shall be deemed incorporated in each such amendment.

5. Records. CONSULTANT shall keep and maintain accurate r ecords of all time expended and costs and ex penses incurred relating to services to be performed by CONSULTANT hereunder. Said records shall be available to CITY for review and copying during regular business hours at 34 3 Updated 2/7/2022
CONSULTANT’s place of business or as o therwise agreed upon by the parties.

6. Authorization. This Agreement becomes effective when endorsed by both parties in the space provided below.

7. Reliance on Professional Skill of CONSULTANT. CONSULTA NT represents tha t it has the necessary professi onal skills to perform the services required and the CITY shall rely on such skills of the CONSULTANT to do and perform the work. In performing services hereunder CONSULTANT shall adhere to the standards generally prevailing for the performance of expert c onsulting services similar to those to be performed by CONSULTANT hereunder.

9. Relationship of Parties . It is u nderstood that the relationship of CONSULTANT to the CITY is that of an independent contractor and all persons working for or under the direction of CONSULTANT are its agents or employees and not agents or employees of the CITY.

10. Schedule. CONSULTANT shall adhere to the schedule set forth in Exhibit A; provided, that CITY shall grant reasonable extensions of time for the performance of such services occasioned by governmental reviews of CONSULTANT’s work product or other unavoidable delays; provided, further, that such unavoidable delay shall not include strikes, lockouts, work stoppages, or other labor disturbances conducted by, or on behalf of, CONSULTANT’s officers or employees.

CONSULTANT acknowledges the importance to CITY of CITY’s Project schedule and agrees to put forth its best professional efforts to perform its services under this Agreement in a manner consistent with that schedule.

11. Indemnity. To the fullest extent allowed by law, CO NSULTANT hereby agrees to defend, indemnify, and save harmless CITY and Estero Municipal Improvement District, its Council, boards, commissions, offic ers, employees and agents, from and against any and all claims, suits, actions liability, lo ss, damage, ex pense, cost (including, without limitation, costs and fees of litigation) of every nature, kind or description, which may be brought against, or suffe red or sust ained by, City of Foster City or Estero Municipal Improvement District, its Council, boards, commissions, officers, employees or agents caused by, or alleged to have been caused by, the negligence, intentional tortuous act or omission, or willful misconduc t of CONSULTANT, its officers, employ ees, subcontractors or agents in the performance of any services or work pursuant to this Agreement.

35 4 Updated 2/7/2022
The duty of CONSULTANT to indemnify and save harmless, as set forth herein, shall include the duty to defend as set f orth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code; provided, however, that nothing herein contai ned shall be construed to require CONSULTANT to indemni fy City of Foster City and Estero Municipal Improvement District, its Council, boards, commissions, officers, employees and agents against any responsibility or liability in contravention of Section 2782 of the California Civil Code.

CONSULTANT’s responsibility for such defense and indemnity obligations shall survive the termination or completion of this Agr eement for the full period of time allowed by law.

The defense and indemnificati on obligations of this agreement are undertaken in addition to, and shall not in any way be limited by, the insurance obligations contained within this Agreement.

12. Insurance. CONSULTANT shall acquire and maintain Workers’ Compensation, employer’s liabi lity, commerci al general liability, owned and non- owned and hired automobile liability, and professional liability insurance coverage relating to CONSULTANT ’s services to be perform ed hereunder covering CITY’s risks in form subject to the approval of the C ity Attorney and/or CITY’s Risk Manager. The minimum amounts of coverage corresponding to the aforesaid categories of insurance per insurable event, shall be as follows:

Insurance Category Minimum Limits

Workers’ Compensation statutory minimum

Employer’s Liability $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease

Commercial General Liability $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate for bodily injury,
personal injury and property damage

Automobile Liability $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage (coverage
required to the extent applic able to
CONSULTANT’s vehicle usage in
performing services hereunder)

1Professional Liability $1,000,000 per claim and aggregate

1 Note: Professional liability insurance coverage is not required if the CONS ULTANT is not providing a service regulated by the state. (Examples of service prov iders regulated by the state are insurance agents, professional engineers, doctors, certif ied public accountants, l awyers, etc.) Please check and initial the following if professional liability is NOT required for this agreement. Recommended ______ [Project Manager] Approved _______[Risk Manager]
36 5 Updated 2/7/2022
It shall be a requirement under this Agreement that any available insurance proceeds broader than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverage requirements and/or limits shall be available to the CITY as an A dditional I nsured. Furthermore, the requirement s for coverage and limits shall be the great er of either ( 1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this Agr eement or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named Insured.

CONSULTANT agrees to include with all subcontractors in their subcontracts the same requirements and provisions of this agreement including the indemnity and insurance requirements to the extent they apply to the sc ope of the subcontractor’s work. Subcontractor s hired by CONSULTANT shall agree to be bound to CONSULTANT and CITY in the same manner and to the same extent as CONSULTANT is bound to CITY under this Agreement and its accompanying documents. Subcontractor s shall fu rther agree to include these same provisions with any sub - subcontractors. A copy of the indemni ty and insurance provisions of this Agreement will be f urnished to the Subcontractor upon request.

CONSULTANT shall require all subcontractors to provide a val id certificate of insurance and the r equired endorsements included in the subcontract agreement and will provide proof of compliance to the CITY prior to commencement of any work by the subcontractor.

Concurrently with the execution of this Agre ement, CON SULTANT shall furnish CITY, on the form included as Exhibit D or similar form, wi th certificates and copies of information or declaration pages of the insurance required hereunder to be included as Exhibit C hereto. With respect to evidence of c ommercial general liability and automobile liab ility insurance coverage, CONSULTANT must al so include in E xhibit C the following original endorsements:

(a) Precluding cancellation or reduction in per occurrence limits before the expiration of thirty (30) days (10 days fo r nonpayment) after CITY shall have received written notification of cancel lation in coverage or reduction in per occurrence limits by first class mail;

(b) Naming the City of Foster City and Estero Municipal Improvement District, its Council, officers, boards, commissions, employees, and agents, as additional insureds; and

(c) Providing tha t CONSULTANT’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance with respect to City of Foster City and Estero Municipal Improvement District, its Counci l, officer s, boa rds, commissions, employees, an d agents, and any insurance or self - insurance maintained by CITY for itself, its Council, officers, boards, commis sions, employees, or agents shall be in excess of CONSULTANT’s insurance and not contributory w ith it.

CONSULTANT and its insurer may not seek contribution from CITY’s insurance or self-insurance.
37 6 Updated 2/7/2022

The limits of insurance required in this agreement may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or exces s insurance shal l contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall al so apply on a primary and non- contributory basis for the benefit of CI TY, to the extent required by this Agreement, before the CITY ’s insurance or self -insurance may be called upon to protect CITY as a named Insured.

All Self-Insured Retentions (SIR) must be disclosed t o CITY for approval and shall not reduce the limits of liability coverage. Policies containing and SIR provision shall provide or be endorsed to provi de that the SIR may be satisfied by either the named CONSULTANT/Named Insured or CITY.

CITY reserves the right to obtain a full certified copy of any insurance policy and endorsements. Failure to exercise this right shall not constitute a waiver of right to exercise later.

Any and all Subcontractors shall agree to be bound to CONSULTANT and CITY in the same manner and to the same extent as CONSULTANT is bound to CITY under this Agreement. Subcontractors shall further agree to include the same requirem ents and provis ions of this Agreement, including the indemnity and insurance requirements, in any agreem ent with sub-subcontractors to the extent that they appl y to the scope of the sub-subcontractor’s work. A copy of the indemnity and insurance provisions of this Agreement shall be furnished to any subcontractor upon request.

CONSULTANT shall maintain insurance as required by this Agreement to the fullest amount allowed by law and shall maintain insurance for a minimum of five (5) years following complet ion of this pro ject or service.

In the event CONSULTANT fails to obtain or maintain compl eted operations coverage as required by this Agreement, the CITY at its sole discretion may purchase the coverage required and the cost will be paid by CONSULTANT.

13. WORKERS' COMPENSATION. CONSULTANT certifies that he is aware of the provisions of the Labor Code of the State of California which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self -insurance in accordance with the pr ovisions of that Code, and CONS ULTANT certifies that he will comply with su ch provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this agreement.

14. NON-DISCRIMINATION. The CONSULTANT will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for e mployment because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. The CONSULTANT will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are em ployed and the employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, color, reli gion, sex or na tional origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to the 38 7 Updated 2/7/2022
following: employmen t, advancement, demotion, transfer, recruitment, or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation, and se lection f or tra ining, including apprenticeship . The CONSULTANT shall at all times be in compliance with the requirements of the Federal Americans With Disabili ties Act (Public Law 101- 336) which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability by publi c entitie s. Th e CONSULTANT agrees to post in conspicuous places available to employees an d applicants f or employment any notices provided by the CITY setting forth the provisions of this non-discrimination clause.

15. Notice. All notices required by thi s Agreement shall be given to the CITY and CONSULTANT in writing, by first class mail, pos tage prepaid, addressed as follows:

CITY: City of Foster City
610 Foster City Boulevard
Foster City, CA 94404-2299
Attention: Kevin Miller, Interim City Manager

CONSULTANT: Urban Planning Partners Inc.
388 17th Street, Suite 230
Oakland, CA 94612
Lynette Dias
President/Principal
[email protected]

16. Non-Assignment. This Agreement is not assignable either in w hole or in part.

17. Amendments. This Agreeme nt may be amended or modif ied only by written agreement signed by both parties.

18. Validity. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provisio n of this Agreement.

19. Governing Law . This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California and any suit or action initiated by either party shall be brought in the County of San Mateo, California. In the event of lit igation between the parties hereto to enforce any provision of the Agreem ent, the unsuccessful party will pay the reasonable attorney’s fees and expenses of litigation of the successful party.

20. Mediation. Should any dis pute arise out of this Agreement , the parties shall meet in mediation and attem pt to reach a resolution w ith the assistance of a mutuall y acceptable mediator. Neither party shall be permitted to file legal action without first meeting in mediation and mak ing a good faith attempt to reac h a mediated res olution. The costs of the mediator, if any, shall be pai d equally by the parties. If a mediated settlement is reached neither party shall be deemed the prevailing party 39 8 Updated 2/7/2022
for purposes of the settlement and each party shall bear its own legal costs.

21. Conflict of Interest. CONSULTANT may serve other clients, but none who are active within the City of Foster City or who conduct business that would place CONSULTANT in a "conflict of interest" as that term is defined in State law.

22. Entire Agreement . Th is Agreement, including Exhibit s A, B C, and D , comprises the entire Agreement.

IN WI TNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed on the date first above written by their res pective officers duly authorized in that behalf.

CITY OF FOSTER CITY

Dated: _________________________________ Richa Awasthi, Mayor
(for contracts $50,000 or more)

ATTEST:

Dated: ________________________________ Priscilla Schaus, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM

Dated:

Benjamin Stock, City Attorney

CONSULTANT

Dated:

Lynette Diaz, President/Principal, Urban
Planning Partners Inc.

40 13

3. A PPROACH & S COPE OF W ORK
This section outlines Urban Planning Partners’ recommended approach and scope of work for preparing the Housing and Safety Elements Update EIR. Urban Planning Partners will lead the environmental review process, including defining the project for purposes of CEQA, conducting the necessary analysis, preparing the appropriate CEQA document and associated notices, and then publishing and distributing.

PROJECT APPROACH
The approach detailed in the following scope of work is generally consistent with the environmental scope of work described in the request for proposals (RFP) with a couple exceptions that we believe will make for a more efficient CEQA process without compromising the quality of the analysis or review of the project. Our recommended modifications are described below.  Dispense of Initial Study. The scope of work outlined in the RFP includes preparing an Initial Study to identify, and determine the extent of, potentially significant environmental impacts resulting from the project. We do not recommend preparing an Initial Study, particularly since the city has committed to preparing an EIR. Based on this scope of work, the topics anticipated to not be significant or less than significant can be listed in the NOP and then briefly analysed/discussed in a section of the EIR called Effects Found Not to be Significant. The Effects Found Not to be Significant or Less than Significant chapter will include the same analyses as would typically be presented in an Initial Study, but outside of the standard checklist format (see Task 2A below).

Urban Planning Partners regularly uses this approach and finds that it increases efficiency and reduces cost by allowing the NOP to be published without preparing and reviewing an Initial Study independent of the EIR. It also places the results of the initial environmental analyses in the same document as the detailed analyses, allowing lay readers to both locate all conclusions and follow the review process more easily.
 Technical Memoranda. The RFP references the city’s desire for the environmental team to prepare technical memoranda for several resource topics. Instead, we propose preparing more comprehensive EIR sections that contain all necessary technical information that makes it easier for EIR readers and reviewers to find relevant information, reduces the length of the EIR, and ensures that the findings made by our technical consultants are communicated clearly and effectively to readers of the EIR sections. We find preparing abbreviated EIR sections that defer to technical memoranda or studies to be less user-friendly to most reviewers in that it is more material to review, increases the likelihood of inconsistencies between the technical study/memorandum and the information in the EIR section, and creates redundancies if the same information is contained both in the technical study/memorandum and the EIR section.

Exhibit A
41 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES J ANUARY 2022

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND S AFETY E LEMENT S U PDATE EIR 14 SCOPE OF WORK
The following scope of work includes three sequential phases:

1. Project Initiation,

2. Draft EIR, and

3. R
esponse to Comments Document/Final Environmental Impact Report An ongoing project management and meetings component that will occur throughout the duration of the project is also included. This component includes general project management, staff and project meetings, and preparation of the administrative record.

A summary of our proposed work program is provided in Table 2. All the tasks necessary to complete an EIR are detailed in the scope of work.

PROJECT INITIATION
The following tasks include a kick-off meeting, base map preparation, data gathering and evaluation, and the project description.

TASK 1A. PROJECT INITIATION
The project initiation task for the project will provide an opportunity for the Urban Planning Partners team to collaborate with the City to refine our recommended scope of work and project schedule.

1. Kick-Off Meeting
Urban Planning Partners will meet with City staff to discuss expectations regarding the tasks to be undertaken as part of the environmental documentation effort. We will prepare and circulate an agenda for this meeting. Topics for discussion at this meeting will include:
 Team composition and respective roles of consultants and City staff.  The City’s desired approach to involving various City departments during preparation of the EIR and review of the administrative and screencheck drafts (or portions thereof).  When and how frequently we should hold standing meetings.  Defining the project for CEQA.
 Review and confirmation of what topics can be focused out and addressed as part of an “Effects F
ound Not to be Significant” section included in the Draft EIR.  Determining what should be incorporated in the cumulative scenario.  Potential project alternatives.
 Project schedule.
42 J ANUARY 2022 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND SAFETY E LEMENT U PDATE S EIR 15 TABLE 2 W ORK PROGRAM SUMMARY
PHASE 1. PROJECT INITIATION
TASK 1A. PROJECT INITIATION

1. Kick-Off Meeting

2. Data Gathering and Evaluation

3. Base Map Preparation

4. Project Description
TASK 1B. SCOPING MEETING
TASK 1C. REVIEW OF NOP COMMENTS/WORK PROGRAM REFINEMENT PHASE 2. DRAFT EIR
TASK 2A. EFFECTS FOUND TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT

1. Agriculture and Forest Resources

2. Biological Resources

3. Cultural Resources

4. Tribal Cultural Resources

5. Geology and Soils

6. Hydrology and Water Quality

7. Mineral Resources

8. Recreation

9. Wildfire
TASK 2B. SETTING, IMPACTS, STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, AND MITIGATION MEASURES

1. Land Use and Planning

2. Transportation and Traffic

3. Air Quality

4. Greenhouse Gas Emissions

5. Energy

6. Hazards and Hazardous Materials

7. Noise and Vibration

8. Population and Housing

9. Public Services and Utilities

10. Aesthetics
TASK 2C. CEQA REQUIRED ASSESSMENT CONCLUSIONS
TASK 2D. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
TASK 2E. STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL/MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM AND

FINDINGS
TASK 2F. DRAFT EIR

1. Administrative Draft EIR

2. Screencheck Draft EIR

3. Public Review Draft EIR
TASK 2G. DRAFT EIR HEARINGS
PHASE 3. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS DOCUMENT/FINAL EIR
TASK 3A. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS DOCUMENT/FINAL EIR

1. Administrative Draft RTC Document

2. Screencheck Draft RTC Document

3. Final RTC Document
TASK 3B. EIR CERTIFICATION HEARINGS

PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND MEETINGS

STAFF AND PROJECT TEAM MEETINGS

ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD

GENERAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT
43 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES J ANUARY 2022

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND S AFETY E LEMENT S U PDATE EIR 16 2. Data Gathering
Existing data and analyses applicable to the Housing and Safety Elements Update EIR will be collected and evaluated to gain an understanding of the available information that will be used as part of the environmental review. Urban Planning Partners will review relevant planning policy and CEQA documentation previously prepared.

Urban Planning Partners will also contact responsible agencies or potentially affected agencies, including Caltrain, Caltrans, San Mateo County Airport Land Use Commission, and City departments that may have information about the project site or insight into potential project impacts.

3. Base Map Preparation
A base map of the housing opportunity sites will be prepared by Urban Planning Partners using the best available map information from the City. The base map will be used to illustrate streets, the relationship to surrounding areas, topography, surrounding land uses, and General Plan and zoning designations. The base map will be available for consultant and staff use during meetings and presentations.

4. Project Description
Crafting an appropriately detailed and illustrated project description is often one of the more challenging elements of an EIR. Urban Planning Partners will prepare a project description based on materials provided by the City. The project description will include a discussion of key characteristics of the Housing and Safety Elements, project objectives, details of the Housing and Safety Elements relative to CEQA, the required approvals, and the anticipated buildout.

A draft of the project description will be submitted to the City for review and acceptance prior to the Urban Planning Partners team conducting any quantitative impact analyses. Up to two drafts will be prepared in response to comments received.

TASK 1B. SCOPING MEETING
Urban Planning Partners will attend one public scoping session before the Planning Commission. After the meeting, Urban Planning Partners will summarize and review all public comments and identify any changes required in the work program (see Task 1C). We will ensure that each substantive comment received, including written and verbal, related to the scope of the EIR is addressed in the EIR.

TASK 1C. REVIEW OF NOP COMMENTS/WORK PROGRAM REFINEMENT It may be necessary to refine the scope of work in accordance with information compiled in the above subtasks and based on the preliminary findings. Following completion of the public comment period and receipt and review of all the comments on the NOP (see Task 1B), Urban Planning Partners will work with planning staff to refine the scope of work, if necessary, to address any new environmental issues 44 J ANUARY 2022 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND SAFETY E LEMENT U PDATE S EIR 17 identified in the NOP comments. Urban Planning Partners will present the revised scope of work and budget for review and approval to the City.

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
As part of this phase, the Urban Planning Partners team will prepare the analysis necessary for each environmental topic relevant to the project in accordance with the City’s thresholds. The following topics will be analyzed as potentially significant impacts: land use and planning, transportation, air quality, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, energy, hazards and hazardous materials, noise and vibration, population and housing, public services and utilities, and aesthetics. All other topics are anticipated to be addressed as effects found to be less than significant (see Task 2A below). An alternatives analysis will also be completed as part of the Draft EIR (see Task 2D below).

TASK 2A. EFFECTS FOUND TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT
Urban Planning Partners anticipates that the project’s impact relative to several environmental topics will not be significant including: agriculture and forest resources, biological resources, cultural resources, tribal cultural resources, geology and soils, hydrology and water quality, mineral resources, recreation, and wildlife.

We will provide a brief discussion of each of these topics and document why the project’s impact will not be significant. We anticipate the level of analysis and discussion for these topics will be similar to what is typically be included in an Initial Study. The City’s Standard Conditions of Approval will be referenced where applicable.

TASK 2B. SETTING, IMPACTS, STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, AND

MITIGATION MEASURES
The work conducted as part of this task will be incorporated into the administrative Draft EIR and will constitute the major portion of the Draft EIR. Each environmental topic section will include: 1) a description of the existing setting relevant to the proposed project including regulatory setting; 2) significance criteria; 3) impacts evaluation; and 4) Standard Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures necessary to reduce potentially significant impacts. This scope does not include the preparation of separate technical reports; all information and findings will be detailed in the EIR and as appropriate technical data in appendices to the EIR.

1. Land Use and Planning
Urban Planning Partners will prepare a land use and planning section for the project. This section will evaluate the potential impacts to land uses within the project area from the implementation of the Housing and Safety Element Updates. This section will be based on the project and will discuss compatibility of proposed land use changes with existing land uses in the surrounding areas. Direct impacts are those which result in land use incompatibilities, the division of neighborhoods or 45 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES J ANUARY 2022

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND S AFETY E LEMENT S U PDATE EIR 18 communities, or interference with other land use plans, including habitat and/or wildlife conservation plans. Indirect impacts are secondary effects resulting from land use policy implementation, such as an increase in demand for public utilities or services, or increased traffic on roadways. Indirect impacts will be addressed in other topical sections.

2. Transportation and Traffic
Fehr & Peers is preparing the transportation analysis for the project. Urban Planning Partners will review their analysis and determine if any additional information or updates are necessary and incorporate their analysis and findings into the transportation section of the EIR. Urban Planning Partners has a long- standing relationship with Fehr & Peers and are working collaboratively on several current projects.

Transportation tasks will be incorporated into the EIR prepared for both the Housing Element and Safety Element Updates. Transportation analysis will be performed in conformance with CEQA requirements, OPR guidance, Caltrans, and C/CAG.

A. Vehicle Miles Traveled Assessment
Fehr & Peers’ analysis will consider the transportation impacts of the Foster City’s Housing Element Update leveraging Fehr & Peers’ knowledge of the current CEQA and C/CAG Guidelines. Impacts to the transportation system related to the Housing Element Update will be based on the vehicle-miles of travel (VMT) generated by future residents of the expanded number of sites, as well as the increased intensity of development on the sites. The analysis will capture the proposed changes in use at each identified site, relative to the use and intensity identified in the current General Plan. Fehr & Peers will leverage our experience with statewide VMT best practices and our understanding of the unique transportation conditions and history of land use planning in Foster City and San Mateo County to ensure that the Housing Element Update analysis balances the needs of statewide housing and greenhouse gas reduction goals with local community goals.

Because Foster City has not yet adopted vehicle miles traveled (VMT) thresholds of significance for CEQA, they will use OPR and C/CAG guidance to establish the appropriate VMT metric, methodology, significance threshold, and mitigation measures if applicable.

For this analysis, Fehr & Peers assumes new housing units will be distributed throughout the City and will be analyzed as a group. Site-specific VMT impact analysis will not be prepared.

Establishing VMT Evaluation Approach
C/CAG has recently released VMT methodology and threshold information for San Mateo County. Foster City will need to select a project-specific impact threshold for the Housing and Safety Elements Update EIR. Guidance provided in the OPR non-binding advisory document Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, and the C/CAG guidance referenced above which will be used to present to Foster City with options for selecting a methodology and thresholds of significance with respect to VMT impact evaluation. Fehr & Peers will discuss the memorandum in a conference call or meeting with City staff and participate in a Planning Commission meeting to review the material, if 46 J ANUARY 2022 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND SAFETY E LEMENT U PDATE S EIR 19 requested. At the conclusion of this step, a methodology and thresholds will be selected by the City, for use in the Housing and Safety Elements Update EIR. This scope does not include detailed VMT modeling for Foster City and will rely on published data. Deliverable for this task includes a brief memorandum summarizing background information on the updated CEQA Guidelines implementing SB 743 and a recommended evaluation approach for this EIR.

Establishing Existing Setting
Once the final set of Housing Element sites is completed by City staff, Fehr & Peers will prepare a high- level description of the citywide transportation network, including the roadway network, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and transit service, with additional information provided for study facilities identified for the Non-CEQA Intersection and Roadway analysis task. They assume that the City will provide us map files (GIS, adobe illustrator) needed to create maps showing these facilities. Fehr & Peers will provide a regulatory setting including applicable plans and policies from the City’s General Plan, C/CAG, and Caltrans.

VMT Assessment
Fehr & Peers will conduct a VMT assessment for the selected housing sites. The sites will be analyzed as a group, consistent with a programmatic EIR approach. Using the methodology and thresholds recommend in the earlier task, Fehr & Peers will determine which (if any) of the Housing Element sites may be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact to transportation based on VMT. This may include sites that are located within one-half mile of high-quality transit based on the City’s definition of high-quality transit. Fehr & Peers will use the C/CAG-VTA Travel Demand Model to assess the following VMT metrics for the baseline and cumulative scenarios, both without the Housing and Safety Elements Update (i.e., uses under the existing General Plan and Zoning) and with the Housing and Safety Elements Update (i.e., with the proposed Housing and Safety Element Updates uses).

1. Citywide – All VMT

2. Citywide – Home based VMT

3. Housing Element sites as a group, including sites screened out from transportation VMT impacts – A
ll VMT (for use in the air quality and greenhouse gas analysis) This task includes a high-level review of the C/CAG-VTA Travel Demand Model land use assumptions within Foster City, and adjustment if appropriate to better-represent current development expectations per current General Plan zoning for the “No Project” case. Fehr & Peers will also check key model outputs such as trip lengths for reasonableness. Note that the project budget does not include a sub-area validation for Foster City. If, in the course of this work, substantial model performance issues are identified, they will prepare a separate proposal to address those issues.

Fehr & Peers will assess the VMT impacts using the selected thresholds of significance. If significant impacts are identified, they will develop mitigation measures including travel demand management measures, urban design measures, infrastructure improvements to support more bicycling and walking, transit service subsidies, and others as appropriate. Fehr & Peers will assess the potential VMT reductions 47 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES J ANUARY 2022

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND S AFETY E LEMENT S U PDATE EIR 20 which could be achieved with the measures based on published literature and determine the final impact significance with mitigation.

Other Checklist Items
Fehr & Peers will conduct the assessment for the other three CEQA Guidelines Appendix G checklist criteria (related to transit/bicycle/pedestrian plan conflicts, related to increasing hazards, and related to emergency access), and will develop mitigation measures if needed to address any significant impacts.

As with the VMT analysis, this analysis will be performed for the group of all Housing Element sites; site- specific analysis will not be performed.

Documentation and Meetings
Fehr & Peers will prepare the following documents:
 Evaluation Approach Memo
 Admin Draft TIA (for incorporation into ADEIR)
 Public Review Draft TIA (for incorporation into DEIR)  Response to public comments on DEIR
This scope of work assumes that only minor editorial comments are received on the draft report. As the number and complexity of public comments on the DEIR is unknown, they have budgeted 16 hours to review and assist in preparing responses. Should the number of comments and their complexity exceed the level of effort, a budget amendment would be necessary.

Fehr & Peers will attend up to four staff-level meetings or calls and up to two public hearings as a part of this scope. Attendance at additional meetings or public hearings can be added for an additional budget, if desired.

B. Intersection / Roadway Analysis (Non-CEQA)
As the new CEQA Guidelines specify that Level of Service (LOS) may not be used to determine CEQA impacts, Fehr & Peers will prepare a separate non-CEQA assessment for evaluation of consistency with General Plan policies. They understand that the three key concerns of City staff and residents are related to freeway ramp operations in the City, key arterial operations, and local neighborhood streets. The General Plan is not prescriptive in the methodologies used to evaluate roadways and intersections; they propose a flexible approach to be confirmed with City staff as part of the scoping process to effectively inform residents and decision makers of the relationship between traffic and housing development.

Data Collection
Fehr & Peers will collect data at up to 5 locations to be determined in consultation with City staff. They understand that some intersection count data was recently collected in 2019 (pre-COVID) and may be used in this analysis. Fehr & Peers propose to collect new 2022 data at key overlapping locations to compare to 2019 data to 2022 data to determine the validity of using 2022 data. Data collected will likely include peak hour turning movement counts at key intersections, 24-hour roadway counts at key 48 J ANUARY 2022 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND SAFETY E LEMENT U PDATE S EIR 21 arterials, and 72-hour driveway counts and some recent housing developments. Some new housing developments have recently been constructed in Foster City. Fehr & Peers proposes to collect data at new driveways to determine the effect these housing developments have had on the transportation network compared to expectations. Data collection may also include some “Big Data” from cell phone providers to help answer questions related to trip origins/destinations and to compare local traffic to regional cut through traffic.

Optional Data Collection
If more intersection count data is needed, Fehr & Peers can collect data at an additional 20 locations to be determined in consultation with City staff.

LOS and Roadway Analysis
Fehr & Peers will evaluate intersection LOS, arterial LOS, and local street operations at study locations under the following scenarios to help address key traffic concerns:
 Existing
 Cumulative 2040 No Project
 Cumulative 2040 Plus Project
Documentation and Meetings
Fehr & Peers will prepare the following documents:
 Non-CEQA Analysis Memo
 Public-facing figures/diagrams summarizing local/regional traffic issues

3. Air Quality
Baseline will prepare an EIR section to evaluate potential impacts related to air quality from buildout of the proposed housing developments. The analysis will include an overview of the environmental setting and regulatory framework. The primary air quality concerns will likely be related to the net increase in criteria air pollutant emissions and the exposure of nearby sensitive receptors (e.g., residences) to toxic air contaminants (TACs) during project construction and operation. The project would emit diesel particulate matter (DPM), a type of TAC, from the use of diesel-powered equipment for construction and the emergency diesel generators (if any) during operation.

Potential air quality impacts will be assessed in accordance with the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (BAAQMD’s) CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. The net emissions of criteria air pollutants during project construction and operation will be estimated using the most current version of the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod). Health risks associated with DPM emissions during project construction and operation will be assessed for the largest proposed housing development near sensitive receptors (i.e., a worst-case scenario) based on the results of air dispersion modeling. If mitigation measures are required to reduce health risks associated with the largest housing development, then the smaller proposed housing developments will have the option to either comply with the measures or complete a separate project-specific health risk assessment. Baseline will also provide a cumulative 49 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES J ANUARY 2022

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND S AFETY E LEMENT S U PDATE EIR 22 health risk assessment for the largest proposed housing development that includes existing and foreseeable future sources of TACs (e.g., freeways, major roadways, and stationary sources) within 1,000 feet of the housing development in accordance with the BAAQMD’s CEQA Guidelines. The health risks from the cumulative sources of TACs will be evaluated using the BAAQMD’s online air quality analysis tools.

Baseline assumes that the City will provide information about existing conditions, proposed construction schedules, and foreseeable future projects. Baseline assumes that the transportation and traffic studies completed as part of the environmental analysis will include information about the project’s anticipated trip generation, vehicle miles traveled, and general fleet mix. Baseline will include the City’s standard Conditions of Approval regarding air quality, and other pertinent laws and regulations in the analysis. The project’s estimated net emissions of criteria air pollutants and health risk impacts will be compared with the BAAQMD’s recommended thresholds of significance. Baseline will prepare mitigation measures, as needed, to reduce any significant air quality impacts to less-than-significant levels, if feasible.

4. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Baseline will prepare an EIR section to evaluate potential impacts related to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from buildout of the proposed housing developments. The analysis will include an overview of the environmental setting and regulatory framework. In accordance with BAAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, Baseline will provide a qualitative analysis on the project’s consistency with applicable state and local greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction plans, such as the BAAQMD’s 2017 Clean Air Plan, Foster City Climate Action Plan, and BAAQMD’s 2030 and 2050 GHG reduction goals.

The net GHG emissions from the proposed project will be estimated using the most current version of CalEEMod. The BAAQMD is in the process of drafting new GHG emission thresholds for 2030 and beyond; however, it’s unclear when the new thresholds will be adopted at this time. The Foster City Climate Action Plan has established the long-term GHG emission reduction goals of 20 percent below the 2005 levels by 2025 and 80 percent below the 2005 levels by 2050. Therefore, Baseline will recommend a project-specific threshold for GHG emissions based on the City’s GHG reduction goals and any updates (if available) to the BAAQMD’s GHG thresholds.

Baseline assumes that the City will provide information about existing conditions, proposed construction schedules, and foreseeable future projects. Baseline assumes that the transportation and traffic studies completed as part of the environmental analysis will include information about the project’s anticipated trip generation, vehicle miles traveled, and general fleet mix. Baseline will include the City’s standard conditions of approval regarding GHGs, and other pertinent laws and regulations in the analysis. Baseline will prepare mitigation measures to reduce any significant impacts to a less-than-significant level, if feasible.

5. Energy
Baseline will prepare an EIR section to evaluate potential impacts related to energy resources. The analysis will include an overview of the environmental setting and regulatory framework. Baseline will quantify the project’s operational energy use based on the most current version of CalEEMod. Baseline 50 J ANUARY 2022 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND SAFETY E LEMENT U PDATE S EIR 23 will summarize the project’s proposed energy-saving features, projected energy consumption, consistency with applicable energy efficiency policies and standards, and the potential need for new energy supplies or facilities to serve the project.

6. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Baseline will prepare an EIR section to evaluate potential impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials at the proposed housing developments. The analysis will include an overview of the environmental setting and regulatory framework. Baseline will review previous sites investigations (if available) and environmental records from the State Water Board’s GeoTracker database to identify potential contamination in soil and groundwater that could be disturbed during construction of the proposed housing developments. Potential impacts related emergency response and excavation routes will be discussed. Baseline will include the City’s standard conditions of approval regarding hazards and hazardous materials, and other pertinent laws and regulations in the analysis. Mitigation measures will be prepared, as needed, to reduce any potentially significant impacts to less-than-significant levels.

7. Noise and Vibration
Baseline will prepare an EIR section to evaluate potential impacts related to noise and vibration. The analysis will include an overview of the environmental setting and regulatory framework. Noise and vibration generated during construction and operation of the proposed housing developments could expose nearby sensitive receptors to levels that exceeds the standards specified in the Foster City General Plan and Municipal Code.

The primary sources of existing ambient noise levels in the City are from roadways. The existing noise levels in the City will be discussed based on ambient noise level measurements reported in the City’s General Plan and/or more recent studies (if available). Baseline will evaluate the construction and operational noise and vibration impacts from the largest proposed housing development (i.e., worst-case scenario) and prepare mitigation measures, as needed, to reduce any potentially significant impacts to less-than-significant levels, if feasible.

8. Population and Housing
Urban Planning Partners will prepare the EIR analysis of potential impacts related to population and housing. This section will identify current conditions and trends and describe the setting of population, housing, business activities, and employment in the City. The section also will describe the contributions of the project to citywide growth. Urban Planning Partners will complete a plan-level evaluation of the extent to which the project would induce substantial population growth within the context of existing citywide and regional planning efforts. The assessment will include a plan-level, qualitative analysis of whether the project would induce substantial population and employment growth directly (by the new development) or indirectly (by infrastructure and other improvements), and whether such growth would exceed that contemplated in the City’s General Plan and thereby generate impacts not previously considered or analyzed.
51 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES J ANUARY 2022

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND S AFETY E LEMENT S U PDATE EIR 24 Consistent with the City’s significance criteria, the assessment of impacts will address the potential for the project to result in displacement of existing housing and residents and/or the displacement of businesses and jobs, and whether any such displacement would involve substantial numbers of housing, people, businesses, and/or jobs, necessitating the construction of replacement housing or business facilities elsewhere, in excess of that contemplated in the City’s general plan.

9. Public Services and Utilities
Urban Planning Partners will describe the existing utility infrastructure and public services that serve the city based on information available from the utility providers. The following public services and utility systems will be evaluated: schools, police, fire, waste disposal, wastewater, stormwater and water supply, telecommunications, and electricity and gas.

Utilities and public services are provided to the city by numerous agencies. The EIR will include a concise summary of these agencies, their individual responsibilities, and existing utility and service constraints.

Urban Planning Partners will contact each utility and service provider to determine if they have any concerns about providing service to the project. The EIR will examine the demand for services generated by the project, and the physical impacts of this demand on existing infrastructure. Urban Planning Partners will also evaluate the potential impact to public safety responses, including fire trucks and emergency vehicles access and circulation.

Urban Planning Partners also understands that the project will also require a Water Supply Assessment (WSA). This WSA will be prepared by Maddaus Water Management in accordance with current Foster City standards for per project water needs (see Appendix A).

Sherwood Design Engineers will provide a wastewater/sewer capacity study. It will include modeling of the existing sewer system; analysis of the anticipated wastewater flows from the new development; analysis to identify impacts to the existing system and required improvements; and documenting the analysis and findings.

10. Aesthetics
Urban Planning Partners will analyze the project’s potential aesthetic impacts to the visual appearance and character of the surrounding area from implementation of the project. It will include a discussion of the qualitative aesthetic characteristics of the existing environment that would be potentially degraded by implementation of the project and assesses the potential impacts related to scenic vistas, scenic highways, visual character, and light and glare.

If potentially significant impacts are identified, mitigation measures will be recommended to reduce the level of impact to a less-than-significant level to the extent feasible.

TASK 2C. CEQA REQUIRED ASSESSMENT CONCLUSIONS
Urban Planning Partners will prepare the appropriate conclusions to fulfill CEQA requirements by providing an assessment of several mandatory impact categories, including:
52 J ANUARY 2022 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND SAFETY E LEMENT U PDATE S EIR 25  Significant unavoidable environmental impacts,
 Significant irreversible environmental changes, and
 Relationship between local short-term uses of the environment and long-term productivity.

Urban Planning Partners will recommend which topics will be less than significant and will provide a brief discussion of each of these topics and document why the project’s impact will not be significant. We anticipate the level of analysis and discussion for these topics will be like what is typically included in an Initial Study.

TASK 2D. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
The Urban Planning Partners team will identify and evaluate up to three alternatives to the project, one of which will be the CEQA-required No Project Alternative. The alternatives will be developed in consultation with City staff. The alternatives will be based in part on the significant impacts of the project that are identified during the technical analysis phase of the Draft EIR process.

According to the CEQA Guidelines, alternatives can be evaluated in less detail than the project, and therefore we would propose that the alternatives analysis in the EIR be undertaken at a qualitative level.

The discussion will be of sufficient detail to evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of each alternative and to provide some qualitative conclusions regarding the alternatives. Based on this analysis, the Environmentally Superior Alternative will be identified (as required by CEQA).

TASK 2E. STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND MITIGATION MONITORING

AND REPORTING PROGRAM AND FINDINGS
Urban Planning Partners will prepare a Standard Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (SCAMMRP) for this project and will identify responsibility for implementing and monitoring each mitigation measure, along with monitoring triggers and reporting frequency. The draft SCAMMRP will be submitted to the City for review with either the Public Review Draft EIR or the Administrative Draft Final EIR (depending on the City’s preference). The final SCAMMRP will be included with the Final EIR. Urban Planning Partners will prepare the CEQA findings, and if necessary, a Statement of Overriding Considerations.

TASK 2F. DRAFT EIR

1. Administrative Draft EIR
The information developed in Tasks 2A through 2E will be organized into an administrative Draft EIR.

Please note we recommend including the cumulative analysis within each environmental resource topic section (and as such, we have not included as a separate chapter below). The EIR is expected to include the following components:
 Introduction
 Executive Summary
 Project Description
53 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES J ANUARY 2022

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND S AFETY E LEMENT S U PDATE EIR 26  Environmental Regulatory Setting, Impacts, Standard Conditions of Approval, and Mitigation Measures
 Effects Found not to be Significant or Less than Significant with Standard Conditions of Approval a
nd Mitigation Measures
 Other CEQA-Required Sections
 Alternatives
 EIR Preparers and References
 Technical Appendices (as needed)
Urban Planning Partners will review recent environmental documents (complete and/or in process) to make certain that approaches, assumptions, methodologies, and impact conclusions for the project are consistent with other environmental documents. Where appropriate, Urban Planning Partners will coordinate and discuss such with subconsultants working on the project.

Urban Planning Partners will prepare one (1) electronic copy of the administrative Draft EIR and submit to the City for review and comment. We will accommodate on-going dialogue with the City between completion of the administrative Draft EIR and the screencheck Draft EIR.

2. Screencheck Draft EIR
Upon receipt of the City’s consolidated comments on the administrative draft, Urban Planning Partners will prepare a screencheck draft. A redline version of the draft will be provided, showing the explicit changes made. Urban Planning Partners will provide one (1) electronic copy of the screencheck draft for review and comment.

3. Public Review Draft EIR
Urban Planning Partners will make necessary revisions to the screencheck draft and prepare the Draft EIR for publication. We will provide ten (10) hard copies and one (1) electronic copy, plus all appendices to the City for distribution. Urban Planning Partners will prepare the Notice of Authorization (NOA) and will assist the City with noticing and distribution.

Urban Planning Partners will maintain all materials referenced in the environmental document and promptly provide such materials to the City upon request.

TASK 2G. DRAFT EIR HEARINGS
Urban Planning Partners will prepare and present a staff report and PowerPoint presentation for up to two (2) public hearings on the Draft EIR; the purpose of these hearings is to provide the Planning Commission to review the adequacy of the Draft EIR and for the public to have an opportunity to comment on the Draft EIR. Urban Planning Partners will be available to answer questions. 54 J ANUARY 2022 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND SAFETY E LEMENT U PDATE S EIR 27 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS DOCUMENT/FINAL EIR
TASK 3A. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS DOCUMENT

1. Administrative Draft Response to Comments Document
Urban Planning Partners will prepare the Response to Comments (RTC) document on the project following the public review period.

Immediately following the completion of the 45-day public review period, Urban Planning Partners will meet with City staff to discuss any comments received during the public review period, and the approach to undertake in responding to the comments. Urban Planning Partners will incorporate public and/or agency comments received on the Draft EIR, and responses to these comments, into one final document for publication and distribution. One (1) electronic copy will be provided to the City for review and comment.

Our budget estimate in Table 4 shows the level of professional effort assumed for this task. Should an unexpectedly large volume of comments be submitted (e.g., an organized letter-writing campaign by project opposition or a substantial package of comments by a law firm representing labor union interests), an adjustment in the budget to cover work beyond the assumed level would be needed.

2. Screencheck Draft Response to Comments Document
Upon receipt of the City comments on the administrative draft, Urban Planning Partners will consolidate and reconcile comments and prepare a screencheck draft. A redline version of the draft will be provided, showing the explicit changes made. Urban Planning Partners will provide one (1) electronic copy of the screencheck draft for review and comment.

3. Final Response to Comments Document
Urban Planning Partners will make any necessary revisions to the screencheck draft and prepare the Final RTC Document for publication. We will provide fifteen (15) hard copies and one (1) electronic copy, including all appendices to the City for distribution.

TASK 3B. EIR CERTIFICATION HEARINGS
Urban Planning Partners will prepare and present a staff report and PowerPoint presentation for up to three (3) public meetings before the Planning Commission and City Council on the RTC Document/Final EIR and will be available to respond to questions, as necessary. Additional meetings and/or hearings can be attended upon request on a time-and-materials basis. 55 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES J ANUARY 2022

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND S AFETY E LEMENT S U PDATE EIR 28 PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND MEETINGS

STAFF AND PROJECT TEAM MEETINGS
Lynette Dias, President will serve as Principal-in-Charge, and Carla Violet, Associate Principal/Planning Manager, will serve as the Project Manager. Both Lynette and Carla will be available to attend working sessions with City staff and the project team. Carla will coordinate the day-to-day activities associated with the project, including coordination with subconsultants, City staff, and outside regulatory agencies.

Project management tasks include regular client contact; contract management; assistance to team members; schedule coordination; and development of products.

In addition to the Kick-off meeting, Lynette and Carla will attend up to six (6) public hearings.

Furthermore, Carla will attend up to twelve (12) meetings and Lynette will attend up to eight (8) meetings with City staff. Carla will be responsible for preparing meeting agendas and minutes for City review.

ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
Urban Planning Partners will compile and organize the CEQA portion of the Administrative Record. The record will include all referenced technical reports and would be transmitted to the City in a format consistent with the City’s standard for Administrative Records. The record will be kept current and would be provided to the City at key milestones.

GENERAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Urban Planning Partners will undertake a variety of general project management tasks throughout the EIR preparation period. Carla, with assistance from Lynette, will provide input on scope, budget, contract negotiation and management, scheduling of the project, and quality assurance for all work conducted.

Carla will lead day-to-day activities associated with the project, including regular contact with the City, as necessary. Carla will also provide direction to all team members to ensure an internally consistent and coherent document. Lynette will review all documents prior to submittal to the City. Lynette and Carla will be available for consultation on CEQA procedural matters as well as application of the CEQA Guidelines to this project. Urban Planning Partners will be responsible for the recordation of the NOA of the environmental document and the Notice of Determination (NOD). 56 29

4. T IMELINE
The estimated timeline for completing an EIR for the Foster City Housing and Safety Elements based on the scope of work detailed in Section 3 is shown in Table 3. 57 Table 3. Proposed Timeline
City of Foster City Housing and Safety Elements Update EIR Bold: Public Meetings
Consultants
Date Date
Project Initiation
Issue Notice of Preparation City Fri, Jan 21, 2022
City Council approve CEQA Consultant Agreement Mon, Feb 7, 2022 Scoping Session with PC City Thu, Feb 17, 2022
End of NOP Scoping Period -- 30 days Mon, Feb 21, 2022
late February
Prepare Draft EIR
Administrative Draft EIR UPP 13
weeks Mon, May 23, 2022 3 weeks Mon, Jun 13, 2022
Screen Draft EIR UPP 3 weeks Tue, Jul 5, 2022 2 weeks Tue, Jul 19, 2022 Public Review Draft UPP 1 week Tue, Jul 26, 2022
Draft EIR Public Review
End of DEIR 45-day Comment Period -- 45 days Fri, Sep 9, 2022 Planning Commission - DEIR City Thu, Sep 15, 2022
Response to Comments/Final EIR
Admin Draft Response to Comments UPP 2 weeks Thu, Sep 29, 2022 1 week Thu, Oct 6, 2022 Screencheck Draft Response to Comments UPP 1 week Thu, Oct 13, 2022 1 week Thu, Oct 20, 2022 Final Response to Comments UPP 5 days Tue, Oct 25, 2022 Public/Approval Hearings
Planning Commission UPP/City TBD
City Council UPP/City TBD
Mtg with City Staff to review NOP comments and
CEQA approach
City Review
Weeks/Days Weeks/Days
Consultant Work and Public Review
1 58

A PPENDIX A

WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT SCOPE OF WORK
59

Page 1 ends

January 11, 2022
C
arla Violet
Urban Planning Partners
388 17th Street, Suite 230
Oakland, CA 94612
Subject: Proposal for Technical Services for Foster City EIR Water Supply Assessment Study Dear Ms. Violet,
Maddaus Water Management Inc. (MWM) is pleased to present this proposal to provide technical services for the development of a Water Supply Assessment (WSA) in Technical Memorandum (TM) format for the City of Foster City (City) in partnership with Urban Planning Partners Inc. (UPP). This letter proposal presents MWM company and personnel information along with a project scope, schedule, and estimated fees.

LIST OF PROJECT TASKS
The project tasks (Scope of Work) that MWM intends to complete are outlined below.

Task 1 – Technical Study for Water Supply Assessment
UPP has requested to work dynamically with MWM to develop a technical study in the form of a TM that will serve as a WSA for the City ’s General Plan . The WSA will focus on a clear connection to Estero Municipal Improvement District’s (EMID’s) 2020 Urban Water Management Plan . Based on MWM’s recent 2021 work preparing EMID’s potable water demand fore cast, MWM will advise on the challenges of future water supply availability and revisit the potential for net zero water policy approach to new development , which supports continued development with the proposed future curtailment in SFPUC water supplies. More details, including opportunities to resolve these challenges, will be discussed during the development of the City’s WSA.

Based on the updated findings and discussion with City staff and UPP, MWM will draft a WSA (approximately 20 pages in length) that conforms to California Department of Water Resources guidance for preparation of WSAs.

It is assumed that one electronic draft WSA will be provided to U PP for comment by City staff. In addition, it is assumed that one set of consolidated electronic comments with information from the City (preferably in track changes format) will be provided to MWM by UPP. The WSA will be revised one time based on these electronic comments. If the proposed parameters change and the WSA needs to be revised, it is assumed that additional scope and budget will be required for MWM to revise and complete the WSA.

Task 2 – Technical Support (Optional)
Additional technical support by MWM will be directed by the City and/or UPP staff, up to the allowable budget.

This support may include MWM participation in the public stakeholder process. All additional support will be completed based on written authorization by the City and/or UPP.

Deliverables
The following deliverables are planned for this WSA:
• Draft WSA in an electronic Word document, approximately 20 pages long in TM format. • Final WSA in an electronic Word document and PDF, approximately 20 pages long in TM format.

SCHEDULE
The work outlined above has a planned completion date of October 31, 2022. 60

Page 2 ends

COST ESTIMATE
Task Title/Description
Michelle
Maddaus
Project
Manager
$290/hr.

Tess
Kretschmann
Technical
Analysis
$200/hr.

Sierra
Orr
Project
Support
$165/hr.

Andrea
Pacheco
Document
Edit/Format
$140/hr.

Hannah
Braun
Technical
Analysis
$120/hr.

Total
Budget
1 Technical
Memorandum/Water
Supply Assessment
30 20 16 20 50 136
2 Technical Support
(optional) 24 10 - - 16 50
Total Hours and
Labor Cost $15,660 $6,000 $2,640 $2,800 $7,920 $35,020 The cost estimate for this project is $35,020. The project is to be completed on a time and materials basis. MWM will not exceed the project budget without prior written authorization from the City of Foster City and Urban Planning Partners Inc.

SUMMARY OF KEY STAFF AND 2022 RATE SCHEDULE
Michelle Maddaus will serve as Project Manager. The following table presents specific qualifications for all MWM personnel. Staff biographies are available on the MWM website: http://www.maddauswater.com/team.html.

Full resumes are available upon request.

MWM Personnel Qualifications and 2022 Rates
Person Position Service/Discipline Education/Degree Hourly Rate
Michelle
Maddaus, P.E.

Project Manager, Senior
Engineer
Water Demand Forecasting,
Water Conservation
Planning and Management
M.B.A.,
B.S. Engineering $290
Lisa Maddaus,
P.E. Senior Engineer
Water Resource Planning
and Management, Water
Conservation Strategy
Development, CalWEP and
State Compliance
M.S. Engineering $295
Christopher
Matyas
Senior Software Engineer,
Water Resources
Specialist
Software for Water
Efficiency, Water Resource
Planning and Management
B.S. Engineering $290
Tess
Kretschmann Water Resources Analyst Water Resource Planning and Management B.S. Engineering $200
Sierra Orr Senior Water Resources
Project Manager
Water Resource Planning,
Management and Program
Outreach
M.A. Leadership, B.A.

Communications and
History
$165
Hannah Braun Water Resources Analyst,
Demand Forecast Modeler
Water Resource Planning
and Management
B.A. Environmental
Studies $120
Nicki Powell Water Resources Analyst,
Demand Forecast Modeler
Water Resource Planning
and Management
B.S. Environmental
Studies, B.A.

Biostatistics
$120
Andrea
Pacheco Technical Editor Technical Documentation
Review/Design B.A. English $140
61

Page 3 ends

We look forward to having the opportunity to work with the City of Foster City and Urban Planning Partners Inc. staff. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please contact Michelle Maddaus at (925) 831-0194 or [email protected].

Sincerely,
Mic
helle Maddaus, P.E.

President
Maddaus Water Management
105 Zephyr Place
Danville, CA 94526

FIRM OVERVIEW AND QUALIFICATIONS
Maddaus Water Management Inc. (MWM) is a certified Micro Small Business Enterprise and Women Business Enterprise in California, incorporated in January 2013 and originally founded by William Maddaus in 1995. The firm has 8 employees and operates from its offices in Danville and Sacramento, California. MWM has completed over 500 projects in 26 years, including trainings for more than 1,100 attendees and more than 300 audits in the field. MWM has conducted numerous commercial water audits and over 28 hands-on field and PowerPoint - based CII audit trainings over the past 8 years (2014–2021).

MWM regularly partners with engineering and financial planning firms across the United States, serving clients throughout most of the country as well as internationally . As an internationally recognized water conservation authority, MWM brings extensive knowledge of demand analysis and water conservation and an unparalleled combination of water conservation expertise and understanding of CII conservation programs to its projects .

Most MWM clients are municipal agencies or governmental entities. O ver 90% of MWM’s projects come from repeat clients seeking to expand MWM services into other planning areas or, after a few years, revisit design of their conservation programs.

MWM gives clients the personal attention expected of a small business. Owned and operated by registered professional engineers, MWM has always taken a technically rigorous approach to water management planning using proven engineering estimates of water savings and benefit-cost analysis. The company is widely recognized for its expertise and capabilities in conservation planning and CII surveys, water resource management, drought and water conservation planning evaluations , and for innovative contributions in advancing demand management technology including AMI meters and integrated water resources planning.

MWM started supporting Best Management Practice (BMP) design during the original negotiations of the Memorandum of Understanding (1989–1990) for the California Urban Water Conservation in California (CUWCC), now the California Water Efficiency Partnership (CalWEP). MWM has since helped more than 200 utilities prepare demand forecasts and water conservation plans , including San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC), Bay Area Water Supply & Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) and its 27 water agencies, City of Sacramento, City of Foster City (EMID), San Jose Water, and Santa Clarita Valley Water Agency (SCV Water).

In 2006, William and Lisa Maddaus were original authors of the first edition of the American Water Works Association ’s Manual of Water Supply Practices, M52, Water Conservation Programs – A Planning Manual. Published at the end of 2017, the second edition was updated by the entire MWM team, then peer- reviewed by AWWA members. In November 2013, MWM also completed a new publication for the International Water Association, Preparing Urban Water Use Efficiency Plans – A Best Practices Guide, which has an update by MWM pending in 2021.
62 31
5 . E ST I MATED F EE
Urban Planning Partners is proposing to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Housing and Safety Elements Update for the City of Foster City, which includes a Water Supply Assessment and Wastewater/Sewer Capacity Study. Our estimated fee for completion of the scope of work set forth in this proposal is $346,284.

The total cost for optional tasks would be $22,121.

A detailed breakdown of the estimated fee is provided in Table 4. We will undertake the work on a time- and-materials basis, with an estimated not-to-exceed amount without prior authorization. 63 Table 4 Estimated Fee
Lynette Dias
Principal-in-Charge
Carla Violet
Project Manager
Project Planner
Graphics/
Word Processing
L
eslie Carmichael
Technical Advisor
Bruce Abelli-Amen, CHg
Principal/Senior
Hydrogeologist
Patrick Sutton
Environmental Engineer
III
Cem Atabek
Environmental Engineer
III
Yilin Tian
Environmental Engineer
Word Processing
Project/Contract
Administration
Matt Goyne
Associate in Charge
Mike Hawkins
Project Manager
Project Engineer/Planner
Forecasting Lead
Support/Graphics
Michelle Maddaus
Project Manager
Tess Kretschmann
Technical Analysis
Sierra Orr
Project Support
Andrea Pacheco
Document Edit/Format
Hannah Braun
Technical Analysis
John Leys
Principle
Brian Ballerini
Senior Project Manager
Craig Boman
Project Engineer
Alex Cabrera
Design Engineer II
Hourly Rate: $300 $195 $125 $130 $210 $225 $185 $185 $175 $120 $130 $250 $210 $150 $200 $140 $290 $200 $165 $140 $120 $245 $200 $190 $165 PHASE 1. Project Initiation
Task 1A: Project Initiation

1. Kick-Off Meeting 2 2 - - 2 1,410$ - 2 1 1 - - 730$ - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ 1 - 1 - 435$ 2,575$ 2 . Data Gathering -
2 4
2 -
1,150$ -
-
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-
-$
-
1 1
2 720$ 1,870$
3 . Base Map Preparation -
2 -
4 -
910$
-
-
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-
-$
-
1 1
2 720$ 1,630$

4. Project Description 2 8 4 4 2 3,600$ - - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - 1 1 1 555$ 4,155$ S
ubtotal for Task 1A 4
14 8
10 4
7,070$ -
2 1
1 -
-
730$ -
-
-
-
-
-$ -
-
-
-
-
-$ 1
3 4
5 2,430$ 10,230$
Task 1B: Scoping Meeting
Subtotal for Task 1B 2 - 2 810$ - - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - -$ 810$ Task 1C: Review of NOP Comments/Work Program Refinement Subtotal for Task 1C 1 2 4 - - 1,190$ - - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - -$ 1, 190$ hours 5 18 12 10 6 - 2 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 3 4 5 $ 1,
500 3,510 1,500 1,300 1,260 9,070$ - 370 185 175 - -
730$ -
-
-
-
-
-$ -
-
-
-
-
-$ 245 600 760 825 2,430$ 12,230$ PHASE 2. Draft EIR
Task 2A. Effects Found to be Less Than Significant
Subtotal for Task 2A 2 6 12 4 - 3,790$ 4 - 48 - 2 - 10,020$ - - - - - - - - - - - -$ 13,810$ Task 2B. Setting, Impacts, Standard Conditions of Approval, and Mitigation Measures

1. Land Use and Planning 2 10 12 4 4 5,410$ - - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - -$ 5,410$

2. Transportation and Traffic 4
8 6
6 2
4,710$ - -
-
-
-
- -$
32 96
224
46 76
81,600$ -
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-$
86,310$

3. Air Quality 1
4 2
1 -
1,460$ -
4 -
40 1
-
7,860$ -
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-$
9,320$
4 . Greenhouse Gas Emissions 1 2 1 1 - 945$ - 4 - 30 1 - 6,110$ - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - -$ 7,055$ 5 . Energy -
2 1
1 -
645$
2 -
12 1
2,590$ -
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-$
3,235$
6 . Hazards and Hazardous Materials 1
2 2
1 -
1,070$ -
2 40
-
1 -
7,890$ -
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-$
8,960$
7 . Noise and Vibration 1
4 2
1 -
1,460$ -
4 - 40 1 - 7,860$ - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - -$ 9,320$ 8 . Population and Housing 1
2 2
1 -
1,070$ -
-
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-$
1,070$
9 . Public Services and Utilities 2
10 24
1 2
6,100$ -
-
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-
-$
30 20
16 20
50 24,140$ 3
10 22
40 13,515$ 43,755$

10. 4
8 12
6 -
5,040$ - - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - -$ 5,040$ S
ubtotal for Task 2B 17
52 64
23 8
27,910$ -
16 40
122 5
-
32,310$ 32
96 224
46 76
81,600$ 30
20 16
20 50
24,140$ 3
10 22
40 13,515$ 179,475$
Task 2C. CEQA Required Assessment Conclusions
Subtotal for Task 2C 1 4 4 1 - 1,710$ - - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - -$ 1, 710$ Task 2D. Alternatives Analysis
Subtotal for Task 2D 6 20 16 4 4 9,060$ - - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - -$ 9, 060$ Task 2E. Standard Conditions of Approval/Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Findings Subtotal for Task 2E 2 8 16 4 2 5,100$ - - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - -$ 5, 100$ Task 2F. Draft EIR

1. Admin Draft 12 16 12 10 8 11,200$ - 2 8 8 - - 3,250$ - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - -$ 14,450$

2. Screencheck 6
14 20
8 4
8,910$ -
2 6
6 -
-
2,530$ -
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-$
11,440$

3. Public Review Draft EIR 4
12 16
6 2
6,740$ -
4 12
12 -
-
5,060$ -
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-$
11,800$
Subtotal for Task 2F 22
42 48
24 14 26,850$ - 8 26 26 - - 10,840$ - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - -$ 37,690$ Task 2G. Draft EIR Hearings (2 mtgs)
Subtotal for Task 2G 4 10 - - - 3,150$ - - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - -$ 3,150$ hours 54 142 160 60 28 4 24 114 148 7 - 32 96 224 46 76 30 20 16 20 50 3 10 22 40 13,515$ $ 16,200 27,690 20,000 7,800 5,880 77,570 900 4,440 21,090 25,900 840 - 53,170 8,000$ 20,160$ 33,600$ 9,200$ 10,640$ 81,600$ 8,700$ 4,000$ 2,640$ 2,800$ 6,000$ 24,140$ 735 2,000 4,180 6,600 13,515$ 249,995$ PHASE 3. Response to Comments Document/Final EIR
Task 3A. Response to Comments Document

1. Admin Draft RTC 6 20 16 8 6 10,000$ - - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - -$ 10,000$

2. Screencheck Draft RTC 4
12 12
4 2
5,980$ -
-
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-$
5,980$

3. Final RTC 4
8 8
2 -
4,020$ -
-
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-$
4,020$
S
ubtotal for Task 3A 14
40 36
14 8 20,000$ - - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - -$ 20,000$ Task 3B. EIR Certification Hearings (2 mtgs)
Subtotal for Task 3B 4 10 - - 6 4,410$ - - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - -$ 4,410$ hours 18 50 36 14 14 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $5
, 4 0 0 9,750 4,500 1,820 2,940 24,410 - -
-
-
-
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-
-$ -
-
-
-
-
-$ -
-
-
-
-$ 24,410$
ON-GOING. Project Management and Meetings
Staff/Project Team Meetings
Subtotal 16 36 16 - 4 14,660$ - - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - -$ 14,660$ EIR Administrative Record
Subtotal 2 4 24 12 - 5,940$ - - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - -$ 5,940$ General Project Management
Subtotal 12 40 20 - - 13,900$ - - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - - -$ - - - - -$ 13,900$ hours 30 80 60 12 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
$9
, 0 0 0 15,600 7,500 1,560 840 34,500 - -
-
-$
-
-
-
-
-
-$ -
-
-
-
-
-$ -
-
-
-
-$ 34,500$

TOTAL EIR LABOR ESTIMATE
hours 107 290 268 96 52 4 26 115 149 7 0 32 96 224 46 76 30 20 16 20 50 4 13 26 45 $ 32,100$ 56,550$ 33,500$ 12,480$ 10,920$ 145,550$ 900$ 4,810$ 21,275$ 26,075$ 840$ -$ 53,900$ 8,000$ 20,160$ 33,600$ 9,200$ 10,640$ 81,600$ 8,700$ 4,000$ 2,640$ 2,800$ 6,000$ 24,140$ 980$ 2,600$ 4,940$ 7,425$ 15,945$ 321,135$ Team Total
Urban Planning Partners
Total
Maddaus Total
Maddaus Water Management Sherwood Design Engineers
Sherwood Total
ONGOING. PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND MEETINGS

SUBTOTAL
PHASE 1. PROJECT INITIATION SUBTOTAL
Aesthetics
PHASE 3. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS

DOCUMENT/FINAL EIR
PHASE 2. DRAFT EIR
Urban Planning Partners Baseline Environmental Consulting Baseline Environmental
Total
Fehr & Peers Total
Fehr & Peers
Exhibit B
64 Table 4 Estimated Fee
Lynette Dias
Principal-in-Charge
Carla Violet
Project Manager
Project Planner
Graphics/
Word Processing
L
eslie Carmichael
Technical Advisor
Bruce Abelli-Amen, CHg
Principal/Senior
Hydrogeologist
Patrick Sutton
Environmental Engineer
III
Cem Atabek
Environmental Engineer
III
Yilin Tian
Environmental Engineer
Word Processing
Project/Contract
Administration
Matt Goyne
Associate in Charge
Mike Hawkins
Project Manager
Project Engineer/Planner
Forecasting Lead
Support/Graphics
Michelle Maddaus
Project Manager
Tess Kretschmann
Technical Analysis
Sierra Orr
Project Support
Andrea Pacheco
Document Edit/Format
Hannah Braun
Technical Analysis
John Leys
Principle
Brian Ballerini
Senior Project Manager
Craig Boman
Project Engineer
Alex Cabrera
Design Engineer II
Hourly Rate: $300 $195 $125 $130 $210 $225 $185 $185 $175 $120 $130 $250 $210 $150 $200 $140 $290 $200 $165 $140 $120 $245 $200 $190 $165 Team Total
Urban Planning Partners
Total
Maddaus Total
Maddaus Water Management Sherwood Design Engineers
Sherwood Total
Urban Planning Partners Baseline Environmental Consulting Baseline Environmental
Total
Fehr & Peers Total
Fehr & Peers

DIRECT COSTS

1. Misc. Direct Costs and Printing 500$ 6, 400$ 6,900$

2. Su
bconsultant Mark-up (10%) 18,249$ 18,249$ TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 18,749$ -$ 6,
400$ -$
-$
25,149$

TOTAL ESTIMATED FEE
164,299$ 53,900$ 88,000 $ 24,140 $ 15,945 $ 346,284$

OPTIONAL TASKS
1 Additional Roadway Analysis Locations 4 10 38 12 14 13,160$ 13,160$ 2 Additional Roadway Analysis Locations Direct Costs 6,950$ 6,950$ 3 Subconsultant Mark-up (10%) 2,011$ 2,011$ TO
TAL OPTIONAL TASKS 2,011$ -$ 20,
110$ -$
-$
22,121$

TOTAL ESTIMATED FEE (WITH OPTIONAL TASKS)
166,310$ 53,900$ 108,110$ 24,140$ 15,945 $ 368,405$ 65 12 Updated 2/7/2022

EXHIBIT C

INSURANCE FORMS

CONSULTANT shall provide, in addition to the Certificates of Insurance, original Endorsement affecting the coverages specified in Section 12 - INSURANCE of the Agreement on the attached form. No substitute form will be accepted.

ATTACHED

1. Insurance Coverage Form

66 13 Updated 2/7/2022

EXHIBIT D
This INSURANCE COVERAGE FORM modifies or documents insurance provided under the following:

Named Insured: Effective Work Date(s):

Description of Work/Locations/Vehicles:

ADDITIONAL INSURED: City of Foster City/Estero Municipal Improvement District (CITY) 610 Foster City Boulevard, Foster City, CA 94404
Attention: _________________________________
Contract Administrator
Endorsement and Certificates of Insurance Required
The Additional Insured, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees and voluntee rs are included as insureds with regard to damages and defense of claims arising from: (Check all that apply)
Insurer Policy
No.

General Liabi lity: (a) ac tivities performed by or on behalf of the Named Insured, (b) products and complete d operations of the Named Insured, (c) premises owned, leased occupied or used by the Named Insured, and/or (d) permits issued for operations performed by the Named Insured. {Note:

MEETS OR EXCEEDS ISO Form # CG 20 10 11 85}

Auto Liab ility: the ownership, operation, maintenance, use, loading or unloading of any auto owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Named Insured, regardless of whether liability is attributable to the Named Insured or a combination of the Named Insured and the Ad ditional Insured, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees or volunteers.

Other:

Certificates of Insurance Required (no endorsement n eeded) (Check all that apply)
Insurer Policy
No.

Workers Compensa tion: work performed by employees of the Named Insured while those employees are eng aged in work under the simultan eous directions and control of the Named Insured and the Additional Insured.

Professional Liability:

PRIMARY/NON-CONTRIBUTORY: This insurance is primary and is not additional to or contributing wit h any other insurance carried by or for the benefit of Additional Insureds.

SEVERABILITY OF INTEREST: The insurance afforded by this policy applies separately to each insured who is seeking coverage or against whom a claim is made or a suit is brought, except with respect to the insurer’s limit of liability.

PROVISIONS REGARDING THE INSURED' S DUTIES AFTER ACCIDENT OR LOSS : Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policy shall not affect coverage provided to the Additional Insured, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, or volunteers.

CANCELLATION NOTICE. The insurance afforded by this policy shall not be suspended, voided, canceled, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice (ten ( 10) days if canceled due to non-payment) by regular mail return receipt requested has been given to the Additional Insured. Such notice shall be addressed as shown above.

WAIVER OF SUBROGATION: The insurer(s) named above agree to waive all rights of subr ogation against the CITY , its e lected or appointed officers, officials, agents, volunteer s and employees for losses paid under the terms of this policy which arise from wor k performed by the Named Insured for the CITY.

Nothing herein contained shall vary, alter or extend any provision or condition of the Policy other than as above stated.

SIGNATURE OF INSURER OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE INSURER

I, ______________________________________________________________(print/type name), warrant that I have a uthority to bind the above-named insurance company and by my signature hereon do so bind this company.

SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE (original signature required)

ORGANIZATION: TITLE:

ADDRESS:

TELEPHONE: ( ) DATE ISSUED:

67 DATE: December 13, 2021
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Kevin Miller, Interim City Manager
FROM: Marlene Subhashini, Community Development Director SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) FOR EIR CONSULTANTS TO

CONDUCT AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AS PART OF THE

NEXT HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE

RECOMMENDATION
It
is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution, authorizing staff to
issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) for professional services regarding the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to meet the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the Housing Element and Safety Element Updates.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff is requesting that the City Council
authorize staff to issue an RFP for professional
services for the preparation of an EIR to meet the requirements of CEQA for the Housing Element and Safety Element updates.

Since the project involves additional housing units throughout the City, there may be potentially significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed project with regard to traffic, water supply, public services, and perhaps others and therefore Staff has determined that preparation of an EIR to analyze such impacts is warranted.

BACKGROUND
The Housing Element of
the General Plan is required to be updated every eight years (or more frequently if not submitted on time) pursuant to California Government Code Attachment 3
68 Section 65583. Housing Elements within the San Francisco Bay Area are required to be adopted by January 31, 2023. The Housing Element identifies and addresses housing needs by including goals, policies, and programs to preserve, improve, and develop housing for all economic segments of the community. This includes identifying housing sites to provide capacity for the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for the 2023-2031 planning period of 1,896 units. On November 22, 2021, ABAG issued the proposed Final RHNA Plan, which includes adjustments to the final allocations for Contra Costa County and Pittsburg as a result of the partially granted appeal. Of the 28 appeals that ABAG received from Bay Area jurisdictions the ABAG Administrative Committee partially granted the appeal for the County because an area annexed to Pittsburg in 2018 was incorrectly included as part of unincorporated Contra Costa County in the Plan Bay Area 2050 Final Blueprint. As a result, 35 RHNA units were transferred to the City of Pittsburg, and has been reflected in the Final RHNA Plan. This did not affect the allocations for any jurisdictions other than the County of Contra Costa and the City of Pittsburg. On December 16, 2021, the ABAG Executive Board will conduct a public hearing to consider adoption of the Final RHNA plan.

Government Code Section 65864 requires that a Housing Element provide adequate sites so that at all times throughout the planning period its remaining unmet share of the RHNA can be accommodated. Additionally, the law requires that cities consider a buffer so that if, after adoption of the Housing Element, a housing development is approved that includes fewer housing units or higher affordability levels than projected in the Housing Element, the Housing Element will continue to provide capacity for enough units to meet the RHNA. HCD recommends a buffer of 15% to 30%. The City’s current Housing Element included a buffer of 18% to 53% in each of the Below Market Rate income categories. Even though staff is likely to go with the State recommended minimum buffer of 15%, evaluating an upper threshold buffer of 30% in the CEQA analysis gives the City the ability to consider a range without having to go back and amend the EIR. The amount of the buffer included in the CEQA analysis does not commit the City to that particular amount. (For additional information, see Attachment 3:

Housing Element Site Inventories: Why Buffers and Excess Capacity Matter.) Specific sites for the housing units have not been identified at this time, but will generally be spread throughout the City, including accessory dwelling units on single- family properties, increased densities at existing apartment sites and conversion or inclusion of mixed use at existing non-residential sites. The analysis for the EIR will be at a “program” level (discussed in more detail below) and will assume a wide distribution of the housing units.

Per State law, the Safety Element of the General Plan is required to be updated concurrently with the Housing Element. The Safety Element assesses risks and vulnerabilities to hazards and includes goals, policies, and programs to reduce these risks to acceptable levels. The Safety Element update will rely heavily on the recently 69 updated Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP), a separate item on this same agenda, and will also address recent State requirements related to climate change and evacuation planning.

ANALYSIS
The proposed updates to the Housing Element and Safety Element will need to comply with the requirements of the CEQA. The City of Foster City will serve as the lead agency for the purposes of CEQA and will administer the project contract. The CEQA process is primarily designed to identify and disclose to decision makers and the public the significant environmental impacts of a proposed project prior to its consideration and approval. (See Attachment 4 for an overview of the CEQA process.) The CEQA process provides for the full disclosure to the public of the reasons for lead agency approval of projects with significant environmental impacts using the following methods:
 Findings
 Statements of Overriding Consideration
CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region-wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region-wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposal project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable."
The EIR will be a “program level” EIR rather than a “project level” EIR. A program level EIR analyzes the potential environmental impacts of programs based on the level of specificity included in the project. For program plans such as a Housing Element or Safety Element, the analysis will be at a more general level that does not analyze site- specific impacts. Site specific environmental impacts will be evaluated as part of the “project level” environmental assessment as part of the development review of the project.

The environmental scope of work includes conducting analyses, investigations, and technical studies related to the preparation of the appropriate level of CEQA documentation for the project, as provided in the RFP (Attachment 2). The environmental consultant team will prepare an administrative draft Initial Study (IS) to identify, and determine the extent of, potentially significant environmental impacts resulting from the project.

The CEQA documentation for this project is assumed to be an Environmental Impact 70 Report (EIR). As part of preparation of the EIR, the environmental team will prepare Technical Memoranda for the following resource areas: traffic and transportation including VMT analysis, air quality and greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and public services and utilities (including a water supply study). The Technical Memoranda will be included as appendices to the EIR. For preparation of the EIR, the environmental consultant team will undertake a program of data collection in those areas in which current data are not available, are not valid, or are insufficient for a thorough analysis of potential impacts. The team will conduct an evaluation, and will document, the likely environmental impacts resulting from project implementation.

Environmental analysis by resource topics is identified as follows:
• Aesthetics
• Agriculture and Forestry Resources
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources
• Energy
• Geology and Soils
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Land Use and Planning
• Mineral Resources
• Noise and Vibration
• Population, Housing, and Employment
• Public Services and Utilities
• Recreation
• Transportation/Traffic
• Utility and Service Systems
• Wildfire
The EIR shall be prepared in the required format and shall include each discussion section as mandated under the CEQA provisions (Division 13, Section 21000 et seq. of the California Public Resources Code), State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15000 et seq. of the California Administrative Code), and the Foster City Environmental Review Guidelines (linked).

To initiate the environmental assessment process, an RFP will be issued upon authorization from City Council. City staff will review and evaluate the proposed scope of work, schedule, and budget submitted by consultants and will ensure that the proposal fulfills the City’s standards and requirements. 71 Attachment 2 includes the draft RFP including the proposed Scope of Work that will be issued if the City Council approves this item and tentative timeline for selection as follows:

Attachment 4 includes the CEQA Process Flow Chart illustrating the EIR process.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact from the issuance of the RFP. There will be a cost for the preparation of the EIR. Funds for this are available in the General Plan Maintenance Fund (Fund 128), funding for which comes from fees charged to building permits. At the time of the award of the contract, staff will provide the information for a budget appropriation.

CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREA
The preparation of an EIR for the Housing and Safety Element Update would evaluate the environmental impacts of the project. This effort is in alignment with the City Council’s adopted Vision and Mission statements and is related to the Council’s Value/Priority Area for “Smart Planning, Development, and the Local Economy”.

Attachments:
 Attachment 1 – Resolution
 Attachment 2 – Draft Request for Proposal (RFP)
 Attachment 3 – Housing Element Site Inventories: Why Buffers and Excess Capacity Matter
 Attachment 4 – CEQA Process Flow Chart
72 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES

CITY OF FOSTER CITY

HOUSING AND SAFETY ELEMENT S UPDATE EIR
Submitted to:

Marlene Subhashini, Community Development Director
City of Foster City
Community Development Department
610 Foster City Boulevard
Foster City, CA 94404
January 2022
Attac hment 4
73 74

P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES

CITY OF FOSTER CITY

HOUSING AND SAFETY ELEMENT S UPDATE EIR

Submitted to:

Marlene Subhashini, Community Development Director
City of Foster City
Community Development Department
610 Foster City Boulevard
Foster City, CA 94404
January 2022

Prepared by:

Urban Planning Partners, Inc.
388 17th Street, Suite 230
Oakland, CA 94612
510.251.8210

75 76

January 18, 2022 (Revised January 26, 2022)

Marlene Subhashini, Community Development Director
City of Foster City
610 Foster City Boulevard
Foster City, CA 94404
Re: Proposal to Prepare the Foster City Housing and Safety Elements Update EIR Dear Marlene:

Urban Planning Partners, Inc. is pleased to submit the attached Proposal for Services to prepare the Foster City Housing and Safety Elements Update EIR. We know Foster City like few other planning consultants and although we are relatively new in the housing policy and element space, we are quickly becoming a recognized leader given our fresh, innovative, and problem-solving approaches. Lynette Dias, our founder, has been working with the City for over 25 years and several of our staff also have significant experience with the City. Highlights of our Foster City CEQA work include preparing environmental review documents for the Metro Center GDP Area New Hotel, Lincoln Centre Campus, 15 Acres Town Center, Amendment to the Pilgrim Triton Master Plan, Chess Hatch Office Development, Levee Protection Planning and Improvements, and Gilead Sciences Integrated Corporate Campus Master Plan.

Our Housing Element and related CEQA work clients include the City of Saratoga, Town of Portola Valley, City of Antioch, and Town of Paradise. This experience, combined with our knowledge conducting environmental review for planning programs and development projects throughout the Bay Area, will enable us to conduct a defensible, reasoned, and cost-effective analysis that will ensure the City complies with CEQA requirements. Our team is composed of the following well-qualified subconsultants, all of whom have previous experience in the City of Foster City (apart from Sherwood Engineers):
 Baseline Environmental Consulting: Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Geology and Soils, Energy, Hazards, Hydrology and Water Quality, Noise and Vibration  Fehr & Peers: Transportation and Traffic
 Maddaus Water Management: Water Supply Assessment
 Sherwood Engineers: Wastewater/Sewer Capacity Study
Our proposal explains our qualifications, approach and work plan, key staff members, timeline, budget, and references. We have been fortunate to work with the City of Foster City for many years and hope to have the opportunity to work together once again.

Sincerely,
URBAN PLANNING PARTNERS, INC.

Lynette Dias Carla Violet

PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE PROJECT MANAGER

PRESIDENT ASSOCIATE PRINCIPAL/PLANNING MANAGER

77 78

T ABLE OF C ONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION & PROJECT UNDERSTANDING ..................................................................... 1 Table 1 City of Foster City RHNA Across Income Categories ................................................. 2

2. QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE ............................................................................................3 Figure 1 Organization Chart .................................................................................................. 4

3. APPROACH & SCOPE OF WORK ............................................................................................ 13 Table 2 Work Program Summary ......................................................................................... 15

4. TIMELINE ............................................................................................................................... 29 Table 3 Proposed Timeline ................................................................................................... 30

5. ESTIMATED FEE ..................................................................................................................... 31 Table 4 Preliminary Fee Estimate ......................................................................................... 33

6. REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 35

APPENDIX A
Water Supply Assessment Scope of Work

APPENDIX B
Key Staff Resumes
Urban Planning Partners, Inc.

Baseline Environmental Consulting
Fehr & Peers
Maddaus Water Management
Sherwood Engineers

79 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES J ANUARY 2022

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND S AFETY E LEMENT S U PDATE EIR ii

80 1

1. I NTRODUCTION & P ROJECT U NDERSTANDING
Urban Planning Partners, Inc. (Urban Planning Partners) is pleased to submit this proposal to prepare the Foster City Housing and Safety Elements Update EIR (project). This section describes our project understanding. Section 2 introduces our team and details relevant project experience. Our recommended approach and scope of work, timeline, estimated fee, and references are provided in Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6, respectively.

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
Urban Planning Partners’ understanding of the
project is informed by the Request for Proposals
(RFP) issued by the City on December 14, 2021. In
addition, Leslie Carmichael, Principal Planner, is
currently supporting the City’s efforts on the 6th
cycle Housing Element Update and Safety Element
Update, with assistance from Carla Violet and Alyssa
Chung; as such, we are very familiar with the City’s
process and requirements for each document.

The Housing and Safety Elements Update EIR is
intended to assess the environmental impacts of the
proposed updates to the Housing and Safety Elements. The City intends to use the streamlining/tiering provisions of CEQA to the maximum feasible extent, so that future environmental review of specific development and infrastructure projects are expeditiously undertaken, without the need for repetition and redundancy.

HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
Foster City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation
(RHNA) is 1,896 units (including a 30 percent buffer),
which is a 341 percent increase from its last Housing
Element cycle allocation. At this time, specific sites for the additional housing units are not yet known but are
anticipated to be spread throughout the city. The
additional housing units may include accessory
dwelling units, increased densities at existing
apartment sites, and conversion or inclusion of mixed-
use buildings at existing non-residential sites. Table 1 shows the City’s RHNA across income categories.
81 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES J ANUARY 2022

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND S AFETY E LEMENTS U PDA TE EIR

2 TABLE 1 CITY OF FOSTER CITY RHNA ACROSS INCOME CATEGORIES Income Level RHNA
Very-Low-Income (0-50 percent of AMI) * 520
Low-income (50-80 percent of AMI) 299
Moderate-income (80-120 percent of AMI) 300
Above moderate-income (120 percent or more of AMI) 777 TOTAL 1,896
*Area Median Income

SAFETY ELEMENT UPDATE
The Safety Element is being revised concurrently
with the 6th cycle Housing Element. Consistent with
Government Code Section 65302(g), the element
must address the following topics: seismic hazards;
tsunami, seiche, and dam failure; slope instability;
subsidence; liquefaction; flooding, wildland and
urban fires; and climate change. The Safety
Element assesses risks and vulnerabilities for each
topic area and includes goals, policies, and
programs to reduce these risks to acceptable levels.
82 3

2. Q UALIFICATIONS & E XPERIENCE
This section introduces our project team and provides an overview of our qualifications to prepare the Housing and Safety Elements Update EIR and relevant project experience demonstrating these qualifications. Additionally, this section outlines our proposed subconsultant team. It begins with a brief firm description and key staff qualifications followed by relevant projects for Urban Planning Partners.

URBAN PLANNING PARTNERS, INC.

Urban Planning Partners is a land use planning firm that was established in 2009. We are a small (15- person staff) firm located in Downtown Oakland and 100-percent woman-owned.

The firm is led by Lynette Dias, Urban Planning Partners’ Founder and President. Lynette has over 30 years of urban and environmental planning experience. She began her career in the public sector in northern and southern California cities, and later transitioned into consulting, where she spent most of her career working for public agencies and private developers throughout California.

OUR MISSION AND VALUES
Our mission is to help create better places in partnership with our clients and the communities in which we work. Our core values are:
 We care. We have called the Bay Area home since our founding and love playing a part in shaping some of our favorite places. We take on projects that stir something in us, and it shows.  We collaborate. Projects are stronger when the development process is collaborative. Whether it’s working with one another, our subconsultants, or our clients, we believe in joining forces.  We reach. The potential for what we can do, not relying on what we’ve always done, is what motivates us. Reaching up and preaching out keeps our work innovative, our team engaged, and our approach inclusive.
 We are real. We pride ourselves on telling it like it is. Our clients can count on us for honest, practical guidance.

Our key services include planning policy, development services, community engagement, environmental review, contract planning, and grant writing. Trust, objectivity, and insight are the foundations of our work. Our dedication, strong communication skills, and diverse range of experience enable successful partnerships with our clients. We collaborate with our clients and the communities in which we work to achieve approval and implementation of policies and projects that better urban environments.

83 P R OPOSAL FOR S ERVICES J ANUARY 2022

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND S AFETY E LEMENTS U PDATE EIR 4 PROJECT TEAM SUMMARY
As prime consultant, Urban Planning Partners would manage the contract for the Housing and Safety Elements Update EIR, be responsible for the accuracy and quality of all technical documentation and represent the team at all public hearings. We have assembled the following well-qualified team to prepare this document:
 Urban Planning Partners, Inc.: prime consultant, project management, project description, land use and planning, aesthetics, public services and utilities, effects found to be less than significant, and alternatives.
 Baseline Environmental Consulting: air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, geology and soils, energy, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, and noise and vibration.  Fehr & Peers: transportation and traffic.
 Maddaus Water Management: water supply assessment.
 Sherwood Engineers: wastewater/sewer capacity study.

The organization chart in Figure 1 illustrates our team’s composition.

FIGURE 1 ORGANIZATION CHART

84 J ANUARY 2022 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND E LEMENTS U PDATE EIR
5 KEY STAFF
The Urban Planning Partners’ team for the EIR for the Update of the Housing and Safety Elements of the General Plan will be directed by Lynette Dias, President, managed by Carla Violet, Associate Principal/Planning Manager. Technical expertise will be provided by Leslie Carmichael, Principal Planner. Brief professional biographies for Lynette, Carla, and Leslie are provided below, with full resumes provided in Appendix B.

Lynette Dias, Principal-in-Charge. Lynette
has over 30 years of planning policy and
CEQA experience. Her clients and peers
appreciate Lynette’s commitment to
collaboration, pro-active problem-solving
approach, willingness to be real, and success
in effectively moving processes forward.

Lynette currently splits her time between
strategic planning policy work, CEQA, and
community engagement. Her current
projects include directing the Alameda
County Housing Collaborative (similar to 21
Elements).

Carla Violet, Project Manager. Carla has 10 years of experience in land use planning and environmental review consulting services. She has prepared CEQA documents ranging from streamlined CEQA exemptions to EIRs with a focus on mixed-use, infill development. Carla also has extensive experience working in Foster City as both a contract planner and managing several environmental review projects including the Lincoln Centre Life Sciences Research Campus EIR, Levee Protection Planning and Improvements EIR, New Hotel at Metro Center GDP Area EIR, Pilgrim-Triton Master Plan EIR Addendum, and Gilead Sciences Corporate Master Plan Subsequent EIR addenda.

She is currently managing the Housing Element Update and EIR for the City of Saratoga as well as the Town of Portola Valley’s Housing and Safety Element Updates and CEQA review. As project manager, she maintains meticulous attention to detail to ensure consistency across multiple documents with several authors. Carla is also skilled at managing subconsultant teams and navigating complex projects with expedited timelines that require managing CEQA review and policy implementation on parallel paths.

Leslie Carmichael, Technical Advisor. Leslie has extensive experience coordinating review of complex development projects from the beginning of the planning and environmental review process through construction. Leslie has managed public review processes to ensure that the interests of reviewing agencies and departments, as well as the public, are addressed. Her experience includes review of complex projects, preparation of environmental documents, general plan elements, agenda management, public counter supervision, redevelopment agency administration, affordable housing strategies and management, zoning code updates, architectural guidelines, and much more. 85 P R OPOSAL FOR S ERVICES J ANUARY 2022

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND S AFETY E LEMENTS U PDATE EIR 6 Leslie has an extensive background in planning and redevelopment, including more than 30 years in the public sector. Among her public sector experiences, Leslie managed preparation of Foster City’s Housing Element updates in 2001, 2010, and 2015 including assessment of needs, public outreach, site analysis, and development of policies and implementation measures. Leslie prepared municipal code amendments to implement various aspects of the Foster City Housing Element, including reasonable accommodation, tenant anti-discrimination based on source of income, emergency shelters, and density bonus.

RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Projects that demonstrate the breadth and depth of our qualifications to prepare the Housing and Safety Elements Update EIR are highlighted below.

CEQA AND HOUSING POLICY EXPERIENCE
CEQA for Housing Elements
Multiple Jurisdictions
Urban Planning Partners is currently preparing the CEQA documentation for the following Housing Elements:
 City of Antioch (EIR)
 City of Saratoga (EIR)
 Town of Portola Valley (IS/MND)
 Town of Paradise (IS/MND)
Streamlined CEQA for Housing Projects
Multiple Jurisdictions
Legislation over the past 5 years has resulted in most housing projects being reviewed under one of the streamlined CEQA provisions or CEQA exemptions. Urban Planning Partners has been a leader in working with local jurisdictions in how to most effectively prepare CEQA documents utilizing the streamlined and/or exemption provisions in a way that is best suited for their jurisdiction which varies significantly. We have also prepared over 100 such documents. This experience allows us to comprehensively understand the value of an EIR on a Housing Element and the nuances that are important to consider ensuring the Housing and Safety Elements Update EIR will provide the City’s desired level of coverage for subsequent housing projects. Highlights of our experience include:
86 J ANUARY 2022 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND E LEMENTS U PDATE EIR
7 The Phoenix Supportive Housing Project – CEQA/NEPA (2018)

CITY OF OAKLAND
Urban Planning Partners helped a development
team obtain planning approvals for the Phoenix,
including over 100 units of affordable housing,
half of which are permanent supportive housing
for individuals and families who are currently
homeless. The project also includes over 200
units of market-rate housing and a maker space
for local artists. Urban Planning Partners was
instrumental in getting the Phoenix approved on
a tight timeline by:
 Working with Alameda County Department of Environmental Health, the project applicant, and the City to navigate the site’s cleanup process and how it related to the CEQA and the planning approval timeline.
 Meeting with City staff across departments to build support and obtain the necessary resources to ensure the project went to the Planning Commission before the County’s funding deadline.  Managing and preparing a streamlined CEQA document providing environmental clearance for the project’s approval.

Urban Planning Partners led preparation of a NEPA Environmental Assessment (EA) in the HUD- prescribed format. The project site is between a freeway and a neighborhood of historic Victorian homes in an area that is transitioning from light industrial to residential uses. The site’s context has made analysis related to the Clean Air Act, Contamination and Toxic Substances, Explosive and Flammable Hazards, Historic Preservation, Noise, and Environmental Justice particularly salient. Urban Planning Partners managed a team of technical subconsultants to ensure objective analysis and compliance with all applicable federal regulations.

New Hotel in Metro Center General Development Plan Area EIR (2021) City of Foster City
Urban Planning Partners prepared the EIR for a
new hotel proposed in the Metro Center
General Development Plan (GDP) area on a

1.36‑acre site. The project includes
development of a new, six-story hotel and a
two-level parking garage with raised podium.

The hotel would feature up to 155 guest rooms
on the upper floors; a limited-service
restaurant; a rooftop deck; and other employee
and visitor amenities totaling approximately
94,259 square feet.
87 P R OPOSAL FOR S ERVICES J ANUARY 2022

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND S AFETY E LEMENTS U PDATE EIR 8 The Public Review Draft of the EIR was published in March of 2020 and the Response to Comments/Final EIR was finalized in 2021. The New Hotel in Metro Center GDP Area Project EIR was the first in the City of Foster City to use Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis for evaluation of transportation impacts. 2580 Bancroft Mixed-Use Infill EIR (2018)
City of Berkeley
Urban Planning Partners worked with the City of Berkeley on an Infill EIR, for a mixed-use project adjacent to the University of California. The project includes demolition of the Bancroft Center at 2558- 2588 Bancroft Way, including the 44-space subterranean parking garage, and partial demolition of the southern half (rear) of the Fred Turner Building, a City Landmark, to construct a new mixed-use building with approximately 122 dwelling units and 11,000 square feet of ground-floor retain, and 37 commercial parking spaces in a subterranean garage.

Urban Planning Partners worked closely with the City of Berkeley to ensure that project impacts specifically around Historic Resources were adequately addressed in the Infill EIR.

Downtown Oakland Specific Plan and EIR (Draft Published 2019) City of Oakland
Urban Planning Partners is working with Dover
Kohl & Partners on the Downtown Oakland
Specific Plan and EIR. In addition to
management of the EIR, their work on the
Specific Plan includes public outreach and
preparation of Specific Plan policies and
development standards. This project represents
a unique opportunity to reinvigorate the central
business district in concert with adjacent
planning efforts, such as the Lake Merritt Area
Plan and the Broadway-Valdez Specific Plan.

The consultant team is working together with
the City to develop a Specific Plan and EIR that
will enhance the downtown through balancing
Oakland’s diversity and uniqueness with
economic growth and the increased presence of
creative and technology-based industries.

The Public Review Draft of the Specific Plan EIR and the Draft of the Specific Plan were published in late August 2019. The consultant team is working on the Response to Comments document as well as the Final Draft Plan tentatively schedule for Winter 2022. The Downtown Oakland Specific Plan EIR was the first in the City of Oakland to use Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis for evaluation of transportation impacts.
88 J ANUARY 2022 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND E LEMENTS U PDATE EIR

9 2100 Telegraph – Eastline Project EIR and Entitlements (2018) City of Oakland, Lane Partners, and Strategic Urban Development Alliance (SUDA) The Eastline project, which includes the redevelopment of an approximately 3-acre site covering a full city block with up to

2.8 million square feet was approved by the City of Oakland in 2018. This project represents a unique opportunity to
strengthen and revitalize the urban fabric of Downtown and the Uptown District, improve public safety, and activate the connection between Broadway and Telegraph Avenue.

The project included a Planned Unit Development/Preliminary Development Plan (PUD/PDP) that guided and regulated
redevelopment of this site immediately adjacent to the 19th Street BART station. The PUD/PDP included four illustrative development scenarios are programmed in the PUD/PDP: a
maximum residential scenario, a maximum office scenario, an office and residential scenario, and an all-office scenario.

Some of the challenges included: on- and off-site historic resources, BART tunnels directly beneath the project site, public and private ownership of the site, the proposed scale and height (over 900 feet), traffic generated by the project in a congested downtown area, shade and shadow resulting from the project, existing public parking on the site, and the desired flexibility in the approval to allow the project to be flexible to market demands given a tenant was not yet secured.

Urban Planning Partners, with Lynette Dias as Principal-in-Charge and Carla Violet as Project Manager, worked closely with both the City of Oakland and the project applicants in preparing a comprehensive EIR to evaluate this project and its multiple development scenarios. 89 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES J ANUARY 2022

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND S AFETY E LEMENTS U PDATE EIR

10 Housing Element and Safety Element Preparation and Implementation City of Foster City
Urban Planning Partners has worked extensively in Foster City on housing policy and implementation.

This work was done by Leslie Carmichael, Principal Planner, who was a Senior Planner and Planning Manager (1987-2009) where she oversaw the Planning Division and was responsible for the City's affordable housing programs and preparation and administration of the department budget preparation.

Some highlights of Leslie’s accomplishments at Foster City include:
 Managing preparation of Housing Elements updates in 2009-10 and 2014-15 including assessment of needs, public outreach, site analysis, and development of policies and implementation measures.  Preparing municipal code amendments to implement the Housing Element, including reasonable accommodation, tenant anti-discrimination based on source of income, emergency shelters, and State and local density bonuses.
 Facilitating discussion and negotiations with the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).
 Giving presentations to the Planning Commission and City Council.  Overseeing implementation of Housing Element policies to achieve compliance with State law.  Identifying sites for the affordable housing overlay zones using existing underdeveloped sites or sites ripe for redevelopment.
 Overseeing completion of the required nexus study and adoption of a commercial linkage fee for affordable housing.
 Management and oversight of the City’s affordable housing program, including six City-owned units and 480 affordable units at several housing developments throughout the City.  Preparation of the Land Use and Circulation Element adopted February 1, 2016, required working with the City to find ways to adapt to changing conditions and needs, while still staying true to the intent of the original planned community master plan. This work included public outreach, background studies, development of policies and implementation programs to address changing needs and requirements while still maintaining community character.  Preparation of the combined Safety Element/Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP), including gathering a multi-departmental team to perform the analysis of assets and hazards, capability assessment, development of mitigation and adaptation strategies, and plan maintenance procedures. The use of a combined Safety Element/LHMP was chosen to provide the City with one point of reference for safety and hazard mitigation planning that will be easier to implement, maintain, and keep updated going forward.
90 J ANUARY 2022 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND SAFETY E LEMENT U PDATE S EIR 11 Affordable Housing Overlay
City of Foster City
To provide the capacity for Foster City’s
Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA),
the City’s Housing Element includes an
Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO)
Combining District that encourages the
production of additional housing units,
including affordable units. The AHO rezones
select sites with existing, older apartments to
encourage redevelopment with additional
housing that is sensitive to the neighborhood
and surrounding development. Leslie Carmichael oversees this program, including the creation of the zoning regulations, outreach to property owners, and bringing the new regulations and zoning map changes through the approval process.

City of Santa Cruz Objective Development Standards for Multi-Family Development and Community Engagement (Draft 2021)
City of Santa Cruz
Urban Planning Partners is currently working with the City of Santa Cruz to develop objective design standards for multi-family development per State laws SB 35 and the Housing Accountability Act. Given previous misinformation and community resistance to multi-family development, the Urban Planning Partners team (in partnership with InterEthnica) developed an equity-focused engagement approach that will reach communities not typically involved with the planning process. Through this more targeted approach and candid discussions with stakeholders, the team hopes to facilitate meaningful dialogue that will shape development standards that are economically feasible for developers and representative of community priorities and values.

In addition to community engagement, the objective standards will be informed by robust analysis.

Urban Planning Partners is leading a team of technical subconsultants with economic, transportation, and urban design expertise to ensure the development standards are feasible. Urban Planning Partners, with help from Kristen Hall City Design and Strategic Economics, is currently completing test fits and proforma analyses to identify current barriers to development that could be addressed with the objective development standards.

Accessory Dwelling Unit Initiative (2021)
City of Oakland and Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)/ Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)
Urban Planning Partners is leading an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Initiative to update the City of Oakland’s ADU policies, procedures, and practices and remove barriers to ADU construction. The ADU Initiative is among several strategies to increase affordable housing stock for renters while protecting current residents from displacement and ensuring that Oakland’s housing policies are racially and 91 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES J ANUARY 2022

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND S AFETY E LEMENT S U PDATE EIR 12 economically equitable. Stakeholder feedback and utilizing an equity lens have been crucial throughout the entirety of the process given our goal of reducing racial disparities through ADU development.

As the lead consultant for this project, Urban Planning Partners is developing strategies to achieve these goals supported by robust research, policy analysis, and public outreach. We have finished the research stage of the project, which included reviewing existing literature, collecting and analyzing qualitative and quantitative data from stakeholder engagement, and performing a regulatory review and geospatial analyses. Based on our findings, Urban
Planning Partners worked with the City to
identify and prioritize solutions that will best
fit Oakland’s unique needs and have the most
impact: revising the survey requirement to
make expensive property surveys the
exception and not the rule, developing short
ADU and landlord guides for homeowners to
help them know what to expect, and
establishing a pre-approved plan program to
streamline the permitting process.

LOCAL FOSTER CITY EXPERIENCE
In addition to these more recent projects listed above, we will also draw from our experience managing other Foster City environmental review projects including (note some of these projects were completed more than 5 years ago):
 Lincoln Centre Project and EIR, an approximately 595,000-square-foot office and laboratory campus that required a General Plan Amendment and Rezoning.
 15 Acres Project and EIR, a mixed-use development with senior housing, neighborhood retail, community services, and a large public plaza that will act as the City’s new town center.  Pilgrim Triton Master Plan EIR Addendum analyzed an amendment to the Master Plan, changing the allowed land uses for Phase C. This included analysis of infrastructure capacities, traffic impacts, and service impacts of the land use change.
 Gilead Sciences Integrated Corporate Campus Master Plan Subsequent EIR addenda, analyzed an amendment to the Master Plan to increase laboratory space and decrease office space and the addition of a new 61,000-square-foot Wellbeing Center.
92 13

93 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES J ANUARY 2022

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND S AFETY E LEMENT S U PDATE EIR 14 SCOPE OF WORK
The following scope of work includes three sequential phases:

1. Project Initiation,

2. Draft EIR, and

3. Response to Comments Document/Final Environmental Impact Report An ongoing project management and meetings component that will occur throughout the duration of the project is also included. This component includes general project management, staff and project meetings, and preparation of the administrative record.

A summary of our proposed work program is provided in Table 2. All the tasks necessary to complete an EIR are detailed in the scope of work.

PROJECT INITIATION
The following tasks include a kick-off meeting, base map preparation, data gathering and evaluation, and the project description.

1. Kick-Off Meeting
Urban Planning Partners will meet with City staff to discuss expectations regarding the tasks to be undertaken as part of the environmental documentation effort. We will prepare and circulate an agenda for this meeting. Topics for discussion at this meeting will include:
 Team composition and respective roles of consultants and City staff.  The City’s desired approach to involving various City departments during preparation of the EIR and review of the administrative and screencheck drafts (or portions thereof).  When and how frequently we should hold standing meetings.  Defining the project for CEQA.
 Review and confirmation of what topics can be focused out and addressed as part of an “Effects Found Not to be Significant” section included in the Draft EIR.  Determining what should be incorporated in the cumulative scenario.  Potential project alternatives.
 Project schedule.

94 J ANUARY 2022 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND SAFETY E LEMENT U PDATE S EIR

15 TABLE 2 WORK PROGRAM SUMMARY
PHASE 1. PROJECT INITIATION
TASK 1A. PROJECT INITIATION

1. Kick-Off Meeting

2. Data Gathering and Evaluation

3. Base Map Preparation

4. Project Description
TASK 1B. SCOPING MEETING
TASK 1C. REVIEW OF NOP COMMENTS/WORK PROGRAM REFINEMENT PHASE 2. DRAFT EIR
TASK 2A. EFFECTS FOUND TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT

1. Agriculture and Forest Resources

2. Biological Resources

3. Cultural Resources

4. Tribal Cultural Resources

5. Geology and Soils

6. Hydrology and Water Quality

7. Mineral Resources

8. Recreation

9. Wildfire
TASK 2B. SETTING, IMPACTS, STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, AND MITIGATION MEASURES

1. Land Use and Planning

2. Transportation and Traffic

3. Air Quality

4. Greenhouse Gas Emissions

5. Energy

6. Hazards and Hazardous Materials

7. Noise and Vibration

8. Population and Housing

9. Public Services and Utilities

10. Aesthetics
TASK 2C. CEQA REQUIRED ASSESSMENT CONCLUSIONS
TASK 2D. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
TASK 2E. STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL/MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM AND

FINDINGS
TASK 2F. DRAFT EIR

1. Administrative Draft EIR

2. Screencheck Draft EIR

3. Public Review Draft EIR
TASK 2G. DRAFT EIR HEARINGS
PHASE 3. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS DOCUMENT/FINAL EIR
TASK 3A. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS DOCUMENT/FINAL EIR

1. Administrative Draft RTC Document

2. Screencheck Draft RTC Document

3. Final RTC Document
TASK 3B. EIR CERTIFICATION HEARINGS

PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND MEETINGS

STAFF AND PROJECT TEAM MEETINGS

ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD

GENERAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT

95 P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES J ANUARY 2022

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND SAFETY E LEMENT U PDATE S EIR

17 identified in the NOP comments. Urban Planning Partners will present the revised scope of work and budget for review and approval to the City.

TASK 2B. SETTING, IMPACTS, STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, AND

For this analysis, Fehr & Peers assumes new housing units will be distributed throughout the City and will be analyzed as a group. Site-specific VMT impact analysis will not be prepared.

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND SAFETY E LEMENT U PDATE S EIR

19 requested. At the conclusion of this step, a methodology and thresholds will be selected by the City, for use in the Housing and Safety Elements Update EIR. This scope does not include detailed VMT modeling for Foster City and will rely on published data. Deliverable for this task includes a brief memorandum summarizing background information on the updated CEQA Guidelines implementing SB 743 and a recommended evaluation approach for this EIR.

1. Citywide – All VMT

2. Citywide – Home based VMT

3. Housing Element sites as a group, including sites screened out from transportation VMT impacts – All VMT (for use in the air quality and greenhouse gas analysis) This task includes a high-level review of the C/CAG-VTA Travel Demand Model land use assumptions within Foster City, and adjustment if appropriate to better-represent current development expectations per current General Plan zoning for the “No Project” case. Fehr & Peers will also check key model outputs such as trip lengths for reasonableness. Note that the project budget does not include a sub-area validation for Foster City. If, in the course of this work, substantial model performance issues are identified, they will prepare a separate proposal to address those issues.

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND S AFETY E LEMENT S U PDATE EIR 20 which could be achieved with the measures based on published literature and determine the final impact significance with mitigation.

As with the VMT analysis, this analysis will be performed for the group of all Housing Element sites; site- specific analysis will not be performed.

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND SAFETY E LEMENT U PDATE S EIR

21 arterials, and 72-hour driveway counts and some recent housing developments. Some new housing developments have recently been constructed in Foster City. Fehr & Peers proposes to collect data at new driveways to determine the effect these housing developments have had on the transportation network compared to expectations. Data collection may also include some “Big Data” from cell phone providers to help answer questions related to trip origins/destinations and to compare local traffic to regional cut through traffic.

Optional Data Collection
If more intersection count data is needed, Fehr & Peers can collect data at an additional 20 locations to be determined in consultation with City staff.

Baseline assumes that the City will provide information about existing conditions, proposed construction schedules, and foreseeable future projects. Baseline assumes that the transportation and traffic studies completed as part of the environmental analysis will include information about the project’s anticipated trip generation, vehicle miles traveled, and general fleet mix. Baseline will include the City’s standard conditions of approval regarding GHGs, and other pertinent laws and regulations in the analysis. Baseline will prepare mitigation measures to reduce any significant impacts to a less-than-significant level, if feasible.

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND SAFETY E LEMENT U PDATE S EIR

23 will summarize the project’s proposed energy-saving features, projected energy consumption, consistency with applicable energy efficiency policies and standards, and the potential need for new energy supplies or facilities to serve the project.

If potentially significant impacts are identified, mitigation measures will be recommended to reduce the level of impact to a less-than-significant level to the extent feasible.

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND SAFETY E LEMENT U PDATE S EIR

25  Significant unavoidable environmental impacts,
 Significant irreversible environmental changes, and
 Relationship between local short-term uses of the environment and long-term productivity.

TASK 2E. STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND MITIGATION MONITORING

TASK 2F. DRAFT EIR

1. Administrative Draft EIR
The information developed in Tasks 2A through 2E will be organized into an administrative Draft EIR.

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND S AFETY E LEMENT S U PDATE EIR 26  Environmental Regulatory Setting, Impacts, Standard Conditions of Approval, and Mitigation Measures
 Effects Found not to be Significant or Less than Significant with Standard Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Measures
 Other CEQA-Required Sections
 Alternatives
 EIR Preparers and References
 Technical Appendices (as needed)
Urban Planning Partners will review recent environmental documents (complete and/or in process) to make certain that approaches, assumptions, methodologies, and impact conclusions for the project are consistent with other environmental documents. Where appropriate, Urban Planning Partners will coordinate and discuss such with subconsultants working on the project.

Urban Planning Partners will maintain all materials referenced in the environmental document and promptly provide such materials to the City upon request.

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND SAFETY E LEMENT U PDATE S EIR

27 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS DOCUMENT/FINAL EIR
TASK 3A. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS DOCUMENT

1. Administrative Draft Response to Comments Document
Urban Planning Partners will prepare the Response to Comments (RTC) document on the project following the public review period.

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND S AFETY E LEMENT S U PDATE EIR 28 PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND MEETINGS

Project management tasks include regular client contact; contract management; assistance to team members; schedule coordination; and development of products.

In addition to the Kick-off meeting, Lynette and Carla will attend up to six (6) public hearings.

108

29 4. T IMELINE
The estimated timeline for completing an EIR for the Foster City Housing and Safety Elements based on the scope of work detailed in Section 3 is shown in Table 3.

109
Table 3. Proposed Timeline
City of Foster City Housing and Safety Elements Update EIR Bold: Public Meetings
Consultants
Date Date
Project Initiation
Issue Notice of Preparation City Fri, Jan 21, 2022
City Council approve CEQA Consultant Agreement Mon, Feb 7, 2022 Scoping Session with PC City Thu, Feb 17, 2022
End of NOP Scoping Period -- 30 days Mon, Feb 21, 2022
late February
Prepare Draft EIR
Administrative Draft EIR UPP 13
weeks Mon, May 23, 2022 3 weeks Mon, Jun 13, 2022
Screen Draft EIR UPP 3 weeks Tue, Jul 5, 2022 2 weeks Tue, Jul 19, 2022 Public Review Draft UPP 1 week Tue, Jul 26, 2022
Draft EIR Public Review
End of DEIR 45-day Comment Period -- 45 days Fri, Sep 9, 2022 Planning Commission - DEIR City Thu, Sep 15, 2022
Response to Comments/Final EIR
Admin Draft Response to Comments UPP 2 weeks Thu, Sep 29, 2022 1 week Thu, Oct 6, 2022 Screencheck Draft Response to Comments UPP 1 week Thu, Oct 13, 2022 1 week Thu, Oct 20, 2022 Final Response to Comments UPP 5 days Tue, Oct 25, 2022 Public/Approval Hearings
Planning Commission UPP/City TBD
City Council UPP/City TBD
Mtg with City Staff to review NOP comments and
CEQA approach
City Review
Weeks/Days Weeks/Days
Consultant Work and Public Review
1 110

31 5 . E ST I MATED F EE
Urban Planning Partners is proposing to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Housing and Safety Elements Update for the City of Foster City, which includes a Water Supply Assessment and Wastewater/Sewer Capacity Study. Our estimated fee for completion of the scope of work set forth in this proposal is $346,284.

The total cost for optional tasks would be $22,121.

A detailed breakdown of the estimated fee is provided in Table 4. We will undertake the work on a time- and-materials basis, with an estimated not-to-exceed amount without prior authorization.

111
P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES J ANUARY 2022

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND E LEMENTS U PDATE EIR

32 112
Table 4 Estimated Fee
Lynette Dias
Principal-in-Charge
Carla Violet
Project Manager
Project Planner
Graphics/
Word Processing
Leslie Carmichael
Technical Advisor
Bruce Abelli-Amen, CHg
Principal/Senior
Hydrogeologist
Patrick Sutton
Environmental Engineer
III
Cem Atabek
Environmental Engineer
III
Yilin Tian
Environmental Engineer
Word Processing
Project/Contract
Administration
Matt Goyne
Associate in Charge
Mike Hawkins
Project Manager
Project Engineer/Planner
Forecasting Lead
Support/Graphics
Michelle Maddaus
Project Manager
Tess Kretschmann
Technical Analysis
Sierra Orr
Project Support
Andrea Pacheco
Document Edit/Format
Hannah Braun
Technical Analysis
John Leys
Principle
Brian Ballerini
Senior Project Manager
Craig Boman
Project Engineer
Alex Cabrera
Design Engineer II
Hourly Rate: $300 $195 $125 $130 $210 $225 $185 $185 $175 $120 $130 $250 $210 $150 $200 $140 $290 $200 $165 $140 $120 $245 $200 $190 $165 PHASE 1. Project Initiation
Task 1A: Project Initiation

1. Kick-Off Meeting 2 2 - - 2 1,410$ - 2 1 1 - - 730$ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ 1 - 1 - 435$ 2,575$

2. Data Gathering - 2 4 2 - 1,150$ - - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - 1 1 2 720$ 1,870$

3. Base Map Preparation - 2 - 4 - 910$ - - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - 1 1 2 720$ 1,630$

4. Project Description 2 8 4 4 2 3,600$ - - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - 1 1 1 555$ 4,155$ Subtotal for Task 1A 4 14 8 10 4 7,070$ - 2 1 1 - - 730$ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ 1 3 4 5 2,430$ 10,230 $ Task 1B: Scoping Meeting
Subtotal for Task 1B 2 - 2 810$ - - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - -$ 810$ Task 1C: Review of NOP Comments/Work Program Refinement Subtotal for Task 1C 1 2 4 - - 1,190$ - - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - -$ 1,190$ hours 5 18 12 10 6 - 2 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 3 4 5 $ 1,500 3,510 1,500 1,300 1,260 9,070 $ - 370 185 175 - - 730$ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ 245 600 760 825 2,430$ 12,230 $ PHASE 2. Draft EIR
Task 2A. Effects Found to be Less Than Significant
Subtotal for Task 2A 2 6 12 4 - 3,790$ 4 - 48 - 2 - 10,020$ - - - - - - - - - - - - $ 13,810$ Task 2B. Setting, Impacts, Standard Conditions of Approval, and Mitigation Measures

1. Land Use and Planning 2 10 12 4 4 5,410$ - - - - - - -$ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 5,410$

2. Transportation and Traffic 4 8 6 6 2 4,710$ - - - - - - -$ 32 96 224 46 76 81,600$ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 86,310$

3. Air Quality 1 4 2 1 - 1,460$ - 4 - 40 1 - 7,860$ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 9,320$

4. Greenhouse Gas Emissions 1 2 1 1 - 945$ - 4 - 30 1 - 6,110$ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 7,055$

5. Energy - 2 1 1 - 645$ 2 - 12 1 2,590 $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 3,235$

6. Hazards and Hazardous Materials 1 2 2 1 - 1,070$ - 2 40 - 1 - 7,890$ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 8,960$

7. Noise and Vibration 1 4 2 1 - 1,460$ - 4 - 40 1 - 7,860$ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 9,320$

8. Population and Housing 1 2 2 1 - 1,070$ - - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 1,070$

9. Public Services and Utilities 2 10 24 1 2 6,100$ - - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ 30 20 16 20 50 24,140$ 3 10 22 40 13,515$ 43,755 $

10. 4 8 12 6 - 5,040$ - - - - - - -$ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 5,040$ Subtotal for Task 2B 17 52 64 23 8 27,910$ - 16 40 122 5 - 32,310$ 32 96 224 46 76 81,600$ 30 20 16 20 50 24,140$ 3 10 22 40 13,515$ 179,475 $ Task 2C. CEQA Required Assessment Conclusions
Subtotal for Task 2C 1 4 4 1 - 1,710$ - - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - -$ 1,710$ Task 2D. Alternatives Analysis
Subtotal for Task 2D 6 20 16 4 4 9,060$ - - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - -$ 9,060$ Task 2E. Standard Conditions of Approval/Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Findings Subtotal for Task 2E 2 8 16 4 2 5,100$ - - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - -$ 5,100$ Task 2F. Draft EIR

1. Admin Draft 12 16 12 10 8 11,200$ - 2 8 8 - - 3,250$ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 14,450$

2. Screencheck 6 14 20 8 4 8,910$ - 2 6 6 - - 2,530$ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 11,440$

3. Public Review Draft EIR 4 12 16 6 2 6,740$ - 4 12 12 - - 5,060$ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 11,800$ Subtotal for Task 2F 22 42 48 24 14 26,850$ - 8 26 26 - - 10,840$ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 37,690$ Task 2G. Draft EIR Hearings (2 mtgs)
Subtotal for Task 2G 4 10 - - - 3,150$ - - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 3,150$ hours 54 142 160 60 28 4 24 114 148 7 - 32 96 224 46 76 30 20 16 20 50 3 10 22 40 13,515$ $ 16,200 27,690 20,000 7,800 5,880 77,570 900 4,440 21,090 25,900 840 - 53,170 8,000 $ 20,160 $ 33,600 $ 9,200 $ 10,640 $ 81,600 $ 8,700 $ 4,000 $ 2,640 $ 2,800 $ 6,000 $ 24,140 $ 735 2,000 4,180 6,600 13,515 $ 249,995 $ PHASE 3. Response to Comments Document/Final EIR
Task 3A. Response to Comments Document

1. Admin Draft RTC 6 20 16 8 6 10,000$ - - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 10,000$

2. Screencheck Draft RTC 4 12 12 4 2 5,980$ - - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 5,980$

3. Final RTC 4 8 8 2 - 4,020$ - - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 4,020$ Subtotal for Task 3A 14 40 36 14 8 20,000$ - - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 20,000$ Task 3B. EIR Certification Hearings (2 mtgs)
Subtotal for Task 3B 4 10 - - 6 4,410$ - - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 4,410$ hours 18 50 36 14 14 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $5 , 4 0 0 9,750 4,500 1,820 2,940 24,410 - - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 24,410$ ON-GOING. Project Management and Meetings
Staff/Project Team Meetings
Subtotal 16 36 16 - 4 14,660$ - - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 14,660$ EIR Administrative Record
Subtotal 2 4 24 12 - 5,940$ - - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 5,940$ General Project Management
Subtotal 12 40 20 - - 13,900$ - - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 13,900$ hours 30 80 60 12 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $9 , 0 0 0 15,600 7,500 1,560 840 34,500 - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - - $ - - - - - $ 34,500$

TOTAL EIR LABOR ESTIMATE
hours 107 290 268 96 52 4 26 115 149 7 0 32 96 224 46 76 30 20 16 20 50 4 13 26 45 $ 32,100$ 56,550 $ 33,500 $ 12,480 $ 10,920 $ 145,550 $ 900 $ 4,810$ 21,275 $ 26,075 $ 840 $ - $ 53,900$ 8,000 $ 20,160 $ 33,600 $ 9,200 $ 10,640 $ 81,600 $ 8,700 $ 4,000 $ 2,640 $ 2,800 $ 6,000 $ 24,140 $ 980 $ 2,600$ 4,940 $ 7,425 $ 15,945 $ 321,135$ Team Total
Urban Planning Partners
Total
Maddaus Total
Maddaus Water Management Sherwood Design Engineers
Sherwood Total
ONGOING. PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND MEETINGS

SUBTOTAL
PHASE 1. PROJECT INITIATION SUBTOTAL
Aesthetics
PHASE 3. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS

DOCUMENT/FINAL EIR
PHASE 2. DRAFT EIR
Urban Planning Partners Baseline Environmental Consulting Baseline Environmental
Total
Fehr & Peers Total
Fehr & Peers
113
Table 4 Estimated Fee
Lynette Dias
Principal-in-Charge
Carla Violet
Project Manager
Project Planner
Graphics/
Word Processing
Leslie Carmichael
Technical Advisor
Bruce Abelli-Amen, CHg
Principal/Senior
Hydrogeologist
Patrick Sutton
Environmental Engineer
III
Cem Atabek
Environmental Engineer
III
Yilin Tian
Environmental Engineer
Word Processing
Project/Contract
Administration
Matt Goyne
Associate in Charge
Mike Hawkins
Project Manager
Project Engineer/Planner
Forecasting Lead
Support/Graphics
Michelle Maddaus
Project Manager
Tess Kretschmann
Technical Analysis
Sierra Orr
Project Support
Andrea Pacheco
Document Edit/Format
Hannah Braun
Technical Analysis
John Leys
Principle
Brian Ballerini
Senior Project Manager
Craig Boman
Project Engineer
Alex Cabrera
Design Engineer II
Hourly Rate: $300 $195 $125 $130 $210 $225 $185 $185 $175 $120 $130 $250 $210 $150 $200 $140 $290 $200 $165 $140 $120 $245 $200 $190 $165 Team Total
Urban Planning Partners
Total
Maddaus Total
Maddaus Water Management Sherwood Design Engineers
Sherwood Total
Urban Planning Partners Baseline Environmental Consulting Baseline Environmental
Total
Fehr & Peers Total
Fehr & Peers

DIRECT COSTS

1. Misc. Direct Costs and Printing 500$ 6,400$ 6,900$

2. Subconsultant Mark-up (10%) 18,249$ 18,249$ TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 18,749$ -$ 6,400$ -$ - $ 25,149$

TOTAL ESTIMATED FEE
164,299$ 53,900$ 88,000 $ 24,140 $ 15,945 $ 346,284 $

OPTIONAL TASKS
1 Additional Roadway Analysis Locations 4 10 38 12 14 13,160$ 13,160$ 2 Additional Roadway Analysis Locations Direct Costs 6,950$ 6,950$ 3 Subconsultant Mark-up (10%) 2,011$ 2,011$ TOTAL OPTIONAL TASKS 2,011$ -$ 20,110$ -$ - $ 22,121$

TOTAL ESTIMATED FEE (WITH OPTIONAL TASKS)
166,310$ 53,900$ 108,110$ 24,140$ 15,945 $ 368,405$ 114

35 6 . R EFERENCES
We encourage you to contact our references regarding the quality of our work, management of budget and schedule, and attentiveness to project needs.

Leslie Mendez, Planning Manager
City of San Rafael (formerly with City of Berkeley)
(415) 485-3095
[email protected]
Project Overview: 2580 Bancroft Mixed-Use Infill EIR

Charlie Bryant, Planning & Building Director
City of Emeryville
(510) 596-4361
[email protected]
Project Overview: Various City of Emeryville CEQA Projects

Drew Haydel, Principal
Lane Partners
(605) 838-0100
[email protected]
Project Overview: 2100 Telegraph – Eastline Project EIR and Entitlements

Ada Chan, Regional Planner

MTC/ABAG
(415) 820-7958
[email protected]

Darin Ranelletti, Policy Director for Housing Security
City of Oakland, Mayor’s Office
(510) 238-3460
[email protected]
Projects Overview: Accessory Dwelling Unit Initiative and Alameda County Housing Collaborative

Susan Hartman, Community Development Director
Town of Paradise
(530) 872-6291 ext 417
[email protected]
Project Overview: Town of Paradise Housing Element and IS/MND

Laura Russell, Planning and Building Director
Town of Portola Valley
(650) 851-1700 ext. 218
[email protected]
115
P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES J ANUARY 2022

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND E LEMENTS U PDATE EIR
36 Project Overview: Portola Valley Housing Element Update, Safety Element Update, and CEQA Review

Debbie Pedro, Community Development Director
City of Saratoga
(408) 686-1222
[email protected]
Project Overview: Saratoga Housing Element Update and EIR

116

A PPENDIX A

WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT SCOPE OF WORK

117
P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES J ANUARY 2022

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND E LEMENTS U PDATE EIR

118

Page 1 ends

January 11, 2022

Carla Violet
Urban Planning Partners
388 17th Street, Suite 230
Oakland, CA 94612
Subject: Proposal for Technical Services for Foster City EIR Water Supply Assessment Study Dear Ms. Violet,
Maddaus Water Management Inc. (MWM) is pleased to present this proposal to provide technical services for the development of a Water Supply Assessment (WSA) in Technical Memorandum (TM) format for the City of Foster City (City) in partnership with Urban Planning Partners Inc. (UPP) . This letter proposal presents MWM company and personnel information along with a project scope, schedule, and estimated fees.

LIST OF PROJECT TASKS
The project tasks (Scope of Work) that MWM intends to complete are outlined below.

Task 1 – Technical Study for Water Supply Assessment
UPP has requested to work dynamically with MWM to develop a technical study in the form of a TM that will serve as a WSA for the City ’s General Plan . The WSA will focus on a clear connection to E stero Municipal Improvement District’s (EMID’s) 2020 Urban Water Management Plan . Based on MWM’s recent 2021 work preparing EMID’s potable water demand fore cast, MWM will advise on the challenges of future water supply availability and revisit the potential for net zero water policy approach to new development , which supports continued development with the proposed future curtailment in SFPUC water supplies. More details, including opportunities to resolve these challenges, will be discussed during the development of the City’s WSA.

It is assumed that one electronic draft WSA will be provided to U PP for comment by City staff. In addition, it is assumed that one set of consolidated electronic comments with information from the City (preferably in track changes format) will be provided to MWM by UPP. The WSA will be revised one time based on these electronic comments. If the proposed parameters change and the WSA needs to be revised, it is assumed th at additional scope and budget will be required for MWM to revise and complete the WSA.

Task 2 – Technical Support (Optional)
Additional technical support by MWM will be directed by the City and/or UPP staff, up to the allowable budget.

This support may include MWM participation in the public stakeholder process. All additional support will be completed based on written authorization by the City and/or UPP.

SCHEDULE
The work outlined above has a planned completion date of October 31, 2022. 119

Page 2 ends

COST ESTIMATE
Task Title/Description
Michelle
Maddaus
Project
Manager
$290/hr.

Tess
Kretschmann
Technical
Analysis
$200/hr.

Sierra
Orr
Project
Support
$165/hr.

Andrea
Pacheco
Document
Edit/Format
$140/hr.

Hannah
Braun
Technical
Analysis
$120/hr.

Full resumes are available upon request.

MWM Personnel Qualifications and 2022 Rates
Person Position Service/Discipline Education/Degree Hourly Rate
Michelle
Maddaus, P.E.

Biostatistics
$120
Andrea
Pacheco Technical Editor Technical Documentation
Review/Design B.A. English $140

120

Page 3 ends

Sincerely,

Michelle Maddaus, P.E.

President
Maddaus Water Management
105 Zephyr Place
Danville, CA 94526

MWM regularly partners with engineering and financial planning firms across the United States, serving clients throughout most of the country as well as internationally . As an internationally recognized water conservation authority, MWM brings extensive knowledge of demand analysis and water conser vation and an unparalleled combination of water conservation expertise and understanding of CII conservation programs to its projects .

Page 4 ends

City of Foster City, Water Supply Assessments, California MWM Project Manager: Michelle Maddaus
MWM Technical Lead (DSS Model): Chris Matyas
Value of Contracts: $130,000
Projects Completed: 2014–2021
Contacts: Laura Galli, Engineering Manager
Allen Smith, Public Works Maintenance Manager
Phone: 650-867-2280 (Laura); 650-286-3546 (Allen)
Email: [email protected]; [email protected]
MWM assisted the City of Foster City in the development of four Water Supply Assessments (WSAs), which were drafted to provide information for use in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis for the proposed projects. The WSAs added to previous water demand projections created as part of the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency Regional Demand and Conservation Projections completed by MWM. The purpose of the WSAs was to determine if there was adequate water supply to meet the water needs of the new proposed projects within the Foster City/Estero Municipal Improvement District (EMID) service are a. MWM collaborated on the WSAs with Urban Planning Partners and the Foster City (EMID) Planning and Engineering Departments. MWM’s role was to estimate calculations for water demand and assist in compiling WSA reports for the following projects: Lincoln C enter Campus, Pilgrim Triton Development Project Phase C, new hotel in Metro Center, and the more recent Gilead Wellbeing Center.

City of Foster City 2020 Urban Water Management Plan and Water Shortage Contingency Plan, California
MWM Project Manager: Michelle Maddaus
MWM Technical Review (QA/QC): Lisa Maddaus
MWM Lead Modeler: Hannah Braun
Value of Contract: $22,000
Completion Date: July 2021
Contacts: Laura Galli, Engineering Manager
Allen Smith, Public Works Maintenance Manager
Phone: 650-867-2280 (Laura); 650-286-3546 (Allen)
Email: [email protected]; [email protected]
MWM worked as a team with EKI Environment and Water, Inc. to prepare the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) and 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) for the City of Foster City/Estero Municipal Improvement District (EMID). The UWMP closely followed the content requirements found in the California Department of Water Resources 2020 UWMP Guidebook. MWM supported Chapter 4 of the UWMP, which was an evaluation of current and future water demand estimates. EMID’s UWMP projected water demands came from the DSS Model demand analysis, which was a result of MWM’s work on the BAWS CA 2020 Demand Analysis. This included updated population, production and consumption for 2019 and 2020.

For the 2020 WSCP, MWM helped EMID present potentially catastrophic conditions leading to water shortages, planned response to short-term and long-term water shortages (including drought), and an organizational chart including the roles and responsibilities of EMID staff and other stakeholders with regard to tracking and implementing the WSCP. Furthermore, the WSCP outlined the water shortage stages of action and prohibitions of water end uses, including landscape irrigation, CII uses, water features, and swimming pools. In the WSCP, consumption reduction methods were defined, water shortage reductions were determined, and EMID’s normal supply and routin e ongoing conservation activity was described. Revenue and expenditure impacts as well as drought rate structures and surcharges were exhibited. A Public Outreach Plan relating to WSCP implementation was also included and was based on MWM’s prior experience working with Foster City/EMID. 122

Page 5 ends

EMID’s 2020 UWMP and 2020 WSCP were adopted by the City Council after a public hearing then submitted to DWR for approval by July 1, 2021.

Valley of the Moon Water District, Sonoma County Springs Specific Plan Water Supply Assessment, California
MWM Project Manager: Michelle Maddaus
Value of Contract: $20,000
Completion Date: July 2019
Contacts: Beth Thompson, De Novo Planning Group
Chris Petlock, Valley of the Moon Water District
Phone: 916-812-7927 (Beth); 707-996-1037 (Chris)
Email: [email protected]; [email protected] MWM assisted De Novo Planning Group in the preparation of a Water Supply Assessment (WSA) for the development of the Springs Specific Plan in Sonoma County. The WSA was drafted to provide information for use in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis for the proposed projects. This WSA builds on previous water demand projections created as part of the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan Water Demand Analysis and Water Conservation Meas ures Update worked on in conjunction with the eight other Sonoma - Marin Saving Water Partnership (SMSWP) Water Contractors and completed in July 2015. The purpose of the WSA was to determine if there was adequate water supply to meet the water needs of the new proposed Springs Specific Plan project within the plan area, which is in the unincorporated area of Sonoma County, north of the City of Sonoma city limits.

This project included the following:
• 15 new neighborhood commercial connections with 8 dwelling units • 82 new commercial connections with 120 hotel rooms
• 50 new mixed-use connections with 138 new dwelling units • 3 mixed-use irrigation connections
• 3 new recreational connections
• 131 medium density residential connections with 119 single-family and 113 multifamily dwelling units • 31 high density residential connections with 310 new multifamily dwelling units MWM’s role was to estimate calculations for water demand and assist in compiling WSA reports for Sonoma County. The analysis concluded that the Springs Specific Plan project will add a total of 209 acre -feet of water per year.

More information about the Springs Specific Plan can be found online:
https://sonomacounty.ca.gov/PRMD/Long-Range-Plans/Springs-Specific- Plan/#:~:text=Its%20purpose%20is%20to%20implement,infrastructure%20to%20serve%20the%20area.

123
124

A PPENDIX B

KEY STAFF RESUMES
125
P ROPOSAL FOR S ERVICES J ANUARY 2022

F OSTER C ITY H OUSING AND E LEMENTS U PDATE EIR

126

LYNETTE DIAS
P r e s i d e n t / P r i n c i P a l

EXPERIENCE
Lynette has over 25 years of planning experience working for both public agencies and private landowners and developers. Much of her work focuses on planning policy, community engagement, project entitlement strategy, and environmental review. Lynette has significant experience in developing and implementing entitlement strategies for many high-profile and complex urban projects, including many TOD and downtown projects, as well several significant redevelopment and public/private partnership projects. Preparing planning policy and assisting municipal governments in developing land and development regulations, managing projects, negotiating development agreements, and updating general plans, specific plans, and zoning codes are also strong practice areas for Lynette.

Lynette’s experience is uniquely balanced between project-specific implementation and longer-range policy planning. She is recognized by colleagues and clients for her strengths in working on complex projects, effectively presenting project information to a diverse audience, and identifying and solving project challenges related to implementation of and consistency with relevant planning policy and the associated entitlement process.

As Co-Chair of Urban Land Institute’s (ULI) Policy and Practice Committee, Lynette is leading several significant initiatives to identify and implement innovative solutions to the many challenges faced by the Bay Area region.

One of these initiatives includes the development and piloting of an urban development training for public officials that ULI now offers across the US.

PROJECT EXPERIENCE HIGHLIGHTS
• Irvington BART Station Site Plan Environmental Review, Fremont and BART, CA • Downtown Oakland Specific Plan and EIR, Oakland, CA
• BART to Livermore Extension Project EIR, Livermore, CA • Jack London District 4th and Madison EIR, Oakland, CA • MacArthur BART Transit Village EIR, Oakland, CA
• Foster City Redevelopment Area/Shopping Centers EIR for the City of Foster City • Alameda Point General Plan Amendment EIR for the City of Alameda • Strong Neighborhoods Initiative Program EIR for the Redevelopment Agency of San José CAREER
RRM Design Group Principal
LSA Associates, Inc. Principal/Associate
City of Saratoga Planner
City of Campbell Planner
RRM Design Group Planner

EDUCATION
Bachelor of Science, City and Regional Planning, California Polytechnic State University 127
URBAN

PLANNING

PARTNERS
INC.

CARLA VIOLET
A S S O C I A T E P R I N C I P A L / P l a n n i n g M a n a g e r

EXPERIENCE
Carla has ten years of experience in land use planning and environmental review consulting services. She has managed CEQA documents, ranging from streamlined CEQA exemptions to EIRs with a focus on mixed-use, infill development projects near transit stations. Carla has also served as a contract planner for the cities of El Cerrito, Union City, Foster City, Berkeley, and Novato.

Carla is currently Union City’s contract planner managing the Station East Residential and Mixed-Use Project EIR and entitlements near the Union City BART Station which proposes the development of up to approximately

1.8 million square feet, 974 new residential units and 30,800 square feet of commercial space. She is also managing the California College of the Arts (CCA) Oakland Campus Redevelopment Project EIR. The CCA project proposes redevelopment of a 4.2-acre campus with 462 residential units across two residential buildings, office space, and 1.54 acres of public open space, as well as the renovation and relocation of existing historic buildings.

Her recently completed project include the Eastline at 2100 Telegraph Avenue Project EIR, the redevelopment of a 3-acre site in downtown Oakland. The EIR analyzed several mixed-use scenarios, the largest of which was up to 2.8 million square feet of office. She also served as Deputy Project Manager for the new Irvington BART Station Site Plan and Area Plan for the City of Fremont and BART. Carla is skilled at managing large subconsultant teams and navigating complex projects with expedited timelines that require managing the CEQA review and entitlements processes on parallel paths in close collaboration with City staff and applicant teams.

PROJECT EXPERIENCE HIGHLIGHTS
• California College of the Arts Oakland Campus Redevelopment Project EIR, Oakland, CA • Station East Residential and Mixed-Use Project Contract Planning, Union City, CA • New Hotel in Metro Center General Development Plan Project EIR, Foster City, CA • Irvington BART Station Site Plan, Area Plan, and Environmental Review, City of Fremont and BART • Eastline Project at 2100 Telegraph Avenue Entitlements and EIR, Oakland, CA • Levee Protection Planning and Improvements Project EIR, Foster City, CA • Lincoln Centre Life Sciences Research Campus Project EIR, Foster City, CA • Chevron Refinery Modernization Project Outreach and EIR, Richmond, CA CAREER
Houseal Lavigne Associates Associate Intern
Texas Low Income Housing Information Services Policy Analyst Intern Self-Help Federal Credit Union
Executive Intern
Energy Solutions Contracts Manager

EDUCATION
Master of Science, Community and Regional Planning, University of Texas at Austin Bachelor of Arts, Sociology, University of California, Davis 128
URBAN

PLANNING

PARTNERS
INC.

EXPERIENCE
Leslie has extensive experience coordinating review of complex development projects from the beginning of the planning and environmental review process through construction. Leslie has managed public review processes to ensure that the interests of reviewing agencies and departments, as well as the public, are addressed.

Her experience includes review of complex projects, preparation of environmental documents, general plan elements, agenda management, public counter supervision, redevelopment agency administration, affordable housing strategies and management, zoning code updates, architectural guidelines, and much more.

Leslie has an extensive background in planning and redevelopment, including more than 30 years in the public sector. Among her public sector experiences, Leslie managed preparation of Foster City’s Housing Element updates in 2001, 2010, and 2015 including assessment of needs, public outreach, site analysis, and development of policies and implementation measures. Leslie prepared municipal code amendments to implement various aspects of the Foster City Housing Element, including reasonable accommodation, tenant anti-discrimination based on source of income, emergency shelters, and density bonus.

CONTRACT PLANNING EXPERIENCE HIGHLIGHTS
• Affordable Housing Program Management, Foster City, CA • Station East Residential Mixed Use Project Entitlements, Union City, CA • Lazuli Landing Affordable Housing Project Entitlements, Union City, CA • Housing Element Updates (2001, 2010, and 2015), Foster City, CA • General Plan Update: Local Hazard Mitigation Plan/Safety, Land Use/Circulation Elements, Foster City, CA
• Pilgrim Triton Master Plan and Review of Subsequent Development Phases and Projects (730 units and 296,000 SF of commercial), Foster City, CA
• One Hundred Grand Apartments and Retail (166 units), Foster City, CA • Waverly Cove Townhouses (20 units), Foster City, CA
• Marlin Cove Redevelopment Project Apartments and Retail (280 units), Foster City, CA • Miramar Apartments Redevelopment Project (159 units), Foster City, CA • Management of Planning Division, including public counter, agenda preparation and development review, Foster City, CA
CAREER
Urban Planning Partners Principal Planner
Metropolitan Planning Group City Planner
City of Foster City Senior Planner/Planning Manager
Denise Duffy Associates City Planner
City of Novato Planner/Zoning Administrator

EDUCATION
Master of Urban & Regional Planner, San Jose State University Bachelor of Arts, Environmental Planning, University of California, Santa Cruz

LESLIE CARMICHAEL AICP
P r i n c i P a l P l a n n e r
129
Bruce Abelli-Amen, PG, CHg
Principal, Certified Hydrogeologist

Areas of Expertise
Project management, CEQA,
hydrology and water quality, geology,
hazardous materials management
Education
M.S., Environmental Systems, Applied
Geology, Humboldt State University,
1988
B.A., Geological Sciences, University of
California, Santa Barbara
Registrations/Certifications
Certified Hydrogeologist No. 96, 1995
Professional Geologist No. 5593, 1993
Years of Experience
31 Years
Bruce Abelli-Amen, owner and Principal of Baseline, is a Certified Hydrogeologist, Professional Geologist, and a CEQA project manager.

He also manages hazardous materials investigations. He has experience in all phases of CEQA and NEPA projects, including a wide range of project types from small focused projects to managing large multi-disciplinary teams of specialists in the preparation of Expanded Initial Studies, Mitigated Negative Declarations, and Environmental Impact Reports and Statements. He has managed CEQA projects for landfill decommissioning, new wastewater treatment plants, mining projects, resource management plans, mixed-use developments, and major water and sewer conveyance infrastructure projects (including tunnels and pipelines).

Bruce has managed numerous on-call environmental services contracts for municipal agencies, including SF Public Works, SF Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC), Port of Oakland, Port of SF, Yolo County, City of Milpitas, Town of Windsor, and others.

He also has experience with construction management, mitigation monitoring, and permitting, which provides useful insights into the development of feasible and practical bid specifications and mitigation measures for identified significant CEQA impacts.

He has extensive experience managing hazardous materials investigations and has designed and implemented groundwater aquifer tests and remediation systems for the cleanup of contaminated shallow groundwater aquifers. He has managed numerous underground storage tank (UST) investigations and is familiar with local, state, and federal regulatory requirements for such investigations. He has supervised soil excavation, large scale bioremediation projects, and backfill operations.

Project Experience
Various On-Call Environmental Consulting Contracts, Contract and Project Manager for on-call contracts with City of Berkeley, San Francisco Public utilities Commission, SF Public Works, City of Milpitas and Sonoma County Water Agency.

SFPUC Channel Tunnel EIR, Project Manager for preparation of comprehensive CEQA documents (detailed initial Study and focused EIR).

KC BBQ Meat Smoker Emission Evaluation, Project Manager in assisting City of Berkeley Attorney’s Office in evaluation of air quality impacts associated with wood smoke emissions.

Foster City Levee Improvement Project EIR, Technical Project Manager for preparation of EIR. Prepared and/or provided review for technical sections including hydrology, geology, hazardous materials, noise, air quality, GHG, and alternatives.

City Place EIR, Santa Clara, Project Manager for Geology, Groundwater Hydrology and Water Quality, and Hazardous Materials sections.

Apple Campus EIR, Cupertino, Project Manager for Geology, Hazards, and Hydrology EIR sections. 130
Patrick Sutton, P.E.

Senior Environmental Engineer

Areas of Expertise
Air Quality, GHGs, Hazardous
Materials, Geology, and Hydrology
Education
M.S., Civil and Environmental
Engineering, University of
California – Davis
B.S., Environmental Science,
Dickinson College
Registration
Professional Engineer No. 13609 (RI)
Years of Experience
17 Years
Patrick Sutton is an environmental engineer who specializes in the assessment of hazardous materials released into the environment.

Mr. Sutton prepares technical reports in support of environmental review, such as Phase I/II Environmental Site Investigations, Air Quality Reports, Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reduction Plans, and Health Risk Assessments. He has prepared numerous CEQA/NEPA
evaluations for air quality, GHGs, geology, hazardous materials, and water quality related to residential, commercial, and industrial projects, as well as large infrastructure developments. His proficiency in a wide range of modeling software (AERMOD, CalEEMod, RCEM, CT‐EMFAC) as well as relational databases, GIS, and graphics design allows him to thoroughly and efficiently assess and mitigate environmental concerns.

For mixed‐use development projects, Mr. Sutton has prepared health risk assessments for sensitive receptors exposed to toxic air contaminants based on air dispersion modeling. He has also prepared GHG Reduction Plans to demonstrate how projects can comply with State and/or local GHG reduction goals. For large highway infrastructure improvement projects, Mr. Sutton has prepared air quality and hazardous materials technical reports in accordance with Caltrans requirements. Air quality assessments include the evaluation of criteria air pollutants, mobile source air toxics, and GHG emissions to support environmental review of the project under CEQA/NEPA and to determine conformity with the State Implementation Plan.

Hazardous materials investigations include sampling and statistically analysis of aerially‐deposited lead adjacent to highway corridors.

Project Experience
Oakland Downtown Specific Plan EIR. Prepared a program‐ and project‐level Air Quality and GHG Emissions analysis. Developed a mitigation measure with performance standards to ensure GHG emissions from future projects comply with the Citywide 2030 GHG reduction target.

I‐680 Express Lanes from SR 84 to Alcosta Boulevard Project. Prepared Initial Site Assessment and Preliminary Site Investigation to evaluate contaminants of potential concern in soil and groundwater. Prepared Air Quality Report to determine the project’s conformity to federal air quality regulations and to support environmental review of the project under CEQA and NEPA.

Altamont Corridor Expressway (ACE/Forward) Project EIR/EIS. Prepared a program‐ and project‐level Hazardous Materials analysis for over 120 miles of railroad corridor from San Jose to Merced. Hazardous materials concerns, such as release sites, petroleum pipelines, agricultural pesticides, and nearby school sites were evaluated in GIS.

Stonegate Residential Subdivision EIR. Prepared a project‐level Hydrology and Water Quality analysis for a residential development located within the 100‐year floodplain. The proposed project included modifications to existing levees and flood channels.

BART Silicon Valley Extension Project. Prepared Initial Site Assessment and Hazardous Materials EIS/EIR section for extending 6 miles of proposed BART service through the Cities of San Jose and Santa Clara. 131
Cem Atabek
Senior Environmental Engineer

Cem Atabek is an environmental engineer who specializes in hazardous materials management, site characterization, development and implementation of remedial actions, and soil vapor intrusion mitigation for city, county, port, commercial/industrial, and school district clients.

He has extensive experience in preparation of technical content for CEQA documents including Initial Studies/Mitigated Negative Declarations (IS/MNDs), and Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs). He has worked on CEQA documents for school districts, utility districts, remediation projects, transportation/rail projects, dredging projects, levee projects, landfills, biomedical facilities/campuses, residential and mixed‐use developments. His CEQA work has been heavily focused on the topics of hazards and hazardous materials, geology and soils, and hydrology and water quality.

He has conducted investigations and remediation activities on contaminated properties and leaking underground storage tank sites, including media contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons, solvents, metals, and manufactured gas plant wastes. He has designed and provided oversight for the installation of remedial surface caps to prevent exposure to impacted soils, and soil vapor intrusion mitigation systems. Through his work, he has developed a thorough understanding of regulatory requirements and established working relationships with regulatory agency staff on the state and local levels. His technical background and experience provide useful insights into the development of feasible and practical mitigation measures for identified significant CEQA impacts.

Areas of Expertise
Hazardous Materials, Geology, and
Hydrology and Water Quality
Education
B.S., Environmental Engineering,
University of California, Berkeley
Registrations/Certifications
40‐hour OSHA training
Years of Experience
15 Years
Project Experience
Former General Electric Oakland Facility Redevelopment, EIR, 2019‐2020. Prepared technical sections for hazardous materials, geology, and hydrology for the remediation and redevelopment of a former GE manufacturing facility which was heavily contaminated with volatile organic compounds and polychlorinated biphenyls. Coordinated with regulatory agencies to ensure the adequacy of proposed remedial actions and developed a mitigation measure to ensure that construction activities would not result in the release of hazardous materials into the environment.

Biomarin and Whistlestop/Eden Housing Project, EIR, San Rafael, 2019. Prepared the hazardous materials technical section for the remediation and redevelopment of a former manufactured gas plant site into a biomedical facility and senior housing.

Former Potrero Power Plant, Remediation Projects, IS/MNDs, 2015‐2018. Deputy project manager and prepared technical sections for hazardous materials, geology, and hydrology for two IS/MNDs that reviewed two separate remedial actions, one addressing contaminated soils in the upland area and the other address nearshore sediments.

Making Waves Academy, Charter School Campus, IS and EIR, Pittsburg, 2018. Prepared technical sections for hazardous materials, geology, and hydrology for the remediation and redevelopment of a former asbestos‐containing materials manufacturing facility and former bulk fuel storage facility into a charter school campus and sports facility. The proposed project included construction within a flood zone and required soil stabilization near the shoreline to address potential liquefaction hazards. Developed mitigation measures to ensure that the project would not result in the release of hazardous materials into the environment, exacerbate flooding conditions, or impact water quality.

Altamont Corridor Express (ACEforward and ACEextension) Railroad Improvements and Expansion, EIRs, 2015‐2018. Prepared the hydrology technical section for two commuter rail expansion projects involving rehabilitation of existing tracks and construction of new tracks, bridges, trains stations, and intermodal connections. Many segments of the project alignment crossed levees and flood zones and sea level rise was a major concern due to tracks crossing through wetlands of San Francisco Bay. Developed mitigation measures to ensure that the project would not exacerbate flooding conditions, impact water quality, or deplete groundwater resources due to tunnel dewatering. 132
Yilin Tian, Ph.D
Environmental Engineer

Areas of Expertise
Air Quality and GHGs Analysis,
Noise and Vibration, Emission
Inventory Development, and
Environmental Compliance Monitoring
Education
Ph.D./M.S., Environmental Science
and Engineering, Clarkson University
B.S., Environmental Science, Beijing
University of Technology
Registrations/Certifications
40-hour OSHA training
Engineer-In-Training, No. 167986
Years of Experience
10 Years
Yilin joined the Baseline team in 2019 as an Environmental Engineer.

Prior to joining Baseline, she worked as a postdoctoral researcher at University of California, Berkeley for 4 years. Her research focused on indoor air quality and human exposure, with the purpose of ensuring the health and performance of building occupants. Yilin was a member of the American Association for Aerosol Research and the International Society of Indoor Air Quality and Climate.

At Baseline, Yilin has assisted in the analysis of air quality, greenhouse gases (GHGs), noise and vibration, and energy impacts in support of CEQA review. She is familiar with state/local environmental regulations and guidelines related to CEQA review. Yilin has worked on residential infill, commercial, and highway improvement projects.

She is also experienced with preparing health risk assessments for exposing sensitive receptors to project-generated and cumulative sources of toxic air contaminants. Yilin is proficient with air pollution models (e.g. CalEEMod and AERMOD), noise models (e.g. FHA TNM and SoundPLAN), geospatial data analysis, and database
management.

Besides CEQA studies, Yilin has worked with the Bay Area Air Management District (BAAQMD) on the improvement existing emissions estimation techniques and updating emission inventories.

Her strong background in statistics and air pollutants emissions allows her to process and analyze data properly and efficiently.

Yilin has assisted the City of Berkeley and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) with environmental compliance and mitigation monitoring including reviewing submittals and performing environmental field inspections. Beyond that, Yilin has experience with Phase I Environmental Site Assessments, air monitoring, hydroacoustic monitoring, and the state’s Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund application.

Project Experience
Metro Center Hotel Project – Prepared a project-level Air Quality and GHG Emissions analysis for the development of a new, seven-story hotel in central Foster City.

I-80/Ashby Avenue Interchange Improvement Project – Prepared Air Quality Report to determine the project’s conformity to federal air quality regulations and to support environmental review of the project under CEQA and NEPA.

Improving Methods for Estimating Emissions from Residential Wood Combustion for San Francisco Bay Area – Updated the methodology and datasets used by the BAAQMD to quantify residential wood combustion emissions within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin. This methodology will be used to update the BAAQMD’s residential wood-burning emissions inventory and reduce uncertainties in the existing emission inventory.

Environmental Compliance Monitoring for the SFPUC – Managed three SFPUC projects since 2020 including the Sunol Long Term Improvements Projects, Southeast Community Center Project, and the Force Main Rehabilitation at Embarcadero & Jackson Street.

Environmental Compliance Monitoring for the City of Berkeley – Reviewed noise reduction plans submitted by the developers against the requirements of the MMRP and standard conditions of approval. Conducted site visits during the construction phase of the projects.
133

Matt Goyne, PE
Senior Associate

EDUCATION
B.S. in Civil Engineering,
Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, 2008

REGISTRATIONS
Professional Engineer– State of California
No. 81855

AFFILIATIONS
San Francisco Planning and Urban Research
(SPUR) Member
Urban Land Institute (ULI) Member

EXPERTISE
• Project Management
• Land Use and Transportation Planning
• CEQA and Transportation Impact
Studies (TIS)
• Traffic Operations and Multimodal
Simulation
• Bicycle and Pedestrian Planning
• MainStreet and Mixed-Use (MXD)
Trip Generation
• TOD and Neighborhood Planning

ABOUT
Matt serves as a project manager and senior advisor on a wide variety of challenging projects at the nexus of land use and transportation planning. Matt recognizes that the public is the ultimate client for all of our work, and therefore works collaboratively with our private and public-sector clients to create an inclusive workflow with easy to digest recommendations. Matt’s client-service approach is based on building trust with communities through empathy and sensitivity to the unique concerns of our clients and their stakeholders. Matt understands the nuances of transportation planning and the CEQA process for Bay Area communities through over ten years of experience working on a range of development and infrastructure projects.

Fehr & Peers brings a deep history of working with Foster City through the completion of numerous EIR’s over the past 15 years, citywide transportation plans, and the 2008 Multi-Project Traffic Analysis that resulted in a focused fee program to address traffic impacts associated with the build out of the Gilead Sciences Master Plan, Lincoln Centre, Pilgrim-Triton, and Foster City 15 developments. Fehr & Peers is at the forefront of addressing the Peninsula’s complex transportation challenges and developing innovative multimodal solutions for public and private sector clients, such as through the recent 92 Alliance partnership between the City of Foster City and major employers that lead to the creation of a transportation management association. Fehr & Peers will also leverage recent experience from leading C/CAG’s SB 743 implementation project and the Metro Center Hotel transportation impact analysis to help the City of Foster City understand how VMT metrics can fit within the fee program.

PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Foster City Housing Element and General Plan EIR’s (Foster City, CA) Matt managed the transportation section of Foster City’s 2015 Housing Element and General Plan Update EIR’s. This included an evaluation of citywide transportation facilities with the buildout of the Housing Element and General Plan, including the development of VMT estimates for GHG analysis. Subsequent follow up work included assisting Foster City’s City Manager and a coalition of Foster City businesses to evaluate how to coordinate commute options, such as coordinated shuttle or ferry programs, which led to the establishment of a transportation management association.
134
Gilead Sciences EIR (Foster City, CA)
Matt managed the transportation impact analysis study for the expansion of the Gilead Sciences biotech campus in Foster City, CA to over 2.5 million square feet. This study included evaluating impacts on the surrounding local roadway and freeway system, transit system, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Working with city staff and Gilead, Fehr & Peers assisted with developing a robust Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program to reduce the impact to the transportation network. In addition to the Gilead Sciences EIR, Matt has recently managed the
transportation component of several other EIRs in Foster City including the Lincoln Centre Campus Redevelopment, Foster City General Plan, Foster City – Civic Center 15 development, and the Chess Drive Hotel Initial Study.

Foster City Citywide Transportation Plan
(Foster City, CA)
Matt served as the associate-in-charge supervising the 2017 citywide transportation plan, which focused primarily on bicycle and pedestrian circulation. This project included developing Safe Routes to School assessments for all four public schools in Foster City, evaluating the citywide bicycle network, reviewing traffic signal network improvements, and overseeing responses to several site-specific citizen requests. Matt was responsible for ensuring that walking audits with local stakeholders such as school and city staff, parents, and other community members were effective at developing community-based
recommendations for improving walking and bicycling
throughout Foster City. Fehr & Peers also developed a citywide assessment of roadway level of traffic stress for bicyclists to help inform stakeholders about the relative priority for improvements as they fit into unique suburban context. This process included evaluating key issues such as bicycle and pedestrian connectivity across barriers such as the Highway 92 freeway on- and off- ramps that bisect the city.

San Francisco Housing Element 2022 Update EIR (San
Francisco, CA)
Matt is serving as the project manager for the transportation team (Fehr & Peers and LCW Consulting) to conduct the
transportation portion of San Francisco’s Housing Element 2022 Update EIR. This project kicked off in August 2020 and includes an evaluation of multiple concepts to create 150,000 to 220,000 new homes in an equitable manner as outlined in the San Francisco Housing Affordability Strategies report. The study will evaluate citywide VMT, transit service, hazards, accessibility, and emergency vehicle access in accordance with San Francisco’s 2019 Transportation Impact Analysis guidelines. This contract also included an evaluation of San Francisco’s policies relating to vehicle miles traveled and led workshops with stakeholders from multiple City, regional, and state agencies to ensure San Francisco’s policies adopted in 2015 were in alignment with City goals and state requirements.

Better Market Street EIR (San Francisco, CA)
The civic backbone of San Francisco, Market Street is among the busiest streets west of the Mississippi for people walking, biking, and riding transit. The City’s vision for Better Market Street is to transform Market Street into a 21
st century multimodal street,
improving the accessibility and safety for pedestrians and bicyclists while reducing transit travel times through the City’s Downtown core. Matt served as the Fehr & Peers project
manager, overseeing the transportation impact study and the development of several travel models for the study area, including a multimodal VISSIM simulation model of a two-mile corridor from the Embarcadero to Octavia Boulevard. This simulation tool was used to evaluate several alternatives with respect to safety for people walking and biking and travel times for people riding transit along the corridor. Matt led the development of CEQA and NEPA transportation studies that adapted from the traditional vehicle delay/LOS-based approach to one based on safety and accessibilility for people walking, biking, riding transit, and driving in Downtown San Francisco.

Petaluma SB 743 Implementation (Petaluma, CA)
Matt served as associated-in-charge on the implementation of the transition from level of service to vehicle miles traveled as required by SB 743 in Petaluma. This effort included presenting options for VMT methods, metrics, and thresholds to City staff and a technical advisory committee and helping to evaluate which options best reflected community values, such as
sustainability and equity. The most challenging aspects involved balancing housing production goals with GHG reduction targets and the identification of project- and community-level
transportation demand management strategies that would be effective for this suburban community. Matt leveraged his experience with state of the practice TDM effectiveness quantification methods in a range of Bay Area communities to help the City of Petaluma develop a suite of TDM measures that were applicable to different areas of the city, including the downtown core, transit-adjacent, and suburban neighborhoods.

Foster City General Plan and Climate Action Plan EIR
(Foster City, CA)

Matt has extensive experience working with Foster City staff from all departments on projects that have helped shape Foster City into the city it is today. This includes the City’s current General Plan and Climate Action Plan (CAP), which involved developing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) estimates for the baseline and future scenarios and determining the required transportation
improvements to accommodate the travel demand associated with the build out of the General Plan. We leveraged our understanding of the local and regional transportation networks, a practical understanding of the C/CAG travel demand model, and the environmental review process to help the public understand the sources of local transportation issues facing Foster City and the near- and long-term solutions to support the City’s goals.
135

Mike Hawkins, PE, TE
Senior Transportation Engineer/Planner

EDUCATION
BS, Civil Engineering, Cal Poly San Luis
Obispo

REGISTRATION
Civil Engineer – California No. 83513
Traffic Engineer – California No. 2884

PUBLICATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS
Using the Versatility of VISSIM to Model the
Versatility of Roundabouts, TRB International
Conference on Roundabouts, 2014, Seattle,
Washington

Modeling Transit Engineering Infrastructure:

Synchro Can Do That?, ITE Annual District 6
Conference, 2013, Phoenix, Arizona (Andy
Kosinski, Eric Womeldorff, and Mike Hawkins)

EXPERT ISE
• Project Management
• Transportation Impact Analysis
• CEQA Environmental Review Process
• Traffic Operations and Multimodal
Simulation
• Integrated Land Use and Transportation
• Multimodal Planning
• Transportation Demand Management
(TDM)

ABOUT
Mike is a senior transportation engineer/planner in the San Francisco Office of Fehr & Peers with ten years of experience developing effective transportation solutions for projects throughout the Bay Area. Mike has served as project manager on a wide variety of projects, from large-scale transportation impact studies that require the most advanced, state-of-the-practice analysis techniques, to transportation demand management studies that focus on creative ways to reduce vehicle miles traveled.

Mike has also been the technical leader on many challenging, high-profile projects throughout San Francisco, Napa, and San Mateo Counties. This diverse transportation experience allows him to bring a multi-disciplined and practical approach to projects of all sizes and settings. Mike is well versed in many technical software packages that can help to visualize the most complex issues. Mike has a passion for closely coordinating with clients to develop solutions to solve transportation challenges that improve communities.

Mike and Fehr & Peers bring a deep history of working with Foster City through the completion of numerous EIRs and citywide transportation plans. Fehr & Peers is at the forefront of addressing the Peninsula’s complex transportation challenges and developing innovative multimodal solutions for public and private sector clients, such as through the recent 92 Alliance partnership between the City of Foster City and major employers that lead to the creation of a transportation management association. Fehr & Peers will also leverage recent experience from leading C/CAG’s SB 743 implementation project and the Metro Center Hotel transportation impact analysis to help the City of Foster City understand VMT.

PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Foster City General Plan Update (Foster City, CA)
Mike served as the lead transportation engineer for Foster City’s update to the General Plan Circulation Element. Mike’s role involved analyzing the operation of the existing transportation system and determining the required improvements to accommodate demand from future planned land uses. The update also included a review of existing goals, policies, and implementation measures to ensure that they strongly support all travel modes to minimize vehicle trip making and enhance livability. Foster City was interested in including a quantitative analysis of pedestrian and bicycle circulation in the General Plan EIR, including a Level of Service analysis for pedestrian, bicycle, and transit conditions, typically referred to Multi-Modal Level of Service (MMLOS).
136
Metro Center Hotel EIR (Foster City, CA)
Mike served as the project manager for this hotel development EIR located in Foster City’s urban core. Mike led Foster City staff through their first VMT-based CEQA analysis in the post-SB 743 world. This presented the opportunity to walk decision makers through the process of establishing appropriate VMT metrics, methodologies, and significance thresholds. Other key challenges that the team overcame included evaluating parking
demand/supply, iterating site access and circulation plans, and determining appropriate mitigation measures. Fehr & Peers also helped the City establish new, more flexible parking requirements for projects located within development districts to encourage an increased non-vehicle mode share for this project and other similar projects.

Foster City Pedestrian and Bicycle Assessment (Foster
City, CA)
Mike served as the project manager for this comprehensive citywide transportation plan, which focused primarily of pedestrian and bicycle circulation. Fehr & Peers developed Safe Routes to School recommendations for all four public schools in Foster City and provided a citywide bicycle network assessment, including level of traffic stress to help inform stakeholders about the relative priority of improvement as they fit into Foster City’s unique context. Fehr & Peers also provided peer review support for a traffic signal network assessment and several bicycle infrastructure plans. Mike was responsible for overseeing all technical work and coordinating walking audits with local stakeholders such as school staff, city staff, parents, local law enforcement, and other community members. Fehr & Peers
worked to develop community-based recommendations for
improving walking and bicycling throughout Foster City.

Millbrae Station Area Specific Plan (Millbrae, CA)
Mike served as the deputy project manager and lead
transportation engineer for Fehr & Peers on the Millbrae Station Area Specific Plan Project. We provided multimodal
transportation engineering and planning services for the Millbrae Intermodal Station and the surrounding Specific Plan Area. Mike coordinated with several regional transportation agencies, local jurisdictions, as well as private developers to develop a Station Area Specific Plan and Station Access Plan that accommodates all users. The project focused on safe, convenient, and reliable transportation (transit, pedestrian, and bicycle) access in the Plan Area, including accommodating bicycle and pedestrian access across the El Camino Real barrier. Analysis included complex transit ridership forecasts and mixed-use trip generation.

Harbor View EIR (Redwood City, CA)
Mike served as the project manager for this large-scale office redevelopment EIR located east of US 101 in the Inner Harbor area of Redwood City. The location presented several
transportation challenges including limited access across US 101 to the rest of Redwood City, accommodating Bay Trail plans through the study area, and a heavily congested corridor and interchange. Mike applied state of the practice trip generation methodologies (MXD+ and Mainstreet) and TDM+ to accurately forecast the project’s impact on the transportation network. Mike led a team that developed a complex simulation of the
congested Woodside Road corridor and interchange with US 101 to accurately evaluate project impacts on the transportation network.

South San Francisco Station Area Land Use Plan (South
San Francisco, CA)
Mike took over managing this project which analyzed the potential impacts of high-density growth replacing industrial land use in South San Francisco. The Plan promoted alternative modes of access to improve connectivity between proposed new
Caltrain station and downtown South San Francisco. Mike applied complex state-of-the-practice mixed-use trip generation and distribution methodologies to accurately forecast internalized trips. Mike also guided the project through EIR certification and approval stages.

Foster City Levee EIR (Foster City, CA)
Mike served as the project manager for the transportation section of the environmental document for the Levee Protection
Planning and Improvement Project in Foster City. He led a team that performed technical transportation impact analysis that studied the effects of upgrading the existing perimeter levee system which protects the City of Foster City and parts of San Mateo. The transportation analysis assessed the effects of levee construction on the transportation network, including road capacity for vehicles, truck routing, and temporary potential closures to the Bay Trail.

Passage at San Mateo Transportation Planning Support
(San Mateo, CA)
Mike served as the project manager for the broad-ranging transportation assessment for this Transit-Oriented development near the Hayward Park Caltrain station. Mike worked closely with the developer and City staff to prepare the planning application submittal for this mixed-use development which proposes approximately 900 housing units and retail. Mike led a wide variety of tasks, which included estimating future travel demand, forecasting parking and loading demand for passenger and delivery drop-offs while accounting of disruptive trends such as autonomous vehicles, a thorough multimodal review of site circulation and access, development of an off-site transportation improvement package, a transportation demand management plan that would help reduce the use of single-occupancy vehicles at the project site, TIS peer review, and analysis of the surrounding cut-through traffic associated with congestion at the SR 92 / US 101 interchange. Mike focused on developing feasible and practical transportation solutions that appeased the development team and City staff. Fehr & Peers also developed a series of graphics to help communicate the impacts and benefits of the project to public stakeholders.
137
APPENDIX A. KEY PERSONNEL PROJECT TEAM RESUMES
Michelle Maddaus, P.E.

President
Relevant Experience
Foster City Water Supply Assessments for Lincoln Center Campus, Pilgrim Triton Development Project Phase C, Hotel in Metro Center, and Gilead Wellbeing Center, CA 2014 –2020. Michelle was Project Manager for the Water Supply Assessments (WSAs) that provided information for use in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis for various proposed projects in Foster City. Each WSA involved an assessment of whether available water supplies would be sufficient to serve the demand generated by the project as well as the reasonably foreseeable cumulative demand during normal year, single dry year, and multiple dry year conditions over the next 20 years. The WSA reports built on previous water demand projections created as part of the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency Regional Demand and Conservation Projections, also completed in September 2014. The new demands from the BAWSCA study were approved by Estero Municipal Improvement District (EMID) and were used as a basis for the 2015 UWMP submitted by EMID in June 2016. MWM collaborated on the WSAs with Urban Planning Partners and the Foster City (EMID) Planning and Engineering Departments. MWM’s role was to estimate calculations for the water demand and assist in compiling the WSA reports for the following projects: Lincoln Center Campus, Pilgrim Triton Development Project Phase C, new hotel in Metro Center, and new Gilead Wellbeing Center.

Mid-Peninsula Water District, 2015 & 2020 Urban Water Manageme nt Plan, CA, 2015-16, 2020-present
Michelle was Project Manager for the MWM project team that worked with Marty Laporte from ManageWater to prepare water demand and conservation savings forecasts for Mid- Peninsula Water District’s (MPWD’s) 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. The Plan closely followed the content requirements found in the California Department of Water Resources 2015 Guidebook. As part of the UWMP development, a per capita water use analysis, DSS Model based water demand analysis and demand management measure study were conducted. The DSS Model included a conservation analysis of more than 20 individual water conservation measures. The measures were reviewed along with per capita conservation targets to meet the SB X7-7 conservation targets of 20% reduction by the year 2020. Michelle also lead the team in updating MPWD’s Water Shortage Contingency Plan.

Urban Water Management Plans (UWMPs), 2005-2016
Michelle has been working with Urban Water Management Plans since 2000.

She has been involved in plans with the City of Sacramento (2000), Calistoga (2005), Suisun -Solano Water Authority (2005, 2010, 2015), South Tahoe Public Utilities (2010), Liberty Utilities (2015- 16), Mid -Peninsula Water District (2015-16), City of Sonoma (2015- 16) and technical demand analysis portion of the UWMPs for over 60 agencies, including Marin Municipal Water District, North Marin County Water District, City of Santa Rosa, City of License
Professional Engineer,
Calif., No. C68712, 2003
Experience
21 years
Education
M.B.A., University of California,
Davis, 2003
B.S., Civil and Environmental
Engineering, UC Davis, 1999
Study Abroad, University of
New South Wales, Sydney,
Australia, 2003
Study Abroad, University of
Oxford, UK, 1997
Awards
AWWA, Outstanding
Achievement Service and
Initiative in Sustainability of
Water Resources, 2012
Areas of Expertise
Water Resources
Planning Management
Demand and Conservation
Planning
Integrated Water Resources
Planning
Commercial, Industrial, and
Institutional (CII)
Advanced Metering
Infrastructure (AMI)
Drought
138
Petaluma, City of Rohnert Park, Town of Windsor, City of Sonoma, Valley of the Moon, City of Cotati.

Santa Barbara Water Conservation Master Plan and 2020 Urban Water Management Plan Technical Assistance, California, 2018-present
MWM is supporting development of a Water Conservation Strategic Plan “Making Conservation a Santa Barbara Way of Life,” intended to support the City’s compliance with the G480 Standard and joining the AWE Leaderboard. This is a complement to and continuation of previous work between the City and MWM. Historical and ongoing water use is tracked and analyzed for various demand projection scenarios, and water conservation estimates are being developed for over 25 conservation measures and 3 conservation program scenarios.

BAWSCA “Making Conservation a Way of Life” Water Conservation Strategic Plan and Regional Water Demand/Conservation Projections, California, 2017-present From 2017 -18, Michelle managed this multi- team Phase 1 effort to develop BAWSCA’s Water Conservation Strategic Plan, reviewing California’s “Making Water Conservation a California Way of Life” regulations and existing BAWSCA conservation efforts. Phase 2, completed in June 2019, had two objectives: 1) a residential indoor and outdoor water use study designed to provide insight into the current breakdown of indoor and outdoor water use among residential customers within the BAWSCA service area; and 2) a commercial Pilot Project that evaluated the potential for the successful implementation of a Regional CII Audit Program. In 2019, Michelle and the MWM team began Phase 3 with a follow-up effort to develop regional water demand and conservation projections for each of the 27 agencies. The demand and conservation projections will be designed to support BAWSCA’s regional and individual agency planning efforts and is due to be completed in June 2020.

Sonoma-Marin Saving Water Partnership 2015 Urban Water Management Plan Water Demand Analysis and Water Conservation Measures Update, California, 2005-2016 Michelle was Project Manager to develop forecasts of demand and conservation savings for the 2015 UWMP for local retail Water Contractors of the Sonoma -Marin Saving Water Partnership: City of Cotati, Marin Municipal Water District, North Marin Water District, City of Petaluma, City of Rohnert Park, City of Santa Rosa, City of Sonoma, Valley of the Moon Water District, and Town of Windsor. The objectives of the project were to perform the following for each Water Contractor: 1) quantify the total average-year water demand to the year 2040 using the MWM DSS Model; 2) quantify the passive and active conservation water savings potential through 2040; 3) identify conservation programs for further consideration for regional implementation; and 4) provide a user -friendly model that could be used to support ongoing demand and conservation planning efforts.

Selected Recent Publications and Presentations
• “We have AMI data – Now what do we do with it?” with A. Johnson, WaterSmart Innovations Conference, Las Vegas, Nevada, October 2019.
• “Water Conservation Program Benefit-Cost Analysis Workshop,” with L. Maddaus, WaterSmart Innovations Conference, Las Vegas, Nevada, October 2019. • “Keys to Integrated Resources Plans and Designing a Sustainable Water Demand Forecast,” American Water Works Association Sustainable Water Management Conference, Tucson, Arizona, April 2019.
• “’Making Water Conservation a California Way of Life’ – Leveraging the New Legislation for 27 Water Agencies,” with A . Johnson (BAWSCA), American Water Works Association Sustainable Water Management Conference, Tucson, Arizona, April 2019. • “Cutting Edge in Water Conservation: New Developments in AMI – Water Champions Showcase,” Water Conservation Showcase, San Francisco, California, March 2019. 139

Tess Kretschmann
Water Resources Analyst
Relevant Experience
BAWSCA Conservation Strategic Plan and Regional Water Demand and Conservation Projections, California, 2017-2020
Tess is primary modeler in this multi- team effort. MWM reviewed California’s “Making Conservation a Way of Life” regulations and BAWSCA existin g conservation efforts. Then, MWM assessed outdoor landscape area measurements and CII account classification capabilities and best practices. The full Project Team also inventoried current water auditing and water loss control for each of the BAWSCA member agencies and outlined areas for improvement.

In 2019, a follow-up effort to develop regional water demand and conservation projections for each of BAWSCA’s 27 member agencies began as a 5-year update to the previous 2014 BAWSCA Demand and Conservation Update.

Santa Clarita Valley Water Agency Population Assessment (2013-14), Demand Forecast Update (2013-15), Water Use Efficiency Strategic Plan Update (2013- 15, 2016-17), Ongoing Tech Support (current)
Tess was project engineer and lead modeler on these SCVWA projects. In 2018, MWM provided technical assistance for the SCVWA Water Use Efficiency program as well as water resources planning services to investigate indoor water use and the consequential wastewater generation for multiple water and wastewater service areas. The effort also offered assistance addressing new California regulations SB 606 and AB 1668. Model training videos and web-based guidance were provided. A review of past assumptions for determining indoor water use was conducted as well as a n estimate of new development indoor water use and wastewater generation. Currently, MWM continues to support the water conservation analysis for SCVWA and its four water divisions.

Santa Barbara Water Conservation Analysis, Calif., 2014 & 2018-present As lead Project Engineer, in 2014 Tess and MWM explored water use and conservation water savings estimates for two scenarios: 1) Long Term Conservation Plan for 2014-2040, and 2) Drought Program for 2014-2015. Using MWM’s DSS Model, the analysis was performed from various perspectives, including the utility and community. Currently, MWM is supporting development of a Water Conservation Strategic Plan that is designed to assist the City in adhering to the G480 Standard and joining the AWE Leaderboard.

Historical and ongoing water use is tracked and analyzed for various demand projection scenarios, and water conservation estimates are being developed for over 25 conservation measures and 3 conservation program scenarios.

Water Conservation Strategic Plan, City of Flagstaff, Arizona, 2018-2020 Tess reviewed existing City practices and procedures to create a comprehensive list of water use efficiency measures currently in place. She also reviewed relevant literature and practices of other agencies t o determine potential measures to be implemented by the City. Tess compared various water efficiency initiatives and assessed factors (e.g., likelihood of adoption and Experience
16 years
Education
B.S. in Civil
Engineering,
Duke University, 2004
Areas of Expertise
Water Resources Planning
Management
Demand and
Conservation
Planning
Integrated Water
Resources Planning
Commercial,
Industrial, and
Institutional (CII)
Drought
Shared Vision
Planning

140

amount of volume potentially saved) then compared actions in terms of cost per volume o f water saved and energy savings along with community benefits.

Water Conservation Master Plan, Weber Basin Water Conservancy District, Utah, 2019-present Tess discussed and reviewed existing conservation efforts and planning documents before using preliminary data to pre -populate the DSS Model data gathering workbooks for the District and its customer agencies. Tess compiled a list of conservation measures by merging those from the Utah Division of Water Resources’ Conservation Best Management Practices with MWM’s own list of measures utilized by other agencies, resulting in a list of over 100 potential measures for screening.

Tess then performed a preliminary matrix analysis to score the effectiveness of each measu re. An evaluation of conservation programs used to form three increasingly aggressive conservation programs scenarios and a benefit-cost analysis and demand projection will then be conducted based on the measures selected.

Water Management and Conservation Plan, City of Bend, Oregon, 2019-present As project engineer and modeler, Tess has assisted with data collection and analysis and has reviewed the submitted data. She also has spent time clarifying questions for the City and reviewing the water savings and cost -effectiveness analysis of this project. Tess’s efforts on this project also include peer -reviewing the modeling efforts and results for the curtailment plan as needed to comply with the Water Conservation Master Plan requirements in order to meet the City’s needs and facilitate efficient implementation.

Regional Demand Forecasts and Conservation Evaluations for 16 County Atlanta Metro Areas, Georgia, 2016, pending update 2021
In 2016, Tess was modeler on the MWM team that worked on the update to the original project for the Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District. The update included using the DSS software to model new demand forecast and conservation measures and water savings. More than 100 potential water conservation measures were initially screened for their applicability to the Atlanta area; 25 measures were selected for further evaluation.

Water Use Efficiency Plan, Liberty Utilities (Apple Valley Ranchos Water) Corp., California, 2017 Tess was on the project team for Liberty Utilities (Apple Valley Ranchos Water) Corp. Water Use Efficiency Plan, which identified programs that would be most effective in meeting Liberty’s water use requirements. Tess was part of the modeling effort, providing detailed information for 19 conservation measures, giving Liberty the flexibility to use this plan as a guide to implement additional water saving measures.

Selected Recent Publications and Presentations
• “World Water Leaders -Innovative National/International Program Strategies,” WaterSmart Innovations, Las Vegas, Nevada, October 2016.
• “Get REAL Savings! Energy & Water Utilities Team on CII Water Efficiency,” WaterSmart Innovations Conference, Las Vegas, Nevada, October 2016. • “Water Conservation Benefit- Cost Analysis Workshop,” AWWA Sustain able Water Management Conference, Providence, Rhode Island, March 2016.

141

YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
21 years

EDUCATION
University of California, Berkeley
Master of Science in Civil & Environmental
Engineering
Emphasis: Environmental Engineering
University of California, Berkeley
Bachelor of Science in Civil &
Environmental Engineering
Emphasis: Environmental Engineering
University of California, Santa Cruz
Bachelor of Arts in Environmental Studies
Emphasis: Watershed Restoration
Gadjah Mada University, Indonesia
Studies in Art, Culture, and Language

PROFESSIONAL

REGISTRATION
Registered Professional Engineer,
State of California (72828)
State of Hawaii (PE-15975)
LEED Accredited Professional
US Green Building Council

PROFESSIONAL

AFFILIATIONS
American Society of Civil Engineers
US Green Building Council, Member
JOHN LEYS, P.E., LEED AP

PRINCIPAL
John Leys is a civil engineer leading sustainable infrastructure planning and project implementation at Sherwood Design Engineers. He has over 20 years of experience working with public agencies, institutions, and private developers on the implementation of water management and sustainable infrastructure systems. He has extensive experience interfacing with the many city and county agencies in the Bay Area including among others City of San Jose, City of Menlo Park, City of San Francisco, City of Mountain View, City of Palo Alto, Town of Atherton, County of San Mateo and County of Marin.

John’s experience ranges from the development of sustainable infrastructure for Fulton Corridor Specific Plan, Downtown Hayward Specific Plan, and San Mateo County Sustainable Green Streets to the urban revitalization of San Jose’s Downtown West transit oriented district surrounding Diridon Station. On all of his projects, he pursues integrated water management strategies that achieve project design goals while strengthening regional natural systems. He also has spearheaded ecological planning and the implementation of sustainable design guidelines related to preservation, conservation, and restoration of the project sites. He pursues energy saving and water conservation techniques that address sensitive economic and environmental constraints.

John is a LEED Accredited Professional and a member of the US Green Building Council. He received degrees in Environmental Studies and Civil Engineering and has worked in the offices of planners, architects, and landscape architects as a civil engineer. John’s experience includes project work in green building design, parks and public spaces, roadway and trail design, water feature design, commercial and residential planned developments, utility infrastructure design, streetscape design, earthwork design and calculations, fine grading and drainage design, cost estimation, development of proprietary green design tools, integrated stormwater management, and feasibility analysis.
142

YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
4 years

EDUCATION
Carnegie Mellon University
Master of Science in Civil and
Environmental Engineering
Carnegie Mellon University
Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering
with University Honors

PROFESSIONAL

REGISTRATION
Registered Professional Engineer,
State of California #89808
Craig Boman serves as a Project Engineer at Sherwood. He has worked on a variety of projects ranging from city streetscapes to corporate campuses to public and private schools throughout California. He has experience as a lead designer on several street corridor designs, mixed-use developments, and technical utility studies throughout the Bay Area. From streetscape stormwater analyses to campus wide planning, he has provided technical design and guidance on roadway and utility infrastructure corridors for both planning and construction documents. Working in cities including Richmond, San Leandro, Hayward, Sunnyvale, Cupertino, Mountain View, Berkeley, and El Cerrito.

Craig has worked on designing both new and revitalizing existing streetscape corridors.

Craig has a strong background working on construction documents, project cost estimating, utility analyses, technical report creation, and project team coordination. With a passion for Low-Impact Design approach focused on protecting and encouraging local ecology and community, Craig focuses on project team collaboration to produce creative, constructible, and cost-effective design solutions. He strives to provide technical guidance that looks beyond the typical baseline approach and delivers innovative alternatives to help produce the best long-term solutions.

Project Experience:
• Google Landings, Mountain View, CA - As the design engineer for the 29-acre Mountain View campus, Craig coordinated the utility layout and stormwater management strategy for the unique structure starting from the conceptual design phase.
• Facebook Willow Campus, Menlo Park, CA - As a designer, Craig helped take the project to 100% DD’s for several miles of roadway and utility infrastructure. Now back at the planning stages, I have helped as lead designer for the new roadscape, utility infrastructure, and stormwater management strategy for the 60+ acre site. • Terminal One Mixed-Use Development* - Craig worked as the co-lead designer for the 14-acre mixed-use residential site that redeveloped the previous Terminal One in Richmond, CA from SD through CD’s.
• Antioch Housing Element, Antioch,CA*
• Saratoga Housing Element, Saratoga, CA*
*Work experience prior to Sherwood

CRAIG BOMAN, P.E.

PROJECT ENGINEER
6 143
URBAN

PLANNING

PARTNERS
INC.
144

NOTICE OF PREPARATION
of a
Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City of Foster City 6th Cycle Housing Element Update, Safety Element Update, and Associated Zoning Amendments
DATE: January 26, 2022
TO: State Clearinghouse, Responsible Agencies, Trustee Agencies, Federal Agencies, and other Interested Agencies, Interested Parties, and Organizations
SUBJECT: Not
ice of Preparation (NOP) of a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR
) for the City of Foster City 6th Cycle Housing Element Update, Safety Element Update, and Associated Zoning Amendments and Notice of Public Scoping Meeting (EA2021-0004) and Notice of Public Scoping Meeting

NOP COMMENT
PERIOD: January 26, 2022 to February 25, 2022 by 5:00 p.m.

PUBLIC SCOP
ING MEETING: February 17, 2022 at 7:00 p.m. Zoom Webinar LEAD AGENCY:

City of Foster City Community D evelopment Department
Marlene Subhashini, Community Development Director
610 Foster City Blvd.

Foster City, CA 94404
Phone: (650) 286-3239
Email: [email protected]
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT The City of Foster City (lead agency) will prepare a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed City of Foster City 6th Cycle Housing Element Update, Safety Element Update, and Associated Zoning Amendments ( collectively referred to as the “proposed project”). The Program EIR will address the environmental impacts associated with the adoption and implementation of the proposed project. This Notice of Preparation (NOP) is being distributed to applicable responsible agencies, trustee agencies, and interested parties as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Interested agencies are requested to comment on the scope and content of the descriptions of the significant environmental issues, mitigation measures (if needed), and reasonable alternatives to be explored in the Program EIR. Information regarding the project description, project location, public outreach process and topics to be addressed in the Program EIR is provided below. 30-DAY NOP COM
MENT PERIOD: The City of Foster City solicits comments regarding the scope and content of the Program EIR from all interested parties, responsible agencies, agencies with jurisdiction by law, trustee agencies, and involved agencies. In accordance with the time limits established by CEQA, the NOP public review period will begin on January 26, 2022 and end on February 25, 2022. If no response or request for additional time is received by any Responsible or Trustee Agency by the end of the review period, the Lead Agency may presume that the Responsible Agency or Trustee Agency has no response Attachment 5
145
Notice of Preparation
Draft Program EIR - Foster City 6th Cycle Housing Element Update, Safety Element Update, and Associated Zoning Amendments
to make [CEQA Guidelines Section 15082(b)(2)]. Please send your written/typed comments (including name, affiliation, telephone number, and contact information) by 5:00 p.m. on February 25, 2022 to:

C
ity of Foster City Community Development Department
Marlene Subhashini, Community Development Director
610 Foster City Blvd.

Foster City, CA 94404
Phone: (650) 286-3239
Email: [email protected]
P
UBLIC SCOPING MEET ING: The City will hold an EIR Public Scoping Meeting to: 1) inform the public and interested agencies about the proposed Project; and 2) solicit public comment on the scope of the environmental issues to be addressed in the Program EIR as well as the range of practicable alternatives to be evaluated. Meeting details are provided below:

T
hursday, February 17, 2022 at 7:00 p.m.

Please click the link below to join the webinar:
https://fostercity-org.zoom.us/j/83998928441
Or One tap mobile :

US: +16699006833,,83998928441# or +14086380968,,83998928441# Or Telephone:

Dial (for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location):

US: +1 (669) 900-6833 or +1(408) 638-0968 or +1(346) 248-7799 or +1(253) 215-8782 or +1(312)626-6799 or +1(646)876-9923 or +1(301)715-8592
Webinar ID: 839 9892 8441
International numbers available: https://fostercity-org.zoom.us/u/kc6Qnwbn2c A
s an alternative, the City will also stream video and audio of the public scoping meeting at the following webpage; however, the link below does not provide the ability to comment during the meeting:
https://www.fostercity.org/community/page/fctv-live-stream.

PR
OJECT-RELATED DOCUMENTS: Foster City’s existing General Plan documents (including the 2015- 2023 Housing Element and 201 6 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan/Safety Element) and materials for the proposed project and Program EIR are available at fostercity.org. More information specific to the Housing Element Update process is available at : https://www.fostercity.org/commdev/page/housing-element- update-cycle-6.

P
ROJECT LOCATION: The City of Foster City is located in central San Mateo County. The City is bordered by San Mateo to the west, Belmont to the southwest and Redwood City to the southeast, with the San Francisco Bay bordering the east and northeast. The General Plan Planning Area is the geographic extent for the environmental analysis, composed of approximately 12,345 acres. California State Route 92, which serves as a major east to west corridor in the Bay Area, intersects Foster City, which includes the western terminal of the San Mateo Bridge. Route 101, a major north-south highway runs along the west side of the City boundary which connects Foster City to San Francisco to the north and San Jose to the south.

T
he City Boundaries and regional location of Foster City are shown in Figure 1-1.

P
ROJECT BACKGROUND: The City of Foster City’s comprehensive General Plan establishes a consistent direction for future development and contains elements covering State-mandated topics. The Foster City General Plan Elements are: Land Use and Circulation, Housing, Parks and Open Space, Noise, Local Hazard Mitigation Plan & Safety, and Conservation. The City of Foster City adopted its General Plan elements at various times and has updated one or two elements at a time based on State requirements. In accordance with State law, the new planning period, also known as the “6th Cycle”, for the updated Housing Element will extend from January 31, 2023 to January 31, 2031. Revision of the Housing Element also 146
Notice of Preparation
Draft Program EIR - Foster City 6th Cycle Housing Element Update, Safety Element Update, and Associated Zoning Amendments
triggers review and update of the Safety Element (SB 1035, 2018). Through this update process, the City may need to amend other elements to ensure internal consistency between the various General Plan elements.

KEY COMPONENTS OF HOUSING ELEMENT: Through the Housing Element update process, the City is required to demonstrate that it has the regulatory and land use policies to accommodate its assigned Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). Local governments are not required to build the housing; rather, the actual development of housing is anticipated to be constructed by developers. However, the Housing Element is required to identify potential sites where housing can be accommodated to meet all the income levels of a jurisdiction’s RHNA. Identification of potential sites and related site housing capacity does not guarantee that construction will occur on that site. If there are insufficient sites and capacity to meet the RHNA allocation, the Housing Element is required to identify a rezoning program to accommodate the required capacity. If there is insufficient infrastructure capacity to support the RHNA allocation, the Housing Element is required to include a program that ensures access and availability to infrastructure . If the City does not identify capacity for its RHNA allocation, the City could be deemed out of compliance and risk losing important sources of funding currently provided by the State as well as fac e legal challenges including loss of local control.

T
he Key Components of the housing element are:

1. Housing Needs Assessment: Examine demographic, employment, and housing trends and conditions and identify existing and projected housing needs of the community, with attention pai d
t
o special housing needs (e.g., large families, persons with disabilities).

2. Evaluation of Past Performance: Review the prior Housing Element to measure progress i n i
mplementing policies and programs.

3. Housing Sites Inventory: Identify locations of available sites for housing development or redevelopment to ensure there is enough land zoned for housing to meet the future need at all income levels and potentially rezone areas, if necessary.

4. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH): Facilitate deliberate action to explicitly address, combat, and relieve disparities resulting from past patterns of segregation to foster more inclusiv e
c
ommunities, in compliance with Assembly Bill 686 (2018).

5. Community Engagement: Implement a robust community engagement program, reaching out to all economic segments of the community plus traditionally underrepresented groups.

6. Constraints Analysis: Analyze and recommend remedies for existing and potential governmental and nongovernmental barriers to housing development.

7. Policies and Programs: Establish policies and programs to be carried out during the 2023- 20 31 pl
anning period to fulfill the identified housing needs.

RE
GIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION (RHNA) : In addition to including goals, policies, and implementation strategies regarding housing, housing elements must include a list of housing sites that can accommodate the amount of housing units assigned to the City by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). This assignment is referred to as a RHNA. Along with the amount of RHNA units currently assigned to the C ity (see Table 1), the C ity needs to provide a buffer (extra housing sites) to ensure there is capacity to ensure an ongoing supply of sites at each income level for housing during the eight-year-cycle of the Housing Element. Without the buffer, the City could be obliged to identify new sites and amend the Housing Element prior to the end of the cycle if an identified site were developed with a non-housing project or developed at a density less than that anticipated in the Housing Element or developed at affordability levels higher than that anticipated in the Housing Element .

T
he need for a buffer is even more important during this cycle because of new rules in the Housing Accountability Act’s “no net loss” provisions. SB 166 (2017) requires that the land inventory and site identification programs in the Housing Element always include sufficient sites to accommodate the unmet RHNA. This means that if a site identified in the Element as having the potential for housing development to accommodate the lower‐income portion of the RHNA is actually developed for a higher income level, the locality must either: 1) identify and rezone, if necessary, an adequate substitute site; or 2) demonstrate that 147
Notice of Preparation
Draft Program EIR - Foster City 6th Cycle Housing Element Update, Safety Element Update, and Associated Zoning Amendments

the land inventory already contains an adequate substitute site. An adequate buffer will be critical to ensuring that the City remains compliant with the requirements.

Table 1 City of Foster City RHNA

INCOME LEVEL RHNA
Very-Low-Income (0-50
percent of AMI) * 520
Low-income (50-80 percent of
AMI) 299
Moderate-income (80-120
percent of AMI) 300
Above moderate-income (120
percent or more of AMI) 777
TOTAL 1,896
*Area Median Income

PROPOSED HOUSING SITES INVENTORY: The Housing Element Update will include a housing sites inventory with sufficient existing and new housing sites at appropriate densities to meet the City’s RHNA requirement plus a buffer. To determine where these potential housing sties will be and what densities will be required, the City will seek community input and feedback by engaging with the community online and at public meetings/study sessions to identify parcels i n the City where housing sites could potentially be located. In addition to these sites, the City anticipates accessory dwelling units spread throughout the City.

SAFETY ELEMENT: The goal of the Safety Element is to reduce the negative impacts caused by natural phenomena such as fires, floods, droughts, earthquakes, and landslides. This goal is achieved by identifying policies and programs that reduce the risks faced by residents. In recent years, State requirements have expanded the Safety Element’s scope to include climate change vulnerability and adaptation and greater attention to evacuation routes. Jurisdictions are required to complete a vulnerability assessment, develop adaptation and resilience goals, policies, and objectives, and develop a set of feasible implementation measures addressing climate change adaptation and resiliency (SB 379, 2015).

Jurisdictions must review and update these portions of the Safety Element upon each revision of the Housing Element or Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP), but not less than once every eight (8) years. (SB 1035, 2018).

PROGRAM EIR ANALYSIS: The City of Foster City, as the Lead Agency, will prepare a Program EIR for the proposed project in accordance with CEQA, implementing the CEQA Guidelines, relevant case law, and City procedures. The Foster City 6
th Cycle Housing Element Update, Safety Element Update, and Associated Zoning Amendments is considered a “project” under CEQA and is therefore subject to CEQA review. As policy documents, the proposed project provides guidance and sets standards for several areas of mandatory environmental review for later “projects” that would be undertaken by local government and the private sector.

The Program EIR will evaluate potential environmental impacts associated with adopti on and implementation of the proposed project. The Program EIR will disclose potential impacts of the proposed project, propose mitigation measures to avoid and/or reduce impacts deemed potentially significant, identify reasonable alternatives, and compare the environmental impacts of the alternatives to the proposed project’s impacts. Pursuant to Section 15063(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, no Initial Study will be prepared.

The Program EIR will evaluate the full range of environmental issues contemplated under CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.

At this time, it is anticipated that the following issues/technical sections will be addressed in the EIR:
• Aesthetics
• Air Quality
• Energy
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Land Use and Planning
148
Notice of Preparation
Draft Program EIR - Foster City 6th Cycle Housing Element Update, Safety Element Update, and Associated Zoning Amendments
• Noise
• P
opulation and Housing
• Public Services, Recreation, and Utilities
• Transportation
T
he Project, as currently understood, does not have the potential for significant impacts on the following environmental factors, and, as a result, these environmental factors will receive limited analysis in this EIR:
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources
• Geology and Soils
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Mineral Resources
• Tribal Cultural Resources
T
he Program EIR will also discuss the cumulative impacts of the project in combination with other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects in the vicinity.

T
he Program EIR will describe and evaluate the comparative merits of a reasonable range of alternatives to the project that could reasonably accomplish most of the basic project objectives and could avoid or substantially lessen one or more of the significant impacts. The Program EIR will also analyze the “No Project Alternative” and will identify the environmentally superior alternative. The Program EIR will briefly describe and explain any alternatives that were eliminated from detailed consideration. The alternatives to be analyzed will be developed during the environmental review process and will consider input received during the public scoping process.

T
HE PURPOSE OF THIS NOTICE: In accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR] Section 15082), the City has prepared this NOP to inform agencies and interested parties that an EIR will be prepared for the Foster City 6 th Cycle Housing Element Update, Safety Element
Update, and Associated Zoning Amendments. The purpose of an NOP is to provide sufficient information about the proposed project to allow agencies and interested parties the opportunity to provide a meaningful response related to the scope and content of the EIR, including mitigation measures that should be considered and alternatives that should be addressed (State CEQA Guidelines 14 CCR Section 15082[b]).

E
NVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS: Following completion of the 30- day NOP public review period, the City will incorporate relevant information into the Draft Program EIR, including results of public scoping and technical studies. Subsequently, the Draft Program EIR will be circulated for public review and comment for a 45- day public review period. The City requests that any potential Responsible or Trustee Agency responding to this notice do so in a manner consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15082(b). All interested parties that have submitted their names and email or mailing addresses will be notified throughout the CEQA review process.

A
copy of the NOP can be found on the project website at www.fostercity.org and on file at the City of Foster City Community Development Department (610 Foster City Blvd., Foster City, CA 94404). If you wish to be placed on the mailing list or need additional information, please contact Marlene Subhashini, Community Development Director, City of Foster City, at (650) 286-3239 or [email protected].

A
ttachments:

Figure 1-1, Regional Location
149
92 101
Foster City Limit
Foster City city parcels
Water bodies
Source: City of Foster City, 2019.

Foster City 6th Cycle Housing and Safety Element Updates Figure 1-1
Regional Location
2 Miles
1 0.50
N

HAYWARD
Union
City
Fremont
SAN

LEANDRO
San Mateo
Foster City
Redwood
City
Palo Alto
580
880
Project Location
San Francisco Bay
92 84
101
City of Foster City
Redwood City
Belmont
San Mateo
150
DATE: February 7, 2022

TO:

Mayor and Members of the City Council
President and Members of the Estero Municipal Improvement District (EMID) Board of Directors

VIA: Kevin Miller, Interim City/District Manager

FROM: Maria Saguisag-Sid, Human Resources Director

SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH

KOFF & ASSOCIATES, A DIVISION OF GALLAGHER BENEFIT
SERVICES INC., TO PROVIDE COMPENSATION STUDY

SERVICES

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council/EMID Board of Directors (hereinafter referred to as "City Council") adopt the attached resolutions authorizing the Mayor/President to enter into an agreement with Koff & Associates, a division of Gallagher Benefit Services Inc., in an amount not to exceed $60,390, to conduct a Compensation Study.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On November 15, 2021, the City Council approved issuance of a request for proposals (RFP) for Compensation Study services. Staff received two (2) proposals and is recommending to the City Council to enter into an agreement with Koff & Associates to conduct the study. The cost for the Compensation Study is not to exceed $60,390.
151

BACKGROUND
The City is currently in the process of completing a classification study and is now interested in conducting a compensation study. The current pay plan for the organization has several issues related to compression and inequities that have developed over the years. The City is interested in updating its pay plan to attract and retain quality staff, provide salaries commensurate with assigned duties, provide justifiable pay differentials between individual classes, and maintain a competitive position with other comparable agencies in the area.

On November 15, 2021, the City Council approved issuance of an RFP for Compensation Study services. Staff advertised the RFP in the following ways.

1. Direct emails to known service providers

2. Posting on the City's website

3. Posting on the City of Foster City's LinkedIn page and shared by various employees

4. Distribution of the RFP at the CalPELRA conference

ANALYSIS
Proposals were due on December 7, 2021. There were two (2) proposals received in response to the RFP, one from Koff & Associates, a division of Gallagher Benefit Services, and one from Transformance Consulting. Staff reviewed the two proposals and determined that Koff & Associates was the most qualified firm to complete the Compensation Study. While Koff & Associates’ proposal is a higher cost of the two proposals (not to exceed $60,390 for Koff & Associates as opposed to $22,500 plus travel and expenses for Transformance Consulting), Koff & Associates demonstrated in their proposal more extensive attention to detail, experience, and expertise in conducting surveys, especially in the San Francisco Bay Area. Koff & Associates is also currently conducting our Classification Study and is familiar with our organizational structure and positions, which will be vital in making market comparisons during the study. Staff is requesting the Mayor/President enter into an agreement with Koff & Associates, a division of Gallagher Benefit Services, Inc, so that staff can initiate the study. 152

FISCAL IMPACT
The cost of the compensation study is not to exceed $60,390 and is budgeted in the Human Resources General Fund, Account No. 001-1210-415- 4251. No further budget appropriation is required.

CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREA
This action addresses the City Council’s Value/Priority of “Staff Empowerment and Operational Excellence.” The key outcome is to ensure our pay plan is competitive to attract and retain high-caliber talent. By meeting this key outcome, the City will continue to be able to proactively provide exceptional service to our community.

Attachments:
Attachment 1 – City Resolution
Attachment 2 – EMID Resolution
Attachment 3 – Agreement
Attachment 4 – Koff & Associates Total Compensation Study Proposal 153
RESOLUTION NO.____________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOSTER CITY

APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH KOFF & ASSOCIATES, A DIVISION OF GALLAGHER BENEFIT SERVICES, INC., IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $60,390

FOR COMPENSATION STUDY SERVICES

CITY OF FOSTER CITY
WHEREAS, the City of Foster City’s current pay plan was adopted on December 13, 2021; and
WHEREAS, over the years, individual job classifications in the pay plan have been created, reviewed, and added to the pay plan on an as needed basis; and WHEREAS, the City of Foster City desires to review and amend the pay plan and benefits package for employees to ensure the organization continues to attract and retain quality high-caliber talent; and
WHEREAS, the review of the pay plan and benefits will involve substantial research and analysis that will require consultant services, and WHERAS, on November 15, 2021, upon authorization from the City Council, the City of Foster City issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) for professional services to conduct a compensation study; and
WHEREAS, the City received two (2) responses to the RFP, including Koff & Associates, a division of Gallagher Benefit Services, Inc., and Transformance Consulting and
WHEREAS, staff determined that Koff & Associates, a division of Gallagher Benefit Services, Inc. stood out as the firm most capable of conducting the Compensation Study; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that these consulting services are needed.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Foster City does hereby authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement dated February 7, 2022 with Koff & Associates, a division of Gallagher Benefits Inc. in an amount not to exceed $60,390 for professional services to conduct a Compensation Study. 154
PASSED AND ADOPTED as a resolution of the City Council of the City of Foster City at the regular meeting held on the 7th day of February 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

RICHA AWASTHI, MAYOR
ATTEST:

PRISCILLA SCHAUS, CITY CLERK
155
RESOLUTION NO.____________

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE ESTERO MUNICIPAL

IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH KOFF & ASSOCIATES, A DIVISION OF GALLAGHER BENEFIT SERVICES, INC., IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $60,390 FOR COMPENSATION STUDY SERVICES

ESTERO MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the Estero Municipal Improvement District current pay plan was adopted on December 13, 2021; and
WHEREAS, over the years, individual job classifications in the pay plan have been created, reviewed, and added to the pay plan on an as needed basis; and WHEREAS, the Estero Municipal Improvement District desires to review and amend the pay plan and benefits package for employees to ensure the organization continues to attract and retain quality high-caliber talent; and WHEREAS, the review of the pay plan and benefits will involve substantial research and analysis that will require consultant services, and WHERAS, on November 15, 2021, upon authorization from the Board of Directors, the Estero Municipal Improvement District issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) for professional services to conduct a compensation study; and WHEREAS, the District received two (2) responses to the RFP, including Koff & Associates, a division of Gallagher Benefit Services, Inc., and Transformance Consulting and
WHEREAS, staff determined that Koff & Associates, a division of Gallagher Benefit Services, Inc. stood out as the firm most capable of conducting the Compensation Study; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors finds that these consulting services are needed.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Estero Municipal Improvement District does hereby authorize the President to execute an agreement dated February 7, 2022 with Koff & Associates, a division of Gallagher Benefits Inc. in an amount not to exceed $60,390 for professional services to conduct a Compensation Study.
156
PASSED AND ADOPTED as a resolution of the Board of Directors of the Estero Municipal Improvement District at the regular meeting held on the 7th day of February 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

RICHA AWASTHI, PRESIDENT
ATTEST:

PRISCILLA SCHAUS, DISTRICT SECRETARY
157
1 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
FOR

COMPENSATION STUDY SERVICES
T
his Agreement (“Agreement”) is made and entered into as of the _____ day of February 2022 by and between the City of Foster City hereinafter cal led "CITY " and Koff & Associates, a division of Gallagher Benefit Services, Inc. hereinafter called "CONSULTANT".

RE CITALS
T
his Agreement is entered into with reference to the following facts and circumstances:

A. T
hat CITY desires to engage CONSULTANT to provide professional services in the CITY by preparing a comprehensive compensation study;
B. T
hat CONSULTANT is qualified to provide such services to the CITY and; C. T
hat the CITY has elected to engage the services of CONSULTANT upon the terms and conditions as hereinafter set forth.

1. Services. The services to be performed by CONSULTANT under this Agreement shall include those services set forth in Exhibit A, which is, by this reference, incorporated herein and made a part hereof as though it were fully set forth herein.

P
erformance of the work specified in said Exhibit A is hereby made an obligation of CONSULTANT under this Agreement, subject to any changes that may be made subsequently hereto upon the mutual written agreement of the said parties.

W
here in conflict, the terms of this Agreement supersede and prevail over any terms set forth in Exhibit A.

In the event of such termination, CITY shall compensate CONSULTANT for services rendered, and reimburse CONSULTANT for costs and expenses incurred, to the date of termination, calculated in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 3. In ascertaining the services actually rendered to the date of termination, consideration shall be given both to completed work and work in process of completion. Nothing herein contained shall be deemed a limitation upon the right of CITY to terminate this Agreement for 158
2 cause, or otherwise to exercise such rights or pursue such remedies as may accrue to CITY hereunder.

3. Compensation; Expenses; Payment . CITY shall compensate CONSULTANT for all services performed by CONSULTANT hereunder in an amount based upon CONSULTANT’s hourly rates during the time of the performance of said services. A copy of CONSULTANT ’s hourly rates for which services hereunder shall be performed are set forth in CONSULTANT’s fee schedule marked Exhibit “B” hereof, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the combined total of compensation and reimbursement of costs payable hereunder shall not exceed the sum of sixty thousand, three hundred and ninety dollars ($60,390). Invoices for amounts in excess of sixty thousand, three hundred and ninety dollars ($60,390) shall not be paid unless the performance of services and/or reimbursement of costs and expenses in excess of said amounts have been approved in advance of performing such services or incurring such costs and expenses by the City Manager (for contracts less than $5 0,000) or City Council (for contracts $50,000 or more) evidenced by motion duly made and carried and a written contract amendment having been executed.

Compensation and reimbursement of costs and expenses hereunder shall be payable upon monthly billing therefor by CONSULTANT to CITY, which billing shall include an item ized statement, briefly describing by task and labor category or cost/expense items billed.

4. Additional Services. In the event CITY desires the performance of additional services not otherwise included within the services described in Exhibit A, such services shall be authorized in advance of the performance thereof by the City Manager (for contracts less than $5 0,000) or City Council (for contracts $5 0,000 or more) by motion duly made and carried. Such amendment to this Agreement shall include a description of the services to be performed thereunder, the maximum compensation and reimbursement of costs and expenses payable theref or, the time of performance thereof, and such other matters as the parties deem appropriate for the accomplishment of such services. Except to the extent modified by written amendment, all other terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be deemed incorporated in each such amendment.

5. Records. CONSULTANT shall keep and maintain accurate records of all time expended and costs and expenses incurred relating to services to be performed by CONSULTANT hereunder. Said records shall be available to CITY for review and copying during regular business hours at CONSULTANT’s place of business or as otherwise agreed upon by the parties.

159
3 6. Authorization. This Agreement becomes effective when endorsed by both parties in the space provided below.

7. Reliance on Professional Skill of CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT represents that it has the necessary professional skills to perform the services required and the CITY shall rely on such skills of the CONSULTANT to do and perform the work. In performing services hereunder CONSULTANT shall adhere to the standards generally prevailing for the performance of expert consulting services similar to those to be performed by CONSULTANT hereunder.

8. Documents. All documents, plans, drawings, renderings, and other papers, or copies thereof, as finally rendered, prepared by CONSULTANT pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, shall, upon preparation and delivery to CITY, become the property of CITY. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CONSULTANT will retain sole and exclusive ownership of all right, title and interest in and to its intellectual property and derivatives thereof which no data or confidential information of the CITY was used to create and which was developed entirely using CONSULTANT’S own resources. To the extent CONSULTANT’S intellectual property is necessary for the CITY to use the services provided, CONSULTANT will grant to the CITY a non- exclusive, royalty -free license to CONSULTANT’s intellectual pr operty solely for the CITY’S use of such services.

9. Relationship of Parties . It is understood that the relationship of CONSULTANT to the CITY is that of an independent contractor and all persons working for or under the direction of CONSULTANT are its agents or employees and not agents or employees of the CITY.

11. Indemnity and Limitation of Liability . To the fullest extent allowed by law, CONSULTANT hereby agrees to defend, indemnify, and save harmless CITY and Estero Municipal Improvement District, its Council, boards, commissions, officers, employees and agents, from and against any and all claims, suits, actions liability, loss, damage, expense, cost (including, without limitation, costs and fees of litigation) of every nature, kind or 160
4 description, which may be brought against, or suffered or sustained by, City of Foster City or Estero Municipal Improvement District, its Council, boards, commissions, officers, employees or agents caused by, or alleged to have been caused by, the negligence, intentional tortuous act or omission, or willful misconduct of CONSULTANT, its officers, emp loyees, subcontractors or agents in the performance of any services or work pursuant to this Agreement.

The duty of CONSULTANT to indemnify and save harmless, as set forth herein, shall include the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code; provided, however, that nothing herein contained shall be construed to require CONSULTANT to indemnify City of Foster City and Estero Municipal Improvement District, its Council, boards, commissions, officers, employees and agents against any responsibility or liability in contravention of Section 2782 of the California Civil Code.

CONSULTANT’S liability to the CITY and any other party for any losses, injury or damages to persons or properties or work performed arising out of in connection with this Agreement and for any other claim, whether the claim arises in contract, tort, statut e or otherwise, shall be limited to the amount of the total fees due to CONSULTANT from CITY for the particular services giving rise to the claim. NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING TO THE

CONTRARY IN THIS AGREEMENT, CONSULTANT SHALL NOT BE

LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, I NDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, LOST

PROFITS, OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES SUSTAINED OR INCURRED IN

CONNECTION WITH THIS AGREEMENT, WHETHER OR NOT SUCH
DAMAGES ARE FORESEEABLE.

CONSULTANT’s responsibility for such defense and indemnity obligations shall survive the termination or completion of this Agreement for the full period of time allowed by law.

The defense and indemnification obligations of this agreement are undertaken in addition to, and shall not in any way be limited by, the insurance obligations contained within this Agreement.

12. Insurance. CONSULTANT shall acquire and maintain Workers’ Compensation, employer’s liability, commercial general liability, owned and non-owned and hired automobile liability, and professional liability insurance coverage relating to CONSULTANT ’s services to be performed hereunder covering CITY’s risks in form subject to the approval of the City Attorney and/or CITY’s Risk Manager. The minimum amounts of coverage corresponding to the aforesaid categories of insurance per insurable event, shall be as follows:

Insurance Category Minimum Limits

Workers’ Compensation statutory minimum
161
5 Employer’s Liability $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease

Commercial General Liability $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate for bodily injury,
personal injury and property damage

Automobile Liability $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage (coverage required
to the extent applicable to
CONSULTANT’s vehicle usage in
performing services hereunder)

1Professional Liability $1,000,000 per claim and aggregate

Furthermore, the requirements for coverage and limits shall be the greater of either (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this Agreement or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named Insured.

CONSULTANT agrees to include with all subcontractors in their subcontracts the same requir ements and provisions of this agreement including the indemnity and insurance requirements to the extent they apply to the scope of the subcontractor’s work. Subcontractors hired by CONSULTANT shall agree to be bound to CONSULTANT and CITY in the same manner and to the same extent as CONSULTANT is bound to CITY under this Agreement and its accompanying documents. Subcontractors shall further agree to include these same provisions with any sub- subcontractors. A copy of the indemnity and insurance provisio ns of this Agreement will be furnished to the Subcontractor upon request.

CONSULTANT shall require all subcontractors to provide a valid certificate of insurance and the required endorsements included in the subcontract agreement and will provide proof of compliance to the CITY prior to commencement of any work by the subcontractor.

Concurrently with the execution of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall furnish CITY, on the form included as Exhibit D or similar form, with certificates and copies of information or declaration pages of the insurance required hereunder to be included as Exhibit C hereto. With respect to evidence of commercial general liability insurance coverage, CONSULTANT must also include in Exhibit C the following original endorsements:

(b) Naming the City of Foster City and Estero Municipal Improvement District, its Council, officers, boards, commissions, employees, and agents, as additional insureds; and

(c) Providing that CONSULTANT’s Commercial General Liability insurance coverage shall be primary insurance with respect to City of Foster City and Estero Municipal Improvement District, its Council, officers, boards, commissions, employees, and agents, and any insurance or self-insurance maintained by CITY for itself, its Council, officers, boards, commissions, employees, or agents shall be in excess of CONSULTANT ’s insurance and not contributory with it.

CONSULTANT and its insurer may not seek contribution from CITY’s insurance or self-insurance.

The limits of insurance required in this agreement may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Only the Commercial General Liability insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non-contributory basis for the benefit of CITY, to the extent required by this Agreement, before the CITY ’s insurance or self -insurance may be called upon to protect CITY as a named Insured.

CITY reserves the right to obtain a full copy of any endorsements. Failure to exercise this right shall not constitute a waiver of right to exercise later.

Any and all Subcontractors shall agree to be bound to CONSULTANT and CITY in the same manner and to the same extent as CONSULTANT is bound to CITY under this Agreement. Subcontractors shall further agree to include the same requirements and provisions of this Agreement, including the indemnity and insurance requirements, in any agreement with sub- subcontractors to the extent that they apply to the scope of the sub- subcontractor’s work. A copy of the indemnity and insurance provisions of this Agreement shall be furnished to any subcontractor upon request.

CONSULTANT shall maintain insurance as required by this Agreement to the fullest amount allowed by law and shall maintain insurance for a minimum of two (2) years following completion of this project or service. In the event CONSULTANT fails to obtain or maintain completed operations coverage as required by this Agreement, the CITY at its sole discretion may purchase the coverage required and the cost will be paid by CONSULTANT.

163
7 13. WORKERS' COMPENSATION. CONSULTANT certifies that he is aware of the provisions of the Labor Code of the State of California which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and CONSULTANT certifies that he will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this agreement.

14. NON-DISCRIMINATION. The CONSULTANT will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. The CONSULTANT will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed and the employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to the following:
employment, advancement, demotion, transfer, recruitment, or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation, and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The CONSULTANT shall at all times be in compliance with the requirements of the Federal Americans With Disabilities Act (Public Law 101- 336) which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability by public entities. The CONSULTANT agrees to post in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment any notices provided by the CITY setting forth the provisions of this non-discrimination clause.

15. Payment. The CITY shall pay CONSULTANT for its fees and reimbursable expenses (if applicable) within 30 days following the date of receipt of each applicable invoice. If CITY contests or questions any invoice, it agrees to raise any questions with management of CONSULTANT within such 30-day period. Late fees in the amount of 2% of invoice amount will accrue if current invoice is not paid within 30 days of payment due date of that invoice. If late fees are not paid, they will carry forward to next invoice.

16. Notice. All notices required by this Agreement shall be given to the CITY and CONSULTANT in writing, by first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows:

CITY: City of Foster City
610 Foster City Boulevard
Foster City, CA 94404-2299
Attention: Maria Saguisag-Sid

CONSULTANT: Koff & Associates, a divi sion of Gallagher Benefit Services, Inc.
2835 Seventh Street
Berkeley, CA 94710
Attention: Katie Kaneko

17. Non-Assignment. This Agreement is not assignable either in whole or in part.
164
8 18. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended or modified only by written agreement signed by both parties.

19. Validity. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this Agreement.

20. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California and any suit or action initiated by either party shall be brought in the County of San Mateo, California. In the event of litigation between the parties hereto to enforce any provision of the Agreement, the unsuccessful party will pay the reasonable attorney’s fees and expenses of litigation of the successful party.

21. Mediation. Should any dispute arise out of this Agreement, the parties shall meet in mediation and attempt to reach a resolution with the assistance of a mutually acceptable mediator. Neither party shall be permitted to file legal action without first meeting in mediation and making a good faith attempt to reach a mediated resolution. The costs of the mediator, if any, shall be paid equally by the parties. If a mediated settlement is reached neither party shall be deemed the prevailing party for purposes of the settlement and each party shall bear its own legal costs.

22. Conflict of Interest. CONSULTANT may serve other clients, but none who conduct business that would place CONSULTANT in a "conflict of interest" as that term is defined in State law.

23. Entire Agreement . This Agreement, including Exhibit s A, B C, and D , comprises the entire Agreement.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed on the date first above written by their respective representatives duly authorized in that behalf.

CITY OF FOSTER CITY

Dated: _________________________________ Richa Awashti, Mayor

ATTEST:

Dated: ________________________________ Priscilla Schaus, City Clerk
165
9 APPROVED AS TO FORM

Dated:

Benjamin Stock, City Attorney

KOFF & ASSOCIATES, A DIVISION OF
GALLAGHER BENEFIT SERVICES, INC.

Dated:

Georg S. Krammer, Managing Director

166
10 EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF WORK AND SCHEDULE

FOR COMPENSATION STUDY SERVICES

167

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

10 SCOPE OF SERVICES
The City desires human resources assistance to conduct a total compensation study. The current pay plan for the organization has several issues related to compression and inequities that have developed over the years and the City is looking to update their pay plan to attract and retain quality staff, provide salaries commensurate with assigned duties, provide justifiable pay differentials between individual classes, and maintain a competitive position with other comparable agencies in the area.

The City currently has 102 job titles in 6 position groups that it wishes to include in the study. These positions are broken into 5 compenation steps.

Position Group Number of Job Titles
Executive Management 10
Other Management 45
AFSCME – Maintenance Unit 13
AFSCME – General Unit 19
FCPOA 7
Hourly/ Part-Time / Seasonal 8

The City is seeking at a minimum the following services:

• Review current compensation plan. Develop understanding of recruiting and retention of employees. • Provide recommendation and identify consistent market position the City can strive to maintain. • Recommend comparable public sector employers for compensation survey. • Develop and conduct benefits survey
• Recommend appropriate salary range for each position based on classification plan, compensation survey results and internal relationships. Prepare new salary structure based on results. • Identify extreme current compensation inequities and provide recommended corrective actions. • Provide comprehensive training for Human Resources staff on new system. • Provide periodic status reports on progress.
• Present information to Executive Leadership Team, unions, employees groups and City Council.

The study’s goal will be to review the City’s compensation structure for the studied classifications and to conduct a total compensation market survey (salaries plus benefits) using a set of appropriate comparator agencies. The identification of comparator agencies, benchmark classifications, and benefits to be collected is an iterative process that includes all stakeholders. We have found this open discussion philosophy to be critical to our success for organizational buy-in. Once the external data development is completed, we will make specific recommendations for internal equity for non-benchmarked classifications and classifications without a large enough market sampling.

The compensation study will contain specific recommendations regarding the integration of all study classifications into the City’s compensation structure, with the goal of developing a clearly designed, internally equitable format that is flexible for career opportunity and future growth. Our study will make recommendations regarding a salary structure that takes the City’s compensation preferences into consideration as well as the appropriate placement of each classification on the City’s salary schedule. 168

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

11 The study includes a significant number of m eetings with the Study Project Team, Executive Leadership Team, Human Resources, employees, union representation, and the City Council, as desired. We have expertise in labor/management relations and understand the importance of active participation by all stakeholders to ensure a successful outcome. The meetings and “stakeholder touch -points” that we recommend ensure understanding of the project parameters, enhance accurate intake and output of information, and create a collaborative and interactive appr oach result ing in greater buy -in for study recommendations. This interactive approach has resulted in almost 100% implementation success of K&A’s studies.

The majority of our clients are unionized and our larger city and county clients typically have mult iple unions. Due to the multitude of stakeholder groups who are affected by any compensation study K&A conducts, our team understands the importance of accurate and validated data that withstands any scrutiny, effective and ongoing communication throughout each effort, and collaboration with the various stakeholder groups to ensure organizational buy -in to our findings and recommendations. We have developed a unique methodology of stakeholder “touchpoints” and collaboration that has made us highly successful and effective and has earned our team respect, agreement, and understanding from all stakeholders. In addition, we adjust and customize our methodology based on each individual client’s unique needs and circumstances.

We also recognize that both the City and union representatives have obligations to employees and members to ensure that any study is conducted in a fair and equitable manner. Our project work plans are designed for transparency and we strongly encourage dialog with all stakeholders on stu dy deliverables so they in turn can express their concerns; we all have a shared goal of ensuring the process followed is fair and equitable.

This intense and comprehensive stakeholder engagement and our transparent study processes are also a mechanism of quality control. The fact that our information, data, and recommendations have to be able to withstand utmost scrutiny by diverse stakeholders require an in -depth multi -step quality control process for deliverables . This involves K&A t eam member validati on of classification analyses and compensation data , K&A Project Manager review of all classification and compensation analyses, recommendations and deliverables , and finally K&A Principal (Project Director) review of deliverables before submittal to the client.

Total Compensation Study Objectives
 To make recommendations regarding a list of appropriate, logical and defensible comparator agencies, benchmark classifications, and benefits to be collected prior to beginning the compensation portion of the study;
 To collect accurate salary and benefit data from the approved group of comparator agencies and to ensure that the information is analyzed in a manner that is clear and comprehensible to the Study Project Team, Human Resources, management, employees, union representation, and the City Council;
 To carefully analyze the scope and level of duties and responsibilities, requirements for successful work performance, and other factors for survey classes, according to generally accepted compensation practices;
169

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

12  To r eview the City’s compensation structure and practices and develop compensation recommendations that will assist the City in recruiting, motivating, and retaining competent staff;
 To develop solutions that address pay equity issues, analyze the financial i mpact of addressing pay equity issues, and create a market adjustment implementation strategy supporting the City’s goals, objectives, and budget considerations;  To evaluate benefit offerings in the labor market and make recommendations for better alignment and/or different benefit offerings as indicated by the analysis and best practices;
 To create a comprehensive final report summarizing the compensation study approach and methodology, analytical tools, findings, and recommended compensation structure;  To recommend appropriate internal salary relationships and allocate classes to salary ranges in a comprehensive salary range plan; and
 To ensure sufficient documentation and training throughout the study, on methods used to determine appropriate salary range s, methods for logical progression of movement within the salary scale for each classification, and other practices, so that our recommendations can be implemented and maintained in a competent and fair manner.

Overall Objectives:
 To review and understand all current documentation, rules, regulations, policies, budgets, procedures, class descriptions, organizational charts, memoranda of understanding, personnel policies, wage and salary schedules, and related information so that our recommendations can be operationally incorporated with a minimum of disruption;  To conduct start-up Study Project Team meetings with management, study project staff, and other stakeholders to discuss any specific concerns with respect to the development of compensation recommendations; finalize study plans and timetables; conduct orientation sessions with management, union leadership, and staff in order to educate and explain the scope of the study and describe what are and are not reasonable study expectations and goals;
 To work collaboratively and effectively with the City and its stakeholders while at the same time maintaining control and objectivity in the conduct of the study;  To develop a compensation structure that meets all legal requirements, that is totally non-discriminatory, and that easily accommodates organizational change, growth, and operational needs;
 To document all steps in the process and provide documentation and training for Human Resources and other staff, as appropriate, in compensation analysis me thodologies so that the City can integrate, maintain, administer, and defend any recommended changes after the initial implementation; and
 To provide effective ongoing communications throughout the duration of the project and continued support after implementation.

170

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

13 METHODOLOGY

TOTAL COMPENSATION STUDY
Deliverable A: Meetings with Study Project Team and Management Staff and Initial Documentation Review
During the initial meeting with the Study Project Team, we will discuss the compensation study factors that need to be agreed upon. This task includes identifying the City’s Study Project Team (Human Resources, management, employee representation, etc.), contract administrator, and reporting relationships. Our team will conduct an orientation and briefing session with the Study Project Team to explain process and methodology; create the specific work plan and work schedule; identify subsequent tasks to be accomplished; reaffirm the primary objectives and specific end products; determine deadline dates for satisfactory completion of the overall assignment; determine who will be responsible for coordinating/scheduling communications with employees, managers, and other stakeholders; and develop a timetable for conducting the same.

Included in this task will be the gathering of written documentation, identifying current incumbents, and assembling current class descriptions, organizational charts, salary sched ules, budgets, employment contracts, personnel policies, previous compensation studies, and any other relevant documentation to gain a general understanding of City operations.

City terminology and methods of current compensation procedures will be reviewed and agreed to. We will discuss methodology, agree to formats for compensation results, identify appropriate comparator agencies, benchmark classifications and benefits to be surveyed for compensation survey purposes. We will respond to any questions that may arise from the various stakeholders.

Deliverable B. List of Comparator Agencies, Benchmark Classifications, and Benefits to be Collected During the initial meeting with the Study Project Team, we will discuss and agree to the compensation study factors. We will identify appropriate , logical and defensible comparator agencies that will be included in the external market survey, which will b e the foundation for ensuring that the City’s salaries for the studied classifications are competitively aligned with the external labor market . We will also identify those classifications that will be surveyed in the market (i.e., benchmark classifications), with the intention of internally aligning the remaining classifications with those that were surveyed.

Finally, we will determine the list of benefits that the City wants to include in the total compensation data gathering process.

1. Determination of Comparator Agencies
The selection of comparator agencies is a critical step in the study process. We typically use the following factors to identify appropriate comparators and will receive approval before proceeding with the total compensation study.

Our recommended methodology is that we involve management, Human Resources , employee representation, and the City Council, in the decision -making process of selecting which comparable agencies are included, PRIOR to beginning the study. Our experience has shown that 171

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

14 this is the most successful approach. The factors that we typically review when selecting and recommending appropriate comparator agencies include:
 Organizational type and str ucture – While various organizations may provide overlapping services and employ some staff having similar duties and responsibilities, the role of each organization is somewhat unique, particularly in regard to its relationship to the citizens it serves a nd level of service expectation. During this iterative process, the City’s current/ previous list of comparators, if any, and the advantages/disadvantages of including them or others would be discussed.
 Similarity of population served, City demographics, City staff, and operational budgets – These elements provide guidelines in relation to resources required (staff and funding) and available for the provision of services.
 Scope of services provided – While having an organization that provides all of the services at the same level of citizen expectation is ideal for comparators, as long as the majority of services are provided in a similar manner, sufficient data should be available for analysis.

When reviewing this factor, the City’s unique services would be evaluated in order to ensure that the majority of comparators provide the same services. This ensure s that each comparator yields a sufficient number of matches for the City’s jobs.  Labor market – The reality of today’s labor market is that many agencies are in competition for the same pool of qualified employees, because large portions of the workforce don’t live in the communities they serve, are accustomed to lengthy commutes, and are more likely to consider changing jobs in a larger geographic area than in the past. Therefore, the geographic labor market area (where the City may be recruiting from or losing employees to) is taken into consideration when selecting potential comparator organizations. As part of this analysis, we will determine whether the City has identified agencies that it competes with for qualified talent; those agencies are taken into consideration for purposes of our analysis. It is important to understand and consider the City’s competitive landscape and include agencies in the study to whom the City loses talent.
 Cost-of-living – The price of housing and other cost -of-living related issues are some of the biggest factors in determining labor market s. We review overall cost -of-living of various geographic areas, median house prices, and median household incomes to determine the appropriateness of various potential comparator agencies.

We typically recommend using 10-12 comparator agencies for all survey benchmarks in order to achieve statistical significance but are flexible and can easily use a different approach based on the City’s preferences.

2. Determination of Benchmark Classifications
In the same collaborative manner as described in Step 1 above, we will work with the City’s stakeholders to select those classifications that will be surveyed. “Benchmark classes” are ordinarily chosen to reflect a broad spectrum of class levels. In addition, those that are selected normally include classes that are most likely to be found in other similar agencies, and therefore provide a sufficient valid data sample for analysis. Internal relationships will be determined between the benchmarked and non-benchmarked classifications and internal equity alignments will be made for salary recommendation purposes. 172

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

15 Due to the fact that the labor market typically yields reliable data, we recommend using approximately 60-65% of all classifications as benchmarks but we are happy to use a different model.

3. Determination of Salary and Benefits Data to Be Collected In addition to base salaries, benefit data elements for a total compensation study normally include at least the following (which are generally available to all staff in a specific job class ification):

Employee Retirement, Retiree Healthcare cost, Health, Dental, Vision, and other insurance coverage, Vacation, Holidays, Administrative Leave, Deferred Compensation, Auto Allowance, and other benefits that the City wants to add.
 Monthly Salary – The top of the normal, published salary range. All figures are presented on a monthly or annual basis. We normalize the salary data to reflect number of hours in the work week and/or roll-up of retirement or other benefits in base salaries.  Employee Retirement – This includes two figures: the amount of the employee’s State or other public or private retirement contribution that is contributed by the agency and the amount of the agency’s Social Security contribution.
 Retiree Healthcare – Given that healthcare costs are rising and retiree healthcare and liabilities increasing for many public agencies, we collect this information to capture the costs.  Insurance – This typically includes Health, Dental, Vision, and other insurance coverage.  Leave – Other than sick leave, which is usage-based, leave is the amount of days off for which the organization is obligated. We will discuss with the City whether leave days/hours should be converted to direct salary cost in dollars or represented in days/hours.  Vacation: The number of vacation days available to all employees after five years of employment.
 Holidays: The number of holidays (including floating) available to the employee on an annual basis.
 Administrative/Personal Leave: Administrative leave is normally the number of days available to management staff to compensate for the lack of payment for overtime.

Personal leave may be available to other groups of employees to augment vacation or other time off.
 Deferred Compensation – We report any employer contribution made on the employee’s behalf, whether dollar amount or percentage of salary, that does not require an employee- matching contribution. We can also report employer contributions that do require an employee match and would do so as a separate report.
 Other – This category includes any other benefits that are available to all employees within a classification and not already specifically detailed.

Deliverable C. Data from Comparators and Preliminary Analysis of Data K&A does not collect market compensation data by merely sending out a written questionnaire. We find that such questionnaires are often delegated to the individual in the department with the least experience in the organization and given a low priority. Our experienced compensation analysts conduct all of the data collection and analysis to ensure validity of the data and quality control. This approach also ensures that we compare job description to job description and not just job titles, therefore ensuring true “matches” of at least 70%, which is the percentage we use to determine whether to include a comparator classification or not.
173

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

16 Objective factors in the whole position classification methodology include:

1. Decision making/judgment

2. Difficulty and complexity of work

3. Supervisory responsibilities

4. Non-supervisory responsibilities

5. Minimum qualifications

6. Working conditions/risk factors

7. Contacts

We typically collect classification descriptions, organization charts, salary schedules, personnel policies, budgets, master plans, operational information, MOUs, and other information via website, by telephone, or by an onsite interview. With the prior knowledge from the data gathered directly from each comparator agency and our experience in the public sector human resources field, our compensation analysts make preliminary “matches” and then schedules appointments by telephone, or sometimes in person, with knowledgeable individuals to answer specific questions. We find that information collected using these methods has a very high validity rate and allows us to substantiate the data for employees, management, and governing bodies.

Data will be entered into spreadsheet format designed for ease of interpretation and use. The information will be p resented in a format that will identify the comparator positions used for each classification comparison. Information will be calculated based upon both average and median figures allowing the City to make informed compensation decisions. Other elements of the compensation survey report are agencies surveyed; comparable class titles; salary range maximum/control point; number of observations; and percent of the City’s salary range is above/below the market values.

In addition, we will include any type of statistical representation and analysis that the City desires such as 60 th, 70th, or any other percentiles per the City’s compensation philosophy.

Benefits data will be displayed in an easy-to-read format. You will receive three sets of spreadsheets per classification, one with base pay, one with the benefits detail, and one with total compensation statistical data. In addition, we are often asked to collect “other” benefits (as listed in the benefits section above), which we typically report on a separate spreadsheet.

Deliverable D. Draft Compensation Findings/Additional Analysis/Study Project Team Meetings As part of our transparent approach and communication strategy to ensure organizational buy -in to the study, we share the market survey with the organization. We first distribute our draft findings to the Study Project Team. After their preliminary review, K&A will meet with the Study Project Team and other stakeholders (including Human Resources, management, employees) to clarify data, to receive requests for reanalysis of certain comparators, and to answer questions and address concerns. This provides an opportunity for the Study Project Team and other stakeholders to review and question any of our recommended benchmark comparator matches. If questions arise, we conduct follow -up analysis to reconfirm our original analysis and/or make corrections as appropriate.

Deliverable E. Analysis of Internal Relationships and Alignment To determine internal equity for all studied positions, considerable attention will be given to this phase of the project. It is necessary to develop an internal position hierarchy based on the organizational value of each classification. Again, we utilize the whole position analysis methodology as described earlier. 174

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

17 By reviewing those factors, we will make recommendations regarding vertical salary differentials between classes in a class series, for example, as well as across departments. This analysis will be integrated with the results of the compensation survey and the City’s existing compensation plan.

The ultimate goal of this critical step in the process is to address any potential internal equity issues and concerns with the current compensation system, including compaction issues between certain classifications. We will create a sound and logical compensation structure for the various levels within each class series, so that career ladders are not only reflected in the classification system but also in the compensation system, with pay differentials between levels that allow employees to progress on a clear path of career growth and development. Career ladders will be looked at vertically, as well as horizontally, to reflect the City’s classification structure.

Deliverable F. Compensation Structure and Implementation Plan Depending on data developed as a result of the internal analysis, we will review and make recommenda- tions regarding internal alignment and the salary structure (set of salary ranges, salary differentials, steps within ranges, and/or alternative compensation plans) within which the classes are allocated, based upon the City’s preferred compensation model. We w ill also assist the City in developing a compensation philosophy and practices relative to the surveyed public jurisdictions, if desired. Finally, we will develop a proposed implementation plan based on the study results and recommendations, including calculating the cost of implementing the plan.

We will conduct a competitive pay analysis using the market data gathered to assist in the determination of external pay equity and the recommendation of a new base compensation structure , if desired. We will conduct a comparative analysis to illustrate the relationships between current pay practices and the newly determined market conditions and develop solutions to address any significant individual or group pay equity issues, analyze the financial impact of a ddressing pay equity issues, and create a market adjustment implementation strategy supporting City goals, objectives, and budget considerations.

Recommendations will also include guidelines to assist City staff with determining the starting pay for new employees based on knowledge and experience above the minimum requirements of the position, how difficult the position is to fill, and market competitiveness. We will also make recommendations and provide implementation strategies related to other key compensation practices, based on market demands, including pay for performance, skill pay, special assignment pay, certification pay, bilingual pay, promotional pay, and acting assignment pay.

Draft recommendations will be discussed with the Study Project Team and management for discussions and decisions on overall pay philosophy and the practicality of acceptance and prior to developing an Interim Report.

Deliverable G. Final Report and Guidelines for Implementation A draft Interim Report of the Compensation Study) will be completed and submitted to the Study Project Team for review and comment. The report will provide detailed compensation findings, documentation, and recommendations. The report will include:
 An executive summary of the compensation study results;  A set of all market data spreadsheets;
 A proposed Salary Range Placement document;
175

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

18  A procedure to address employees whose base pay exceeds the maximum of their newly assigned pay range;
 Implementation issues and cost projections surrounding our recommendations; and  A guide for rules, policies and procedures for the City in implementing, managing and maintaining the compensation system, as appropriate.

Once all of the City’s questions/concerns are addressed and discussed, a Final Compensation Report will be created and submitted in the City’s preferred format. The Final Report will incorporate any appropriate revisions identified and submitted during the review of the draft report.

Deliverable H. Formal Appeals Process
Should the City have an formal appeals process regarding the allocation of positions, this proposal does not cover time regarding a formal appeal process. Should our on-site participation be desired, our stated composite hourly rate will be honored. As mentioned above, however, our internal process usually addresses any of these issues.

Deliverable I. Final Presentation
Our proposal includes multiple meetings and weekly oral and written status/progress updates to the Study Project Team. Regarding the involvement of the City Council, etc., we recommend at least one initial meeting to identify the comparator agencies to be included in the study, one interim study se ssion (to discuss the initial findings of the compensation study), and one final presentation of our Final Report. Of course, we are flexible regarding having more or less interaction with the Council , based on the City’s preferences.

176

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

19 OPTIONAL SERVICES
Our approach and methodology, as described in this proposal, are very comprehensive and no additional optional services are being proposed. If the City desires formal training classes regarding classification and compensation methodologies, we would be happy to provide options for training services.

177

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

20 TIME REQUIREMENTS
Our professional experience is that total compensation studies of this scope and for this size organization take approximately three to four (3 - 4) months to complete, allowing for adequate compensation data collection and analysis, review steps by the City, the development of final reports, any appeals, and presentations.

The following is a suggested timeline (which can be modified based on the City’s needs):

Deliverables Total Compensation Survey Completion by:

A. Meetings with Study Project Team and Management Staff and Initial Documentation Review Week 1
B. List of Comparator Agencies, Benchmark Classifications, and Benefits to be Collected Week 2
C. Data from Comparators and Preliminary Analysis of Data Week 10 D. Draft Compensation Findings/Additional Analysis/Study Project Team Meetings Week 12
E. Analysis of Internal Relationships and Alignment Week 13 F. Compensation Structure and Implementation Plan Week 13 G. Final Report and Guidelines for Implementation Week 14 H. Formal Appeals Process * As Needed
I. Final Presentation As Scheduled

178
11 EXHIBIT B

CONSULTANT’S FEE SCHEDULE

179

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

21 COST PROPOSAL
We have often found our process requires a very high level of time commitment, which sometimes results in a higher proposal cost. We believe that our methodology and implementation success rate is attributable to the significantly greater level of contact we have with employees, management, and the governing body. The time we commit to working with the employees (sharing of compensation survey data, informal appeal process, etc.) results in significantly greater buy -in throughout the process and no formal appeals at the end of the study.

Our clients always provide feedback that our process was professional, comprehensive, understandable, timely, and inclusive. Employees, although not necessarily always happy with our recommendations, have always indicated that we listened to their issues and concerns, were available for discussion, and able to provide documentation and data to support our recommendations . Although time consuming, we also drive the process to ensure that timelines are met and schedules are maintained.

For purposes for this cost proposal, we assume that, due to COVID-19, all meetings and presentations will be conducted virtually and not onsite travel will occur. We have several technological solutions that can easily facilitate the entire process. Of course, if the travel situation should change, we are more than happy to travel onsite to City offices, as needed, and adjust our cost proposal accordingly.

Deliver-
ables Total Compensation Study Hours
A. Meetings with Study Project Team and Management Staff and Initial Documentation Review 5
B. List of Comparator Agencies, Benchmark Classifications, and Benefits to be Collected 12
C. Data from Comparators and Preliminary Analysis of Data (this assumes 12 comparator agencies and up to 65 classifications) 260
D. Draft Compensation Findings/Additional Analysis/Study Project Team Meetings 40
E. Analysis of Internal Relationships and Alignment 12 F. Compensation Structure and Implementation Plan 12
G. Final Report and Guidelines for Implementation 12
H. Formal Appeals Process * 0
I. Final Presentation 5
Anticipated hours for additional unscheduled meetings and phone calls 8 Total Professional Hours – Compensation 366

Combined professional and clerical composite rate: $165/Hour $60,390

Expenses are included in the composite hourly rate: N/A Expenses include but are not limited to duplicating documents, binding reports, phone, supplies, postage, parking, meals, travel time, etc.

TOTAL PROJECT COST NOT TO EXCEED: $60,390
*Additional consulting will be honored at composite rate ($165/hr)

180
12 EXHIBIT C
I

NSURANCE FORMS

1. I
nsurance Coverage Form
181
December 6, 2021
Total Compensation
Study Proposal
City of Foster City

KOFF & ASSOCIATES, A GALLAGHER COMPANY
K
atie Kaneko
Managing Director, Compensation and Rewards Consulting
2 835 Seventh Street
Berkeley, CA 94710
www.KoffAssociates.com
[email protected]
Tel
: 510.612.3197
Fax: 510.652.5633
Attachment 4
182

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

December 6, 2021
Ms. Maria Saguisag-Sid
Human Resources Director/Risk Manager
610 Foster City Boulevard
Foster City, CA 94404

Dear Ms. Saguisag-Sid:

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to your Request for Proposals for a Compensation Study for the City of Foster City (“City”). We are most interested in assisting the City with this important study and feel that we are uniquely qualified to provide value to your organization based on our experience working with other cities, counties, special districts, joint-powers associations, and other public agencies , and of course our familiarity with the City due to the classification study we are currently conducting.

Koff & Associates , now a Gallagher company, is an experienced Human Resources and Recruitment Services firm providing human resources services to cities, counties, special districts, courts, educational institutions, and other public agencies for 37 years. The firm has achieved a reputation for working successfully with management, employees, and governing bodies. We believe in a high level of dialogue and input from study stakeholders and our proposal speaks to that level of effort. Our firm’s extra effort has resulted in close to 100% implementation of all of our classification and compensation studies.

Koff & Associates ensures that each of our projects is given the appropriate resources and attention, resulting in a high level of quality control, excellent communication between clients and our office, commitment to meeting timelines and budgets, and a consistently high-caliber work product.

We understand the City is currently in the process of completing a classification study, and is seeking assistance in completing a compensation study. The current pay plan for the organization has several issues related to compression and inequities that have developed over the years and the City is looking to update their pay plan to attract and retain quality staff, provide salaries commensurate with assigned duties, provide justifiable pay differentials between individual classes, and maintain a competitive position with other comparable agencies in the area.

As a Managing Director of Koff & Associates , I would assume the role of Project Director and be responsible for the successful completion of project. I can be reached at our Berkeley address and the phone number listed on the cover page. My email is [email protected].

This proposal will remain valid for at least 90 days from the date of submittal. In addition, This proposals, including all pricing quotes, will remain in effect for the entire term of the contract (up to two years). Please call if you have any questions or wish additional information. We look forward to the opportunity provide professional services to the City of Foster City.

Sincerely,

Katie Kaneko
Managing Director, Compensation and Rewards Consulting
183
Total Compensation Study Proposal
City of Foster City

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Firm Qualifications 1

Team Member Qualifications 2

Scope of Services 10

Methodology 13

Time Requirements 20

Cost Proposal 21

References 22

Contractual Considerations 24
- Memorandum of Insurance

Signature Page

184
Total Compensation Study Proposal
City of Foster City

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

1 FIRM QUALIFICATIONS
Koff & Associates (“K&A”) is a full-spectrum, public-sector human resources and recruitment services firm that was founded in 1984 by Gail Koff; K&A has been assisting cities, counties, special districts, other public agencies, and non-profit organizations with their human resources needs for 37 years.

As of April 30, 2021, we are in the process of merging with Arthur J. Gallagher and are now officially a Gallagher Division. Our headquarters are in Berkeley, CA , and we have satelli te office s in Southern California, the Central Valley, the Sacramento Region, and the Western Region.

We are familiar with the various public sector organizational structures, agency missions, operational and budgetary requirements, and staffing expectations. We have extensive experience working in both union and non-union environments (including service as the management representative in meet & confer and negotiation meetings), working with City Councils, County Commissions, Boards of Directors, Boards of Supervisors, Boards of Trustees, Merit Boards, and Joint Power Authorities.

The firm’s areas of focus are compensation studies (approximately 70% of our workload); executive search and staff recruitments; organizational development/assessment studies; performance management and incentive compensation programs; development of strategic management tools; policy/procedure development and employee handbooks; training and development; public agency consolidations and separations; Human Resources audits; and serving as off-site Human Resources Director for smaller public agencies that ne ed the expertise of a Human Resources Director but do not need a full -time, on -site professional.

Without exception, all of our compensation studies have successfully met all of our intended commitments; communications were successful with employees, super visors, management, and union representatives; and we were able to assist each agency in successfully implementing our recommendations. All studies were brought to completion within stipulated time limits and proposed budgets.

Our long list of clients (please see https://koffassociates.com/our-clients/ ) is indicative of our firm’s
reputation as being a quality organization that can be relied on for producing comprehensive, sound, and cost-effective recommendations and solutions. K&A has a reputation for being “hands on” with the ability and expertise to implement its ideas and recommendations through completion in both union and non - union environments.

K&A relies on our stellar reputation and the recommendations and referrals of past clients to attract new clients. Our work speaks for itself and our primary goal is to provide professional and technical consulting assistance with integrity, honesty and a commitment to excellence. We are very proud of the fact that in working with hundreds of public agency clients and completing hundreds of classification and/or compensation and other types of studies, we have only had a handful of formal appeals in our entire history.

185

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

2 Our team consists of 32 employees as shown below in our organizational chart.

No subcontractors will be assigned to this study.

TEAM MEMBER QUALIFICATIONS
All members of our team have worked on multiple total compensation studies and are well acquainted with the wide array of public sector organizational structures, compensation structures, classification plans, as well as the challenges and issues that arise when conducting studies such as this one for the City.

KEY PERSONNEL
Our project team will be led by Co -Project Directors Katie Kaneko (Managing Director) and Alyssa Thompson (Senior Project Manager). They will coordinate all of K&A’s efforts, attend all meetings with the City, and be responsible for all work products and deliverables.

Georg Krammer
Katie Kaneko
Managing Directors
Lisa Gardner
Kelly Basoco
Maggie Williams-Dalgart
Lindsay Christopher
Monica Garrison-Reusch
Arlene Gibbs
Jamie Inderbitzen
Sarah Nunes
Ariele Rodriguez
Frances Trant
Senior H.R. Associates
Cindy Harary
Renate Tiner
Trish Griffus
H.R. Associates
Eileen King
Marketing
Associate
John Logsdon
Senior Proposals
Developer
Lenissa Dumlao
Elise Johnson
Administrative
Coordinators
Jessica Keast
Kathy Crotty
Sarah Williams
Administrative
Assistants
Joshua Boudreaux
Gary Palmer
Recruiters
Ember Plummer
Recruiting
Coordinator
Alyssa Thompson
Debbie Owen
Senior Project Managers
Frank Rojas
Recruitment Manager
Mike Harary
Kari Mercer
Amber Richards
Project Managers
golbou ghassemieh
Project Manager /
Recruitment Manager
186

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

3 CONSULTANTS
Lindsay Christopher (Senior HR Associate), Jamie Inderbitzen (Senior HR Associate), Cindy Harary (HR Associate) and Renate Tiner (HR Associate) will conduct compensation data collection and analysis, internal job analysis, develop recommendations and implementation strategies.

WORKLOAD
We currently have a team of 20 HR consultants and five administrative support staff – resources that we are able to pool base on each project’s needs, to execute projects and to meet clients’ needs and expectations. Each time we are selected as the successful bidder on a project, we strategize to determine project timelines, deliverable deadlines, and the resources that are required to produce the deliverables as promised. We are poised to accommodate the City’s total compensation study and plan to devote the necessary resources for the successful executive of the project.

Following are short biographies of the specific staff who will be assigned to this study:

Catherine “Katie” Kaneko, C.P.A., P.H.R.

Managing Director, Compensation and Rewards Consulting
Katie is one of the two principals of Koff & Associates. She brings more than 25 years of management - level human resources and consulting experience to K&A. She has extensive experience in classification analysis and evaluation techniques, compensation, p erformance incentive programs, recruitment, and organizational studies.

Armed with her Bachelor of Business Administration degree, and as a CPA (Certified Public Accountant), Katie began her career in an international accounting/consulting firm. She transitioned into Human Resources within the firm to become the Human Resources Director of the San Francisco office. She next moved into the high-tech industry where she served in leadership positions for high -growth companies, startup firms, and organizations in transition. Katie then moved to the public sector, joining K&A in 2003 and has been the firm’s President since 2005; over the last 16 years, she has overseen hundreds of compensation, classification, organizational and other studies for cities, cou nties, and special districts throughout California.

Agencies for whom classification and/or compensation studies, or HR Services (such as organizational assessments, executive performance evaluations, succession planning studies, etc.) were led by Katie, as Project Director, during the last few years, include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Cities and/or Towns : Albany, Belmont, Benicia, Calistoga, Carmel, Coachella, Crescent City, Cupertino, Danville, Dinuba, East Palo Alto, Fairfield, Galt, Hayward, Hillsborough, Los Altos, Los Gatos, Madera, Manteca, Merced, Monterey, Moraga, Morgan Hill, Mt. Shasta, Newman, Novato, Pacific Grove, Pacifica, Palo Alto, Paradise, Piedmont, Redwood City, Rohnert Park, Sacramento, San Bruno, San Pablo, San Ramon, Santa Cruz, Santa Rosa, Seaside, Sonora, Tracy, Tulare
• Counties: Butte, El Dorado, Humboldt, Mendocino, Merced, Placer, San Joaquin, San Mateo, Sonoma, Tuolumne, Yuba
• Courts: Superior Court of the County of Alameda, Superior Court of San Joaquin County • Education: First Five Contra Costa, First Five Santa Clara, Hartnell College, Salinas Union High School District, Southwestern Community College District, Travis Unified School District 187

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

4 • State: California State Compensation Insurance Fund; California State Auditor’s Office • Other: Municipal Pooling Authority, Public Agency Risk Sharing Authority of California • Special Districts:
o Open Space Districts: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority, Sonoma County Agricultural Preserve and Open Space District. o Park and Recreation Districts: Livermore Area Recreation and Park District, Mendocino Coast Recreation & Park District,
o Air Quality: Bay Area Air Quality Management District o Community Services District: Cosumnes Co mmunity Services District, Discovery Bay Community Services District, Groveland Community Services District, Rancho Murieta Community Services District, Town of Discovery Bay CSD
o Fire and Police Protection: Central Fire District of Santa Cruz County, East Contra Costa Fire Protection District
o Housing/Economic Development: Oakland Housing Authority o Public Utilities: Northern California Power Agency
o Retirement: Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement Association, Retirement Office of City of San José
o Solid Waste: Alameda County Waste Management Authority, Humboldt Waste Management Authority, Monterey Regional Waste Management District, Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority
o Transportation: Alameda Contra Costa Transit District, San Francisco County Transportation Authority, Solano Transportation Authority
o Wastewater: Castro Valley Sanitary District, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, Dublin San Ramon Services District, East Palo Alto Sanitary District, Encina Wastewater Authority, Fairfield Suisun Sewer District, Las Gallinas Sanitary District, Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency, Mt. View Sanitary District, Vallejo Flood and Wastewater District, West Valley Sanitation District
o Water: Alameda County Water District, Coastside County Water District, Indian Wells Valley Water District, North Coast County Water District, Santa Clara Valley Water District, Valley County Water District, Zone 7 Water Agency
Katie will be key personnel and serve as the Co-Project Director for this project; she will coordinate all of K&A’s efforts, will attend all meetings with the City, and will be responsible for all work products and deliverables.

Alyssa Thompson, Ph. D.

Senior Project Manager
Alyssa has over 12 years of human resources experience in classification and compensation analysis and development, performance management, affirmative action program development, and recruitment.

Alyssa also has experience in designing and conducting quantitative and qualitative research studies.

Since joining K&A in 2007, Alyssa has led and worked on well over 300 classification, compensation, organizational assessment, and recruitment projects for cities, counties, and special districts, including but not limited to some of these more recent projects:
188

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

5 • Cities and Towns: Concord, Danville, Discovery Bay, Fremont, Hayward, Hillsborough, Los Altos Hills, Monterey, Napa, Oakland, Orange, Palm Desert, Piedmont, Redlands, Sacramento, San Diego, Santa Barbara, Santa Rosa, Vallejo • Counties: Bernalillo (N ew Mexico), Humboldt, Orange, Placer, San Joaquin, San Mateo, Solano, Tehama, Tuolumne
• Special Districts:
o Community Services District: Cosumnes CSD, Hayward Area Recreation and Park District, Heritage Ranch CSD, Tualatin Hills Park & Recreation District (OR) o Fire and Police Protection: Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District o Housing/Economic Development: Housing Authority of the County of Alameda, Oakland Housing Authority, San Diego Housing Commission, Santa Clara County Housing Authority
o Open Space: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District o Public Utilities: East Bay Municipal Utility District, Northern California Power Agency
o Transportation: Alameda County Transportation Commission, Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Ontario International Airport, Port of Hueneme, Port of Long Beach, Riverside County Transportation Commission, SACOG (Sacramento Area Council of Governments), Western Riverside Council of Governments
o Wastewater: Central Contra C osta Sanitary District, Central Marin Sanitation Agency, Encina Wastewater Authority, Orange County Sanitation District, Vallejo Flood and Wastewater District
o Water: Alameda County Water District, Bay Area Water Supply & Conservation Agency, Coastside County Water District, Contra Costa Water District, Dublin San Ramon Services District, Mid -Peninsula Water District, San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District, Santa Clara Valley Water District, Santa Clarita Valley Water Agency, South Coast Water Dis trict, Valley County Water District, Zone 7 Water Agency
• Education: Alameda Unified School District, Berkeley Unified School District, Cutler-Orosi Unified School District, Foothill-De Anza Community College District, Mount San Antonio College, Salinas Union High School District, Travis Unified School District, West Valley Mission Community College District
• Courts: Habeas Corpus Resource Center, Superior Court of California-County of Orange She earned a Bachelor’s degree in Psychology with a minor in Sociol ogy-Organizational Studies from the University of California, Davis, and a Ph.D. in Organizational Psychology from Alliant International University.

Alyssa will serve as the Co -Project Director for this study; together with Katie, she will coordinate all of K&A’s efforts, will attend all meetings with the City, and will be responsible for all work products and deliverables. She will provide consultant support for this project, including classification analysis, interviews with employees and management, compensation data collection and analysis, internal job analysis, development of recommendations, and implementation strategies.

189

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

6 Lindsay Christopher
Senior H.R. Associate
Lindsay’s professional qualifications include ten years of experience working in the public sector, mostly with Alameda County. In her role as Human Resources Analyst, she was responsible for classification and compensation projects, as well as recruitment and selection, in a Civil Service, merit-based, environment.

Mostly recently, she continued to focus on classification and compensation projects at East Bay Regional Park District.

Since joining K&A, Lindsay has worked on studies for the following:
• Cities: Gardena, Hemet, Milpitas, Tracy, Corona, Seattle (Library), Napa • Counties: Humboldt
• Special Districts: Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement Association, Greater LA County Vector Control District, Orange County Sanitation District, Purissima Hills Water District, Marin Municipal Water District, Housing Authority of the City of Santa Barbara, Tri-City Mental Health Authority, Victor Valley College, Buena Park Library District, East Bay Regional Park District, Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District, Valley Water, San Luis and Delta Mendota Water Authority
A Bay Area native, Lindsay earned her B.A. degree in Sociology with a concentration in Criminology from San Jose State University.

Lindsay will provide Senior H.R. Associate support throughout this effort, including classification analysis, interviews with employees and management, compensation data collection and analysis, internal job analysis, development of recommendations, and implementation strategies.

Jamie Inderbitzen, HRAC, CCC, PCM, CAPM
Senior H.R. Associate
Jamie has over 12 years of human resource program experience, most of which have been spent serving as either a team consultant or project manager working for the State of California Department of Human Resources. Her primary professional focus over the last several years has been on classification and compensation practices.

Prior to joining K&A, she performed classification and compensation consulting services to over 86 State of California Departments, including the California Department of Veterans Affairs, California Department of Transportation, California Department of Consumer Affairs, Department of State Hospitals, Department of Developmental Services, Californian Department of Corrections, and California Department of Technology to name a few. She served as project manager on various projects including the State of California’s Classification Abolishment and Consolidation project. During her tenure as a public sector employee, Jamie also gained experience in labor relations, policies and procedures administration and implementation, recruitment activities, and performance management. Jamie served as a statewide trainer and was charged with the development and delivery of various training courses related to Classification and Compensation, such as Position Allocation and Duty Statement Writing. She has also taught workshops on Business Process Improvement. Prior to Jamie providing human resources consultation, she served as a paralegal to the California Department of Human Resources’ Administrative Law Judge, performing legal analysis and judicial support related to non-merit labor claims. 190

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

7 Given her professional experience, education and training, Jamie consistently provides accurate, analytical, and professional results that are utilized by her clients in making decisions that provide short and long-term solutions as well as help meet organizational goals.

Since joining K&A, Jamie has worked on studies for the following clients:
• Cities: Anaheim, Antioch, Citrus Heights, Cupertino, Davis, East Palo Alto, Elk Grove, Merce d, Milpitas, Paradise, Pleasant Hill, Redwood City, Ridge crest, Rohnert Park, San Diego, Santa Monica, Seattle, Spokane, and Tracy.
• Counties: Humboldt, Solano, and Sonoma.
• Special Districts : Central Marin Sanitation Agency, Cosumnes Community Services District, Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo, Housing Authority of Santa Cruz, Mt. View Sanitary District, Orange County Fire Authority, Oro Loma Sanitary District, Port of Stockton, Regional Government Services, Sacramento Regional Transit District, San Joaquin Regional Transit District, Tri- City Mental Health Services, and Victor Valley Community College.

Jamie has a Human Resources Academy Certificate (HRAC) from California State University, Sacramento, and a Classification and Compens ation Credential (CCC) from the California Department of Human Resources. She is a PMI Certified Associate in Project Management (CAPM). In addition, she holds certifications as a Paralegal, Life Coach, and Prosci Change Manager (PCM).

Jamie will provide Senior H.R. Associate support for this project, including classification analysis, interviews with employees and management, compensation data collection and analysis, internal job analysis, development of recommendations, and implementation strategies.

Cindy Harary, B.A.

H.R. Associate
Cindy’s professional qualifications include over 32 years of experience in the Human Resources field, primarily in classification and compensation. She spent the first 11 years in the public sector working for the City of Whittier, California, where she started out in their Public Works Department before moving to the Human Resources Department. She gained experience in classification and compensation, recruitment and selection, employee training and development, labor rel ations, and general human resources administration.

For the next 16 years, Cindy worked as a Human Resources Consultant for a consulting firm where she specialized in conducting classification and compensation studies for multiple public sector agencies including cities, counties, and special districts as well as several private sector clients. Some of the Orange County Cities she worked on in partnership with other consultants at that firm were: Cities of Brea, Laguna Beach, Lake Forest, La Palma, Los Alamitos, Placentia, San Clemente, Stanton and Tustin. In Los Angeles County, her work includes: Cities of Corona, Downey, El Monte, Manhattan Beach, and Upland. Finally, in San Bernardino County she has worked on the City of Rancho Cucamonga.

Since joining Koff & Associates in 2015, Cindy has worked on Classification and/or Compensation studies for:
191

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

8 • Cities/Towns: Anaheim, Big Bear Lake, Campbell, Carmel, Corona, Danville, Davis, Indian Wells, Laguna Niguel, Los Altos, Manteca, Menifee, Murrieta, National City, San Diego, Santa Ana, Santa Barbara, Seal Beach, Tracy, Yucca Valley • Counties: Orange
• Education: Compton College
• Special Districts: Alameda Housing Authority, Altadena Library District, Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Age ncy, Cosumnes Community Services District, Eastern Municipal Water District, Encina Wastewater Authority, Housing Authority of Alameda County, Housing Authority County of San Bernardino, Housing Authority for the County of Santa Barbara, Humboldt Waste Man agement Authority, Inland Empire Utilities Agency, Monte Vista Water District, North Coast County Water District, Orange County Fire Authority, Orange County Mosquito & Vector Control District, Oro Loma Sanitary District, Port of Hueneme, Rincon del Diablo Municipal Water District, Riverside County Transportation Commission, Santa Clarita Valley Water Agency, South Coast Air Quality Management District, Sweetwater Authority, Trabuco Canyon Water District, Vallecitos Water District, Water Replenishment District of Southern California, Western Municipal Water District

Cindy earned her B.A. degree in Broadcast Journalism at California State University, Long Beach.

Cindy will provide H.R. Associate support throughout this effort, including classification analy sis, interviews with employees and management, compensation data collection and analysis, internal job analysis, development of recommendations, and implementation strategies.

Renate Tiner, B.Sc.

H.R. Associate
Renate’s professional qualifications include five years of both non -profit and private sector Human Resources experience. Starting in Human Resources administration and rising into Human Resources management, she gained experience in full -cycle recruitment, orientation and on -boarding, Health and Safety, Worker’s Compensation, licensing and accreditation, policy development, and general Human Resources administration.

Since joining Koff & Associates in 2017, Renate has worked on Classification and Compen sation Studies for the following agencies:
• Cities: Bellflower, Concord, Cupertino, El Monte, Hillsborough, Los Altos, Mt. Shasta, Piedmont, Rohnert Park, San Diego, Sausalito, West Sacramento • Special Districts: Alameda County Transportation Commission, Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency, Eastern Municipal Water District, Dublin -San Ramon Services District, Foothill- De Anza Community College District, Groveland Community Services District, Los Angeles County Employees Retirement Association, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Port of Long Beach, Riverside Community College District, and San Joaquin County Superior Court 192

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

9 Renate earned her B.Sc. degree in Psychology from the University of Northern British Columbia, in Prince George BC, Canada. She was a Canadian Human Resource Professional (CHRP) Candidate before moving to the United States.

She will provide H.R. Associate support throughout this effort, including classification analysis, interviews with employees and management, compensation data collection and analysis, internal job analysis, development of recommendations, and implementation strategies.

193

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

The City currently has 102 job titles in 6 position groups that it wishes to include in the study. These positions are broken into 5 compenation steps.

Position Group Number of Job Titles
Executive Management 10
Other Management 45
AFSCME – Maintenance Unit 13
AFSCME – General Unit 19
FCPOA 7
Hourly/ Part-Time / Seasonal 8

The City is seeking at a minimum the following services:

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

196

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

13 METHODOLOGY

Finally, we will determine the list of benefits that the City wants to include in the total compensation data gathering process.

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

15 Due to the fact that the labor market typically yields reliable data, we recommend using approximately 60-65% of all classifications as benchmarks but we are happy to use a different model.

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

16 Objective factors in the whole position classification methodology include:

1. Decision making/judgment

2. Difficulty and complexity of work

3. Supervisory responsibilities

4. Non-supervisory responsibilities

5. Minimum qualifications

6. Working conditions/risk factors

7. Contacts

In addition, we will include any type of statistical representation and analysis that the City desires such as 60 th, 70th, or any other percentiles per the City’s compensation philosophy.

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

202

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

203

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

The following is a suggested timeline (which can be modified based on the City’s needs):

Deliverables Total Compensation Survey Completion by:

204

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

Combined professional and clerical composite rate: $165/Hour $60,390

Expenses are included in the composite hourly rate: N/A Expenses include but are not limited to duplicating documents, binding reports, phone, supplies, postage, parking, meals, travel time, etc.

TOTAL PROJECT COST NOT TO EXCEED: $60,390
*Additional consulting will be honored at composite rate ($165/hr)

205

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

22 REFERENCES
Agency & Project Contact
City of American Canyon (population: 20,452)

Total Compensation Study, completed 2016.

Mr. Scott Corey
Human Resources Officer/City Manager
(707) 647-4361
4381 Broadway St., Suite 201
American Canyon, CA 94503
[email protected]

City of Belmont (population: 27,140)

Total Compensation Study, completed 2019.

Ms. Corazon “Cora” Dino
Human Resources Director
(650) 637-2988
One Twin Pines Lane
Belmont, CA 94002
[email protected]

City of Campbell (population: 41,544)

Total Comp Study (Police), completed 2021.

Classification Study, completed 2016.

FLSA class study, completed 2015.

Classification and Compensation Studies, completed 2008 and 2013.

Management Compensation Study, completed 2009.

Ms. Salina Flores
Acting Human Resources Manager
(408) 866-2705
70 N. First St.

Campbell, CA 95008
[email protected]

City of Concord (population: 129,783)

Total Compensation Study, completed 2019. Currently about to commence 2021 Study.

Total Compensation Study, completed 2016.

Ongoing classification and compensation work since 2016.

Ms. Jasmin Loi
Director of Human Resources
(925) 671-3310
1950 Parkside Drive, MS/30
Concord, CA 94519
[email protected]

City of Cupertino (population: 60,643)

Organization Study, Completed 2020.

Total Compensation Study, Completed 2019.

Total Compensation Study, completed 2016.

Ms. Kristina Alfaro
Director of Administrative Services
(408) 777-7608
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
[email protected]

City of Gilroy (population: 55,069)

Total Compensation Study, completed 2019.

Total Compensation Study, completed 2016.

Ms. LeeAnn McPhillips
Human Resources Director/Risk Manager
(408) 846-0205 direct
7351 Rosanna St.

Gilroy, CA 95020
[email protected]

City of Hayward (population: 160,500)

Total Compensation Study for Local 21, completed 2020.

Total Compensation Study for SEIU, completed 2019.

Total Compensation Study for Hayward Association of Management Employees [HAME] Group, completed 2018.

Kakshi Master
Human Resources Analyst II
(510) 583-4831
777 B St.,
Hayward, CA 94541
[email protected]

206

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

23 City of Los Altos (population: 30,561)

Total Compensation Study (unrepresented classifications), completed 2018. About to commence 2021 Total Compensation Study for City Manager.

Compensation Study, Police Department, completed 2017.

Ms. Jennifer Leal
Human Resources Manager
(916) 614-3206
1021 Harvard Wy
El Dorado, CA 95762
[email protected]

Note: Ms. Leal is no longer with City of Los
Altos but is now serving as Human Resource
Manager at El Dorado Hills Community
Services District where she can provi de a
reference.

Town of Moraga (population: 16,250)

Total Compensation Study, completed 2019.

Mr. Norm Veloso
Administrative Services Director
(925) 888-7032
329 Rheem Boulevard
Moraga, CA 94556
[email protected]

City of Newman (population: 11,000+)

Total Compensation Study (23 classes), completed 2018.

Mr. Lewis Humphries
Finance Director
(209) 862-3725
938 Fresno St., 2nd Floor
Newman, CA 95360
[email protected]

City of Pleasant Hill (population: 34,987)

Total Compensation Study (11 benchmarks, 15 comparators), completed 2019.

Ongoing Classification and Compensation studies since 2015.

Organizational Study, completed 2016.

Ms. Ericka Mitchell
Human Resources Manager
(925) 671-5277
100 Gregory Lane
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
[email protected]

City of Sausalito (population: 7,100)

Citywide Total Compensation Study (38 benchmarks, 12
comparators), completed 2019.

Completed a Total Comp study in 2014/2015.

Citywide Classification and Total Compensation Study, completed in 2012; December 2011 to May 2012.

Ms. Susan Paterson
HR Manager
(415) 805-7326
28 Liberty Ship Way, Ste. 2800
Sausalito, CA 94965
[email protected]

Note: Ms. Paterson is no longer with City
of Sausalito. She now serves as HR
Manager for Southern Marin Fire District
where she can be reached for a
reference.

207

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

24 CONTRACTUAL CONSIDERATIONS
We will be pleased to sign the City’s professional services agreement for a Total Compensation Study. We respectfully request that the City will allow for a period of negotiation of certain terms in the professional services contract related to liability, indemnity, insurance, and other terms. We have found that we have always come to an agreement with all of our clients in the past and appreciate the City’s flexibility in reviewing certain terms in a collaborative fashion between our legal counsels.

The following are terms we would like to review with the City if we are fortunate to be selected for this project:
• Section 5 (Page 12) - Gallagher is able to provide relevant books and records, but is not able to provide the city access to our facilities.
• Section 8 (Page 13) - Gallagher will retain sole and exclusive ownership of all right, title and interest in and to its intellectual property and derivatives thereof which no data or confidential information of City was used to create and which was developed entirely using Gallagher’s own resources. To the extent Gallagher’s intellectual property is necessary for City to use the services provided, Gallagher will grant to City a non -exclusive, royalty-free license to Gallagher’s intellectual property solely for City use of such services.
• Section 11 (Page 13) – We request i ndemnification should be limited to grossly negligent acts and omissions, breaches of the contract, intentional misconduct, or violations of law. • Section 11 (Page 13) – We request a limitation of liability of fees paid needs to be added to the indemnification provision.

It is our practice to provide the coverage below in lieu of the District/City contract insurance language. We therefore propose to replace the insurance language in the RFP’s sample agreement with coverage language provided by Gallagher as follows (we attach our Memorandum of Insurance for your review as well):

Section 12 (Pages 14 - 16), Section 13 (Page 16) and Exhibit D (Pages 22 - 23) - Gallagher shall at all times during the term of this Agreement and for a period of two (2) years thereafter, obtain and maintain in force the following minimum insurance coverages and limits at its own expense:

• Commercial General Liability (CGL) insurance on an ISO form number CG 00 01 (or equivalent) covering claims for bodily injury, death, personal injury, or property damage occurring or arising out of the performance of this Agreement, including coverage for premises, products, and completed operations, on an occurrence basis, with limits no less than $2,000,000 per occurrence;

• Workers Compensation insurance with statutory limits, as required by the state in which the work takes place, and Employer’s Liability insurance with limits no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. Insurer will be licensed to do business in the state in which the work takes place;

• Automobile Liability insurance on an ISO form number CA 00 01 covering all hire d and non-owned automobiles with limit of $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage;

208

2835 Seventh Street, Berkeley, California 94710 | 510.658.5633 | www.KoffAssociates.com

25 • Umbrella Liability insurance providing excess coverage over all limits and coverages with a limits no less than $10,000,000 per occurrence or in the aggregate;

• Errors & Omissions Liability insurance, including extended reporting conditions of two (2) years with limits of no less than $5,000,000 per claim, or $10,000,000 in the aggregate;

• Cyber Liability, Technology Errors & Omissions, and Network Security & Privacy Liability insurance, including extended reporting conditions of two (2) years with limits no less than $2,000,000 per claim and in the aggregate, inclusive of defense cost; and

• Crime insurance covering third -party crime and employee dishonesty with limits of no less than $1,000,000 per claim and in the aggregate.

• All commercial insurance policies shall be written with insurers that have a minimum AM Best rating of no less than A -VI, and licensed to do business in the state of operation. Any cancelled or non - renewed policy will be replaced with no coverage gap, and a Certificate of Insurance evidencing the coverages set forth in this section shall be provided to Client upon request.

209

Page 1 of 3 ends

Foster City City CouncilFebruary 7, 2022

Foster City City Council
February 7, 2022