Scope of Work
The following scope of work describes the anticipated activities to be conducted by Ascent Environmental to assist the City of Fresno (City) in completing the CEQA process for the South Central Specific Plan (SCSP or Plan). The scope is based on the preparation of a Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168.
Ascent originally commenced preparation of the SCSP PEIR in November 2018. After receiving substantial expressions of concern from residents, agencies, and interested stakeholders, the City decided to pause EIR preparation and retain Ascent’s planning team to conduct a robust community outreach and engagement program. That process resulted in generation of three potential specific plan alternatives, reflected in three distinct land use maps: a Community Alternative that emphasizes residential and commercial development; a Business Alternative that emphasizes industrial development; and a City- proposed Blended Alternative that represents features of both.
The next step was to develop detailed buildout capacity tables by land use type for each alternative land use map and the no project (General Plan land use) alternative. Based on those calculations, Ascent and its transportation subconsultant were requested by the City to perform a preliminary environmental analysis of each alternative to determine if assessment of the buildout condition (which would equate to a planning horizon many decades hence) was a reasonable approach. In lieu of a contract amendment for these tasks, Ascent was directed to use contingency funds approved as part of Amendment 4 and funds slated for other future tasks.
To achieve a more realistic future scenario for the purposes of CEQA analysis, the City commissioned Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) to assess the absorption capacity of the planning area. The resulting forecasts will be used as the basis for a more realistic future scenario, replacing the maximum buildout scenario, which was not supported by the EPS study. While the initial intent was to assume full buildout for the CEQA analysis, the City was advised by Ascent to develop the future scenario using market absorption as a guide rather than maximum buildout. Therefore, based on the project history and the revised approach to the project description and alternatives, the City has requested this updated scope of work and budget for the EIR process. The intent is to disencumber funds from tasks as defined in the original contract and previous amendments and allocate those funds to tasks described herein.
Task 1: Project Initiation
Subtask 1A Kickoff Meeting/Data Review (Completed)
Subtask 1B Project Description
An accurate and complete project description is central to EIR defensibility and sets the stage for the EIR analysis. Based on consultation with City staff, Ascent will prepare the EIR project description as early as practicable given that the specific plan is still in development. The EIR project description will identify project objectives; project characteristics, new and revised policies; degree of potential development accommodated by the plan; and a list of discretionary approvals expected to be needed for project implementation. Ascent will prepare the EIR project description based on the Draft Specific Plan and will describe staff’s preferred alternative as the proposed project to be analyzed in the EIR. Other alternatives will be described and included in the alternatives section of the EIR as part of the EIR task below.
A draft project description will be submitted to the City for review and comment. Comments will be incorporated, and a revised project description will be prepared for use in the EIR.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 02121AD0-F52B-4FD3-8201-53778C95CB10 Deliverables Draft Project Description – Electronic submittal (MS Word) Final Project Description – Electronic submittal (MS Word) Subtask 1C Review Draft Specific Plan
Ascent planning staff will conduct one round of review on the Draft Specific Plan and provide, in the form of a memorandum, comments and suggestions to the City as needed to ensure the Specific Plan meets all necessary requirements for a Specific Plan and is adequate for use in the EIR.
Deliverables
Specific Plan Review Memorandum – Electronic submittal (MS Word) Land Use Development Calculations for Alternatives – Electronic submittal (MS Word)
Task 2: Scoping of the Environmental Impact Report (Completed) Task 3: Environmental Impact Report
Subtask 3A Administrative Draft EIR
Following is a discussion describing the methodologies, technical strategies, and general approach for each issue area to be addressed in the EIR, based on Ascent’s understanding of potential impacts within the plan area. In general, the EIR will include a discussion of the environmental setting/baseline for the plan, a summary of applicable regulations (federal, state, regional, and local), and analysis of the potential impacts of plan implementation. Mitigation will be recommended to reduce or eliminate project impacts, where feasible. Because the project is a specific plan that covers a substantial area, it is anticipated that mitigation measures will largely take the form of performance standards and potential actions to reduce impacts to achieve such standards. Mitigation measures used in other similar documents, including the Southwest Specific Plan EIR, will be reviewed for consistency/applicability to impacts of the plan, and will be used to the extent appropriate and applicable. The following scope of work reflects and is consistent with thresholds adapted from Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines.
Introduction/Project Description
Using the information compiled as part of Task 1, Ascent will prepare the introduction and further refine the project description chapter of the EIR. The introduction will describe the history of the plan area, the type of EIR, and the environmental review process to date. As noted above, the project description will identify plan objectives, the history of the plan, characteristics of the plan, and a description of the policy changes that are proposed. The project description will also briefly describe the annexation process and include a list of potential subsequent approvals (e.g., those of Fresno County, Caltrans, other responsible agencies), and other information relevant to an understanding of the plan.
Aesthetics
Ascent will prepare the existing aesthetics/visual resources setting based on a windshield survey/site visit and photo-documentation, other existing information, and the Caltrans Scenic Highways Program to the extent that the information is relevant. Ascent will evaluate potential environmental effects on visual and scenic resources from implementation of the proposed plan. To accomplish this, Ascent will identify up to eight representative viewpoints within the plan area and possibly adjacent areas within the City and/or Fresno County to characterize the existing visual environment, including long-distance views and DocuSign Envelope ID: 02121AD0-F52B-4FD3-8201-53778C95CB10 topography. Existing light and glare within the area will also be discussed. Visual simulations are not anticipated to be required and are not included as part of this scope of work.
Agricultural Resources
Ascent will prepare the existing agricultural resources setting based on existing information from the Department of Conservation’s Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP). The EIR will evaluate the potential for plan implementation to result in the direct or indirect conversion of Important Farmland to non-agricultural use, as well as potential conflicts between the proposed project and existing agricultural operations, including off-site.
Air Quality
Although the plan area lies within both the City and County of Fresno, the entire area is within the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB) and the jurisdiction of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). As implementation of the plan would likely result in policy changes applicable to construction and operation of new uses, new air quality modeling may be necessary to evaluate potential impacts related to operational criteria air pollutants. To that end, Ascent will discuss potential development level and timing assumptions to be used as assumptions in the impact analysis. As appropriate, Ascent will model potential construction and operational criteria pollutants using the latest version of the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), based on updated traffic data and relevant information obtained from the City. Modeling outputs will be analyzed against SJVAPCD’s annual thresholds of significance and daily mass emissions screening criteria to determine if an ambient air quality analysis is warranted. Ascent will analyze carbon monoxide hotspots qualitatively. Construction- and operation-related emissions of toxic air contaminants (TACs) and the potential to expose existing or future sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations will also be evaluated qualitatively. Because the types and locations of potential new stationary sources of pollutants cannot be known at the plan-level of analysis, no modeling or quantitative health risk assessment are proposed. Similarly, no quantitative health impact assessment will be performed for criteria air pollutants; rather, the narrative will describe how SJVAPCD’s thresholds of significance are intended to be protective of public health. In addition, odor emissions from potential future construction activities and land use development accommodated by the plan will be evaluated qualitatively. Methods and approach to the air quality analysis will be consistent with all SJVAPCD recommendations and guidance.
Biological Resources
Ascent will review available information for the project area, including any biological technical studies previously conducted or provided as part of Subtask 1A and previous CEQA analyses (e.g., General Plan EIR). A comprehensive review of the sensitive biological resources with potential to be affected by the project will be conducted, using updated lists of special-status species and their current regulatory status.
The likelihood of presence in the project area will be based on habitat suitability, species ranges, and documented occurrences. Protocol-level surveys for special-status species or wetland delineation are not required for a program-level analysis and will not be conducted. Key biological resources expected to be evaluated include California tiger salamander, Fresno kangaroo rat, San Joaquin kit fox, Swainson’s hawk, burrowing owl, valley elderberry longhorn beetle, wetlands, and important trees.
Based on information obtained through review of existing documentation, the environmental setting will be prepared and will include an exhibit showing the location and extent of known sensitive biological resources in the plan area. A brief overview of relevant federal, state, and local laws and regulations will be provided, and all potentially significant direct and indirect impacts on biological resources that could result from implementation of the specific plan will be described. Mitigation measures to reduce significant impacts will be recommended.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 02121AD0-F52B-4FD3-8201-53778C95CB10 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Ascent will prepare the existing cultural resources setting based on existing information from the City’s General Plan EIR, as well as any updates conducted by the City for projects and plans, including the Southwest Specific Plan. As part of this analysis, Ascent will conduct a plan area-wide records search for archaeological and historical resources through the California Historical Resources Information System.
Based on existing documentation, including the records search, the EIR will describe the cultural resources that are known or have the potential to occur within the plan area and the potential impacts that may occur as a result of plan implementation. Because the project does not constitute a substantial land use change, for the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that no tribes will request consultation pursuant to AB 52 or SB 18. If requested, Ascent will provide draft letters, inviting relevant tribes to consult pursuant to AB 52/SB 18.
Energy
The EIR will include a section addressing the requirements of the CCR Section 15126.2(b) and Appendices F and G of the CEQA Guidelines. Ascent will work with City staff to determine the existing energy use within the plan area and the potential increases associated with the plan, consistent with the modeling conducted for air quality and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The City’s most recent Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan will be important to consider in this analysis, particularly in addressing the question of whether the project would result in the wasteful or inefficient use of energy. Mitigation measures in the form of energy conservation measures will be proposed, as appropriate, if significant impacts are anticipated.
Geology and Soils
This section will analyze potential project-related environmental impacts related to soil stability, seismicity, and soil erosion from implementation of the plan. The analysis will be based on existing studies and published material and, given the size of the project area and long planning horizon, will be general in nature. The EIR will provide a brief description of the geologic setting, including soil characteristics, and topography. Ascent will evaluate the project’s potential exposure to geologic hazards (e.g., earthquakes, liquefaction) based on information from previous environmental studies, including the City and County general plan EIRs, as appropriate. The EIR will also address concerns associated with soils and foundation stability and evaluate the potential groundwater impacts of the project. The discussion/evaluation of long- term water supply/demand will be included as part of the Utilities and Service Systems section outlined below.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The analysis will include a brief discussion on the current state of the science (e.g., Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s [IPCC] Sixth Assessment Report, IPCC’s Global Warming of 1.5 °C Report) along with applicable regulatory framework and relevant guidance (e.g., Senate Bill [SB] 32 of 2016, the CARB’s most recently adopted Scoping Plan). The most recent GHG emissions inventory for the City will also be presented. Similar to the air quality analysis discussed above, construction and operational GHG emissions will be quantified to the degree feasible using updated traffic information for the plan and the most recent version of CalEEMod. The estimated emissions will include potential new GHG emissions from known sectors (e.g., building energy, mobile, water and wastewater, landscaping, solid waste). The modeling will be based on the proposed specific plan land uses and updated policies. For the impact analysis, Ascent will consider all existing and applicable guidance and policies from the State and local agencies (e.g., SJVAPCD, City of Fresno). An appropriate threshold of significance will be proposed based on relevant case law, state and local guidance, and current best practices. Specifically, the City of Fresno’s most recent Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan will be reviewed and included in the analysis as relevant.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 02121AD0-F52B-4FD3-8201-53778C95CB10 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Ascent will prepare the existing hazards and hazardous materials setting based partly on existing information available from the City, including the analysis from the General Plan EIR and the City’s emergency response planning efforts, as well as database information from the California Environmental Protection Agency where background information is outdated. Ascent will evaluate the potential hazards and hazardous materials impacts associated with implementation of the plan. For example, due to historic agricultural operations throughout the plan area, the use of pesticides/chemicals and their continued presence in local soils will be discussed and evaluated. This section will also evaluate the potential for the plan and development associated/consistent with it to result in a hazard to the public or the environment through transport, upset, or emission of hazardous materials; impairing an emergency response plan; and wildfires. This evaluation will include a discussion of the existing rail lines nearby, as well as recently replaced utility lines (including natural gas lines). Information regarding the types of activities and hazardous materials that could be used during construction and operation will be summarized and evaluated.
Hydrology and Water Quality
Ascent will describe the existing hydrologic setting of the plan area, using publicly available information such as Federal Emergency Management Agency, Fresno County, California Department of Water Resources, City of Fresno the City’s Urban Water Management Plan, and other data and information.
Ascent will summarize appropriate federal, state, county, and city regulations and policies related to these issues. Using this information, Ascent will evaluate the potential impacts of implementation of the plan with respect to modification of existing groundwater pumping, drainage patterns, decreased water quality, runoff, and flooding. This section will also address current efforts within the region regarding groundwater management pursuant to the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). Water supply impacts will be addressed as part of the Utilities and Service Systems analysis identified below.
Land Use and Planning
In this section of the EIR, Ascent will examine the existing land use patterns in the area and will describe any potential for division or conflicts with existing communities, including within the City of Fresno and unincorporated areas of Fresno County. Ascent will discuss land use compatibility associated with implementation of the plan including a discussion relative to regional planning efforts. Potential conflicts with habitat conservation efforts will be evaluated within the Biological Resources section and referred to in this section of the EIR.
Noise
The EIR setting will include a discussion of noise fundamentals and descriptors and identification of applicable regulations. In addition to relevant federal and state noise regulations, the setting will also identify noise regulations established by the City of Fresno. The EIR will describe existing noise and vibration conditions within the plan area and vicinity based on existing environmental documentation and review of aerial photographs. This will include information on the location of existing sensitive receptors (especially residential and other sensitive land uses) and major noise sources (including traffic on SR 99 and local roads, as well as agriculture-related activities), ambient noise levels, and natural factors that relate to the attenuation thereof. This information will be based on existing documentation, site reconnaissance data, and the use of prediction methods (e.g., Federal Highway Administration’s [FHWA’s] Traffic Noise Prediction Model). As part of the analysis, it will be necessary to determine any changes in fleet mix along local and regional roadways as a result of plan implementation. Specifically, the site reconnaissance will include 2 long-term (e.g., 24-hour) noise measurements, one of which would be proximate to SR 99, sufficient to characterize ambient noise in the area.
Implementation of the plan would accommodate development of as-yet unknown projects within the plan area. Construction-related noise and ground vibration will be programmatically assessed using published DocuSign Envelope ID: 02121AD0-F52B-4FD3-8201-53778C95CB10 reference noise and vibration levels for typical construction equipment. Levels of noise and ground vibration exposure at noise-sensitive receptors will be qualitatively evaluated.
Ascent noise specialists will evaluate potential impacts related to new industrial land uses and, if they represent potential major stationary sources of noise, whether such uses could adversely affect nearby receptors within or near the plan area. This analysis will be based on documented source-specific vibration levels and standard modeling procedures. It is assumed that the plan would not result in any new major long-term operational sources of ground vibration, including changes in the frequency of rail traffic.
Traffic noise levels will be estimated in accordance with the FHWA Traffic Noise Model (FHWA 2006) and traffic volume data provided by the transportation analysis. Traffic model runs will be performed for three different scenarios (i.e., existing conditions, 2040 no project, and 2040 with project) for each alternative (see Transportation and Circulation, below). Model runs for buildout conditions of each alternative have already been completed as part of the preliminary environmental analysis.
The exposure of the new uses proposed within the plan to aircraft noise associated with the Fresno Yosemite International Airport will be identified based on existing documentation and noise monitoring data. No aircraft noise modeling is included in this scope of work.
Population, Employment, and Housing
The EIR will describe the population of the region, as well as local and regional employment and housing statistics. The analysis will evaluate the potential for implementation of the Plan to induce substantial population growth (including beyond that of the General Plan) or displace housing or people such that development of replacement housing is required. This discussion will focus on projected population growth, how the existing General Plan may or may not accommodate this growth, and the provision of housing relative to the City’s current Housing Element and Regional Housing Needs Allocation.
Public Services and Recreation
Future development within the plan area could directly and indirectly (e.g., through increased employment) result in an increased demand for emergency services (police and fire), school services, and library facilities. The EIR section will discuss the anticipated demand and analyze the capacity of these existing services to serve the level of development associated with implementation of the plan, based on communication with service providers. This section will also describe the potential for implementation of the plan to result in increased demands for public services including such that new or expanded facilities might be constructed or that proposed facilities would result in significant impacts to the environment.
Transportation and Circulation
TJKM, as a subconsultant to Ascent, will prepare a stand-alone technical transportation study that evaluates the potential transportation impacts of plan implementation under CEQA. The assessment will incorporate the City of Fresno VMT thresholds and will conduct an analysis of segment level of service (LOS) to evaluate the adequacy of the planned roadway network based on the City’s adopted LOS standards. The alternative analysis will include a comparison of VMT impacts under three land use alternatives (including the preferred alternative).
The following task will be completed by TJKM:
Confirm Land Use Buildout with Specific Plan by TAZ (2 Buildout Alternatives) At start-up, TJKM will request the anticipated Specific Plan buildout by land use type for each activity-based model (ABM) transportation analysis zone (TAZ) within the Specific Plan area, for three Specific Plan land use alternatives.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 02121AD0-F52B-4FD3-8201-53778C95CB10 TJKM will work with Ascent to provide a map showing the TAZ boundaries, and an accompanying spreadsheet showing the General Plan buildout assumptions by land use for each TAZ within the Specific Plan boundaries. Ascent will provide the requested buildout information by updating the spreadsheet to show the Specific Plan buildout by land use for each TAZ for each of the three Specific Plan buildout alternatives. The City of Fresno has defined the 2040 buildout scenario for the plan as approximately half of the initial buildout numbers.
Transportation Impact Analysis
TJKM will conduct an impact analysis, consistent with CEQA requirements, that bases the assessment of traffic impacts on the City of Fresno’s vehicle miles traveled (VMT) thresholds. TJKM will also assess multi- modal impacts to transit, bicycle and pedestrian circulation, based on CEQA checklist criteria. The impact analysis will be conducted for the following three scenarios (model runs for buildout conditions of each alternative were completed as part of the preliminary environmental analysis):
• Existing Conditions
• Year 2040 Baseline (No Project) Conditions
• Year 2040 Project Conditions (presuming buildout of a single, preferred land use alternative) In addition, TJKM will conduct an analysis of traffic level of service (LOS) for planning purposes, and to conform the proposed street network provisions are appropriate for the anticipated travel volumes. TJKM proposes to evaluate peak-hour segment LOS on up to 50 study segments. Given the current reduction in traffic volumes due to COVID-19: TJKM would primarily utilize prior count data rather than conduct new counts. However, if needed, TJKM will collect new traffic counts for project study segments and intersections as part the proposed cost estimate.
TJKM will prepare a stand-alone Transportation Impact Analysis report that contains the following chapters:
1. Introduction will summarize the TIA methodology and the key plan components relevant to the analysis of transportation impacts.
2. Existing Conditions will describe the existing multi-modal transportation network relevant to the study area. This section will also describe the existing rates of vehicle miles traveled (VMT)
3. Year 2040 Baseline (No Project) Conditions will describe the anticipated Year 2040 roadway network (consistent with the General Plan EIR and Active Transportation Plan) and the baseline rates of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) relevant to the impact analysis.
4. Alternatives Analysis will provide a comparison of VMT impacts under Year 2040 Baseline Conditions, and Year 2040 Conditions with buildout of three land use alternatives for the Specific Plan area. The VMT comparison will be based on the City of Fresno’s adopted VMT thresholds. This section will also provide a qualitative comparison of multi-modal impacts under each alternative.
5. Year 2040 Project Conditions will describe the transportation impacts with buildout of the preferred alternative, including the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) impact findings. This chapter will also assess multi-modal impacts to transit, bicycle and pedestrian circulation, based on CEQA checklist criteria.
Where significant impacts are identified: potential mitigations will be identified.
6. Level of Service will describe the findings of the Traffic Level of Service (LOS) analysis for up to 50 study segments and 24 study intersections for the preferred alternative, in comparison with Existing Conditions and Year 2040 Baseline (No Project) Conditions. This analysis will be utilized to provide recommendations concerning the adequacy of the proposed street network to serve anticipated travel volumes.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 02121AD0-F52B-4FD3-8201-53778C95CB10
7. Findings & Recommendations will summarize the impact findings and recommended mitigations, as well as the findings of the LOS analysis and any accompanying recommendations for modifications to the proposed circulation network under the Specific Plan including multi-modal mobility recommendations.
TJKM will prepare a Draft TIA Report for review by Ascent and City staff. Following review and comments:
TJKM will prepare a Final Draft TIA Report that will serve as an appendix to the Draft EIR and will be the basis of the Traffic/Transportation chapter within the Draft EIR.
Utilities and Service Systems
The EIR will discuss the potential demand of plan area development for public utilities and service systems based on information provided by the City of Fresno Department of Public Utilities (including the infrastructure study in progress for the plan area) and other utility agencies. The analysis will assess potential for implementation of the Plan to affect demand for potable water, water treatment, wastewater treatment, water and wastewater conveyance, natural gas, and electricity, particularly as it relates to capacity of existing facilities. The EIR section will discuss impacts from the demand for these services and will also assess the long-term availability and reliability of water supplies to the site.
The project meets the requirements for a formal water supply assessment (WSA) under SB 610 (Section 21151.9 of CEQA and Section 15155 of the State CEQA Guidelines). West Yost, as a subconsultant to Ascent, will prepare a WSA for the Plan. Ascent will incorporate into the analysis of the EIR.
The following tasks will be completed by West Yost:
• Review Water Demand Projection and Evaluate Water Supply Availability: West Yost will review the estimated water demand for buildout of the plan as prepared by Akel Engineering Group. Inc., and any available information of the plan’s proposed use of recycled water and/or water conservation or water use efficiency measures. Only the buildout water demand will be evaluated in the WSA; no phasing will be considered. West Yost will then conduct an evaluation of available water supplies to meet the plan’s water demands. West Yost will use the City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) as a basis for determining the available water supplies to meet the demands under normal, single dry, and multiple dry year conditions. Based on the evaluation of supply availability, West Yost will identify whether the City has sufficient water supplies and water supply reliability to meet the water demand associated with the plan.
• Prepare Water Supply Assessment: West Yost will prepare a WSA for the plan in accordance with the requirements of SB 610. The WSA will be based on the projected water demands for buildout of the plan, the assumed water supplies for the plan, project information provided by the City, the City’s existing and future water supply and demand as documented in the City’s 2020 UWMP, other identified supplies if any, and other existing data to the extent available. Results of the analysis will be documented in an Administrative Draft WSA, and the scope includes responses to Ascent and City staff comments and preparation of a Draft WSA and Final WSA for use in the EIR. • Assumptions:
o The proposed land use would not change during the preparation of the WSA. o The WSA is based on water supply and demand only and offsite and onsite utilities will not be investigated.
Cumulative Impacts
The Ascent team will evaluate the impacts of cumulative development on the resource issues evaluated in the EIR. Ascent will work closely with City staff, and coordinate with other agencies (e.g., Fresno County, Caltrans), as appropriate to identify reasonably foreseeable related development based on existing land DocuSign Envelope ID: 02121AD0-F52B-4FD3-8201-53778C95CB10 use plans and/or a list of cumulative projects (proposed, approved, and under construction). The EIR section will also describe cumulative effects and determine whether the project contribution is cumulatively considerable.
Alternatives
CEQA requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to a project that feasibly attain most of the objectives but could avoid or reduce at least one environmental impact (Section 15126.6). Ascent assumes that up to four (4) alternatives to the specific plan, including the no-project alternative will be analyzed in a separate section of the EIR, and we will work closely with City staff during preparation of the Administrative Draft EIR, as well as during Task 1, to identify these alternatives. Two of the proposed alternatives are assumed to be the Community and Business Alternatives included in the Specific Plan. To ensure meaningful comparisons of environmental effects, Ascent planning staff will work with the City to develop the approach and calculate development capacity by land use type for each alternative, such that each reflects the same planning horizon.
The alternatives section will provide sufficient detail to compare the impacts of the plan against the other alternatives. A qualitative (quantitative where practical) discussion of each of the EIR’s issue areas will be presented for each alternative. If during preparation of the EIR it becomes apparent that minor variations or changes to the plan or its policies could be implemented to reduce or eliminate the environmental impacts or concerns of the project, these changes will be described and evaluated.
Growth Inducement
This section will qualitatively evaluate the project’s potential to induce growth and any subsequent environmental impacts that would occur (pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126[d]). Projects generally induce growth by removal of an existing obstacle to growth (e.g., providing additional employment, housing, expanding roadway capacity, extending infrastructure to new areas) or by providing increased economic activity in an area. It is expected this discussion will focus on the construction of new uses within the plan area and the potential effects that could occur elsewhere as a result of that growth.
Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
This section will clearly and succinctly summarize any significant and unavoidable environmental effects of the plan and alternatives as evaluated in the EIR. To the extent that mitigation can help avoid significant impacts, the number of unavoidable significant effects may be limited.
Other Sections Required by Statute
CEQA provides very specific requirements for the contents of an EIR. Ascent will provide the City with a complete EIR, containing all sections required by CEQA. Sections required by CEQA not mentioned above include table of contents, executive summary, introduction, effects not found to be significant, discussion of irreversible commitment of resources, references, and individuals and agencies consulted.
Additionally, Ascent will include a discussion of environmental justice related issues due to the location of housing within and near the plan area. Environmental justice has become increasingly important as part of CEQA documentation, as evidenced by the passage of Senate Bill (SB) 1000, which requires consideration of environmental justice as part of local general plans, like the City’s General Plan. The City’s General Plan was approved prior to passage of SB 1000, but in consideration of existing residences in the area, a discussion of environmental justice may be warranted. The discussion would summarize analyses provided in other sections of the EIR (e.g., aesthetics, air quality, hazards, and utilities), and use demographic and other available data to assess the impact of the project on vulnerable communities, with emphasis on evaluation of the potential for disproportionate effects on such communities.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 02121AD0-F52B-4FD3-8201-53778C95CB10 The EIR will include visual aids, such as maps and diagrams, to clearly present the environmental analysis to the decision makers, responsible agencies, and the public. The EIR will include an executive summary, including a summary table of all impacts and mitigation measures identified in the EIR.
Deliverable Administrative Draft EIR – electronic submittal (MS Word and pdf versions of each chapter of the Administrative Draft EIR)
Subtask 3B Screencheck Draft EIR
Based on one consolidated set up reconciled comments received from the City, Ascent will revise the Administrative Draft EIR and will prepare a Screencheck Draft EIR, as well as a draft Notice of Availability (NOA) and Notice of Completion (NOC), for City review.
Deliverable
Notice of Completion – electronic submittal (MS Word and pdf versions) Notice of Availability – electronic submittal (MS Word and pdf versions) Screencheck Draft EIR (Electronic submittal – MS Word and pdf versions of each section of the EIR)
Subtask 3C Public Review Draft EIR
Upon receipt of a consolidated set of reconciled comments on the Screencheck Draft EIR, Ascent will revise the document and prepare a Draft EIR, suitable for public review. It is assumed that the City would be responsible for posting the EIR on the City’s website, distributing the EIR, as appropriate, as well as posting the EIR at the County Clerk’s office. Ascent will upload an electronic version of the EIR and NOA to the Office of Planning and Research (OPR), State Clearinghouse office. At the time of publication of the Draft EIR, Ascent will also provide the City with a complete electronic record of all references used in the environmental analysis.
Ascent will also finalize the Notice of Availability (NOA) and Notice of Completion (NOC) of the Draft EIR for posting in a local publication and with OPR. It is assumed that Ascent will arrange for posting of the NOA in the Fresno Bee.
Deliverable
Draft EIR – electronic submittal (MS Word and pdf)
Notice of Availability/Notice of Completion – electronic submittal (MS Word and pdf)
Record of References – Electronic (via flashdrive/USB)
Subtask 3D Administrative Final EIR
Ascent’s team will closely review all comments received during the Draft EIR comment period, as well as any late comments that require response. Ascent will provide thorough, well-substantiated written responses to comments that raise issues with the Draft EIR’s environmental analysis. The number and complexity of the comments cannot be determined with any degree of specificity. For purposes of this scope of work, Ascent assumes that approximately 200 hours of technical staff time (i.e., not including graphics, word processing, administrative support) will be adequate to respond to all comments. However, if a more substantial effort is needed to respond, Ascent will coordinate with City staff regarding schedule and budget implications. Responses may include master responses that address multiple comments regarding the same topic.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 02121AD0-F52B-4FD3-8201-53778C95CB10 The Final EIR will consist of the Draft EIR and a Responses to Comments Volume. Reproduction of a revised Draft EIR is not required and not included in this scope. The Responses to Comments Volume will include three major sections: 1) an introduction, which will include a matrix of comment letters received and a summary of the environmental issues raised by each letter; 2) responses to comments, which will include individually bracketed and numbered comments with the corresponding responses and any master responses; 3) revisions to the Draft EIR, which will include excerpts of Draft EIR text that require revision, with revisions shown in underline and strikeout; and 4) a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The administrative Final EIR will be submitted to the City for review.
Deliverable Administrative Final EIR – electronic submittal (MS Word and pdf versions of each chapter of the Administrative Draft Final EIR) Subtask 3E Screencheck Final EIR
Based on one set of consolidated and reconciled comments from the City, Ascent will incorporate written comments on the Administrative Draft Final EIR to produce a Screencheck Final EIR, which will be submitted to the City.
Deliverable Screencheck Final EIR – electronic submittal (MS Word and pdf versions of each chapter of the Screencheck Final EIR)
Subtask 3F Final EIR
The Screencheck Final EIR will be revised based on one set of consolidated comments from the City, and Ascent will prepare the Final EIR. It is assumed that the City will submit electronically either the Final EIR or excerpted formal responses to any agencies that submitted comments on the Draft EIR no less than 10 days prior to consideration of the EIR by the City Council for certification. Although not required by CEQA, Ascent will also arrange for electronic posting of the Final EIR at OPR.
Deliverable Final EIR –electronic submittal (MS Word and pdf versions of each section of the EIR)
Subtask 3G Notice of Determination
This scope assumes that Ascent will prepare the Notice of Determination (NOD) for the EIR and submit it electronically to the City for review. Ascent will revise the NOD based on City staff comments and arrange for electronic posting at OPR within 5 days of certification of the EIR. It is assumed that the City will arrange for posting at the County Clerk and remit required California Department of Fish and Wildlife fees.
Deliverable Administrative Draft NOD – Electronic submittal (pdf) Final NOD – Electronic submittal (pdf)
Task 3H Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Ascent will prepare draft CEQA Findings of Fact and, if there are significant and unavoidable impacts, a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC). The Findings/SOC will specify which mitigation measures have been incorporated into the plan and those measures that have not, and will explain why certain measures, if any, are found to be infeasible. If applicable, the Findings/SOC will also identify which of the DocuSign Envelope ID: 02121AD0-F52B-4FD3-8201-53778C95CB10 feasible project alternatives could reduce adverse environmental effects but are not being implemented, with an explanation as to why they would be infeasible. Ascent will prepare draft and final versions of the Findings/SOC and will submit each electronically to the City. It is assumed that the City Attorney’s office will finalize or otherwise approve the Findings/SOC.
Deliverable Draft Findings/SOC – Electronic submittal (MS Word) Revised Findings/SOC – Electronic submittal (MS Word)
Task 4: Project Management and Meetings
Subtask 4A Project Management
Ascent’s management team will devote effort each month to ensure an efficient and timely process for project execution. In our experience, early identification of issues and agreement upon resolution is tantamount to maintaining an overall project schedule. Ascent will maintain close communication with City staff to ensure the objectives are met, the schedule is maintained, and the project is implemented within established budget parameters. Ascent will prepare monthly progress reports regarding the project schedule, status of technical studies, information needs, and status of the contract.
Deliverable Monthly progress reports –
Submitted electronically with monthly invoices
Subtask 4B Meetings/Hearings Related to the EIR
Ascent management staff will attend up to twenty-four virtual team meetings/conference calls for review of comments received, coordination/information gathering purposes, and discussion of the EIR process, as needed. Ascent will also provide a summary of action items and information/direction obtained from each meeting. It is also assumed that up to 20 hours of additional senior staff time may be required to address technical topics (e.g., traffic analysis, air quality, noise, GHGs).
Additionally, as part of this task, Ascent management staff will prepare for and attend up to two public hearings for the project. It is assumed that the meetings will be virtual and City staff will prepare any presentation materials pertaining to the plan itself. Ascent will prepare materials (assumed to be portions of a PowerPoint presentation) pertaining to the CEQA process and environmental analysis. Ascent will be responsible for capturing summary notes of public and agency comments. It is assumed that verbatim recording or hire of a court reporter is not necessary for these meetings.
Deliverable Meeting notes – Electronic (MS Word and pdf)
Schedule of Work
WORK PRODUCT/MILESTONE ESTIMATED DUE DATE*
Receive notice to proceed October 13, 2022
Kick-off meeting, discuss document format and information needs COMPLETED DocuSign Envelope ID: 02121AD0-F52B-4FD3-8201-53778C95CB10 WORK PRODUCT/MILESTONE ESTIMATED DUE DATE*
Ascent submits draft Notice of Preparation (NOP) for City review COMPLETED City submits draft NOP comments to Ascent COMPLETED
Ascent submits NOP to City for distribution COMPLETED
Distribute NOP with announcement of scoping meeting COMPLETED Scoping meeting COMPLETED
30-day scoping period ends COMPLETED
Review and Comment on Draft Plan November 10, 2022
Prepare administrative draft EIR – submit for City review February 9, 2023** City reviews administrative draft EIR – submit comments to Ascent March 2, 2023 Prepare screencheck draft EIR – submit for City review March 30, 2023 City reviews screencheck draft EIR – submit comments to Ascent April 20, 2023 Ascent submits public draft EIR May 11, 2023
City publishes public draft EIR May 25, 2023
Public hearings on draft EIR June 2023
45-day public review period ends July 9, 2023
Ascent receives all comments on the public draft EIR July 11, 2023 Ascent submits administrative final EIR August 8, 2023*** City submits comments on the administrative final EIR August 29, 2023 Ascent submits screencheck final EIR September 12, 2023 City submits comments on screencheck final EIR September 26, 2023 Ascent submits final EIR October 17, 2023
City publishes final EIR October 31, 2023
Public agency review of proposed responses to comments Min. 10 days Planning Commission and City Council Meetings for Consideration of EIR Certification November 2023 Schedule Assumptions:
*If a step in the schedule is delayed for reasons beyond Ascent’s control (e.g., public requests for extended review periods), the elapsed time between subsequent steps will be maintained to allow adequate time to perform those later tasks. ** It is assumed that the project description will not change upon notice to proceed and submittal of the administrative draft EIR. ***The time to prepare and submit the administrative final EIR is dependent on the number, nature, and complexity of the comments received on the draft EIR.
Cost Estimate
The proposed price for the EIR is presented in the attached spreadsheet. With the objective of promoting clarity about the proposed price, the following assumptions explain the basis of the price to implement the proposed scope of work. Please note that the price is estimated based on a good-faith effort and current DocuSign Envelope ID: 02121AD0-F52B-4FD3-8201-53778C95CB10 understanding of the project needs of the City. Variations in approach, issues, and deliverables can adjust the contract price.
1. Proposal Validity: The proposed scope of work and price are valid for 120 days from the date of submittal, after which it may be subject to revision.
2. Price and Staff Allocation to Tasks. Labor, subconsultant, and other direct costs have been allocated to tasks to determine the total budget. Ascent may reallocate costs and labor resources, as needed, as long as the total contract price is not exceeded.
3. Schedule: The price is based on the proposed schedule. Should significant delay occur (more than 60 days) for reasons beyond Ascent’s control, a budget amendment may apply to the remaining work, based on labor rates in effect at that time. Ascent will consult with the City about a course of action, if a significant delay occurs.
4. Changes to the Description of the Project or Alternatives: After the descriptions of the project and alternatives are approved by the City for use in the environmental document, it is assumed they will not change over the course of analysis and document preparation. If changes are necessary, amendment of the budget will be warranted to the extent that already completed analysis and document preparation need to be revised or redone.
5. Changes in the Scope of Analysis: The proposed price assumes that no new technical issues, alternatives, field surveys, modeling, or topical areas of research or analysis will be identified through the scoping process or by other affected agencies after contract execution.
6. References Cited in the Deliverables: Ascent will maintain electronic copies of reference documents or portions of documents cited and will make the electronic files available during public review. Ascent will submit electronic copies of references to the City for project files upon completion of the authorized work.
7. Reproduction Costs: Because of the increasing trend to exchange, edit, and post deliverables electronically, reproduction of hard copies of deliverables is not included. This scope of work assumes that reproduction needed would be done by the City. If requested, Ascent can produce hard copies with an amendment to this scope and cost.
8. Final Environmental Document: The final environmental document will consist of a Responses to Comments volume with excerpted text changes to the Draft EIR and an MMRP. Modification and/or reproduction of the draft environmental document is not needed.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 02121AD0-F52B-4FD3-8201-53778C95CB10 Principal in
Charge
Project
Manager/Sr
Planner
Asst. Proj.
Manager
Sr. AQ/Noise
Specialist
AQ/GHG
Specialist
Noise/
Transportation
Specialist
Sr. Biologist Biologist Env. Planner
III
Planner/Env.
Planner II
Env. Planner
I
WP/Prod./
Admin
GIS/
Graphics
hourly rate: $310 $225 $165 $190 $155 $165 $185 $150 $165 $150 $135 $135 $155 Task 1: Project Initiation Price Hours
1A Kickoff Meeting - COMPLETED - $ 0 1B Project Description 35,000 $ 168 32 56 40 16 24 1C Specific Plan Review 10,200 $ 56 24 32
Subtotal, Task 1 45,200$ 224 32 80 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 0 16 24 Task 2: Scoping of Environmental Impact Report Price Hours 2A Admin Draft NOP - COMPLETED - $ 0 2B Final NOP - COMPLETED - $ 0
Subtotal, Task 2 - $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Task 3: Environmental Impact Report Price Hours
3A Administrative Draft EIR
Introduction/Revised Project Description 5,220 $ 26 2 12 8 22 Aesthetics 10,105 $ 59 2 3 48 2 4
Agricultural Resources 7,345 $ 45 2 4 36 2 1 Air Quality 23,970 $ 136 6 16 4 24 84 2
Biological Resources 13,020 $ 80 2 4 12 58 2 2 Cultural Resources 8,390 $ 52 2 4 44 2
Energy 7,585 $ 43 2 4 10 26 1
Geology and Soils 7,345 $ 49 2 4 40 2 1
Greenhouse Gas Emissions 14,110 $ 78 4 12 4 16 40 2 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 8,045 $ 55 2 3 48 2 Hydrology and Water Quality 7,345 $ 49 2 4 40 2 1 Land Use and Planning 7,480 $ 41 3 6 28 2 2 Noise 17,050 $ 99 3 6 6 80 22
Population, Employment, and Housing 8,390 $ 48 2 4 40 2 Public Services and Recreation 8,700 $ 50 2 4 40 2 2 Transportation and Circulation 12,820 $ 72 4 8 12 40 26 Utilities and Service Systems 12,200 $ 68 4 8 8 44 2 2 Alternatives Analysis/Alts Development Calcs 59,700 $ 350 12 32 60 18 60 40 4 16 24 32 16 4 32 Other CEQA Sections 9,400 $ 52 4 12 8 24 4 QA/QC, EIR Assembly and Production 18,830 $ 90 16 32 32 82 3B Screencheck Draft EIR 46,860 $ 252 16 64 64 4 16 10 8 40 8 10 8 4 3C Public Review Draft EIR 29,250 $ 146 12 64 40 4 2 2 8 2 2 8 2 3D Administrative Final EIR 43,210 $ 222 24 64 40 8 24 4 8 24 8 16 2 3E Screencheck Final EIR 17,760 $ 84 12 40 24 8 3F Final EIR 15,120 $ 74 6 40 16 12
3G Notice of Determination 1,380 $ 8 2 4 2 3H Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Consid. 17,420 $ 76 8 64 4 Subtotal, Task 3 438,050$ 2404 156 520 330 80 254 176 24 108 280 146 156 107 67 Task 4: Project Management, Meetings, and Hearings Price Hours 4A Project Management 31,290 $ 142 32 60 36 12 2 4B Meetings/Hearings Related to EIR 28,460 $ 116 36 60 20 Subtotal, Task 4 59,750$ 258 68 120 36 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 2 Task 5: Community Engagement Price Hours
5A COMPLETED - $ 0
PRICE PROPOSAL
South Central Specific Plan EIR
September 20, 2022
DocuSign Envelope ID: 02121AD0-F52B-4FD3-8201-53778C95CB10 Subtotal, Task 5 - $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LABOR SUBTOTAL 543,000$ 2886 256 720 406 100 254 176 24 108 280 178 156 135 93 79,360$ 162,000 $ 66,990 $ 19,000 $ 39,370 $ 29,040 $ 4,440 $ 16,200 $ 46,200 $ 26,700 $ 21,060 $ 18,225 $ 14,415 $
REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES
Printing - $
Reproduction 500 $
Mileage / Parking / Travel 2,000 $
Postage 200 $
Field Equipment 200 $
Other (CHRIS Records Search + NOA Posting) 5,000 $
Subconsultants 136,050 $
TJKM (Transportation) 101,000$
West Yost (Water Supply Assessment) 30,000$
Administrative Cost (5%) 5,050$
TOTAL PRICE
Remaining Contract Funds
Net Increase
475,639.74$
211,310.26$
143,950$
686,950.00$
ASSUMPTIONS
Assumptions that explain the basis of the proposed price are enclos ed and are an integral part of this proposed scope for work for services.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 02121AD0-F52B-4FD3-8201-53778C95CB10