April 13, 2023
Christian Murdock, Planning Director
City of Pacifica Planning Department
540 Crespi Dr.
Pacifica, CA 94044
Re: Proposal for Pacifica Housing Element Rezoning Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
Dear Christian:
We are pleased to submit this proposal for environmental review of the proposed 2023-2031 Housing Element rezoning program. Dyett & Bhatia offers substantial understanding of Pacifica and project timeline synergies, having led the recent update for the 2040 General Plan and associated EIR. D&B’s approach to cumulative analysis also presents the added benefit of the most up-to-date information for citywide transportation, greenhouse gas emissions, public services, and other topics that may result in additional efficiencies for the City in the future.
APPROACH
Our program-level EIR approach will reflect the rezoning of the approximately 20 sites, resulting in over 1,500 additional units of housing needed to meet Pacifica’s housing needs as outlined in the 2023-2031 Housing Element. Though the EIR will not include a project-level analysis, D&B and the project team will delve deeper into specific resources, constraints, and potential impacts for each of these sites. D&B understands the high priority that the Pacifica community places on safety and biological conservation, and as such, Geocon Consultants and WRA, Inc. will conduct focused reconnaissance and analysis for some areas where particular hazards or resources may be present.
One key issue to resolve with City staff will be the establishment of the appropriate time horizon for the EIR. Cumulative citywide impacts analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR extend to 2040, and buildout as part of the Housing Element is anticipated to occur over an eight-year period of 2031. At the onset of the project process, the team will discuss the relative benefits and challenges of a 2030 versus 2040 horizon year and help the City reach the most appropriate conclusion. For either horizon year, D&B will prepare traffic analysis zone (TAZ)-level projections reflecting combined development from the General Plan and the Housing Element rezoning, to enable transportation and other cumulative analysis (air quality, energy and greenhouse gas emissions, and noise) to be conducted.
TEAM
The project team brings together consultants with significant experience in Pacifica and other San Mateo coastal communities, experience in preparing program EIRs, and technical depth needed for the assignment.
- 2 -
Dyett & Bhatia would be the lead consultant for this project. Dyett & Bhatia brings a strong under-standing of Pacifica and unique environmental sensitivities of San Mateo County through our work on the 2040 Pacifica General Plan EIR. D&B has prepared over 40 Program EIRs, and is currently preparing Housing Element EIRs for Fairfax, Ross, Oakland, San Pablo, and Monterey.
Within San Mateo County, in addition to the Pacifica General Plan, D&B has prepared EIRs on general plans for Daly City, South San Francisco, San Bruno, and San Carlos. D&B is also exceptionally familiar with State Housing Element requirements; two of the 14 Bay Area housing elements certified so far by the HCD have been prepared by D&B.
All D&B staff working on this project all have deep knowledge and direct experience working on the Pacifica 2040 General Plan Update and EIR. Rajeev Bhatia, AICP will serve as the Principal in Charge. Alison Moore, Senior Associate, will serve as the Project Manager and primary point of contact for the City. In addition to overall project management responsibilities, she will be actively involved in the development of all EIR sections, with assistance from D&B Associates Clare Kucera and Mayu Tanaka.
DKS Associates will conduct transportation analysis. DKS has a long history of working on planning projects in San Mateo, both at the county-wide or regional level as well as with individual jurisdictions. As part of the Rezoning EIR, DKS will update the transportation and mobility analyses to reflect the net buildout of rezoned sites as well as overall cumulative citywide and regional impacts, building upon the work they conducted for the 2040 Pacifica General Plan Update EIR. These updated transportation outputs will also inform the Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas and Energy, and Noise sections of the Rezoning EIR, and updated roadway volumes will also provide the most up-to-date inputs for any additional transportation planning efforts. Senior Transportation Planner Erin Vaca will lead DKS efforts.
WRA, Inc. will conduct focused biological resources reconnaissance-level analysis at sites with potential to contain sensitive habitats or species and recommend any potential mitigations for site development. WRA, Inc. staff includes seasoned Coastal Zone experts, regulatory permitting Specialists and professional biologists. WRA has also contributed to several environmental review projects in Pacifica, including the Former Sharp Park Rifle Range, the Rockaway Quarry Reclamation Plan, and the assisted living facility on Oddstad Boulevard near San Pedro Creek. WRA is also working with Dyett & Bhatia on the City of Fairfield General Plan EIR and on the recently adopted Sonoma Developmental Center Specific Plan. Principal Leslie Lazarotti will lead WRA efforts.
Geocon Consultants, Inc. will conduct focused geotechnical analysis at sites located within seismic hazard areas. As part of this effort, Geocon will describe potential impacts and recommend strategies/ mitigation options. Geocon has contributed to several EIR efforts in Pacifica, including the Rockaway Quarry Reclamation Plan Project EIR. Shane Rodacker, Vice President and Senior Engineer, will lead this work.
Charles Salter Associates prepared existing and future noise contours for the 2040 General Plan EIR. CSA will update future noise contours based on updated traffic modeling and provide supporting analysis for the EIR. Principal Consultant Jeremy Decker will lead the CSA team.
- 3 -
TIMELINE AND BUDGET
Per State deadlines, zoning to accommodate the RHNA must be completed within a year after the statutory deadline of January 31, 2023. As such, our proposal outlines a highly streamlined threemonth timeline for delivering a complete Administrative Draft of Draft EIR to the City. Given public circulation requirements(45 days for the Draft EIR and 30 days for the Final EIR), the overall timeline for publishing the Final EIR will be approximately 6 months, enabling the City to complete adoption hearings by the statutory deadline.
As the lead organization for the 2040 General Plan EIR, D&B and the team already have transportation model structure, understanding of the citywide buildout at the Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ) level, and other cumulative, citywide inputs and processes to which rezoning buildout can easily and efficiently be added. With these efficiencies, we can assure you of our ability to meet the project schedule.
Our budget reflects efficiencies resulting from our familiarity with Pacifica, and the depth of technical analysis that will be included in the EIR through participation by specialized technical sub-consultants.
We are willing to adjust any aspects of our proposal to better meet your needs.
We are highly enthusiastic about this project and look forward to working with the City again.
Sincerely,
Rajeev Bhatia, AICP
Principal
Attachments:
A: Scope of Work
B: Timeline
C: Budget and Assumptions
Attachment A: Scope of Work
This attachment outlines our proposed work program for all phases of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Housing Element Rezoning Project. Work products are outlined at the end of each task, and are also summarized on the Timeline table on page 11.
The task-by-task descriptions that follow represent our approach to data collection, analysis of impacts, and preparation of the EIR document. Initials in parentheses following the sub-section heading identify the lead firm for each sub-task.
• D&B: Dyett & Bhatia
• DKS: DKS Associates, Transportation Planners
• WRA: WRA, Inc., Biological Resources Consultants
• GC: Geocon Consultants, Inc., Geotechnical Consultants • CSA: Charles M Salter Associates Inc., Noise Consultants TASK 1: PROJECT INITIATION
1-A: Kick-Off Meeting with City Staff (Team). The consultant team will meet with City staff to discuss EIR approach. Roles and responsibilities will be clarified, communication protocols will be established, sites for more detailed geotechnical and biological analysis will be discussed, and a detailed work schedule will be developed. City staff will also provide the consultant with background information including an overview of proposed zoning changes and any potential foreseeable impacts and will work with the team to confirm the project horizon year. Because many impacts—such as transportation, noise, air quality and greenhouse gases—will be cumulative in nature, the horizon year will need to be established early in the process. 1-B: Review Background Materials (Team). The consultants will review pertinent documents, provided by City staff or otherwise available. This will include the 2040 General Plan and EIR (which we are already familiar with), the Zoning Code, utility master plans, urban water management plan, and any other relevant documentation.
1-C: Sites Mapping (D&B). The City will provide a shapefile of rezoned Housing Element sites or provide APNs for D&B to create shapefiles to be used for any additional maps that may need to be created for the EIR. D&B will use the basemap and other maps used previously in preparation of the 2040 General Plan EIR.
Meetings Products
• Kick-off Meeting with City Staff • N/A
TASK 2: SCOPING
2-A: Notice of Preparation (Staff, D&B). D&B will prepare and staff will circulate the Notice of Preparation (NOP) of the EIR for the Housing Element Rezoning effort ("Proposed Project").
Because it has already been determined that an EIR will be needed, an Initial Study need not be conducted. It is anticipated that Agricultural and Forest Resources, Cultural and Historic Resources, and Mineral Resources, and possibly Hazardous Materials, may be able to be scoped out; this will be noted in the NOP with brief rationale for scoping out these topics provided. D&B will review comments received on the NOP and ensure that comments are addressed in the EIR. 2-B: Tribal Consultation (Staff, D&B). Pursuant to SB 18 and AB 52, D&B will assist the City with tribal consultation, notifying the NAHC of the planning process and contacting tribal representatives in the planning area.
2-C: Scoping Meeting (Staff, D&B). Staff will coordinate a scoping meeting, including sending out meeting notices and reserving a conference room at the City, unless the City prefers that this meeting be conducted on Zoom. D&B will facilitate the meeting and take notes on comments made by those attending. A summary record of comments will be created using these notes and D&B will determine how to address these comments in the EIR.
Meetings Products
• Scoping Meeting (Staff, D&B) • Notice of Preparation
• Tribal Consultation Letters
TASK 3: PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ALTERNATIVES
3-A: Project Description and Alternatives (Staff). Staff will prepare a concise EIR-level project description. This will include proposed new zones, and density and height changes. Staff will also provide direction on up to two land use alternatives (including the No Project Alternative) for inclusion in the EIR. Our budget allocates ~17 hours for consultant support to staff for alternatives development. The project description will contain the project proposal, purpose and objectives, anticipated buildout, a discussion of potential areas of controversy, and issues to be resolved.
3-B: Project Description and Alternatives Review (D&B). D&B will edit and refine the project description and description of alternatives for inclusion in the EIR.
Meetings Products
• Scoping Meeting (Staff, D&B) • Project Description and Alternatives (Staff) TASK 4: ADMINISTRATIVE DRAFT EIR (ADEIR) PREPARATION
The ADEIR will evaluate the Project and up to two alternatives (including a No Project alternative). At key points during the process, D&B will provide feedback to staff regarding environmental impacts. The ADEIR will include:
• Executive Summary;
• Project Description;
• Environmental Impact Analysis, including environmental setting; • Comparative Assessment of Alternatives; and
• CEQA-Required Conclusions.
4-A: Executive Summary (D&B). The Executive Summary will explain the purpose and scope of the EIR, EIR organization, study approach, project background, environmentally superior alternative and summary of impacts and mitigation.
4-B: Project Description (D&B). The Project Description will be the project proposal, purpose and objectives, anticipated buildout resulting from the Proposed Project and changes resulting from previously approved plans, a discussion of potential areas of controversy, and issues to be resolved developed in Task 3.
4-C: Environmental Setting (Team). The Environmental Setting will provide a general description of existing conditions and geography of sites to be rezoned, suitable to support a programmatic-level EIR analysis. For citywide setting, D&B will incorporate the General Plan EIR by reference, and add supplemental information for the rezoned sites. This section will incorporate the most up-todate literature, maps, databases, and other resources, including site reconnaissance findings from WRA on biological resources and GC on geotechnical hazards. The setting will also clearly document the City’s existing policy and regulatory framework and that of other agencies to permit careful analysis of potential for mitigation associated with existing codes and policies. 4-D: Environmental Impact Analysis. D&B and team will build upon our extensive experience preparing general plan and general plan EIRs, particularly for Pacifica's 2040 General Plan Update.
The analysis will consider general impacts associated with buildout as part of the Proposed Project, as well as cumulative effects of General Plan buildout plus the Proposed Project to the established horizon year. Where possible, impacts will be quantified, and their level of significance established. If existing data does not allow definitive quantification, reasonable assumptions will be used to qualitatively approximate potential impacts. The impact analysis will be comprehensive in scope, covering all CEQA requirements. Significance criteria will be identified for each impact topic, largely based upon thresholds of significance established in the 2040 General Plan EIR. Impact analysis will account for the potential mitigating effect of existing City plans and policies. Issues to be addressed are expected to include:
• Aesthetics (D&B). Key visual and open space resources in and around the City include scenic open natural lands around the City’s perimeter such as the panoramic coastline and ocean views, lateral ridges of the Coast Range, San Pedro Mountain, and scenic highway-eligible roadways Highway 1 and Sharp Park Road.
Analysis will draw upon resource evaluation in the General Plan EIR and evaluate site zoning changes, such as height increases or increased density, for potential impacts, including potential loss or obstruction of identified scenic qualities. Visual modeling is not assumed as part of this analysis; impacts to these resources will be rated objectively using approaches and methodologies accepted by the City in the General Plan EIR to permit the community and decision-makers to ascertain the impacts of zoning changes and consider the tradeoffs associated with impacts to such resources with attaining other City and Housing Element objectives.
• Air Quality (D&B). Operational air quality impacts associated with cumulative buildout (from the Proposed Project, and plus the cumulative assumed buildout as part of the General Plan to the horizon year) will be evaluated by determining whether it is consistent with the most recently adopted Air Quality Plan prepared by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD,) as well as with their recommended analysis thresholds. Construction-related emissions associated with the Proposed Project will be evaluated qualitatively based on guidance provided by the BAAQMD and will also include the identification of constructionrelated mitigation measures recommended by the BAAQMD. D&B will qualitatively evaluate potential health risks associated the General Plan Update, which includes an evaluation of exposure of new sensitive receptors proposed as part of sites rezoning to existing or planned sources of toxic air contaminants (TACs) and PM2.5.
• Energy, Greenhouse Gas and Climate Change (D&B). D&B will prepare a GHG analysis to address the potential net increase of GHG emissions during construction and operation activities associated with additional buildout resulting from the Proposed Project, and cumulative impacts of the Proposed Project plus assumed General Plan buildout. This section will refer to and update the General Plan overview of the current regulatory framework regarding GHGs/climate change, including but not limited to the California’s Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32), Senate Bill (SB) 97, SB 375, SB 32, Executive Order B-55-18, the CEQA Guidelines, and any policies or measures contained in the City's Climate Action Plan (CAP).
The analysis will quantify carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) units associated with construction and operational emissions attributable to the net change of housing units that may be associated with the proposed project. Emission factors and methodologies will use the most recent versions of CARB’s Orion 2018 database, the latest version of EMFAC2017 air pollutant emissions database to calculate GHG emissions utilizing VMT data, as described more fully under the air quality analysis above, and the CalEEMod emissions model (for nontransportation related emissions). This analysis will utilize the established General Plan EIR thresholds; if any significant impacts are determined by our analysis, we will prepare appropriate mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. • Biological Resources (WRA). The City’s planning area includes critical habitat for steelhead and the California red legged frog, and the presence of several other special status species has been documented. While most rezoning sites are previously developed. there are a few vacant sites where special status species could be present. As a part of the Environmental Setting portion of the EIR Biological Resources section, WRA will summarize special-status wildlife and plant species known to occur within and in the immediate vicinity of undeveloped or partially undeveloped sites including plants and animals listed, proposed for listing, or candidates for listing as threatened or endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) or the California Endangered Species Act (CESA); animals listed as “fully protected” under the California Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Code; animals designated as “Species of Special Concern” by the CDFW; and plants listed as rare or endangered by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). This listing will be based on current secondary sources, including but not limited to, the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB), CDFW lists, United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) databases, CNPS lists, and other applicable secondary sources.
A table which lists all potentially occurring special-status species in the vicinity will be provided in the SEIR section.
WRA will also review special habitats, including critical habitat and sensitive biological communities known to occur in the general vicinity. Following the review of existing biological and regulatory information, WRA will conduct a reconnaissance field survey of the focus sites. The field survey will assess the existing biological resources and identify, confirm, and augment any potentially sensitive biological issues. Generalized mapping of the biological resources for each site will be provided; however, this Scope of Work does not include any wetland delineations or specific species surveys.
• Geologic Hazards (D&B, GC). Drawing from General Plan EIR analysis of known geologic hazards, GC will provide geotechnical feasibility review of up to eight (8) sites to identify potential geotechnical impacts to planned redevelopment, with particular focus on seismic hazards and landslides. GC will develop a memo that presents professional opinions on geotechnical feasibility of redevelopment and discussion of potential geotechnical site constraints, and describe impacts of rezoned sites with potential to be exposed to these geotechnical hazards. We propose to perform an EIR-level geotechnical feasibility review of each site to identify potential geotechnical impacts to planned redevelopment, with particular focus on seismic hazards. D&B will incorporate these findings into the Geologic Hazards section. Should mitigation measures be needed, they will focus on appropriate methods to reduce the risk from these hazards and outline any further studies that would be needed for specific sites prior to development approval. These inputs will be presented in a memo format; D&B will use these inputs to develop this EIR section. • Hazards and Hazardous Materials (D&B). The EIR will evaluate the potential for rezoned sites to be exposed to contaminant releases and airport compatibility. This will include an updated search on GeoTracker, a statewide geographic information system that tracks soil, vapor, and groundwater of leaking underground storage tank (LUST) cases and non-UST cleanup sites, including Site Cleanup Program Sites (formerly referred to as Spills-Leaks-InvestigationsCleanups (SLIC) sites), Military Sites (formerly referred to as Department of Defense sites (DOD)), and Land Disposal (Land Fill) Sites. The analysis will assess the impact of these hazards on future site development/redevelopment.
• Hydrology and Water Quality (D&B). The City of Pacific is located within all or part of nine watersheds, and flood hazards exist among most of the creeks. Broad flood inundation is relatively common in several low-lying areas, including the Sharp Park area along Sanchez Creek and in the Linda Mar neighborhood along San Pedro Creek (also an area within the 100- year flood plain, as designated by FEMA). D&B will utilize existing information within the General Plan EIR and other information such as the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (with any available updates) to describe watershed conditions, drainage patterns, flood hazards and water quality issues with input from City staff. Staff will also qualitatively evaluate potential hydrologic and water quality impacts associated with future rezoning development including increases in peak discharges, flooding, the adequacy of drainage infrastructure, and adverse effects on water quality. Programmatic mitigation measures will be identified for hydrologic-surface runoff impacts. Mitigation may include avoidance of certain critical drainage areas, design/management practices, drainage facility improvements, and implementation of water quality best management practices. • Land Use and Planning (D&B). This section of the EIR will describe potential physical and policy conflicts related to proposed land use in the planning area. The EIR will evaluate the consistency of proposed rezoning with other potential applicable policies, such as the Coastal Act.
• Population and Housing (D&B). D&B will evaluate the effect of the rezoned site development/redevelopment on dividing an established community and any potential displacement effects. D&B will include the discussion of growth inducing impacts of the project under a separate chapter which discusses all CEQA required conclusions required under CEQA Guidelines §15126.
• Noise (CSA, D&B). Building upon work conducted for the General Plan EIR, CSA will update future noise contours based on new traffic data associated with potential site rezoning buildout. CSA will review updated traffic volume data from the engineer per the rezoning update; calculate traffic noise levels based on future traffic volumes, speeds, and truck percentages for each roadway segment to be included in the model; and provide the results of our traffic noise analysis in electronic spreadsheet format. The EIR will also evaluate mitigation strategies for potential future development and existing sensitive receptors that may be impacted by future development. Mitigation requirements will be identified, and potential development standards suggested, if necessary. • Public Utilities, Facilities and Services (D&B). Our team will review existing available information to identify existing capacity and constraints for public utilities, services and infrastructure, including schools, parks and recreation, water, wastewater, solid waste service, utilities, fire safety and emergency response, and police services. Using this information and projected demand, we will evaluate potential impacts associated with increased potential buildout as part of the rezoning buildout program and cumulative General Plan buildout until the horizon year, as well as any increased associated demand for public utilities, services and infrastructure. Analysis will utilize existing General Plan EIR thresholds. • Transportation and Traffic (DKS). Update of transportation modeling includes the following three subtasks:
A. Revised Future Land Use Inputs
DKS will develop revised year 2040 land use inputs for the C\CAG travel demand model that reflect the proposed rezoning. DKS will work with Dyett & Bhatia to calculate the expected increase in housing units by each Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ) in the Pacifica planning area. The revised land use inputs will be reviewed by Dyett & Bhatia and accepted by the City of Pacifica before further work is conducted.
B. VMT Impact Assessment
DKS previously calculated VMT metrics associated with the preferred future alternative for the Pacifica General Plan Update. The metrics previously calculated include home-based VMT per capita, and home-based work VMT per employee summarized at local, county, and regional geographies. Under this task, DKS will repeat these calculations using the revised land use inputs developed under Task 1.
Because the Housing Element has a planning horizon of 2031 and the C\CAG model’s horizon year is 2040, VMT metrics may be interpolated between existing conditions and the 2040 results to estimate circa year 2030 VMT metrics, should the City decide upon that year as the horizon. Should the horizon year remain at 2040, as in the General Plan EIR, increase in housing from the rezoning program will be layered on top of development already included in the General Plan EIR analysis. This calculation ma need to be repeated for the “no project” alternative should the horizon year differ from that used in the General Plan EIR.
C. Updated General Plan Study Intersections and Roadway Segments DKS will update the study intersection and roadway level of service calculations previously prepared for the General Plan Update. These analyses involve eight general plan study intersections and 15 roadway segments. The analyses will rely on the revised year 2040 model outputs and utilize a growth increment approach. Results will be compared to those of the general plan preferred alternative to identify any impacts.
Note that DKS does not propose to collect new traffic volume data from which to calculate future year volumes for this task. DKS also does not propose updating any signalized intersection timing plans for the analysis. The focus of the analysis would be changes to results obtained for the general plan.
• Wildfire (D&B). While none of the sites currently proposed for rezoning are within a very high fire hazard severity zone, a few near Pacifica's southern border are in proximity to state responsibility areas with this designation. D&B will build upon analysis in the General Plan EIR to analyze CEQA requirements for wildfire.
• Alternatives (Team). Our team will analyze up to two alternatives (including the No Project Alternative) that are capable of substantially reducing or eliminating project impacts while also attaining the key policy and planning objectives identified in the draft General Plan.
Although the analysis of alternatives will be less detailed than that for the project, sufficient analysis will be provided on the magnitude of each impact to understand the consequences and tradeoffs associated with each policy approach.
D&B will provide a qualitative analysis of traffic impacts for the alternatives. The No Project alternative would assume a future growth pattern and transportation improvements based on the current General Plan, and would include regional growth and transportation improvements outside of the City.
4-E: Other Required CEQA Sections (D&B). In addition to project impacts analysis and assessment of alternatives, we will address all standard required CEQA Sections as follows:
• Significant and Unavoidable Impacts. We will describe those significant impacts that, despite feasible mitigation, cannot be reduced to a level of insignificance. We are familiar with different approaches to such impacts, their relationship to a potential statement of overriding considerations and findings, and that long-range planning efforts often require balancing such impacts with other social and economic benefits of the project. • Significant, Irreversible Environmental Changes. As required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15126, the EIR will present information on the extent to which the project would result in an irreversible commitment of environmental resources. Based on our recent general plan EIR experience, such findings have become more relevant for general plans when considering non-renewable energy demand and climate change.
• Cumulative Impacts. CEQA Guidelines define cumulative impacts as that consisting of an impact which is created as a result of the combination of the project and other projects causing related impacts. Cumulative analysis will focus on issues such as regional commuting and congestion, regional air quality, greenhouse gases, noise, and services and utilities, etc. • Growth-Inducing Impacts. As required by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2, the EIR will assess the ways in which the sites rezoning could, either directly or indirectly, foster economic or population growth (e.g., job creation that substantially exceeds housing supply), the construction of additional housing, or the extension of arterials or infrastructure (e.g., sewer lines) in outlying areas that may contribute to or stimulate future growth. • Impacts Found Not to Be Significant. We will summarize potential environmental impact where no significant impacts were identified.
Meetings Products
• N/A • Admin Draft EIR (D&B, Team)
• Electronic copies: PDF and Word
TASK 5: DRAFT EIR PREPARATION AND PUBLIC REVIEW
5-A: Draft EIR (Team). We will prepare the public review Draft EIR, incorporating changes in response to the City’s comments. We assume that our team will receive one consolidated set of comments on the ADEIR from City staff, ideally in track changes with comments as needed. We will then prepare and submit one electronic copy of a “screen check” draft to permit final review by City staff to ensure that City comments on the ADEIR have been addressed to the City’s satisfaction. Following any final revisions, we will produce the public review Draft EIR, and provide an electronic copy with Word and PDF versions.
5-B: Notice of Completion (D&B, Staff). D&B will prepare an electronic copy of the Notice of Completion (NOC) to accompany the required copies of the DEIR to the State Clearinghouse. The team assumes one round of City review and comment on the NOC and that City staff will be responsible for distributing the NOC and DEIR to the State Clearinghouse. 5-C: Notice of Availability (D&B, Staff). D&B will prepare an electronic copy of the Notice of Availability (NOA) of the DEIR for filing with the San Mateo County Clerk/Recorder. D&B assumes that one round of City review and comment on the NOA will be required. D&B will be responsible for adequately satisfying all filing and noticing requirements associated with the NOA in the manner required under CEQA and/or other applicable regulations, with the exception of public noticing in newspaper publications.
Meetings Products
• N/A • Screen Check Draft EIR (D&B, Team)
• Electronic copies: PDF and Word
• Public Review Draft EIR (D&B, Team)
• Electronic copies: PDF and Word
• Notice of Completion (D&B, Staff)
• Notice of Availability (D&B, Staff)
TASK 6: FINAL EIR AND HEARINGS
6-A: Response to Comments and Final EIR (Team). Our team will prepare a Final EIR which will address all comments received on the Draft EIR. Changes to the Draft EIR text will be made in strikeout/underline formatting to permit easy tracking of all changes. The EIR will include appropriately detailed responses to all written and oral comments received. A list of letters, emails, and verbal responses will be keyed to detailed responses and/ or changes in EIR text as appropriate. Our team is very familiar with the level of detail of comments typically received from local agencies (e.g., Caltrans, C/CAG). Given the volume of General Plan EIR comments, the scope anticipates up to ~150 hours of staff time to prepare responses to comment and other Final EIR components. We anticipate that responses that are within the scope of work and budget will consist of relatively detailed explanations, elaborations, or clarifications of the data contained in the Draft EIR, as well as minor corrections of background information. However, if substantive new analysis or issues that could not have been anticipated or new alternatives, or substantial project changes need to be addressed, or if the effort exceeds the budgeted amount because of the number or complexity of responses, a contract amendment may be required.
We will provide an electronic copy of the administrative draft Final EIR in Word and PDF for City staff review. Upon receipt of one set of consolidated staff comments, if possible in track changes with comments as needed, our team will provide a “screen check” draft in Word and PDF for final review by City staff to ensure that City comments on the Draft EIR have been addressed to the City’s satisfaction.
We will then incorporate final changes and submit five (5) printed, bound copies, and Word and PDF versions of the Response to Comments and Final EIR to the City. 6-B: Mitigation Measures and Monitoring and Reporting Plan (D&B, Team). To the extent that additional mitigation measures are necessary, we will closely coordinate with City staff on the development of mitigation measures and the required Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP). If a MMRP is deemed necessary, all such measures would be assessed for feasibility and related to known or potential funding sources. Clear lines of responsibility for implementation would also be included, along with suggested timing. As the MMRP would be integral to tracking performance standards and achievement of programmatic mitigations, D&B would work closely with City staff on development of the MMRP and identification of appropriate tracking mechanisms.
6-C: Public Hearings (D&B). We will present the Draft and Final EIR at up to a combined three hearings/meetings of the Planning Commission and City Council. D&B will work with staff to decide how to best distribute the hearings/meetings. If staff chooses to conduct a Planning Commission meeting during the public review period, a second Planning Commission meeting will need to be held after the completion of the Draft and Final EIR for the Planning Commission to make a recommendation on the Draft and Final EIR. The City Council will certify the EIR. 6-D: Notice of Determination (D&B). Upon certification of the Final EIR, staff will prepare a Notice of Determination for the Final EIR, which staff will be responsible for filing and distributing. 6-E: Findings and Statement of Overriding Consideration (D&B). D&B will prepare Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations as required under CEQA Guidelines sections 15091 and 15093, respectively.
Meetings Products
• Planning Commission and City Council
Hearings (up to 3)
• Admin Draft Final EIR (D&B, Team)
• Screen Check Draft Final EIR (D&B, Team)
• Final EIR (D&B, Team)
• Mitigation Measures and Monitoring and
Reporting Plan, if needed (D&B)
• Notice of Determination (D&B)
• Findings and Statement of Overriding
Consideration
SCOPE OF WORK ASSUMPTIONS
Our Scope of Work and budget is based on the following assumptions:
• Invoices. Invoices will be based on hourly costs, and will be submitted monthly. • Meeting Attendance. The budget assumes attendance at meetings as shown in the Scope of Work.
Costs of additional meeting attendance would be on a time and materials basis if requested; such costs are not included within the guaranteed maximum fee. Bi-weekly (every two weeks) coordination phone calls with staff will be held.
• Final EIR Effort. Because the effort to prepare the Final EIR (Response to Comments on the Draft EIR) is not predictable in advance, our budget assumes that ~150 hours (100 hours of D&B time and 49 hours of subconsultant time) will be sufficient for this task. Additional effort will be additional services.
• Consolidated Comments and Direction. City staff will provide a single set of consolidated comments on the review drafts of all documents.
• Number of Review Drafts. Each product will be finalized following one round of staff review. Prior to publication, electronic Screencheck drafts of documents will be provided. • Electronic Documents. We will provide digital files of documents in Word and Adobe PDF formats, available by electronic transfer. Files will be provided both in high-resolution format for printing as well as low-resolution for posting on the City’s website. Maps will be provided in native file formats (Illustrator or ArcGIS) upon conclusion of the project. • Printing. Printing is not assumed in our budget. We would be happy to print hard copies of documents for an additional cost.
• Travel Expenses, Mailing Costs, and Other Direct Costs. The budget includes direct costs related to the project, including travel expenses, database searched, and other similar reimbursable items.
City staff will be responsible for any filing fee.
• Reallocation by Task/Subconsultant. Dyett & Bhatia reserves the right to reallocate budget by task or consultant team member, provided the overall project budget is not affected. • Increased Costs Due to Delay. Should the project extend for more than two years for no fault of consultant, the budget for remaining work would be adjusted to account for change in costs/billing rates (based on change in San Francisco-Oakland-San JoséCPI from project start).
Attachment B: Timeline
Attachment C: Budget
Proposal for City of Pacifica: EIR on Housing Rezoning
ATTACHMENT C: HOURS BY TASK
Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Task 4 Task 5
Project
Initiation Scoping Project Description and Alternatives Administrative
Draft EIR
Draft EIR Final EIR Hearings (3)
Dyett & Bhatia
Rajeev Bhatia, Principal 3 3 3 24 8 8 12 61
Senior Associate 7 3 5 55 13 15 18 116
Associate 4 3 6 90 25 20 148
Planner 96 15 38 149
Sr. GIS Specialist 3 3 40 8 54
Project Associate 3 40 24 20 87
Sub-Total 20 9 17 345 93 101 30 615
DKS
Principal 0 4 1 5
Project Manager 4 32 7 43
Project Engineer 7 1 8
Assistant Engineer 2 78 9 89
Project Administrator 6 6
Sub-Total 6 127 18 151
WRA
Principal 1 6 2 9
Senior Associate 2 10 4 16
Staff 2 22 8 32
Staff 28 10 38
Staff 16 16
Staff 22 22
Sub-Total 5 104 24 133
Geocon
Principal Engineer 33 2 35
Associate Engineer 60 4 64
Staff Engineer 50 50
Research Assistant 35 35
Sub-Total 178 6 184
Charles M. Salter Associates
Vice President 3 3
Associate 18 18
Sub-Total 21 21
TOTAL HOURS 31 9 17 775 93 149 30 1,104
TOTAL
Task 6
Proposal for City of Pacifica: EIR on Housing Rezoning
ATTACHMENT C: BUDGET BY TASK
Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Task 4 Task 5
Project
Initiation Scoping Project Description
and Alternatives
Administrative
Draft EIR
Draft EIR Final EIR Hearings (3)
Dyett & Bhatia
Rajeev Bhatia, Principal $ 265 $ 795 $ 795 $ 795 $ 6,360 $ 2,120 $ 2,120 $ 3,180 $ 16,165 Senior Associate 190 $ 1,330 $ 570 $ 950 $ 10,450 $ 2,470 $ 2,850 $ 3,420 $ 22,040 Associate 175 700 525 1,050 15,750 4,375 3,500 - 25,900 Planner 140 - - - 13,440 2,100 5,320 - 20,860
Sr. GIS Specialist 165 495 - 495 6,600 1,320 - - 8,910
Project Associate 105 315 - - 4,200 2,520 2,100 - 9,135 Direct Cost 50 700 - 50 50 100 950
Sub-Total $ 3,685 $ 2,590 $ 3,290 $ 56,850 $ 14,905 $ 15,940 $ 6,700 $ 103,960 DKS
Principal $ 325 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,300 $ - $ 325 $ - $ 1,625 Project Manager 260 $ 1,040 $ - $ - $ 8,320 $ - $ 1,820 $ - $ 11,180 Project Engineer 195 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,365 $ - $ 195 $ - $ 1,560 Assistant Engineer 180 $ 360 $ - $ - $ 14,040 $ - $ 1,620 $ - $ 16,020 Project Administrator 180 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,080 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,080 Direct Cost 50 50 $ 100
Sub-Total $ 1,450 $ - $ - $ 26,105 $ - $ 4,010 $ 31,565 WRA
Principal $ 289 $ 289 $ - $ - $ 1,734 $ - $ 578 $ - $ 2,601 Senior Associate 273 $ 546 $ - $ - $ 2,730 $ - $ 1,092 $ - $ 4,368 Staff 180 $ 360 $ - $ - $ 3,960 $ - $ 1,440 $ - $ 5,760 Staff 164 $ - $ - $ - $ 4,592 $ - $ 1,640 $ - $ 6,232
Staff 180 $ - $ - $ - $ 2,880 $ - $ - $ - $ 2,880
Staff 180 $ - $ - $ - $ 3,960 $ - $ - $ - $ 3,960
Direct Cost $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Sub-Total $ 1,195 $ - $ - $ 19,856 $ - $ 4,750 $ - $ 25,801 Geocon
Principal Engineer $ 240 $ - $ - $ - $ 7,920 $ - $ 480 $ - $ 8,400 Associate Engineer 210 - - - 12,600 - 840 - 13,440
Staff Engineer 130 - - - 6,500 - - - 6,500
Research Assistant 105 - - - 3,675 - - - 3,675
Direct Cost - - - - - -
Sub-Total $ - $ - $ - $ 30,695 $ - $ 1,320 $ - $ 32,015 Charles M. Salter Associates
Vice President $ 325 $ - $ - $ - $ 975 $ - $ - $ - $ 975 Associate 225 - - - 4,050 - - - 4,050
Direct Cost - - - - - - - -
Sub-Total $ - $ - $ - $ 5,025 $ - $ - $ - $ 5,025
TOTAL FEE $ 6,330 $ 2,590 $ 3,290 $ 138,531 $ 14,905 $ 26,020 $ 6,700 $ 198,366 TOTAL
Hourly
Rate
Task 6