HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AG PKT 2010-08-09 #RAGENDA STAFF REPORT
DATE: August 9, 2010
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
THRU: David Carmany, City Manager
FROM: Mark H. Persico, AICP, Director of Development Services
SUBJECT: CONTRACT WITH RBF CONSULTING FOR
PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMNETAL IMPACT
REPORT (EIR) TO AMEND THE DWP SPECIFIC PLAN
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
Adopt Resolution No. 6042 approving a Professional Services Agreement
between the City of Seal Beach and RBF Consulting for preparation of an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to amend the DWP Specific Plan.
BACKGROUND AND FACTS
Bay City Partners (BCP) originally filed an application to amend the Specific Plan
and an application to amend the General Plan and for a Zone Change. The
Specific Plan Amendment application was subsequently withdrawn. However, in
order to amend the General Plan and Zoning a Specific Plan Amendment is also
required.
In order to proceed with the project review the City, acting as the Lead Agency,
needs to initiate a project review under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). BCP has executed a reimbursement agreement agreeing to pay all of
the City's direct and indirect costs. Further, in a July 27, 2010 letter BCP has also
agreed to complete a full EIR for the project (Attachment B). Subsequent to City
Council approval of this contract, BCP will deposit $150,000 into a liability
account against which all expenses will be paid.
City staff requested cost proposals from the City's three pre - qualified
environmental consulting firms: CAA Planning, PCR Services Corporation and
RBF Consulting.
<, Firm Name-_ :.::
Cost Pro , osal.
CAA Planning
$162,026
PCR Services Corporation
$228,865
RBF Consulting
$350,655
Agenda Item R
Page 2
In March the consulting firms were interviewed by a panel comprised of members
of the Planning Commission (Commission Massa - Lavitt), Environmental Quality
Control Board (Board member Barton), the DWP Advisory Committee
(Committee member Eaker) and staff. The panel unanimously selected RBF
Consulting as the most qualified firm for completing the EIR. The selection was
based upon RBF's extensive experience with the City, their extensive experience
with coastal issues, their extensive background in resource management and the
fact that they are a full service environmental firm.
RBF has outlined a 16 month schedule to complete the EIR, but that schedule
was drafted before the applicant agreed to prepare an EIR. Based upon that new
information, staff and RBF will re- examine the schedule at the project kick -off
meeting to develop a final schedule. When the schedule is finalized staff will
forward that information to the City Council and the DWP Citizens Ad Hoc
Committee.
When cities hire professional services firms they are not required to select the
lowest cost bidder. Instead the standard is the most highly qualified firm based
upon the technical expertise of the firm and their project understanding.
Throughout the written cost proposal and interview process, RBF Consulting
demonstrated that they were the most qualified firm to undertake the EIR for this
project.
RBF Consulting has been in business for more than 65 years and further
information on the firm can be obtained at www.RBF.com City Manager
David Carmany has had a professional relationship with Raub, Bein, Frost &
Associates (now RBF Consulting) since 1979. Additionally, Development
Services Director, Mark Persico, served on the California American Planning
Association (CCAPA) Board with RBF Vice President and project manager,
Glenn Lajoie, in the mid- 1990's.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
There are no financial impacts because the applicant will reimburse the City
based upon the signed reimbursement agreement.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended City Council adopt Resolution No. 6042 authorizing the City
Manager to execute the Professional Services Agreement in a not to exceed
amount of $350,655 for the hiring of RBF Consulting based upon the Update
Proposal dated August 2, 2010.
Page 3
SUBMITTED BY:
ark H. Persico, AICP
Director of Development Services
NOTED AND APPROVED:
David Carma y, City Manager
Attachments
A. Resolution No. 6042 Authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional
Services Agreement with RBF Consulting
B. Bay City Partners letter July 27, 2010
C. Updated Cost Proposal August 2, 2010
D. Professional Services Agreement
ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION NO. 6042
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SEAL
BEACH, CALIFIRNIA APPROVING A
PROFESSIONAL SERVUCES AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY AND RBF CONSULTING FOR
PREPARATION OF AN EIR
RESOLUTION NUMBER 6042
A RESOLUTION OF THE SEAL BEACH CITY COUNCIL
APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH AND RBF CONSULTING
FOR THE PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMNETAL IMPACT
REPORT FOR THE DWP SPECIFIC PLAN SITE
THE SEAL BEACH CITY COUNCIL HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council hereby approves the Professional Services
Agreement between the City of Seal Beach and RBF Consulting for preparation
of an Environmental Impact Report for the DWP Specific Plan Site.
Section 2. The Council hereby directs the City Manager to execute the
Professional Services Agreement with RBF Consulting.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the Seal Beach City Council at a
regular meeting held on the 9th day of August , 2010 by the following
vote:
AYES: Council Members
NOES: Council Members
ABSENT: Council Members
ABSTAIN: Council Members
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA }
COUNTY OF ORANGE } SS
CITY OF SEAL BEACH }
I, Linda Devine, City Clerk of the City of Seal Beach, do hereby certify that the
foregoing resolution is the original copy of Resolution Number 6042 on file in
the office of the City Clerk, passed, approved, and adopted by the Seal Beach
City Council at a regular meeting held on the 9th day of August , 2010.
City Clerk
ATTACHMENT B
BAY CITY PARTNERS LETTER
JULY 27, 2010
Bay City Partners
2999 Westminster Avenue Suite 211
Seal Beach, California 90740 562 - 594 -6715
Mr. Mark Persico, Director Development. Services
City of Seal Beach
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
July 27, 2010
Re: Bay City Partners Reimbursement Agreement
Dear Mark,
After consultation with city staff Bay City Partners has elected to go directly to the
preparation of an EIR for our application. We feel skipping the initial study and MND
analysis will'save.both the City and Bay City Partners time and money and the city will
end up with a more complete environmental document. We look forward to working with
you o e pr ration of this important document.
City of Sea! bL;zI:.h
Edward D Selich
Bay City Partners Project Manager I f
627 Bayside Drive
Newport Beach Ca 92660
949: 723 -6383
Department of
edselich(a-road runner. com
Cc: David Carmany, City- Manager
Quinn Barrow, City Attorney
City Council
0
LI
ATTACHMENT C
UPDATED COST PROPOSAL
AUGUST 2, 2010
2 h i
CONSULTING
August 2, 2010 JN 10- 107353
Mr. Mark Persico, AICP
Director of Development Services
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, California 90740
Subject: Updated Proposal to Prepare Environmental Compliance Documentation for the
Department of Water and Power Specific Plan Amendment, City of Seal Beach
Dear Mr. Persico:
RBF Consulting is pleased to submit this updated Proposal to the City of Seal Beach to prepare
environmental compliance documentation for the Department of Water and Power (DWP) Specific
Plan Amendment. This proposal supercedes our February 16, 2010 and June 30, 2010 submittals.
It is our understanding that the project applicant's proposed amendment would allow up to 55 single -
family residents and 5.3 acres of open space and parks on the 10.6 -acre site located south of Marina
Drive and west of 1 at Street. Proposed development of the site is anticipated to have great interest
and scrutiny throughout the local area. The RBF team believes that it is essential to have a careful
and diligent environmental process in order for the community and reviewing agencies to have an
understanding of potential environmental effects resulting from construction and buildout of the
Project site.
Based upon our review of available Project information and background with similar projects
throughout California, we have developed a greater understanding of the environmental analysis
required for the Project. We believe that the background and experience of our team members are
key attributes that we can provide the City. In summary, RBF offers the following benefits for your
consideration:
• EIR Project Team Commitment and Availability: The designated Team will be led by Mr.
Glenn Lajoie, AICP, serving as Project Manager and Mr. Eddie Torres, INCE,REA, serving as
Project Coordinator. Mr. Lajoie and Mr. Torres have an extensive background related to
environmental review involving coastal development and Specific Plan projects. Resumes
for each team member are included in this submittal.
• Legally Defensible Documentation: Throughout RBF's 39 years of preparing
environmental documentation, we have attained extensive experience in writing accurate,
legally defensible environmental documents for all types of policy, development and
infrastructure projects.
Experience with Coastal Development Projects: Our resume includes several types of
mixed -use coastal projects in highly sensitive environments. Project references include the
Shoreline Gateway Project EIR for the City of Long Beach, the Hotel del Coronado Master
Plan EIR in Coronado, the Long Point (Terranea) Resort EIR in Rancho Palos Verdes, the
Ritz Carlton Specific Plan EIR in Rancho Palos Verdes, the La Bahia Hotel EIR in Santa
Cruz, the Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan Program EIR in Huntington Beach and the
Dana Point Harbor Revitalization EIR in Dana Point.
PLANNING ■ DESIGN ■ CONSTRUCTION
14725 Alton Parkway, Irvine, CA 92618 -2027 ■ P.O. Box 57057, Irvine, CA 92619 -7057 ■ 949.472.3505 ■ FAX 949.472.8373
Offices located throughout California, Arizona & Nevada ■ www.RBF.com
Mr. Mark Persico, AICP
August 2, 2010
Page 2
• Background in Seal Beach: RBF has had the opportunity to become intimately familiar with
environmental factors and issues on concern in Seal Beach. Project references include the
Boeing Specific Plan EIR, the Adolfo Lopez Townhomes Project MND, the Rivers End
Staging Area and Bikeway Enhancement Plan MND, the Pacific Gateway Plaza Project MND
and the Citywide Sewer Capital Improvement Project MND.
Experience with Specific Plans and Mixed -Use Projects: Our team has attained
extensive experience with mixed -use projects in built -out urban areas. Project references
include the Oasis Road Specific Plan Master EIR in Redding, the Hawthorne Boulevard
Specific Plan and Redevelopment Project Area Plan Program EIR in Lawndale, the
Clearwater Specific Plan EIR for the Town of Mammoth Lakes, the Route 66 Specific
Plan /Program EIR in Glendora, and the Beverly Hills Gardens and Montage Hotel EIR.
Multi- Disciplinary Capabilities: RBF possess a unique in -house network of professionals in
disciplines including Planning /Environmental Services, Transportation Engineering, Civil
Engineering (including Grading, Public Works, Water/Wastewater and Hydrology),
Mechanical /Electrical /Energy Engineering, Computer Aided Design and Drafting (CADD) and
GIS Services, Mapping, Surveying, Aerial Photogrammetry and Media Services, which
results in a coordinated and efficient effort, with full - service consulting capabilities within one
firm.
Diverse Planning and Environmental Services: RBF's Planning Department offers an
extensive background of services and expertise for projects including General Plans, Specific
Plans, Environmental Impact Reports, Due Diligence Reports, Negative Declaration, Urban
Design, Entitlement Processing, NEPA Review, Noise Studies, View Analyses, Hazardous
Assessments and Air Quality Modeling. The RBF Planning Department also includes the
Urban Design Studio (UDS) division.
• Excellent Track Record of Meeting Schedules and Budgets: RBF has proven capabilities
to effectively complete environmental studies on time and on budget.
We appreciate your consideration of the RBF Consulting Team for the DWP Specific Plan
Amendment environmental compliance documentation and are available to begin the work program
immediately. Our thanks also for meeting with us on February 3 to discuss the project in greater
detail. The undersigned is an agent authorized to submit proposals on behalf of RBF Consulting and
is authorized to negotiate with the City of Seal Beach on this Project. In addition, the RBF Team has
no conflicts of interest in providing services for this project and there are no commitments which may
impact our ability to perform the contracted services.
We welcome the opportunity to meet with you to discuss the work program in greater detail. Please
do not hesitate to contact me at 949.855.3663 or at GAL @rbf.com you have any questions or would
like additional information.
Sincerely,
Glenn Lajoie, AICP
Vice President
Community Planning and Environmental Services
REVISED PROPOSAL
FOR CONSULTING SERVICES
DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance
Documentation
SEA1��,
� aPo�
0
R2L
'NTY,
Prepared for:
City of Seal Beach
Submitted by:
RBF Consulting
August 2, 2010
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction and Understanding of the Project ........................................................ ..............................1
1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................. ..............................1
1.2 Statement of RBF's Commitment to the City ............................................. ..............................1
1.3 Understanding of the Project ..................................................................... ............................... 2
II Scope of Work
.......................................................................................................... ..............................5
1.0
Project Scoping ........................................................................................... ..............................5
1.1
Project Kick -Off and Project Characteristics ................................ ..............................5
1.2
Research and Investigation ........................................................... ..............................5
1.3
Preparation of the Initial Study ..................................................... ...............................
5
1.4
Initial Study Findings and Meeting with City Staff ......................... ..............................6
2.0
Focused Environmental Review ................................................................. ..............................6
2.1
Aesthetics/Light and Glare ............................................................ ..............................6
2.2
Air Quality ...................................................................................... ..............................7
2.3
Biological Resources .................................................................... ..............................8
2.4
Climate Change Analysis .............................................................. ..............................9
2.5
Cultural Resources ...................................................................... .............................10
2.6
DrainageMater Quality ................................................................ .............................11
2.7
Geology and Soils ........................................................................ .............................12
2.8
Growth /Population and Housing .................................................. .............................13
2.9
Jurisdictional Wetland Delineation .............................................. .............................13
2.10
Land Use and Relevant Planning ................................................ .............................14
2.11
Noise ............................................................................................. .............................15
2.12
Parks, Recreation and Open Space ............................................ .............................16
2.13
Public Services and Utilities ......................................................... .............................16
2.14
Traffic and Circulation .................................................................. .............................17
3.0
CEQA Option 1: Preparation of Administrative Draft EIR ......................... .............................18
3.1
Notice of Preparation ................................................................... .............................19
3.2
Scoping Meeting ........................................................................... .............................19
3.3
Introduction and Purpose ............................................................. .............................19
3.4
Executive Summary ..................................................................... .............................19
3.5
Thresholds of Significance ........................................................... .............................20
3.6
Project Description ....................................................................... .............................20
3.7
Cumulative Projects /Analysis ...................................................... .............................20
3.8
Environmental Analysis ................................................................ .............................20
3.9
Alternatives to the Proposed Action ........................................... ...............................
21
3.10
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ............................. .............................21
3.11
Additional Sections ....................................................................... .............................21
3.12
Graphic Exhibits ............................................................................ .............................22
4.0
Draft EIR ..................................................................................................... .............................22
4.1
Preliminary Draft EIR ................................................................... .............................22
4.2
Completion of the Draft EIR ......................................................... .............................22
5.0
Final Environmental Impact Report .......................................................... .............................22
5.1
Response to Comments .............................................................. .............................22
5.2
Final EIR ....................................................................................... .............................22
5.3
Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations ............... .............................23
6.0
EIR Project Coordination and Meetings .................................................... .............................23
6.1
Coordination ................................................................................. .............................23
6.2
Meetings ....................................................................................... .............................23
7.0
EIR Deliverables
........................................................................................ .............................24
8.0
CEQA Clearance Option 2: Mitigated Negative Declaration .................... .............................25
8.1
Public Review Mitigated Negative Declaration ............................ .............................25
8.2
Final Review Mitigated Negative Declaration .............................. .............................25
8.3
CEQA Notices .............................................................................. .............................25
9.0
MND Deliverables ...................................................................................... .............................26
TABLE OF CONTENTS
10.0 MND Project Coordination and Meetings .................................................. .............................26
10.1 Coordination ................................................................................. .............................26
10.2 Meetings ....................................................................................... .............................26
III. Preliminary CEQA Schedule ................................................................................... .............................28
IV. Summary of Qualifications ...................................................................................... .............................30
V. References ............................................................................................................ ............................... 55
VI. Project Team ........................................................................................................... .............................56
VII. Liability Insurance .................................................................................................... .............................69
VIII. Statement of Financial Conditions .......................................................................... .............................70
IX. Budget .................................................................................................................... .............................72
of SEat e City of Seal Beach
�ftPOgq� y
* Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Complian Documentation
9 a ez
j K R 21
Wil. gyp`
1. INTRODUCTION AND UNDERSTANDING OF
THE PROJECT
1.1 INTRODUCTION
RBF Consulting has submitted this updated Proposal to prepare environmental compliance
documentation which will assess potential impacts and identify mitigation measures for the
Department of Water and Power (DWP) Specific Plan Amendment in the City of Seal Beach. The
environmental review and associated work products will be prepared in accordance with the criteria,
standards and provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, Section 21000 et. seq.
of the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq.), the City of Seal
Beach Environmental Guidelines, and the regulations requirements and procedures of responsible
Public Agency with jurisdiction bylaw. RBF will, throughout the environmental review process, and
where appropriate, relate the proposed Project to the general trends in Seal Beach and the
surrounding area.
Each environmental issue area of study is approached thoroughly in order to fully assess all potential
impacts, establish thresholds of significance, and identify mitigation measures. RBF is the lead firm
for this work program and will provide services from our Corporate Headquarters in Irvine. Our
familiarity with environmental and land use issues involving coastal development and Specific Plan
projects, coupled with prior environmental review experience in Seal Beach are key assets that we
will offer in order to complete the environmental clearance for the project.
1.2 STATEMENT OF RBF'S COMMITMENT TO THE CITY
The following affirms RBF's commitment to the City of Seal Beach and the proposed work program:
1. The proposed services to be provided by the RBF Consulting team involve the preparation of
environmental compliance documentation, pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, for the DWP
Specific Plan Amendment in Seal Beach, California.
2. RBF Consulting is focused on a comprehensive and complete review process. The RBF
team will provide services, pursuant to the goals set forth in the City's RFP, and as detailed
in Section II of this proposal.
3. RBF Consulting will thoroughly address each environmental issue area and will recommend
the appropriate CEQA clearance for the project. RBF Consulting holds as the top priority, the
integrity of documentation and processing, focusing on legal defensibility and full compliance
with CEQA.
4. All aspects of RBF Consulting's proposal, including costs, have been determined
independently, without consultation with any other prospective Consultant or competitors for
the purpose of restricting competition.
5. All declarations in RBF Consulting's proposal and attachments are true and constitutes a
warranty, the falsity of which shall entitle the City to pursue any remedy by law.
JN 10- 107353 • 1 • August 2, 2010
�E SEA( B City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
6< Environmental Compliance Documentation
r
�Cf R 2119� ��O
NTY. gyp`
6. The RBF Consulting team agrees that all aspects of the City's RFP and this February 16,
2010 proposal by RBF Consulting is binding, if the proposal is selected and a contract is
awarded.
7. The RBF Consulting team agrees to provide the City of Seal Beach with any other
information that the City determines to be necessary for an accurate determination of the
Consultant's ability to perform services as proposed.
8. If RBF Consulting is selected for this and all other assignments with the City, RBF Consulting
will comply with all applicable rules, laws and regulations.
9. RBF has a dedicated team whom maintains the in -house Library/Filing Management System.
All project related files are categorized and independently filed to preserve the integrity of the
Administrative Record. Documentation of all project transactions are kept in a central file
readily accessible to project team members. Any public records act or Administrative Record
requests are coordinated with the Lead Agency, and implemented per applicable laws and
regulations.
1.3 UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROJECT
It is RBF's understanding that the City of Seal Beach is seeking to retain a consultant to prepare and
process environmental compliance documentation for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment, in
accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The project applicant is seeking
to amend the 1996 Specific Plan, which allows a maximum 150 -room hotel and banquet facilities on
3.2 acres and arks and open space on 7.4 acres of the 10.6 -acre site, located south of Marina Drive
and west of 1 Street. The proposed amendment would allow up to 55 single - family residents on 5.3
acres and 5.3 acres of open space and parks. The Project would be built out under the City's RMD
(Residential Medium Density) zoning standards.
The proposed Amendment is expected to have great interest and scrutiny throughout the community.
The City of Seal Beach has emphasized the need for a complete and diligent environmental review
work program which provides a clear understanding of environmental issues, level of significance of
impacts and mitigation to reduce potential affects. Our work program involves a methodical step -by-
step approach in order to validate the environmental clearance review and will result in full
compliance with CEQA. The initial environmental review Phase will involve Project Scoping and
documentation through an Initial Study in order to confirm the potential for impacts and level of
significance. Our findings will be presented to City Staff and a determination will be rendered for
processing either an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND).
Our work program provides both CEQA compliance options. The following summarizes the range of
potential environmental requiring review:
• Aesthetics/Viewshed. The site's prominent location in the coastal area and the proximity of
existing residents, as well as public areas (adjacent roadways, pathways, River's End public
access, etc.) will require review of viewshed impacts, building massing affects and overall
view character considerations.
• Air Quality: Air emissions resulting from project construction and buildout will be studied.
The project's mobile and area source emissions will be evaluated in accordance with the
South Coast Air Quality Management District's modeling criteria.
JN 10- 107353 • 2 • August 2, 2010
D E SEAL B
�i P0R4jf Fq�s
°� 62
F. R 21
� VY. gyp`
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Docu mentation
• Biological Resources: Although there are no apparent biological resource issues of
concern on -site, there is a lack of data /references to validate conditions. The RBF team
recommends a review to verify flora and fauna conditions.
• Climate Change Analysis: RBF will conduct a greenhouse gas emissions analysis and a
review of consistency with the State's goals for reducing emissions.
• Cultural Resources: Similar to biological resources, there is a lack of data/references for
cultural resources. Given the site's vacant condition and the history and sensitivity of cultural
resource conditions in Seal Beach, the RBF team recommends a cultural resources
evaluation of the site, which will include records review and on -site reconnaissance.
• Drainage and Water Quality. Although development plans are not available, the RBF team
will evaluate potential alterations to on- and off -site drainage facilities and water quality
impacts.
• Geology and Soils: Our preliminary review has concluded that based upon documented
conditions in the area, potential issues related to lateral spreading, seismicity and
liquefaction may occur on -site. Our work program has identified the need for more extensive
geotechnical review and will require further discussions with City Staff.
• Jurisdictional Wetland Delineation: Similar to biological and cultural resources, there is a
lack of data/references regarding any potential for jurisdictional wetlands on -site. The RBF
team will conduct a literature review and site reconnaissance in accordance with standards
set forth by the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE).
• Land Use and Relevant Planning. Amendments to both the Specific Plan and
Redevelopment Plan are proposed. Consistency with existing policies, standards and overall
compatibility of the project with existing residents, recreational uses and planned
uses /improvements in the local area will be studied.
• Noise: Project noise impacts to sensitive uses (residents, recreational /beach areas) in close
proximity to the project area will be addressed. Impacts along local roadways and to
sensitive receptors (schools, parks, etc.) in the vicinity will be analyzed.
• Parks, Recreation and Open Space: The analysis will need to further clarify the visitor
serving recreational use component of the project. Building footprint and the project's intent
for open space and parks requires review. Project affects with regard to parkland needs
throughout the community will be studied.
• Public Services and Utilities: The ability of existing public services, utilities and
infrastructure to support on -site development and increased demand will require further
analysis.
JN 10- 107353 • 3 • August 2, 2010
OE SEA( City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
a
Environmental Compliance Documentation
y Cf R27t \ti
INIX gyp`
Traffic, Circulation and Parking: On- and off -site construction and buildout affects to
traffic level of service, turning movements, parking, circulation and affects /improvements to
nearby and regional roadway facilities require further study. RBF will provide a peer review
of the applicant's traffic and circulation study. Key focuses of review include site access,
affects to roadways in the adjacent neighborhood, affects to facilities in Long Beach and to
nearby Pacific Coast Highway.
• Growth/Population and Housing: The potential for the Project to induce growth will be
evaluated in accordance with local and regional projections. The status of the City s Housing
Element and overall review of housing conditions will be included.
Alternatives: Given the interests and concern for development of the project site, there is a
need for a comprehensive review of alternatives. The range may include the existing 1996
Plan, a more extensive open space component, a project reduction alternative and a no
project alternative. A comparative analysis of impacts for each alternative with the proposed
project will be conducted. A matrix will be utilized to assist the reader when evaluating
impacts.
The scale of the Project, as well as its geographical location will require careful consideration of the
analysis and conclusions of the environmental review. Careful consideration is necessary for on -site
conditions and compatibility of the project with the surrounding community. RBF will serve as an
extension of staff to assure that the entire CEQA process is conducted in a comprehensive manner,
which will include consideration of recent CEQA legislation and requirements of reviewing agencies.
The RBF project management team led by Mr. Glenn Lajoie, AICP, and Mr. Eddie Torres, INCE, will
provide regular and consistent communications and updates to staff on the progression of the work
program and status of the analysis.
The RBF Team will be viewed as an integral component in the project review and will participate in
meetings with staff and public hearings, as required by the City. The RBF Team will have the
responsibility of leading the public participation program for the environmental review, including
public scoping meetings and throughout the public hearing process for certification in accordance
with CEQA. The RBF Team will assist decision makers and the public in understanding the analysis,
conclusions of the environmental review and guide the entire CEQA review process. RBF has
served in this role with a countless number of agencies and with a wide range of projects of great
interest to communities.
JN 10- 107353 • 4 • August 2, 2010
�E SEA( d
r yc � `y \t`oQ
'NTY gyp`
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Documentation
Ilo SCOPE OF WORK
The following Scope of Work has been prepared based upon information received by RBF
Consulting. The cost estimate, which is itemized according to task and issue, is included in Section
IX of this proposal.
1.0 PROJECT SCOPING
1.1 PROJECT KICK -OFF AND PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
The environmental review work program will be initiated with a kick -off meeting with City Staff to
discuss the project in greater detail. This initial meeting is vital to the success of the CEQA process
and will be a key milestone in order to confirm the parameters of the analysis, proposed buildout
conditions, scheduling and overall communications. Prior to the kick -off, RBF will distribute a kick -off
meeting agenda and detailed memorandum, which will identify information needs. Based upon the
detailed project information obtained at the project kick -off meeting, RBF will draft a preliminary
project description for review and approval by City Staff.
1.2 RESEARCH AND INVESTIGATION
RBF will obtain and review available referenced data for the project area, including policy
documentation from the City of Seal Beach, County of Orange, State and Federal agencies, the
Southern California Association of Governments and all other agencies which maybe affected by the
Project. This information, along with environmental data and information available from the City and
other nearby jurisdictions, will become part of the foundation of the environmental review and will be
reviewed and incorporated into the analysis, as deemed appropriate. This task includes a visit to the
project area, which will include a detailed photographic recording of on- and off -site conditions.
1.3 PREPARATION OF THE INITIAL STUDY
The Initial Study will include detailed explanations of all checklist determinations and discussions of
potential environmental impacts. The analysis will be prepared in accordance with Public Resources
Code Section 21080(c) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15070. The Initial Study will be structured in
the same format as Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. The Initial Study will contain a description
of the Project, the Project location, and a description of the environmental setting. The main body of
the document will consist of a City- approved environmental checklist and an accompanying
environmental analysis. This section will denote the appropriate CEQA action based upon the
Environmental Checklist/Environmental Analysis.
The Project will be analyzed for the potential to create significant environmental impacts in the areas
specified on the City's approved environmental checklist. The Initial Study will also include
mandatory findings of significance, long -term versus short-term goals, cumulative impacts, and direct
and indirect impacts upon human beings.
JN 10- 107353 • 5 • August 2, 2010
�E SEA( B
9- v
y
82
/NTY. Cp
1.4 INITIAL STUDY FINDINGS AND MEETING WITH CITY STAFF
Once the Initial Study is completed, the RBF team will meet with City officials to review and discuss
the findings of the Initial Study review. Based upon the results of consultations and, as directed by
City officials, the RBF team will proceed forward and initiate CEQA compliance documentation and
the processing of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) in
accordance with either Optional Task 3.0 or 9.0.
2.0 FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
RBF will conduct a technical environmental review of the proposed project to document baseline
conditions, conduct project and cumulative impact evaluations, and determine the level of mitigation
for each environmental issue that could potentially lead to a significant environmental impact. Based
on consultations with City Staff, RBF assumes that technical studies, development concepts, and
baseline evaluations will not be provided by the Applicant team. Upon completion of the
environmental evaluated discussed below, RBF will consult with City staff and incorporate the
findings into the environmental documentation.
2.1 AESTHETICS /LIGHT AND GLARE
The visual resource analysis will characterize the existing aesthetic environment and visual
resources for the site. The analysis will thoroughly discuss the existing aesthetic environment and
visual resources, including a discussion of views from surrounding residential areas and recreational
resource areas. Visual impacts from construction activities, as well as long -term effects (view
blockage, light/glare, etc.) will be discussed and evaluated.
Existinq Conditions This section will characterize the existing aesthetic environment and visual
resources for the site, including a discussion of views within the site and views from surrounding
areas. Particular views to be analyzed include those from the residences along 1 st Street and Marina
Drive. Color site photographs will be provided to illustrate on -site and surrounding views.
Construction - Related Impacts Short-term construction impacts will be studied. Potential impacts to
sensitive uses as a result of staging areas and visible earthwork activities will be addressed. Also,
construction related haul trucks and activities will be analyzed, if necessary.
View Blockage Residential uses to the east currently have views of the Pacific Ocean and the Los
Alamitos Bay area. The analysis will consider the potential for view blockage as a result of potential
development within the Specific Plan area. Other view impacts from sensitive uses within 0.5 mile
will also be considered.
A viewshed analysis will be performed to determine potential areas that future development within
the Specific Plan area would be visible from (up to a Y2 -mile radius). This scope assumes that RBF
will create a three - dimensional model of potential on -site structures with a maximum building height
of 25 -to 35 -feet, as permitted by the proposed Specific Plan Amendment. The data for the 0.5 -mile
viewshed map will be created using Geographic Information System (GIS) technology and will
include Digital Surface Model (DSM) data, which takes into account view blockage resulting from
existing structures and vegetation. When the viewshed is completed, each cell within the viewshed
will be given colored value to represent areas that can view the Specific Plan area versus areas that
cannot.
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Documentation
JN 10- 107353 • 6 • August 2, 2010
Po City of Seal Beach
* * Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
.; Environmental Compliance Documentation
yCF n it
INTY. cP`
Photosimulations RBF will utilize the viewshed analysis to select the Key Views for the proposed
Specific Plan, in consultation with City staff. Professional photographs will be taken from multiple
locations with a Fuji GX617 Panoramic camera, providing a 2.25 x 6 inch film transparency. Backup
shots will be taken using a Nikon D1X digital camera. RBF will provide the City with the preliminary
photographs, at which time the City will comment and approve up to three Key View photographs,
which will then be simulated for the project.
This scope assumes that the photosimulations will illustrate the general massing and heights of
potential structures within the Specific Plan area. Site topography, paving, and landscaping will be
modeled as masses. Small details such as curb and gutter, drainage swales, and fences will not be
included. All objects in the model will be assigned to color to replicate the actual material color. The
rendered subject will then be superimposed into the photograph utilizing masking techniques that
blend the two together seamlessly.
Character /Quality Analysis The analysis will consider the potential for the modification of the
surrounding character /quality. The compatibility of the proposed land uses, building heights and
possible building materials, as compared to the surrounding area, will be studied.
RBF will incorporate and address the architectural design guidelines for proposed development.
Potential visual impacts from the proposed setback requirements and building heights will be
reviewed, and buffering /architectural treatments will be recommended if necessary.
Light and Glare Analysis RBF will address the potential for significant impacts to be generated by
the introduction of light and glare associated with the development of the Specific Plan Amendment.
This analysis will include a light and glare impact discussion on neighboring sensitive uses, from
building lighting, vehicle headlights, parking lots, etc. RBF will also recommend mitigation measures,
if necessary, to reduce potential light and glare impacts to the maximum extent possible.
2.2 AIR QUALITY
Air quality is often a potentially significant impact for similar type projects in Southern California.
RBF's air quality staff will provide a thorough and complete assessment of the Project's air quality
impacts. The proposed Project would result in construction - related and operational- related emissions
of air pollutants. In recognition of the need to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the project's
impacts on air quality, RBF's Air Quality Analysis will quantify project emissions and identify
mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant air quality impacts to the extent feasible. RBF's
analysis will primarily follow guidance contained in the South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) CEQA Air Quality Handbook. A detailed discussion of RBF's scope of work for the air
quality study is provided below.
Climate. Meteorology, and Ambient Conditions The project site is within the South Coast Air Basin
(Basin), which is under the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD). Baseline and project setting meteorological
data developed by the California Air Resources Board (CARE) will be utilized for the description of
existing ambient air quality. Air quality data from the nearest air quality monitoring stations will be
included to highlight existing air quality local to the proposed project site. Other sources such as
regulatory documents, professional publications, and RBF experience in the project area will
supplement background information.
JN 10- 107353 • 7 • August 2, 2010
DE SEA( 9
y Cf
R27
IT
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Documentation
Standards and Conditions A summary of current air quality management efforts will be provided. A
summary of the relevant policies, rules, and regulations from the United States Environmental
protection Agency (EPA), CARB (i.e., California Clean Air Act, Air Quality Attainment Plans, etc.),
and the SCAQMD will also be provided.
Sensitive Receptors An overview of the nature and location of existing sensitive receptors will be
provided. The sensitive receptors would include, but not be limited to the residences along Marina
Avenue and 1" Street, parks (i.e., Rivers End area, Marina Community Park, Alamitos Park),
hospitals, and schools.
Construction - Related Emissions Based upon the development guidelines set forth in the Amended
Specific Plan, RBF will develop a set of assumptions for quantifying short-term construction related
emissions. Fugitive dust emissions from construction activities will be quantified using
URBEMIS2007. The analysis will estimate equipment exhaust emissions utilizing the latest emission
factors as prescribed by CARB and the EMFAC2007 and OFFROADS2007 models. RBF will also
qualitatively discuss naturally occurring asbestos impacts.
Loner -Term Emissions Based upon trip generation data contained in the Traffic Impact Analysis,
RBF will quantify mobile source emissions and provide a comparison to the SCAQMD thresholds of
significance. Area source assumptions will be derived from land use data contained in the Amended
Specific Plan. The emissions will be quantitatively derived utilizing the EMFAC2007 and
URBEMIS2007 models.
Project consistency with regional air quality plans will be evaluated, including the 2007 Air Quality
Management Plan for the South Coast Air Basin (2007 AQMP). Additionally, the analysis will
evaluate whether the applicable land use and transportation control measures from the 2007 AQMP
have been included in the project design. The consistency analysis will determine if the project
would cause or contribute to a violation of an ambient air quality standard.
Should the project traffic warrant Carbon Monoxide Hotspot modeling, RBF will model intersections
utilizing the BREEZE ROADS model. The analysis will be consistent with the Transportation Project -
Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol, prepared by the Institute of Transportation Studies at the University
of California, Davis.
Localized Emissions Consistent with the SCAQMD environmental justice program and Localized
Significance Threshold (LST) methodologies, RBF will identify impacts using SCAQMD's mass daily
thresholds to identify localized emissions impacts. RBF will identify mitigation measures, if
necessary, to reduce emissions to less than significant levels.
2.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
RBF has retained Harmsworth Associates (HWA) Environmental Consultants to conduct the
biological resources review for the Specific Plan project area. HWA will conduct a review of
sensitive species with potential for occurrence within the project area, based on review of relevant
reports, the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), and other pertinent literature. Where
necessary, appropriate resource agencies, including California Department of Fish and Game
(CDFG) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), will be contacted regarding special- status
wildlife species with potential to occur in the project vicinity. In addition, resource conservation
organizations such as the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) and local County of Orange -
approved plant and wildlife biological groups will be consulted, as appropriate. Information obtained
JN 10- 107353 • 8 • ' August 2, 2010
of SEA( City of Seal Beach
P0N4jf E9�= Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
t
Env ironmental Compliance Documentation
p AJ ;
21 As h \��@
IHrr. a�
from the review of existing literature and discussions with resource experts will be used to identify
issues of biological concern within the project site and, if necessary, focus any subsequent field
survey efforts.
Field Surveys Field surveys by qualified biologists will include up -to -date vegetation mapping and
full floristic surveys to document the plant species present onsite. Based on site photographs
reviewed by HWA, it is anticipated that there will be no need for formal protocol surveys for any
special- status plant or wildlife species; however, if suitable habitat exists on -site for any special
status plant or wildlife species then focused surveys may be required to satisfy agency requirements
during the CEQA review process. Field surveys by qualified biologists will include up -to -date wildlife
surveys and habitat assessments. Should any regulatory agencies require additional focused
protocol surveys for special- status species, HWA will notify the City immediately to determine the
preferred course of action.
Report Preparation The results and the analysis, surreys, and recommendations will be compiled
into a Biological Constraints Report. Information gathered during the literature review and
subsequent surveys will be described, including major plant communities, wildlife resources, and
special- status species of the project site. In addition, a detailed discussion of key Federal, State,
and local regulations and policies associated with protection of biological resources of the project
site will be included, as well as brief discussions of impacts and recommended mitigation.
2.4 CLIMATE CHANGE ANALYSIS
RBF's climate change experts are at the forefront in developing sound scientific regulatory
assessments and strategies within the rapidly changing regulatory environment. As the climate
change analytical methodologies evolve, RBF continues to offer its Clients /Agencies the highest
quality analytical, policy, and business management services. RBF has developed proprietary
models for quantifying and analyzing greenhouse gases (GHG) from a variety of direct and indirect
sources including construction, vehicular traffic, electricity consumption, water conveyance, and
sewage treatment. RBF's analyses recommend innovative greenhouse gas /air pollutant reduction
methods during the construction and operation of a project, conduct advanced air dispersion
modeling, evaluate the potential impacts of air pollutants on surrounding areas, investigate the use
of renewable energy sources /energy efficient products, and quantify the benefits of resource
conservation (i.e., electricity usage, recycling, etc.). The following outlines RBF's Climate Change
Analysis for the proposed project:
Methodology and Approach RBF will utilize the California Air Pollution Control Officers (CAPCOA)
CEQA and Climate Change White Paper (White Paper) (January 2008) and CARB's Climate Change
Proposed Scoping Plan ( Scoping Plan) (October 2008) to provide background information on the
effects of climate change. As there are not any currently adopted thresholds, RBF will utilize the
performance standards and reduction percentages specific in the Global Warming Solutions Act
(Assembly Bill 32, adopted 2006).
Emissions Inventory RBF will review the land use data associated with the proposed plan. Based
on this review, and the data produced through the Traffic Impact Assessment, RBF will prepare an
inventory of the GHG emissions (i.e., nitrous oxide, methane, and carbon dioxide) from both direct
and indirect sources. The emissions inventory will be compiled consistent with the methodology
prescribed by CARB in the Local Government Operations Protocol for the Quantification and
Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories (dated September 28, 2008).
JN 10- 107353 • 9 • August 2, 2010
E. SEA( B
a
� �bZ
a
CEN 27
NTY.
Indirect Impacts In response to Executive Order S -13 -08 (2009 California Adaptation Strategy),
RBF will identify and analyze the indirect impacts to the project from anticipated climate change.
Such impacts include rising sea levels, public health threat caused by higher temperatures and more
smog, damage to agriculture, habitat modification and destruction, higher risk of fires, and increased
demand of electricity.
Energy Conservation RBF will analyze the energy implications of the project pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 21100(b)(3) and Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines. These statutes and
guidelines require an EIR to describe, where relevant, the wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary
consumption of energy caused by a project. The analysis will analyze energy consumption
associated with short -term construction activities, long -term operations, buildings, and transportation.
Additionally, the assessment of environmental impacts on energy resources will include mitigation
measures to reduce inefficient and unnecessary consumption of energy.
2.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
RBF has retained SWCA to conduct a Cultural and paleontological resources assessment for the
Specific Plan area. Based upon the sensitivity of the study area, a records search and pedestrian
survey will be conducted to document any artifacts or resources of significance. The study will be
conducted per the methodology discussed below:
Cultural Resources SWCA will conduct a California Historical Resources Information System
(CHRIS) records search of the project area and a 0.5 -mile radius around the project area at the
South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) at California State University, Fullerton. The
purpose of the CHRIS records search is to identify any previously recorded cultural resources known
to exist within or adjacent to the project area. In addition to the archaeological inventory records and
reports, an examination will be made of historic maps, the National Register of Historic Places, the
California Inventory of Historical Resources, and the listing of California Historical Landmarks. The
records search will also reveal the nature and extent of any cultural resources work previously
conducted within the project area, as well as the presence of previously recorded cultural resources
within or near the project area. In addition, SWCA will review any local registers to identify any locally
designated landmarks that may be located within or near the project area. SWCA will contact the
California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for a review of their Sacred Lands File.
The NAHC will provide a list of Native American groups and /or individuals that they believe should be
contacted for additional information. SWCA will prepare and mail a letter to each of the NAHC- listed
contacts, requesting notification if they know of any Native American cultural resources within or
immediately adjacent to the project area.
Upon completion of the CHRIS records search, SWCA will conduct a Phase I intensive pedestrian
surrey of the entire 10.6 -acre project area. SWCA archaeologists will conduct the survey using
pedestrian transects spaced at maximum intervals of 10 meters. For the purposes of this proposal
and cost estimate, SWCA assumes that the survey will be negative for cultural resources (i.e., no
previously unrecorded prehistoric or historic resources will be encountered and no previously
recorded resources will require updates). Any previously unrecorded cultural resources identified
during the survey would require a change order for formal recordation. No testing or excavation will
be conducted, nor will any artifacts, samples, or specimens be collected during the surrey.
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compli Documentation
JN 10- 107353 • 10 • ' August 2, 2010
of SEA1 6 City of Seal Beach
P F Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
_ Environ C Documentation
y R Q Q
G ptt�
Nrr, LP`
SWCA will prepare a cultural resources technical report that will document the results of the study
and provide management recommendations for resources located within the project area. The report
will meet the Secretary of Interior's Standards and Guidelines and will follow the Office of Historic
Preservation's Archaeological Resource Management Reports: Recommended Contents and Format
(ARMR) guidelines. The report will include maps depicting the area surveyed forcultural resources. If
the locations of sensitive archaeological sites or Native American cultural resources depicted or
described in the report, it will be considered confidential; the report may not be distributed to the
public. In order to protect these sensitive resources, the confidential technical report shall be made
available only to qualified cultural resources personnel and project management personnel on a
"need to know" basis.
Paleontological Resources SWCA will examine records maintained by the Natural History Museum
of Los Angeles County (LRCM) in order to determine whether or not previously recorded
paleontological resources occur within the project area and vicinity. Published and unpublished
literature and geologic maps will be reviewed in order to thoroughly assess the paleontological
resource potential of the project area. Using the results of the geologic map search, locality searches
and literature review, the paleontological resource potential (sensitivity) of all geologic units within
the project area will be evaluated and analyzed in accordance with professional standards set forth
by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) and in accordance with the requirements of CEQA.
SWCA will prepare a paleontological resources technical report documenting the results of the
paleontological study. The report will describe the geologic units within the project area and vicinity in
terms of their paleontological content and sensitivity, present the results of the paleontological
sensitivity analysis, summarize and discuss any previously recorded fossil localities within the project
area; discuss the significance of previously recorded localities within the project area and elsewhere
in the same geologic units; discuss the paleontological requirements of the project and compliance
with the requirements of all applicable regulatory frameworks; and present paleontological resource
mitigation recommendations.
2.6 DRAINAGE/WATER QUALITY
The RBF team will review existing hydrology and drainage data for the site area in order to identify
any existing drainage and water quality issues. The analysis will address any changes in absorption
rates, drainage patterns, storm drain improvement and downstream affects. RBF will also evaluate
water quality conditions and identify National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
techniques /structures in accordance with local, State and Federal requirements. The potential for
the project description to degrade water quality, interfere with groundwater recharge or expose
people to water related hazards will be identified. RBF's in -house Drainage/Water Quality Division
will address surface hydrology and drainage, associated with project development, in orderto satisfy
CEQA requirements for review of runoff water quantity, drainage infrastructure and surface water
quality. The following tasks are inclusive of the Drainage and Water Quality Study:
Review and Research Existing Reports RBF will provide research and investigation to compile
existing literature and reports previously prepared regarding the tributary watershed and drainage
systems impacting the Specific Plan project area. Research will include a review of drainage master
plans and other available data. This task also includes an initial discussion with City staff regarding
the specific drainage requirements for the project and specific criteria for this area.
Watershed Boundary Delineation RBF will prepare analysis of the existing watershed and drainage
patterns associated with the proposed project boundary. The local watershed sub - boundaries for the
JN 10- 107353 • 11 • August 2, 2010
�E SEA! 9
v 2
9s�
y Gf A21
NTV. Gp�
area tributary to the project site will be determined in order to evaluate (1) the watershed area and
(2) existing facility requirements. RBF will measure the drainage areas and the watershed
parameters associated with the subareas for the analysis.
Existing Hydrologic Conditions Analysis RBF will prepare preliminary estimate peak runoff rates
associated with the existing surface hydrology for area. The tributary off -site areas will be determined
utilizing documents obtained from the City. In addition the on -site drainage boundaries and subareas
will be delineated, and results of the hydrology analysis will be summarized on a hydrology map.
Proposed Development Hydrolog - RBF will prepare preliminary developed condition surface
hydrology analysis for the project area based upon County hydrology criteria and methodology to
quantify the expected runoff rates. RBF will prepare a single rational hydrology analysis for a single
proposed specific plan for the property. RBF will provide a qualitative analysis of the hydrologic and
hydraulic impacts adjacent property owners.
Conceptual Water Quality Control Program An evaluation will be performed to qualitatively describe
post - development pollutant loadings of the urban runoff. Pre- and post - development conditions will
be compared to assess project impacts of non -point source pollutants. Best Management Practices
(BMP's) will be identified which can mitigate water quality concerns as part of a conceptual program
for the specific plan area.
Technical Report Preparation RBF will prepare a written report summarizing the drainage
assessment for the project. Report shall include discussions reviewing the drainage constraints, off -
site and on -site hydrology, flooding impacts and mitigation, flood protection requirements, and off -site
drainage impacts, and water quality impacts. A technical appendix will be prepared which includes
all hydrologic and hydraulic analysis for the site, and all reference documents.
2.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Based on review of preliminary geotechnical conditions for the site, the property contains several
features that are anticipated to require engineering and design solutions that would need to be
incorporated into the site and building plans for the Project. Specifically, although no recorded faults
are present on the site, the property is within a seismically active area and contains soils with
expansion characteristics that would require replacement fill. Also, shallow groundwater conditions
require the use of special drainage techniques and consideration during grading. RBF has retained
Geologist D. Scott Magorien to analyze the stability of the soils and geology in order to support the
project and its associated infrastructure. The study will also address the potential for lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse, seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction,
strong seismic ground shaking, expansive soils, and soil erosion. The following tasks are inclusive
of the Geotechnical Study:
Literature Review An in -depth review of existing published and unpublished geologic /geotechnical
reports will be conducted, as well as other relevant geotechnical /geologic reports on file with the City.
Background information pertaining to the construction of the San Gabriel River Channel (Channel)
will be researched. Historic stereo - paired, black and white aerial photographs will be reviewed to
determine the changes to the pattern of flow at the mouth of the Channel. A review of published
reports and geologic maps prepared by the U.S. and California Geological Surreys (USGS and CGS)
will also be conducted, as well as any previous consultant's reports in the vicinity of the project area.
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Docume ntation
JN 10- 107353 • 12 • August 2, 2010
�E SIM BF
��UNiY, Gp�
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environm Compliance Documentation
Site Reconnaissance A site review will be conducted in order to preliminarily evaluate the nature
and extent of liquefaction -prone soils, and other secondary seismic hazards (i.e., soil settlement and
lateral spread), as well as the long -term settlement potential of the soils beneath the project area.
The following work will be conducted during the site reconnaissance:
• Perform five (5), 75- foot -deep Cone Penetration Test (CPT) soundings.
• Drill, sample and log two (2), 75 -foot deep rotary-wash borings.
• Laboratory testing of the soil samples obtained from the drilling, which would include
consolidation tests (5), grain size with hydrometer (5), moisture density (40 + / -), direct shear
testing (2).
• Geotechnical evaluation of all data compiled and slope stability analyses of the adjacent
Channel wall.
Report Preparation The results of the literature, soil samples, and findings will be summarized in a
technical report. The overall format of the report will discuss the existing conditions, geologic/
geotechnical hazards, constraints, and general mitigation concepts forthe proposed development. It
is anticipated that the data and analyses generated by this study will be sufficient to define impacts
and mitigation measures pursuant to CEQA and is not intended for design and construction
purposes.
2.8 GROWTH /POPULATION AND HOUSING
RBF will provide a project specific analysis of potential growth- inducing impacts pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15126(8). The basis for analysis will be population and housing data from the
City of Seal Beach, California Department of Finance, and U.S. Census. The section will consider
housing conditions and projections for the area. It is acknowledged that the City does not have a
certified Housing Element, which will be considered and addressed in the analysis. The section will
discuss ways in which the proposed project could foster economic or population growth, or the
construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. The
analysis addresses growth- inducing impacts in terms of whether the project influences the rate,
location, and the amount of growth. Growth - inducing impacts are assessed based on the project's
consistency with adopted /proposed plans that have addressed growth management from a local and
regional standpoint. Potential growth- inducing impacts from the proposed development will be
analyzed as they relate to population, housing and employment factors.
2.9 JURISDICTIONAL WETLAND DELINEATION
Currently, the site is undeveloped, and may have the potential to contain wetlands as defined by the
Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) or California Coastal Commission. A determination of potential
waters /wetlands will be conducted utilizing the following methodology:
Literature Review Prior to visiting the project site, RBF Regulatory staff will conduct a thorough
literature review of relevant information that supports the site reconnaissance and report preparation.
Sources reviewed are anticipated to include topographic maps, soil surveys, historic and current
aerial photography, flood maps, hydrology /climate information and watershed data.
JN 10- 107353 • 13 • August 2, 2010
of SEA! a City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
- Environmental Compliance Documentation
y . v ii
y �fA 27
AUNTY. �p
Site Reconnaissance RBF will conduct a site reconnaissance to perform a delineation that will
determine jurisdictional "waters of the United States" and "waters of the State" (including wetlands),
located within the boundaries of the project site. RBF's delineation methodology is in compliance
with the most recent U.S. Supreme Court decision, Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. United
States, which resulted in changes to ACOE jurisdictional authority after June 2007. The delineation
will result in:
A determination of potential Coastal waters /wetlands using the Cowardin classification
system. This classification system defines a wetland by the presence of the proper hydrology
and either the presence of hydric soils or hydrophytic vegetation.
A determination of the ACOE ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and indicate the existence
of any three (3) parameter wetlands on -site. The actual presence or absence of wetlands
on -site will be verified through the determination of the presence of hydrologic conditions,
hydrophytic vegetation, and hydric soils pursuant to the September 2008 Regional
Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Arid West Region
(Version 2.0). A significant nexus test is excluded from this scope of work; therefore,
findings will be based on the assumption that a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination will
be pursued with the ACOE.
• The CDFG's jurisdiction being identified via the top of bank of the on -site streambed or to the
outer drip line of riparian vegetation (if present) pursuant to the 1994 CDFG Field Guide to
Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements.
• In cases where isolated and /or Rapanos conditions are present, the delineation will identify
areas under the jurisdiction of the Regional Board.
Findings Once RBF conducts a site visit and the project site baseline information is obtained, RBF
will prepare a comprehensive written report discussing on -site jurisdictional areas. The delineation
will consist of the following Sections: 1) Introduction and Purpose; 2) Summary of Regulations; 3)
Methodology; 4) Literature Review; 5) Site Conditions; 6) Findings 7) Regulatory Approval Process;
8) References; and 9) Appendices.
Pursuant to agency requirements, the delineation report will include a maximum of five (5) exhibits to
enhance the written text and clarify the Project, jurisdictional areas, and project impacts. This task
includes time for Geographic Information Systems (GIS) analysis associated with the delineation
map. The delineation map will be a scale of 1 "= 300' or greater and will consist of an aerial
photograph. Drainages will be overlain on the aerial photograph and each agency's jurisdiction will
be identified by width and length.
2.10 LAND USE AND RELEVENT PLANNING
The proposed project would require an amendment to the original 1996 Plan and would also amend
the Riverfront Redevelopment Plan. The applicant has not submitted a Development Plan and build -
out of the project would be in accordance with the City's Residential Medium Density Zoning
standards. The focus of this section is to conduct a consistency review with existing policies,
standards and to review overall land use compatibility of the project with adjacent residents,
recreational uses and planned uses /improvements in the local area.
JN 10- 107353 • 14 • August 2, 2010
�E SEA( B
CFA 21 t
�DUNTY. G ay\
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Comp liance Documentation
The consistency review will focus on General Plan policies and the standards /provisions set forth in
the City's Zoning Code. This portion of the review will include any proposed modification to
development and design standards. The interface of the project with nearby uses will be studied.
The project is anticipated to be subject to compliance with the Coastal Act Section 30600(c), which
requires that a coastal development permit be obtained from the California Coastal Commission. As
the City does not have a certified Local Coastal Program (LCP) the Coastal Commission is
responsible for reviewing project compliance with the Coastal Act. Thus, RBF will conduct a
consistency review with Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act. In addition, the regional planning review will
include consistency with the SCAG Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide policies.
2.11 NOISE
Development of the Specific Plan would increase the level of activity in the area. Accordingly, the
proposed project would have the potential to create noise and vibration impacts that could adversely
affect surrounding land uses. RBF will prepare a Noise Analysis will consist of.
Existing Conditions RBF will conduct a site visit along the project site and at adjacent land uses.
During the site visit, RBF will conduct short-term noise level measurements along the project area.
Noise monitoring equipment will consist of a Briiel & Kjaer model 2250 sound level meter (SLM)
equipped with BrQel & Kjaer pre - polarized freefield microphone. The results of the noise
measurements will be post - processed and graphically illustrated with the BrQel & Kjaer Noise
Explorer software. The noise monitoring survey will be conducted at up to five separate locations to
establish baseline noise levels in the project area. Noise recording lengths are anticipated to require
approximately 10 minutes at each location. The noise measurements will evaluate noise exposure
due to traffic while accounting for local topography, shielding from existing structures, and variations
in travel speed.
Construction- Related Noise and Vibration Based upon the development guidelines set forth in the
Amended Specific Plan, RBF will develop a set of assumptions for quantifying short-term
construction related noise. The construction noise impacts will be evaluated in terms of maximum
levels (L and hourly equivalent continuous noise levels (L and the frequency of occurrence at
the adjacent residential uses. The analysis will be based on Section 7.15.025 of the City's Noise
Ordinance. A review of City Council Policy 600 -11 will also be conducted, which established
benchmarks for continuous and intermittent short-term noise sources.
Stationary Noise Sources The effects of stationary noise sources will be evaluated based on local
land use compatibility standards. Such noise sources are typically attributed to mechanical
equipment and parking areas. Compliance with applicable noise standards will be evaluated, with
recommended mitigation measures included where appropriate.
Traffic Noise The proposed project is anticipated to generate new vehicular traffic trips from future
growth. Noise impacts from vehicular traffic will be assessed using the U.S. Federal Highway Traffic
Noise Prediction Models (FHWA -RD -77 -108 and TNM 2.5). Model input data will include average
daily traffic volumes, day /night percentages of autos, medium and heavy trucks, vehicle speeds,
ground attenuation factors, and roadway widths. Noise impacts related to the potential site
ingress /egress point(s) will be evaluated to determine noise impacts to the residences along 1st
Street.
JN 10- 107353 • 15 • August 2, 2010
DE SEA( 6
AUNTY, �P`
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Documentation
2.12 PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE
Given the concerns and need for parks and recreation facilities in the community and considerations
for open space onsite, a focused analysis will be conducted. RBF will provide an existing conditions
analysis of citywide active and passive recreational facilities (i.e., parks, trails, etc.). The analysis
will address potential impacts to existing facilities as well as project compliance with existing
programs, standards and provisions applicable to the subject site. The project's building footprint
and intent for open space and parks will be studied. The analysis will clarify the visitor serving
recreational component of the project. The evaluation will conclude significance of any impacts and
recommendations for mitigation to reduce significance.
2.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
RBF will contact potentially affected agencies to confirm relevant existing conditions, project impacts
and recommended mitigation measures. The discussion will focus on the potential alteration of
existing facilities, extension or expansion of new facilities and the increased demand on services
based on the proposed land uses. RBF will evaluate the ability of the project to receive adequate
service based on applicable City and County standards and, where adequate services are not
available, will identify the effects of inadequate service and recommended mitigation measures.
Issues discussed include:
Public Services:
Solid Waste Solid waste generation resulting from the proposed uses may impact landfill
capacities. The analysis will establish baseline projections for solid waste, including composting
and recycling for both construction and operation of the project. Project's compliance with AB
939 will also be addressed.
Fire. The overall need for Fire Services would potentially increase beyond existing conditions as
a result of the project. The Fire Services review will include a review of existing
services /facilities in the area, response times to the sites (which includes hazardous material
responses to emergencies), available fire flow, project impacts and required mitigation.
Police The Police Service review will focus upon response times to the site, available personnel
and overall protection services. The overall need for police protection services would increase
beyond existing conditions as a result of the project. Mitigation incorporated into the project
design, including lighting, signage and security hardware to further reduce potential crime activity
will be identified.
Schools Potential impacts to schools focusing on existing conditions, student capacities,
current enrollment and facility locations. Generation rates resulting from the project will be the
basis for the impact analysis. Mitigation measures will be provided to reduce the significance of
impacts.
JN 10- 107363 • 16 • August 2, 2010
i oE sEat e City of Seal Beach
�`t 9 �i Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Env ironmental Compliance Documentation
r
yCtrA 21
�oWX
Public Utilities:
Water Based upon technical information provided by the City, existing capacities and
deficiencies will be addressed. The on -site potable and non - potable water system conditions will
be presented. Off -site potable and non - potable water storage, pumping and transmission
facilities will be studied.
Sewer Based upon technical information provided by the City, existing capacities and
deficiencies will be addressed. Major off -site sewer conveyance, treatment and disposal will be
presented. Project generation, infrastructure connections, easement modifications and upgrades
to the existing system will be studied.
Electrical Existing facilities, project impacts, infrastructure relocation, undergrounding of
overhead lines, easements and necessary mitigation.
Telephone Existing facilities, project impacts, infrastructure relocated, undergrounding of
overhead lines, easements and necessary.
Gas Existing facilities, project impacts, infrastructure relocation, easements and necessary
mitigation.
Roadway Maintenance The proposed project may incrementally increase the maintenance of
streets, storm drains, and other below surface facilities. RBF will consult with the project team
and City Public Works Division to ascertain key concerns /impacts due to increased utilization of
area roads.
2.14 TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION
RBF's Transportation Department will conduct a two- phased peer review of the applicant's Traffic
Study. The original report will be critiqued and any follow -up revisions and /or new information will
also be evaluated. The traffic impact analysis peer review will include the following:
• Conduct a site visit and field review of surrounding circulation system to familiarize RBF staff
with traffic and transportation related conditions and issues in the project vicinity;
• Field verify study area geometry configurations and traffic signal operations utilized in the
traffic analysis;
• Examine the traffic study in accordance with City of Seal Beach City Traffic Impact Study
Guidelines;
• Review the results of the traffic analysis to confirm summary of level of significance;
• Examine potential /approved project trip generation based on a list of pending /approved
projects in the vicinity of the proposed project or an annual growth rate factor to account for
cumulative /approved projects contained in the analysis.
• Assess identified mitigation measures for feasibility and ability to eliminate or reduce impacts
to a level considered less than significant;
• Review traffic signal warrant analysis, if applicable;
JN 10- 107353 • 17 • August 2, 2010
DF SEA1 B
CAM
* #
y q 21
'NTY, gyp`
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Documentation
Evaluate the Traffic Study for compliance with the Los Angeles and Orange County
Congestion Management Program (CMP) requirements;
• Evaluate the traffic study for compliance with the Caltrans Guide for Preparation of Traffic
Impact Studies (State of California, Department of Transportation, December 2002); and
Prepare a memorandum summarizing the adequacy of the traffic impact analysis for
inclusion in an environmental document and suggest modifications as necessary.
Based upon the finalized traffic study to be prepared by the applicant's consultant, the CEQA
document will describe the existing roadway circulation in the study area, including roadway lanes,
intersection geometry and intersection control mechanisms. The existing operating level of service of
the study area circulation system will be described and documented in accordance with the Agency's
criteria and established analysis methodology. The Traffic Study is expected to forecast existing plus
Project and existing plus Project plus cumulative traffic conditions, based upon an agreed upon
buildout/horizon year. The analysis will include an evaluation of circulation, turning movement and
roadway standards for the internal Project roadways. Ingress /egress points will be evaluated.
Utilizing established performance criteria and thresholds of significance, necessary mitigation
measures will be developed to address traffic impacts.
3.0 CEQA CLEARANCE OPTION 7:
PREPARATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE DRAFT EIR
The EIR will include the Introduction and Purpose, Executive Summary and Project Description. The
Environmental Analysis section will evaluate the necessary information with respect to the existing
conditions, the potential adverse effects of Project construction and implementation (both individual
and cumulative), and measures to mitigate such effects. Environmental issues raised during the
scoping process (Notice of Preparation responses; Public Scoping mailing; and any other relevant
and valid informative sources) will also be evaluated. The environmental analysis section of the EIR
will thoroughly discuss the existing conditions for each environmental issue area; identify short-term
and long -term environmental impacts associated with the project and their levels of significance.
Feasible mitigation measures will be recommended to reduce the significance of impacts and identify
areas of unavoidable significant adverse impacts even after mitigation. The environmental review
(Task 3.8) will focus on the comprehensive review of the following topical area, as detailed in Section
2.0 of this proposal:
• Aesthetics /Light and Glare
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Climate Change analysis
• Cultural Resources
• Drainage/Water Quality
• Geology and Soils
• Growth /Population and Housing
• Jurisdictional Wetland Delineation
• Land Use and Relevant Planning
• Noise
• Parks, Recreation and Open Space
JN 10- 107353 • 18 • August 2, 2010
i pF SEA! 9 City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
* ` En Compliance Documentation
9
yCF p21
WN, gyp`
• Public Services and Utilities
• Traffic and Circulation
Based upon the analyses conducted under Task 2.0, RBF will complete the environmental review
process, respond to all comments received during the Draft EIR public review period, prepare the
mitigation monitoring program and draft the necessary Findings and possible Statement of
Overriding Considerations pursuant to Sections 15091 and 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines. The
environmental review process will result in the presentation of pertinent information associated with
Project impacts and findings to the City decision makers for determination and CEQA certification.
3.1 NOTICE OF PREPARATION
RBF will prepare, distribute and file the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the EIR. A Draft NOP will be
prepared and forwarded to City Staff for review and comment. RBF will then finalize the NOP for
distribution. The distribution of the NOP and Initial Study as an attachment will be based on a City -
approved distribution list to be provided by City staff. This task includes certified mailing to affected
agencies and interested parties. Comments received in response to the NOP will be evaluated
during the preparation of the EIR.
3.2 SLOPING MEETING
A public scoping meeting, which can also involve Federal, State or other local agencies, will be
scheduled during the NOP public review period, in order that the community can gain an
understanding of the proposed project and provide comments on environmental concerns. The
Scoping Meeting will orient the community on the CEQA review process and will be presented in a
manner which the community can gain a greater understanding of the proposal, intent of CEQA and
the key issue areas to be addressed in the EIR. RBF will provide a PowerPoint presentation handout
and presentation -size graphics to supplement the discussion. Following the presentation, the
meeting will be devoted to public participation, questions and comments. Written comment forms
will be provided for this purpose, and these comments, along with oral comments, will become a part
of the administrative record.
3.3 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
The Introduction will cite the provisions of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Seal Beach
CEQA Implementation procedures for which the proposed project is subject. This section will identify
the purpose of the study and statutory authority as well document scoping procedures, summary of
the EIR format, listing of responsible and trustee agencies and documentation incorporated by
reference.
3.4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Executive Summary will include a Project Summary, an overview of project impacts, mitigation
and levels of significance after mitigation, summary of project alternatives and areas of controversy
and issues to be resolved. The Environmental Summary will be presented in a columnar format.
JN 10- 107353 • 19 • August 2, 2010
ipE SEAL g City of Seal Beach
a` Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
r Environmental Compliance Documentation
�C`rx Zt 5� ��O
3.5 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
This section will provide a comprehensive description of thresholds of significance for each issue
area of the environmental analysis. The significance threshold criteria will be described and will
provide the basis for conclusions of significance. Primary sources to be used in identifying the
criteria include the CEQA Guidelines, local, State, Federal or other standards applicable to an impact
category.
3.6 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project Description section of the EIR will detail the project location, background and history of
the project, discretionary actions, characteristics (addressed in Task 1.1), goals and objectives,
construction program, phasing, agreements, and required permits and approvals that are required
based on available information. This section will include a summary of the Project's local
environmental setting for the project. Exhibits depicting the regional and site vicinity will be included
in this section.
3.7 CUMULATIVE PROJECTS /ANALYSIS
In accordance with Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines, the EIR will include a section providing a
detailed listing of cumulative projects and actions under consideration for the analysis. The
likelihood of occurrence and level of severity will be studied. The purpose of the section is to present
a listing and description of projects, past, present and anticipated in the reasonably foreseeable
future, even if those projects are outside of Seal Beach' jurisdiction. The potential for impact and
levels of significance are contingent upon the radius or area of interaction with the project area. RBF
will consult with City staff and other applicable local jurisdictions to define the appropriate study area
for the cumulative analysis. The cumulative analysis for each topical area will be incorporated
throughout the analysis in Section 3.8.
3.8 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
RBF will evaluate the necessary information with respect to the existing conditions, the potential
adverse effects of Project implementation (both individual and cumulative), and measures to mitigate
such effects. Environmental issues raised during the scoping process (Notice of Preparation
responses, Public Scoping Meeting, and any other relevant and valid informative sources) will also
be evaluated. The analyses will be based upon all available data, results from additional research,
and an assessment of existing technical data.
The Environmental Analysis section of the EIR will thoroughly discuss the existing conditions for
each environmental issue area, identify short-term construction and long -term operational impacts
associated with the project and their levels of significance. The impact analysis will be in a
consistent order of environmental factors as Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines (Aesthetics, Air
Quality, etc.). For each Environmental Factor Analysis Section, the Impacts Subsection will begin
with a list of all issues contained in the Initial Study. The thresholds for significance shall be
identified for every environmental issue. A brief discussion will be provided for all environmental
issues determined to be No Impact or Less Than Significant Impact in the Initial Study, explaining
why these determinations were made and that no further analysis in the EIR is warranted. The
JN 10- 107353 • 20 • August 2, 2010
of SEA1 a City of Seal Beach
�I'" fq � s Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
p a,�
Environmental Compliance Documentation
yG'F B 21 19 \`0
'NTY. gyp`
Impact Subsection will provide a detailed analysis of each issue determined to be Less Than
Significant With Mitigation incorporated or Potentially Significant Impact. For each environmental
issue, the EIR will state the level of significance of impact, and provide the analysis discussion,
mitigation measures specific to the environmental issue, and level of significance after mitigation.
3.9 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION
It is anticipated that there will be great interest and concern for development of project site and the
Alternatives section will provide the opportunity to compare and contrast optional conditions for the
property. The range of Alternatives may include the existing 1996 Plan, a more extensive open
space component, a project reduction Alternative and a No Project Alternative, as required under
CEQA. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6, RBF will provide an analysis which will
compare environmental impacts of each alternative for each impact area to the project. For each
alternative, RBF will provide both quantitative and qualitative analysis for topical areas presented in
Section 2.0 of this proposal. One important element of the Alternatives section will be an impact
matrix which will offer a comparison of the varying levels of impact of each alternative being
analyzed. This matrix will be prepared in a format to allow decision - makers a reference that will be
easily understood, while providing a calculated (where feasible), accurate comparison of each
alternative.
The alternatives section will conform to both amendments to Section 15126.6 of the CEQA
Guidelines and to recent and applicable court cases. RBF will discuss as required by the CEQA
Guidelines, the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and the reasons for rejecting or
recommending the project alternatives stated. This alternatives section will culminate with the
selection of the environmentally superior alternative in accordance with CEQA requirements.
3.10 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
To comply with the Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 (AB 32180), RBF will prepare a
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to be defined through working with City staff to identify
appropriate monitoring steps /procedures and in order to provide a basis for monitoring such
measures during and upon Project implementation.
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Checklist will serve as the foundation of the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program for the proposed Project. The Checklist indicates the mitigation
measure number as outlined in the EIR, the EIR reference page (where the measure is
documented), a list of Mitigation Measure /Conditions of Approval (in chronological order under the
appropriate topic), the Monitoring Milestone (at what agency /department responsible for verifying
implementation of the measure), Method of Verification (documentation, field checks, etc.), and a
verification section for the initials of the verifying individual date of verification, and pertinent remarks.
3.11 ADDITIONAL SECTIONS
RBF will provide additional sections in the EIR to meet CEQA and City requirements including the
following: Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes That Would Be Involved In the Proposed
Action Should It Be Implemented, Effects Found Not To Be Significant, Inventory of Unavoidable
Adverse Impacts, and Organizations and Persons Consulted /Bibliography.
JN 10- 107353 • 21 • August 2, 2010
of SEA( City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
E Compliance Documentation
9 � v6Z
Q
AUNTY. 6P
3.12 GRAPHIC EXHIBITS
The EIR will include a maximum of 35 exhibits to enhance the written text and clarify the proposed
Project environmental impacts. Using state -of -the -art computer design equipment and techniques,
our in -house graphic design team will create professional quality, black and white or full color
exhibits, dividers and covers for the EIR and Appendices. This Task assumes camera -ready base
maps are provided by the City. All exhibits will be 8.5" x 11" in size.
4.0 DRAFT EIR
4.1 PRELIMINARY DRAFT EIR
RBF will respond to one complete set of City comments on the Administrative Draft EIR. If desired
by the City, RBF will provide the Preliminary Draft of the EIR with all changes highlighted to assistthe
final check of the document.
4.2 COMPLETION OF THE DRAFT EIR
RBF will respond to a second review of the Preliminary Draft EIR and will prepare the report for the
required 45 -day public review period. In addition, RBF will prepare the Notice of Completion (NOC)
for submittal to the Office of Planning and Research (OPR). RBF will also work with the City to
develop a distribution listing for the NOC and Draft EIR.
5.0 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
5.1 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
RBF will respond to comments received on the Draft EIR during the 45 -day public review period, and
any additional comments raised during hearings that occur during the 45 -day review. RBF will
prepare thorough, reasoned and sensitive responses to relevant environmental issues. This task
includes written responses to both written and oral comments received on the Draft EIR (includes
review of hearing transcripts, as required). The Draft Responses to Comments will be prepared for
review by City staff. Following review of the Draft Responses to Comments, RBF will finalize this
section for inclusion in the Final EIR.
It is noted that it is unknown at this time the extent of public and agency comments that will result
from the review process. RBF has budgeted conservatively, given the potential scrutiny involved
with the proposed project. Should the level of comments and response exceed our estimate, RBF
will submit additional funding requests to the City in order to complete the responses.
5.2 FINAL EIR
The Final EIR will consist of the revised Draft EIR text, as necessary, and the "Comments to
Responses" section. The Draft EIR will be revised in accordance with the responses to public
comments on the EIR. To facilitate City review, RBF will format the Final EIR with shaded text for
any new or modified text, and "strike out" any text which has been deleted from the Final EIR. RBF
will also prepare and file the Notice of Determination within five (5) days of EIR approval. This scope
of work excludes the required fees for the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG).
JN 10- 107353 • 22 • August 2, 2010
DE SEA1 9
C. 1921
�DUNTY. gyp`
5.3 FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
RBF will provide administrative assistance to facilitate the CEQA process including the preparation of
the Notice of Determination, Statement of Overriding Considerations and Findings for City use in the
Project review process. RBF will prepare the Findings in accordance with the provisions of Section
15091 and 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines and in a form specified by the City. RBF will submit
the Draft Findings for City review and will respond to one set of City comments.
6.0 EIR PROJECT COORDINATION AND MEETINGS
6.1 COORDINATION
Mr. Glenn Lajoie, AICP, and Mr. Eddie Torres, INCE, will be responsible for management and
supervision of the EIR Project Team as well as consultation with the City staff to incorporate City
policies into the EIR. Mr. Lajoie and Mr. Torres will undertake consultation and coordination of the
Project and review the EIR for compliance with CEQA requirements and guidelines and City CEQA
procedures. RBF will coordinate with state and local agencies regarding this environmental
document. Mr. Lajoie and Mr. Torres, will coordinate with all technical staff, consultants, support
staff and word processing toward the timely completion of the EIR. It is the goal of RBF to serve as
an extension of City staff throughout the duration of the EIR Project. As is stated in Understanding of
the Project, RBF will be available to meet with staff to discuss particular Project parameters, as
required by the City. In addition, as requested, RBF will provide detailed progress reports on a
monthly basis. All progress reports will include the status of documents currently in production,
delivery dates of documents, upcoming meetings with City Staff, and any outstanding items to be
resolved at that time. Each progress report will include a summary of tasks performed and the
percentage of work completed to date according to individual task.
6.2 MEETINGS
Mr. Lajoie, and /or Mr. Torres, will attend all staff meetings and will represent the Project Team at
public hearings and make presentations as necessary. RBF anticipates several meetings with City
staff, including a "kick -off meeting" (refer to Task 1.1), progress meetings, public meetings and
hearings. Mr. Lajoie and Mr. Torres along with other key Project Team personnel will also be
available to attend meetings with affected jurisdictions, agencies and organizations as needed to
identify issues, assess impacts and define mitigation. Should the City determine that additional
meetings beyond the following meetings are necessary, services will be provided under a separate
scope of work on a time and materials basis. The estimated cost for additional meetings is
approximately $800 per person.
One Public Scoping Meeting (Refer to Task 3.2).
Progress meetings with City Staff assumes five (5) meetings to provide written and oral
progress reports resolve issues, review comments on Administrative documents and receive
any necessary direction from City Staff.
Up to four (4) public hearings with presentations as necessary. This includes the
Environmental Review Board (ERB), Planning Commission and City Council meetings.
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environ mental Compliance Documentation
JN 10- 107353 • 23 • August 2, 2010
of SEA( City of Seal Beach
� �`�" f9 � s Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
* '` Environmental Compliance Documentation
9 p4Z
y CFn 21
TV. CP
7.0 EIR DELIVERABLES
The following is a breakdown of all products /deliverables. The listed deliverables assume a standard
number of deliverables for a project of this type and can be adjusted, as directed by the City. RBF
can also provide a cost, per document, and can provide billing on a time and materials basis, as
requested by the City.
PROJECT SLOPING
• Twenty -five (25) copies of the Notice of Preparation
• Twenty -five (25) copies of the Initial Study
• Sixty (60) CD versions of the NOP /Initial Study
• One (1) Camera -Ready Unbound Copy
• One (1) Electronic Copy of the NOP /Initial Study
PREPARATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE DRAFT EIR
• Five (5) copies of the Administrative Draft EIR and Technical Appendices
• Five (5) CD's containing the Administrative Draft EIR and Technical Appendices
• One (1) electronic copy of the Administrative Draft EIR and Exhibits
DRAFT EIR
• Five (5) copies of the Second Administrative Draft EIR and Technical Appendices
• Five (5) CD's containing the Second Administrative Draft EIR and Technical Appendices
• One (1) electronic copy of the Second Administrative Draft EIR and Exhibits
• Twenty -five (25) copies of the Draft EIR with Technical Appendices
• Seventy -five (75) CD's containing the Draft EIR and Technical Appendices
• One- hundred (100) copies of the Notice of Completion
• One (1) camera -ready unbound original of the Draft EIR and Technical Appendices
• One (1) electronic copy of the Draft EIR and Appendices
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
• Five (5) copies of the Draft Responses to Comments
• One (1) electronic copy of the Response to Comments
• Five (5) copies of the Administrative Final EIR and Technical Appendices
• Five (5) CD's containing the Administrative Final EIR Technical Appendices
• Twenty -five (25) copies of the Final EIR and Technical Appendices
• Fifty (50) CD's containing the Final EIR and Technical Appendices
• One (1) unbound camera -ready original of the Final EIR, Exhibits and Technical Appendices
• One (1) electronic copy of the Final EIR, including exhibits and Technical Appendices
• Five (5) copies of the Draft Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
• One (1) camera -ready Final Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
• One (1) electronic copy of the Final Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
• One (1) camera -ready Notice of Determination
• One (1) camera -ready Notice of Completion
JN 10- 107353 @24* August 2, 2010
DE SEA! d
i
�CFe \9�
f�UNTY. gyp`
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
E nvironmental Co Documentation
8.0 CEQA CLEARANCE OPTION 2:
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
RBF will update the Initial Study in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines (see Task 1.3). The Initial
Study, in support of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, will include detailed explanations of all
checklist determinations and discussions of potential environmental impacts. The analysis shall be
in accordance with Sections 15063, 15162, 15167 and 15168 of the CEQA statutes.
8.1 PUBLIC REVIEW MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Should the Initial Study conclude that no significant environmental effects will occur, a Mitigated
Negative Declaration (MND) will be prepared. Following this determination, RBF will prepare the
Notice of Availability (NOA) and the MND for City Staff review. The NOA and MND will be attached
to the Initial Study to fully explain the proposed project and its effects. RBF will submit the IS /MND to
the State Clearinghouse. This task excludes radius mailing or newspaper noticing required for public
review. The IS /MND would be subject to a mandatory 30 -day public review period.
8.2 FINAL REVIEW MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
RBF will prepare a draft Final IS /MND for City review and approval. RBF will respond to comments
on the draft final document. The final document will include a purpose subsection, reference the
review process, comments letters received, responses to comments, and any required edits /updates
to the Public Review document. Also included within this task is the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program (MMRP) in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 (AB 3180).
RBF will provide written responses to each agency /interested party who submitted a comment letter
during the 30 -day public review period. After the close of the required public review period for the
mitigated negative declaration, RBF and City Staff will review the comment letters received during
the public review period. Should the level of comments/ responses exceed our budgetary
assumptions, RBF will confer with City Staff to determine scope /budget amendments which may be
necessary.
Upon adoption of the IS /MND, RBF will prepare and file a Notice of Determination (NOD) with the
County Clerk. This task assumes that the NOD will be filed by the City. Additionally, this scope of
work excludes the required fees for the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG).
8.3 CEQA NOTICES
RBF will be responsible for the preparation of CEQA notices (Notice of Availability /Notice of Intent
(refer to Deliverables Task 10.0), Negative Declaration, and Notice of Determination). RBF will
prepare the agency distribution lists. RBF has assumed that City Staff will be responsible for public
noticing to comply with City requirements, such as posting notices or newspaper notices. RBF will
circulate notices to designated reviewing agencies.
JN 10- 107353 • 25 • August 2, 2010
Ri o SEA1 City of Seal Beach
F �* Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Documentation
Q r
VY.
9.0 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION DELIVERABLES
• Five (5) copy of Administrative Draft MND /Initial Study
• Five (5) CD's containing the Administrative Draft MND /Initial Study
• Five (5) "Check Copies" of Draft MND /Initial Study
• One (1) PDF file of the Draft Initial Study and "Check Copy' Drafts
• Twenty -five (25) copies of Draft MND /Initial Study
• One (1) camera -ready original of Draft Initial Study
• Fifty (50) CDs with electronic PDF version of Draft Initial Study, Graphics and Technical
Appendices (including 15 copies for State Clearinghouse which will include an Executive
Summary attachment)
• Draft Notice of Availability /Notice of Intent
• One (1) camera -ready original of Draft Comment and Responses
• One (1) PDF version of Draft Comment and Responses
• Twenty -five (25) copies of Final MND /Initial Study
• One (1) Camera -Ready Original of Final Initial Study
• One (1) CD with electronic PDF version of Final Initial Study, Graphics, and Technical
Appendices
• Fifty (50) CDs of Final Initial Study, Graphics and Technical Appendices in Microsoft Word.
10.0 MND PROJECT COORDINATION AND MEETINGS
10.1 COORDINATION
Mr. Glenn Lajoie, AICP, and Mr. Eddie Torres, INCE, will be responsible for management and
supervision of the Project Team as well as consultation with the City staff to incorporate City policies
into the MND. Mr. Lajoie and Mr. Torres will undertake consultation and coordination of the Project
and review the MND for compliance with CEQA requirements and guidelines and City CEQA
procedures. RBF will coordinate with state and local agencies regarding this environmental
document. Mr. Lajoie and Mr. Torres, will coordinate with all technical staff, consultants, support
staff and word processing toward the timely completion of the MND. It is the goal of RBF to serve as
an extension of City staff throughout the duration of the EIR Project. As is stated in Understanding of
the Project, RBF will be available to meet with staff to discuss particular Project parameters, as
required by the City. In addition, as requested, RBF will provide detailed progress reports on a
monthly basis. All progress reports will include the status of documents currently in production,
delivery dates of documents, upcoming meetings with City Staff, and any outstanding items to be
resolved at that time. Each progress report will include a summary of tasks performed and the
percentage of work completed to date according to individual task.
10.2 MEETINGS
Mr. Lajoie, and /or Mr. Torres, will attend all staff meetings and will represent the Project Team at
public hearings and make presentations as necessary. RBF anticipates several meetings with City
staff, including a "kick -off meeting" (refer to Task 1.1), progress meetings, public meetings and
hearings. Mr. Lajoie and Mr. Torres along with other key Project Team personnel will also be
available to attend meetings with affected jurisdictions, agencies and organizations as needed to
identify issues, assess impacts and define mitigation. Should the City determine that additional
meetings beyond the following meetings are necessary, services will be provided under a separate
JN 10- 107353 • 26 • August 2, 2010
�E SEA( B
�'� �cAPeor+4�F F9Cs
zM
NTY. gyp`
scope of work on a time and materials basis. The estimated cost for additional meetings is
approximately $800 per person.
• Progress meetings with City Staff assumes three (3) meetings to provide written and oral
progress reports resolve issues, review comments on Administrative documents and receive
any necessary direction from City Staff.
• Four (4) public hearings with presentations as necessary. This includes Environmental
Review Board (ERB), Planning Commission and City Council meetings.
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Doc umentation
JN 10- 107353 • 27 • August 2, 2010
�E SEA( 9
CD
�a ��PORq�F °F'�ts
i
yC f
R 21
WTY. Gp�
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Documentation
111, PRELIMINARY( CEQ1 SCHEDULE*
The following preliminary schedule assumes authorization to proceed with the work program in 2010.
Several work tasks may be adjusted and streamlined in order to further accelerate the schedule. A
date - specific schedule will be provided at the project kickoff.
INITIAL STUDY REVIEW
Month 10
Project Kickoff Meeting
Month 1
RBF Prepares Draft Project Description
Months 1 - 2
City Review of Draft Project Description
Month 2
RBF Completes Project Description
Month 2
RBF Research and Investigation
Months 1 - 2
RBF Prepares Draft Initial Study
Months 2 - 3
City Review of Draft Initial Study
Months 3 - 4
RBF Completes Initial Study
Month 4
Initial Study Findings Meeting with City
Month 4
TECHNICAL STUDIES
RBF Team Prepares Draft Environmental Technical Studies Months 4 - 8
City Review of Draft Environmental Technical Studies Month 8
RBF Completes Draft Environmental Technical Studies Month 9
CEQA OPTION 1: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Notice of Preparation /Initial Study
Month 10
30 -Day NOP Public Review
Month 10
EIR Scoping Meeting
Month 10
Administrative Draft EIR Preparation
Months 10 - 12
City Review of Administrative Draft EIR
Month 12
Preliminary Draft EIR Preparation
Month 13
City Review of Preliminary Draft EIR
Month 13
Complete, Publish, Circulate Draft EIR
Month 13
45 -Day Public Review Period
Months 13 - 14
Hearing during the Draft EIR Review to receive Comments
Month 14
RBF prepares Responses to Comments
Month 15
JN 10- 107353 9289
August 2, 2010
SERI f9 � City of Seal Beach
s Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
A� Environmental Compliance Documentation
�CF
R 27 I \COQ
AUNTY,
City Review of Responses to Comments Month 15
RBF Prepares Administrative Final EIR Months 15 - 16
City Review of Administrative Final EIR Month 16
Complete, Publish, Circulate Final EIR Month 16
Certification Hearings TBD
CEQA OPTION 2: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Administrative Draft MND Preparation
Months 10 - 11
City Review of Administrative Draft MND
Month 11
Preliminary Draft MND Preparation
Month 12
City Review of Preliminary Draft MND
Month 12
Complete, Publish, Circulate MND
Month 12
30 -Day Public Review Period
Month 13
RBF Prepares Response to Comments
Month 14
City Review of Response to Comments
Month 14
RBF Prepares Administrative Final MND
Months 14 - 15
City Review of Administrative Final MND
Month 15
Complete, Publish, Circulate Final MND
Month 15
Certification Hearings
TBD
The schedule considers on -going coordination and meetings with the project team through the duration of
the project.
JN 10- 107353 *29e August 2, 2010
�E SEA( 6
Ali - p
yC f 1977 soh
NTY, gyp`
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Documentation
IV, SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS
RBF Consulting is a multi - disciplinary planning and engineering firm with offices in Orange,
Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura, San Diego, Contra Costa, Marin, Santa Clara, and Sacramento
counties. With over 65 years of public and private sector experience, RBF is respected and
recognized in the profession of consulting planning, environmental, and engineering services
throughout the state of California. RBF has in -house expertise in disciplines including Environmental
Analysis, Planning, GIS Services, Surveying, Aerial Photogrammetry, Mapping, Real Estate
Assessments, Transportation/Traffic Engineering, Civil Engineering (including Grading, Public
Works, Water/Wastewater, Hydrology), Mechanical/ Electrical /Energy Services, Computer Aided
Design and Drafting (CADD) and Media Services. Over 60 professionals are dedicated to Planning,
Environmental Services and Landscape Architecture.
RBF possesses the full range of disciplines necessary to provide tum -key planning, design and
implementation of a wide range of projects. We combine our expertise in development projects and
urban planning, transportation and air quality management, to develop and assess project designs
that minimize impacts to the natural environment and community. The following is a comprehensive
list of RBF departments and services:
DEPARTMENTS AREAS OF EXPERTISE
Land Planning and Urban Conceptual Design; Master Planning; Site Planning; Hillside
Design: Grading; Landscape Architecture; Redevelopment and Infill
Land Use Planning; Illustrative Plans; Pedestrian and
Vehicular Trail Studies; Visual Analysis; Design Guidelines
and Development Standards.
Policy Planning: Specific Plans, General Plans; Community Participation
Programs; Project Management and Coordination;
Feasibility /Special Studies; Fee Programs; Entitlement to
Use (including zone changes, General Plan Amendments
and annexation studies); Redevelopment Studies;
Consultant Coordination; Governmental Agencies /Public
Liaison; and Development Support Services through
Construction.
Environmental Services: Environmental Impact Reports /Statements; Expanded Initial
Studies /Negative Declarations; Mitigation Monitoring
Programs; Public Participation Programs; Natural Resource
Management; Resource Mitigation Permits; EIR and EIS
Review; Noticing; Statements of Overriding Considerations;
Findings; and Special Studies, such as Phase I Site
Assessment for hazardous materials, climate change, as
well as noise and air quality monitoring and modeling.
JN 10- 107353 • 30 • August 2, 2010
�E SEA! 9
y• �QQ
c F A
NTY. gyp`
Transportation Planning:
Master Plans of Circulation; Transportation Planning/
Engineering; Traffic Impact Studies; Traffic Control Plans;
Traffic Signal Coordination; Traffic Signal Design;
Congestion Management Programs; Street Lighting;
Signing, Striping, and Construction Detour Plans.
Media Services:
Report Graphics; Presentation Graphics; View Analysis;
Illustrations; Slide Shows; Video Services; and CADD
Illustrative Plans.
Civil Engineering:
Subdivision Engineering; Structural Engineering;
Engineering Design; and CADD mapping.
Mechanical /Electrical
Commercial Office Buildings; Retail Shopping Center;
Engineering:
Educational Facilities; Hotel /Motel; Industrial; Special
Energy Systems; Entertainment Performing Arts Centers;
and Computer Centers.
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
As a leader in the environmental consulting field, RBF offers an extensive array of services
associated with environmental compliance and documentation. RBF provides evaluation for the full
range of environmental effects for all types of projects. Our award - winning team offers
documentation in compliance with environmental laws and regulations including CEQA, NEPA, the
Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act and other applicable environmental laws.
Environmental documents prepared at RBF address the full range of environmental and technical
issues, with in -house specialists providing technical evaluation for traffic and transportation, flood
control and drainage, air quality, climate change, noise, land use, socioeconomics, utilities and
services, energy conservation, visual and aesthetic effects, relevant planning, Phase I hazardous
materials, neighborhood and construction effects, landform modification, agricultural suitability and
many other environmental issue areas. RBF draws upon the profession's leading subconsultants for
specialized biological, archeological, geotechnical and fiscal /economic studies to build a multi-
disciplinary team of environmental analysts. State -of- the -art computer facilities including Computer
Aided Drafting and Design (CADD), ARC /INFO, and specially created computer programs are utilized
in obtaining the highest level of technical completeness and efficiency.
CEQA AND NEPA DOCUMENTS
RBF has over 30 years experience in the preparation and processing of CEQA and NEPA
compliance studies. The RBF Environmental staff have provided CEQA and NEPA documentation
and environmental technical studies for a diverse range of capital improvement and development
projects, as well as regulatory/policy documents such as General Plans and zoning ordinances.
RBF environmental documents are not only legally defensible and user - friendly, but are supported by
professionals with expertise in hydrology, water quality, transportation, water/wastewater, landscape
architecture, urban design, policy planning, structural design, civil engineering, GIS, mapping, and
surveying. RBF produces environmental documents that are sensitive to both the public's concern
for resource protection and community impacts, as well as real -world issues associated with cost
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Documentation
JN 10- 107353 • 31 • August 2, 2010
of sEai a City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
_ E n v iron me ntal C Documentation
z
� R2719�y ��OQ
�D'NTY. gyp`
and feasibility of implementing mitigation measures. RBF's environmental compliance managers
have a broad resume of project experience in coastal, urban and rural communities and have worked
on numerous complex projects requiring technical expertise, creative solutions and development of
effective and workable mitigation. Our team has a thorough understanding of CEQA, NEPA, the
Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, National Historic Preservation Act and
other local, state and federal regulations.
AIR QUALITY AND NOISE STUDIES
RBF is a recognized leader in air quality modeling and analysis, with expertise in the areas of: 1) air
quality dispersion modeling; 2) construction and operational pollutant modeling; 3) carbon monoxide
hotspots modeling; 4) odor analysis; and 5) greenhouse gas emissions analysis.
RBF has prepared a wide variety of air quality analyses for projects throughout California. Our staff is
familiar with Federal, State, and local requirements and thresholds of significance for criteria
pollutants. RBF routinely consults with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, SCAQMD, and
other air pollution control districts to ensure adequate project -level analysis under existing air quality
regulations.
RBF utilizes state -of -the -art air quality models to accurately quantify air pollutant levels both during
construction and project operations. These models include the ISC -3 Gaussian plume model,
AERMOD plume model, BREEZE ROADS dispersion model, and URBEMIS emissions model. RBF
also provides Global Climate Change analysis in response to AB -32 and Executive Order S -3 -05,
which encourage an increasing level of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions analysis for development
projects within the State.
RBF provides a full range of noise impact analyses for public and private sector clients, in
accordance with local, State, and Federal impact assessment criteria. RBF provides acoustical
expertise in the areas of: 1) on -site noise measurement; 2) residential noise studies and sound
insulation analysis; 3) construction noise measurement and analysis; 4) community noise impact
surveys; and 5) traffic and rail noise measurement, analysis, and abatement design.
RBF is skilled in utilizing various noise modeling programs, including the FHWA RD -77 -108 model,
FHWA Transportation Noise Model, and FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model. RBF has the
capability to provide ambient noise levels surveys, utilizing Larson Davis 820 and Brael & Igaer 2250
sound level meters.
REGULATORY AGENCY PERMITS
Our regulatory services team is trained in the most up -to -date regulations and have prepared and
processed hundreds of permit applications through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE),
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB),
and the California Coastal Commission (CCC). RBF works closely with each applicant to assure that
the jurisdictional baseline and permit applications accurately address project impacts and ultimately
complies with the state and federal review process. RBF's existing relationships with the resource
agencies allow RBF to be a liaison between the applicant and the regulatory agencies.
JN 10- 107353 • 32 • August 2, 2010
pF SEA( B City of Seal Beach
� Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
* Environmental Compliance Documentation
C f A21 9`' �t
�D'NTT gyp`
RBF has certified regulatory staff that is professionally trained to perform wetland delineations on
projects that need to meet regulatory requirements of the ACOE (Clean Water Act Section 404),
CDFG (California Fish and Game Code Sections 1600 - 1616), RWQCB (Clean Water Act Section
401, Porter - Cologne Water Quality Control Act), and CCC (California Coastal Act).
Years of experience preparing and processing regulatory permits through the resource agencies
have enabled RBF to identify successful strategies for satisfying agency requirements. No matterthe
location, the regulatory services team has provided regulatory support to clients throughout
California, Nevada, and Arizona. Our staff has successfully delineated project sites and properties
ranging from less than 1 -acre to 1,600- acres. Projects have ranged from small stream crossings to
long -term maintenance projects to large -scale mass grading activities. The regulatory services team,
coupled with our environmental and stormwater staff, allows RBF to expeditiously acquire permits
from state and federal regulatory agencies.
PUBLIC OUTREACH PROGRAMS
RBF has exceptional experience and capabilities in the strategic planning, presentation, and
technical support of public participation programs. RBF is presently implementing public outreach
programs for several city General Plans and EIR's in Southern California, facilitates scoping
meetings for CEQA/NEPA documents, and has facilitated Design Advisory Group processes for the
highly controversial such as the potential extension of State Route 710. RBF has a complete in-
house Media Services Department, which can develop virtually any form of public communication
information, including project web sites, video, PowerPoint, illustrative graphics, multi - lingual
newsletters or other materials.
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ASSESSMENTS
RBF provides a range of Hazardous Materials Assessments to meet our clients needs for various
project types. RBF has prepared hundreds of Hazardous Materials Assessments for a variety of
projects throughout California utilizing the American Society for Testing & Materials (ASTM)
standards for commercial real estate transactions (E1527 -05 and E1528 -06), All Appropriate Inquiry
(AAI), the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines, as well as appropriate protocol
from lending institutions and regulatory agencies. The comprehensive capabilities and professional
experience of our in -house staff allows RBF to effectively and efficiently complete Hazardous
Materials Assessments for any type of property.
RBF's capabilities include Phase I Environmental Site Assessments (ASTM E1527 -05), Transaction
Screens (ASTM E1528 -06), Preliminary Hazardous Materials Assessments, Environmental Baselines
Surveys (for the United States Department of Navy), and Initial Site Assessments (for the California
Department of Transportation).
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
The RBF Planning staff provides opportunities and constraints assessments as part of preliminary
design studies for capital improvement projects and due diligence studies for development projects.
Using our GIS capabilities, RBF identifies resource and regulatory compliance issues for project
alternatives, as well as anticipated local agency and community issues. RBF provides strategic
project development services in early planning stages, which can substantially reduce or avoid cost
and schedule impacts associated with regulatory agency permitting and the public review process.
JN 10- 107353 • 33 • August 2, 2010
a oF SEA( 9 City of Seal Beach
.N�' Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
E C Documentation
i 27 ° e
cF a 2a
Wil. gyp`
VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS
RBF provides visual stimulation studies for aesthetic and visual impact evaluation. Simulations
produced by RBF range from simple photo composite /3D massing studies to full photorealistic
depictions. RBF uses state of the art software and advanced techniques such as metric
photogrammetry and Real Time Kinematic (RTK) global positioning. Data is processed using state -
of -art computer techniques into high - quality graphics that allow the public to understand the visual
impacts of a project.
RBF provides dynamic views of proposed developments through the use of animations and
Matchmove technology (the process of combining computer animation with video). Animations
provide visual analysis while moving through or around a project on foot, in a vehicle or plane.
Additionally, RBF has the capabilities to perform viewshed analyses that may be utilized to determine
whether or not project features are visible within a one -mile- radius. The viewshed map is created
using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) technology and may include Digital Surface Model
(DSM) data. DSM data allows RBF to determine view blockage resulting from existing structures,
terrain, and landscaping (i.e., large trees).
RBF also prepares shade and shadow analyses by overlaying shadow diagrams on a base map that
show the building footprints of the project and the surrounding buildings. The intent of this work is to
illustrate any change in shadow patterns that would be directly attributable to the project, and to
visually demonstrate the effect of these shadows on surrounding land uses, particularly any adjacent
residential or other sensitive uses.
MITIGATION MONITORING
RBF develops Mitigation Monitoring Programs for CEQA documents, and provides assistance to
public and private sector clients in interpreting and implementing the required programs. RBF
services include, through a combination of our Construction Management and Planning staff, field
monitoring for air quality, dust, traffic control, and resource mitigation. RBF received an award from
the Association of Environmental Professionals for our Mission Bay Mitigation Monitoring Program
web site, allowing interactive viewing and updating of mitigation compliance by agency staff, the
developer and the public.
REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS
The following pages provide a small sample of representative projects throughout Southern
California. Additional examples and references may be provided, as requested.
JN 10- 107353 • 34 • August 2, 2010
Boeing Specific plan EIR
Seal Beach, CA
RBF prepared the EIR for a 107 -acre Specific Plan area between
Westminster Avenue and Seal Beach Boulevard. The Boeing
Specific Plan Project provides a planned mixed -use business park
development that would be compatible with existing Boeing
facilities and operations at the site. The Specific Plan established
the general type, location, parameters and character of all
development within the site's boundaries. The Project also included
a General Plan Amendment (Land Use and Circulation), a Vesting
Tentative Tract Map, a Coastal Development Permit and possibly a
Development Agreement, Conditional Use Permits and other
approvals.
The proposed Project involved maintaining approximately
1,150,000 square feet of existing building area (within Planning
Areas 1 and 2). New light industrial buildings for Planning Area 2
would require relocation and/or demolition of existing buildings and
facilities. The project also includes 345,000 square feet of
additional building area within the existing Boeing facilities, 55,000
square feet designated for hotel uses and 32,500 square feet,
designated for commercial uses, including retail, restaurant and
similar commercial uses and 973,000 square feet for Business Park
uses. The proposed buildings/expansions would result in a total of
2,210,500 square feet of floor area, representing a net increase of
1,060,500 square feet over the existing floor area of 1,150,000
square feet. The new floor area would be developed with up to
thirteen new light industrial buildings, a hotel and up to three
commercial buildings.
Key issues reviewed include local and regional traffic impacts,
affects to nearby residents at Leisure World and the Island Village
residential community in Long Beach (adjacent to the site),
proximity to the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Research Station,
coastal access considerations, water quality/habitat effects, and
cultural resources.
Highlights:
• Environmental Services:
Environmental Impact
Report
• Proximity to Leisure World
• General Plan Amendment
• Extensive Cultural
Resources Mitigation
• Coastal Access Issues
Contact:
City of Seal Beach
211 8"' Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
Mr. Lee Whittenberg
562/431 -2527
V"
CONSULT11493
: r 4ti
Rivers End Staging Area & San Gabriel River
Bikeway Enhancement Plan Project MND
Seal Beach, CA
RBF prepared the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
(IS/MND) for the Rivers End Staging Area & San Gabriel River
Bikeway Enhancement Plan Project for the City of Seal Beach.
Among the major issues analyzed in the IS /MND were aesthetics,
air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology,
hydrology, land use, and noise.
The project would improve and expand the Rivers End Staging
Area, as well as improve the San Gabriel River Bikeway. Proposed
project features included a decorative concrete area, cobblestone
kiosk, trail map, interpretive signage, drinking fountain, bicycle
racks, landscaping improvements, and restriping/resurfacing of the
bike trail. The IS/MND included analysis of potential short-term
construction activities as well as long -term operations of the
proposed project. Mitigation measures were recommended in the
IS/MND only for construction activities in the areas of aesthetics,
air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology,
hydrology, and noise. The IS /MND determined that no potential
negative environmental impacts would result from long -term
operations of the project, but rather project operations would result
in beneficial impacts.
Highlights:
• Staging Area Expansion and
Improvement
• Bike Trail Improvements
• Landscaping Improvements
• Construction Impacts Only
Reference:
City of Seal Beach
211 8"' Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
Mr. David Spitz, P.E.
Associate Engineer
562/431 -2527
CONSII LTING
Hotel del Coronado Master Plan EIR
and EIR Addendum
Coronado, CA
RBF prepared the EIR for the Hotel del Coronado Master Plan
project. The Master Plan identified expansion at the hotel site,
including additional guest accommodations, health spa, conference
facilities, and parking structures. RBF worked closely with City
staff and City Consultants, as well as with the project applicant to
prepare an Existing Conditions Report that included extensive
documentation of existing resources and facilities on and around
the hotel property. The Existing Conditions Report was
incorporated into the EIR work program, once the Master Plan was
finalized. The EIR phase was completed and certified by the
Coronado City Council in October 2001. RBF attended public
workshops and hearings, providing CEQA consultation, and
explanation of specific technical issues. Key environmental and
community issues included, but were not limited to: land use
compatibility; visual/aesthetics; historical architecture; traffic and
circulation; and compatibility with the nearby NAS North Island air
operations and established Air Installation Compatibility Use
Zones.
In 2008, RBF also prepared an EIR Addendum for an update to the
approved Master Plan which focused on design modifications for
the property. The work program involved the Addendum
document, review of technical studies provided by the applicant,
coordination with third -party traffic reviewer, preparation of CEQA
findings, and staff reports. Significant issues evaluated in the
Addendum include: visual impacts, traffic, biological resources,
water quality, and parking.
Highlights:
• Land Use Compatibility
• Visual / Aesthetics
• Historical Architecture
• Traffic and Circulation
• Compatibility with the
Nearby NAS North Island
Air Operations and
Established Air Installation
Compatibility Use Zones
Reference:
City of Coronado
1825 Strand Way
Coronado, CA 92118
Mr. Peter Fait
619/522 -2414
[W...
CONSULTING
Malryrnount College Facilities Expansion EIR
RBF prepared an EIR for renovation to the Marymount College
Campus consisting of the modernization and expansion of existing
buildings, construction of new academic and student housing
buildings, and relocation/reconfiguration of recreational facilities
and parking. The Project involves the demolition of approximately
18,022 square feet of existing floor area, the construction of
139,008 square feet of new floor area, including a 14,916- square
foot expansion to existing buildings. The new floor area would be
developed in the form of seven (7) new structures and the
expansion of four existing structures. Additionally, the proposed
Project would relocate the existing athletic courts/soccer field,
tennis and basketball courts from the east side of the campus to the
west side. Also, the entry drive and existing parking area would be
reconfigured/reconstructed providing a total of 463 parking spaces
(a net increase of 120 spaces). Key environmental topics for
review included geologic stability, drainagetwater quality, traffic
and circulation, parking capacity and visual/view simulations from
various locations surround the site.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA
Highlights:
• EIR for Campus
Modernization and
Expansion
• Academic Facilities, Student
Housing, Recreational
Facilities and Parking
Reference:
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Department of Planning,
Building and Code
Enforcement
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Mr. Ara Mihranian, AICP,
310/544 -5228
W
CONSULTING
f�
Long Point (Terranea) Resort Project EIR
RBF prepared a Program/Project EIR on behalf of the City of
Rancho Palos Verdes for the Long Point (Terranea) Resort project.
The project included development of a full- service hotel providing
approximately 582 guestrooms, along with restaurants/bars and
meeting/function spaces. The project also involved approximately
31.6 acres of conserved/enhanced habitat and approximately 81
acres of public open space/recreation facilities, including public
parking, shoreline access ramps, public parks/overlooks, public
walking/hiking trails, a public golf practice facility, and a 9 -hole
public -use golf course.
The EIR addressed two separate components. The Lower Point
Vicente, which sits on the coastal bluff and has historically been
referred to as the former Marineland, proposed a hotel complex and
resort amenities. The Upper Point Vicente (north of Lower Point
Vicente), which is land under City ownership, was primarily
devoted to golf holes and conservation areas. Key issues included
biological resources, traffic, public safety (golf), geologic stability
of the bluffs, view impacts and alternatives. The Biological
Resources Section was updated to include spring survey data for
several sensitive species and was re- circulated for additional public
review (30 days). The Final EIR was approved and certified by the
Rancho Palos Verdes City Council. The project involved an
extensive number of concerns and issues raised by community
groups and residents. RBF's role, on behalf of the City, was to
assure that a proper and complete environmental review process be
conducted and to fully respond to environmental concerns of
agencies and residents.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA
Highlights:
• Coastal Development
Project
• Examination of Multiple
Alternatives
• Extensive Community
Participation
Reference:
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Mr. Joel Rojas, 310.544.5228
CONSULTING
Seal Beach Townhomes Project POND
Seal Beach, CA
RBF prepared the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
(IS /MND) for the Seal Beach Townhome Project located on the
northwest corner of the Seal Beach Boulevard and Adolfo Lopez
Drive intersection, immediately adjacent to the Boeing Space and
Communications Group Specific Plan area. The City of Seal Beach
Police Department and Public Works Facilities Yard are also
located immediately south of the project site, across Adolfo Lopez
Drive. The Seal Beach Townhomes project was a proposed
residential development with 87 townhome units on an
approximately 4.5 -acre site. The townhome development proposed
three separate unit designs ranging in area from 1,300 square feet to
more than 1,700 square feet.
The project required a zone change from Light Manufacturing (M-
1) to residential High Density (RHD). Additionally a General Plan
Amendment would be required to change the existing Industrial -
Light designation to Residential High Density. Key issues included
land use, aesthetics, cultural resources, traffic/circulation, and public
utilities. Visual simulations were also prepared as a part of the
aesthetics analysis. The IS/MND included extensive mitigation for
cultural resources and sewer system utilities.
EXISTING CONDITION
PROPOSED CONDITION
Highlights:
• Environmental Services:
Providing an Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration
• Residential Infill Project
located adjacent to the
Boeing Specific Plan Office
Park
• Included Mitigation for
Upgrades for a Sewer Lift
Station
• Visual Simulations
Contact:
City of Seal Beach
211 8` Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
Mr. Lee Whittenberg
562.431.2527
CO NSULTINO
Pacific Gateway Plaza Project RAIN®
Seal Beach, CA
RBF prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
(ISMND) for the Pacific Gateway Plaza Project. The approximately
4.47 -acre Project site is included within the Planning Area 4
(Parking Lot 7) of the Boeing Specific Plan area, adjacent to the
existing Boeing facilities. The Project includes a 110 room
Hampton Inn, 7,800 square feet of retail shops, and approximately
11,473 square feet of fast - food/in -line food service uses. The retail
shops and in -line restaurant are located at the western portion of the
site, and the fast foot restaurant is located at the southeastern portion
of the site.
Implementation of the proposed Project required amendments to the
Boeing Specific Plan regarding building heights, as well as building
setback distances from Seal Beach Boulevard. The IS/MND
assessed impacts to aesthetics, land use, air quality, noise,
hydrology, and several other impact categories. Long -term noise
monitoring was also conducted at Leisure World, located to the
north across Westminster Boulevard, in order to address noise
concerns during construction and operational activities.
Highlights:
• Environmental Services:
Providing an Initial
Study /Mitigated Negative
Declaration
• Within the Boeing Specific
Plan Area
• Development of Hotel,
Retail, and Restaurant Uses
Contact:
City of Seal Beach
211 8 Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
Mr. Lee Whittenberg
562.431.2527
Pmlm
CGNSUI.TINr
City Wide Sewer Capital Improvement Project
Pal N D
Seal Beach, CA
RBF prepared the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
(IS/MND) for the City Wide Sewer Capital Improvement Project
for the City of Seal Beach. The IS/MND consisted of the analysis
of several different issue areas. Major issues addressed in the
IS/MND include aesthetics, air quality, cultural resources, hazards,
and noise. The City pursued funding for the project through the
State Water Resouces Control Board (SWRCB) State Revolving
Fund (SRF) program, which is a loan program intended to provide
low- interest loans for wastewater projects that address water
quality problems and prevent pollution to State waters. Therefore,
as the SRF has partial Federal funding, the IS/lvlND included a
CEQA and CEQA -Plus compliance document. The CEQA -Plus
review included additional analysis in the Air Quality, Biological
Resources, and Cultural Resources sections in accordance with the
Federal Clean Air Act, the Federal Endangered Species Act, and
the National Historic Preservation Act.
The IS/MND analyzed the City Wide Sewer Capital Improvement
Project, which proposed 10 -year capital improvement facilities, as
recommended in the 2005 Sewer System Master Plan Update. The
goal of the project was to provide the City with a short- and long -
range planning tool to implement the construction of needed
infrastructure improvements. Potential impacts as a result of the
project were analzyed for short-term construction activities as well
as long -term operations. The IS/MND considered three methods of
pipeline reconstruction (e.g., pipe bursting, cured -in place, and
trenching activities) and analyzed their respective impacts.
Mitigation measures were recommended for potential
environmental impacts resulting from the proposed project.
Highlights:
• CEQA and CEQA -Plus
Compliance Document
• City Wide Improvement
Project and Detailed Project
Analysis
• Extensive Native American
Consultation
• Three Pipeline Construction
Types
Reference:
City of Seal Beach
211 8` Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
Michael Ho, P.E.
562/431 -2527
W...
CONSULTING
Marblehead Coastal
San Clemente, CA
The Marblehead Coastal project in San Clemente is one of the last
undeveloped coastal properties in Southern California. Located on
a coastal plateau, the 248 -acre site contained agricultural uses, an
abandoned sewer treatment plant, eroding coastal bluffs, degraded
coastal sage habitat and fresh water wetlands. With a prime
location, expansive ocean views, rolling topography and a unique
site, Marblehead Coastal is planned for 313 residences, a 52 -acre
regional commercial center, and over 125 acres of open space. The
Marblehead Coastal design preserves the landforms and canyons
while integrating habitat protection and restoration with
recreational uses throughout. The regional landscape character is
reflected throughout the community by using California coastal
sage scrub and native grassland plants.
RBF has provided ongoing services for site planning, extensive
community participation and outreach, civil, traffic and structural
engineering, natural and visual resource inventories, environmental
services, landscape architecture, architecture as well as entitlement
and wild life agency processing. A General Plan Amendment,
Specific Plan, Parks and Trails Master Plan, Habitat Management
Plan, Landscape Design Guidelines, Runoff Management Plan,
Water Quality Management Plan, and Integrated Pest Management
Plan were prepared for Marblehead Coastal. Construction
document preparation is underway.
RBF has also obtained the full range of resource agency permits
which will implement the state -of -the -art Water Quality Plan and
Habitat Management Plan for the project including: 404 Permit
(U.S. Army Corps of Engineers); 401 Certification (Regional
Water Quality Control Board); 4(d) Interim Take Permit
(USFWS /CDFG); and a 1603 Streambed Alteration Agreement
(CDFG). The project has also received a Coastal Development
Permit (CDP) from the California Coastal Commission. The area is
one of the last undeveloped coastal properties in Southern
California.
Highlights:
■ 248 -Acre Coastal Project
a 313 Residential Units
® 640,000 Square Foot
Regional Commercial
Center
a 125 Acres of Open Space
and Public Parks
■ Entitlement, Site Planning,
Environmental and
Engineering Services
® Water Quality Plan
s Habitat Management Plan
■ Resource Agency Permits
Award:
e 2005 SCC /ASLA Award of
Merit
References:
Westport Capital Partners LLC
2361 Rosecrans Ave., Suite 375
El Segundo, CA 90245
W. Greg Geiger, Principal
310/294 -1232
CO NSULTIN6
Pacific Coast Highway /2nd Street Improvement
Project MND
Long Beach, CA
RBF prepared an IS/MND for the Pacific Coast Highway /2nd
Highlights:
Street Improvement Project. The proposed project would
° Infrastructure improvement
involve improvements to the intersection at Pacific Coast
9 Traffic Impact Analysis
Highway (PCH) and 2nd Street to eliminate a narrowing of the
° Air quality and noise
roadway at the intersection and provide a consistent right -of-
modeling
way roadway width north of 2nd Street within the City of Long
Beach. At project completion, the full lane configuration would
° Phase I Initial Site
provide three northbound through lanes, a painted median, two
Assessment
southbound left -turn lanes, three southbound through lanes, and
a standard shoulder allowing right -turns. The provision of a
Reference:
Caltrans shoulder providing sufficient roadway width for right-
City of Long Beach
turns without blocking the through lanes would fulfill the
333 West Ocean Boulevard
original intent of the identified traffic improvement
Long Beach, CA 90802
recommended as mitigation in the Marina Shores Final
Ms. Jill Griffiths
Environmental Impact Report.
562/570 -6191
The IS/MND consisted of the analysis of several different issue
areas. Major issues addressed in the IS/MND include air
quality, noise, hazards and hazardous materials, and geology and . ; -•
soils. Potential impacts as a result of the project were analyzed
for short-term construction activities as well as long -term
operations. Technical studies included a traffic impact analysis,
air quality and noise modeling, and a Phase I Initial Site
Assessment.
CONSULTING
®r
CONSULTING
Naples Seawall Interim and Long Range Repair
IAN®
Long Beach, CA
RBF prepared the IS/MND for the Naples Seawall Interim and
Long Range Repair Project for the City of Long Beach. The
IS /MND includes a detailed analysis of multiple environmental
issue areas. Notable issues being addressed in the IS/NM include
air quality, biological resources, geology, hazards, and noise.
The project involves approximately 11,000 linear feet of
improvements to the Naples seawall located in the community of
Naples. The purpose of the project is to identify viable options for
the stabilization of the seawall in its present deteriorating state, as
well as extend the life of the seawall. Following a stability
investigation of the concrete sheet pile seawall, repair concepts
have been developed and include interim and long range repairs.
Interim repairs would assist in the temporary stabilization of the
seawall until funding becomes available for long range repairs
(seawall replacement). Project impacts were assessed for both the
interim and long range repair options, for both construction and
operations of the project. Key impact areas analyzed included
minimization of biological impacts to potential marine species and
habitats in the project area as well as water quality impacts during
construction.
Highlights:
• Seawall Stabilization
• Interim Repair Options
• Long Range Repair Options
• Specialized Analyses for
Potential Marine Biological
Impacts (i.e., eelgrass)
• Consideration of Potential
Noise Impacts to Marine
Biological Species
• Consideration of Water
Quality Impacts During
Construction
Reference:
Reference:
City of Long Beach
333 West Ocean Boulevard
Long Beach, CA 90802
Mr. Mark Christoffels
562/570 -6771
J
Shoreline Gateway EIR
Long Beach, CA
RBF completed a Project -Level and Supplemental EIR for the
Shoreline Gateway Project in the City of Long Beach. The project
EIR evaluated a mixed -use development involving a 22 -story
residential tower, a 15- to 19 -story stepped slab building, and a 10-
story building on nine parcels (approximately 2.2 acres), generally
located north of Ocean Boulevard, between Atlantic and Alamitos
Avenues. The Supplemental EIR addressed development of a 35-
story residential tower on the site. The location of the project site
serves as an entrance to the East Village Arts District and the
eastern edge of the downtown. For both the project and
Supplemental EIR, the proposal involved 358 residential units, a
maximum of 20,000 square feet of ground floor retail, art gallery,
cafd, civic space uses, and parking for approximately 860 cars. The
environmental review involved an aesthetics analysis, including
light/glare, shade/shadow and land use compatibility, traffic and
parking, air quality, noise, historic resources, hazardous materials
assessment, public services, and utilities.
Highlights:
e Mixed -Use Project
■ Redevelopment Site
■ 2.2 Acres
N 358 Residential Units
a Key Issues: Traffic, Air
Quality, Noise, Historic
Resources and Aesthetics
Reference:
City of Long Beach
333 West Ocean Boulevard
Long Beach, CA 90802
Ms. Jill Griffiths
562/570 -6191
E i try nta p C Mport!
4 R*0,1911L t NEE
"G!A °
1�,R�OJiE���TV H �E
CGNStl LTING
Reconstruction of the Los Alamitos Pump Station
and Retarding Basin
Orange and Los Angeles Counties, CA
The Los Alamitos Pump Station was constructed in 1958 to pump Highlights:
storm water from low -lying marshlands up to the San Gabriel
® Reconstruction of a Major
River. In 1961 a portion of the discharge force -mains were
Storm Water Pump Station
siphoned in order to allow for the construction of a cooling tower
® Extensive Coordination
intake - channel for DWP's Haynes Electrical Generating Station.
and Permitting
Significant modifications to the pump station facility were made in
s Coastal Permitting
1980. Due to the facility's age, replacement parts for the motors
had become increasingly difficult to locate. Each discharge line
Reference:
outlets to the San Gabriel River. The original pump station was
constructed without a shelter and the motors were exposed to the
County of Orange Public Works
elements. The four discharge force -mains were 610 -ft in length
Department
and there was concern that the discharge lines may have partially
300 North Flower
corroded, cracked, or separated under the DWP intake - channel.
Santa Ana, CA 92703
Mr. Jim Volz
The original pump station was designed to convey 450 cfs.
714/834 -2037
RBF prepared plans, specifications, and estimates for a new 800 cfs
storm water pump station with engine driven pumps. Work
included preparation of a value engineering report, final
engineering report, hydrology and hydraulic routing, best
management practices for improving water quality, inspection and
analysis of existing 2,400 if of 54" discharge piping, Phase I and H
environmental assessments, geotechnical investigation, CEQA,
permit processing and coordination with agencies and homeowner
associations.
RBF also prepared the Delineation of Jurisdictional Waters and
acquired resource agency permits from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Section 404 Nationwide Permit 43), the California
Department of Fish and Game (1602 Streambed Alteration
Agreement), the Regional Water Quality Control Board (Section
401 Water Quality Certification), and the California Coastal
Commission (Coastal Development Permit) for the project.
F%IJ.
GONSULTINU
Ritz Carlton Resort Specific Plan /Program EIR
The Ritz Carlton Resort work program included the preparation of
a Specific Plan and EIR for 340 acres of coastal property located
within the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adjacent to the San
Pedro/Rancho Palos Verdes corporate boundary. The project
proposed construction of a 450 -room Ritz Carlton Resort, 18 -hole
championship golf course, 128 single - family custom estate lots, a
commercial village, and a variety of public amenities. RBF
prepared land use/site plan programs, a visual analysis document,
graphic designs /illustratives (i.e., resort conceptual landscape plan),
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) package, and the Specific Plan
document, including development standards and design guidelines.
RBF worked closely with the City of Rancho Palos Verdes to
achieve a grading design which preserved all existing ocean views,
as well as provided extensive public coastal access along the bluff
top. Major environmental issues addressed during the course of the
project design included geological stability, views, biological
resources, and land use constraints associated with development
within the Coastal Zone.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA
Highlights:
■ 340 -Acre Bluff Top
Development Site
■ 450 -Room Ritz Carlton
Resort
a 128 Custom Residential
Estate Lots
■ 18 -Hole Championship Golf
Course
■ Commercial Village
■ Public Amenities
Reference:
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA, 90275
Mr. Joel Rojas
310/544 -5228
■
CCN3U LTIN6
La Bahia Hotel EIR
Santa Cruz, CA
RBF prepared the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the La
Bahia Hotel project located in the Santa Cruz City Beach
commercial area, adjacent to Santa Cruz Boardwalk Amusement
Park.
The La Bahia project consists of demolition of a historic structure
and construction of a 125 -room hotel, parking garage, restaurant
and bar, spa, swimming pool, and conference facilities.
To accommodate the project, an amendment to the City's General
Plan/LCP Beach and South of Laurel Area Plan (B /SOL Area Plan)
and zoning ordinance will be required to permit the demolition of
all buildings and incorporation of "character defining elements" in
the architectural design. It would also allow an increase in height
up to 72.5 feet, subject to approval of the City Council.
Originally built in 1926, La Bahia represents a Spanish Colonial
Revival style of architecture. Design features such as internal
courtyards, varied levels, red Spanish tiles rolled roofing, and the
prominent tower secured La Bahia's designation as a Santa Cruz
city landmark. In addition, the site is eligible for State and
National Registers of historic properties. Demolition of this
resource was determined to be a significant unavoidable impact.
Environmental issues addressed in the EIR included: land use,
aesthetics, cultural and historic resources, traffic and transportation,
and water supply.
Highlights:
■ Tiered EIR
o Visual Simulations
s Historic Resources
■ Local Coastal Plan and
Coastal Act Consistency
Analysis
Reference:
City of Santa Cruz,
Redevelopment Agency
337 Locust Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Ms. Cell Cirillo, 831/420 -5150
FWF
CONSULTING
Beverly Hills Gardens and
Montage Hotel Mixed Use Project EIR
Beverly Hills, CA.
RBF was hired by the City of Beverly Hills to prepare Revised
Sections/Additional Alternatives to the Draft EIR, which had
already been circulated for a 45 -day review period and undergone
numerous hearings with the Planning Commission. The work
effort to complete the Revised Sections/Additional Alternatives
was completed in less than four weeks, when it was then circulated
for 45 days prior to hearings with the City Council.
The project proposed a 228 -room hotel with 25 residential units
and ancillary retail, dining, banquet, and spa facilities; 33,000
square -foot public gardens space, subterranean parking with up to
1,508 spaces; and a building lining the public garden space with a
mix of commercial space and habitable units. The technical
analysis included site access review, truck loading operations,
parking analysis, air quality analysis, and noise analysis.
Construction for the project was completed in 2009.
Highlights:
E 228 -Room, Five -Star Hotel
■ 25 Condominium Units
E Public Gardens
E Four -Week Work Product
Turnaround
Reference:
City of Beverly Hills
455 North Rexford Drive
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
Mr. Larry Sakurai
310/285 -1123
■
CONSI�LTING
Dana Point Harbor. Revitalization -EIR
Dana Point, CA
RBF prepared a Program EIR for this high profile coastal
revitalization project. The project, developed through several years
of community / stakeholder meetings and concept development
planning, proposes a comprehensive range of land use and
infrastructure enhancements to improve the overall function,
appearance, and community value of the harbor, while maintaining
the Harbor's historic small craft character. Key land use changes
associated with the project include a new parking structure,
additional retail, creation of a Festival Plaza and pedestrian
promenade, addition of a dry - stacked boat storage system capable
of handling up to 800 boats, dock modifications to accommodate
larger boats and improve guest boater access and ADA compliance,
potential future hotel expansion, marinelembarcadero
improvements, - and related infrastructure improvements such as
wastewater, drainage and water quality. RBF is also assisting in
preparing the Local Coastal Plan Amendment and Planned
Community Text Amendment to allow project implementation.
Key environmental issues include construction- related access for
businesses and visitors, temporary off -site staging and parking
areas, long -term changes in parking and access, traffic, coastal
access, coastal visual impacts, regulatory agency permitting issues,
compliance with local plans/policies including the Coastal Act,
marine biological resources (including shorebirds), and water
quality. One of the project's many objectives is to improve water
quality through incorporation of state -of -the -art BMP measures, as
well as exploring potential diversion opportunities to reduce water
quality issues at the popular Baby's Beach.
Highlights:
• Program EIR
• Local Coastal Plan
Amendment
• Extensive Public Outreach
• Off -site Staging Areas
Reference:
County of Orange Public Works
Department
300 North Flower
Santa Ana, CA 92703
Mr. Ronald Tippets
714/834 -5394
CONSULTING
Southeast Coastal Redevelopment Plan
Program EIR
City of Huntington Beach, CA
Highlights:
• 172 -Acre Coastal
Redevelopment Area
• On -Site Land Uses Include
the AES Generating Station,
a State- Listed Superfund
Site, Wetlands, and Various
Industrial Uses
■ Extensive Public
Outreach Program
Reference:
Rosenow Spevacek Group (RSG)
309 West 4th Street
Santa Ana, CA 92701
Mr. Jim Simon
714/541 -4505
■
CONSIILTIN6
RBF prepared the Program EIR for the 172 -acre Southeast Coastal
Redevelopment Plan for the City of Huntington Beach. The Plan
proposed to generate tax increment revenues to facilitate
improvements to the blighted project area without changing
General Plan or Zoning designations. On -site land uses include the
AES Generating Station, a state - listed Superfund site, wetlands,
and various industrial uses. The.site is adjacent to Pacific Coast
Highway, and is bordered by residential uses on three sides, and
Edison Community Center and a former landfill to the North.
Key issues analyzed within the EIR included land use, relevant
planning, traffic, aesthetics, biological resources, geology, noise,
air quality, and cultural resources.
The environmental process for this project involved an extensive
public outreach program, which included numerous community
meetings and public hearings to obtain public input on the scope of
environmental issues analyzed within the EIR
�E SEA! d
9 FZ
�'NTY,
SUBCONSULTANT EXPERIENCE SUMMARY
RBF Consulting regularly works with qualified subconsultants to provide specialized field and
technical services, and we have worked with all of the following subconsultants on previous or
current environmental planning projects. In order to foster an effective working team relationship,
RBF maintains regular and frequent contact with our subconsultant team members in orderto review
project scope, schedule and current issues. All subconsultant work is required to meet the same
work standards as RBF.
Harmsworth & Associates
Harmsworth & Associates (HWA) is a team of highly qualified environmental consultants experienced
in the field of environmental resource analysis and assessment. The firm has been located in
Orange County since 1984 and specializes in:
• Biological Resources Surreys and Analysis,
• Environmental Permitting,
• Environmental Documents,
• Mitigation Monitoring and Compliance, and
• Habitat Restoration.
HWA's team of flexible and innovative staff has extensive experience in biological resource analysis,
environmental permitting and documentation, and habitat restoration associated with wetlands,
riparian and aquatic systems. HWA has extensive experience with all aspects of biological
compliance, including:
• Habitat assessment and focused surveys for Threatened /Endangered species and other
sensitive species and habitats,
• Biological technical studies for proposed developments and projects,
• Construction monitoring in compliance with permit requirements and city /county requirements,
• Determination of impacts to biological resources,
• Mitigation for impacts, including habitat restoration,
• Co- ordination and approvals from USFWS, CDFG, cities /counties and other agencies,
• Wetland delineations and 404/1600 permitting, and
• Co- ordination and permit approvals from Corps and CDFG.
SWCA
Dr. Steven W. Carothers founded SWCA, Inc., in 1981 as a NEPA and environmental science firm.
SWCA has since expanded from a sole proprietorship to a 100% employee -owned corporation with
more than 600 employees and 23 offices in 12 states. SWCA's presence in California dates to 2001
and includes offices in Pasadena, San Luis Obispo, and Half Moon Bay.
SWCA's cultural resources specialists in California include seven Registered Professional
Archaeologists with as many as 20 years of individual experience, five Secretary of the Interior -
qualified Architectural Historians, as well as a full complement of experienced support staff. We
specialize in compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA; including
Sections 106 and 110) and the cultural resources requirements of CEQA.
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Docu mentation
JN 10- 107353 • 53 • August 2, 2010
of sEat a City of Seal Beach
PO Fq �' * Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
�g6Q Environmental Compliance Documentation
r
� N 21
NNTY. Cp`�
SWCA's archaeological services include: literature searches, reconnaissance studies, intensive
archaeological surveys, preservation and treatment plans, memoranda of agreement, site
testing /evaluation for California Register of Historical Resources /National Register of Historic Places -
eligibility, full -scale excavation for data recovery, construction monitoring, impact mitigation
management, and site preservation. SWCA professional archaeologists are thoroughly familiarwith
applicable regulations governing the treatment of cultural resources and experienced at the methods
and techniques necessary to undertake such studies. Additionally, the firm maintains the laboratories
and equipment required for any cultural resource undertaking.
SWCA combines extensive experience with innovative, cost - effective, and common sense strategies
for the assessment, management, mitigation, and conservation of paleontological resources. SWCA
also provides all aspects of paleontological resource services, including monitoring and mitigation,
third -party review, assessment, collection, documentation, analysis, preparation, conservation, and
education. SWCA assists their clients in obtaining paleontological permits and clearances, facilitate
the achievement of paleontological resource management objectives, and design and produce
educational and interpretive displays. Paleontology sections of NEPA and CEQA documents
prepared by SWCA staff are both science -based and readable.
SWCA's scientists and resource specialists work closely with land managers, regulatory agencies,
public and private sector clients and museums. SWCA's paleontological team includes experienced
and permitted field personnel and laboratory technicians all backed by a motivated support staff.
SWCA teams with museum professionals and other specialists on a regular basis to allow us to
respond to expedited schedules and compressed timeframes.
Scott Magorien, CEG, Consulting Geologist
For the past 30 years, Mr. Magorien has served as the principal geologic investigator for numerous
hillside and coastal residential and commercial projects throughout southern California. This work
has included preparation of the geology, soils and seismicity sections for more than 40 CEQA -level
studies and EIR reports for both large and small residential, commercial and industrial projects
throughout southern California. The scope of Mr. Magorien's work involves the review of
geologic /geotechnical issues associated with active faulting and secondary seismic hazards (i.e.,
liquefaction, seismically induced landslides and soil settlement, lateral spreading, etc.), slope
stability /landslide mitigation, impacts of proposed grading /landform modification on soil erosion,
groundwater conditions, as well as other geologic hazards and geotechnical constraints. Mr.
Magorien has also served as a geotechnical consultant to the Grading Section of the Orange County
Environmental Management Agency. For the last nine years, Mr. Magorien has also served as a
technical expert to the California State Board of Registration for Geologists and Geophysicists.
Most recently, Mr. Magorien served as the principal investigator for the large landslide that occurred
within the Ocean Trails Golf Course in Rancho Palos Verdes; provided EIR -level review services to
the City for the proposed Long Point golf course and hotel project; and provided an independent
evaluation of potential slope instability next to Marymount College and bordering the South Shores
landslide. Mr. Magorien also provided engineering geologic services to the Hellman Ranch project in
Seal Beach.
JN 10- 107353 • 54 • August 2, 2010
�E SEA( d
P�� Fq�s
y Cf p 27
�D'NTY. gyp`
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
En vironmental Compliance Documentation
V. REFERENCES
RBF Client references are provided below. Additional references are available upon request.
Ms. Kimberly Christensen, AICP
Planning Manager
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
350 Main Street
El Segundo, California 90245
310.524.2300
Ms. Jill Griffiths
Advanced Planning Officer
CITY OF LONG BEACH
333 W. Ocean Boulevard, 5 Floor
Long Beach, California 90802
562.570.6357
Mr. Ted Commerdinger, AICP
Planning Manager
CITY OF CYPRESS
5275 Orange Avenue
Cypress, California 90630
714.229.6720
Mr. Joel Rojas
Community Development Director
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes, California 90275
310.544.5228
Mr. Peter Fait
Associate Planner
CITY OF CORONADO
1825 Strand Way
Coronado, California 92118
619.522.2414
Ms. Karen Johnston
Deputy Town Manager
TOWN OF MAMMOTH LAKES
437 Old Mammoth Road
Mammoth Lakes, California 93546
760.934.8989
JN 10- 107353 • 55 a August 2, 2010
of SEA( City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
* - L Envi ronmental Compliance Documentation
yc�C a 77
NTY. GP
VI. PROJECT TEAM
The following are brief background descriptions for the key professionals who would be responsible
for preparing the environmental documentation. The percentage of hours of each staff member and
individual tasks are included in the Fee Summary.
p � SEAI g
ti a 1 1 , f'
`S'
fi r:
Biological Resources
* — �
Irrx�"`
CONSULTIN93
Paul Halvin
Harmsworth & Associates (H &A)
- --
SWCA
Rita Garcia
rM IRONI MN CONSYIUNTS
Glenn Lajoie, AICP
Collette Morse, AICP
Eddie Torres, INCE, REA
AlrQuality/
Biological Resources
Land Use
Climate Change
Paul Halvin
Eddie Torres, INCE, REA
Eddie Torres, INCE, REA
Narmj"r(h &Assarores
Rita Garcia
Achilles Malisos
Cultural Resources
Geological
Jeff Dietler, PhD
Jurisdictional
Delineation
Hazards /Soils
swU
Richard Beck CEM. REA
Scott Magorien. CEG
Parks and Recreation
Hydrology/
Rita Garcia
Traffic/Transportation
Water Quality
Bob Matson
Rebecca Kinney. PE
Public Service & Utilities
Paul Martin, PE. PME
Rita Garcia
Kristien Bogue, REA
Noise
Growth, Population
Eddie Torres, INCE, REA
Visual Resources
& Housing
Achilles Malisos
EddieTorres. INCE, REA
Rita Garcia
Kristen Bogue, REA
Kristen Bogue, REA
JN 10- 107353 • 56 • August 2, 2010
�F SEA( d
9�lv 2
NTY. gyp`
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Documentation
GLENN LAJOIE, AICP I PROJECT MANAGER
Reg is trati o n/C a rtiPi cati o n:
1994, American Institute of Certiflied
Planners, 087288
Years Experience: 24
Education:
B.A., 1985, Geography /Urban Studies, California State University,
Long Beach
M.P.A., 1992, Public Policy and Administration, California State
University, Long Beach
Professional Affiliations:
Full Member, American Planning Association
Full Member, Association of Environmental Professionals
Member, Orange County American Planning Association Board of
Directors, 1992 -1997
President, Orange County American Planning Association, 1994 -1996
Lecturer, California State University, Long Beach
Mr. Lajoie's primary responsibilities include oversight of daily operations, management of projects, staff
mentoring and instruction, scheduling, and business development. With many years of practical experience,
Mr. Lajoie is a recognized leader in CEQA and NEPA studies (EIR's, EIS's, Negative Declarations,
Environmental Assessments), as well as other policy planning documents, including General Plans, Area
Plans, Specific Plans, and due diligence studies. Projects have ranged from private entitlement applications
related to residential and commercial projects as well as a variety of water, wastewater, highway, and
redevelopment projects throughout California. Project responsibilities include analysis, technical review and
management of environmental and policy planning documentation for compliance with CEQA/NEPA,
implementation of public participation programs, and assistance to various public and private sector clients in
meeting the requirements of local, State, and Federal agencies.
Relevant Experience:
• Beverly Hills Gardens and Montage Hotel Mixed Use Project EIR (Beverly Hills, CA)
• Boeing Specific Plan Program EIR (Seal Beach, CA)
• Buena Park General Plan Update /Program EIR (Buena Park, CA)
• Citywide Capital Improvement Project MND (Seal Beach, CA)
• Downtown and Central Long Beach Redevelopment Plans Master EIR (Long Beach, CA)
• Hampton Inn MND (El Segundo, CA)
• Hotel Del Coronado Master Plan EIR (Coronado, CA)
• Long Point Resort EIR (Rancho Palos Verdes, CA)
• Marblehead Coastal EIR (San Clemente, CA)
• Marymount College Facilities Expansion EIR (Rancho Palos Verdes, CA)
• North Downtown Lancaster Neighborhood Revitalization / Transit Village Plan EIR/EA (Lancaster, CA)
• Oasis Road Specific Plan Master EIR (Redding, CA)
• Old Town Yucca Valley Specific Plan Program EIR (Yucca Valley, CA)
• Pacific Gateway Plaza Project MND (Seal Beach, CA)
• Ritz Carlton (Rancho Palos Verdes, CA)
• Rivers End Staging Area & San Gabriel Bikeway Enhancement Plan MND (Seal Beach, CA)
• Seal Beach Townhomes Project MND (Seal Beach, CA)
• Shoreline Gateway EIR (Long Beach, CA)
• South Pasadena Downtown Revitalization EIR (South Pasadena, CA)
• The Clearwater Specific Plan EIR (Mammoth Lakes, CA)
JN 10- 107353 • 57 a August 2, 2010
pE SEA( City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
p Envir Compliance Documentation
y G'f q 77 \ga \
AUNTY, gyp`
COLLETTE MORSE, AICP I CEQA ADVISOR
Reg istratio n/Ce rtificatio n:
1996, American Institute of Certified
Planners, 12382
Years Experience: 24
Education:
B.A., 1984, Geography/ Ecosystems, U.C.L.A.
Professional Affiliations:
Commissioner, American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) for
Region VI, 2006 — 2010
Past President, California Chapter, American Planning Association,
2005
President, California Chapter, American Planning Association, 2003 to
2004
Ms. Morse's primary responsibilities at RBF include the preparation of CEQA and NEPA documents
(Environmental Impact Reports, Negative Declarations, Initial Studies, Environmental Assessments), aswell
as other policy planning documents, including General Plans and Specific Plans. She has prepared
environmental documents for policy plans, mixed -use developments, high -rise office, commercial, residential,
industrial, schools (elementary, high school, and colleges/universities), hospitals, and redevelopment projects
for both public and private sector clients throughout California. Ms. Morse's responsibilities include analysis,
technical review and management of environmental documents for CEQA compliance, staff support for public
agencies, and assistance to private sector clients in meeting governmental agency requirements. Ms. Morse is
also responsible for updating and implementing RBF's in -house QA/QC program.
Relevant Experience:
• Beverly Hills Gardens and Montage Hotel Mixed Use Project EIR (Beverly Hills, CA)
• Carson General Plan Update and EIR (Carson, CA)
• Cerritos General Plan Update and EIR (Cerritos, CA)
• Costa Mesa General Plan Update and EIR (Costa Mesa, CA)
• Cypress General Plan Update and EIR (Cypress, CA)
• Duarte General Plan EIR (Duarte, CA)
• Fullerton General Plan Update EIR (Fullerton, CA)
• Garden Grove General Plan Update and EIR (Garden Grove, CA)
• Glendora General Plan Update (Glendora, CA)
• Goleta General Plan Existing Conditions and Community Outreach (Goleta, CA)
• Hi Hope Ranch MND (Oceanside, CA)
• Historic Town Center EIR (San Juan Capistrano, CA)
• Mariners Mile Gateway MND (Newport Beach, CA)
• Pacific Coast Highway Corridor Affordable Housing Projects EIR (Signal Hill, CA)
• Pier Bowl Master Plan Program EIR (San Clemente, CA)
• Prescott Valley 2020 General Plan (Prescott Valley, AZ)
• Rancho Del Oro Village XII Program EIR (Oceanside, CA)
• Rush Creek Estates EIR (Mann County, CA)
• South Gate General Plan EIR (South Gate, CA)
• St. Cloud Residential MND (Oceanside, CA)
• Stanton General Plan EIR (Stanton, CA)
• Temecula General Plan EIR (Temecula, CA)
JN 10- 107353 • 58 • August 2, 2010
of SEAL a City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
z
Environmental Compliance Documentation
°� bq
�NNTY. GP
EDWARD TORRES, INCE REA I PROJECT COORDINATOR
Registration /Certification:
2003, Institute of Noise Control Engineers
2009, Registered Environmental Assessor,
30154
Years Experience: 11
Education:
B.A., 2000, Environmental Analysis and Design, University of
California, Irvine
B.S., 2000, Mechanical Engineering, University of California, Irvine
M.S., 2005, Mechanical Engineering, University of Southern California
Professional Affiliations:
American Planning Association
Air & Waste Management Association
Acoustical Society of America
Institute of Noise Control Engineering
Americ Institute of Physics
Mr. Torres serves as the Director of Technical Studies, with a specialty in Acoustics, Air Quality, Climate
Change, and Visual Impact Assessments. Mr. Torres leads RBF's efforts to be at the forefront of Global
Climate Change studies. Mr. Torres has prepared numerous analyses that are consistent with climate change
legislation such as Assembly Bill 32, Senate Bill 97, Executive Order S -3 -05, and Senate Bill 375. In addition
to analyzing climate change impacts, Mr. Torres has led the development of numerous greenhouse gas
inventory models which calculate greenhouse gas emissions from such sources as vehicular traffic, stationary
sources, electricity consumption, water consumption, wastewater treatment, and construction processes.
Mr. Torres has also been selected by the California Energy Commission (CEC) to co -lead a set of technical
working groups to develop energy and GHG assessment protocols for single buildings, land use and
infrastructure projects. The program was developed through a Public Interest Energy Research (PIER) grant
to facilitating a series of technical working groups that bring together diverse sets of subject matter experts,
emphasizing individuals with combinations of "front line" experience and vision for the implications for public
policy, regulation, and market transformation. The following is a representative sample of projects forwhich
Mr. Torres has prepared environmental and technical analyses.
Relevant Experience:
• Beverly Hills Gardens and Montage Hotel Mixed Use Project EIR (Beverly Hills, CA)
• Boeing Specific Plan Program EIR (Seal Beach, CA)
• Citywide Capital Improvement Project MND (Seal Beach, CA)
• Dana Point Harbor Revitalization EIR (Dana Point, CA)
• Fullerton Climate Action Plan (Fullerton, CA)
• Hawaiian Gardens General Plan Update EIR (Hawaiian Gardens, CA)
• Historic Downtown Upland Specific Plan Program EIR (Upland, CA)
• Hotel del Coronado Specific Plan Program EIR (Coronado, CA)
• Mammoth Clearwater Specific Plan EIR (Mammoth Lakes, CA)
• Marblehead Coastal EIR (San Clemente, CA)
• Marymount College Facilities Expansion EIR (Rancho Palos Verdes, CA)
• Mumeta Climate Action Plan (Murrieta, CA)
• Pacific Gateway Plaza Project MND (Seal Beach, CA)
• Palmdale Transit Village Specific Plan Program EIR (Palmdale, CA)
• Plan Amendment No. 13 to Existing Project Area No.1 Program EIR (South Gate, CA)
• Rio Bravo Ranch Specific Plan Program EIR (Bakersfield, CA)
• Rivers End Staging Area & San Gabriel Bikeway Enhancement Plan MND (Seal Beach, CA)
• Seal Beach Townhomes Project MND (Seal Beach, CA)
JN 10- 107353 • 59 • August 2, 2010
Q E SEA( 6
� r
'NTY.
RITA GARCIA I SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYST
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Documentation
Years Experience: 20
Education:
B.S., 1988, Urban and Regional Planning, California State Polytechnic
University, Pomona
Professional Affiliations:
American Planning Association
Association of Environmental Professionals
In her responsibilities as Senior Environmental Analyst, Ms. Garcia is involved in the preparation, daily
monitoring and coordination of CEQA documents, ensuring their timely completion reflective of the highest
standard of professional care. With over 20 years in the environmental field, Ms. Garcia has extensive
experience with projects involving sensitive planning and environmental issues including land use compatibility,
noise, traffic /circulation, and population /housing /employment. She has had significant involvement with
environmental analyses of numerous large -scale coastal projects including the Long -Point Resort EIR which
involves sensitive aesthetic, biological, cultural, geological and public health /safety issues. Additional
professional experience includes various large -scale EIR's such as the Boeing Specific Plan EIR, Dana point
Harbor Revitalization EIR, Robinson Ranch North Program EIR, the Alberhill /Lake Elsinore Sports and
Entertainment Center Program EIR, the FedEx Distribution Center FEIR, the Hotel del Coronado Master Plan
EIR, the Big Sky Ranch EIR, and the Route 101 /Airport North Interchange EIR.
Relevant Experience:
• Beverly Hills Gardens and Montage Hotel Mixed Use Project EIR (Beverly Hills, CA)
• Boeing Specific Plan Program EIR (Seal Beach, CA)
• Buena Park General Plan Update /Program EIR (Buena Park, CA)
• Citywide Capital Improvement Project MND (Seal Beach, CA)
• Crestridge Senior Housing EIR (Rancho Palos Verdes, CA)
• Downtown and Central Long Beach Redevelopment Plans Master EIR (Long Beach, CA)
• Edison Mission Energy Solar Photovoltaic Due Diligence Studies (Various locations, CA)
• Hotel Del Coronado Master Plan EIR (Coronado, CA)
• Long Point Resort EIR (Rancho Palos Verdes, CA)
• Marblehead Coastal EIR (San Clemente, CA)
• Marymount College Facilities Expansion EIR (Rancho Palos Verdes, CA)
• North Downtown Lancaster Neighborhood Revitalization / Transit Village Plan EIR/EA (Lancaster, CA)
• Oasis Road Specific Plan Master EIR (Redding, CA)
• Old Town Yucca Valley Specific Plan Program EIR (Yucca Valley, CA)
• Pacific Gateway Plaza Project MND (Seal Beach, CA)
• Ritz Carlton (Rancho Palos Verdes, CA)
• Rivers End Staging Area & San Gabriel Bikeway Enhancement Plan MND (Seal Beach, CA)
• Seal Beach Townhomes Project MND (Seal Beach, CA)
• Shoreline Gateway EIR (Long Beach, CA)
• South Pasadena Downtown Revitalization EIR (South Pasadena, CA)
■ The Clearwater Specific Plan EIR (Mammoth Lakes, CA)
JN 10- 107363 • 60 • August 2, 2010
of SEA( 9
y c�n 21
Wil, 6P��
KRISTEN BOGUE, CEI I ENVIR ONMENTAL ANALYST
Registration /Certification: Education:
2007, Certified Environmental Inspector, B.A., 2005, Environmental Analysis and Design, University of
9924 California, Irvine
Years Experience: 5 Professional Affiliations:
Association of Environmental Professionals
Ms. Bogue assists in the preparation of environmental and planning studies for public and private sector
clients, with a focus on due diligence planning activities. Ms. Bogue specializes in the preparation of
hazardous materials studies and visual analysis services.
Ms. Bogue has prepared numerous hazardous materials related studies. Ms. Bogue prepares Phase I
Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs), Initial Site Assessments (ISAs) for the California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans), Preliminary Hazardous Materials Assessments pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and Environmental Baseline Surveys (EBSs) for the Department of the
Navy. The scopes of the ESAs and ISAs follow guidance provided in American Society for Testing Materials
(ASTM) Standard Practice E 1527 -05. The ASTM 1527 -05 document outlines a procedure for completing
ESAs that includes a review of records (current and historic), site reconnaissance, and interviews. Other
hazardous materials related studies follow the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines
pertaining to hazardous materials.
Additionally, Ms. Bogue is involved with Visual Impact Assessments in conformance with appropriate agency
standards, including the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) "Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) for
Highway Projects," United States Bureau of Land Management guidelines, and California Energy Commission
(CEC) guidelines. Ms. Bogue assists in the preparation of documents with respect to CEQA and the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Visual Services include the preparation of photosimulations, shade and
shadow studies, as well as viewshed mapping.
Relevant Experience:
• Atkinson Lane Specific Plan /Master Plan (Santa Cruz County, CA)
• Citywide Capital Improvement Project MND (Seal Beach, CA)
• Clearwater Specific Plan EIR (Mammoth Lakes, CA)
• Crossroads Plaza Commercial Center Initial Study and EIR (Bakersfield, CA)
• Dana Point Harbor Revitalization EIR (Dana Point, CA)
• Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension (Corona, CA)
• Hercules Town Center Project EIR (Hercules, CA)
• Holiday Haus Project MND (Mammoth Lakes, CA)
• The Lakes Project EIR (Ontario, CA)
• Lincoln Acres Library and Community Center Project (Cypress, CA)
• Los Gatos General Plan Update (Los Gatos, CA)
• Main Street Widening Project MND (Orange, CA)
• Naples Seawall Interim and Long Range Repair IS /MND (Long Beach, CA)
• Osborne Hill Project EIR (Nevada County, CA)
• Ponto Beachfront Vision Plan Due Diligence (Carlsbad, CA)
• The Sherwin Project EIR (Mammoth Lakes, CA)
• Salt Creek Heights Subdivision Initial Study and EIR (Redding, CA)
• Seal Bea ch Townhomes Project MND (Seal Beach, CA)
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Documentation
JN 10- 107353 • 61 • August 2, 2010
�E SEA( 9
�a �Wa�a�r Fq�s
yCF R 27
WX CP
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Documentation
ACHILLES MALISOS I AIR, NOISE, AND CLIMATE CHANGE
Years Experience: 5 Education:
M.A., 2005, Urban and Regional Planning, UC Irvine
Additional Training: B.A., 2003, Environmental Studies, University of California, Santa Cruz
UCLA Extension, "Successful CEQA
Compliance," 2006. Professional Affiliations:
Trinity Consultants, "Practical Air Dispersion Air and Waste Management Association
Modeling Workshop," July 2008.
Achilles Malisos serves as an Environmental Analyst, with a specialty in Acoustics, Air Quality, and Climate
Change. Achilles has experience in the research, analysis, and writing of analyses consistent with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for a variety of
environmental planning projects involving redevelopment, infrastructure, residential, mixed use, institutional,
and commercial uses.
Mr. Malisos has the ability to implement a full analysis methodology per Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), CARB, Air Pollution Control District/Air Quality Management District, and Caltrans /FHWA guidelines.
His expertise in Air Quality /Greenhouse Gas Assessments includes technical modeling experience using
various state and federally approved programs including URBEMIS2007, AERMOD, CALINE4, and
EMFAC2007. As part of his work on air quality assessments, he has been involved with RBF's Global Climate
Change studies. RBF's climate change analyses are prepared in compliance with recent legislation such as
Assembly Bill 32, Senate Bill 97, Executive Order S -3 -05, and Senate Bill 375. Mr. Malisos has developed
numerous greenhouse gas inventory models which calculate existing and future greenhouse gas emissions
from vehicular traffic, stationary sources, electricity consumption, water consumption, wastewater treatment,
and construction processes.
Mr. Malisos also provides a full range of noise impact analyses for public and private sector clients, in
accordance with local, state and federal impact assessment criteria. Noise impact analyses are prepared as
part of environmental documents or as separate studies, addressing changes in ambient and noise levels
associated with vehicle traffic, rail traffic, aircraft, and stationary sources. Mr. Malisos utilizes his experience
with noise monitoring using Type I rated instruments, as well as sophisticated noise modeling using FHWA-
RD -77 -108 and Traffic Noise Model 2.5 to develop noise barrier recommendations where necessary.
Additionally, Mr. Malisos has the ability to provide integrated GIS based maps depicting roadway noise
contours and sensitive receptors.
Current Experience:
• Coastal Water Project (Monterey County, CA)
• Crestridge Senior Villas EIR (Rancho Palos Verdes, CA)
• Dana Point Harbor Revitalization EIR (Dana Point, CA)
• Fullerton Climate Action Plan (Fullerton, CA)
• Huntington Beach Desalination Facility EIR (Huntington Beach, CA)
• La Bahia Hotel Project (Santa Cruz, CA)
• Los Alamitos Pump Station MND (Los Angeles and Orange Counties, CA)
• Marymount College Facilities Expansion EIR (Rancho Palos Verdes, CA)
• Murrieta Climate Action Plan (Murrieta, CA)
• Naples Seawall Interim and Long Range Repair IS /MND (Long Beach, CA)
• Pacific Coast Highway /2nd Street Improvement MND (Long Beach, CA)
• Pacific Gateway Plaza MND (Seal Beach, CA)
• Rivers End Staging Area and San Gabriel River Bikeway Enhancement Plan, IS /MND (Seal Beach, CA)
• Seal Beach Townhomes MND (Seal Beach, CA)
JN 10- 107353 • 62 • August 2, 2010
of sEAt a City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
c
Env i ro nmental Compliance Documentation
9
y G , FA 27
V1. Cp
REBECCA KINNEY, PE I HYDROLOGY QUALITY
Reg istratio n /Certification:
1999, Civil Engineer, CA, 58797
Years Experience: 14
Education:
B.S., 1995, Civil Engineering, California Polytechnic State University,
San Luis Obispo
Professional Affiliations:
Member, Society of Women Engineers
Associate Member, American Society of Civil Engineers
Ms. Kinney has extensive experience in all phases of stormwater management projects including planning,
design and construction. Her recent experience has focused on development of Master Plans of Drainage,
which focus on storm drainage facility sizing, stormwater NPDES compliance, stream stability, and floodplain
management. Her planning experience includes large master planned communities and well as supporting
hydrologic and stormwater quality analysis as a basis for CEQA documentation. Ms. Kinney has prepared
Water Quality Management Plans, Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans, and CEQA water quality technical
studies.
Ms. Kinney is experienced in channel restoration design work including hydrologic and hydraulic modeling and
PS &E work. Ms. Kinney has also served as a regulatory agent for the application of 404 Corps of Engineers,
401 California Regional Water Quality Control Board, and 1601/1603 California of Department of Fish and
Game permits. She received Wetland Delineation training bythe Wetland Training Institute. Her knowledge
of both engineering and environmental requirements makes her an asset to any multi - disciplinary team.
Rebecca Kinney has extensive experience in all areas of floodplain management and floodplain revisions.
She has completed over 20 different floodplain mapping and revision projects for Cities, Counties, Developers,
and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. Ms. Kinney's experience includes numerous Flood Insurance
Rate Map (FIRM) Revisions including both Conditional Letters of Map Revisions and Letters of Map Revision.
Her FIRM revision experience includes processing map revision model by approximate methods and detailed
methods including floodway models. She is also well versed in computer modeling of hydraulic systems
utilizing HEC -RAS River Analysis System, HEC -2, and Water Surface Pressure Gradient (WSPG).
Relevant Experience:
• Dana Point Harbor Revitalization EIR (Dana Point, CA)
• Long Point Resort EIR (Rancho Palos Verdes, CA)
• Los Alamitos Pump Station MND (Los Angeles and Orange Counties, CA)
• Marblehead Coastal EIR (San Clemente, CA)
• Marymount College Facilities Expansion EIR (Rancho Palos Verdes, CA)
• North Downtown Lancaster Neighborhood Revitalization / Transit Village Plan EIR/EA (Lancaster, CA)
• Oasis Road Specific Plan Master EIR (Redding, CA)
• Old Town Yucca Valley Specific Plan Program EIR (Yucca Valley, CA)
• Pacific Coast Highway /2nd Street Improvement MND (Long Beach, CA)
• Pacific Gateway Plaza MND (Seal Beach, CA)
• Ritz Carlton (Rancho Palos Verdes, CA)
• Seal Beach Townhomes Project MND (Seal Beach, CA)
• Shoreline Gateway EIR (Long Beach, CA)
• South Pasadena Downtown Revitalizati EIR (South Pasadena, CA)
JN 10- 107353 • 63 • August 2, 2010
OE SEA( 9
tr. cp`�
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Documentation
BOB MATSON I TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
Years Experience: 25
Education:
B.S., 1984, Engineering Technology, California State Polytechnic
University, Pomona
Certificate, 1988, Land Use and Development Planning, University of
California, Irvine
Professional Affiliations:
Member, Institute of Transoortation
Mr. Matson has manyyears of diverse traffic and transportation experience in preparing a wide range of traffic
studies and transportation planning analyses. He is responsible for managing traffic and transportation studies
for planning, environmental and engineering projects. His experience encompasses serving as the Manager
of Transportation for the Irvine Company for major land use planning, entitlements for generating traffic impact
analyses for Caltrans on an on call basis. Mr. Matson and his staff generate a variety of traffic/transportation
studies to analyze and document projects at various stages of development, such as conceptual planning,
preliminary engineering, agency general plan /zoning modifications, environmental documentation,
project/infrastructure phasing, site plans, tract maps, final engineering, construction traffic management plans,
and parking studies. Mr. Matson received his B.S. in Engineering from California State Polytechnic University,
Pomona and Social Ecology Development and Land Use Planning Certification from the University of
California, Irvine, along with numerous Institute of Transportation Studies certifications.
Relevant Experience:
• Beverly Hills Gardens and Montage Hotel Mixed Use Project EIR (Beverly Hills, CA)
• Buena Vista Casino Project Traffic Analysis Support to Agency Staff (Amador County, CA)
• Casino Morongo Roundabout Traffic Visual Simulations (Palm Desert, CA)
• Downtown Laguna Beach Traffic Circulation and Parking Management Analysis (Laguna Beach, CA)
• Downtown Lancaster Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis (Lancaster, CA)
• Downtown and Central Long Beach Redevelopment Plans Master EIR (Long Beach, CA)
• Downtown Siena Madre Specific Plan and Program EIR Project Traffic and Parking Impact Analysis (Sierra Madre, CA)
• Hotel Del Coronado Master Plan EIR (Coronado, CA)
• Long Point Resort EIR (Rancho Palos Verdes, CA)
• Los Alamitos Medical Center Traffic Impact Analysis (Los Alamitos, CA)
• Marblehead Coastal EIR (San Clemente, CA)
• Marymount College Facilities Expansion EIR (Rancho Palos Verdes, CA)
• North Downtown Lancaster Neighborhood Revitalization / Transit Village Plan EIR/EA (Lancaster, CA)
• Oasis Road Specific Plan Master EIR (Redding, CA)
• Old Town Yucca Valley Specific Plan Program EIR (Yucca Valley, CA)
• Perris Downtown Specific Plan Traffic and Parking Analysis (Perris, CA)
• Plymouth Casino Project Traffic Analysis Support to Agency Staff (Amador County, CA)
• San Fernando Downtown Parking Lots Project Traffic and Parking Impact Analysis(San Femando, CA)
• Seal Beach Townhomes Project MND (Seal Beach, CA)
• South Pasadena Downtown Revitalization Project Traffic and Parking Impact Analysis (South Pasadena, CA)
• Torrance Citywide Comprehensive Traffic Study (Torrance, CA)
JN 10- 107353 *649 August 2, 2010
SEA q � City of Seal Beach
* * Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmenta Complia Documentation
9 62
S v
RICHARD BECK, REA, CEM CEI I JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION
Reg istration /Certification:
2005, Registered Environmental Assessor,
8065
2007, Certified Environmental Manager,
10084
2007, Certified Environmental Inspector,
10084
Years Experience: 11
Education:
B.A., 2000, Environmental Studies, University of California, Santa Cruz
Professional Affiliations:
Association of Environmental Professionals
Building Industry Association
Home Builders Council
BIA Next Generation Group
US Green Building Council
Environmental Assessment Advisory Committee
Richard Beck manages Regulatory Services for RBF's California, Arizona, and Nevada offices. Mr. Beck
specializes in due diligence planning activities and regulatory permit processing, pursuant to the Clean Water
Act (CWA), the California Porter - Cologne Act, the California Fish and Game Code, the Endangered Species
Act, and the California Coastal Act. As a Certified delineator, Mr. Beck has conducted hundreds of
delineations for projects ranging in size from less than 1.0 -acre to more than 1,600- acres. Mr. Beck has
effectively drafted and processed numerous state and federal regulatory applications for residential,
restoration, commercial, flood control, institutional, and transportation projects.
Mr. Beck also has experience in the restoration of riparian ecosystems. Mr. Beck has assisted with the
topographic design, preparation of plant palettes and processing of state and federal regulatory approvals for
various public and private sector projects throughout California. Ecosystem projects have included Morning
Canyon and Buck Gully along the Newport Coast, the County of Orange Wildlife Mitigation Corridor and
creeks impacted by hydromodification within OC Parks. Mr. Beck also specializes in watershed management
activities, ranging from water quality to habitat issues. In 2008, Mr. Beck co- authored Watershed
Management: Integrating People, Land and Water, a resource manual to the watershed approach. Mr. Beck
is providing regulatory guidance on the Steering Committee for the Integrated Regional Watershed
Management Plan for Orange County, CA (Phase III).
Routine duties include supervision of delineation field crew; regulatory specialists that draft, coordinate, and
process state and federal regulatory agency applications; and direct liaison work between public and private
sector clients and regulatory agency staff. Mr. Beck's years of significant regulatory coordination has led to
trusted relationships with regulatory staff at all levels. As a key component to the above processes, Mr. Beck
also assists in the preparation of environmental documents with respect to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
Relevant Experience:
• Buck Gully Restoration Project (Newport Beach, CA)
• Crown Cove Dock (Coronado, CA)
• Huntington Beach Channel (Huntington Beach, CA)
• Interstate 405 /State Route 22 Improvements (Seal Beach, CA)
• Los Alamitos Pump Station (Seal Beach, CA)
• Malibu BMP Study (30- sites) (Malibu, CA)
• Marina Shores East (Long Beach, CA)
• Santa Catalina Island (Santa Catalina, CA)
• Santiago Creek Restoration Project (Orange, CA)
• Seal Beach Wetl Feas ibility Study (Seal Beach, CA)
JN 10- 107353 • 65 • August 2, 2010
DE SEA( d
t
a2
'9 P
B 27 X5
NTY. �P
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Envir Compliance Documentation
HARMSWORTH & ASSOCIATES
PAUL GALVIN I BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Reg istration /Certification:
Federal Master Bird Banding Permit (#
22812)
State of California Memorandum of
Understanding
Scientific collectors permit (# 2285)
USFWS permit (PRT- 821967) for
conducting surveys, nest monitoring and
banding of: California gnatcatcher, least
Bell's vireo and southwestern willow
flycatcher
USFWS permit (PRT- 821967) for
conducting vernal pool branchiopod
surveys
Years Experience: 15
Education:
M.S., Wetlands Ecology, University College Dublin, 1992
B.S., (Honors), Zoology, University College Dublin, 1989
Identification of Southern California Manzanita's, Rancho Santa Ana
Botanic Gardens, 2005
Identification of California fairy shrimps, Mary Belk, 2004
Identification of asteraceae, Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Gardens, 2003
Identification of California oaks, Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Gardens,
2003
Plant Family Identification, CSU Fullerton, 2002
Intensive CEQA course, UCLA Extension, 2002
Wetland permitting update, UCLA Extension, 2002
GIS Certificate, UC Riverside, 1997
National Wetlands Training Institute's Basic Wetland Delineation
Certificate, 1995
FERC Environmental Inspections/Compliance Training, 1995
FERC Environmental Report Preparation Course, 1995
Mr. Paul Galvin has over 15 years of experience conducting biological surveys and assessing avian and
invertebrate resources associated with coastal wetlands, riparian habitats, coastal sage scrub, other upland
habitats and desert habitats. Mr. Galvin has extensive field experience working with threatened /endangered
wildlife, sensitive bird species, sensitive plant species and habitats of special concern. He has conducted
numerous sensitive species and, wildlife habitat surveys throughout southern California. Mr. Galvin is a Master
Bird Bander and has extensive experience with all aspects of bird banding. Mr. Galvin is a certified fairy shrimp
biologist and a wetland delineator and has conducted delineations at numerous sites throughout southern
California. Mr. Galvin has conducted sensitive plant surveys and has supervised wetland /riparian and coastal
sage scrub re- vegetation and enhancement projects. Mr. Galvin also has extensive data analysis and report
writing experience and has been involved in the development of a number of resource management plans.
Mr. Galvin has served as Project Manager on a number of large multidisciplinary projects, including the
biological resources monitoring program for the Upper Chiquita Canyon Conservation Easement Biological
Resource Monitoring Program, the Gorman Ranch bio- assessment, the Willow Springs bio- assessment, the
Protocol Area bio- assessment, the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor, the proposed San Diego Creek
Watershed SAMP and NCCP Amendment for Orange County Central /Coastal subregion, the San Joaquin
Marsh mitigation project, the PA9 Woodbury construction monitoring program and PA 27 -Turtle Ridge
construction monitoring program. Mr. Galvin's responsibilities have included designing, implementing and
coordinating sensitive wildlife and plant surveys, supervising cowbird trapping and removal programs, overall
project coordination, managing project budgets, staff supervision, data analysis, report writing, client
communication, and agency contacts.
Relevant Experience:
• Bonita Creek Wetlands and San Diego Creek Salt Marsh Restoration Monitoring Program (Newport Beach, CA)
• West Basin Desalter (Redondo Beach, CA).
• West Basin Water Recycling Program Phase II (Redondo Beach, CA)
• Wetland Resource Assessments for the Proposed Poseidon Desalination Plant (Long Beach, CA)
JN 10- 107353 • 66 • August 2, 2010
DE SEA( B
F
�a PoR4jFa 9�s
yB 21
INiY. gyp`
SWCA
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmen Compliance Documentation
DR. JEFF DIETLERI CULTURAL RESOURCES
Registration /Certification:
Registered Professional Archaeologist,
ID #15224, since 2003
Certified Archaeological Consultant, County of
Riverside (Certification #227)
Years Experience: 16
Education:
Ph.D., Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles, 2008
M.A., Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles, 2003
B.A. magna cum laude, Anthropology, The George Washington
University, Washington D.C., 1996
Dr. Dietler is the Archaeology Lead and Principal Investigator in SWCA's Pasadena office. He is oversees the
production of high - quality cultural resources research by creating innovative research designs, mentoring staff,
and providing QA/QC for technical reports. He routinely conducts cultural resources work in compliance with
CEQA, NEPA, and Section 106 of NHPA.
He is a versatile researcher who has supervised research projects of all sizes and descriptions. During the
past 16 years he has supervised archaeological studies in California and Florida and contributed to research in
Arizona, New Jersey, Canada, Mexico, Honduras, and Peru. He has more than 14 years experience in cultural
resources management, including over 150 projects in southern California. These projects include small -and
large -scale cultural resource surveys, testing programs, and the mitigation of significant impacts through data
recovery programs. This extensive coastal California experience enables him to produce high - quality research
within limited budgets and timeframes.
Dr. Dietler specializes in the analysis of prehistoric craft economies, particularly those of coastal hunter -
gatherers. His MA thesis focused on the specialized production of stone microblades by Chumash
households, a key component of the southern California shell bead economy. He subsequently applied
method and theory developed in the Chumash region to a case study in coastal South Florida for his
dissertation research. The study produced novel solutions to questions that scholars have wrestled with for
over a century in that region.
He has technical expertise in the analysis of flaked stone and marine shell artifacts. He has investigated Euro-
American archaeological sites on both coasts of North America and has worked extensively with Native
American tribes in southern California.
Dr. Dietler is a member of the Register of Professional Archaeologists (RPA), Society for American
Archaeology (SAA), Society for California Archaeology (SCA), and the Southeastern Archeological
Conference (SEAC). He has authored or co- authored numerous professional reports, book chapters, and
peer- reviewed publications. Lastly, he routinely presents papers at professional meetings.
Relevant Experience:
• Chumash Microblade Production Project (Santa Cruz Island, CA)
• Model Marsh Monitoring and Data Recovery Project (San Diego, CA)
• Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach Archaeological Survey (Seal Beach, CA)
• Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach Integrated Cultural Resources Management Plan (Seal Beach, CA)
Trancas Canyon Channel Restoration Project (Malibu, CA)
JN 10- 107353 • 67 • August 2, 2010
�E SEQ B City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
o` a Environmental Compliance Documentation
21 = ��
�QUNiY, gyp`
SCOTT MAGORIEN I CONSULTING GEOLOGIST
Reg istratio n/Certificatio n:
Professional Geologist: California,
Washington and Wyoming
Certified Engineering Geologist: California
and Washington
Years Experience: 25
Education:
B.Sc. Geology, California State University, Northridge, 1979
Graduate Studies at Ohio State University and University of California,
Berkeley, 1987
ASFE Institute for Professional Practice, 1989
Professional Affiliations:
Association of Engineering Geologists
Seismological Society of America
American Geophysical Union
Geological Society of America
For the past 30 years, Mr. Magorien has served as the principal geologic investigatorfor numerous hillside and
coastal residential and commercial projects throughout southern California. This work has included
preparation of the geology, soils and seismicity sections for more than 40 CEQA -level studies and EIR reports
for both large and small residential, commercial and industrial projects throughout southern California. The
scope of Mr. Magorien's work involves the review of geologic/geotechnical issues associated with active
faulting and secondary seismic hazards (i.e., liquefaction, seismically induced landslides and soil settlement,
lateral spreading, etc.), slope stability/landslide mitigation, impacts of proposed grading/landform modification
on soil erosion, groundwater conditions, as well as other geologic hazards and geotechnical constraints. Mr.
Magorien has also served as a geotechnical consultant to the Grading Section of the Orange County
Environmental Management Agency. For the last nine years, Mr. Magorien has also served as a technical
expert to the California State Board of Registration for Geologists and Geophysicists.
Most recently, Mr. Magorien served as the principal investigator for the large landslide that occurred within the
Ocean Trails Golf Course in Rancho Palos Verdes; provided EIR -level review services to the City for the
proposed Long Point golf course and hotel project; and provided an independent evaluation of potential slope
instability next to Marymount College and bordering the South Shores landslide. Mr. Magorien also provided
engineering geologic services to the Hellman Ranch project in Seal Beach.
Relevant Experience:
• Coastal bluffs residential development in the Niguel shores Community (Dana Point, CA)
• Coastal Water Project (Carlsbad, CA)
• Dana Point Headlands and beachside Strands Development (Dana Point, CA)
• Hellman Ranch residential and golf course development project in (Seal Beach, CA)
• Hoag Hospital water treatment plant (Newport Beach, CA)
• Huntington Beach Desalination Facility EIR (Huntington Beach, CA)
• Long Point Resort (Rancho Palos Verdes, CA)
• Ocean Trails Landslide remedial stabilization plans (Rancho Palos Verdes, CA)
• Port of Los Angeles slope stability evaluation (San Pedro, CA)
• Ritz Carlton (Rancho Palos Verdes, CA)
• Shore Cliff Residential Development (Huntington Beach, CA)
JN 10- 107353 • 68 • August 2, 2010
Q E SEA( 9
�a PO fq�s
° y bZ
yC F p21
RTY. cP`
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Do cumen tat ion
RBF has general liability insurance in the amount of $4,000,000. RBF's Professional Liability (Errors
and Omissions) amounts to $3,000,000. RBF also carries automobile liability, excess liability,
worker's compensation and employer's liability. Further information and /or certificates of insurance
will be provided by RBF, as requested by the Client.
JN 10- 107353 969* August 2, 2010
of SEAt a City of Seal Beach
fq � * Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
9 Environmental Compliance Documentation
y�� a 21
NTY. gyp`
VIII. STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL. CONDITIONS
This proposal shall be valid for a period of 90 days. Progress billings will be forwarded based on
payment criteria established by the City. These billings will include the fees earned for the billing
period. The City shall make every reasonable effort to review invoices within fifteen (15) working
days from the date of receipt of the invoices and notify Consultant in writing of any particular item
that is alleged to be incorrect.
The fees proposed herein shall apply until June 1, 2012. Due to annual increases in costs
associated with inflation, staff wage increases and increases in direct costs, Consultant will increase
those portions of the contract fee for which work must still be completed after June 1, 2012, by
fifteen percent (15 %).
Deviations or modifications from the Scope of Work will result in potential re- evaluation of the
associated fees. Items not specifically stated in the proposal will be considered an additional work
item.
All work will be performed at a "Not to Exceed" contract price, which will become the fixed price upon
completion of negotiations with the City staff authorized to negotiate and agreement. The total
budget includes all miscellaneous costs for travel /mileage, reproduction, telephone, postal, delivery,
reference materials, and incidental expenses.
The budget provides a breakdown of our estimated cost of performing the services described in this
Scope of Services. Our Scope of Services and its associated cost are based on several key
assumptions, including the following:
1. City will develop the mailing list for distribution of CEQA documents and notices. The City
will be responsible for newspaper cost of publication of notices, which will be billed directlyto
the City, so they are not included in the proposed budget.
2. Photocopy costs included in the proposal are for the specified number of copies of
deliverables and reasonable incidental and in -team photocopying. If additional copies of
deliverables are needed, they can be provided with an amendment to the proposed budget.
3. Review cycles for preliminary documents are presented in the scope of work. Additional
review cycles or additional versions of administrative drafts are assumed to not be needed.
4. The proposed work addresses CEQA requirements of the proposed action. Work related to
NEPA compliance, Section 404 compliance, or other permitting processes is not included
(although these can be added, as needed, with a contract amendment). Work concludes at
the acceptance by the City of the final deliverable.
5. The budget is based on completion of work within an agreed upon schedule. If substantial
delay occurs, an amendment of the budget would be warranted to accommodate additional
project management time and other costs. Substantial delay is normally defined as 90 days
or more.
JN 10- 107353 • 70 • August 2, 2010
�E SEA( d
y •`'L� Q e
B
'NTY.
6. Costs are included for the number of meetings specified in the scope of work. If additional
meetings are needed, they can be included with an amendment of the budget.
7. The extent of public comment is not predictable. The proposed budget includes a
reasonable, preliminary estimate time to respond to comments. RBF will consult with the
City after the valuation of the comments to determine if the preliminarily estimated budget is
sufficient. An excessive amount of comments is generally considered to be more than thirty
(30) commenting agencies /individuals and /or over 150 comments that require answers other
than "Comment is noted."
8. Costs have been allocated to tasks to determine the total budget. RBF may reallocate costs
among tasks, as needed, as long as the total budget is not exceeded.
9. Once the proposed project description, baseline, and alternatives are approved by the City
for analysis in the CEQA clearance document, it is assumed they will not change thereafter.
If changes requiring revisions to analysis or rewriting of the CEQA clearance document
information occurs, an amendment of the budget would be warranted.
10. The CEQA statutes or guidelines may change during the course of this environmental review.
If amendments require redoing work already performed or substantially increasing effort, a
contract amendment may be warranted.
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Documentation
JN 10- 107353 • 71 • August 2, 2010
�E SEAL B
cz p6t
yCFg 2119�y �0@
�'NTY. tP`�
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Documentation
IX® BUDGET
TASK
G.L
220
C.M.
200
ET.
150
R.G.
135
K.B.
120
A.M.
120
B.M.
210
R. K.
180
R.B.
150
GrA
65
Total
Hours
Sub
Consultants
Repro
Total
Cost
1.0 PROJECT SCOPING
3
22
82
107
$0
1.1 Pro ect Krck -0ff and Pro ect Chararxenstics
8
2
24
30
20
58
32
$5.360
12 Research and Invest anon
12
2
8
6
2
6
34
$4,300
5.610
1.3 Pre ration of Ore Initial Stud
4
2
10
26
8
8
2
2
64
$9,140
1.4 Initial Study Findings and Meeting with City Staff
6
5
12
570.075
$2,220
TOTAL HOURS
30
2
48
34
10
14
0
2
2
0
142
$5,000
$18740
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
S8,600
$400
57,200
S4,59D
$1,200
$1,680
$0
$360
$300
$0
5
$0
$0
$22,330
TOTAL LABOR COSTS 1
1
1 $22,330
2.0 FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
I
I
1
0
s0
2.1 Aesthetics/Light and Glare
3
22
82
107
$13800
2.2 Air Duality
2
2
10
30
20
58
68
$8.660
2.3 Biological Resources
1
2
2
20
20
3
$4,300
$4.820
2.4 Climate Change Analysis
2
2
70
74
$9,140
2.5 Cultural Resources
2
2
4
570.075
$10,815
26 Drainage/Water Quality
2
2
2
100
1
104
$5,000
$18740
2.7 Geology and Soils
3
2
5
$50.490
$61,450
2.8 Growth/Population and Housing
1
2
30
33
$4,570
2.9 Jurisdictional Welland Delineation
1
4
2
80
20
a5
88
$13.270
2.10 Land Use and Relevant Planning
3
1
2
So
30
65
$9,060
2.11 Noise
2
16
I
55
73
9,440
2.12 Parks. Recreation and Open Space
2
61
2
24
401
01
01
01
01
28
$3.980
2.13 Pubic Services and Utilities
2
$1,200
2
$6,7501
40
Sol
Sol
Sol
$0
40
44
SO
$5,000
$5.540
2.14 Traffic and Circulation
2
$67,510
4
36
42
1
$8.800
TOTAL HOURS
28
0
72
114
122
181
36
100
85
0
738
SO
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
56.160
$0
$10,800
$15,390
S14,640
S21,720
$7,560
$18,000
$12,750
s0
108
584.885
$0
$171,!785
TOTAL LABOR COSTS
4
$171,885
3.0 CEQA CLEARANCE OPTION 1:
0
s0
PREPARATION OF ADMIN DRAFT EIR
0
s0
3.1 Notice of Preparation
2
2
2
30
20
4
$740
3.2 Scopft Meeting
6
2
6
20
20
12
$2.220
3.3 Introduction and Purpose
2
7
9
$1.490
3.4 Executive Summary
2
7
9
$1,490
3.5 Thresholds of Significance
2
2
2
1
1
8
$5,000
$1.340
36 Protect Description
2
18
20
$3,140
3.7 Cumulative Projects/Analysis
2
8
10
$1.640
3.8 Environmental Anal sis
16
4
65
80
20
185
$27.270
3.9 Alternatives to the Pro osed Action
3
1
34
36
30
104
$14,420
3.10 Mj' ation Monitoring and Reporting Program
2
10
I
12
$1,940
3 11 Additional Sections
2
61
4
14
401
01
01
01
01
20
$2.930
3.12 Graphic Exhibits
2
$1,200
4
$6,7501
$4.8001
Sol
Sol
Sol
$0
40
46
SO
$5,000
$3,640
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
$67,510
1
$62,260
4.0 DRAFT EIR
0
SO
4.1 Preliminary Draft EIR
6
2
50
30
20
108
$15670
4.2 Completion of the Draft EIR
4
1
20
14
39
$S,970
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
1
$21,1140
6.0 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
of
s0
5.7 Respartseto Comments
6
2
30
24
6
4
2
2
76
$11,680
5.2 Final EIR
8
1
28
35
$5.720
5.3 Fintl n Statement of Overriding Considerations
4
20
24
$3,880
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
$21,280
6.0 EIR PROJECT COORDINATION AND MEETINGS
0
s0
6.1 Coordination
60
4
70
134
$24,500
62 Mestintis
501
50
1
6
108
$19.760
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
$44,260
7.0 EIR DELIVERAB
0
$7,000
$7,000
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
$7,000
TOTAL HOURS
179
15
435
200
76
0
10
9
3
40
961
1
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
539,360
$3,000
$85,250
$27,000
$9.120
$0
$2.100
$540
5450
$2.600
SO
$7.000
$156,440
TOTAL LABOR COSTS
$156 4 -40
8.0 CEQA CLEARANCE OPTION 2:
0
$0
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
0
s0
8.1 Public Review Mi' ated No live Declaration
10
2
50
30
20
112
$16.550
112 Final Review Mitigated Negative Declaration
6
2
40
20
20
88
$12.820
8.3 CEOA Notices
2
8
10
$1,640
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
$31,010
9.0 MND DELIVERABLES
0
$5,000
$5,000
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
$5,000
10.0 MND PROJECT COORDINATION AND MEETINGS
0
s0
10.1 Coordination
40
2
50
92
518 700
10.2 MeeO s
40
40
SO
$14.800
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
I
I
$31,500
TOTAL HOURS
931
61
1881
Sol
401
01
01
01
01
382
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS 1
$21.5601
$1,200
1 $28.2001
$6,7501
$4.8001
Sol
Sol
Sol
$0
$0
SO
$5,000
$67,510
OTAL LABOR CO5TS
$67,510
Total Budget for CEQA Clearance Option 1, EIR (Tasks 1.0 through 7.0) - 5350,655
G.L. = Glenn L ejote R.G. = Rite Garcia B.M. = Bob Matson GrA = Graphic Artist
C.M. = Collette Morse K.S. = Kristen Bogus R.K. = Rebecca Kinney
E.T. a Eddie Tones A.M. = Achilles MalBos R.B. = Rich Beck
Notc AN work will be pertonnad at a 'Not to exceed' contract price, which will become the firm brad price upon completion of it"oladons with the Client- The total budget Includes all miscellaneous mats for travelmlleage, reproduction.
Mimburseables. telephone, postal, daavery, rarerence materials and Incidental expenses. RBF will receive payment either on a percentage basis using milestones W by monthly hating, as determined by the Client. The RBF prated manager
reserves the right to make adjustments to staff allocations m necessary within the overall budget.
ATTACHMENT
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT
1
WE - =11 �
between
City of Seal Beach
211 - 8th Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
RBF Consulting
14725 Alton Parkway, Irvine, CA 92618
(949) 472 -3505
This Professional Service Agreement ( "the Agreement ") is made as of the 9th day
of August , 2010 (the "Effective Date "), by and between RBF Consulting
( "Consultant "), a , and the City of Seal Beach ( "City "), a California
charter city, (collectively, "the Parties ").
1 of 11
S7296- 0001 \1236808v1.doc
RECITALS
A. City desires certain professional services.
B. Consultant represents that it is qualified and able to provide City with such
services.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the Parties' performance of the
promises, covenants, and conditions stated herein, the Parties hereto agree as follows.
AGREEMENT
1.0 Scope of Services
1.1. Consultant shall provide those services ( "Services ") set forth in the
attached Exhibit A, which is hereby incorporated by this reference. To the extent that
there is any conflict between Exhibit A and this Agreement, this Agreement shall control.
1.2. Consultant shall perform all Services under this Agreement in accordance
with the standard of care generally exercised by like professionals under similar
circumstances and in a manner reasonably satisfactory to City.
1.3. In performing this Agreement, Consultant shall comply with all applicable
provisions of federal, state, and local law.
1.4. Consultant will not be compensated for any work performed not specified
in the Scope of Services unless the City authorizes such work in advance and in writing.
The City Manager may authorize payment for such work up to a cumulative maximum of
$10,000. Payment for additional work in excess of $10,000 requires prior City Council
authorization.
2.0 Term
This term of this Agreement shall commence as of the Effective Date and shall
continue for a term of 2 years unless previously terminated as provided by this
Agreement.
3.0 Consultant's Compensation
City will pay Consultant in accordance with the hourly rates shown on the fee
schedule set forth in Exhibit B for Services but in no event will the City pay more than
$ 350,655 . Any additional work authorized by the City pursuant to Section 1.4
will be compensated in accordance with the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit B.
2 of 11
S7296 -0001 \1236808v1.doc
4.0 Method of Payment
4.1. Consultant shall submit to City monthly invoices for all services rendered
pursuant to this Agreement. Such invoices shall be submitted within 15 days of the end
of the month during which the services were rendered and shall describe in detail the
services rendered during the period, the days worked, number of hours worked, the
hourly rates charged, and the services performed for each day in the period. City will
pay Consultant within 30 days of receiving Consultant's invoice. City will not withhold
any applicable federal or state payroll and other required taxes, or other authorized
deductions from payments made to Consultant.
4.2. Upon 24 -hour notice from City, Consultant shall allow City or City's agents
or representatives to inspect at Consultant's offices during reasonable business hours
all records, invoices, time cards, cost control sheets and other records maintained by
Consultant in connection with this Agreement. City's rights under this Section 4.2 shall
survive for two years following the termination of this Agreement.
5.0 Termination
5.1. This Agreement may be terminated by City, without cause, or by
Consultant based on reasonable cause, upon giving the other party written notice
thereof not less than 30 days prior to the date of termination.
5.2. This Agreement may be terminated by City upon 10 days' notice to
Consultant if Consultant fails to provide satisfactory evidence of renewal or replacement
of comprehensive general liability insurance as required by this Agreement at least 20
days before the expiration date of the previous policy.
6.0 Party Representatives
6.1. The City Manager is the City's representative for purposes of this
Agreement.
6.2. Glenn Laioie, AICP, Vice President is the Consultant's primary
representative for purposes of this Agreement.
7.0 Notices
7.1. All notices permitted or required under this Agreement shall be deemed
made when personally delivered or when mailed 48 hours after deposit in the United
States Mail, first class postage prepaid and addressed to the party at the following
addresses:
To City: City of Seal Beach
211 -8th Street
Seal Beach, California 90740
Attn: City Manager
3 of 11
S7296- 0001 \1236808v1.doc
To Consultant: RBF Consulting
PO Box 57057
Irvine, CA 92619
Attn: Glenn Lajoie, AICP
7.2. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice
occurred, regardless of the method of service.
8.0 Independent Contractor
8.1. Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City.
All services provided pursuant to this Agreement shall be performed by Consultant or
under its supervision. Consultant will determine the means, methods, and details of
performing the services. Any additional personnel performing services under this
Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall also not be employees of City and shall at all
times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Consultant shall pay all
wages, salaries, and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their
performance of services under this Agreement and as required by law. Consultant shall
be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such additional personnel,
including, but not limited to: social security taxes, income tax withholding,
unemployment insurance, disability insurance, and workers' compensation insurance.
8.2. Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless City and its elected officials,
officers, employees, servants, designated volunteers, and agents serving as
independent contractors in the role of City officials, from any and all liability, damages,
claims, costs and expenses of any nature to the extent arising from Consultant's
personnel practices. City shall have the right to offset against the amount of any fees
due to Consultant under this Agreement any amount due to City from Consultant as a
result of Consultant's failure to promptly pay to City any reimbursement or
indemnification arising under this Section.
9.0 Subcontractors
No portion of this Agreement shall be subcontracted without the prior written
approval of the City. Consultant is fully responsible to City for the performance of any
and all subcontractors.
10.0 Assignment
Consultant shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement whether by
assignment or novation, without the prior written consent of City. Any purported
assignment without such consent shall be void and without effect.
4of11
S7296 -0001 \1236808v1.doc
11.0 Insurance
11. 1. Consultant shall not commence work under this Agreement until it has
provided evidence satisfactory to the City that Consultant has secured all insurance
required under this Section. Consultant shall furnish City with original certificates of
insurance and endorsements effecting coverage required by this Agreement on forms
satisfactory to the City. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy
shall be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf,
and shall be on forms provided by the City if requested. All certificates and
endorsements shall be received and approved by the City before work commences.
The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance
policies, at any time.
11.2. Consultant shall, at its expense, procure and maintain for the duration of
the Agreement, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property
that may arise from or in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Insurance
is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating no less than A:VIII,
licensed to do business in California, and satisfactory to the City. Coverage shall be at
least as broad as the latest version of the following: (1) General Liability: Insurance
Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001);
(2) Automobile Liability: Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form
number CA 0001, code 1 (any auto); and, if required by the City, (3) Professional
Liability. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: (1) General Liability: $2,000,000
per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage and if Commercial
General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either
the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this Agreement/location or the
general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit; (2) Automobile
Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage; and
(3) Professional Liability: $1,000,000 per claim /aggregate.
11.3. The insurance policies shall contain the following provisions, or Consultant
shall provide endorsements on forms supplied or approved by the City to state:
(1) coverage shall not be suspended, voided, reduced or canceled except after 30 days
prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City;
(2) any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies, including
breaches of warranties, shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its directors,
officials, officers, (3) coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its
directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers, or.if excess, shall stand
in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the Consultant's scheduled underlying
coverage and that any insurance or self - insurance maintained by the City, its directors,
officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's
insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it; (4) for general liability
insurance, that the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and
volunteers shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the services or
operations performed by or on behalf of the Consultant, including materials, parts or
equipment furnished in connection with such work; and (5) for automobile liability, that
__. the.. City,:- its...directors,.. officials, - officers,-- employees,- agents. and -- volunteers. = shall: -be-
5of11
S7296- 0001 \1236808v1.doc
covered as additional insureds with respect to the ownership, operation, maintenance,
use, loading or unloading of any auto owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the
Consultant or for which the Consultant is responsible.
11.4. All insurance required by this Section shall contain standard separation of
insureds provisions and shall not contain any special limitations on the scope of
protection afforded to the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents, and
volunteers.
11.5. Any deductibles or self- insured retentions shall be declared to and
approved by the City. Consultant guarantees that, at the option of the City, either:
(1) the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self- insured retentions as
respects the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers; or
(2) the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related
investigation costs, claims and administrative and defense expenses.
12.0 Indemnification, Hold Harmless,-and Duty to Defend
Consultant shall defend, indemnify, and hold the City, its officials, officers,
employees, volunteers and agents serving as independent contractors in the role of city
officials (collectively "Indemnities ") free and harmless from any and all claims, demands,
causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to
property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to
any acts or omissions of Consultant, its employees, or its agents in connection with the
performance of this Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all
consequential damages and attorneys' fees and other related costs and expenses,
except for such loss or damage arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of
the City. With respect to any and all such aforesaid suits, actions, or other legal
proceedings of every kind that may be brought or instituted against Indemnitees,
Consultant shall defend Indemnitees, at Consultant's own cost, expense, and risk, and
shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award, or decree that may be rendered against
Indemnitees. Consultant shall reimburse City and its directors, officials,. officers,
employees, agents and /or volunteers, for any and all legal expenses and costs incurred
by each of them in connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity herein provided.
Consultant's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any,
received by Consultant, the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents or
volunteers. All duties of Consultant under this Section shall survive termination of this
Agreement.
13.0 Equal Opportunity
Consultant affirmatively represents that it is an equal opportunity employer.
Consultant shall not discriminate against any subcontractor, employee, or applicant for
employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, handicap, ancestry, sex,
sexual orientation, or age. Such non - discrimination includes, but is not limited to, all
activities related to initial employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or
recrui a l ayoff, or termination.
6of11
S7296 -0001 \1236808v1.doc
14.0 Labor Certification
By its signature hereunder, Consultant certifies that it is aware of the provisions
of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code that require every employer to be insured
against liability for Workers' Compensation or to undertake self- insurance in accordance
with the provisions of that Code, and agrees to comply such provisions before
commencing the performance of the Services.
15.0 Entire Agreement
This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the
subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior negotiations, understandings, or
agreements. This Agreement may only be modified by a writing signed by both parties.
16.0 Severability
The invalidity in whole or in part of any provisions of this Agreement shall not
void or affect the validity of the other provisions of this Agreement.
17.0 Governing Law
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws
of the State of California.
18.0 No Third Party Rights
No third party shall be deemed to have any rights hereunder against either party
as a result of this Agreement.
19.0 Waiver
No waiver of any default shall constitute a waiver of any other default or breach,
whether of the same or other covenant or condition. No waiver, benefit, privilege, or
service voluntarily given or performed by a party shall give the other party any
contractual rights by custom, estoppel, or otherwise.
20.0 Prohibited Interests; Conflict of Interest
20.1. Consultant covenants that it presently has no interest and shall not
acquire any interest, direct or indirect, which may be affected by the Services, or which
would conflict in any manner with the performance of the Services. Consultant further
covenants that, in performance of this Agreement, no person having any such interest
shall be employed by it. Furthermore, Consultant shall avoid the appearance of having
any interest, which would conflict in any manner with the performance of the Services.
Consultant shall not accept any employment or representation during the term of this
Agreement which is or may likely make Consultant "financially interested" (as provided
in California Government Code § §1090 and 87100) in any decision made by City on any
matter in connection with which Consultant has been retained.
7of11
S7296 -0001 \1236808v 1.doc
20.2. Consultant further warrants and maintains that it has not employed or
retained any person or entity, other than a bona fide employee working exclusively for
Consultant, to solicit or obtain this Agreement. Nor has Consultant paid or agreed to
pay any person or entity, other than a bona fide employee working exclusively for
Consultant, any fee, commission, gift, percentage, or any other consideration contingent
upon the execution of this Agreement. Upon any breach or violation of this warranty,
City shall have the right, at its sole and absolute discretion, to terminate this Agreement
without further liability, or to deduct from any sums payable to Consultant hereunder the
full amount or value of any such fee, commission, percentage or gift.
20.3. Consultant warrants and maintains that it has no knowledge that any
officer or employee of City has any - interest, whether contractual, noncontractual,
financial, proprietary, or otherwise, in this transaction or in the business of Consultant,
and that if any such interest comes to the knowledge of Consultant at any time during
the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall immediately make a complete, written
disclosure of such interest to City, even if such interest would not be deemed a
prohibited "conflict of interest" under applicable laws as described in this subsection.
21.0 Attorneys' Fees
If either party commences an action against the other party, either legal,
administrative or otherwise, arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the
prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to have and recover from the losing
party all of its attorneys' fees and other costs incurred in connection therewith.
22.0 Exhibits
All exhibits referenced in this Agreement are hereby incorporated into the
Agreement as if set forth in full herein. In the event of any material discrepancy
between the terms of any exhibit so incorporated and the terms of this Agreement, the
terms of this Agreement shall control.
23.0 Corporate Authority
The person executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants that he or
she is duly authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of said Party and that by his
or her execution, the Consultant is formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement.
8 of 11
S7296 -0001 \1236808v1.doc
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto, through their respective authorized
representatives have executed this Agreement as of the date and year first above
written.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
David Carmany, City Manager
CONSULTANT
By: _ 7
Name: mi rr, Pl j. Bnrk AICP
Attest:
AZ
Linda Devine, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Quinn Barrow, City Attorney
Its: Executive Vice President
By:
Name: Glenn Lajoie, AICP
Its: Vice President, Planning /E nvironmental
9of11
S7296 -0001 \1236808v1.doc
Exhibit A
10 of 11
S7296- 000111236808v1.doc
�E SEA( 9
v `
o
��UNrr. cP�
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental C Documentation
III SCOPE OF WORK
The following Scope of Work has been prepared based upon information received by RBF
Consulting. The cost estimate, which is itemized according to task and issue, is included in Section
IX of this proposal.
1.0 PROJECT SLOPING
1.1 PROJECT KICK -OFF AND PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
The environmental review work program will be initiated with a kick -off meeting with City Staff to
discuss the project in greater detail. This initial meeting is vital to the success of the CEQA process
and will be a key milestone in order to confirm the parameters of the analysis, proposed buildout
conditions, scheduling and overall communications. Prior to the kick -off, RBF will distribute a kick -off
meeting agenda and detailed memorandum, which will identify information needs. Based upon the
detailed project information obtained at the project kick -off meeting, RBF will draft a preliminary
project description for review and approval by City Staff.
1.2 RESEARCH AND INVESTIGATION
RBF will obtain and review available referenced data for the project area, including policy
documentation from the City of Seal Beach, County of Orange, State and Federal agencies, the
Southern California Association of Governments and all other agencies which maybe affected by the
Project. This information, along with environmental data and information available from the City and
other nearby jurisdictions, will become part of the foundation of the environmental review and will be
reviewed and incorporated into the analysis, as deemed appropriate. This task includes a visit to the
project area, which will include a detailed photographic recording of on- and off -site conditions.
1.3 PREPARATION OF THE INITIAL STUDY
The Initial Study will include detailed explanations of all checklist determinations and discussions of
potential environmental impacts. The analysis will be prepared in accordance with Public Resources
Code Section 21080(c) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15070. The Initial Study will be structured in
the same format as Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. The Initial Study will contain a description
of the Project, the Project location, and a description of the environmental setting. The main body of
the document will consist of a City- approved environmental checklist and an accompanying
environmental analysis. This section will denote the appropriate CEQA action based upon the
Environmental Checklist/Environmental Analysis.
The Project will be analyzed for the potential to create significant environmental impacts in the areas
specified on the City s approved environmental checklist. The Initial Study will also include
mandatory findings of significance, long -term versus short-term goals, cumulative impacts, and direct
and indirect impacts upon human beings.
JN 10- 107353 • 5 • August 2, 2010
DE SEA( 6
�� �� 0RP0a0 j� Fq � s
�` a2
2, ,,9`,'' f\y0Q
TY. gyp`
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Com pliance Documentation
1.4 INITIAL. STUDY FINDINGS AND MEETING WITH CITY STAFF
Once the Initial Study is completed, the RBF team will meet with City officials to review and discuss
the findings of the Initial Study review. Based upon the results of consultations and, as directed by
City officials, the RBF team will proceed forward and initiate CEQA compliance documentation and
the processing of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) in
accordance with either Optional Task 3.0 or 9.0.
2.0 FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
RBF will conduct a technical environmental review of the proposed project to document baseline
conditions, conduct project and cumulative impact evaluations, and determine the level of mitigation
for each environmental issue that could potentially lead to a significant environmental impact. Based
on consultations with City Staff, RBF assumes that technical studies, development concepts, and
baseline evaluations will not be provided by the Applicant team. Upon completion of the
environmental evaluated discussed below, RBF will consult with City staff and incorporate the
findings into the environmental documentation.
2.1 AESTHETICS /LIGHT AND GLARE
The visual resource analysis will characterize the existing aesthetic environment and visual
resources for the site. The analysis will thoroughly discuss the existing aesthetic environment and
visual resources, including a discussion of views from surrounding residential areas and recreational
resource areas. Visual impacts from construction activities, as well as long -term effects (view
blockage, light/glare, etc.) will be discussed and evaluated.
Existing Conditions This section will characterize the existing aesthetic environment and visual
resources for the site, including a discussion of views within the site and views from surrounding
areas. Particular views to be analyzed include those from the residences along 1 Street and Marina
Drive. Color site photographs will be provided to illustrate on -site and surrounding views.
Construction - Related Impacts Short-term construction impacts will be studied. Potential impacts to
sensitive uses as a result of staging areas and visible earthwork activities will be addressed. Also,
construction related haul trucks and activities will be analyzed, if necessary.
View Blockage Residential uses to the east currently have views of the Pacific Ocean and the Los
Alamitos Bay area. The analysis will consider the potential for view blockage as a result of potential
development within the Specific Plan area. Other view impacts from sensitive uses within 0.5 mile
will also be considered.
A viewshed analysis will be performed to determine potential areas that future development within
the Specific Plan area would be visible from (up to a V2 -mile radius). This scope assumes that RBF
will create a three - dimensional model of potential on -site structures with a maximum building height
of 25 -to 35 -feet, as permitted by the proposed Specific Plan Amendment. The data for the 0.5 -mile
viewshed map will be created using Geographic Information System (GIS) technology and will
include Digital Surface Model (DSM) data, which takes into account view blockage resulting from
existing structures and vegetation. When the viewshed is completed, each cell within the viewshed
will be given colored value to represent areas that can view the Specific Plan area versus areas that
cannot.
JN 10- 107353 • 6 • August 2, 2010
of SEA( d
yC�C N
21%
�Nly. t
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Documentation
Photosimulations RBF will utilize the viewshed analysis to select the Key Views for the proposed
Specific Plan, in consultation with City staff. Professional photographs will be taken from multiple
locations with a Fuji GX617 Panoramic camera, providing a 2.25 x 6 inch film transparency. Backup
shots will betaken using a Nikon D1 X digital camera. RBF will provide the City with the preliminary
photographs, at which time the City will comment and approve up to three Key View photographs,
which will then be simulated for the project.
This scope assumes that the photosimulations will illustrate the general massing and heights of
potential structures within the Specific Plan area. Site topography, paving, and landscaping will be
modeled as masses. Small details such as curb and gutter, drainage swales, and fences will not be
included. All objects in the model will be assigned to color to replicate the actual material color. The
rendered subject will then be superimposed into the photograph utilizing masking techniques that
blend the two together seamlessly.
Character /Quality Analysis The analysis will consider the potential for the modification of the
surrounding character /quality. The compatibility of the proposed land uses, building heights and
possible building materials, as compared to the surrounding area, will be studied.
RBF will incorporate and address the architectural design guidelines for proposed development.
Potential visual impacts from the proposed setback requirements and building heights will be
reviewed, and buffering /architectural treatments will be recommended if necessary.
Light and Glare Analysis RBF will address the potential for significant impacts to be generated by
the introduction of light and glare associated with the development of the Specific Plan Amendment.
This analysis will include a light and glare impact discussion on neighboring sensitive uses, from
building lighting, vehicle headlights, parking lots, etc. RBF will also recommend mitigation measures,
if necessary, to reduce potential light and glare impacts to the maximum extent possible.
2.2 AIR QUALITY
Air quality is often a potentially significant impact for similar type projects in Southern California.
RBF's air quality staff will provide a thorough and complete assessment of the Project's air quality
impacts. The proposed Project would result in construction - related and operational- related emissions
of air pollutants. In recognition of the need to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the project's
impacts on air quality, RBF's Air Quality Analysis will quantify project emissions and identify
mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant air quality impacts to the extent feasible. RBF's
analysis will primarily follow guidance contained in the South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) CEQA Air Quality Handbook. A detailed discussion of RBF's scope of work for the air
quality study is provided below.
Climate, Meteorology. and Ambient Conditions The project site is within the South Coast Air Basin
(Basin), which is under the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD). Baseline and project setting meteorological
data developed by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) will be utilized for the description of
existing ambient air quality. Air quality data from the nearest air quality monitoring stations will be
included to highlight existing air quality local to the proposed project site. Other sources such as
regulatory documents, professional publications, and RBF experience in the project area will
supplement background information.
JN 10- 107353 • 7 • August 2, 2010
�E SEA( 6
�'� aWaPaW�f Fy�S
y \ Q
R21
NTX GP
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Complia Documentation
Standards and Conditions A summary of current air quality management efforts will be provided. A
summary of the relevant policies, rules, and regulations from the United States Environmental
protection Agency (EPA), CARB (i.e., California Clean Air Act, Air Quality Attainment Plans, etc.),
and the SCAQMD will also be provided.
Sensitive Receptors An overview of the nature and location of existing sensitive receptors will be
provided. The sensitive receptors would include, but not be limited to the residences along Marina
Avenue and 1 Street, parks (i.e., Rivers End area, Marina Community Park, Alamitos Park),
hospitals, and schools.
Construction- Related Emissions Based upon the development guidelines set forth in the Amended
Specific Plan, RBF will develop a set of assumptions for quantifying short -term construction related
emissions. Fugitive dust emissions from construction activities will be quantified using
URBEMIS2007. The analysis will estimate equipment exhaust emissions utilizing the latest emission
factors as prescribed by CARB and the EMFAC2007 and OFFROADS2007 models. RBF will also
qualitatively discuss naturally occurring asbestos impacts.
Long -Term Emissions Based upon trip generation data contained in the Traffic Impact Analysis,
RBF will quantify mobile source emissions and provide a comparison to the SCAQMD thresholds of
significance. Area source assumptions will be derived from land use data contained in the Amended
Specific Plan. The emissions will be quantitatively derived utilizing the EMFAC2007 and
URBEMIS2007 models.
Project consistency with regional air quality plans will be evaluated, including the 2007 Air Quality
Management Plan for the South Coast Air Basin (2007 AQMP). Additionally, the analysis will
evaluate whether the applicable land use and transportation control measures from the 2007 AQMP
have been included in the project design. The consistency analysis will determine if the project
would cause or contribute to a violation of an ambient air quality standard.
Should the project traffic warrant Carbon Monoxide Hotspot modeling, RBF will model intersections
utilizing the BREEZE ROADS model. The analysis will be consistent with the Transportation Project -
Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol, prepared by the Institute of Transportation Studies at the University
of California, Davis.
Localized Emissions Consistent with the SCAQMD environmental justice program and Localized
Significance Threshold (LST) methodologies, RBF will identify impacts using SCAQMD's mass daily
thresholds to identify localized emissions impacts. RBF will identify mitigation measures, if
necessary, to reduce emissions to less than significant levels.
2.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
RBF has retained Harmsworth Associates (HWA) Environmental Consultants to conduct the
biological resources review for the Specific Plan project area. HWA will conduct a review of
sensitive species with potential for occurrence within the project area, based on review of relevant
reports, the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), and other pertinent literature. Where
necessary, appropriate resource agencies, including California Department of Fish and Game
(CDFG) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), will be contacted regarding special- status
wildlife species with potential to occur in the project vicinity. In addition, resource conservation
organizations such as the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) and local County of Orange -
approved plant and wildlife biological groups will be consulted, as appropriate. Information obtained
JN 10- 107353 • 8 • August 2, 2010
OE SEAT a City of Seal Beach
*i �`� Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
z Environmental Compliance Documentation
G'F A p
'NTY. gyp`
from the review of existing literature and discussions with resource experts will be used to identify
issues of biological concern within the project site and, if necessary, focus any subsequent field
survey efforts.
Field Surveys Field surveys by qualified biologists will include up -to -date vegetation mapping and
full floristic surveys to document the plant species present onsite. Based on site photographs
reviewed by HWA, it is anticipated that there will be no need for formal protocol surveys for any
special- status plant or wildlife species; however, if suitable habitat exists on -site for any special
status plant or wildlife species then focused surveys may be required to satisfy agency requirements
during the CEQA review process. Field surveys by qualified biologists will include up -to -date wildlife
surveys and habitat assessments. Should any regulatory agencies require additional focused
protocol surreys for special- status species, HWA will notify the City immediately to determine the
preferred course of action.
Report Preparation The results and the analysis, surveys, and recommendations will be compiled
into a Biological Constraints Report. Information gathered during the literature review and
subsequent surveys will be described, including major plant communities, wildlife resources, and
special- status species of the project site. In addition, a detailed discussion of key Federal, State,
and local regulations and policies associated with protection of biological resources of the project
site will be included, as well as brief discussions of impacts and recommended mitigation.
2.4 CLIMATE CHANGE ANALYSIS
RBF's climate change experts are at the forefront in developing sound scientific regulatory
assessments and strategies within the rapidly changing regulatory environment. As the climate
change analytical methodologies evolve, RBF continues to offer its Clients /Agencies the highest
quality analytical, policy, and business management services. RBF has developed proprietary
models for quantifying and analyzing greenhouse gases (GHG) from a variety of direct and indirect
sources including construction, vehicular traffic, electricity consumption, water conveyance, and
sewage treatment. RBF's analyses recommend innovative greenhouse gas /air pollutant reduction
methods during the construction and operation of a project, conduct advanced air dispersion
modeling, evaluate the potential impacts of air pollutants on surrounding areas, investigate the use
of renewable energy sources /energy efficient products, and quantify the benefits of resource
conservation (i.e., electricity usage, recycling, etc.). The following outlines RBF's Climate Change
Analysis for the proposed project:
Methodology and Approach RBF will utilize the California Air Pollution Control Officers (CAPCOA)
CEQA and Climate Change White Paper (White Paper) (January 2008) and CARB's Climate Change
Proposed Scoping Plan ( Scoping Plan) (October 2008) to provide background information on the
effects of climate change. As there are not any currently adopted thresholds, RBF will utilize the
performance standards and reduction percentages specific in the Global Warming Solutions Act
(Assembly Bill 32, adopted 2006).
Emissions Inventory RBF will review the land use data associated with the proposed plan. Based
on this review, and the data produced through the Traffic Impact Assessment, RBF will prepare an
inventory of the GHG emissions (i.e., nitrous oxide, methane, and carbon dioxide) from both direct
and indirect sources. The emissions inventory will be compiled consistent with the methodology
prescribed by CARB in the Local Government Operations Protocol for the Quantification and
Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories (dated September 28, 2008).
JN 10- 107353 • 9 • August 2, 2010
sEAt e City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
* !�
E Compliance Documentation
Q `
NTY1�P�
Indirect Impacts In response to Executive Order S -13 -08 (2009 California Adaptation Strategy),
RBF will identify and analyze the indirect impacts to the project from anticipated climate change.
Such impacts include rising sea levels, public health threat caused by higher temperatures and more
smog, damage to agriculture, habitat modification and destruction, higher risk of fires, and increased
demand of electricity.
Energy Conservation RBF will analyze the energy implications of the project pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 21100(b)(3) and Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines. These statutes and
guidelines require an EIR to describe, where relevant, the wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary
consumption of energy caused by a project. The analysis will analyze energy consumption
associated with short -term construction activities, long -term operations, buildings, and transportation.
Additionally, the assessment of environmental impacts on energy resources will include mitigation
measures to reduce inefficient and unnecessary consumption of energy.
2.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
RBF has retained SWCA to conduct a Cultural and paleontological resources assessment for the
Specific Plan area. Based upon the sensitivity of the study area, a records search and pedestrian
survey will be conducted to document any artifacts or resources of significance. The study will be
conducted per the methodology discussed below:
Cultural Resources SWCA will conduct a California Historical Resources Information System
(CHRIS) records search of the project area and a 0.5 -mile radius around the project area at the
South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) at California State University, Fullerton. The
purpose of the CHRIS records search is to identify any previously recorded cultural resources known
to exist within or adjacent to the project area. In addition to the archaeological inventory records and
reports, an examination will be made of historic maps, the National Register of Historic Places, the
California Inventory of Historical Resources, and the listing of California Historical Landmarks. The
records search will also reveal the nature and extent of any cultural resources work previously
conducted within the project area, as well as the presence of previously recorded cultural resources
within or near the project area. In addition, SWCA will review any local registers to identifyany locally
designated landmarks that may be located within or near the project area. SWCA will contact the
California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for a review of their Sacred Lands File.
The NAHC will provide a list of Native American groups and /or individuals that they believe should be
contacted for additional information. SWCA will prepare and mail a letter to each of the NAHC - listed
contacts, requesting notification if they know of any Native American cultural resources within or
immediately adjacent to the project area.
Upon completion of the CHRIS records search, SWCA will conduct a Phase I intensive pedestrian
survey of the entire 10.6 -acre project area. SWCA archaeologists will conduct the survey using
pedestrian transects spaced at maximum intervals of 10 meters. For the purposes of this proposal
and cost estimate, SWCA assumes that the survey will be negative for cultural resources (i.e., no
previously unrecorded prehistoric or historic resources will be encountered and no previously
recorded resources will require updates). Any previously unrecorded cultural resources identified
during the survey would require a change order for formal recordation. No testing or excavation will
be conducted, nor will any artifacts, samples, or specimens be collected during the survey.
JN 10- 107353 • 10 • August 2, 2010
�E SEA( B
o -Q
yC f 8 77
TY.
SWCA will prepare a cultural resources technical report that will document the results of the study
and provide management recommendations for resources located within the project area. The report
will meet the Secretary of Interior's Standards and Guidelines and will follow the Office of Historic
Preservation's Archaeological Resource Management Reports: Recommended Contents and Format
(ARMR) guidelines. The report will include maps depicting the area surveyed for cultural resources. If
the locations of sensitive archaeological sites or Native American cultural resources depicted or
described in the report, it will be considered confidential; the report may not be distributed to the
public. In order to protect these sensitive resources, the confidential technical report shall be made
available only to qualified cultural resources personnel and project management personnel on a
"need to know" basis.
Paleontological Resources SWCA will examine records maintained by the Natural History Museum
of Los Angeles County (LRCM) in order to determine whether or not previously recorded
paleontological resources occur within the project area and vicinity. Published and unpublished
literature and geologic maps will be reviewed in order to thoroughly assess the paleontological
resource potential of the project area. Using the results of the geologic map search, locality searches
and literature review, the paleontological resource potential (sensitivity) of all geologic units within
the project area will be evaluated and analyzed in accordance with professional standards set forth
by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) and in accordance with the requirements of CEQA.
SWCA will prepare a paleontological resources technical report documenting the results of the
paleontological study. The report will describe the geologic units within the project area and vicinity in
terms of their paleontological content and sensitivity, present the results of the paleontological
sensitivity analysis, summarize and discuss any previously recorded fossil localities within the project
area; discuss the significance of previously recorded localities within the project area and elsewhere
in the same geologic units; discuss the paleontological requirements of the project and compliance
with the requirements of all applicable regulatory frameworks; and present paleontological resource
mitigation recommendations.
2.6 DRAINAGEIWATER QUALITY
The RBF team will review existing hydrology and drainage data for the site area in order to identify
any existing drainage and water quality issues. The analysis will address any changes in absorption
rates, drainage patterns, storm drain improvement and downstream affects. RBF will also evaluate
water quality conditions and identify National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
techniques /structures in accordance with local, State and Federal requirements. The potential for
the project description to degrade water quality, interfere with groundwater recharge or expose
people to water related hazards will be identified. RBF's in -house Drainage/Water Quality Division
will address surface hydrology and drainage, associated with project development, in order to satisfy
CEQA requirements for review of runoff water quantity, drainage infrastructure and surface water
quality. The following tasks are inclusive of the Drainage and Water Quality Study:
Review and Research Existing Reports RBF will provide research and investigation to compile
existing literature and reports previously prepared regarding the tributary watershed and drainage
systems impacting the Specific Plan project area. Research will include a review of drainage master
plans and other available data. This task also includes an initial discussion with City staff regarding
the specific drainage requirements for the project and specific criteria for this area.
Watershed Boundary Delineation RBF will prepare analysis of the existing watershed and drainage
patterns associated with the proposed project boundary. The local watershed sub - boundaries forthe
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Envi ronmental Compliance Documentation
JN 10- 107353 • 11 • August 2, 2010
of SEA( d City of Seal Beach
�a a�" �� Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
* a Envi Compliance Documentation
�D INTY.
area tributary to the project site will be determined in order to evaluate (1) the watershed area and
(2) existing facility requirements. RBF will measure the drainage areas. and the watershed
parameters associated with the subareas for the analysis.
Existinq Hydrologic Conditions Analysis RBF will prepare preliminary estimate peak runoff rates
associated with the existing surface hydrology for area. The tributary off -site areas will be determined
utilizing documents obtained from the City. In addition the on -site drainage boundaries and subareas
will be delineated, and results of the hydrology analysis will be summarized on a hydrology map.
Proposed Development Hydrology RBF will prepare preliminary developed condition surface
hydrology analysis for the project area based upon County hydrology criteria and methodology to
quantify the expected runoff rates. RBF will prepare a single rational hydrology analysis for a single
proposed specific plan for the property. RBF will provide a qualitative analysis of the hydrologic and
hydraulic impacts adjacent property owners.
Conceptual Water Quality Control Program An evaluation will be performed to qualitatively describe
post - development pollutant loadings of the urban runoff. Pre- and post - development conditions will
be compared to assess project impacts of non -point source pollutants. Best Management Practices
(BMP's) will be identified which can mitigate water quality concerns as part of a conceptual program
for the specific plan area.
Technical Report Preparation RBF will prepare a written report summarizing the drainage
assessment for the project. Report shall include discussions reviewing the drainage constraints, off -
site and on -site hydrology, flooding impacts and mitigation, flood protection requirements, and off -site
drainage impacts, and water quality impacts. A technical appendix will be prepared which includes
all hydrologic and hydraulic analysis for the site, and all reference documents.
2.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Based on review of preliminary geotechnical conditions for the site, the property contains several
features that are anticipated to require engineering and design solutions that would need to be
incorporated into the site and building plans for the Project. Specifically, although no recorded faults
are present on the site, the property is within a seismically active area and contains soils with
expansion characteristics that would require replacement fill. Also, shallow groundwater conditions
require the use of special drainage techniques and consideration during grading. RBF has retained
Geologist D. Scott Magonen to analyze the stability of the soils and geology in order to support the
project and its associated infrastructure. The study will also address the potential for lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse, seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction,
strong seismic ground shaking, expansive soils, and soil erosion. The following tasks are inclusive
of the Geotechnical Study:
Literature Review An in -depth review of existing published and unpublished geologic /geotechnical
reports will be conducted, as well as other relevant geotechnical /geologic reports on file with the City.
Background information pertaining to the construction of the San Gabriel River Channel (Channel)
will be researched. Historic stereo - paired, black and white aerial photographs will be reviewed to
determine the changes to the pattern of flow at the mouth of the Channel. A review of published
reports and geologic maps prepared by the U.S. and California Geological Surveys (USGS and CGS)
will also be conducted, as well as any previous consultant's reports in the vicinity of the project area.
JN 10- 107353 • 12 • August 2, 2010
Q E SEA( B
Ty. gyp`
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environment Compliance Documentation
Site Reconnaissance A site review will be conducted in order to preliminarily evaluate the nature
and extent of liquefaction -prone soils, and other secondary seismic hazards (i.e., soil settlement and
lateral spread), as well as the long -term settlement potential of the soils beneath the project area.
The following work will be conducted during the site reconnaissance:
• Perform five (5), 75- foot -deep Cone Penetration Test (CPT) soundings.
• Drill, sample and log two (2), 75 -foot deep rotary-wash borings.
• Laboratory testing of the soil samples obtained from the drilling, which would include
consolidation tests (5), grain size with hydrometer (5), moisture density (40 + / -), direct shear
testing (2).
• Geotechnical evaluation of all data compiled and slope stability analyses of the adjacent
Channel wall.
Report Preparation The results of the literature, soil samples, and findings will be summarized in a
technical report. The overall format of the report will discuss the existing conditions, geologic/
geotechnical hazards, constraints, and general mitigation concepts for the proposed development. It
is anticipated that the data and analyses generated by this study will be sufficient to define impacts
and mitigation measures pursuant to CEQA and is not intended for design and construction
purposes.
2.6 GROWTH/POPULATION AND HOUSING
RBF will provide a project specific analysis of potential growth- inducing impacts pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15126(g). The basis for analysis will be population and housing data from the
City of Seal Beach, California Department of Finance, and U.S. Census. The section will consider
housing conditions and projections for the area. It is acknowledged that the City does not have a
certified Housing Element, which will be considered and addressed in the analysis. The section will
discuss ways in which the proposed project could foster economic or population growth, or the
construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. The
analysis addresses growth- inducing impacts in terms of whether the project influences the rate,
location, and the amount of growth. Growth - inducing impacts are assessed based on the project's
consistency with adopted /proposed plans that have addressed growth management from a local and
regional standpoint. Potential growth- inducing impacts from the proposed development will be
analyzed as they relate to population, housing and employment factors.
2.9 JURISDICTIONAL WETLAND DELINEATION
Currently, the site is undeveloped, and may have the potential to contain wetlands as defined by the
Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) or California Coastal Commission. A determination of potential
waters /wetlands will be conducted utilizing the following methodology:
Literature Review Prior to visiting the project site, RBF Regulatory staff will conduct a thorough
literature review of relevant information that supports the site reconnaissance and report preparation.
Sources reviewed are anticipated to include topographic maps, soil surveys, historic and current
aerial photography, flood maps, hydrology /climate information and watershed data.
JN 10- 107353 • 13 • August 2, 2010
Do E sEat B City of Seal Beach
N`�" q �s Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
'a Environmental Compliance Documentation
r R21
AUNTY. gyp`
Site Reconnaissance RBF will conduct a site reconnaissance to perform a delineation that will
determine jurisdictional 'Waters of the United States" and "waters of the State" (including wetlands),
located within the boundaries of the project site. RBF's delineation methodology is in compliance
with the most recent U.S. Supreme Court decision, Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. United
States, which resulted in changes to ACOE jurisdictional authority after June 2007. The delineation
will result in:
• A determination of potential Coastal waters /wetlands using the Cowardin classification
system. This classification system defines a wetland by the presence of the proper hydrology
and either the presence of hydric soils or hydrophytic vegetation.
A determination of the ACOE ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and indicate the existence
of any three (3) parameter wetlands on -site. The actual presence or absence of wetlands
on -site will be verified through the determination of the presence of hydrologic conditions,
hydrophytic vegetation, and hydric soils pursuant to the September 2008 Regional
Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region
(Version 2.0). A significant nexus test is excluded from this scope of work; therefore,
findings will be based on the assumption that a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination will
be pursued with the ACOE.
• The CDFG's jurisdiction being identified via the top of bank of the on -site streambed or to the
outer drip line of riparian vegetation (if present) pursuant to the 1994 CDFG Field Guide to
Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements.
• In cases where isolated and /or Rapanos conditions are present, the delineation will identify
areas under the jurisdiction of the Regional Board.
Findings Once RBF conducts a site visit and the project site baseline information is obtained, RBF
will prepare a comprehensive written report discussing on -site jurisdictional areas. The delineation
will consist of the following Sections: 1) Introduction and Purpose; 2) Summary of Regulations; 3)
Methodology; 4) Literature Review; 5) Site Conditions; 6) Findings 7) Regulatory Approval Process;
8) References; and 9) Appendices.
Pursuant to agency requirements, the delineation report will include a maximum of five (5) exhibits to
enhance the written text and clarify the Project, jurisdictional areas, and project impacts. This task
includes time for Geographic Information Systems (GIS) analysis associated with the delineation
map. The delineation map will be a scale of 1"= 300' or greater and will consist of an aerial
photograph. Drainages will be overlain on the aerial photograph and each agency's jurisdiction will
be identified by width and length.
2.10 LAND USE AND RELEVENT PLANNING
The proposed project would require an amendment to the original 1996 Plan and would also amend
the Riverfront Redevelopment Plan. The applicant has not submitted a Development Plan and build -
out of the project would be in accordance with the City's Residential Medium Density Zoning
standards. The focus of this section is to conduct a consistency review with existing policies,
standards and to review overall land use compatibility of the project with adjacent residents,
recreational uses and planned uses /improvements in the local area.
JN 10- 107353 • 14 • August 2, 2010
pF SEA( City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
�• Environmental Compliance Documentation
9 �l �PB
y l''fp 27
C �UNrr. cp`
The consistency review will focus on General Plan policies and the standards /provisions set forth in
the City's Zoning Code. This portion of the review will include any proposed modification to
development and design standards. The interface of the project with nearby uses will be studied.
The project is anticipated to be subject to compliance with the Coastal Act Section 30600(c), which
requires that a coastal development permit be obtained from the California Coastal Commission. As
the City does not have a certified Local Coastal Program (LCP) the Coastal Commission is
responsible for reviewing project compliance with the Coastal Act. Thus, RBF will conduct a
consistency review with Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act. In addition, the regional planning review will
include consistency with the SCAG Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide policies.
2.11 NOISE
Development of the Specific Plan would increase the level of activity in the area. Accordingly, the
proposed project would have the potential to create noise and vibration impacts that could adversely
affect surrounding land uses. RBF will prepare a Noise Analysis will consist of:
Existing Conditions RBF will conduct a site visit along the project site and at adjacent land uses.
During the site visit, RBF will conduct short -term noise level measurements along the project area.
Noise monitoring equipment will consist of a Bruel & Kjwr model 2250 sound level meter (SLM)
equipped with Briiel & Kjaer pre - polarized freefield microphone. The results of the noise
measurements will be post - processed and graphically illustrated with the Bruel & Kjaer Noise
Explorer software. The noise monitoring survey will be conducted at up to five separate locations to
establish baseline noise levels in the project area. Noise recording lengths are anticipated to require
approximately 10 minutes at each location. The noise measurements will evaluate noise exposure
due to traffic while accounting for local topography, shielding from existing structures, and variations
in travel speed.
Construction - Related Noise and Vibration Based upon the development guidelines set forth in the
Amended Specific Plan, RBF will develop a set of assumptions for quantifying short-term
construction related noise. The construction noise impacts will be evaluated in terms of maximum
levels (L and hourly equivalent continuous noise levels (L, and the frequency of occurrence at
the adjacent residential uses. The analysis will be based on Section 7.15.025 of the City's Noise
Ordinance. A review of City Council Policy 600 -11 will also be conducted, which established
benchmarks for continuous and intermittent short-term noise sources.
Stationary Noise Sources The effects of stationary noise sources will be evaluated based on local
land use compatibility standards. Such noise sources are typically attributed to mechanical
equipment and parking areas. Compliance with applicable noise standards will be evaluated, with
recommended mitigation measures included where appropriate.
Traffic Noise The proposed project is anticipated to generate new vehicular traffic trips from future
growth. Noise impacts from vehicular traffic will be assessed using the U.S. Federal Highway Traffic
Noise Prediction Models (FHWA -RD -77 -108 and TNM 2.5). Model input data will include average
daily traffic volumes, day /night percentages of autos, medium and heavy trucks, vehicle speeds,
ground attenuation factors, and roadway widths. Noise impacts related to the potential site
ingress /egress point(s) will be evaluated to determine noise impacts to the residences along 1St
Street.
JN 10- 107353 • 15 • August 2, 2010
DE SEAL 9
9 p6
F .
� INTY. CP
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Documentation
2.12 PARIS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE
Given the concerns and need for parks and recreation facilities in the community and considerations
for open space onsite, a focused analysis will be conducted. RBF will provide an existing conditions
analysis of citywide active and passive recreational facilities (i.e., parks, trails, etc.). The analysis
will address potential impacts to existing facilities as well as project compliance with existing
programs, standards and provisions applicable to the subject site. The project's building footprint
and intent for open space and parks will be studied. The analysis will clarify the visitor serving
recreational component of the project. The evaluation will conclude significance of any impacts and
recommendations for mitigation to reduce significance.
2.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
RBF will contact potentially affected agencies to confirm relevant existing conditions, project impacts
and recommended mitigation measures. The discussion will focus on the potential alteration of
existing facilities, extension or expansion of new facilities and the increased demand on services
based on the proposed land uses. RBF will evaluate the ability of the project to receive adequate
service based on applicable City and County standards and, where adequate services are not
available, will identify the effects of inadequate service and recommended mitigation measures.
Issues discussed include:
Public Services:
Solid Waste Solid waste generation resulting from the proposed uses may impact landfill
capacities. The analysis will establish baseline projections for solid waste, including composting
and recycling for both construction and operation of the project. Project's compliance with AB
939 will also be addressed.
Fire. The overall need for Fire Services would potentially increase beyond existing conditions as
a result of the project. The Fire Services review will include a review of existing
services /facilities in the area, response times to the sites (which includes hazardous material
responses to emergencies), available fire flow, project impacts and required mitigation.
Police The Police Service review will focus upon response times to the site, available personnel
and overall protection services. The overall need for police protection services would increase
beyond existing conditions as a result of the project. Mitigation incorporated into the project
design, including lighting, signage and security hardware to further reduce potential crime activity
will be identified.
Schools Potential impacts to schools focusing on existing conditions, student capacities,
current enrollment and facility locations. Generation rates resulting from the project will be the
basis for the impact analysis. Mitigation measures will be provided to reduce the significance of
impacts.
JN 10- 107353 • 16 • August 2, 2010
of SEA! B City of Seal Beach
�' N�RP0g4jF F9�= Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Env Compliance Documentation
a r
9
WTI, gy
Public Utilities:
Water Based upon technical information provided by the City, existing capacities and
deficiencies will be addressed. The on -site potable and non - potable water system conditions will
be presented. Off -site potable and non - potable water storage, pumping and transmission
facilities will be studied.
Sewer Based upon technical information provided by the City, existing capacities and
deficiencies will be addressed. Major off -site sewer conveyance, treatment and disposal will be
presented. Project generation, infrastructure connections, easement modifications and upgrades
to the existing system will be studied.
Electrical Existing facilities, project impacts, infrastructure relocation, undergrounding of
overhead lines, easements and necessary mitigation.
Telephone Existing facilities, project impacts, infrastructure relocated, undergrounding of
overhead lines, easements and necessary.
Gas Existing facilities, project impacts, infrastructure relocation, easements and necessary
mitigation.
Roadway Maintenance The proposed project may incrementally increase the maintenance of
streets, storm drains, and other below surface facilities. RBF will consult with the project team
and City Public Works Division to ascertain key concerns /impacts due to increased utilization of
area roads.
2.14 TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION
RBF's Transportation Department will conduct a two- phased peer review of the applicant's Traffic
Study. The original report will be critiqued and any follow -up revisions and /or new information will
also be evaluated. The traffic impact analysis peer review will include the following:
• Conduct a site visit and field review of surrounding circulation system to familiarize RBF staff
with traffic and transportation related conditions and issues in the project vicinity;
• Field verify study area geometry configurations and traffic signal operations utilized in the
traffic analysis;
• Examine the traffic study in accordance with City of Seal Beach City Traffic Impact Study
Guidelines;
• Review the results of the traffic analysis to confirm summary of level of significance;
• Examine potential /approved project trip generation based on a list of pending /approved
projects in the vicinity of the proposed project or an annual growth rate factor to account for
cumulative /approved projects contained in the analysis.
• Assess identified mitigation measures for feasibility and ability to eliminate or reduce impacts
to a level considered less than significant;
• Review traffic signal warrant analysis, if applicable;
JN 10- 107353 • 17 • August 2, 2010
�F SEA( B
Liy Po�Fpfq��
y�
yC f B 71
TY. gyp`
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environment Co mpliance Documentation
Evaluate the Traffic Study for compliance with the Los Angeles and Orange County
Congestion Management Program (CMP) requirements;
• Evaluate the traffic study for compliance with the Caltrans Guide for Preparation of Traffic
Impact Studies (State of California, Department of Transportation, December 2002); and
Prepare a memorandum summarizing the adequacy of the traffic impact analysis for
inclusion in an environmental document and suggest modifications as necessary.
Based upon the finalized traffic study to be prepared by the applicant's consultant, the CEQA
document will describe the existing roadway circulation in the study area, including roadway lanes,
intersection geometry and intersection control mechanisms. The existing operating level of service of
the study area circulation system will be described and documented in accordance with the Agency's
criteria and established analysis methodology. The Traffic Study is expected to forecast existing plus
Project and existing plus Project plus cumulative traffic conditions, based upon an agreed upon
buildout/horizon year. The analysis will include an evaluation of circulation, turning movement and
roadway standards for the internal Project roadways. Ingress /egress points will be evaluated.
Utilizing established performance criteria and thresholds of significance, necessary mitigation
measures will be developed to address traffic impacts.
3.0 CEQA CLEARANCE OPTION 1:
PREPARATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE DRAFT EIR
The EIR will include the Introduction and Purpose, Executive Summary and Project Description. The
Environmental Analysis section will evaluate the necessary information with respect to the existing
conditions, the potential adverse effects of Project construction and implementation (both individual
and cumulative), and measures to mitigate such effects. Environmental issues raised during the
scoping process (Notice of Preparation responses; Public Scoping mailing; and any other relevant
and valid informative sources) will also be evaluated. The environmental analysis section of the EIR
will thoroughly discuss the existing conditions for each environmental issue area; identify short-term
and long -term environmental impacts associated with the project and their levels of significance.
Feasible mitigation measures will be recommended to reduce the significance of impacts and identify
areas of unavoidable significant adverse impacts even after mitigation. The environmental review
(Task 3.8) will focus on the comprehensive review of the following topical area, as detailed in Section
2.0 of this proposal:
• Aesthetics /Light and Glare
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Climate Change analysis
• Cultural Resources
• Drainage/Water Quality
• Geology and Soils
• Growth /Population and Housing
• Jurisdictional Wetland Delineation
• Land Use and Relevant Planning
• Noise
• Parks, Recreation and Open Space
JN 10- 107353 • 18 • August 2, 2010
of SEA1 d City of Seal Beach
.J �` Fq � s Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
o „I_ Environmental Compliance Documentation
yC f -21
�NNTY. gyp`
• Public Services and Utilities
• Traffic and Circulation
Based upon the analyses conducted under Task 2.0, RBF will complete the environmental review
process, respond to all comments received during the Draft EIR public review period, prepare the
mitigation monitoring program and draft the necessary Findings and possible Statement of
Overriding Considerations pursuant to Sections 15091 and 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines. The
environmental review process will result in the presentation of pertinent information associated with
Project impacts and findings to the City decision makers for determination and CEQA certification.
3.1 NOTICE OF PREPARATION
RBF will prepare, distribute and file the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the EIR. A Draft NOP will be
prepared and forwarded to City Staff for review and comment. RBF will then finalize the NOP for
distribution. The distribution of the NOP and Initial Study as an attachment will be based on a City -
approved distribution list to be provided by City staff. This task includes certified mailing to affected
agencies and interested parties. Comments received in response to the NOP will be evaluated
during the preparation of the EIR.
3.2 SLOPING MEETING
A public scoping meeting, which can also involve Federal, State or other local agencies, will be
scheduled during the NOP public review period, in order that the community can gain an
understanding of the proposed project and provide comments on environmental concerns. The
Scoping Meeting will orient the community on the CEQA review process and will be presented in a
manner which the community can gain a greater understanding of the proposal, intent of CEQA and
the key issue areas to be addressed in the EIR. RBF will provide a PowerPoint presentation handout
and presentation -size graphics to supplement the discussion. Following the presentation, the
meeting will be devoted to public participation, questions and comments. Written comment forms
will be provided for this purpose, and these comments, along with oral comments, will become a part
of the administrative record.
3.3 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
The Introduction will cite the provisions of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Seal Beach
CEQA Implementation procedures for which the proposed project is subject. This section will identify
the purpose of the study and statutory authority as well document scoping procedures, summary of
the EIR format, listing of responsible and trustee agencies and documentation incorporated by
reference.
3.4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Executive Summary will include a Project Summary, an overview of project impacts, mitigation
and levels of significance after mitigation, summary of project alternatives and areas of controversy
and issues to be resolved. The Environmental Summary will be presented in a columnar format.
JN 10- 107353 • 19 • August 2, 2010
�E SEA( 9
co
�i N�PO�'F Fq�s
yC f p 77 19� ��O
�NNiY, GPI.
3.5 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
This section will provide a comprehensive description of thresholds of significance for each issue
area of the environmental analysis. The significance threshold criteria will be described and will
provide the basis for conclusions of significance. Primary sources to be used in identifying the
criteria include the CEQA Guidelines, local, State, Federal or other standards applicable to an impact
category.
3.6 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project Description section of the EIR will detail the project location, background and history of
the project, discretionary actions, characteristics (addressed in Task 1.1), goals and objectives,
construction program, phasing, agreements, and required permits and approvals that are required
based on available information. This section will include a summary of the Project's local
environmental setting for the project. Exhibits depicting the regional and site vicinity will be included
in this section.
3.7 CUMULATIVE PROJECTS /ANALYSIS
In accordance with Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines, the EIR will include a section providing a
detailed listing of cumulative projects and actions under consideration for the analysis. The
likelihood of occurrence and level of severity will be studied. The purpose of the section is to present
a listing and description of projects, past, present and anticipated in the reasonably foreseeable
future, even if those projects are outside of Seal Beach' jurisdiction. The potential for impact and
levels of significance are contingent upon the radius or area of interaction with the project area. RBF
will consult with City staff and other applicable local jurisdictions to define the appropriate study area
for the cumulative analysis. The cumulative analysis for each topical area will be incorporated
throughout the analysis in Section 3.8.
3.8 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
RBF will evaluate the necessary information with respect to the existing conditions, the potential
adverse effects of Project implementation (both individual and cumulative), and measures to mitigate
such effects. Environmental issues raised during the scoping process (Notice of Preparation
responses, Public Scoping Meeting, and any other relevant and valid informative sources) will also
be evaluated. The analyses will be based upon all available data, results from additional research,
and an assessment of existing technical data.
The Environmental Analysis section of the EIR will thoroughly discuss the existing conditions for
each environmental issue area, identify short-term construction and long -term operational impacts
associated with the project and their levels of significance. The impact analysis will be in a
consistent order of environmental factors as Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines (Aesthetics, Air
Quality, etc.). For each Environmental Factor Analysis Section, the Impacts Subsection will begin
with a list of all issues contained in the Initial Study. The thresholds for significance shall be
identified for every environmental issue. A brief discussion will be provided for all environmental
issues determined to be No Impact or Less Than Significant Impact in the Initial Study, explaining
why these determinations were made and that no further analysis in the EIR is warranted. The
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Co Documentation
JN 10- 107353 • 20 • August 2, 2010
DF SEA( 6
i ao F
y ��c
R27
INTY. CP��
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Docum
Impact Subsection will provide a detailed analysis of each issue determined to be Less Than
Significant With Mitigation incorporated or Potentially Significant Impact. For each environmental
issue, the EIR will state the level of significance of impact, and provide the analysis discussion,
mitigation measures specific to the environmental issue, and level of significance after mitigation.
3.9 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION
It is anticipated that there will be great interest and concern for development of project site and the
Alternatives section will provide the opportunity to compare and contrast optional conditions for the
property. The range of Alternatives may include the existing 1996 Plan, a more extensive open
space component, a project reduction Alternative and a No Project Alternative, as required under
CEQA. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6, RBF will provide an analysis which will
compare environmental impacts of each alternative for each impact area to the project. For each
alternative, RBF will provide both quantitative and qualitative analysis for topical areas presented in
Section 2.0 of this proposal. One important element of the Alternatives section will be an impact
matrix which will offer a comparison of the varying levels of impact of each alternative being
analyzed. This matrix will be prepared in a format to allow decision - makers a reference that will be
easily understood, while providing a calculated (where feasible), accurate comparison of each
alternative.
The alternatives section will conform to both amendments to Section 15126.6 of the CEQA
Guidelines and to recent and applicable court cases. RBF will discuss as required by the CEQA
Guidelines, the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and the reasons for rejecting or
recommending the project alternatives stated. This alternatives section will culminate with the
selection of the environmentally superior alternative in accordance with CEQA requirements.
3.10 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
To comply with the Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 (AB 32180), RBF will prepare a
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to be defined through working with City staff to identify
appropriate monitoring steps /procedures and in order to provide a basis for monitoring such
measures during and upon Project implementation.
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Checklist will serve as the foundation of the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program for the proposed Project. The Checklist indicates the mitigation
measure number as outlined in the EIR, the EIR reference page (where the measure is
documented), a list of Mitigation Measure /Conditions of Approval (in chronological order under the
appropriate topic), the Monitoring Milestone (at what agency /department responsible for verifying
implementation of the measure), Method of Verification (documentation, field checks, etc.), and a
verification section for the initials of the verifying individual date of verification, and pertinent remarks.
3.11 ADDITIONAL SECTIONS
RBF will provide additional sections in the EIR to meet CEQA and City requirements including the
following: Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes That Would Be Involved In the Proposed
Action Should It Be Implemented, Effects Found Not To Be Significant, Inventory of Unavoidable
Adverse Impacts, and Organizations and Persons Consulted /Bibliography.
JN 10- 107353 • 21 • August 2, 2010
�E SEA( d
Po �� F � Fq ��
TY. � P`\
City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Documentation
3.12 GRAPHIC EXHIBITS
The EIR will include a maximum of 35 exhibits to enhance the written text and clarify the proposed
Project environmental impacts. Using state -of -the -art computer design equipment and techniques,
our in -house graphic design team will create professional quality, black and white or full color
exhibits, dividers and covers for the EIR and Appendices. This Task assumes camera -ready base
maps are provided by the City. All exhibits will be 8.5" x 11" in size.
4.0 DRAFT EIR
4.1 PRELIMINARY DRAFT EIR
RBF will respond to one complete set of City comments on the Administrative Draft EIR. If desired
by the City, RBF will provide the Preliminary Draft of the EIR with all changes highlighted to assist the
final check of the document.
4.2 COMPLETION OF THE DRAFT EIR
RBF will respond to a second review of the Preliminary Draft EIR and will prepare the report for the
required 45 -day public review period. In addition, RBF will prepare the Notice of Completion (NOC)
for submittal to the Office of Planning and Research (OPR). RBF will also work with the City to
develop a distribution listing for the NOC and Draft EIR.
5.0 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
5.1 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
RBF will respond to comments received on the Draft EIR during the 45 -day public review period, and
any additional comments raised during hearings that occur during the 45 -day review. RBF will
prepare thorough, reasoned and sensitive responses to relevant environmental issues. This task
includes written responses to both written and oral comments received on the Draft EIR (includes
review of hearing transcripts, as required). The Draft Responses to Comments will be prepared for
review by City staff. Following review of the Draft Responses to Comments, RBF will finalize this
section for inclusion in the Final EIR.
It is noted that it is unknown at this time the extent of public and agency comments that will result
from the review process. RBF has budgeted conservatively, given the potential scrutiny involved
with the proposed project. Should the level of comments and response exceed our estimate, RBF
will submit additional funding requests to the City in order to complete the responses.
5.2 FINAL EIR
The Final EIR will consist of the revised Draft EIR text, as necessary, and the "Comments to
Responses" section. The Draft EIR will be revised in accordance with the responses to public
comments on the EIR. To facilitate City review, RBF will format the Final EIR with shaded text for
any new or modified text, and "strike out' any text which has been deleted from the Final EIR. RBF
will also prepare and file the Notice of Determination within five (5) days of EIR approval. This scope
of work excludes the required fees for the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG).
JN 10- 107353 • 22 • August 2, 2010
OE SEA( City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
A ai
Environmental Compliance Documentation
�CfA2t 9``'P��Q
NTY. 6P��
5.3 FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
RBF will provide administrative assistance to facilitate the CEQA process including the preparation of
the Notice of Determination, Statement of Overriding Considerations and Findings for City use in the
Project review process. RBF will prepare the Findings in accordance with the provisions of Section
15091 and 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines and in a form specified by the City. RBF will submit
the Draft Findings for City review and will respond to one set of City comments.
6.0 EIR PROJECT COORDINATION ARID MEETINGS
6.1 COORDINATION
Mr. Glenn Lajoie, AICP, and Mr. Eddie Torres, INCE, will be responsible for management and
supervision of the EIR Project Team as well as consultation with the City staff to incorporate City
policies into the EIR. Mr. Lajoie and Mr. Torres will undertake consultation and coordination of the
Project and review the EIR for compliance with CEQA requirements and guidelines and City CEQA
procedures. RBF will coordinate with state and local agencies regarding this environmental
document. Mr. Lajoie and Mr. Torres, will coordinate with all technical staff, consultants, support
staff and word processing toward the timely completion of the EIR. It is the goal of RBF to serve as
an extension of City staff throughout the duration of the EIR Project. As is stated in Understanding of
the Project, RBF will be available to meet with staff to discuss particular Project parameters, as
required by the City. In addition, as requested, RBF will provide detailed progress reports on a
monthly basis. All progress reports will include the status of documents currently in production,
delivery dates of documents, upcoming meetings with City Staff, and any outstanding items to be
resolved at that time. Each progress report will include a summary of tasks performed and the
percentage of work completed to date according to individual task.
6.2 MEETINGS
Mr. Lajoie, and /or Mr. Torres, will attend all staff meetings and will represent the Project Team at
public hearings and make presentations as necessary. RBF anticipates several meetings with City
staff, including a "kick -off meeting" (refer to Task 1.1), progress meetings, public meetings and
hearings. Mr. Lajoie and Mr. Torres along with other key Project Team personnel will also be
available to attend meetings with affected jurisdictions, agencies and organizations as needed to
identify issues, assess impacts and define mitigation. Should the City determine that additional
meetings beyond the following meetings are necessary, services will be provided under a separate
scope of work on a time and materials basis. The estimated cost for additional meetings is
approximately $800 per person.
One Public Scoping Meeting (Refer to Task 3.2).
Progress meetings with City Staff assumes five (5) meetings to provide written and oral
progress reports resolve issues, review comments on Administrative documents and receive
any necessary direction from City Staff.
Up to four (4) public hearings with presentations as necessary. This includes the
Environmental Review Board (ERB), Planning Commission and City Council meetings.
JN 10- 107353 • 23 • August 2, 2010
�E SEA! B City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
p 62
Environmental Compliance Documentation
, yGF 1p
f UUNTy.
7.0 EIR DELIVERABLES
The following is a breakdown of all products /deliverables. The listed deliverables assume a standard
number of deliverables for a project of this type and can be adjusted, as directed by the City. RBF
can also provide a cost, per document, and can provide billing on a time and materials basis, as
requested by the City.
PROJECT SLOPING
• Twenty -five (25) copies of the Notice of Preparation
• Twenty -five (25) copies of the Initial Study
• Sixty (60) CD versions of the NOP /Initial Study
• One (1) Camera -Ready Unbound Copy
• One (1) Electronic Copy of the NOP /Initial Study
PREPARATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE DRAFT EIR
• Five (5) copies of the Administrative Draft EIR and Technical Appendices
• Five (5) CD's containing the Administrative Draft EIR and Technical Appendices
• One (1) electronic copy of the Administrative Draft EIR and Exhibits
DRAFT EIR
• Five (5) copies of the Second Administrative Draft EIR and Technical Appendices
• Five (5) CD's containing the Second Administrative Draft EIR and Technical Appendices
• One (1) electronic copy of the Second Administrative Draft EIR and Exhibits
• Twenty -five (25) copies of the Draft EIR with Technical Appendices
• Seventy -five (75) CD's containing the Draft EIR and Technical Appendices
• One - hundred (100) copies of the Notice of Completion
• One (1) camera -ready unbound original of the Draft EIR and Technical Appendices
• One (1) electronic copy of the Draft EIR and Appendices
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
• Five (5) copies of the Draft Responses to Comments
• One (1) electronic copy of the Response to Comments
• Five (5) copies of the Administrative Final EIR and Technical Appendices
• Five (5) CD's containing the Administrative Final EIR Technical Appendices
• Twenty -five (25) copies of the Final EIR and Technical Appendices
• Fifty (50) CD's containing the Final EIR and Technical Appendices
• One (1) unbound camera -ready original of the Final EIR, Exhibits and Technical Appendices
• One (1) electronic copy of the Final EIR, including exhibits and Technical Appendices
• Five (5) copies of the Draft Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
• One (1) camera -ready Final Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
• One (1) electronic copy of the Final Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
• One (1) camera -ready Notice of Determination
• One (1) camera -ready Notice of Completion
JN 10- 107353 • 24 • August 2, 2010
Exhibit
11 of 11
S7296- 000111236808v1.doc
0 1 ; SEA( dF City of Seal Beach
Revised Proposal for the DWP Specific Plan Amendment
Environmental Compliance Do
e
A 21
/NTY, GP
Igo BUDGET
TASK
G.L.
220
C.M.
200
E.T.
160
R.G.
135
K.B.
120
A.M.
120
B.M.
210
R.K.
180
R.B.
750
G-
65
Total
Hours
Sub
Consultants
Repro
Total
Cost
1.0 PROJECT SLOPING
3
22
82
107
$0
1.1 Project KICkOff and Prolect Characteristics
8
2
24
30
20
58
32
$5,360
12 Research end Invest ation
12
2
6
6
2
6
34
$4,300
$5,610
1.3 Pre .ration of the Initial Stu
4
2
10
28
8
8
2
2
84
$9.140
1.4 Initial Stud sand M9eti Findin with CI Staff
6
6
12
510075
$2,220
TOTAL HOURS
30
2
48
34
10
14
D
2
2
0
142
55.000
$18,740
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
$6.800
5400
$7,200
$4,590
$1.200
$1,550
$0
$380
$300
s0
5
33
$0
50
$22,330
TOTAL LABOR COSTS 1
t
3
1 $22,330
2.0 FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
0
s0
2.1 AestheD M and Glare
3
22
82
107
$13 8D0
2.2 Air Quality
2
2
10
30
20
58
68
$8.660
2.3 Biological Resources
1
2
2
20
20
3
$4,300
$4.820
2.4 Climate Change Analysis
2
2
70
74
$9,140
2.5 Cultural Resources
2
2
4
510075
$10815
2.6 Drains eNVater Quality
2
2
2
100
1
104
55.000
$18,740
2.7 Geology and Sods
2.8 GrowthfFlopulaftit and Ho=nA
3
1
2
2
30
5
33
$50.490
$51.450
54 570
2.9 Jurisdictional Weiland Delineation
2.10 Land Use and Relevant Planning
t
3
2
2
60
55
88
25
513.270
$9.060
2.11 Noise
2
4
16
80
20
55
73
$9.440
2.12 Parks Recreation and Open S
2
1
2
24
30
28
$3.980
2.13 Public SerAces and Utilities
2
2
40
44
55.540
2.14 Traffic and Circulation
2
8
4
14
40
0
36
0
0
0
42
$8.800
TOTALHOURS
28
0
72
114
122
181
36
100
85
0
738
so
35.000
43.640
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
86,160
SO
$70,800
$15,390
$14.640
$21.720
57,560
818,000
512,750
SO
$64.885
$O
$777.855
TOTAL LABOR COSTS
5171,885
3.0 CEOA CLEARANCE OPTION 1:
0
$0
PREPARATION OF ADMIN DRAFT EIR
0
3.1 Notice of Preparation
2
2
2
30
20
4
3.2 Sic Mea'
6
2
6
20
20
12
3.3 Introduction and Purpose
2
7
9
RS77.24700.
3.4 Executive Summa
2
7
8
3.5 Thresholds of S nl6oanae
2
2
2
1
1
8
55.000
36 P ect Description
2
18
ZO
3.7 Cumulative Pro /Anal sis
2
8
10
3.a Environmental Analysis
16
4
65
80
20
i
185
516 700
3.9 Altemallves to the Proposed Action
3
1
34
3 6
30
104
$14.420
3.10 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Proorran
2
10
12
$1,940
3.11 Additional Sections
2
8
4
14
40
0
0
0
0
0
20
$2.930
3.12 Graphic Exhibits
2
$1,200
4
$8.750
54,800
SO
SO
So
$O
4046
so
35.000
43.640
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
$62,260
4.0 DRAFT EIR
0
s0
4.1 lontlirninary Draft EIR
6
2
50
3o
20
108
$15570
42 Completion of the Draft EIR
4
1
20
14
39
$5,970
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
$21,640
5.0 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
0
$0
5.1 Response to Comments
6
2
30
24
6
4
2
2
76
S11,690
WY Final EIR
6
1
28
35
$5,720
5.3 FindinustStatomntof0vorddinaCorisideratiorts
4
20
24
s3 880
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
$21,280
6.0 EIR PROJECT COORDINATION AND MEETINGS
0
s0
6.1 Coordination
60
4
70
134
$24.500
6.2 Meetln s
50
50
6
106
$19,7W
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
$44,250
7.0 EIR DELIVERABLES
I
i
1
0
7,000
$7.000
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
$7,000
TOTAL HOURS
179
161
435
200
T8
0
10
3
3
40
961
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
$39,350
$3.000
$05.250
$27.000
$9.120
$()1
$2,100
5540
I 5450
1 52,600
1
SO
I $7.
$158,440
TOTAL LABOR COSTS
1
$156,440
8.0 CEQA CLEARANCE OPTION 2:
0
$0
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
0
$0
8.1 Public Rjowlew Mlb ated Negative Declaration
10
2
50
30
20
112
$16.550
8 2 Final Review Mitigated Negative Declaration
8
2
40
20
20
as
$12.820
8.3 CEDA Notices
2
8
10
$1,640
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
$31,010
9.0 MND DELIVERABLES
0
55.000
$5,000
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
$5,000
10.0 MND PROJECT COORDINATION AND MEETINGS
0
$0
10.1 Coordination
1 401
21
Sol
i
92
516 700
10.2 Meetin s
401
1 40
80
$14800
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
$31,500
TOTALHOURS
98
8
188
50
40
0
0
0
0
0
352
SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS
$21.560
$1,200
$28.200
$8.750
54,800
SO
SO
So
$O
$0
so
35.000
$67.510
TOTAL LABOR TS
$67,510
Total Budget for CEQA Clearance Option 1, EIR (Teaks 1.0 through 7.0) _ $360,665
G L = Glenn L sjole R.G. - Rite Garda B.M. = Bob Matson GrA = Graphic Artist
C.M. - Collette Morse K.B. - Kristen Bogus R.K. = Rebecca Kinney
E.T. = Eddie Torres A.M. = Achilles Mellsoa R.B. = Rich Beek
Note: All work will be periormed at a'Not to exceed' contract price, wttictt will became the firm fared price upon completion of negoliallona *din On Client. The total budget Includes all miscellaneous coats for trsveVmgeage, mProducfm
rehnburseabbs, telephone, postal, delivery, referential m d atedels and Incidental expenses. RBF cu receive payment either on a percentage basis using milestones or by monthly blifrn9, as detenolned by the ChenL The RBF project manager
reserves the fight to make adjustnlerds to staff alloca8orre as necessary within the wmali budget.