HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGMT - Hellman Properties, LLC (Reimbursement Agmt for EIR) r r
AGREEMENT FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND
FISCAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARATION COSTS
AND STAFF SUPPORT SERVICES
HELLMAN RANCH, SEAL BEACH
1 THIS AGREEMENT is made this %9 ` day of _e 6, by and
2 between the City of Seal Beach (hereinafter "CITY ") and Hellman Properties LLC (hereinafter
3 "OWNER ").
4
5 1. Recitals. OWNER has requested that CITY retain CITY - selected consultants
6 (Consultant Team) for the purposes of preparing an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and a
7 Fiscal Impact Analysis relating to a proposed request for General Plan Amendments, a Specific
8 Plan Amendment, Development Agreement, and Tentative Tract Map approvals on properties
9 included within the proposed Hellman Ranch Specific Plan, dated October 1996, in Seal Beach.
10 OWNER has submitted a formal project. The necessary scope of work, work schedule, and
11 estimated budget for the completion of required reports and analysis necessary to allow the CITY
12 and other responsible agencies to evaluate the project ( "program activities ") in accordance with the
13 provisions of the Code of the City Seal Beach, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
14 and the Government Code of the State of California, and other appropriate State and Federal laws
15 and regulations relating to wetlands, archaeological resources and other significant areas of concern
C:\MYDOCUMENTSV- IELLMAN \STAFFREIMBURS.AGR \LW\11 -25 -96
' �'
• Hellman Ranch Reimbursement Agreement with
City of Seal Beach re: Consultant Team and Staff Support Costs
November, 1996
1 has been prepared by CITY consultants (See Exhibits A and B attached hereto and made a made a
2 part hereof).
3
4 OWNER agrees to reimburse CITY in full for all costs and expenses incurred
5 pursuant to said proposed contract between CITY and the Consultant Team for the purposes of
6 preparing an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and a Fiscal Impact Analysis in accordance with
7 the required scope of work, work schedule, and estimated budget for the completion of the required
8 report preparation and evaluation as set forth in the paragraph above.
9
10 2. Reimbursement. OWNER agrees to reimburse CITY in full for all costs and
11 expenses incurred pursuant to the agreements proposed to be entered into, at OWNER's request, by
12 and between CITY and Consultant Team, copies of which will be independently negotiated and
13 approved at a later date between CITY and Consultant Team, and which will be attached hereto as
14 "Exhibit A" and "Exhibit B" upon execution, so long as this agreement shall remain in effect.
15 OWNER agrees to reimburse City in full for all CITY personnel (full -time and part-tine positions)
16 staff costs, including, without limitation, City's Attorney's fees, incurred in managing the contract
17 with Consultant Team and other costs related to the preparation and completion of the above
18 referenced EIR and Fiscal Impact Analysis, and the processing of OWNER's applications for
19 development entitlements. OWNER hereby acknowledges that the execution of this agreement
20 prior to retention of the Consultant Team by CITY is necessary to accommodate expeditious
C:\MYDOCUMENTS\HELLMAN\STAFF REIMBURS.AGR \LW\11 -25 -96
2
i . i
•
Hellman Ranch Reimbursement Agreement with
City of Seal Beach re: Consultant Team and Staff Support Costs
November, 1996
1 processing of OWNER's development application and, on that basis, OWNER hereby waives any
2 defense to the enforcement of this agreement which may be based upon or arise out of the lack of a
3 pre - existing agreement by and between CITY and the Consultant team. OWNER agrees to
4 reimburse CITY according to the following schedule:
5
6 (a) one -tenth (1 /10) of Consultant Team's total estimated fees upon execution of
7 Consulting Agreements by and between CITY and members of the Consultant Team;
8
9 (b) A lump -sum deposit of $10,000.00 shall be paid by OWNER to CITY upon
10 approval of this agreement by the City Council and execution by the parties. Said sum will be used
11 to reimburse CITY's staff support costs until exhausted. In the event that CITY staff costs exhaust
12 the original $10,000.00 deposit, such additional costs shall be reimbursed by OWNER to CITY on
13 a monthly basis, within twenty (20) days of receipt of an invoice from the CITY, describing in
14 reasonable and understandable detail the services rendered by CITY staff personnel. Any balance
15 due owner at the conclusion of the studies shall be promptly remitted upon final completion of the
16 above referenced program activities.
17
18 (c) Thereafter, the CITY shall within fifteen (15) days after the last calendar
19 day of each month, submit an invoice to the OWNER itemizing tasks performed and reimbursable
20 expenses by the Consultant Team and CITY Staff for the previous month. OWNER shall pay
C:\MYDOCUMENTS\HELLMANISTAFF REIMBURS.AGRINA 11 -25 -96
3
•r 'S
Hellman Ranch Reimbursement Agreement with
City of Seal Beach re: Consultant Team and Staff Support Costs
November, 1996
1 within twenty (20) days of receipt the amount set forth in the monthly invoice submitted to
2 OWNER by CITY describing in reasonable and understandable detail the services rendered.
3 OWNER understands and agrees that work on the EIR and /or Fiscal Impact Analysis shall be
4 immediately suspended if at any time OWNER's payment is not received by the CITY within the
5 time frame specified herein.
6
7 (d) OWNER shall reimburse City for CITY staff personnel (full -time and part-
8 time positions) costs including, without limitation, City Attorney's fees, incurred in managing the
9 contract with Consultant Team and other costs related to the completion of the above referenced
10 program activities.
11
12 3. Cost Estimate. OWNER acknowledges and agrees that CITY has informed
13 OWNER that CITY estimate of the costs to be reimbursed by OWNER will be approximately
14 $237,850.00 over the course of the project. Said cost estimate was derived as follows:
15
16 a. EIR Consultant fees and expenses: $ 132,000.00
17 b. Fiscal Impact Consultant fees
18 and expenses: $ 10,850.00
19 c. City Staff time and expenses: $ 55,000.00
20 d. Attorney's fees and expenses: $ 40,000.00
C:\MYDOCUMENTS \HELLMAN\STAFF REIMBURS.AGR\LW\1 1 -25 -96
4
i • .i
Hellman Ranch Reimbursement Agreement with
City of Seal Beach re: Consultant Team and Staff Support Costs
November, 1996
1 Said estimates are for planning purposes only, and represents a reasonable approximation
2 based upon CITY's past experience and standard hourly rates. The estimate in any or all categories
3 above may be exceeded based upon the ultimate scope of work necessary to adequately process
4 OWNER's applications. CITY shall use its best efforts to maintain project costs within the
5 estimated amount however, in no event shall said cost estimate be construed as a limitation or
6 maximum figure of OWNER's ultimate cost reimbursement responsibility. At such time as the
7 actual costs incurred by CITY in any category itemized above equal or exceed eighty percent (80 %)
8 of the estimated amount, CITY shall notify OWNER of that fact in writing to allow OWNER to
9 plan accordingly. OWNER acknowledges and agrees that the amount of CITY's costs to be
10 reimbursed by OWNER pursuant to this Agreement are not negotiable. Regular bi- monthly
11 meetings will be held by CITY and OWNER to discuss process, progress, budget and other items
12 pertaining to the project.
13
14 4. Abandonment of Project. In the event OWNER abandons the project, CITY will
15 terminate performance of work by the Consultant Team under contract with the CITY at the earliest
16 practicable time, upon written request from OWNER directed to the City Manager of CITY.
17 OWNER shall reimburse CITY for all services the Consultant Team and CITY staff personnel had
18 performed prior to the termination of the agreements between CITY and the members of the
19 Consultant Team.
20
C:\MYDOCUMENTS\HELLMAN\STAFF REIMBURS.AGR\LW\11 -25 -96
5
• t '
Hellman Ranch Reimbursement Agreement with
Cu)? of Seal Beach re: Consultant Teanh and Staff Support Costs
November, 1996
1 5. Independent Consultants.
2 (a) During existence of CITY's contracts with the Consultant Team, and for a
3 time period of one (1) year from final resolution of OWNER's application, neither OWNER, nor
4 any of its representatives, agents or other persons acting in concert with OWNER will enter into
5 any financial or business relationship with any members of the Consultant Team or propose to enter
6 into any future such relationship with any such member of the Consultant Team.
7
8 (b) OWNER hereby acknowledges and agrees as follows:
9 (i) CITY has sole discretion to select which of its employees are
10 assigned to work on OWNER's application;
11 (ii) CITY has sole discretion to determine which persons CITY
12 will hire as employees and contractors to work on OWNER's application;
13 (iii) CITY has sole discretion to direct the work and evaluate the
14 performance of the employees and contractors whom the CITY hires to work on OWNER's
15 application and CITY retains the right to terminate or replace at any time any employee or
16 contractor who is assigned to work on OWNER's application.
17 (iv) CITY has sole discretion, within reason, to determine the
18 amount of compensation paid to employees or contractors hired by CITY to work on OWNER's
19 application.
20 (v) CITY, not OWNER, shall pay employees and contractors
C:\MYDOCUMENTSWELLMAN\STAFF REIMBURS.AGR\LW\i 1 -25 -96
6
r 5
Hellman Ranch Reimbursement Agreement with
City of Seal Beach re: Consultant Team and Staff Support Costs
November, 1996
1 hired or assigned by CITY to work on OWNER's application from a CITY account under the
2 exclusive control of CITY.
3
4 (c) CITY and OWNER hereby acknowledge and agree that processing of
5 OWNER's application is not contingent on the hiring of any specific contractor[s].
6
7 (d) CITY and OWNER hereby acknowledge and agree that OWNER's duty to
8 reimburse CITY is not contingent upon the CITY's approval or disapproval of the proposed project
9 or upon the result of any action of the CITY.
10
11 (e) Neither OWNER nor its officers, employees or agents, shall communicate
12 with Consultant Team during the term of this Agreement, unless specifically authorized to do so in
13 advance by CITY's Director of Development Services.
14
15 6. Interpretation. This Agreement is deemed to have been prepared by all of the
16 parties hereto, and any uncertainty or ambiguity herein shall not be interpreted against the drafter,
17 but rather, if such ambiguity or uncertainty exists, shall be interpreted according to the applicable
18 rules of interpretation of contracts under the law of the State of California.
19
20
C:\MYDOCUMENTS\HELLMAN\STAFF REIMBURS.AGR \LW\ 11-25-96
7
Hellman Ranch Reimbursement Agreement with
City of Seal Beach re: Consultant Team and Staff Support Costs
November, 1996
1 7. Assignment. This Agreement shall not be assigned in whole or in part, without the
2 prior written consent of CITY.
3
4 8. Notice. Any notice required to be given to OWNER shall be deemed duly and
5 properly given upon delivery, if sent to OWNER postage prepaid to:
6 Hellman Properties LLC
7 Attn: Jerry Tone, Agent
8 244 California Street, Suite 400
9 San Francisco, CA 94111
10
11 or personally delivered to OWNER at such address or other address specified to the CITY in
12 writing by OWNER.
13 Any notice required to be given to CITY shall be deemed duly and properly given
14 upon delivery, if sent to CITY postage prepaid to:
15 Director of Development Services
16 City of Seal Beach
17 211 8th Street
18 Seal Beach, CA 90740
19
20
21 or personally delivered to CITY at such address or other address specified to the OWNER in
22 writing by CITY.
23
24 9. Entire Agreement. This agreement represents the entire integrated agreement
25 between CITY and OWNER, and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements,
C:\MYDOCUMENTS \HELLMAN\STAFF REIMBURS.AGR \LW\11 -25 -96
8
Hellman Ranch Reimbursement Agreement with
City of Seal Beach re: Consultant Team and Staff Support Costs
November, 1996
1 either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument signed by
2 both CITY and OWNER.
3
4 10. Litigation Costs. Should any dispute under this Agreement lead to litigation, the
5 prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the other party reasonable attorneys' fees and costs
6 for the prosecution of the action.
7
8 11. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by, and interpreted according
9 to, the laws of the State of California.
10
11 12. Authority. The persons signing this Agreement warrant that each of them has the
12 authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the party on whose behalf said person is
13 purporting to execute this Agreement, and that this Agreement is a binding obligation of said
14 parties.
EXECUTED in the day and year first above written.
"CITY" CITY OF SEAL B ACH
By --
ICEI R. TILL, CITY MANAGER
C:\MYDOCUMENTS \HELLMAN\STAFF REIMBURS.AGR \LW\11 -25 -96
9
Hellman Ranch Reimbursement Agreement with
City of Seal Beach re: Consultant Team and Staff Support Costs
November, 1996
ATTEST:
l ilt _ -I
/ .4
CITY CLERK
"OWNER" HELLMAN il R fi# ERTIFS
AM By -11�.�.
Y a
"EXHIBIT A ": Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Consultant Agreement (to be
attached upon execution)
"EXHIBIT B" Fiscal Impact Report Consultant Agreement (to be attached upon
execution)
C:\MYDOCUMENTS\HELLMAN\STAFF REIMBURS.AGR LW \11 -25 -96
10
+ . •
Hellman Ranch Reimbursement Agreement with
City of Seal Beach re: Consultant Team and Staff Support Costs
November, 1996
"EXHIBIT A
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Consultant Agreement
(to be attached upon execution)
C:IMYDOCUMENTSIHELLMANISTAFF REIMBURS.AGR\LW\11 -25 -96
11
1 •
SCOPE OF WORK
FOR THE
HELLMAN RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT EIR
Presented to:
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, California 90740 %
Attention:
Lee Whittenberg
Director of Planning
(310) 431 -2527
Presented by:
P &D ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
A division of P &D Consultants, Inc.
1100 Town & Country Road, Suite 300
Contact:
Ms. Sylvia Salenius
Vice President
(714) 835 -4447
November 12, 1996
1 •
PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
The proposed project involves the approval of a new specific plan (SP) for the Hellman Ranch
property which is a 248.7 acre piece of land located in the City of Seal Beach, north of Pacific
Coast Highway, south of Lopez Drive, east of the Haynes Cooling Channel and west of Seal
Beach Boulevard. The new SP developed for this project will replace the previously approved
SP for this area that was developed by the Mola Development Company. The new SP will most
likely call for the development of the following improvements:
• An 18 hole public golf course with pro shop and parking facilities
• Development of 66 single family residential units
• Development of commercial/retail /environmental interpretive center on State
Lands
r
• Dedication of the existing Gum Grove Park to the City of Seal Beach
• Continued use of a portion of the project site for oil production facilities
• Development/restoration of freshwater marsh areas on the project site
• Development/restoration of a saltwater marsh on the project site
P &D understands that this project will also require an amendment of the Land Use, Circulation,
Open Space and Housing Elements of the City's General Plan to make the project consistent with
those elements, a parcel map sub - dividing the project site and possibly a tentative tract map for
the 66 residential units to be developed on the project site. A development agreement will also
be prepared. The need for all of these actions will be described in the project EIR and
appropriate mitigation measures included.
SCOPE OF WORK
HELLMAN RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT EIR
Based on discussions with Seal Beach City staff and the Hellman Ranch project planner, the
following describes the anticipated tasks necessary to complete required environmental clearance
documentation for the Hellman Ranch Specific Plan Amendment EIR.
1.0 Review Technical Studies on the Hellman Ranch
This scope of work reflects P &D Environmental Services (P &D) current understanding
that the project proponent will now be providing the following studies for inclusion in
the project EIR:
A. Focused Biological Survey to Determine the Status of the California Least Tern,
the Belding's Savannah Sparrow. the Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Other
Sensitive Species
B. pacific Pocket Mouse Assessment for the Hellman Ranch
1
IP •
C. Golf Course Management Plan for the Hellman Ranch
D. Biological Resources Management Plan for the Hellman Ranch
E. Wetlands Restoration Plan for the Hellman Ranch Wetlands
F. Geotechnical Evaluation of the Hellman Ranch
G. Hellman Ranch Traffic Study
H. Hellman Ranch Acoustical Analysis
I. Evaluation of Remediation Alternatives. Hydrocarbon Contaminated Soils
J. Amended Hellman Ranch Specific Plan •
K. Hellman Ranch Visual Analysis
L. Tentative Tract Map A & B
M. Concept Grading. Preliminary Grading and Drainage
P &D also understands that the City of Seal Beach will also be providing the following
studies for inclusion in the project EIR or for use in the preparation of the appropriate
sections of this document:
•
N. Cultural Resources Reports on the Hellman Ranch
O. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for Hellman Ranch
The scope of work and associated schedule assume that these studies will be technically
and topically adequate at the time of submittal and that they will address all of the issues
mandated by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). To ensure that this is
the case P &D has included time in our Scope of Work to verify that all of the necessary
issues have been addressed. It is also assumed that these studies will evaluate the
impacts of the project's Preferred Land Use Plan and the alternatives which are defined
for the project. They shall be provided on computer media compatible with WordPerfect
5.1 or Microsoft Word 6.0 and camera ready /computer generated AutoCad graphics shall
be provided which can be directly inserted in the project EIR. It should be recognized
that if these studies are not found to be sufficient by P &D reviewers or P &D
subconsultants on this project, or if additional issues are raised during the Notice of
Preparation (NOP) process, schedule delays and /or additional coordination and analysis
costs may result since the applicant's and City's consultants will need to revise or amend
the studies as necessary. Very critical to the schedule will be the traffic analysis, since
the air quality analyses can not be completed without final traffic numbers.
P &D's biologists will review biological related reports A, B, C and D for their adequacy
on identifying any rare, endangered or threatened species of plants and animals on the
Hellman Ranch property and the potential impacts of the project's golf course on
Hellman Ranch biological resources.
2
1 •
P &D's Senior Biologist, Environmental Planner specializing in water quality issues and
Noble Consultants will review the adequacy of report E (Wetlands Restoration Plan for
• the Hellman Ranch Wetlands) to determine the adequacy of this report. P &D is
particularly concerned about the water source for the proposed saltwater marsh, tidal
flow in and out of the marsh and possible contamination of the marsh by any
hydrocarbons present in groundwater under the project site and by any pesticide or
fertilizer runoff from the golf course. Also of concern is the disturbance impact of
people playing on /maintenance of the golf course on the adjacent saltwater and fresh
water marsh areas.
Mr. Edward Heath, Consulting Engineering Geologist, would review report F
( Geotechnical Evaluation of the Hellman Ranch) for the adequacy of this report. Mr.
Heath is very familiar with the geology and oil operations in the project area. It is
assumed by P &D that this report has taken into consideration the wealth of other
geotechnical reports previously prepared on the Hellman Ranch property so that a
complete picture of the soils, geology and seismicity of the Ranch property is provided
in this report.
P &D's traffic engineers will review report G (Hellman Ranch Traffic Study) to determine
the adequacy of this analysis for use in the EIR. It is assumed that because of the
reduced size of the proposed project that significant traffic impacts will not be created
by the proposed project.
P &D's Senior Environmental Planner most familiar with acoustical analysis will review -
Report H (Hellman Ranch Acoustical Analysis) to determine the adequacy of this report.
P &D's Registered Environmental Assessor will review reports I (Evaluation of
Remediation Alternatives. Hydrocarbon Contaminated Soils) and Report 0 (Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment for the Hellman Ranch) to determine that these reports
adequately identify all hazardous materials on the project site, that proper protocols have
been followed and that these materials will be adequately remediated.
P &D's EIR Project Manager will review report J(Amended Hellman Ranch Specific
Plan) to ensure its adequacy as a specific plan.
P &D's Senior Landscape Architect will review report K (Hellman Ranch Visual
Analysis) to determine that this report adequately addresses all visual impacts that will
be created by the development of the Hellman Ranch property.
A P &D's Engineer will review report L (Tentative Tract Map A & B) and report M
(Concept grading. Preliminary Grading and Drainage) to ensure that they meet all City
and State requirements for such development maps/drainage plans.
P &D will retain the services of Scientific Resource Surveys, Inc. (SRS) to review the
most recent cultural resources reports prepared on the Hellman Ranch property to
determine the adequacy of these reports.
Any critical deficiencies identified in the review of the above reports will be immediately
brought to the attention of City staff so that the reports can be revised as necessary to
meet all the requirements of CEQA, City, State or Federal requirements.
3
1
2.0 PROJECT INITIATION MEETING
Upon Notice to Proceed, P &D's Principal -in- Charge and Project Manager will meet with
City of Seal Beach (City) staff to initiate work on the project EIR. At this meeting the
current status of the project and the development application will be determined and any
modifications to the project description identified. Outstanding issues will be discussed
along with the specific alternatives which should be considered in the EIR.
During the meeting, the appropriate contacts and lines of communication will be
established. Means of handling press inquires will also be defined.
At or prior to this meeting, it is assumed that P &D would be provided with all of the
project related data the City currently has on file. Specifically requested is a copy of the
Land Use, Circulation, Open Space and Housing elements of the City's General Plan,
City Noise Ordinance, City Zoning Code and the latest EIR/Technical Appendices on the
Hellman Ranch project. To expedite the study it would also be useful to receive
information from City service manager regarding the personnel and facilities demands
and costs they would anticipate as a result of the development of 66 dwelling units called
for by the proposed SP, and the type of mitigation they might require. This would allow
P &D to get a "running start" on the EIR analysis.
3.0 PREPARATION OF PROJECT IS/NOP
P &D will review the Initial Study /Notice of Preparation (IS /NOP) prepared by the City
on this project and edit it, as appropriate, for clarity and adherence to CEQA
requirements. It is assumed at this time that the IS /NOP will include a discussion of all
the issues addressed by this scope of work and that it will use the Environmental '
Checklist included in the latest version of the CEQA Guidelines. P &D will give the City
back one (1) hard copy of the revised IS /NOP with any edits to be made marked in red
on the hard copy. P &D assumes that the City will photocopy the required number of
IS /NOPs and circulate this document to all required responsible and trustee agencies and
other interested parties. As an option, P &D could photocopy the project IS /NOP and
distribute it for a 30 day public review period on a time and materials basis.
P &D will also review the project NOP and Draft EIR distribution lists prepared by the
City and suggest additions as required. As an option, P &D can prepared these
distribution lists for review and approval by the City.
This task will also develop the basic project description which will be used in the project
EIR. P &D assumes that the City will prepare a project description as part of the project
IS. P &D will review the project description for adequacy and completeness during the
review of the project IS /NOP. Any necessary revisions to the project description will
be included in P &D's review of the project IS /NOP.
4.0 PREPARE PRELIMINARY DRAFT EIR
P &D will begin preparing a Preliminary Draft EIR for review by City staff. This effort
will incorporate maximum use of available data, while including necessary updating and
meeting legal mandates.
4
1 •
.The Preliminary Draft EIR will contain the following four subsections for each
environmental parameter addressed in this EIR.
A. Setting. Provide a quantitative description of conditions that currently exist on
the project site. A brief statement regarding methodology and a description of
the primary source for the information will be included. Special reports that have
been prepared on the parameter will be noted and included as EIR technical
appendices, such as the project traffic, air quality, noise, biological resources,
geotechnical, visual and any other reports prepared for this project.
B. environmental Impact. A discussion on the threshold of significance for each
impact category will be included in the EIR. A discussion of all direct and
indirect, long and short -term impacts (positive and negative) that will occur as
a result of the construction of project developments will be discussed. Impacts
will be described as significant or non-significant. If no impact on a particular
parameter is anticipated as a result of project implementation, then that fact plus •
the reasoning behind that conclusion will be stated using information from the
Initial Study.
C. Mitigation. Feasible and appropriate mitigation measures will be described for
each parameter for which potentially significant adverse impacts are identified.
Adverse effects remaining after mitigation is implemented will be described for .
each parameter discussed in the EIR.
D. Level of Significance after Mitigation. Discussion will be provided after each
impact section on whether any significant impacts will remain after mitigation
measures have been added to the project.
The Preliminary Draft will include all correspondence sent to or received from affected
agencies and other interested parties, including the IS /NOP and comments thereon, and
will address any concerns raised by those agencies /parties in the text. However, in the
unlikely event that completely new issues or requirements arise in the course of document
preparation or in comments by others, P &D reserves the right to amend this scope of
work to address such issues or requirements.
4.1 Prepare the Project Objectives
The description of the proposed project will include a discussion on the objectives to be
accomplished by the proposed project. The ability of an alternative to meet reasonable
project objectives is one test of its feasibility and therefore is critical to the determination
of which alternatives are addressed in the EIR and which alternative may be preferred
over others. P &D will work with the City and, if necessary, the applicant on defining
the project objectives to be include in the project EIR.
4.2 Prepare EIR Summary of Impacts
The Preliminary Draft EIR will include a Summary in the front of the EIR which will •
include the following:
A. Background and history of planning for the Hellman Ranch project.
5
•
B. A brief description of the current proposed Hellman Ranch project.
C. Summary matrix of potential significant adverse impacts, mitigation measures and
unavoidable significant adverse impacts associated with the proposed project
D. Discussion of any major areas of controversy.
P &D will prepare any necessary exhibits to illustrate the information in this section of
the EIR.
4.3 Prepare the Introduction Section
The Preliminary Draft EIR will include an Introduction Section which will describe the
following:
•
A. The purpose of a focused EIR.
B. The existing project background e.g., environmental setting of the Hellman Ranch
site and history of planning efforts.
C. The Initial Study, NOP and public scoping process, including a table identifying
NOP commentors, general comments and where the comment is addressed in the
DEIR.
D. The format for the EIR.
E. The incorporation of documents by reference and source documents used in the
preparation of the EIR. Brief summaries of the relevant contents of each
document will be provided.
F. Discussion on the Mitigation Monitoring Program proposed for the project.
G. Subsequent approvals necessary to develop the project.
H. Final EIR certification process.
4.4 Prepare the Project Description Section of the EIR
The Preliminary Draft EIR will include a Project Description Section. This section will
include the following:
A. An introduction to the project description.
B. Project objectives developed for the Hellman Ranch project.
C. The location of the Hellman Ranch property.
D. A description of the new facilities proposed to be developed on the Hellman Ranch
property including phasing, construction activities and long term operations.
6
• O The approvals necessary for the Hellman Ranch Specific Plan and proposed
improvements on the Ranch property.
F. The environmental clearance process followed for the project.
G. The alternatives considered in the project EIR.
P &D would review all project description information included in the project IS and
revise it as necessary to fit into the format used for the EIR. P &D would confer with
City staff if it is determined that, to meet CEQA requirements, more information may
be needed about any aspect of the project. P &D would also prepare exhibits necessary
to illustrate the information on the project description including necessary camera ready
exhibits to illustrate this information. However, it is assumed that the exhibits included
in the IS project description will be sufficient for this section of the project EIR.
4.5 Evaluate Key Impact Parameters in the Project EIR •
The following key impact parameters will be evaluated in the project EIR. Data and
methodologies which will be employed are described along with pertinent issues.
A. Population and Housing
The project's impacts on population and housing will be discussed in this section
of the project EIR. P &D will summarize information out of the economic
feasibility report prepared by the project applicant to provide this information.
Mitigation measures, if necessary, will be included to reduce project impacts on
population and housing, as much as possible.
B. Geology /Soils/Seismicity /Liquefaction
This section of the project EIR will discuss the potential geotechnical problems
that could be encountered by the continued presence of oil production facilities on
the project site and by the construction and use of facilities proposed to be
developed on the Hellman Ranch property. The information in Converse
Consultant's Geotechnical Evaluation of the Hellman Ranch and other pertinent
geologic reports will be summarized. A discussion will be included on project
geologic conditions, including a discussion on project soils, seismicity and the
potential for liquefaction of site soils. A map will be included in the EIR which
displays the Newport Inglewood Fault which traverses the project site, other faults
near the project site, and soils subject to liquefaction. Likely event magnitude,
probability (if known) and estimated ground acceleration will be included. P &D
understands that no homes will be constructed on soils subject to liquefaction.
However, the project golf course will be constructed on these soils subject to
liquefaction which may cause future settling of golf course facilities. Oil
production may also induce subsidence. This will be discussed in the project EIR.
Project construction activities will also create changes in the topography of the site
and possibly cause wind or water erosion of soils. This will also be discussed in
the project EIR.
• •
. .
Feasible and appropriate measures to avoid or reduce potential topographic,
grading seismic impacts will be include in the EIR. Measures to avoid or reduce
topographic, grading and seismic impacts on project improvements will also be
included.
C. Air Quality
The quantity of air emissions generated by the project during construction will be
calculated, including worker trips and onsite construction vehicle emissions.
Long -term impacts associated with vehicle miles generated by residents, those
associated with the commercial /retail/interpretive center and golf course patrons
and maintenance vehicles will also be quantified. Emissions from residential units
and structures used to support golf course uses will also be quantifies, whether
they occur on or off -site. These emissions will be evaluated against existing
ambient air quality conditions. s
Consistency of the project with the Air Quality Management Plan and, if
applicable, the Air Quality element of the City's General Plan, will be determined
based upon the project's consistency with SCAG growth projections and jobs/
housing balance goals. Means to reduce vehicle miles traveled will be explored
as mitigation measures. Previously considered measures have included bus
facilities and bike trails.
Odor concerns associated with continued use of the site for oil production and site
remediation of hydrocarbon contaminated soils will also be examined and impacts
described. Prevailing wind patterns on a seasonal and daily basis will be reviewed
to determine the areas most likely to be affected by oil production and remediation
activities. Possible duration of such impacts will be discussed with the applicant's
remediation experts and characterized if such data is available.
D. Hydrology and Water Quality
P &D will review the technical reports that analyzed existing water quality,
hydrology and hydrologic conditions in the project area. Appropriate data from
these reports will be incorporated into the EIR.
P &D will discuss the site's existing baseline water quality condition and the
potential sources of pollutants to existing and future wetlands. However, it is not
clear at this point if all of the necessary information to address water quality
impacts will be available from the studies prepared by the various Hellman Ranch
consultants. If adequate information on existing water quality is not available, it
may be necessary to collect additional information. It may also be necessary to
gather additional data from local agencies including the Regional Water Quality
Control Board and County Flood Control staff. Other critical information could
include the identification of any potential excess nutrient loads or contaminants
from areas such as the planned golf course, existing and proposed housing tracts
or related infrastructure and oil production areas which may require hazardous
materials cleanup. P &D will meet with the City to discuss any additional data
needs for the water quality analysis. At that time, the scope, responsibilities and
costs for collecting additional water quality data would be determined. A cost
8
' • 11
estimate for this additional data collection has not been included, because the need '
for and extent of such surveys cannot be determined until the completion of the
literature review portion of the Scope of Work.
The hydrology and water quality analysis will include a description of the
parameters and assumptions used to identify and evaluate the potential project
impacts; identification of the specific impacts of the project alternatives; and
mitigation measures necessary to avoid or substantially reduce the identified
impacts. P &D will also assess potential flooding issues associated with the project
alternatives, particularly noting existing flood conditions in the Los Alamitos
Retarding Basin, San Gabriel River, Haynes Cooling Channel and the project
vicinity. .
The water quality implications of golf course operations and management will be
a key concern. The potential for excessive use of fertilizers and pesticides exists
along with a concomitant adverse effect on water quality and wetland habitat,
unless rigorous design and operational controls are implemented. Possible impacts
from adjacent residential and commercial uses will also be examined and
mitigation measures proposed, if required.
Also, potential hydrology and water quality impacts which may occur during
construction of the wetlands site and off site properties will be investigated.
Particular attention will be given to surface grading which may distribute
construction runoff or toxic subsurface materials into waters on and off the project
site. Included will be a discussion of non -point source discharges, dewatering
discharges and the movement of wet soils, some of which may be contaminated
by hydrocarbons or other related pollutants, on the site. A discussion of potential
water quality impacts from a variety of other sources such as the Edison power
plant, Rockwell plant, industrial uses to the north of the project site, adjacent
Navy facilities, and planned future development in the area will be included.
This section will also investigate other activities, such as construction staging, odor
control, erosion control, construction traffic management and any special handling
requirements which may effect water quality. Evaluation of these potential
impacts and the required mitigation measures will be developed as part of this
analysis.
The issue of the project's water demand to serve residential, park, and wetland
restoration uses will be addressed in the Public Services and Utilities section of the
EIR. How this could affect the availability of water for others already served by
the local water department will also be addressed in the Utilities section of the
EIR.
E. Biological Resources
There have been numerous surveys/reports/correspondence prepared on biological
resources on the Hellman Ranch property. The results of these studies have been
included in the various EIRs that have been prepared on projects proposed to be
developed on the Hellman Ranch property. Based on discussions with City staff
and the project applicant, there has been little or no change in the character of
9
' 0 lil
these existing biological resources in the recent past. However, there is potential
for change in the context of the proposed project due to• the passage of time,
circumstances or recent court decisions. To ensure that the latest information on
biological resources is included in the project EIR, P &D will summarize the
information in the most recent biological resource surveys prepared on the
Hellman Ranch property and include it in the project EIR. This scope assumes
that all of the existing documentation is adequate for EIR preparation and that the
documentation includes a detailed existing conditions and vegetation map.
Appropriate mitigation measures included in the Moffatt & Nichols Wetlands
Restoration Plan for the Hellman Ranch Wetlands to protect biological resources
will be incorporated in this section of the EIR. Any water quality impacts which
may arise during construction activities and operation /maintenance of the golf
course may have secondary effects on wildlife and habitat quality. This issue will
be evaluated using available data and measures will be identified to prevent harm
as required. •
P &D understands that a wetland delineation has been prepared by State and
Federal agencies. Therefore, designated wetlands do exist on the Hellman Ranch
site and this will be discussed in the project EIR. Because of the "no net loss of
wetlands" rule for wetlands, the project EIR will discuss how the construction
phasing of the project will result in no net loss of delineated wetlands on the
project site, thereby reducing impacts on plant and animal species that depend
upon wetland areas for their survival.
The project EIR will address the direct and indirect impacts on biological
resources related to construction of the project, including dredging and off site
dumping of the dredge material from the saltwater and freshwater marsh areas if
this is proposed as part of this project. The project EIR will also discuss the
impacts of golf course use on bird species that will use the wetlands to be created
on the project site. Conflicts with bird species may occur since it appears that
fairways and greens may be located within close proximity to wetland areas.
Impacts from the introduction of non -native birds (eg. brown - headed cowbirds)
will be addressed. Potential impacts will be described and appropriate mitigation
measures included in the project EIR.
F. Noise
Noise analyses data and applicable information from the City's Noise Element will
be summarized in the project EIR. The information in the RKJK $iellman Ranch
Acoustical Analysis will also be summarized in the EIR. It is assumed by P &D
that this analysis addresses the following concerns.
• Noise created by the City's animal shelter, since noise from this land use
may be of concern to the those living in the homes to be developed on the
project site.
• Noise effects of traffic added by the project to the street network.
• Noise from remaining oil pumping facilities on residential land use and the
project golf course.
10
' • ill
• Noise from aviation facilities at the Los Alamitos Naval Air Station and
Long Beach Airport.
Appropriate mitigation measures will be proposed to control noise and will be
taken from the most recent acoustical analysis prepared on this project. From
P &D's knowledge of the site it appears that to make people aware of noise from
the City's animal shelter notification at purchase could be considered as a
mitigation measure, along with noise barriers, improved glazing standards and
installation of central air conditioning in homes impacted by noise from the animal
shelter. Noise from street traffic could be mitigated by use of noise walls,
glazing, fenestration, air conditioning, floor plan controls and other means to meet
City interior noise standards. It is also anticipated that noise from remaining oil
pumping facilities new proposed residential units could be reduced by switching
them to electric power should they still be powered by diesel or gas powered
pumps.
G. Light and Glare
The project will introduce new sources of light to the project site, as well as
possible sources of reflective glare. Existing sources of light on and adjacent to
the site will be described. New sources of light created by street lights, parking
lot illumination, residential lighting and night lighting of recreation facilities such
as the golf course will be described and, if possible, quantified. Glare from
reflective surfaces such as new water features, parked vehicles and window glass .
will also be described. Means to mitigate light and glare impacts, such as use of
low level stanchions, directional shields, reduced intensity lighting and use of
landscaping as light or glare barriers will be proposed as mitigation measures.
H. Existing and Planned Land Use
This section of the project EIR will address the specific types of land uses being
proposed on the project site and their compatibility with one another and with
existing and planned adjacent uses. This analysis will also address the consistency
of the proposed project plan with the current General Plan designations, zoning
designations, Local Coastal Plan for the site as well as its Redevelopment Area
status and consistency with City redevelopment plans. As discussed with City
staff, this project is currently inconsistent with the Land Use, Circulation, Open
Space and Housing Elements of the General Plan. This will be discussed in the
project EIR and amendments of these elements proposed as mitigation measures.
This section of the EIR will also discuss the jobs /housing balance and the issues
of population increase and affordable housing. The set aside of tax increment
funds from the project will be cited as a key mitigation measure for low and
moderate housing needs.
Use of State Lands for this project will also be described in detail, noting that this
land was previously proposed to be used for hotel use and is now being proposed
for commercial /retail and environmental interpretive center uses. The impacts on
State Land will be described and coordinated with the State Lands Commission.
11
t . 01
Appropriate mitigation measures will be proposed to reduce land use impacts as
much as possible.
I. Natural Resources/Energy
The aggregate long -term use of energy by the project will be calculated, including
energy for lighting, heating, cooling, appliances and motor vehicle operations.
The status of phased out oil wells will be described, since the project site is
currently being used for oil production and such use will ultimately be phased out.
Useful life and phased decommissioning of onsite oil wells will be described if
data is available. Capability to extract additional on -site oil resources in
conjunction with site development will be described.
The site's current value as an open space resource will be contrasted with the
value of the area with restored wetlands which will exist after project •
implementation. Loss of natural open space during the period of time it takes to
accomplish restoration will also be addressed.
Mitigation measures will be identified to reduce the projects impacts on energy use
and protect oil production facilities on the site.
J. Transportation /Circulation
P &D will summarize the information in the RKJK Hellman Ranch Traffic Study
in the project EIR. It is assumed that this study will contain the latest information
on traffic impacts created by the proposed project and include enough information
to prepare the Transportation and Circulation Section of the project EIR. This
section of the EIR would include the following:
• Identify the existing circulation network serving the project site including the
number of arterial through lanes, intersection approach lanes, and traffic
control devices including traffic signals and stop signs. In addition, all
funded, planned and proposed circulation improvements impacting the
project area will also be identified.
• Identify current Level of Service (LOS) conditions at the intersections that
will be impacted by the proposed project.
• Forecast and analyze future year traffic conditions. This incudes identifying
ambient background traffic growth due to development projects in areas
adjacent to the City, as well as identifying development projects within the
City.
• Identify all impacts created by the project on the roadway network serving
the project site.
Appropriate mitigation measures will be included in the project EIR to reduce
impacts of the project on the area roadway network.
12
0 \lb
•
K. Public Services and Utilities
The development of the proposed project will result in impacts to existing public
services and utilities on or near the project site. P &D will contact all applicable
public service and utility providers potentially affected by the proposed project to
determine their ability to provide additional services and utilities to the project.
This assessment will address police, fire and emergency services, schools,
community colleges /college/university, library services, water, wastewater,
electricity, natural gas, telephone, cable TV and other utilities and services that
would be impacted by the project.
Depending on the information received from the service and utility providers,
mitigation measures may be proposed in the project EIR to protect existing utility
systems and to see that adequate services and utilities will be available to serve the
project in the future.
L. Human Health /Risk of Upset
The project site and certain adjacent properties have been, and some still are, the
center of oil field activities such as oil well drilling and production, oil storage,
water and steam injection and abandoned oil wells. The possible adverse health
impacts from hydrocarbon emissions and the safety impacts that these operations
could have on those using the project golf course, Gum Grove Park and residential
land use to be developed on the project site will be reviewed, discussed and
mitigation measures presented in the project EIR.
This section of the project EIR will also summarize the information in the Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment and Converse Environmental West's Evaluation
of Remediation Alternatives. Hydrocarbon Contaminated Soils which have been
prepared on the Hellman Ranch property. It is necessary to discuss hazardous
materials found on the project site. Also, remediation of areas contaminated with
hydrocarbons will potentially expose people to hazardous hydrocarbon emissions.
These impacts will be discussed in the EIR.
The possibility of effects from hazardous waste sites on the Naval Weapons Station
on the project site will also be examined, although it appears from the Navy's data
that the closest sites are comprised of underground fuel storage tanks and paint and
solvent waste which are likely to be quite localized. Cleanup and transfer of waste
on the Navy site may present a risk of exposure to people on the project site due
to exposure of contaminated earth to the air or risk of spills during transport of
contaminated materials to a disposal site. These risks will be reviewed, evaluated
and discussed in the project EIR.
M. Aesthetics
Development of improvements proposed by the Hellman Ranch Specific Plan may
obstruct scenic views of the site from off site land uses. The impacts on scenic
views will be discussed in this section of the project EIR. P &D will summarize
the information contained in the Hellman Ranch Visual Analysis as prepared by
James Goodman Architecture. P &D assumes that this study includes cross
13
1 I I 10 ' 4 4 '
sections of key site lines across the project to determine if specific views are
obstructed and if new beneficial vista points are created. These cross sections will
be referenced in the text and any particular impacts of the project on views
described. If any additional information on architectural style, landscape theme
or entry design is available from the applicant in the form of elevations or
perspective drawings, these will be used in this section of the EIR.
As an option, P &D can prepare computerized visual simulations of the project site
from key vantage points which depict before and after views of the project. Our
computer simulation software program enables P &D to create images which are
virtually indistinguishable from actual photographs. These visual simulations could
be of help in allowing motorists to visualize how development on the site would
look like from Seal Beach Boulevard or Pacific Coast Highway or how the site
might appear from Gum Grove Park or the interpretive center. A view simulation
could also be prepared to show what the developed project site would look like .
from the residential land uses on the southerly boundary of the site.
N. Cultural Resources
P &D will return the services of Scientific Resource Surveys, Inc. (SRS), to
conduct a Cultural Resource Overview Assessment of the Hellman Ranch project.
This study will consist of the following:
A review of available documents relative to cultural resources. This will include
project/site specific documents available from SRS files, those provided by the
project proponent, the City of Seal Beach, and P &D Consultants, and documents
readily available from previous investigators, archaeological information centers,
and local museums. We will also include significant information that has been
prepared over the last five years contained in regional research designs and other
significant site investigations within the project's ethnocultural sphere.
Compilation and mapping of project specific sites based on the information
obtained from Task 1. Historic maps and aerial photographs will be reviewed as
appropriate.
Produce an overall Sites Finds Matrix for the thirteen archaeological sites presently
identified within the immediate sphere of influence of the project. This task will
identify data gaps thereby providing information for developing appropriate
mitigation measures for each site.
Review the existing regional research design, entitled "Research Design for the
Evaluation of Coastal Archaeological Sites in Northern Orange County, •
California" (on file with the California Coastal Commission and the California
State Historic Preservation Office) and compare this with those of LSA and ERA
for the Hellman Ranch property. This will result in a significance evaluation
within a regional context for the sites within the study area.
Summarize the information obtained during this investigation in a final report to
include: an Introduction; Regional Setting - Anaheim and Alamitos Bay Sites; the
History of Cultural Resource Investigations at the Hellman Ranch (report and
14
. ,
db .,
document review); Site Data Gaps and the Recommended Mitigation Measures;
Regional Comparisons and Site Significance Evaluations.
P &D will take all pertinent information on cultural resources and summarize it in
the project EIR. Information on all the cultural resources found on the Hellman
Ranch site will be presented, included information on the prehistoric dwelling
which was recently found on the project site.
Mitigation measures will be included in the EIR which will properly evaluate
and /or protect any cultural resources known to exist on the site or expected to be
found during project construction activities.
0. Recreation
P &D understands that Gum Grove Park will be dedicated to the City as part of the t
proposed project and that an 18 hole public golf course will be constructed on the
Hellman Ranch project site. P &D assumes that the golf course will be operated
by a concessionaire for the Hellman family. These will be positive impacts of the
project and will be discussed in the project EIR. Impacts on Gum Grove Park and
the new residential units to be built on the project site from golf course use will
also be discussed in the project EIR. P &D is particularly concerned about errant
golf balls hitting people using the park or the homes that backup to one of the
fairways on the golf course.
The impacts of the new residents on Gum Grove Park will also be discussed in the
project EIR. Additional use of this park from new residents should be minimal
since so few residential units will be built as part of this project.
The impact of additional recreational use of the site from public use of the
proposed 18 hole golf course will be discussed in the EIR. It is anticipated that
up to 250 people could be using the golf course facility at any one time and the
impacts of this use on the surrounding land uses will be described. Also to be
described will be any facilities necessary to support the golf course, including a
pro shop, maintenance building and possibly a restaurant or bar and their impact
on adjacent land uses.
P &D understands that a public pedestrian trail will be installed around most of the
project site and use of that trail will be described in the project EIR.
Appropriate mitigation measures will be included in the project EIR to reduce
impacts of recreational facilities as much as possible.
P. Growth Inducing Impacts of the project
The EIR will address potential growth inducing aspects of the project which may
occur should the proposed project be developed. Indirect employment - related
growth will be examined as well as direct growth and compared to existing
adopted growth forecasts.
15
. I. ii
0 .
Q. Project Alternatives
This section of the EIR will discuss project alternatives. The No Project
Alternative will be addressed and would mean that the Hellman Ranch site would
be left undeveloped. The environmental consequences of this alternative and the
reasons why it fails to meet the defined project objectives will be described. P &D
will work with City staff to identify up to two additional alternatives for the
proposed project. One of these alternatives could be the land use plan proposed
by the Mola Development Company for the Hellman Ranch site. Another
alternative could be a different land use configuration for the project site or an
alternative that includes greater /lesser intensity development on this site.
P &D does understand that the Hellman Ranch Preferred Land Use Plan will be the
Preferred Project Alternative which will be analyzed in detail in the project EIR.
Information on project alternatives would be presented in a simple matrix form so
decision makers and members of the public can easily see the relative impacts that
would be created by each alternative. The text of the EIR would also provide
brief summaries of how each alternative meets or does not meet the defined project
objectives. The Environmentally Superior Alternative will be identified. Other
land use proposals for the project site that were previously considered for the
Hellman Ranch property will be discussed and the reasons why these alternatives
were rejected from further consideration will also be addressed in the EIR.
R. Summary of Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts
A summary of unavoidable significant adverse effects that remain after mitigation
will be prepared. This discussion will make it easy decision makers and the public
to see what significant adverse impacts, if any, will be created by development of
land uses called for by the revised Hellman Ranch Specific Plan.
S. Organizations and Persons Consulted
A listing will be prepared which includes the name of each organization contained
in preparation of the EIR and the names of each individual contacted.
T. EIR Preparers and Contributors
A list of all the individuals who participated in the preparation of the EIR will be
prepared, including those who participated directly in the preparation of the EIR,
environmental analysis and the technical reports. Professional and academic
credentials will be identified for each contributor.
U. Reference Section
A list will be prepared which includes all reference material use in the preparation
of the EIR.
16
0 iiiii
VIP
V. Glossary and Abbreviations
A glossary of technical terms will be prepared which explains in English the
technical or specialized terms used in the text of the EIR. An explanation of all
abbreviations and acronyms used in the EIR will also be include.
W. Appendices
Appendices to the EIR will be prepared which support the EIR and which will
include the project IS /NOP, NOP responses, other relevant correspondence
received during EIR preparation, and technical reports whose findings have been
summarized and referenced in the EIR text.
5.0 Prepare Preliminary Draft EIR
•
This task involves compiling the analytical data into a coherent and comprehensive
preliminary EIR: In compiling the Preliminary Draft EIR (DEIR), P &D will focus on
a clear, concise presentation of relevant data on the Preferred Project Alternative
identified for this project. P &D assumes that this will be the proposed Hellman Ranch
Preferred Land Use Plan. Graphics and tables will be used extensively to reduce the
need for extensive text and will be 8 1/2 " when folded. The description of the setting
for each topic will be brief and will only include salient information directly relevant to
an understanding of the impact analysis for that parameter. The Preliminary DEIR will
receive a full review by P &D's Principal -in- Charge and the EIR Project Manager who
have over 40 years of combined experience in preparing environmental documents.
Seven (7) copies of the Preliminary DEIR and 2 copies of the appendices will be
delivered to the City no later than four months after the City gives P &D Notice to
Proceed on the preparation of this EIR. This assumes that all technical reports and the
project Specific Plan are adequate and available to analyze project impacts on the
environment.
After a meeting with City staff to "walk - through" requested revisions to the Preliminary
DEIR, P &D will modify the document and appendices as necessary. P &D believes that
page -by -page "walk - through" meetings are effective in ensuring agreement on the
approach to each revision and to create a common understanding on what is to be
achieved. The result is that the revision process is expedited and the revised document
much more closely meets everyone's need. Upon approval by the City of the
Preliminary Draft EIR, P &D will have the required copies photocopied for public
review.
P &D will work with City staff on the development of a DEIR distribution list. P &D will
prepare a draft DEIR distribution list for review by City staff. This list will include
names of all responsible agencies, all neighboring cities, and all federal, state, county or
regional agencies with jurisdiction over the project or potentially affected by the proposed
project. The list will be revised as required before being finalized by P &D.
Subsequent to any final revisions to the second Preliminary DEIR, P &D shall print forty
(40) copies of the project DEIR and technical appendices. These documents will be
printed on both sides of each page. P &D will deliver these copies of the DEIR to the
City. P &D assumes that the City will mail these documents by certified mail and /or
17
•
•
deliver them to those on the DEIR distribution list. This shall occur within 10 days of
receipt of the City's final revisions to the second Preliminary DEIR. The City should
notify P&D of any undelivered documents due to invalid addresses so corrections can be
made to the Final EIR distribution list.
6.0 Prepare Preliminary Final EIR
P&D proposes that the Responses to Comments Report be added to the project's DEIR
to make up the project Final EIR (FEIR). P &D will prepare responses to all comments
received on the DEIR. Responses to written and transcribed oral comments, if any, will
be prepared by P&D and incorporated in this document. If transcriptions are not
available, P &D will summarize oral comments received at the public meetings on the
DEIR and FEIR. P &D will prepare seven (7) copies of the Responses to Comments
Report for review by City staff. P &D will meet with City staff to discuss the Draft
Responses to Comments Report and obtain the City's approval on the content of this 0
document before final printing. A "walk - through" meeting will be held to discuss any
revisions to the Response to Comments Report.
Upon final sign off by the City on changes to the Responses to Comments Report,
twenty-five (25) copies of this document will be made by P &D and sent to the City.
P &D assumes that the City will send a copy of the Responses to Comments Report via
registered mail to all those responsible agencies and other interested parties who
commented on the project DEIR ten (10) days before the Seal Beach City Council
approves the project FEIR.
7.0 Prepare NOC/NOD
P&D will prepare a Notice of Completion (NOC) and send it to the City for review and
approval. P &D assumes that the City will send the NOC to the State Clearinghouse and
file it with the County of Orange Clerk when the DEIR is distributed for public review.
A copy of the NOC should be sent to P &D so a complete record of notices will be
available on this project.
P &D will also prepare a Notice of Determination (NOD) and send it to the City for
review and approval. P &D assumes that the City will send the NOD to the State
Clearinghouse and file it with the County of Orange Clerk when the FEIR is approved
by the Seal Beach City Council. A copy of the NOD should be sent to P &D so a
complete record of project notices will be available on this project.
As an option, P &D could prepare the project NOC and NOD and send them to the State
Clearinghouse and file them with the County of Orange Clerk on a time and materials
basis.
8.0 Prepare Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Pursuant to Assembly Bill 3180, P &D will prepare a draft Mitigation Monitoring Plan
(MMP) for all mitigation measures proposed for the project. The MMP will specify each
required measure, when it will be required to be implemented, who is responsible for its
implementation and who is responsible for making sure that it has been implemented.
18
. Mr MP
Five (5) copies of the draft MMP will be sent to the City for review and comment. P &D
will have a "walk through" meeting to discuss the MMP.
P &D will make all revisions required by the City to the MMP before finalizing it. The
final MMP will include any mitigation measures added to the project by the Responses
to Comments Report. P&D will send the City five (5) copies of the final MMP for
adoption by the Seal Beach City Council when they approve the project FEIR.
9.0 Prepare Findings/Statement of Overriding Considerations
P&D will prepare Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) for the
project. Proper documentation of Findings is essential in the demonstration that an abuse
of discretion has not occurred when a project is approved. The sequential logic of
Findings and the SOC is to recognize the impacts of the proposed project, the mitigation
measures proposed to reduce or avoid those impacts and their remaining significant r
impacts, evaluation and rejection of project alternatives and in reciting the overriding
benefits of the project. Findings and the SOC will be required if there are any
significant unavoidable adverse impacts created by the project even after mitigation
measures are incorporated in the project. P &D suspects that such impacts may be
created by this project.
If this is the case, five (5) copies of a draft of the Findings /SOC would be prepared by
P&D with copies sent to City staff for review by the City's legal counsel. P &D would
hold a "walk- through" meeting with the City to discuss any changes to the
Findings/SOC. P &D would then make any necessary changes to these documents as
required by City staff or their legal counsel. Five (5) copies of the final Findings /SOC
will then be given to the City for adoption by the City Council when they adopt the
project FEIR.
10.0 Project Management/Meetings
P &D will attend up to 5 scheduled project meetings with City staff on the Hellman
Ranch project. This task also includes internal P &D team coordination meetings and
management by the P &D Project Manager and other senior P &D staff members working
on the project EIR. Additional meeting attendance would be on a time and materials
basis per P &D's standard billing rates which are included in the current Schedule of Fees
attached to this scope of work.
During the preparation of the EIR, P &D will confer with the City's Project Manager on
this project at the City's offices, P &D's offices or in the field to ensure adherence to the
project scope of work. P &D's Principal -in- Charge or EIR Project Manager would attend
these meeting along with key technical staff involved in the area under discussion.
Meetings would be as follows:
1. To discuss preparation of the project EIR at the project kickoff meeting.
(1 meeting)
2. To discuss progress on the preparation of the EIR. (2 meetings)
3. To discuss the changes to the Preliminary Draft EIR. (1 meeting)
19
III4 IIIIP
4. To discuss changes to the Responses to Comments Report (1 meeting)
11.0 Attend/Conduct Public Hearings/Meetings
P&D staff will attend and participate in one (1) EIR scoping meeting, one (1) public
hearing on the project Draft EIR before the City's Environmental Quality Control Board
and six (6) public hearings on the project EIR. P &D assumes that the cost to prepare
and print all hearing notices will be paid for by the City. As an option, P &D could be
responsible for preparing and having necessary meeting notices published in a local
newspaper. These meetings would be as follows:
1. One EIR scoping meeting, with the meeting to be held at a site agreed upon by the
City. P &D assumes that this meeting may be held at the City of Seal Beach City
Hall, but the meeting could possibly be held at a school or other public facility
near the project site. P &D assumes that the City will make all arrangements
necessary to hold the meeting at the agreed upon location. P &D also assumes that
the City will prepare and place a public notice/newspaper display ad in a local
paper as required by CEQA for this meeting. P &D will prepare any necessary
handouts for the meeting including a meeting agenda and other pertinent
information on the proposed project. A display size graphic showing the layout
of the project site would be prepared and presented at this meeting. Such a
graphic would be obtained from the planning firm handling the Hellman Ranch
project. As an option, P &D can make all the arrangements necessary to hold this
meeting on a time and materials basis.
At this meeting, P &D's Project Manager will make a presentation on the project
as coordinated with City staff. It is assumed that the Hellman Ranch Project
Planner or P &D's EIR Project Manager will discuss the history of the project and
the land uses now being proposed to be developed in the project site. P &D's
Project Manager will discuss the environmental process that will be followed in
the preparation of the project EIR, and the environmental impacts that have been
identified to date that may be created by the proposed project. P &D will also
solicit the public's environmental concerns about the project at this meeting.
As an option, P &D could arrange additional EIR scoping meetings or workshops
to resolve focussed issues, if the City determines that additional meetings are
needed.
2. Attend one (1) meeting on the Draft EIR before the City's Environmental Quality
Control Board (EQCB). P &D assumes that the City will make all arrangements
necessary to hold this meeting and prepare/place a public notice on the meeting in
a local newspaper. At this meeting, P&D's Project Manager will make a
presentation on the project Draft EIR as coordinated with City staff. P &D's
Project Manager will discuss the environmental process followed in preparing the
EIR and the environmental impacts that have been identified that will be created
by the proposed project. Other P &D and consultant staff who worked on the
Draft EIR will also attend these hearings to answer technical questions on the
Draft EIR. P &D will also answer questions from the EQCB and members of the
public on the Draft EIR. .
20
0
3. Attend six (6) meetings on the project EIR. P &D will attend three (3) meetings
on the project EIR before the City's Planning Commission and three (3) meetings
before the City Council. P&D assumes that the City will make all the
arrangements for these meetings and prepare and place the required public notices
in a local newspaper. At these meetings P &D's Principal -in- Charge or EIR
Project Manager will make a presentation on the project EIR as coordinated with
City staff. P &D will discuss impacts that have been identified in the project EIR
and additional impacts identified through the comments received on the Draft EIR.
Other P&D and consultant staff who worked on the preparation of the project EIR
may also attend these meetings to answer any technical questions raised by
comments on the project EIR. P &D will also answer questions from the City
Council and Coastal Commission on the Final EIR. As an option, P &D and its
technical staff will attend as many additional meetings on the Final EIR as
necessary, on a time and materials basis.
21
•
0 M
PROJECT BUDGET
The following fee schedule describes the cost of each associated task required for the preparation
on the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on this project. The budget also includes a total
estimated project cost encompassing all phases of work to be performed on the project EIR.
This budget is subject to negotiation with the City, since P&D may have included some work
items in the budget that the City may want to perform. Conversely, there may be work tasks
that the City may want P &D to perform in the preparation of the project EIR. The actual fee
charged for preparation of the project EIR will of course depend on the amount of work
necessary to prepare the project EIR. Should any additional effort be required the City will be
notified and the additional work agreed upon before P &D prepares this work.
22
•
w 0
0000000 0 IS)U 00 00000000 00IA o o 000 0 o ool:l Iffoo
if T r 17 a O A CO CO 0 t7 110 In Q {0 e1 In 0 0 0 4. 0 0 Q en en 10 In C 0 10 ^ ^ e0 en
el 0 N 0 1 o e7 0 A e0 of N 0 N O^ CO 0 In CO e0 1n 1n .• e0
N N N N N .•• .- .- , N .• .- N p P1 P .- .: N - e0 e7
�- N 1 [1 .� N lei
< 0
F V
3 la • NN N N N N N 4. N N N N N Q a. N a N PI N N N N N N N N a N
W
A
• •
a 1n N N N CO N N CO V e! N 10
` a.:•
w ..
0
v`
a. : •
L ` Ky . ° �C :ci
CO ti In '
• 1° N N O <
W A ',
Z ac -
W
•
a
Z ° „.0 � on N 40 N N M
•
W ° = A . • '
in t W c .. g:';
Q O < in 0 o0 c o - 40 0 v o o CP ,,, t0 O o O
0•2 P: N Q N ^ < N CV co eO N el at
a W ; J A ..
LL .5 c °°
a
V a c x o o3 CO a N v
W ro w - • 40 - • . .
1 1 . C
N
Sv `o •
V L
Z o Wo
•
IX A .
Z E a ' .
< ° ° .
2W • � 8• • a • J ' <"
• •
W 4 H
2 a .
.
..:
a
= •• N ' -.' N V N N N Q N N N N C P R N N N N N N CP a. t0 N cr N er N N Q Cr 4
w r
>r a A .• :
w r4. - r^ •
re v
W .90`'' -
in v N N
A ,•
> c
r °
0 "'
c in °
o G .1 0 • • • a
E � • 'e G = p m
c31Z ° e o ¢ !j o c a ° W ° > e> > c «
• aC ° a • c 3
0 0 0 a L Ca • 0 = Z • ° °= T 9 0 Tel e l a s a c g m e < oc
O kt o a> a E • > °- 0 c 0 a . e a c W z .- o a ° Ti c N W a
W o o ms • W- 2 ' W 0 - c m o o • ° m ° Y e c
3 r¢ oc a cC W ec m • ;: b g o c 'o > >. c a 3 o e 9 ` 0 0 o W W
Y •° 1 L N 2< a Q ¢ o •• O E
E• Q O- g •- a 4 o x • • 2• $= Q ? m ° c >
46) 3 a o c< ea 2. a = o a 1n • L - w a c
H Oc ac o 0 0 c c ` T d Q o. o w p o 7 o o O o° c c ° 1 .": 3 o E m a W 0 in
p 0 ° • • ° L e • - • - ° ° o o c e • . " o o • o 2 ' 0 , ° Q • 0
� m3LI1- <a 5a.o � 00 0 . a. 1`l E a ` acnx'a m u, 1 -xzaaJ u cccpo_ u,ac
N PI a
III MO
0 0 0 CO 0 N N v m 0 CO a ID
10 00 III 0 V WI 01 r 10 v m co
I. aJ Ojai N0 ai a ii i
1-
ON O N v I
r 0.4.... < N N
N O$ 0 N N O N N n
{� N N m O Q
N In r .� 17
¢
W
0
O m
M A O r
1 O -
Z o E—
W
m`$ moo
0 0 �p o ° O 0 `O o
0 Z v N N O ° O N 4• • O.
' O 0 N °► G a a • °
Q g. 0 °' �j o C 0 0
Zr W m . e .. O. • u i In c
•
Q C N a v N< a1 • W • en kb v O • ° .°. O j
a • � �' m C •
U y • c.¢ • 'c E i>: a o 0
_ J $ =< E a u e e . o°
LL C 44 ° o • E V ° • a
CO 0 0 • i...-1 O Q @ O¢ V m c. •
W m N o W > c- m m o o • °- c
m al 0 ui .. -E m a c 2 m r E
Ol X 40 o c o c
2 t Z 0 C 1 as 0 y o° o o 0
0 V v N o a .¢ m¢ C ._ _o v O it Z°- O .c O c a ` CC a 0 >
C O
Q w Z E m ... .. m ' = _ o
a7 m
CO o o o O .- o • ¢ m e c
m c c O. ¢ 0 ¢ .r 0 it e O
Z O N m 0 0 q 0 0 a 0 0 E °
Q w S m O m m o m m O m m O1 °
2us it N O 0. O O a O O ' d O ° c c 0. Me
Jo o U 0 U U 0 U U 0 0 0 ° m E
o E
Wag , ' ¢ in v in m vin In v In LO c o
=a ;�
O m O
N m N N 01 m N 0 N N V O A
.+ o ° E
L. 2 c i
IO n ° e
0000 0 o In IS) 0 •° A o 0
W O j O N N <.- < i ai < v r M' M o 0 o O
m ° E
a la
A M O/ N M N 44 a 44 .0 • C a
a
N an
r• ° ° c E
C N N r O
¢ . r .+ • e e •
0 0 Ih g
Z ¢ ¢ ¢ E • ° Z o • :
•
• W E • ¢ V F' :: c E e
W 1 N e C $ • �' ° v, a a� FE C 0 8 O
) o¢ ii 2 o C ' • o I n a = ,- 1 B
T d W > e E o` • ''6° o
W
c m o c°% z o o e o 3 0 = V y C m �
E e° E C e - °S V c ° ' E i W o m ° O E m C a 4 m E V E m
9 S C ELL 0 a • 0 • O •
O W J o o o
d e z a d ■ n L ° ° e o • ' ? o h O g Q e a 3
O 0-0
• • • f° C7 C L m 0 .° ...I J J J Y • ` e o o i° o o e ° _ ° o < ° • a :° "' a 2 4<4< 0 • ° m ° 2
° • c • � x a ° H H - I- E E E O
i o i o i • c a . ° a. O O • U - ° _ V o a O O O O D a a a o N
od0d¢0. d E d F o 0 0 • 0 F. M- H. Z • m° m /e
O r N O r N 0 0 0 r 0 m • . 0 0 o A o u o o> ... CO m m CO 4 2 < << r 0
C C > 0 9 0 0 .o ' o m »» O: o I, N
10 {If u i m 4 6 m 6 r r r 10 0 CO W Z CO 0 1. O. 0¢ V1 N N N 0 2.- N I'1 M
N M
PROJECT SCHEDULE
This section present the schedule for the proposed project which incudes all necessary review
periods for the project EIR as required by CEQA. It also provides for time for City staff review
of all documents to be prepared as part of the project EIR. P &D believes that the schedule on
the following page is a realistic schedule necessary to prepare the project EIR. However, P &D
can work with the City to shorten the schedule should there be a critical need to prepare the
project EIR in a shorter amount of time. P&D will make every effort necessary to meet the
City's schedule for this project.
23
N 0
W
o J
a.
0 .. ,----, 1 " : ::::,..." : ::*.z.iiHninic
z fr .... - N . ' 4 ' ; a) c
1- Ki :41.1 .... ilium's'
cc
0 ._<4,.... .,... c
i_
0 . .., ;.....4_ ....,i.....1„
1-0 al
- :.,.:.--z; ...,:.: Eimmin co• u)
0 . _... ... ..... „;...,.
z LU
9:, IN'
03 cc
0.
..1._) _ r.,....„4..:,,,,*..
m [..-.---- ;.11111Mlli Ll• EDI
i a.
--: z ; '.i*:.: ;lit -:';;;; Will co
et) c 7M -- z ., : ., ; , ..mbr i enin u) c
o
ILJ
2 cc cc 0
, 74; -..,..- immill .4. ,,, 0 00 ITI cc c
2
Q. z , ,¢' l ' . ' . Q O O C N1
" i
G ! � i hill.. J
U ' n ' ,G •, 0 C13 0
CO 03 U 2 w
N z -."�: `• P.'., t hill'.
a LI C� U o
.4......, ...0 w v - .. , wwwUU
^- Nt+; el" vl
U e ."1115. Wz W W 0 :
cc
se ±W ::.....mtec:
. J LL- H N . m
a -w. w w � � E c : } up g irt:' `=-A- LI tu' . a a F c o 0- G a 0
'`'_ ' - 0 0 o > >2ii
' �L Y ,. Q V y Q Q C C
a iF'.:t x• z Y ccc cc
r ■sr r� '4 � r O O O d a
�,°%, � : tin.•; 0 a � 2 2 2 2 •
a j : 4 i • C1 0
v 7'75. +rir.
la
G.
2
III 0
PROJECT TEAM
The P &D Team that would prepare the Hellman Ranch Specific Plan Amendment EIR is highly
qualified to prepare this document. The Team has demonstrated experience in the preparation
of EIRs on similar projects and is knowledgeable in the preparation of environmental documents
for the types of facilities being proposed by the project Specific Plan. The project Team is
shown on the exhibit on the next page of this Scope of Work.
P &D would retain the services of Edward Heath a consulting Engineering Geologist to review
the geotechnical reports on the Hellman Ranch property, review the Geology /Soils /Seismicity/
Liquefaction section of the EIR and assist in responding to comments received on this section
of the project Draft EIR.
P &D would also retain the services of Noble Consultants, Inc. to review the Wetlands
Restoration Plan for the Hellman Ranch Wetlands to review the feasibility of the wetlands to be 1
restored /enlarged on the project site. Noble Consultants are recognized experts in coastal
engineering and are very familiar with the processes necessary for the successful creation of
wetland areas.
Scientific Resource Surveys Inc. (SRS) would also assist P &D by reviewing all cultural
resources reports prepared on the Hellman Ranch Project. SRS has prepared cultural resources
studies on areas on either side of the project site and are familiar with the cultural resources
investigations carried out on the Hellman Ranch site.
24
N Ci CI 0 z�
tu as o G w _
� � a n 0 a N
w= r w Q c)
co m 0 a
ao YCD o m
J ' Q 0 O U
-ki- 03 Q 2
W cc
ay E
a
_I CC a w W I Cn 0 o v a 0
cn w = Q CC
m
Z cm N El •
Hm U a
m 0 rn
_ o0o 0
V
GO C7
�'T� J N C
Q = 0 U U ` E -
'IJJ O
W a Q. �: o cr H 0
m Q a W 0 W m a 0 a
:Q °t may a) -' CC
z
Q U a ea >. ~
V: Q Z. �c c c a O I- LLI
W Z cif S i a m. �Q
a = A 0 .../
m
0 V= Cn p' }F- eat) CCv o
. �r O Q 1- Q
"i e 2 d O O0 a7
3
a --
(!� : s Q O C m
I.." .°
cc Q a7 -
V °1- Y
CM C
p Q W
0 w� Q�
cc co co H QW V a)
. W Cy O 2 < OO
To a to ¢ 0 Z I F- ei
E c = Q w '_
C = N M
m
` Cr 0 r
W m C N
0$0 W o
Z ea o} r M . p
W (0.- F= m O co a
C9 p CO v= z Q d II
W it Vcc a2 a
a Zco ocn J
o
2
w m o
c5 w Q
Consultant Agreement — P &D Environmental Services
Hellman Ranch EIR
November, 1996
EXHIBIT B
SCHEDULE OF FEES
•
D: \WP51 \HELLMAN\P &D.AGR\LW\11 -08 -96 19
P & D CONSULTANTS, INC.
SCHEDULE OF FEES
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 15 Mar - 96
LABOR CHARGE RATES • :
PRINCIPALS t. ••• ' n'° • : { ° : 1 $ / HOUR ITRANSP; PLANNERS: 1 $ / HOUR
PRINCIPAL -IN- CHARGE $165 PROJECT TRANSP. PLANNER $125
SR. TRANSP. PLANNER $105
LP OJ MANAGERS:; . ^'; :: TRANSP. PLANNER $90
SR. PROJECT MANAGER $125 TRANSP. SYSTEM ANALYST $75
TRANSP. TECHNICIAN $65
1ENVIRON:: "ENGINEERS ::::::`:.:<.. `*::.:: :.:'•..
PROJECT ENGINEER $100 'ECONOMISTS : -::
SR. ENGINEER $85 SR. ECONOMIST $130
ENGINEER $65 ECONOMIST $1p5
ECONOMIC ANALYST $75
SSCIENTIS'CS :. " •: k f, . • .. • :. .. 1
SENIOR TOXICOLOGIST $140 'LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS :.
SENIOR SCIENTIST $125 PROJECT LAND. ARCHITECT $105
PROJECT SCIENTIST $100 SR. LAND. ARCHITECT $90
TOXICOLOGIST $100 LAND. ARCHITECT $75
SENIOR ENV. SCIENTIST $90 STAFF LAND. ARCHITECT $60
ENV. SCIENTIST $65
SENIOR GEOLOGIST $85
GEOLOGIST $65 'GRAPHICS: • •:.: • . " • • ' I
SR. GRAPHICS $65
:4VIRQN'ANALYSTS :1 DRAFTER /CADD OPER. $50
PROJECT ENVIR. ANALYST $105
SR. ENVIR. ANALYST /SPECIALIST $85 [OTHER STAFF :: • : I
ENVIR. ANALYST /SPECIALIST $75 WORDPROCESSING $55
SR. RESEARCHER $65 ADMIN SUPPORT $50
RESEARCHER $55
TECHNICIAN $55
I • . REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES ••1
HANDLING FEE • 15.00 % VISUAL SIMULATION /HOUR $30
MILEAGE 0.310 /MILE CADD /COMPUTER TIME /HOUR $30
MILEAGE OFF ROAD VEHICLES 0.500 /MILE DELIVERIES /HOUR $35
REPRODUCTION SINGLE SIDED $0.08 /COPY REPRODUCTION 11 X 17 /COPY $0.27
REPRODUCTION TWO SIDED $0.11 /COPY
• INCLUDES REPORT PRINTING/REPRODUCTION, GRAPHIC AIDS, TRAVELMIRFARE,MEALS,ETC.1, FEES BY GOVERNING BODIES,
COMPUTER SERVICES, PHOTOGRAPHY, SUBCONTRACT SERVICES, POSTAGE, TELEPHONE/FAX AND DELIVERY.
ACCOUNTS ARE DUE AND PAYABLE WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE DATE OF THE INVOICE PAST DUE ACCOUNTS WILL HAVE
A FINANCE CHARGE OF 1.25% PER MONTH COMPOUNDED.
ALL RATES MAYBE SUBJECT TO CHANGE AT SUCH TIME AS ADJUSTMENTS ARE MADE AS A RESULT OF AGREEMENTS,
SALARY ADJUSTMENTS AND INCREASED BUSINESS EXPENSES. 1.: ' RATES EFFECTIVE TRW: 12/31/96 •
'uV95
IIIII M
Hellman Ranch Reimbursement Agreement with
City of Seal Beach re: Consultant Team and Staff Support Costs
November, 1996
"EXHIBIT B
Fiscal Impact Report Consultant Agreement
(to be attached upon execution)
C:\MYDOCUMENTS\HELLMAN\SfAFF REIMBURS.AGR \LW\11 -25 -96
12
SCOPE OF SERVICES
FISCAL IMPACT REVIEW
THE HELLMAN RANCH
The Fiscal Impact Review will project the fiscal impacts associated with the Hellman Ranch
Development project within the City of Seal Beach. The fiscal impact analysis will forecast the
revenues to be derived and cost to be incurred on an annual basis as they relate to the projected
land uses at buildout. From this analysis, alternative strategies can be developed to ensure that
the City of Seal Beach and the Riverfront Redevelopment Agency have the financial ability to
mitigate any anticipated incremental costs.
There are four potential sources of direct and indirect impact on municipal services and revenues. •
These sources are:
O The development related infrastructure improvements required to service the
projected land uses. Among items included in this category are circulation
improvements, traffic signal requirements, medians, and other road related
improvements, public safety facilities, community and recreational services, local
drainage facilities, and water and sewer systems.
• The ongoing municipal service requirements associated with changes in projected
land uses. Among the items included in this category are public safety, animal
control, street maintenance and public work services, refuse collection and source
recycling, library and other community services, park and recreation, community
development, water and sewer system operating requirements, and general
municipal administrative services.
O The anticipated changes in municipal revenues based on projected land use.
Reoccurring and one time only revenue sources would be identified. Items included
in this category are initial development impact fees, property- related taxes and fees,
sales and use taxes, redevelopment increment funds, state subventions, state and
local transportation funds, franchise fees, highway user taxes, beneficiary -based
fees, and charges, licenses, permits and fines, and investment income. Also
included in the category are fees derived from any proposed Community Facility
Districts or Assessment Districts.
O The anticipated growth of the nonresident population associated with jobs
generated by projected commercial or industrial land uses. The potential impact on
municipal expenditures will be determined if substantial changes occur because of
increases in "daytime" employment.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Scope of Services for Fiscal Impact Review
November 14, 1996 1 for the City of Seal Beach
TASK I: DEMOGRAPHIC AND CURRENT PUBLIC SERVICE INVENTORY
Data would be gathered to prepare a comprehensive demographic and physical profile and the
current nature and level of municipal services provided and revenues collected. Existing sources
of data including land use projections, tax increment projections, and other available data will be
used. This information will be used to form the basis for developing a forecast of City costs and
revenues. This profile and inventory will include the following information:
❖ Projected population and households.
• ?• Projected public facility needs (street improvements, sewer, water, parks, etc.).
O Land use designation.
❖ Range of municipal services to be provided (law enforcement, fire, public works,
recreation, etc.).
•.• Key service level measurements.
O Current costs and revenues associated with the provision of City services.
•:• Current reoccurring revenues and projected trends.
TASK II: CURRENT CITY SERVICE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS AND STANDARDS
This task will determine those key service level measures and standards that serve as barometers
of costs for each of its municipal services. Examples of these "service barometers" are street
miles for public works, calls for service for police and fire, acres of park land for community
service and annual code violation for community development.
Once the nature and level of these measures and standards are established, they can be applied to
determine the cost of extending existing or increasing levels of municipal services.
TASK III: OPERATING AND CAPITAL COSTS
From the determination of service level measures and standards will flow the forecasts of
operating and capital costs associated with providing municipal services for specific land use
categories. The costs will be broken down as follows:
❖ Reoccurring operating costs.
• Start -up costs including equipment and facilities, if applicable.
O Impact on public and projected infrastructure needs.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Scope of Services for Fiscal Impact Review
November 14, 1996 2 for the City of Seal Beach
ii
The depth and breadth of the analysis of development - related infrastructure is dependent upon
the availability and accuracy of current planning and financial documents such as needed capital
improvement projects and associated costs.
TASK IV: REVENUE PROJECTIONS
Concurrently with Task III, current and anticipated revenues will be identified based on projected
land uses. Revenue forecasts will be determined based on per capita multipliers, case study
methodologies or a combination of both approaches. Our analysis will take a market assessment
of potential land uses into consideration in determining future revenues.
TASK V: FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
Upon completion of all tasks, a comprehensive Fiscal Impact Review Report will be prepared
which will analyze the fiscal impact of project land uses. This Report will include findings and
conclusions regarding the City's financial ability to sustain growth associated with the subject
development project. The Report will include a comparison of costs and revenues implied by
buildout of the project.
The consultant team would be available to participate and make presentations at four scheduled
community meetings /public hearings.
FEE SCHEDULE
The activities associated with this project will be charged on a time and materials basis for a not -
to- exceed fee of $10,850, inclusive of reasonable out -of- pocket expenses. The fee would include
the preparation of all required documents, attendance at specific staff meetings and four
community meetings /public hearings.
The fee will be invoiced on a monthly basis, in accordance with the following hourly rate
schedule:
Project Manager $100
Project Consultant $90
Analyst $70
Word Processing /Support Staff $35
It is RSG's policy to not charge clients for mileage, parking, telephone /fax expense, postage, and
incidental copies. We do, however, charge for additional insured certificates, messenger service,
Express Mail/Federal Express costs, and copies of reports, documents, notices, and support
material in excess of an agreed upon number of copies. These costs are charged at actual
expense, plus a ten percent (10 %) surcharge. Attendance at additional community
meetings /public hearings will be charged on an hourly basis in accordance with the hourly
schedule. above.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Scope of Services for Fiscal Impact Review
November 14, 1996 3 for the City of Seal Beach