2008/02/26 City Council Resolution 2008-29RESOLUTION NO. 2008-29
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK
APPROVING AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE TO THE AGREEMENT FOR
SERVICES WITH ESA REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN
WHEREAS, on October 16, 2003, the City entered into an agreement with ESA to
prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Northeast Area Specific Plan;
WHEREAS, the Specific Plan has been revised by the applicant and the EIR will have to
be amended accordingly before a Draft EIR can be released for public review;
WHEREAS, the City has received and reviewed the "Scope /Costs /Scheduled for
Additional Requested Work to be Conducted for the EIR for the revised Northeast Area Specific
Plan" dated February 8, 2008 ( "Contract Augmentation ") from ESA to perform the additional
environmental work required;
WHEREAS, the cost of preparing the additional environmental work per the proposal
shall be the ultimate responsibility of the Northeast Area Specific Plan proponents;
WHEREAS, Staff has prepared Amendment Number Three to the Agreement for
Services between the City of Rohnert Park and ESA regarding the preparation of the work
outlined in the Contract Augmentation proposal; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park has reviewed and considered
the information contained in the Staff Report and all relevant materials regarding Amendment
Number Three to the Agreement of Services between the City of Rohnert Park and ESA.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert
Park that Amendment Number Three with ESA for an amount not to exceed $84,972.00 is
approved and the City Manager is authorized to execute said Amendment.
DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert
Park on this 26th day of February, 2008.
CITY OF ROHNERT PARK
BREEZE: AYE SMITH: AYE STAFFORD: AYE VIDAK- MARTINEZ: AYE MACKENZIE: AYE
AYES: (5) NOES: (0) ABSENT: (0) ABSTAIN: (0)
AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE
TO THE AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES
BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AND ESA
REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR
THE NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN
The original agreement between the City of Rohnert Park ( "City ") and ESA ( "Consultant ") is hereby
amended.
WHEREAS, the City entered into an agreement with Consultant, dated October 16, 2003 for the
preparation of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Northeast Area Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City has requested additional professional services from the Consultant, as outlined in
the attached "Scope /Costs /Scheduled for Additional Requested Work to be Conducted for the EIR for the
revised Northeast Area Specific Plan" dated February 8, 2008; and
NOW, THEREFORE, City and Consultant agree as follows:
Section 1. SCOPE OF WORK, is amended as follows:
Consultant shall perform those services described as Tasks in the Scope of Work and Schedule of Performance
with the addition of those tasks outlined in the "Scope /Costs /Scheduled for Additional Requested Work to be
Conducted for the EIR for the revised Northeast Area Specific Plan" dated February 8, 2008 attached as Exhibit
"A" within the time frames stated therein.
Section 3. COMPENSATION, is amended as follows:
A. City shall pay Consultant as compensation in full for such services and expenses at the rates set forth in the
Standard Hourl�Rates and Charges attached to the respective approved proposal, with the total sum not to exceed
$315,858.50 (current contract amount of $230,886.50 is increased by $84,972.00 for the additional work tasks
described in attached Exhibit "A" dated February 8, 2008.) Progress payments will be tied to completion of tasks
so all payments are proportional to the work completed.
All other sections of the Agreement shall remain as currently written.
IN WITNESS THEREOF, the City and the Consultant have caused their authorized representative to
execute this Amendment Three on the dates indicated below.
CITY OF ROHNERT PARK ESA
By: By:
Steve Donley, City Manager Karl Heisler,
Acting Community Development Co- Manager
Date: Date:
ESA 225 Bush Street www.esassoc.com
Suite 1700
San Francisco, CA 94104
. 415.896.5900 phone
415.896.0332 fax
February 8, 2008
Ron Bendorff
City of Rohnert Park Planning Department
6750 Commerce Boulevard
Rohnert Park, CA 94928 -2486
Subject: Scope /Costs /Scheduled for Additional Requested Work to be Conducted for the EIR for the
revised Northeast Area Specific Plan
Dear Mr. Bendorff:
The following provides a description the additional work scope, as well as cost estimate and schedule, to complete
the EIR for the proposed revised Northeast Area Specific Plan. This proposed amendment was developed based
on ESA's review of the revised Northeast Area Specific Plan (November 2007), the current regulatory and
physical setting, discussions with City staff regarding assumptions regarding required new data and cumulative
issues, and using current ESA and W -Trans billing rates.
Proposed Work Scope
Update Administrative Draft EIR
Up to eight (8) copies of the Administrative Draft EIR will be submitted to City staff for review. The following
discussion presents considerations related to the updating of individual EIR sections for the revised Northeast
Area Specific Plan.
EIR Project Description
The applicant submitted a copy of the revised Northeast Area Specific Plan for consideration in the EIR. Upon
review of the revised plan, there are a number of minor modifications to the specific plan's land use plan, internal
circulation system, phasing, and revised figures and miscellaneous text changes. The EIR project description will
be revised to include any new aspect of the revised specific plan, both in text, tables and figures.
Transportation and Circulation (W- Trans)
• The study area will include the intersections currently included in the ADEIR, and will add three additional
intersections near the Rohnert Park Expressway freeway interchange. Following is a complete list of the
intersections that will be included in the update.
1. Petaluma Hill Road/Snyder Lane
2. Snyder Lane/Keiser Avenue
3. Petaluma Hill Road/Keiser Avenue
4. Redwood Drive /Commerce Boulevard
5. Wilfred Avenue/Redwood Drive
EXH I BIT A
I" ESA
J
Ron Bendorff
February 8, 2008
Page 2
6. Wilfred Avenue/U.S. 101 South Ramps (future intersection)
7. Golf Course Drive /Commerce Boulevard
8. Commerce Boulevard/U.S. 101 North Ramps
9. Snyder Lane /Golf Course Drive
10. Rohnert Park Expressway /Snyder Lane
11. Rohnert Park Expressway /Commerce Boulevard
12. Rohnert Park Expressway/U.S. 101 North Ramps
13. Rohnert Park Expressway/U.S. 101 South Ramps
14. Rohnert Park Expressway/Petaluma Hill Road
15. Adobe Road/Petaluma Hill Road (County of Sonoma/Penngrove)
16. Main Street /Old Redwood Highway (County of Sonoma/Penngrove)
17. East Cotati Avenue /Old Redwood Highway (City of Cotati)
The roadway segment of Snyder Lane between Golf Course Drive and Keiser Avenue will also be added for
evaluation.
• Many of the traffic counts used in the prior traffic analysis were collected in 2003. Because these counts
would be five years old by the time the DEIR is published, they are inappropriate for use (standard traffic
engineering approach is three years or less) and would be replaced by new data. New traffic counts will
therefore need to be collected at 11 of the study intersections.
• The Transportation setting section will be updated to reflect the newly - collected traffic volume data. The
most recently - available volume data for U.S. 101 will also be obtained from Caltrans. The resulting
calculations will be updated in the report tables, figures, and appendices.
• Any changes to the specific plan's land use quantities and/or roadway configurations will be reviewed, and
the resulting trip generation projections updated. The trip assignment model used in the original analysis may
also be. updated depending on the extent of changes to the plan that have occurred.
• It is our understanding the traffic analysis being conducted for the Sonoma Mountain Village EIR is using a
year 2020 future horizon year. We also understand from the Sonoma County Transportation Authority that,
while a new model is being developed, the most current countywide traffic model is still the 2020 model. The
updated EIR traffic analysis for the Northeast Area Specific Plan will therefore continue to use the 2020
buildout year. Because the development of 2020 model projections relies on determining incremental growth
over existing conditions, the projections will need to be updated to reflect all newly- collected traffic volume
data.
The list of known cumulative development projects that are not accounted for in the 2020 traffic model has
also been updated. The future traffic projections will be updated to include the "worst- case" project
alternative from the Graton Rancheria Casino project's EIS, Sonoma Mountain Village (it is assumed that the
SMV DEIR will be available), and the Stadium.Area Specific Plan. The University District Specific Plan,
Ron Bendorff
February 8, 2008
Page 3
Canon Manor, and Southeast Specific Plan areas are already included in the current version of the Northeast
Area Specific Plan projections.
• The traffic calculations presented in the current ADEIR for 2012 and 2020 Baseline Conditions will be
updated to reflect the expanded study area and newly- collected data. U.S. 101 freeway volume data will be
updated if necessary to reflect any recently - published Caltrans projections. Report tables, figures, and
appendices will be updated to reflect all updates.
• The 2012 plus Project and 2020 plus Project traffic scenarios and ADEIR sections will be updated. The
resulting calculations will be updated in the report tables, figures, and appendices.
• The impacts and mitigation measures provided in the Transportation and Circulation section of the EIR will
be updated based on the results of the revised analysis.
Air Quality
• As appropriate, update the description of local and regional meteorology using the latest available ambient air
monitoring data.
• As appropriate update regional air quality setting to account for current California and National Air Quality
Standards, and potential changes in Attainment status.
• Update the emission analysis of criteria pollutants using updated traffic numbers from the updated traffic
analysis.
• Based on the current air quality standards and the new air quality modeling effort, reassess potential project
and cumulative air quality impacts associated with criteria pollutants resulting from the project.
• Update, as appropriate, feasible mitigation measures for air quality impacts identified for the project.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
California Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, requires the California Air
Resources Board (ARB) to establish a statewide greenhouse gas (GHG) emission cap for 2020 based on 1990
emission levels, and to adopt mandatory reporting rules for significant sources of GHGs. Under AB 32, the ARB
would have to adopt regulations by January 1, 2011 to achieve reductions in GHGs to meet the 1990 emission cap
by 2020. At the present time, however, there are no rules or regulations in place from the Air Resources Board,
SCAQMD, State Clearinghouse or other resource agency applicable to the proposed project that define what is a
"significant" source of GHG emissions, and there are no applicable facility - specific GHG emission limits or caps.
The proposed project would emit GHG emissions from on -site uses and vehicle trips. ESA proposes the
following tasks to assess the potential impact of GHG emissions of the change in land use resulting from the
proposed specific plan:
Ron Bendorff
February 8, 2008
Page 4
• Discuss the regional and local air quality setting as it pertains to the project and GHG's.
• Summarize statewide planning efforts relative to climate change and the generation of GHG emissions,
including Assembly Bill 32, Executive order S -0 1 -07 and the reporting and recommendations to date of the
California EPA Climate Action Team.
• Identify the recommendations of the Association of Environmental Professionals (AEP) on how to analyze
GHG emissions and global climate change in CEQA documents.
• Based on the results of the updated air quality modeling, quantify GHG emissions from the on -site uses and
vehicles from the specific plan.
• Assess this net change in GHG emissions relative to the recommendations of the AEP White Paper and the
goals of AB32 for the purposes of determining impact significance relative to CEQA.
• Identify practical, feasible mitigation measures from the California EPA Climate Action Team which has
developed a report that outlines strategies for meeting the targets mandated by AB32 and the Governor's
Executive Order 5 -3 -05. Incorporate standard mitigations provided by the City, as appropriate.
Noise
• Based on the updated traffic analysis, update the change in noise levels due to for project and cumulative
traffic along roadways most affected by project traffic. Use the noise prediction model of the FHWA to
determine whether there would be significant project or cumulative effects on noise levels along roads in the
project vicinity.
• As appropriate, update the impact discussion for noise from the existing environment to adversely affect
sensitive land uses proposed for the project site.
• Update, as appropriate, feasible mitigation measures for any noise impacts identified for the project.
• No new field noise monitoring is assumed as part of this scope.
Geology, Soils and Seismicity / Hazardous Materials
Review new Phase 1 Environmental Assessment reports provided by the applicant, including:
- Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, 4698 Snyder Lane, APN 045- 222 -006 (SCS Engineers, 2007)
- Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, APNs 045- 222 -007 and -014 (SCS Engineers, 2007)
- Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, APN 045- 222 -002 (SCS Engineers, 2007)
- Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, 4654 and 4638 Snyder Lane, APNs 045- 222 -005 and -021
(Harris & Lee, 2006)
- Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, 1400 Baumgardner Lane, APN 045- 222 -013, (KC Engineering
Company, 2005)
- Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, 4738 Snyder Lane, APN 045-222-011 (KC Engineering
Company, 2005).
ESA
Ron Bendorff
February 8, 2008
Page 5
• As appropriate, update the Hazardous Materials section to include relevant background information and/or
recommendations identified in the Phase 1 Environmental Assessments.
• Review the new soil investigation prepared for the specific plan area by Giblin Associates, Consulting
Geotechnical Engineers (2007)
• As appropriate, update the Geology, Soils and Seismicity section of the EIR to include relevant background
information and/or recommendations from the soil report.
Biological Resources
• As appropriate, consult with the applicant's biological consultants (i.e., Pacific Biological Consulting and
LSA Associates) regarding the status of wetland delineations, off -site mitigation bank, and other relevant
background and/or biological permitting information completed in support of the project, and update the
Biological Resources setting section as appropriate.
• Conduct an update of the electronic database searches using current versions of the CNDDB and CNPS
inventories and update the Biological Resources section appropriately.
• Update the Biological Resources setting section to acknowledge any changes in the regulatory framework for
biological resources that may be applicable.
• Update the biological impacts analysis as appropriate in light of new project changes and/or changes in
regulatory information that may be applicable.
• No new biological site reconnaissance by ESA biologists is assumed.
Population and Housing
As appropriate, update the Population and Housing setting section to acknowledge any new data or reference
materials that may be available regarding growth and housing, including but not limited to the latest available
ABAG projections.
• As appropriate, update the Population and Housing impacts section to acknowledge any new project
information associated with the new specific plan, including but not limited the proposed housing program.
Land Use and Agricultural Resources
• Review the current specific plan and update the land use and agricultural resources setting section to
recognize any land use changes in the proposed specific plan, including land use plan, open space, housing
program, landscaping, circulation, phasing, etc.
E.SA
Ron Bendorff
February 8, 2008
Page 6
• As appropriate, update the land use and agricultural resources impacts analysis, including consistency with
plans and policies, and land use compatibility, potential conflicts with zoning, and conversion and/or loss of
agricultural land and open space.
Water Resources
• ESA will update as appropriate any new information that may be available on public facility improvements
for water infrastructure in the City.
• ESA will consult, as necessary with the applicant's hydrology consultant (Brelje and Race) concerning any
new project specific information that may be available regarding proposed stormwater collection, and/or
water quality measures to be incorporated into the project, etc., and update the EIR as appropriate.
Review of Water Supply Assessment
For scoping purposes, it is assumed the Final Water Supply Assessment (WSA) completed for the Northeast
Area Specific Plan by the City (Final Water Supply Assessment, January 2005) will still be valid for the
proposed revised specific plan. As a result, no new WSA analysis is proposed as part of the revised EIR for
the Northeast Area Specific Plan. Nevertheless, additional cumulative development proposed within the City
since the release of that WSA (i.e., Sonoma Mountain Village) could affect conclusions reached in the 2005
WSA document regarding cumulative water demand and supply. It is ESA's understanding that PBS &J are
currently preparing a WSA in support of the Sonoma Mountain Village EIR. ESA will review that PBS &J's
WSA as appropriate to determine if there may be any new substantial information in that WSA that may
affect relevant background information and/or conclusions in the 2005 WSA for the Northeast Area Specific
Plan. Based on this review, issues arise that could require substantial changes to the 2005 WSA or the Water
Resources section of the EIR, ESA would consult with the City as appropriate regarding options for moving
forward, and potential additional work tasks and costs would be determined at that time.
Public Services and Utilities
• ESA will consult, as appropriate with public service and utility providers, including the City Department of
Public Safety for police and fire protection, school providers (e.g., Cotati- Rohnert Park Unified School
District), the Sonoma County Waste Management Authority, and the Subregional System regarding new
relevant background information that may be available regarding their services /utilities and potential project
effects.
Cultural Resources
• No changes are anticipated for cultural resources.
Alternatives
• No new alternatives are proposed to be added to the EIR, however, based on impacts determined in the
analysis conducted as part of the revised ADEIR, it is assumed minor revisions to the existing Alternatives
chapter may be required.
I" ESA
Ron Bendorff
February 8, 2008
Page 7
Draft EIR, Final EIR, and MMRP
No substantial changes in work effort are assumed for Tasks 6 through 9 from ESA's original contract with the
City (October 16, 2003, as amended) for the EIR for the Northeast Area Specific Plan, specifically:
Task 6: Prepare Draft EIR
Task 7: Prepare Administrative Final EIR
Task 8: Prepare Final EIR
Task 9: Prepare Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
However, this proposed amendment reflects changes in ESA/W -Trans billing rates, specific staff anticipated to
work on the project, and direct costs. See Costs, below.
Costs
Total estimated net new costs are estimated to be conducted on a time and materials basis, for an amount not to
exceed $84,972.00
Management/Hearings
$19,025.00
Administrative Draft EIR (ADEIR):
$58,596.00
Draft EIR (DEIR):
$22,552.00
Administrative Final EIR (AFEIR)
$19,977.00
Final EIR (AFEIR)
$10,154.00
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
$2,668.00
Estimated Total Costs to Complete EIR (see attached spreadsheet):
$132,972.00
Existing Contract Amount:
$230,886.50
Estimated Remaining Funds in Existing Contract (through 2/4/08):
$48,000.00
Net New Funds Requested in Proposed Contract Amendment: $84,972.00
Schedule and Assumptions
The proposed revised project schedule is shown in Table 2, below. The overall duration of the schedule is
believed to be sufficient to accomplish the proposed scope of work, depending on the timely availability of
required project information from the City, and the timely review by the City of submitted work products. Other
than the identified schedule for the ADEIR, all other timeframes are consistent with the original contract with the
City.
Ron Bendorff
February 8, 2008
Page 8
TABLE 2
ANTICIPATED SCHEDULE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Schedule
Task (by weeks) Notes
Preparation of Administrative Wk 1 to Wk 12 Assume 12 weeks
Draft EIR
City Review of ADEIR
Preparation of Draft EIR
Public Comment Period (45 days)
Preparation of Administrative
Final EIR and MMRP
City Review of Administrative
Final EIR and M I"
Preparation of Final EIR and
MMRP
EIR Certification
Wk 13 to Wk 15 Assumes 3 -week review period
Wk 16 to Wk 18 Assumes review of screencheck at 2 weeks;
1 week to publish.
Wk 19 to Wk 24 Assumes 45 -day review period
Wk 25 to Wk 29 Dependent on nature and volume of
comments
Wk 30 to Wk 32 1 Assumes 2 -week review period
Wk 33 to Wk 35
Wk 36 -38
The proposed amendment is based upon the following assumptions and conditions:
• The project description will not change substantively from that presented to ESA at the start of work.
• City staff, the project applicant and its consultants, and other public agencies will respond to information
requests in a timely manner. If information is identified as relevant and available through project
participants subsequent to ESA's initial data request, the project participants will provide it to the project
team in a timely manner.
• The Administrative Draft EIR and Administrative Final EIR Addendum will receive one round of review
(plus screencheck) prior to publication.
• All project - descriptive graphics for use in the EIR will be provided by the project applicant in a form that is
readily adaptable for use in the EIR.
• The City will be responsible for recording public comments at any public hearing held on the Draft EIR.i
• The City will be responsible.for all public noticing public hearings.
i If desired, ESA can arrange for appearance by a court reporter. An additional fee would be charged.
EJ SA
Ron Bendorff
February 8, 2008
Page 9
• ESA will be responsible for mailing and distribution of the Draft EIR, and Final EIR. However, the City or
the project applicant will provide mailing lists and/or labels.
• Work will not be stopped or slowed by circumstances outside the consultant's control. Additional
administrative, management, scheduling, and rescheduling costs caused by an external delay shall be
recoverable by consultant as extra work.
• Consultant team costs required to prepare the Draft EIR, Administrative Final EIR, and Final EIR shall not
exceed the total aggregate cost shown for these tasks in the Cost Estimate. Any consultant team costs
required for these tasks in excess of this amount shall be compensated on a time - and - materials basis as
additional work.
• Consultant team labor hours assignable to project meetings and hearings shall include time required to
prepare for meetings, travel time to and from meetings, and any time required for follow -up activities
required as a result of meetings, as well as time actually spent in meetings. Any costs for this task in excess
of the amount for this task shown in the cost estimate table shall be compensated on a time- and - materials
basis as additional work.
Should you have any questions regarding this scope of work and costs, please feel free to contact me. If this
proposal is agreeable to you, please sign and date a copy of this letter in the spaces provided, and return it to us at
your earliest convenience.
Sincerely, ACCEPTED:
IM
Paul Mitchell
Date:
nti
U
it
a
z
5
a
7.1
4a
FBI
W
40.
i�
C�
rA
H
W
y
U
I
I
H
G
O:
Ego
o � �
U
e
m U Q
� CS
.L z
= o
� U
c �
C N
O
e 0
E a
a a
E O�
3
z
z
0 u
(% Sl) slsoa laa.yQ uo uaPjnB VS8
zv
o v
N
slsoa laaa!Q jaglo
a
Eullleyy/2u4uud
zz
e
(luellnsuoagnS apjujjj
N
o
o
m
sueiyM
as
w
N
10Qe'j VS2 n0 %E jo aad S000931UHMM03
oo�
F o
yam
w
y
woo
F 5
uo.13npoxd
°
N
anl)uals!u!WPV
°m
v N
o
salydejo
I
a
�9 p
v
e
IelIol!PaAulssaaojd PIOM
°a
°°
N N
° °°
m
ls!2olo!8 allIPl!
la120dyIeW
w
a
v
aaam8ud alljeay •g•d `uos!yalnH yae
$
� aauueld uogeNOdsueay aoryaS aalsog uoy
d,
e d
zayaueS Sligo
;A
N
e
sP'nuH/ABoloJpAH/ASoloao
`PulelaluwS
vau a!»
Ja$uueyy laafoja
R
V
yo
N
sney8ulaaeg .fioo
W
N
O
�olaand laafad
y
Ila4al!Ly Ined
W
C4
a
w W
�
a
x_
t•�
o=
U
��ex��
o
a
W.
;
F
v •c
�
a
c
U
v
��
o
a
o
w
o •5
� o
al
O
�
m
�o
r ao
rn
�
O
N
G
O:
Ego
o � �
U
e
m U Q
� CS
.L z
= o
� U
c �
C N
O
e 0
E a
a a
E O�
3
z
z