Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 77-1985 RESOLUTION NO. 77-85 CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT (NON-PUBLIC WORKS) WITH PRC ENGINEERING BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that: 1. Approval of Agreement. The Agreement entitled "Consultant Services Agreement Non-Public Works (PRC Engineering)" among the City of South San Francisco, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco and PRC Engineering, a New York Corporation is hereby approved, and a copy of said Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit "1". 2. Execution of Agreement. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute said Agreement on behalf of the City, and the City Clerk attest his signature thereto. I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a reqular meeting held on the 24th day of April , 19...85 , by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers Mark N. Addiego, Emanuele N. Damonte, Richard A. Haffey, Gus Nicolopulos; and Roberta Cerri Teglia NOES: None ABSENT: None Clerk EXHIBIT "1" TO RESOLUTION NO. 77-85 CONSULTANT SEPt}ICES AGREEMENT NON-PUBLIC'WORKS (PRC ENGINEERING) THIS AGREEMENT is made at South San Francisco, California~ as of May 31 , 19 85 , by and among the CITY OF' SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, a municipal corporation, the REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO (hereinafter referred to jointly as "CITY"), and PRC ENGINEERING, a N~w York Corporation , (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULIANI"), who agre~as follows: 1. Services. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Consultant shall provide to City the services described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto, and by this reference incorporated herein as though set forth verbatim. 2. Compensation. City sh'all pay Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement the amounts set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein as though set-forth verbatim. The payments specified in Exhibit "B'~ shall be the only payments to be made to Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. 3. Facilities and Equipment. Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense~ furnish all facilities and equipment which may be required for furnishing its services pursuant to this Agreement. 4. Term. This Agreement shall be effective on the date first appearing above ani~l~-all continue in effect for a period of forty (40) weeks, unless sooner terminated as provided in Paragraph 11 herein. 5. OwnershiP of Documents. City shall have full and complete access to Consultant's working papers, and other documents during progress of the work. All documents of any description prepared by Consultant shall become the property of the City at the completion of the project. The Consultant may retain a copy of all mater~al produced pursuant to this Agreement for its use in its general business activities. 6. Insurance. The Consultant shall take out and maintain during the life of this Agreement the following policies of insurance: (a) Worker's Compensation and employers' liability insurance in the statutory coverage. In signing this Agreement, the Consultant makes the follow- ing certification: _ "I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Workers' Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of the Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Agreement." CENTRAL RECORDS FILE NO.: ............... lb) Public Liability Insurance: In an amount not less than FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) for injuries including~ but not limited to, death to any one person and subject to the same limit for each person, in an amount not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) on account of any one occurrence. (c) Property Damage Insurance: In an amount not less than FIVE HUNDRED THOUSANU DOLLARS ($500,000.00) for damage to the property of each person on account of any one occurrence. (d) Contractual Liability Insurance: Consultant shall take out and maintain during the life of this. Agreement an insurance policY in the amount of at least ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00), insuring City, its elective and appointive boards, commissions, officers, agents and employees, and Consultant against damages sustained by reason of any action or actions at law or in equity, and/or any claims or demands by reason of any contractual liability, or alleged contractual liability arising out of any contract entered into by Consultant and/or any of'its agents or employees in order to perform the work defined herein. (e) It is agreed that the insurance required by Subsections b, c and d shall be in an aggregate amount of not less than One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000) and shall be extended to include as additional insureds the City of South San Francisco, its elective and appointive boards, officers, agents and employees, with respect to operations performed by the Consultant as described herein. Evidence of the insurance described above shall be provided to CITY upon execution of this agreement and shall be sub- ject to approval by the City Attorney as to form, amount and carrier. The policy of insurance shall also contain a provision indicating that such insurance shall not be reduced or cancelled except upon thirty (30) days written notice to CITY. In addition, the following endorsement shall be made on said policy or the certificate of insurance shall indicate that the policy contains an endorsement which is materially the same as the following endorse- ment. "Notwithstanding any other provisions in this policy, the insurance afforded hereunder to the City of South San Francisco shall be pri- mary as to any other insurance or reinsurance. covering or available to the City of South San Francisco, and such other insurance or reinsur- ance shall not be required to contribute to any liability or loss until and unless the approxi~. mate limit of liability afforded hereunder is exhausted~" 7. Hold Harmless, Defense and Indemnification. (a) Consultant shall hold harmless, indemnify and, at City's request, defend City, its-employees, agents, officers, boards and commissions, whether elected or appointed, from and against all claims, demands, actions, causes of action, losses, damages, liabilities, costs and expenses, including but not limited to attorney's fees or obligations, for or in connection with personal injury, including but not limited to, death, or damage to property, both real and personal, which arises out of or is in any way connected with the negligent act, error or omission of Consultant, its agents, subcontractors or employees in connection with the performance of this Agreement. -2- (b) In order to make certain that Consultant will have adequate re- Sources to fully carry out its responsibilities pursuant to subparagraph (a) above~ Consultant shall~ during the life of this Agreement~ maintain profess- ional liability (e.g. errors and omissions) insurance for all operations of Consultant under this Agreement. Said insurance shall be in an amount of not less than One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000), shall contain a provision that such insurance shall not be reduced or cancelled except upon thirty (30) days written notice to City and shall be subject to the aPproval of the City Attorney as to form, amount and carrier~ 8. Use of Subcontractors~ The Consultant shall not, without the written consent of the City, subcontract any services to be provided hereunder, except for service firms engaged in reproduction, typing and printing. Consultant shall be soley responsible for reimbursing any subcontractors and the City shall have no obligation to them. 9. Assignment. Consultant shall not assign any of its rights nor transfer any of its obligations under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the City, which consent may be withheld at the sole discretion of the City. 10. Termination of Contract for Cause. If, through any cause, either party to this Agreement shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner obligations under this Agreement or violate any of the covenants, conditions, or stipulations of this Agreement, the other party shall thereupon have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice of such termination to the party in violation and specifying the effective date thereof at least five (5) days before the effective date of such termination. In the event of such termination, all finished or unfinished documents, data, surveys, drawings, maps and reports pre- pared by the Consultant shall become the property of the City, and the Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work com- pleted prior to notice of termination on such documents and other materials, including costs of preparing such documents and files for delivery and delivery to the City on the basis of the Consultant's fee schedule~ 11. Termination for Convenience of the City. The City may for its own con- venience terminate this Agreement at any time by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at least fifteen (15) days before the effective date of such termination. 12. Consultant's Qualifications. By executing this Agreement, Consultant holds itself out as a qualified transportation engineering and environmental ~ Consultant possessing the experience and specialized skills necessary to perform the tasks mentioned in Paragraph I herein and agrees it will render to the best of its ability the services described in that paragraph during the full term of this Agreement. 13. Consultant's Status, (a) The services shall be provided City as set forth herein by Consultant as an independent Consultant aS defined in Labor Code Section 3353, under the general control of the Deputy City Manager/CD&A of the City of South San Francisco, concerning the results of the work, but not the means by which such result is accomplished. Nothing herein contained shall be construed to make the Consultant an agent or employee of City while providing said services,' and Consultant shall be entitled to no other benefits or compensation as provided herein. -3- 14. Consultant's Project Management. The Consultant agrees to provide Sylvia Salenius as Project Manager in lieu of Gerard Walters as requested by the City. In addition, Juergen Fehr will be made available to the project via subcontract. 15. Interest of Consultant. The Consultant covenants that he presently has no interest and shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, that would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of services required to be performed under this Agreement. The Consultant further covenants that, in the performance of this contract, no persons having any such interest shall be employed. 16. Notices. All notices herein required shall be in writing, and shall be delivered in person or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid. Notices required to be given to City shall be addressed as follows: City Clerk P.O. Box 711 South San Francisco, CA. 94083 -and- Planning Director Attention: Phil Gorny P.O. Box 711 South San Francisco, CA. 94083 -and- Executive Director/Secretary Redevelopment Agency of the City of South San Francisco P.O. Box 711 South San Francisco, CA. 94083 Notices required to be given to Consultant shall be addressed as follows: PRC Engineering 89 Davis Road Orinda, CA. 94563 Attention: Kenneth M. Bankston IN WITNESS WHEREOF, duly authorized representatives of the City and the 'Consultant have signed in confomation of this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. ' ' CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO 400 Grand Avenue South San Francisco, CA. 94080 City Clerk - Manager REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO A1-FEST: Di rector/Secretary Assistant Secretary PRC ENGINEERING, A New York Corporation Division Executive Vice-President -5- EXHIBIT "A" SCOPE OF SERVICES PRC ENGINEERING,' INC. PRC Engineering will prepare an Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR} for the Oyster Point overcrossing intended to fully satisfying the requirements of the' National Environmental t'~o~e~Llvn Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The EIS/EIR will conform with the environmental §uidelines of the City of Sou~h San Francisco, and will meet the requirements of Caltrans and FHWA. Preparation and processing of the document will follow the FH~/A Manual "Preparation of Environmental Impact/g(f) Statements", and Environmental Impact and Related Procedures (Title 23, Part ??1) and Caltrans Environmental Handbook. PRC Engineering will take ~he lead in conducting a thorough public scoping process to elicit input from all concerned parties. Following the scoping process, the PRC team will work closely wi~h the City and Caitrans in preparing an Administrative Draft EIS/EIR. Submittal of their Administrative Draft will begin an internal review by the agencies, with PRC making the necessary revisions to obtain approval to circulate the official Draft EIS/EIR. Responses will be prepared for ali comments received on the draft document. The responses and comments and other elements will then become ~he basis for preparing the Final EIS/EIR. It is understood that prior to the initiation of the consultant's tasks certain steps must be taken .by the City of South San Francisco and by Caltrans. The two agencies must execute a Memorandum of Understanding regarding responsibilities and how the project will proceed. A Project Development Team must also be selected by Caltrans. In addition the process of preparing a Stage I Work program must be initiated once the Caltrans team and the City's staff for the project have been identified. 'Task 1. Project Scopir~ The environmental pro~ess will begin with holding ~ least one scoping meeting. This meeting will be no.~iced in the Federal Register a,~l in local papers as required by Caitrans and FHWA, PRC's Project Management '~eam will meet with the City and Caitrans to furl~rmer discuss the proposed E~R/EIS wqrkscope and the environmental review Iprocess and outline procedures for the officiai'EIR/EIS scoping process. PRC ~ill initiate the public scoping t)rocess by preparing a Notice of Intent (NOI) and pu~tic information flyer on the proposed project. The City will take responsibility for' ~iistribution of the flyer ar~ otherwise publicizing the scoping meeting locally., The City will also be respon~tl)le for costs associated with any newspaper advertising. Caitrans will be expecte~l to process the Notice of Intent internally and t.r~smit it to EPA for publica, ti~m in the Federal Register. The scoping meeting wiilll be scheduled for a date at: JI~ast one week after notice publication. Prior to this meeting) l~C Engineering will prepare a preliminary evaluation of up to six interchange desigln alternatives including the N~ Build) the Caltrans option) alternatives from the, Shearwater EIR and northe$1¥ extension of Gateway Boulevard. This eva,Amttion will address geometric characteristics) traffic operations) associated ~osts and environmental adv~mlages/disadvantages. The latter will be determine~ using the level of detail associated with a CEQA/NEPA environmental checklist analysis used to determine po,*~ential impacts., This review can then be used as inpaat to the Caltrans and the Ci~7~s work on the Stage I work program. Conceptual geometric plans at a 1"=50' scale and suitable for use at the scoping meeting will be: prepared for the alternatives evaluated in this task. As appropriate) cross-sect'mns and profiles will also be [mepared for key elements of 'the interchange project. At the scoping meeting~ a brief introduction will be gBzen explaining the purpose of the project and the reason for the workshop. Attendee.~ will be asked for verbal or written comments regarding the range of environmental issues and project alternatives they bellevue should be addressed in the 1EIS/EIR. All such public and agency comments will t~e used to define the "scope" or the environmental analysis required in the EIS/EIR~, '1' ; l': Following the meeting PI~C will prepare a memo summarizing comments received and defining the scope of the EIS/EIR. It is expected that the EIS/EIR will address all issues as outlined in the Initial Study and Request for Proposals. The precise emphasis to be placed on, each issue, however, will be determined as a product of this task and could result in modifications to the Stage I and Stage II Work programs and the level of effort to prepare the EISJEIR. Any such changes would be discussed with the City and Caltrans prior to proceeding with work. Task 2. Collect Data and Investigate Site An intensive review of all existing plans, reports, studies, regulations and documents relating to the site will be conducted. Included will be documents such as the City's General Plan and local corridor-level transportation plans developed by Caltrans and MTC, as well as EIRs prepared by PRC, EIp and others on projects in the vicinity of the site (Shearwater, Ter. rabay and The Gateway). Other sources of data will include traffic studies and hazardous materials monitoring studies conducted in the area by PRC Engineering and Brown and Caidweli. Any site data, mapping and plans available from the City and Caitrans wiii also be reviewed. Site investigations will also be undertaken in this task. The site will be investigated for information on traffic, noise, and att other relevant issues for use in conducting the alternatives analysis impact assessment in Tasks 3 and #. Task 3. Develop Pro)ect Alternatives With the guidance received during the scoping process, and the review of preliminary alternatives, PRC Engineering will develop the three primary design alternatives (the no-build alternative and two additional alternatives). This will be an iterative screening process with on-going input from Caltrans and the City, and will be directed toward identifying a higher-capacity cost-effective overcrossing design to be treated as the preferred project alternative in the EIS/EIR. It may also lead to project sub-alternatives and potential design-level mitigations to other environmental impacts. Task 4. Conduct Environmental Impact Analysis: The Alternatives Development process will be carried out concurrently and interactively with the environmental data collection and analysis. Different environmental characteristics are likely to exhibit varying degrees of sensitivity to alteration~ and the level of detail and precise analytical step~ involved in each segment of the environmental investigation may also vary. This scope of work represents our initial assessment of the content o~ each component of the analysis based on our knowledge of site and local area characteristics and preliminary estimations of the response of these characteristics to disturbance. The PRC team will £ully investigate and evaluate all direct~ indirect and cumulative impacts associated with the proposed project~ in accordance with NEPA and CEQA requirements~ and those of Caltrans~ FHWA~ and the City of South San Francisco. A detailed discussion of each component is provided in the paragraphs which follow. Full environmental analysis will be performed according to NEPA and CEQA guidelines for three primary alternatives: no-build~ current City and Caltrans alignment~ and the preferred alternative design concept from the Concept Resolution task described above. The environmental analysis will cover the following types of impacts: 1. Transportation 2. Noise 3. Air Quality 4. Energy 5. Public Services Fiscal 7. Socio Economic (Displacement) g. Cultural Resources 9. Geology 10. Hydrology & Water Quality 11. Hazardous Materials 12. Construction 13. Aesthetics (Visual) 14. Natural Environment 15. Parks and Recreation 16. Growth Inducement 17. Plan Consistency 1. Transportation The Traffic and Transportation section of the EIR/EIS will include: Review of ?~sting Transportation Conditions, Plans and Policies - with special attenction to committed development and roadway projects and to corridor-level highway and transit issues. Assessment of year 2010 Conditions-under all three alternatives for Oyster Point Interchange (no build, proposed Caltrans alignment, one alternative design concept). Development and Appraisal of Mitigation Measures - including street and interchange design sub-alternatives increased Transportation Systems Management and reduced development densities. The assessment of existing transportation conditions will include a description of current traffic facilities, volumes and service levels, transit services, and Transportation Systems Management (TSM) programs'in force in the area, and regional and corridor-wide transportation plans and policies that affect the area. Existing freeways, interchanges, arterial streets and intersections, in the area will be described, and proposed and committed improvements will also be identified, including: O O The Hillside Boulevard extension. The new ramps to/from U.S. 101 from/to Bayshore Boulevard at the Terraba¥ entrance. The southerly extension of Gateway Boulevard. The effects of these modifications on traffic circulation patterns will be discussed. Current traffic counts and a.m. and p.m. peak hour levels of service, as determined by PRC for the Shearwater EIR, will be given for: 0 o 0 0 0 Oyster Point/Dubuque/101 Ramps Oyster Point/Airport Boulevard Airport Boulevard/Scissors Ramk~s Airport Boulvard/Linden On-Ramp Oyster Point/Gateway Boulevard The effects of the planned roadway imprcr~ements identified above will also be quantified along with the impacts of approved cumulative developments, including ShearwateG The Gateway, Terrabay, Oyster Point Business Center and other maior committed pro)ects. Existing Sam Trans bu~ and CalTrain commuter rail services in the area will be described, and planned service changes will .be discussed. Regional and corridor-level transit improvement prospects will also be covered, including MTC's on-going transit alternativ'e~ analysis. TSM facilities (such as express bus and rail park-ride lots) and programs (including The Gateway's and Oyster Point Business Center's shuttle services) will also be described. Key elements of the IMTC Coordinated Traffic 1Mitigation Plan for the Route 101 corridor will be discussed as they apply to the proposed project. Bicycling and pedestrian routes through the interchange area will also be described. Future traffic volumes generated in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours will be distributed on each of the three roadway network alternatives. These volumes will represent the buildout of the area's cumulative development projects and will reflect conditions in the year 2010. The resulting intersection counts, and levels of service will be calculated~ and turning conflicts, weaving maneuvers, traffic delays and safety associated with each Oyster Point interchange alternative will be determined. The impacts of each alternalive on transit operations, including SamTrans bus routes~ CalTrain commuter ra:d operations, access to the CalTrain station~ and local shuttle bus services~ will be described. The effects of the interchange on corridor-level highway and transit objectives will also be discussed. Measures to mitigate the traffic and transit impacts of each overcrossing alternative will be formulated and appraised. These will include traffic flow improvements (including street and intersection design concepts) and measures to reduce traffic generation. Feasible circulation system concepts will be selected 6 from the design possibilities identified for in the Design Concept Resolution subtask of the Alternatives Analysis. Each design will be evaluated in terms of its ability to handle projected traffic flows and serve the general circulation patterns in the area. The benefits of more intensive TSM and transit committments will also be determined along with the effects of reducing development densities of maior development projects. 2. Noise The EIR/EIS will ir~lude a description of the existing noise environment at the site, potential impacts due to construction and use of the proposed overcrossing and mitigation measures to reduce significant impacts. The project area is already dominated by noise from'motor vehicle traffic on Highway 101, aircraft flyovers from SFO and train operations on the Southern Pacific Railroad track that runs through the project site. The site is surrounded by existing and planned residential, office and commercial development. The Noise Element of the Sou~h San Francisco General Plan and Title 25 of the California Administrative Cod~ identify maximum noise levels compatable with such uses. The planned overcrossing will require vehicles to operate on steep grades and will involve at least one major elevated street intersection. These conditions, coupled with the prevailing, background noise from the freeway~ railroad and aircraft and close proximity of potentially sensitive land uses will be critical factors in the EIR/EIS noise analysis. The existing noise s~tting will be described through a series of measurements and computer noise analysis. Noise measurements will be made at a representative number of sites al,~an§ the project corridor. Eight measurement sites will be included as part of this noise survey. Th~ measurement results will be used in conjuction with the FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model~ (FHWA-RD- 77-108)~ to determine the existing ambient noise levels throughout the project area. Noise contours will be determined in the CNEL noise scale (as per the City of South San FrancJ~sco standards) and the Leq (or L10) noise scale (as per Federal standards). A separate section of the noise report will address confor.mity with local noise standards. 7 ShOrt-term noise impacts such as th~se associated with constructing the over- crossing will be described based upor~ lithe type of equipment that will be used for construction. Hours of construction and the estimated construction duration will be presented. The potential for controlling noise impacts through the implementa- tion of noise control devises and other' mitigation measures will be presented. Long-term noise impacts will be described for the project and the no project alternative, and the other remaining otption. The focus of the noise analysis will be on identifying the change in noise leve~ that will be experienced with the project, as well as satisfying State and Federal assessment requirements. CNEL and Leq noise .levels will be developed and co~ared with respect to existing noise levels. The results of this analysis will be presented in terms of increases in boise levels in decibels. Mitigation effects of ex~ noise barriers or topography will be included in the projections. The projections of CNEL and Leq noise levels will be presented in both tabular form and as noise contours drawn on a suitable base map. Noise projections will be compared w~th local and Federal noise criteria. All adversely impacted areas will be clearly identified. Mitigation measures will be considered ior each alternative. Areas along the project site will be identified for which a noise barrier would be required to comply with either the CNEL and/or Leq noise standards. Height requirements for such barriers wiiI be identified based upon preliminary estimates of wail design, if appropriate. 3. Air Quality The air quality analysis will include a description of the existing atmospheric environment of the site including climate and air quality, based on data collected by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), the California Department of Water Resources (a source of wind data) and air pollution modeling of the base case. The construction impacts of the project would result, in part, from dust generated during earthmoving, grading and other site preparation activities. Also emissions generated by the operation of construction equipment and vehicles would be a source of air pollutant emissions. The operational impacts of the proposed project would be due to changes in the amount and location of motor vehicle traffic generated by the proiect. The most important issue would be effect of cumulative traffic on the local concentrations of carbon monoxide. Because of the potentially high volumes of traffic on Highway I01 and Oyster Point Boulevard, as well as other streets in the vicinity and the effects of emissions from San Francisco (which is often upwind), there is substantial potential for elevated carbon monoxide concentrations in this area. The results of the air quality for the Shearwater project (with proiect case) indicated that violations of the g-hour average carbon monoxide standards could occur in the absence of the recently instituted Inspection/Maintenance program. Therefore, a detailed evaluation of potential carbon monoxide impacts is warranted for this proiect. The appropriate analytical tool for the carbon monoxide evaluation is CALINE 3, as suggested in the Request for Proposal. It should be applied to all links in the project area, using link-specific speeds and site specific meteorolo§ical input data. Results should be generated for worst-case conditions at worst-case locations includin§ sidewalks, the nearest homes and other locations with significant human activity. Results should be compared to standards to determine if violations would take place if the proiect is built. Regional air quality could be affected as well based on changes in the overall amount of motor vehicle travel and associated speeds that would accrue as a result of the proposed project. This analysis would be conducted on an "emissions burden" basis, i.e., the predicted change in total emissions volumes would be predicted change in total emissions volumes would be predicted and compared to existing rates. The consistency of the project with all air quality standards and the Bay Area Air Quality Plan will be addressed. Mitigation measures designed to reduce or eliminate significant air quality problems generated by the proposed project would also be recommended. 9 All work would be performed in accordance with procedures accepted by the California Air Resources Board, the BAAQMD and the Federal Highway Admini- stration. t~. Energy The project would consume energy ~ construction and during use. The amount of energy used in construction depend~ en the exact design of the facility and the equipment and methods used in cea~-a'uction. Estimates of the energy cost of cqnstruction are generally based on the dollar cost of construction using data on energy cost per dollar for various types of construction, which are available in the technical literature. The changes in motor vehicle trav~ (both distance and speed) would result in concomitant changes in energy consumption. Energy would be estimated based on predictions of future traffic volu~mes and speeds both with and without the proposed project. Data on vehicular fuel used is available from Caltrans, the California Air Resources Board and e~aher agencies. The total energy cost over the life (~[ ~he proposed project would be summarized in accordance with Federal Highway /~dministration procedures. This includes energy for construction, annual operational energy and a calculation of a simple payback rate. Mitigation measures designed to re~uce project energy impacts would be recom- mended, as appropriate. 5. Public Services The analysis of public service impacts will' focus on those services which are most likely to be affected by the proposed project and alternatives. The initial study prepared by the City for the prr~ject indicates that the services likely to be affected by the project consist of police services and the maintenance of public facilities. Of particular concern will be street maintenance, including the need for landscaped medians, street resurfacing, drainage and lighting. These services and 10 others will be reviewed at the outset of the study in light of the comments received on the Notice of Preparation and at the public scoping meeting, if necessary. Based on this assessment, a thorou§h description of the existing setting will be provided, utilizing information recently prepared by EIP for the Shearwater Project EIR and other studies in the vicini~ of the project site. The impacts of the project will be evaluated, and costs of providing additior{al traffic control, street maintenance and other necessary services generated by the project will be estimated. Mitigation measures will be proposed to minimize significant adverse impacts that are identified. 6. F. iscal Impacts The fiscal analysis will be based on the information developed in the public services section. The analysis will focus only on the costs of additional services and capital expenditures required to accommodate the need of the project. The operating and maintenance expenses incurred by the City will be determined by major function or activity. This will involve identifying current costs per unit of service under existing service levels and assessing the increment of service costs related to the provision of public services to the proposed project. 7. Socio-Economic and Displacement Impacts The key socio-economic impact of the proposed overcrossing will be the improved access it will provide to developing areas east of Highway I01. Without the improved interchange and railroad overcrossing development of this highly desi~abie area would be severely constrained. Conversely, construction of the overcrossing will produce temporary or permanent changes to local circulation, possibly affecting access to some businesses and residences. It is also likely to involve some property acquisition and displacement of existing businesses and/or residences. The EIR/EIS will address both types of impact. This document will provide a description of the socioeconomic characteristics of the affected project vicinity. Existing and projected population and employment levels will be described using data obtained from the City, ABAG and the Census Bureau. Population demographics will be reviewed, with special attention given 11 certain groups, including low income) the elderly) minorities and and the handi- capped. The housing stock in the area will be described in terms of type, cost) rent) condition ad density. The impact of the project on community cohesion) and certain demographic groups will be of'key concern. This section will also consider how this project affects access to l~e jobs in the rapidly growing area east of lOl. 8. Cultural Resources Research conducted for the Shearwater project adjacent to the proposed Oyster Point Overcrossing indicates that there are no known National Register listings) California Historical Landmarks, Points of Historic Interest or known archaeolog- ical sites within the Shearwater project area. Although it is unlikely that any cultural resources would be found within the vicinity of the Oyster Point Overcrossing, the California Archaeological Inventory 'would be notified of the project and a record search would be undertaken. It is assumed at this time that an HPSR and extensive Section 106 processing will not be required. Mitigation would be proposed to avoid impacts in the unlikely event that archaeological artifacts are discovered during project construction activities. 9. Geology The site of the proposed project is on slope debris and ravine fill overlying the Colma Formation. The Hillside Fault passes near the site. Construction of the overcrossing would result in the disruption of existing soils to construct foundations for the project. A review and assessment will be prepared based on existing geotechnical and soil studies of the area. The assessment will focus on such hazards as soil instability, ground failure and seismatically induced groundshaking, which could affect the proposed facility. Sources of data to be consulted as necessary include previous EIRs; U.S. Geological Survey and California Division of Mines and Geology studies; and 5oil Conservation Service-published and unpublished reports for eastern San Mateo county. Information will also be sought from the City Departments of Municipal Services and Planning. Maximum use will be made of available data. No drilling, trenching or similar site-disturbing activities will be undertaken unless specifically authorized by the City. 12 A 'description of the site's soils and geo~og~ will be prepared in the context of the regional stratigraphy, structure and geomorphyology. Soil types will be identifed and their engineering and physical/chemical characteristics described where possi- ble. The evaluation will include identification of existing or potential geologic hazards such as poor foundation conditions due to weak subsoils, erosion potential, and groundshaking intensities. The anticipated impacts of the overcross~ng construction and operation will be identified and described. These could include erosion potential, grading effects and increased life hazards due to groundshakingo Measures to mitigate adverse impacts on soils will be described and discussed. Those measures included as part of the proiect will be evaluated. Mitigations required by regulations and o'rdinances will be identified separately. Recommendations for further mitigations or studies (if necessary) will be made on the basis of practicality and cost effectiveness. 10. Hydrology and Water Quality The proposed overcrossing would be located on alluvial deposits which slope gently down to the northeast. The site is adjacent to a highway, a railroad line, and industrial lands. An inventory of available hydrologic information in the proiect vicinity will be included in the EIR. Voiced concerns regarding the construction of the facility include contamination of groundwater and soil through leaching from nearby contaminated areas. Potential impacts of the project can be summarized as follow: 1) changes in surface' runoff patterns and infiltration rates, 2) on- and off-site erosion and sedimentation, 3) changes in water quality resulting from the increase of petro- chemicals and other urban and industrial pollutants, and #) the introduction of contaminants into subsurface waters due to seepage from the U.S. Steel site. We will work closely with City staff and Caitrans to determine the requirements for storm drainage systems and the potential impacts on quantity and quality of surface water flows. Existing drainage patterns near the site will be disrupted; anticipated short-term (construction) as well as long-term (operation and main- tenance) impacts on the area's hydrology ~vill be discussed. Potential groundwater contamination from the adjacent U.S. Steel site will be examined. 13 Mitigation required by regulations (those of the Regional Water Quality Control Board) for example) will be identified. Mitigations proposed as part of the project will be proposed as necessary. Previous studies indicate a limited presence of soil and groundwater contamination at specific locations on the adjacent U,S, Steel property. Contaminants of concern include lead) chromium, nickel) copper) tin and low and trace concentrations of priority pollutant organic chemicals, To properly characterize toxic waste conditions on ~he site and to satisfy the requirements of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the Hazardous Waste Management Branch of the California Department of Health Services) the following ~pproach was used, The approach assumes that existing data for the site was adequate and analysis was limited to reviewing and assessing this information to determine the potential for impacts to the U,S. Steel site, 11. Hazardous Materials Previous investigations of the Gateway Project and Shearwater Project properties identified the presence of soil and groundwater contamination on both sides of the western portion of Oyster Point Boulevard. The contamination consisted of highly acidic conditions and U,S, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) priority pollutant organic chemicals~ trace metals~ and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Existing data indicate that acidic soil and groundwater conditions and high concentrations of dissolved trace metals occur beneath Oyster Point Boulevard, The previous studies did not define the complete horizontal and vertical extent of the acidic conditions and associated dissolved trace metals. The presence of acidic conditions and EPA priority pollutants may pose a potential environmental hazard to personnel during construction of the Oyster Point Over- crossing, In addition, acidic soil and groundwater could adversely affect the below grade support structure of the overcrossing, Available information will be evaluated relative to existing and proposed contaminant regulations and to the design specifications of the overcrossng to determine the existence and extent of any potential environmental or construction problems, respectively. Appropriate remedial or mitigative measures will be developed and evaluated based on the final design criteria, agency requirements, and other criteria. These measures could include excavation and removal, on-site treatment, or containment and long-term monitoring. 12~ Construction Impacts A number of construction impacts will likely result from implementation of the project: noise, dust, erosion a~d sedimentation, truck traffic) street closures or detours) and adverse views. Eamh of these would occur only during the construction process. The length of time required to complete the project) the amount of truck traffic, and the soil area to be disturbed will all be quantified. Construction duration) proejct phasing, and scheduling data will then be used to identify the significance of the effect on a~), nearby sensitive receptors. Specif. ic construction-related Empacts on traffic circulation, noise, air quality, energy, geology, hydrology, h ~a~rrlous materials, natural environment and aesthe- tics will be described in detail in the respective sections of the EIR/EIS. The chapter on construction impacts will summarize these temporary construction impacts. 13. Aesthetics The visual character of the project site and surrounding community will be documented through text and photographs. Any important views of the project site from the surrounding area, nei~ght>oring hills and buildings and the freeway will be identified. The physical improvements associated with each of the alternatives will be described in terms of height, bulk, color, form~ and materials. Sketches of the alternative designs will be superimposed over photographs taken from the surrounding community. Measm, es designed to minimize the intrusiveness of the structures will be proposed. These might include specifications for landscaping, construction materials color, li§hting~ and design options. The visual compatibility of the proposed project with adjacent land uses will be examined. Consideration will be given to the visual relationships with existing and potential land uses considering the overall form of the proposed project develop- ment densities. Community image and consistency of character will also be addressed. Cumulative impacts will be discussed with reference planned develop- ment patterns in the vicinity of' the project. 15 The visual impacts of night lighting' on the surrounding community and regional view perception will be evaluated, Visual impacts to be expected as a result of construction processes will be addressed and appropriate mitigation measures will be suggested. The topographic form and extent of site grading will be assessed as will the anticipated appearance of the completed project. 1#. Natural Environment The biological resources analysis will concentrate primarily upon indirect impacts to nearby biotic communities imce the area of construction is already heavily impacted and has little biological value. Indirect impacts include increased noise exposure to wildlife values~ changes in drainage patterns and water quality impacts to nearby wetland resources and potential disruption to unique species near the overcrossing. Direct impacts such as removal of habitat, deterioration of existing wildlife habitat or elimination oJ[ a wildlife dispersion corridor are not expected to comprise any significant analysis. PRC will review the project plans with the local offices of California~s Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to solicit their concerns and address them if necessary. PRC has recent experience using Caltrans "Guidelines for Preparing Biological Survey Reports." Specific items to be addressed include the following: 0 0 0 0 0 0 Literature and report search to document nearby resources. Site visitation to characterize site for biotic value. Agency consultation with applicable wildlife agencies. Quantification of l'~bitat loss. Discussion of indirect impacts from construction and operation of overpass. Suggested mitigation measures (if required). 15. Parks and Recreation A preliminary review of the project indicates that no parkland or cultural resources would be displaced as a result of the project; thus eliminating the need for a Section #(f) Evaluation (Section t~(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (#9 USC 1653 #(F)). This section will focus on possible indirect impa,cts of the project on access to parkland, marinas and other recreation in the surrounding community and the San Bruno Mountain Reserve. 16 16. Growth Inducement/Cumuulative Impacts The project vicinity is currem~tly experiencing signifi~cant urban development and intensification. This section, will review this projec"t~ influence on this process. Recent EIR's on all major development projects in th~ area including Shearwater, Terrabay, The Gateway, and. Oyster Point Business Center ha~e determined that each is dependent on the additional traffic capa~ that the Oyster Point Overcrossing would provide. In addition, there is a considerable amount of vacant or underutilized land in the general area, much of it with development proposals already existing or expectec~ in the near future. The planned overcrossing would not o.nly facilitate these development plans, but coultd also increase development pressures on other vacant or tmderutilized properties in the area. These develop- ment pressures will be noted and the likely impac~ identified. General Plan, zoning and other development regulations will be reviewed to identify, how such controls will affect further urban intensification. Although each environmental, topic will consider po.~dl~le cumulative affects of other projects proposed in the area, a spearate section oI the EIR will summarize cumulative impacts. This willl include a listing of current and planned projects in the area. The number of dw~ .elling units, and areas of commercial and industrial development for each project will be identified in a master table, with project location shown on a map. The City's General Plan and other documents will help to characterize the cumulative ~mpact of these projects. 17. Plan Consistency Alt applicable local and regional planning agencies ~zill be contacted for their current plans and policies rela~ng to this project. The:~e include the City's General Plan and zoning ordinance, the Air Quality Managem~t Plan, the Water Quality Management Plan and applicable regional transportalion plans. Of particular importance will be MTC and' Caltrans plans and policies for the Peninsula Route 101 Corridor, including highway improvement plans, transit programs, and coordi- nated traffic mitigation. Local Transporation System l~lanagement (TSM) programs and circualtion plans and plates for Southern Pacific amd Caltrans service expansion will also be addressed. 17 Each plan will be described and the consistency of each project alternative with those plans will be evaluated. Certain of these plans~ such as the AQMP~ will receive more detailed review in other sections of'the EIS. Task 5. Prepare Administrative Draft EIS/EIR The Administrative Draft will include: mitigation measures, 2) a detailed Alternatives, 3) and a discussion of relating to: 1) a Summary listing impacts and suggested Project Description and Description of Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Measures o Transportation o Noise o Air Quality o Energy o Public Services o Fiscal o Socio Economics and Displacement o Cultural Resources o Geology o Hydrology & Water Quality o Hazardous Materials o Construction o Aesthetics o Natural Environment o Parks and Recreation o Plan Consistency The document will also include all statutory sections required by NEPA and CEQA: #) Unavoidable Adverse Impacts; 5) Alternatives to the Project; 6) Short-term versus Long-term Effects; 7) Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes; 8) and Growth-Inducing Impacts of the project. The EIR/EIS will address alternatives to the proposed proiect at the same level of detail as the proposed project. Preliminary conceptual designs will be illustrated for the current preferred alternative and for another feasible alternative identified in Task 3. The alternative could involve significant design changes, such as the addition of ramps, to the preferred alternative. Sub-alternatives to each maior alternative may also be presented. These could include minor intersection widening and rechannelization~ signal coordination~ one-way treatments~ etc. 18 'Task 6. Prepare Draft EIR./EI5 A maximum of 10 copies of the administrative draft will be submitted for simultaneous reviews by the City of South 5an Francisco and Caltrans. A joint meeting will be used to Obtain their comments and any additional analysis and revisions to the text will be made. The City and Caltrans version of the draft document will then be r'eviewed by the P.C.C. and a revised administrative document produced. The Revised ADED (no more than 10 copies) would then be provided to Caltrans for review by Caltrans headquarters and FHWA. Final revisions would be prepare~l and approval to publish obtained. Two hundred copies of the Draft will then be l~rinted and delivered to the City of South San Francisco for distribution. Task 7. Public Hearings The next major step in the public participation process is the distribution of the Draft EIS/EIR after appro~:l-~ are obtained from Caltrans~ FHWA and the City. This will begin a period ofl 45 to 60 days~ during which the public may review and comment on the document. A formal public hearing to satisfy jointly the requirements of the City and Caltrans will be held to receive oral comments on the document. At such public hearing~ PRC's Project Management and Task Leaders will summarize and explair~ the document as necessary. Task 8. Prepare Responses; ~ Comments The PRC team will respon~ Io written comments on the Draft EIR and comments made in the public hearings. The Project Management Team will meet with the 'city, Caltrans and if necessary~ FHWA following the completion of the responses to comments to ensure that 'the material is adequately prepared. Two hundred copies of the responses to comments (the Final EIR/EIS) will be delivered to the City. Task 9. Final EIS/EIR Following completion and distribution of the Final EIS/EIR~ the PRC team will be available to attend one public hearing to review and certify the document. 19 EXHIBIT "B" PAYMENT SCHEDULE PRC ENGINEERING, INC. The City shall pay PRC Engineering an amount not to exceed the sum of $83,900 as consideration for the performance of the services set forth in Exhibit "A". Such compensation shall be paid in the following manner: a) 558,000 shall be paid in equal monthly installments of $1q,500 per month for the four initial months of the project comprising the first five tasks through the preparation of the administrative draft EIS/EIR. b) $12,500 shall be paid upon the completion and submittal to the City of the Draft EIS/EIR. c) $10,#00 shall be paid upon the completion and submittal to the City of the Final EIS/EIR. d) $3,000 shall be paid upon the attendance at two public hearings on the certification of the Final EIS/EIR. e) Any serices not included in the Scope of Services in Exhibit "A" which the City may request from the Consultant will be compensated separately in accordance with Consultant's prevailing hourly rates.