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.