Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLeonard Charles and Associates 2010-05-21Proposed Amendments to Water Rights Permit This agreement shall be considered a contract, and is entered into this 7111 day of /"r , by and between the CITY OF UKIAH, a general law municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to s "CITY" and Leonard Charles & Associates, a partnership, hereinafter referred to as the "CONSULTANT." PREMISES The purpose of this agreement is the preparation and completion by CONSULTANT of an Environmental Impact Report. The scope of work is more particularly described in the Exhibit "A", attached to this agreement. CITY may retain independent contractor to perform special services for CITY or any department thereof. CONSULTANT is willing and able to perform duties and render services in preparation and completion of such an Environmental Impact Report. This work has been determined by the City Council to be necessary for the welfare of residents of the CITY. CITY believes the provision of these services to the residents is in their best interests, and CONSULTANT agrees to perform such duties and render such services as outlined below: AGREEMENT CITY and CONSULTANT agree as follows: ARTICLE 1 SERVICES OF CONSULTANT 1.01 CONSULTANT shall provide those technical, expert, and professional services as described in Exhibit 'A" which consists of the Scope of Work/Bid Proposal, dated March 2010, which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein. CONSULTANT shall provide such services within the time limits described below. 1.02 The absence, omission, or failure to include in this agreement items which are considered to be a part of normal procedure for a study of this type or which involve professional judgement, shall not be used as a basis for submission of inadequate work or incomplete performance. 1.03 CITY relies upon the professional ability and stated experience of CONSULTANT as a material inducement to entering into this agreement. CONSULTANT understands the use to which the CITY will put his work product and hereby warrants that all information contained in the Environmental Impact Report shall be made and prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional practices. 1.04 CONSULTANT shall bear the expense of all printing and reproduction costs until the final document is accepted by the CITY, at which time CONSULTANT shall turn over to CITY all documents. 1.05 CONSULTANT shall deliver the following: 1. Six (6) copies of the Draft Initial Study and Notice of Preparation within four (4) weeks of contract execution. 2. Forty (40) copies of the Final Initial Study and Notice of Preparation within one (1) week of receipt of all comments. 3. (6) Copies of the Administrative Draft Environmental Impact Report twelve (12) weeks of completion of item No. 2 above. 4. Forty (40) copies of the Draft Environmental Impact Report within two (2) weeks of receipt of all comments. An electronic copy of the Draft Environmental Impact Report shall also be provided in a format acceptable to the CITY. 5. Six (6) copies of the Administrative Final Environmental Impact Report within five (5) weeks of receipt of all comments. 6. Forty (40) copies of the Final Environmental Impact Report within three (3) weeks of receipt of all comments. 7. A photo-ready reproducible copy of the Final Environmental Impact Report shall also be submitted. 8. Electronic copies of the documents listed above in items 1-7 shall also be provided in a format acceptable to the CITY. 1.06 CONSULTANT shall be responsible for attendance at a minimum of one (1) public scoping meeting and two (2) public hearings. 1.07 CONSULTANT shall perform any additional services as may be required due to significant changes in general scope of the project. Such additional services shall be paid for by supplemental agreement and shall conform to the rates of payment specified in Article V below. 2 ARTICLE II SERVICES OF CITY 2.01 CITY shall provide any information as to its requirements for performance of the agreement not already contained in Exhibit "A." 2.02 Upon request, CITY shall provide CONSULTANT any information in its possession or reasonably available to it that consultant may need to perform services under this agreement. ARTICLE III TERM OF AGREEMENT 3.01 The term of this agreement shall commence on the effective date and shall terminate when the CITY has formally accepted the final version of the Environmental Impact Report. This agreement may be extended on its same terms and conditions upon written agreement between the CITY and CONSULTANT. 3.02 The execution of this agreement by the CITY shall constitute the CONSULTANT'S authority to proceed immediately with the performance of the work described by Exhibit "A." 3.03 All work by CONSULTANT shall be completed pursuant to Exhibit "A" and paragraph 1.05 above in a reasonable timeframe according to the established deadlines. CONSULTANT shall not be held responsible for delays caused by circumstances beyond its control. 3.04 CONSULTANT acknowledges that timely performance of services is an important element of this agreement and will perform services in a timely manner as provided in paragraph 1.05 above and consistent with sound professional practices. 3.05 If CITY requests significant modifications or changes in the scope of this project the time of performance shall be adjusted appropriately. The number of days of said extension shall be the final decision of CITY. ARTICLE IV COST OF SERVICES 4.01 CONSULTANT has been selected by the CITY to provide services described in Exhibit 'A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, for which compensation shall not exceed $89,484.00 on a time and materials basis. 4.02 Cost overruns or failure to perform within the maximum compensation ceiling established in 4.01 above shall not relieve CONSULTANT of responsibility to provide those services specified in Exhibit "A", for a total compensation including reimbursable expenses not to exceed $89,484.00. 3 ARTICLE V PAYMENT FOR SERVICES 5.01 CITY shall pay CONSULTANT for work required for satisfactory completion of this agreement in amount to be determined in accordance with the method described in paragraph 5.02 below. 5.02 Payment scheduling: Total payment not to exceed $89,484.00. Fees for the professional services and the completion of required tasks as outlined herein shall be paid on a time and materials basis but shall not exceed the price quotes contain in Exhibit A. A detailed explanation of services and associated fees shall be listed on each invoice submitted by CONSULTANT. 5.03 Payments to CONSULTANT shall be based on an itemized invoice submitted by CONSULTANT not more frequently than monthly. 5.04 Payments will be made by CITY within thirty (30) days of receipt of invoice from CONSULTANT. 5.05 If CITY substantially alters the scope of work to include additional analyses or services, the total payment and cost of services may be changed by amending the agreement. ARTICLE VI PROJECT INSPECTION AND ACCOUNTING RECORDS 6.01 Duly authorized representatives of the CITY shall have right of access to the CONSULTANT'S files and records relating to the project included in the agreement and may review the work at appropriate stages during performance of the work. 6.02 CONSULTANT must maintain accounting records and other evidence pertaining to costs incurred, which records and documents shall be kept available at the CONSULTANT'S California office during the contract period and thereafter for three (3) years from the date of final payment. ARTICLE VII DISPOSITION OF FINAL REPORTS 7.01 All documents and associated materials and backup data as required by this agreement shall be and shall remain the sole property of CITY. 7.02 CONSULTANT'S attention is directed to the required notice under Government Code Section 7550, which states in part that "any documents or written reports prepared as a requirement of this contract shall contain, in a separate section preceding the main body of the document, the number and dollar amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to the preparation of those documents or reports if the total cost for work by non-employees of the public agency exceeds $5,000.00." 4 ARTICLE VIII TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT 8.01 At any time CITY may suspend indefinitely or abandon the project, or any part thereof, and may require CONSULTANT to suspend the performance of the service. In the event the CITY abandons or suspends the project, CONSULTANT shall receive compensation for services rendered to date of abandonment and suspension in accordance with the provisions of Sections 5.01, 5.02, and 5.03 herein. 8.02 It is understood and agreed that should CITY determine that any part of the work involved in the program is to be suspended indefinitely, abandoned, or canceled, said agreement shall be amended accordingly. Such abandonment or cancellation of a portion of the program shall in no way void or invalidate this agreement as it applies to any remaining portion of the project. 8.03 If, in the opinion of the CITY, the CONSULTANT fails to perform or provide prompt, efficient, and thorough service, or if CONSULTANT fails to complete the work within the time limits provided, CITY shall have the right to give notice in writing to CONSULTANT of its intention to terminate this agreement. The notice shall be delivered to CONSULTANT at least seven (7) days prior to the date of termination specified in the notice. Upon such termination, CITY shall have the right to take CONSULTANT'S studies and reports insofar as they are complete and acceptable to CITY, and pay CONSULTANT for his performance rendered, in accordance with Sections 5.01, 5.02, and 5.03 herein, prior to the delivery of the notice of intent to terminate, less the amount of damages, general or consequential, which CITY may sustain as a result of CONSULTANT'S failure to satisfactorily perform his obligations under this agreement. ARTICLE IX RESPONSIBILITY FOR CLAIMS AND LIABILITIES 9.01 HOLD HARMLESS: The CONSULTANT shall indemnify and hold harmless the CITY, its agents, officers, and employees against and from any and all claims, lawsuits, actions, liability, damages, losses, expenses, and costs (including but not limited to attorney's fees), brought for, or on account of, injuries to or death of any person or persons including employees of the CONSULTANT, or injuries to or destruction of property, arising out of, or resulting from, the performance of the work described herein, provided that any such claim, lawsuit, action, liability, damage, loss, expense, or cost is caused in whole or in part by any negligent or intentional wrongful act or omission of the CONSULTANT, any subcontractor, anyone directlyor indirectly employed by any of them, or any for whose acts any of them may be liable. CONSULTANT shall have no duty to indemnify or defend CITY under this paragraph if the damage or injury is caused by the active and sole negligence or willfully wrongful actor omission of CITY or its officers or employees. CITY agrees to timely notify CONSULTANT of any such claim and to cooperate with CONSULTANT to allow CONSULTANT to defend such a claim. 5 ARTICLE X INSURANCE 10.01 CONSULTANT, at its expense, shall secure and maintain at all times during the entire period of performance of this agreement, insurance as set forth in Exhibit "B", attached hereto, and incorporated herein by reference. ARTICLE XI GENERAL COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS 11.01 It is understood and agreed that the CONSULTANT will complywith all federal, state and local laws and ordinances as may be applicable to the performance of work under this agreement. ARTICLE XIII NONDISCRIMINATION 12.01 CONSULTANT certifies that it is in compliance with the Equal Employment Opportunity Requirement of Executive Order 11246, as amended by Executive Order 11375, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the California Fair Employment Practices Act, and any other Federal or State laws pertaining to equal employment opportunity and that it will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment on the basis of race, color, religion, handicap, age sex, national origin, or ancestry, in matters pertaining to recruitment, hiring, training, upgrading, transfer, compensation, or termination. 12.02 In the event of the CONSULTANT'S noncompliance with the nondiscrimination provisions of this agreement, the CITY shall impose such contact sanctions as it may determine to be appropriate including, but not limited to: a. Withholding of payments to the CONSULTANT under the agreement until the CONSULTANT complies, and/or b. Cancellation, termination, or suspension of the Agreement in whole or in part. ARTICLE XIV INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT 13.01 The CONSULTANT, in accordance with its status as an independent contractor, covenants and agrees that it will conduct itself consistent with such status, that it will neither hold itself out as nor claim to be an officer or employee of the CITY by reason hereof, and that it will not by reason hereof, make any claim, demand, or application to or for any right or privilege applicable to an officer or employee of the CITY including, but not limited to, worker's compensation coverage, unemployment benefits, and retirement membership or credit. 6 ARTICLE XV SUCCESSOR AND ASSIGNMENTS 14.01 The CITY and the CONSULTANT each binds itself, its partners, successors, and executors, administrators, and assigns to the other party to this agreement, and to the partners, successors, executors, administrators, and assigns to such party in respect to all covenants of this agreement. 14.02 Except as stated above, neither the CITY nor the CONSULTANT shall assign, sublet, or transfer his interest in this agreement without the written consent of the other, however, the CONSULTANT reserves the right to assign the proceeds due under this agreement to any bank or person. 14.03 In the case of death of one or more members of the firm of the CONSULTANT, the surviving member or members shall complete the professional services covered by this agreement. ARTICLE XVI EXTENT OF AGREEMENT 15.01 This agreement shall consist of this agreement, the Scope of Work/Bid Proposal, dated March, 2010, identified as Exhibit "A", as attached hereto and incorporated herein, and the insurance requirements set forth in the attached Exhibit "B." 15.02 This agreement constitutes the whole agreement between the CITY and CONSULTANT and any other representations or agreements are superseded by the terms of this agreement. ARTICLE XVII PARAGRAPH HEADINGS 16.01 The paragraph headings contained herein are for convenience and reference only and are not intended to define or limit the scope of this contract. ARTICLE XVIII BUSINESS LICENSE 17.01 Prior to commencing work, CONSULTANT shall secure a City of Ukiah Business License. ARTICLE XVIV NOTICE 18.01 Whenever a notice to a party is required by this agreement, it shall be deemed given when deposited with proper address and postage in the U.S. mail or when personally delivered as follows: CITY: Charley Stump, Director Planning and Community Development 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482 7 CONSULTANT CONTRACTOR: Leonard Charles 7 Roble Court San Anselmo, CA 94960 ARTICLE XIX DUPLICATE ORIGINALS 19.01 This agreement may be executed in one or more duplicate originals bearing the original signature of both parties and when so executed and such duplicate original shall be admissible as proof of the existence and terms of the agreement between the parties. ARTICLE XX FORUM SELECTION 20.01 CONSULTANT and CITY stipulate and agree that any litigation relating to the enforcement or interpretation of the agreement, arising out of CONSULTANT's performance or relating in anywayto the work shall be brought in Mendocino County and that venue will lie in Mendocino County. CONSULTANT hereby waives any right it might otherwise have to seek a change of venue based on its status as an out of County Corporation, or on any other basis. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused their duly authorized officers to execute this agreement in duplicate the day and year first above written. CITY OF UKIAH Jan ambers / Date - 3 Cit anager CONSULTANT/CONTRACTOR ega. - -hill Leonard Charles IRS IDN Number Date Leonard Charles & Associates fit / L-6 Date ' 8 E-E X 'IT "A" PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF UKIAH WATER RIGHTS PERMIT IMPACT BID PROPOSAL ENVIRONMENTAL March 2010 Prepared for: City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482-5400 Prepared by: Leonard Charles and Associates 7 Roble Court San Anselmo, California 94960 415.454.4575 INTRODUCTION The following proposal describes the scope of work that Leonard Charles and Associates (LCA) proposes to conduct to prepare the Initial Study and EIR for the proposed amendment to the Water Rights Permit for the City of Ukiah ("the project"). Before describing the work that would be done, we would note the following advantages to the City of using our firm to conduct this study. ® General Experience. Since, 1977, Leonard Charles and Associates (LCA) has produced many EIRs and other CEQA documents on projects occurring in Northern California. We have extensive experience in preparing all types of EIRs. ® Experience with Program Level EIRs. LCA has substantial experience preparing EIRs for General Plans, Specific Plans, and other projects that encompass large planning areas. We are currently preparing the Program EIR for the Ukiah Valley Area Plan. In the recent past, we have prepared the EIRs for the Fort Bragg, Lafayette, and Novato General Plans, as well as numerous specific plans. ® Familiarity with the Area. LCA has prepared numerous EIRs in the Ukiah Valley and is quite familiar with the local environment and issues important to the local community. Most importantly, we are currently preparing the Ukiah Valley Area Plan EIR, which assesses long-term impacts of growth in much the same area that is included in the proposed places of use for the City. Recent EIRs completed for projects in the Ukiah Valley include EIRs for the Mendocino County Regional Transportation Plan, the Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension project, the Ukiah Solid Waste Transfer Station, and the City of 10,000 Buddhas project, a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Calpella County Water District Annexation, and the Ukiah Western Hills Study. In the past, we have prepared eight additional EIRs for projects within the Ukiah Valley. ® Legal Adequacy. Because of our involvement with controversial projects, we are thoroughly familiar with the most recent court cases involving EIRs. As importantly, the main controversies surrounding the project involve the potential growth-inducing impacts. We are the only firm who will have access to the growth projections and possible impacts of that growth for the Ukiah Valley. We are experienced in preparing EIRs that will undergo substantial legal scrutiny. Assumptions The proposal is based on the following assumptions: ® The City or its engineering consultants will provide a full project description. ® The City or its engineering consultants will provide all necessary data and explanations regarding any questions we have regarding water rights, the license and permit requirements and procedures, and the operations of the water provider. Water Right Permits EIR Revised 2009 Bid Proposal Leonard Charles and Associates Page 1 ® To assess growth-inducing impacts, this EIR will use the year 2025 growth projections developed for the Ukiah Valley Area Plan Draft EIR. This EIR projects a level of development and the general locations of that development. INITIAL STUDY PREPARATION An Initial Study and NOP were prepared for the original project in 2006. Because the project and the environmental setting have changed, a new Initial Study and NOP should be prepared and circulated. The purposes of this Initial Study would be: • To describe the project. • To inform agencies and the public that an EIR will be prepared for the project. • To present a sufficient level of analysis for the many secondary impacts so that these areas would not need to be addressed in the EIR. • To provide a description of those areas of impact that will be focused on in the EIR. The Initial Study will be attached as an appendix to the EIR. For those areas of impact that the Initial Study addresses in sufficient detail and where mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impact to a less than significant level, the EIR will not include an analysis of those areas of impact. This will reduce the length of the EIR text and allow it to focus on the more important environmental concerns. It is possible that agencies or other individuals responding to the NOP will request that additional analysis be prepared and presented in the EIR, and the EIR will include those analyses (assuming the applicants believe the request is reasonable and feasible). All potential environmental impacts will be discussed in the Initial Study. We will use the format presented in the most recent CEQA Guidelines. See the description of the tasks presented below for the EIR to determine the level of analysis that will be prepared. PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING A public scoping meeting was held in 2006. Again, it is recommended that a new scoping meeting is needed. Leonard Charles will facilitate the public scoping meeting to describe the proposed project and the scope of the EIR. He will answer questions and will record all comments and suggestions given. The City will provide a space for the meeting as well as public notification of the time of the meeting. EIR SCOPE OF WORK The following section describes our revised scope of work and methodology using the same format that will be used to present the data in the Draft EIR. The EIR and this proposal are divided into four basic sections - an overview, a summary, an Ukiah Water Right Permit EIR Revised 2009 Bid Proposal Leonard Charles and Associates Page 2 environmental impact analysis, and a discussion of topical issues and impact summaries. This proposal details what work will be done to complete each section of the EIR. 1. VI SECTION The first section of the EIR will locate the project in time and space in order to give the reader a clear understanding of what the project is, where it is, and its relationship to local land use plans. This Overview will include: 1.1 PURPOSE OF THE EIR This section will describe the purpose of the EIR and provide introductory statements. 1. CONTENTS T I This section will provide a discussion of the purpose of the EIR, the bases for determining impact significance, the assessment of project alternatives, and other information to allow the reader to understand what is and is not included in an EIR. 1.3 COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA REQUIREMENTS This section describes the CEQA requirements for the project and discusses how those requirements have been fulfilled. It will include a summary of comments received as part of the NOP process and a summary of comments made at the public scoping meeting on the EIR. 1. PROJECT LOCALE SETTING This section will include location maps plus a narrative description of the project locale. This will include a brief overview description of the environment and land uses in the area served by the City. 1.5 PROJECT DESCRIPTION We will provide a complete description of the project as proposed. The description will include narrative, tabular, and graphic descriptions of the technical and environmental characteristics of the project. Ukiah Water Right Permit EIR Revised 2009 Bid Proposal Leonard Charles and Associates Page 3 1. REQUIRED This section will describe all required approvals and permits for the project. It will include a list of all reviewing agencies. We will specifically address the concern raised by Lee Howard in his protest of the petitions regarding whether LAFCO needs to approve the project. It is our understanding that the project only gives the right to serve the expanded places of use and that LAFCO would only come into the picture if and when the City applied to annex the areas outside their current service areas. We will explain this interpretation, as amended by our further discussions with the City and its consultant. 2.0 SUMMARY In this section, we will present a summary of all the major findings and conclusions of the report. This will include a section that describes each impact and lists the recommended mitigation measures for that impact. This section will also summarize the growth- inducing impacts, cumulative impacts, and project alternatives. It will summarize those impacts identified as "significant adverse" impacts despite available mitigations. This section is intended to be an outline of major impacts, mitigations, and project alternatives for the reader who does not wish to or need to read the entire report. This section is required by CEQA. 3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS The EIR will focus on three areas: the physical impacts of developing new wells; the effects on streamflow and water quality resulting from future increased diversion; and the growth-inducing effects of the additional water supply. These impacts are the main concern of the four agencies/individuals who protested the petition for the project. Each resource area assessed in the EIR will be analyzed using the following format: A. Setting This section includes a description of the existing situation on the site and in the project area. B. Potential Impacts and Mitigations This section includes a description and analysis of all possible constraints on development and of impacts that would result from development of the project. The EIR will clearly list any impacts that should be considered "significant" per the CEQA Guidelines; the basis for significance will be defined for each area of analysis. Each impact will be numbered and a determination of significance will be determined for that impact. After the discussion of each impact, there will be a listing of feasible mitigation measures to address the identified impact. These discussions Ukiah Water Right Permit EIR Revised 2009 Bid Proposal Leonard Charles and Associates Page 4 will close with a determination of the significance of the impact following application of the mitigation measures. The following sections outline the proposed scope of work and methodology for each environmental factor. 3.1 GEOLOGY Using existing reports, we will discuss whether adding additional wells would result in any geologic impacts. Discuss potential soil erosion from well installation and develop mitigations if warranted. 3.2 HYDROLOGY The Hydrology section will be prepared by the firm of Wagner & Bonsignore. We have had extensive discussions with this firm to ensure that they will address all issues that might be raised about the project's effects on streamflows, water quality in Lake Mendocino and the river, and water availability. The following is their proposal. The City of Ukiah filed petitions with the State Water Board to amend its Water Right Permit to add points of diversion and amend the authorized place of use. Wagner & Bonsignore proposes "re-using" the operations model previously developed by Wagner & Bonsignore for the City of Ukiah Urban Water Management Plan. In that effort a daily model covering 46 water years (1961-2006) was created that simulates Potter Valley Project imports, Lake Mendocino storage and release, City of Ukiah water use, and satisfaction of Russian River required streamflows. An important aspect of that modeling was the application of the 2004 FERC license for Potter Valley Project retroactively to the entire study period. That "retroactive projection" of the FERC license was necessarily conservative because while the FERC license specifies a minimum Tunnel import, it also allows additional discretionary import. However, estimating the discretionary import would require a) building a model of storage and flow for the Eel River basin and b) knowing how PG&E would exercise their discretion. Instead the modeling completed assumed the minimum imports mandated by the FERC license. It is proposed that the same assumption would be used here. Two aspects of the modeling would be revised for this work. One, the projected future City water use would probably change and perhaps the return flow factors would also change. And two, required streamflows on the Russian River would be revised to correspond to the recent Biological Opinion (B.O.) requiring Sonoma County Water Agency to amend D-1610. Because meeting the required streamflows on the Russian River is first priority in practice and in the modeling, there are no impacts to streamflows. Any change in basin water supply instead shows up as a change in water storage levels in Lake Mendocino. Because the B.O. mandates lower streamflows than D-1610, there may be a net gain in basin water supply and net increase in water stored in Lake Mendocino. They will do the following work: Ukiah Water Right Permit E1R Revised 2009 Bid Proposal Leonard Charles and Associates Page 5 ® Recalculate the operations model previously built for City of Ukiah Urban Water Management Plan. Use the reduced Potter imports in all Scenarios. The following scenarios will be done: o Scenario A: ® D-1610 flow rates is Existing Ukiah demand o Scenario B: ® D-1610 flow rates ® Future Ukiah demand o Scenario C: ■ B.O. flow rates ® Existing Ukiah demand o Scenario D: ® B.O. flow rates ■ Future Ukiah demands Reduction in Russian River flows will be result of B.O. flow rates differing from D-1610 flow rates. Explain that required streamflows will be met in all hydrologic conditions in all four Scenarios. Lake Mendocino storage levels will, on average, be higher due to the B.O. flow rates and will, on average, be lower due to the increased Ukiah diversions. This may result in some impact to recreation, which we will not evaluate and is expected to have less than significant effect on water quality. ® Explain that those scenarios resulting in more overall water supply in the basin, may alleviate the push for reduced water use. Explain that those scenarios that result in less overall water supply in the basin may aggravate calls for reduced water use. ® Re-use text in UWMP about Ukiah Valley groundwater resource. ® Re-use information in Ukiah Valley Area Water Plan for background on other water uses in Ukiah Valley (by LCA). ® Discuss groundwater/surface water interactions and implications of wells intercepting groundwater. ® Research climate change. Run additional "with" scenario with less runoff. ® Discuss water quality impacts expected during drilling of water well. ® Identify and coordinate with LCA and City regarding project alternatives. ® Speak with SCWA about their concerns. ® Speak with RRFCD about their concerns. Discuss the relationship between the increased Ukiah diversion and the RRFCD contracts and project water. Ukiah Water Right Permit EIR Revised 2009 Bid Proposal Leonard Charles and Associates Page 6 3.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES The project impacts on streamflows, lake storage levels, and water quality will have impacts on the Russian River fishery and other aquatic resources. We will assess the impact of reducing water flow in the Russian River on listed species. The assessment of impacts to salmonids and other special status species will include a detailed summary of the findings and recommendations included in the Russian River Draft Biological Assessment and the Biological Opinion. We will specifically respond to the various issues and concerns raised in the Department of Fish and Game protest letters on the project. Address the issues where DFG was unclear about the petitions. 3.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES Using existing data, we will provide a general discussion of historical and archaeological resources present or possibly present in the area of the new wells. Provide mitigations if warranted. 3. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION Discuss how installation of new wells would have short-term impacts on the roadway system. 3. AESTHETICS Describe whether installation of new wells and appurtenant facilities would have an aesthetic impact on views from the surrounding areas. Recommend mitigations if warranted. 3.7 NOISE Drilling and installation of new wells and pumps will cause short-term noise impacts. These impacts will be discussed to determine possible impacts on nearby residential neighbors. If there will be aboveground pumps or motors involved with the new wells, the potential noise impacts of this equipment will be described. If warranted, noise mitigations will be recommended. 3.3 QUALITY AIR Describe the potential air quality impacts of new well construction. Because well pumping will require the use of electrical equipment, the project will result in increased Ukiah Water Right Permit ElR Revised 2009 Bid Proposal Leonard Charles and Associates Page 7 emission of greenhouse gases (GHG). We will assess the project's GHG emissions on global climate change. If feasible, we will recommend mitigations. 3.9 LAND USE Discuss whether well installation would affect agricultural land or agricultural uses. We will assess project consistency with General Plan policies and direction. 3.10 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS We will discuss the possible use of hazardous materials when installing wells and provide mitigations if warranted. 4. TOPICAL IS .1 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The project would potentially contribute to a cumulative impact during the well installation phase (i.e., construction noise potentially combining with other construction or other noise in the area) and the long-term cumulative impact of increased diversions form the Russian River. Based on the list of projects already provided to us by the City and the County, we will provide a discussion of the cumulative construction impacts of those projects plus the proposed project. Based on projections that have been developed for the Draft UVAP, calculate the additional water demand needed to meet that need. To the degree data are available, describe current proposals by other water providers to expand their diversion from the river. Discuss the possible cumulative impact on streamflow and water quality, and the consequent effect on the fishery within Mendocino County. To the degree data are available, provide a general discussion of projected diversions downstream of Mendocino County. This analysis will be based on existing data in the Biological Opinion and other data made available by the Sonoma County Water Agency. e2 GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS The project will allow buildout of the City and its Sphere of Influence. As this future growth is a key concern of the City and the public, the EIR will include a discussion of the impacts of that induced growth. To conduct these analyses of growth-inducing impacts, we will rely heavily on the Program EIR that we are currently preparing for the County of Mendocino. This Program EIR examines the long-term impacts of additional growth over an area that includes the City and its Sphere of Influence. While it is possible that the UVAP EIR Ukiah Water Right Permit EIR Revised 2009 Bid Proposal Leonard Charles and Associates Page 8 would not be published prior to the EIR for this project, we would still have access to all those data. We are currently completing a population projection for the area and are distributing that projected growth to traffic area zones in the valley. These projections will be used to project growth within the service areas of the City. Because, the exact nature and location of future development is unknown, the assessment of growth-inducing impacts can be general in nature (i.e., at the level that is typically done for a Program EIR). Because we will not know exactly where such growth might occur, the analysis would not be site-specific. It would assess the general impact of new growth in an area on the resources of that area. We would assess impacts for the following resources: Geology and Soils. Using existing reports and the UVAP EIR that describe the geology and soils of the area, we will describe existing hazards and constraints on development. This will include a discussion of seismic hazards, landslide hazards, liquefaction, and other soil constraints. Given these hazards and constraints, examine the possible risks of new development in the area, or portions of the area. Determine whether the City's General Plan would provide sufficient protection from geologic hazards for projected new development. If warranted, we will recommend additional mitigations. Hydrology and Water Quality We will assess the hydrologic effects of future induced development, including: Summarize existing data regarding flows, flooding, and water quality in the Russian River system. ® Describe existing major flooding problems ® Describe possible impacts resulting from: ® placing new development within flood zones; ® increasing runoff (from new development) and therefore the extent of the flood zones or duration of the flood; ® increasing the amount of pollutants on streets and other paved areas which can pollute the river system and groundwater aquifers; ® erosion from construction and various land uses and impacts on water quality; and Review the policies and implementation measures of the City General Plan to determine whether they provide adequate protection for hydrologic resources and protect the public from flooding. If warranted, recommend additional mitigation measures necessary to reduce the growth-inducing impacts. Ukiah Water Right Permit EIR Revised 2009 Bid Proposal Leonard Charles and Associates Page 9 Biological Resources Using existing reports, we will assess the effects of induced development on area biological resources. This will include assessing the following: • Describe the basic vegetation communities of the affected area. • Describe wildlife use of the area. • Provide a list of special status and sensitive species. • Describe wetlands in the area. • Discuss whether new development would adversely affect any of the resources described above. This includes indirect impacts such as sedimentation and water pollution impacts on salmonids. • Review the policies of the City General Plan and other regionwide agreements on water rights and salmonids to determine if they would reduce, at a program level, all potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level. • If warranted, recommend additional mitigation measures necessary to reduce the significant impacts. Cultural Resources Discuss possible impacts of induced development on cultural resources. Discuss how the policies and implementation measures of the City General Plan provide adequate protection for these resources. Traffic and Circulation Based on the existing traffic modeling that has been done for the City and for MCOG, we will provide a general discussion of the impacts of induced growth on the City roadway system. We would do the following: • The existing traffic conditions within the area will be described. • Roadway improvements required to improve existing roadway deficiencies will be identified. Levels of Service values will be reported for conditions with implementation of improvements. • Roadways forecasted to operate below acceptable LOS thresholds will be identified. Roadway alignments and structural conditions will be compared with the appropriate functional classification standards for each facility. • As warranted, already-identified roadway improvements required to improve area buildout roadway deficiencies will be described. Levels of Service values will be reported for conditions with implementation of improvements. Ukiah Water Right Permit ElR Revised 2009 Bid Proposal Leonard Charles and Associates Page 10 Aesthetics We will assess the impacts of induced development on area aesthetic resources. This will include the following: ® Describe the major aesthetic resources in the area, especially scenic vistas from major roadways and public places. ® Discuss how future development could adversely affect scenic views and resources. Discuss potential impacts to existing neighborhoods. This will include assessment of impacts of new lighting, placement of utility towers, and other special use impacts. ® Determine whether General Plan policies 'and implementation measures will adequately protect scenic views and resources. ® Where warranted, we would recommend additional mitigations to protect important scenic views and the character of existing neighborhoods. Noise Based on the noise analysis being prepared for the UVAP EIR, we will do the following: ® Provide a table showing the distance from major roads to the 60, 65, and 70 Ldn contours, for both existing and future conditions for major roads. ® Based on this table, LCA would determine whether new development would be allowed in areas where existing or future noise levels would exceed standards established in the existing Noise Element of the City General Plan. ® Determine whether existing policies and measures of the Noise Element provide adequate protection from unacceptable fixed source or traffic-generated noise. ® Where warranted, recommend additional mitigation measures. Air Quality We will assess the impacts of induced growth on regional air quality and global climate change. We will do the following work: ® Describe existing air quality and air quality concerns and issues facing the area. ® Describe global climate change and current State requirements for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. ® Discuss how future development in the area could adversely affect air quality. This will include consideration of PM10 emissions from construction and future use, emission of ozone precursors and other vehicle-generated pollutants, and other pollution. Ukiah Water Right Permit EIR Revised 2009 Bid Proposal Leonard Charles and Associates Page 11 • Discuss the potential impacts on global climate. • We will not conduct air quality modeling. Instead, we will determine whether City General Plan policies and implementation measures provide a smart growth planning framework that reduces the need for commuting. Public Services The EIR will assess whether the amount of new development allowed by the project can be adequately served by existing resources or improvements that are planned by the public service providers. We will do the following work: • Calculate the increased demand for public services from projected development over the next 20 years. Contact all public service providers to determine existing resources and their ability to serve projected 20-year growth within their service area. This will include contacting the City Police Department, City Fire Department, Ukiah Unified School District, Ukiah Valley Fire Protection District, Ukiah Public Works Department, Ukiah Parks and Recreation Department, Ukiah Valley Sanitation District, and the Solid Waste Management Authority. • Assess potential long-term impacts on public service providers. • Determine whether General Plan policies provide the framework for ensuring that adequate services are available prior to new development occurring. If the analysis indicates that adequate services may not be available, despite Plan policies and implementation measures, we will recommend additional mitigation measures needed to reduce impact to public service providers to a less than significant level. Land Use We will assess the following land use issues as regards the induced growth: • Assess possible long-term impacts on agriculture. • Assess possible impacts as regards displacement of population or housing. • Assess for possible impacts of physically dividing a community. • Determine whether the policies of the General Plan sufficiently address these potential impacts. • Where warranted, recommend additional mitigation measures. Ukiah Water Right Permit EIR Revised 2009 Bid Proposal Leonard Charles and Associates Page 12 Hazards and Hazardous Materials We will assess the impacts of induced growth as regards the following: ® Provide a general discussion of the potential hazards of transporting, storing, and using hazardous chemicals and materials. Determine whether the General Plan provide adequate protection from hazardous materials and adequate response in case of a spill or release. ® Identify areas that are "high" and "very high" fire hazard areas. Describe existing response strategies. Determine whether the General Plan provides adequate protection from wildfire hazard. ® Review the existing emergency response and evacuation plan(s) for the area. Determine whether there is adequate emergency planning and response. ® Where warranted, revise or recommend additional mitigation measures to provide adequate protection from hazards and hazardous materials. 4.3 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES CEQA requires an analysis of project alternatives. We will work with the applicants and their consultants to develop the final list of at least three alternatives. It is possible this list might include: ® No project, as required by CEQA ® Reduction in the place of use ® Mitigated project that reduces demand by incorporating water conservation, recycling, etc. . RESPONSE COMMENTS We will attend two public hearings on this EIR, including one hearing on the Draft EIR. We will be responsible for responding to all written comments plus verbal comments rendered atone public hearing on the Draft EIR. The comments plus our responses will become the Final EIR for the project. Ukiah Water Right Permit EIR Revised 2009 Bid Proposal Leonard Charles and Associates Page 13 SCHEDULE AND PRODUCTS Once a contract is signed, we will begin work. From that date, the following products.will be completed: 1. Submittal of 6 copies of Draft Initial Study and NOP 2. Submittal of 40 copies of Initial Study and NOP Within 4 weeks of contract signature Within one week of receipt of all comments 3. Submittal of 6 copies of the Administrative Draft EIR 4. Submittal of 40 copies of Draft EIR 5. Submittal of 6 copies of Administrative Final EIR Within 12 weeks of #2 Within 2 weeks of receipt of all comments Within 5 weeks of receipt of all comments 6. Submittal of 40 copies of Final EIR Within 3 weeks of receipt of all of all comments STAFF The following list of individuals will work on this project. Staff Member Responsibility Leonard Charles, Ph.D. Project Manager Lynn Milliman Environmental Analyst Jacoba Charles Environmental Analyst PRICE 0 MOTE The Initial Study, NOP, and EIR will be prepared for a fixed cost of $89,494. The cost breakdown is shown on Table 1 Ukiah Water Right Permit EIR Revised 2009 Bid Proposal Leonard Charles and Associates Page 14 ASSUMPTIONS AND CONDITIONS 1. If the City receives requests for additional analysis or study not included in this scope of work either as a response to the NOP or during the public scoping meeting, and agree that additional work is needed, the additional work can be prepared by amending the scope of work and price quote listed above. 2. The cost for the Response to Comments includes responding to comments based on analyses included in the scope of work. Requests for additional studies beyond those included in the scope of work would require an amendment to the contract. The cost for responding to comments is based on it taking LCA staff 20 hours to respond to comments and 20 hours to prepare the document (i.e., clerical time). If LCA and staff of the applicants agree that responding will take more time to respond and prepare the FEIR then listed above, the City will agree to amending the contract to cover the unforeseen level of comments. 3. The Administrative Draft EIR and Administrative Final EIR will receive one round of review by City staff only, prior to publication. 4. Once LCA is authorized to start work, the project description will not substantively change. 5. The analysis of project alternatives will be qualitative. It will not include quantitative, technical analyses of traffic, runoff, engineering, noise, air quality or other quantitative assessments. 6. The price quote includes the attendance of Leonard Charles at one scoping meeting and two public hearings. If Leonard Charles to attend additional hearings, the cost will be $1,520 per hearing. 7. If additional copies of documents are required, the cost will be $12 per Initial Study and $25 per DEIR or FEIR. 8. The RFP does not specifically request preparation of other CEQA-required documents. Often these are prepared by public agency staff, but more and more frequently the public agency requests the consultant to prepare these documents. If desired, the following documents can be prepared: ® Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program $900 ® Notice of Determination $300 ® Draft Findings $2,600 9. The scope of work does not include the following: ® color mapping ® geologic reconnaissance or subsurface explorations ® field surveys for animals or plants Ukiah Water Right Permit EIR Revised 2009 Bid Proposal Leonard Charles and Associates Page 15 ® assessments of biological impacts by a botanist, fisheries biologist, or wildlife biologist ® quantification of habitat values field sampling for air or water quality ® provision of engineering design for stormwater or any other public service systems engineering analysis of water or wastewater systems ® subsurface archaeological explorations ® Level 1 or higher investigations for toxic materials ® quantitative air quality modeling 10. If work is stopped or slowed by circumstances outside LCA's control, the City will notify LCA in writing. LCA will be reimbursed for all work completed at the time it receives the notice to stop work. If work is stopped for more than six weeks, the contract will be amended to cover the costs of having to re-start the project. 11. The EIR is intended to be a full disclosure document and is provided solely to assist in the evaluation of the proposed project. Leonard Charles and Associates shall not be liable for costs or damages of any client or third parties caused by use of this document for any other purpose, or for such costs or damages of any client or third parties caused by delay or termination of any project due to judicial or administrative action, whether or not such action is based on the form or content of this report or portion thereof prepared by Leonard Charles and Associates. Ukiah Water Right Permit EIR Revised 2009 Bid Proposal Leonard Charles and Associates Page 16 N tn -4 „ v tv 0) u CL N N Q w OO in O in 0 ~ o O C O O U} 0 V' o O o et ' in w o v o v o O o O O et O O M O w iD a ers o N M o to M O et M in w O o tO M t7) r U o d• M O IS03 le;O O tD 00 O ci in et r h r 0 N M at et tD C Y7 di M vt M v► tD tR (D vt M f!} fis Vt tD O N W * 0 r ,d, Oi bT fg b4 V! V► N tR N' V} UP fg OO t9 O tt) C. 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O tp O O] 01 03? LO 6% fA VD? 93} tfY M V4 65 Vi - (t3 W4 W. EA V> &3. Ef4 V% N 0 co M UapJnB N (!3 d4 r N ~ H} O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O . 0 . 0 o a o o o o O Ee - - ffl ffl t!} 0 eci ff4 d4 t{} H4 b4 tt} {t} fA d4 to 0 O O 01 0 0 _ t D M le}o}qn N 6% e N 69 M LO O O O a O r & 4 t 0 M p SISOO MMU 6% » w 0 .18410 pue 6uguud C 0 eJOU61suo8 0 ~ I ~ I o a° +e pause CO 4 v4 v N 6 I w 0 0 0 o a a © O tD O O O a o 0 O O 0 0 0 O O 47 00 P. O 0 00 eF O Q M -e q O O et 0 O6 IN is to V' N to O N co N C ! O N tO h z 0 M 4* a_ tf' VY M yr M ++4 tD er tD ~ M v4 Cl) tH tD a4 M W M - N C 4 at 0 r N 4 to vt ;SOD 1e401 Vol to NtR v NN vz ,6 O W W H M t0 N . et O . O r et V' d' V' ct N V N eOD N M f` OOf N V co s.inOH 10401 VO uj L a to co ip, O leOl.iai3 N <Y ~h et et t0 r d' et W N M ar r Ln W saue43 egoOe 1 D, L f9 O 1 1 et et It N d' et N N N N N OW O O J uew!ll!W UUA-l LO erg N r J C M tO N V' f8 'ct N N tD co t0 OD V o0 N O saue43 pJeuoa-1 r O M M N m m ~ C o ¢S L R g N m ~ U U o C ~ y N O U A ~ pNp~~ U 0 0 E . O .a W C y N 16 m N O O > ?O W , O U 0 U 05 L Q U O to E 0 V 2 0- = w = w CC C U G t6 7 C C C D a? O C d V N C t6 G N 'Op N O a m M > m m a c c~ O 0 O L > c N N N t t6 (0 l0 m 9 . N L U L E C ill c U C O .O -0 Cr. O E G N N Ea ttl ~p t I. C O E p W N L - m c o N E tU CD x 0 m 7 0 12 1- = Q O Z D ¢ C w N 3: 03 0 7 a U L I c = l ~ m o N a v E 2 c [ a LL ~ w O m O E > N N N ` Q O ~ m `m = tn W F°- W `m m a J = te a d a d a m a ¢ ¢ IL - 0 0 t'i th v L6 (6 n 1- H W Q W F- CD O U C cc Ln a~ M U f!{ C 0 tU J 2 tm E N W v U t4 O CL 2 EL CD O lY V Wo f6 V1 O m` o C7 U ETV r..-%HIBIT "'B" INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS Without limiting Consultant's obligations arising under Paragraph 12 of the Professional Service Contract ("Agreement'~ to which this Exhibit is attached, Consultant shall not begin work under the Agreement until it procures and maintains for the duration of the Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with its performance under the Agreement. A. Minimum Scope of Insurance Coverage shall be at least as broad as: 1. Insurance Services Office ("ISO) Commercial General Liability Coverage Form No. CG 00 011185. 2. ISO Form No. CA 0001 (Ed. 1/78) covering Automobile Liability, Code 1 "any auto" or Code 8, 9 if no owned autos and endorsement CA 0025. 3. Worker's Compensation Insurance as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability Insurance. 4. Professional Liability Insurance covering damages which may result from errors, omissions, or acts of professional negligence by Consultant. B. Minimum Limits of Insurance Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: 1. General Liability: $2,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work performed under this Agreement, or the aggregate limit shall be twice the prescribed per occurrence limit. 2. Automobile Liability: $2,000,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. Worker's Compensation and Employers Liability: Worker's compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident. 9 C. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects to the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. D. Other Insurance Provisions The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 1. General Liability and Automobile Liability Coverages a. The City, it officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds as respects; liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant, products and completed operations of the Consultant, premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant, or automobiles owned, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope-of-protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. b. The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects to the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. C. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. d. The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. 2. Worker's Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from Consultant's performance of the work, pursuant to this Agreement. 10 3. All Coverages Each Insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. E. Acce tp ability of Insurers Insurance is to be placed with admitted California insurers with an A.M. Best's rating of no less than A- for financial strength, AA for long-term credit rating and AMB-1 for short-term credit rating. F. Verification of Coverage Consultant shall furnish the City with certificates of Insurance and with original Endorsements effecting coverage required by this Agreement. The Certificates and Endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The Certificates and Endorsements are to be on forms provided or approved by the City. Where by statute, the City's Workers' Compensation - related forms cannot be used, equivalent forms approved by the Insurance Commissioner are to be substituted. All Certificates and Endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before Consultant begins the work of this Agreement. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. If Consultant fails to provide the coverages required herein, the City shall have the right, but not the obligation, to purchase any or all of them. In that event, the cost of insurance becomes part of the compensation due the contractor after notice to Consultant that City has paid the premium. G. Subcontractors If Consultant uses subcontractors or sub-consultants, it shall cover them under its polices or require them to separately comply with the insurance requirements set forth in this Paragraph 6.1. 11