HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Resolution 9709 (Dominican College Master Plan)RESOLUTION NO.9-7 0.9.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
ACCEPTING THE PROPOSAL AND AUTHORIZING THE AGREEMENT
FROM NICHOLS • BERMAN ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING FOR
PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE
DOMINICAN COLLEGE MASTER PLAN.
The City Council of the City of San Rafael finds and determines that:
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act requires
environmental review of the proposed Dominican College Master Plan project;
and
Whereas, the Planning Department Staff of the City of San Rafael
distributed Requests for Proposal for the preparation of the Environmental
Impact Report for the proposed Dominican College Master Plan project; and
WHEREAS, the firm of Nichols • Berman Environmental Planning has
submitted a proposal in the amount of $106,127 for the preparation of the
Environmental Impact Report; and
WHEREAS, the proposal has been reviewed and recommended for
approval by City Staff.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council accepts the
proposal (scope of work) from Nichols • Berman Environmental Planning for the
subject Environmental Impact Report, a copy of which is attached hereto,
marked Exhibit "B", and incorporated herein by reference.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is authorized to
execute, on behalf of the City of San Rafael, a Professional Services Agreement
with Nichols • Berman for said project, a copy of which is attached hereto,
marked Attachment "A", and incorporated herein by reference.
I, JEANNE M. LEONCINI, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify
that the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at
a regular meeting of the City Council of said City held on Monday, the sixteenth
day of September, 1996, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS : None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS : Heller
11, .
JEANWE-M. LEONCIM, City Clerk
u R °9
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIT 'AGE 4 FILE NO. GPA95-5, ZC95-8, UPS ;8, ED95-121, ED96-42
ATTACHMENTS AND EXHIBITS
ATTACHMENT "A" ............................. Professional Services Agreement
Exhibits of the Professional Services Agreement
EXHIBIT "A" .................................... Request for Proposal
EXHIBIT "B" .................................... Nichols • Berman Proposal
EXHIBIT "C" .................................... Service Schedule
�Tv�-dxo'km t- \r- (� \/\
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
This agreement is made and entered into this 16`h day of September, 1996,
between the City of San Rafael, a Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to
as "CITY") and Nichols • Berman Environmental Planning (hereinafter referred
to as "CONSULTANT").
A. RECITALS:
(i) WHEREAS, CITY has heretofore issued its Request for Proposal
pertaining to the performance of professional services with respect
to the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the
Dominican College Master Plan, a full, true and correct copy of
which is attached as EXHIBIT "A" and by reference made a part
hereof.
(ii) WHEREAS, CONSULTANT has submitted its proposal for the
performance of services, which is attached as EXHIBIT "B" and
incorporated by reference hereto; and
(iii) WHEREAS, CITY desires to retain CONSULTANT to perform
professional services necessary to render advice and assistance to
CITY, CITY'S Planning Commission, City Council and staff in the
preparation of an Environmental Impact Report; and
(iv) WHEREAS, CONSULTANT represents that it is qualified to
perform such services and is willing to perform such professional
services as hereinafter defined.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between CITY and CONSULTANT as
follows:
B. AGREEMENT
1. DEFINITIONS: The following definitions shall apply to the
following terms, except where the context of this Agreement
otherwise requires:
- I rpy
CC 0 .1
(a) Project: The project consists of the development proposed in
the Dominican College Master Plan which will require CITY
approval of the following entitlements: Use Permit (UP95-
58), Environmental and Design Review Permit (ED95-121),
Zone Change (ZC95-5) and a General Plan Amendment
(GPA95-5) and an Environmental and Design Review Permit
(ED96-42) for Phase I of the project (Recreation Center and
Parking Lot).
The Dominican College Master Plan includes the
construction of a parking lot and Recreation Center building
on Forest Meadows as Phase I. Additional phases would
allow the construction of a Science and Technology building
near Olive and Palm Avenues, (Phase II), a parking lot near
Caleruega Hall (Phase II -A), a Chapel on Acacia Avenue
near Magnolia Avenue (Phase II -B), a Residence Hall and
related parking on Magnolia Avenue (Phase III), and
outdoor facilities and related parking in Forest Meadows
(Phase IV).
(b) Services: Such professional services as are necessary to
be performed by CONSULTANT in order to complete an
Environmental Impact Report for said "project" which
complies with the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), the State EIR Guidelines as currently Amended, the
City's Environmental Impact Assessment Procedures and
the provisions of this Agreement.
(c) Commencement of Services: CONSULTANT agrees to
commence work upon execution of this agreement.
(d) Comr)letion of Services: The date of completion of all
phases of the EIR, including any and all procedures, maps,
surveys, attendance by CONSULTANT at public hearings
regarding the EIR as set forth in the Schedule outlined in
Exhibit "C", attached and incorporated by reference hereon.
2. CONSULTANT AGREES AS FOLLOWS:
(a) CONSULTANT shall forthwith undertake and perform such
services as necessary to complete an EIR prepared in
accordance with the provisions of the Consultant's Proposal
(Exhibit "B") and in accordance with Federal, State and City
2
statutes, regulations, ordinances and guidelines, all to the
reasonable satisfaction of CITY.
(b) CONSULTANT shall supply copies of all maps, surveys,
reports, plans and documents (hereinafter collectively
referred to as "documents") including all supplemental
technical documents, as described in Exhibit "B" to CITY
within the time specified in the Schedule, Exhibit "C".
Copies of the documents shall be provided at the
consultant's sole cost and expense in such numbers as are
required by this Agreement. CITY may thereafter review
and forward to CONSULTANT comments regarding said
documents and CONSULTANT shall thereafter make such
revisions to said documents as are deemed necessary by
CITY. CITY shall receive revised documents in such form
and in the quantities required by this agreement. The time
limits set forth pursuant to this Section B2.(b) may be
extended upon written approval of CITY.
(c) CONSULTANT shall, at CONSULTANT'S sole cost and
expense, secure and hire such other persons as may, in the
opinion of CONSULTANT, be necessary to comply with
terms of this Agreement. In the event any such other
persons are retained by CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT
hereby warrants that such persons shall be fully qualified to
perform services required hereunder. CONSULTANT
further agrees that no subcontractor shall be retained by
CONSULTANT except upon the prior written approval of
CITY.
(d) CONSULTANT shall attend meetings and provide qualified
staff as specified in Exhibit "B".
3. CITY AGREES AS FOLLOWS:
(a) In consideration of CONSULTANT'S Agreement to perform
well and sufficiently and in a skillful and professional
manner the services contemplated herein, CITY agrees to
pay and CONSULTANT agrees to accept as full payment for
the preparation of the EIR, a total Sum of $106,127.00
payable as follows:
(1) Twenty percent (20%) of the Agreement
K
value ($21,225.) within fifteen (15) days of the
execution of Agreement by CITY and
CONSULTANT.
(2) Forty percent (40%) of Agreement value
($42,450.80) within fifteen (15) days of delivery of an
administrative draft EIR to CITY by CONSULTANT.
(3) Twenty percent (20%) of Agreement value
($21,225) within (15) days of Planning Department
approval of the Draft EIR.
(4) Ten percent (10%) of Agreement value ($10,612.70)
upon delivery of the Administrative Final EIR to
CITY by CONSULTANT. The cost to prepare the
Final EIR is based upon the understanding that the
Final EIR shall not be required to include evaluation
or gathering of technical information not included in
the Draft EIR and the preparation of the Final EIR will
require a maximum of 241 hours of CONSULTANT'S
time. If the maximum is exceeded, additional
payment will be provided as set forth in Section B, 3
(b).
(5) Ten percent (10%) of Agreement value ($10,612.70)
within fifteen (15) days of both the 1) completion of
CONSULTANT services; 2) Certification of Final EIR
by CITY, provided, however, that CITY shall not
unreasonably withhold certification of Final EIR if the
same has been prepared in accordance with the
provisions of this agreement.
(b) Additional services: Payment for additional services
requested, in writing, by CITY, and not included in
CONSULTANT'S proposal as set forth in Exhibit "B" hereof,
shall be paid on a reimbursement basis in accordance with
the fee schedule set forth in said Exhibit "B". Charges for
additional services shall be invoiced on a monthly basis and
shall be paid by CITY within (30 days) after said invoice are
received by CITY.
4. CITY AGREES TO PROVIDE TO CONSULTANT:
(a) Information and assistance as set forth in Exhibit "B" hereto.
4
(b) Such information as is generally available from CITY files
applicable to the project.
(c) Assistance, if necessary, in obtaining information from other
governmental agencies and/or private parties. However, it
shall be CONSULTANT'S responsibility to make all initial
contact with respect to the gathering of such information.
5. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS:
All documents, originals, graphic exhibits and correspondence
developed or received during the course of the EIR's preparation
shall become the property of the CITY. At the CITY'S discretion,
the documents will either be delivered to the CITY immediately
after certification of the EIR or retained by the CONSULTANT for a
period of two (2) years. If the CITY elects to have the
CONSULTANT retain one (1) camera-ready copy for five (5) years,
then the CONSULTANT agrees to maintain it for five (5) years and
shall allow the CITY access to it whenever the CITY so requests.
5. STATUS:
CONSULTANT is an independent contractor and shall not be
deemed, directly or indirectly, to be an officer or employee of the
CITY.
7. AFFILIATION:
During the term of this Agreement, no member or affiliate of the
CONSULTANT or CONSULTANT team shall be an employee of
the project applicant or any principal of affiliate or the applicant or
the firm of Gary T. Ragghianti, Fair Isaac or Architect Bill Liskamm.
8. TERMINATION:
(a) The CITY or CONSULTANT may terminate this Agreement
at any time by providing to the other party thirty (30) days
written notification. Should said notification be received by
the CONSULTANT, all work under this Agreement shall
terminate, except for what minor work is required to
provide the CITY with a clear understanding of work
completed and work remaining.
67
(b) CITY shall pay CONSULTANT all sums then due and
unpaid under this Agreement, including sums for work not
completed, but in preparation. If termination occurs when
any of the Phases of the work called for in Section 3 (a) has
been only partially completed, the CONSULTANT will be
compensated for its work on that phase in accordance with
the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit "B". Payment by CITY
of such compensation shall be considered full and final
settlement for all work performed by the CONSULTANT
under this Agreement.
(c) Upon receipt of final payment, all materials and documents,
whether finished or not, shall become the property of and
shall be delivered to the CITY.
(d) It is mutually understood and agreed that this Agreement
shall be binding upon the CITY and upon the
CONSULTANT, their successors, executors, or
administrators. Neither this Agreement not any part
thereof, nor any moneys due or to become due under this
Agreement may be assigned by the CONSULTANT without
the written consent of the CITY.
9. NOTICES OF DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES:
Any and all notices, demands, invoices and written
communications between the parties hereto shall be addressed as
set forth in this paragraph 9. The below named individuals,
furthermore, shall be those persons primarily responsible for the
performance by the parties under this Agreement:
CITY: City of San Rafael
Planning Department
P.O. Box 151560
San Rafael, CA 94915-1560
CONSULTANT: Bob Berman
Nichols • Berman, Environmental Planners
601 First Street
Benicia, CA 94510
Any such notices, demands, invoices and written communications,
by mail, shall be deemed to have been received by the addressee
I
forty-eight (48) hours after deposit thereof in the United States
mail, postage prepaid and properly addressed as set forth above.
10. INSURANCE:
With respect to performance of work under this agreement, the
CONSULTANT shall maintain, and the CONSULTANT shall
require its subcontractors, to maintain insurance as described
below:
(a) General Liability Insurance: Commercial or Comprehensive
General Liability insurance covering bodily injury and
property damage utilizing an occurrence policy form, in an
amount no less than $1,000,000 combined single limit for
each occurrence. Said insurance shall include, but not be
limited to: premises and operations liability, property
damage liability, and personal injury liability.
(b) Automobile LiabiliV Insurance: Insurance covering bodily
injury and property damage in an amount no less than
$1,000,000 combined single limit for each occurrence. Said
insurance shall include coverage for owned, hired and non -
owned vehicles.
(c) Worker's Compensation Insurance: CONSULTANT and
CONSULTANT'S Subcontractors shall be required to
maintain full Workers' Compensation Insurance for all
persons employed directly in carrying out the work
specified herein, in accordance with provisions of the State
of California Labor Code.
(d) Errors and Omissions Liability Insurance: Errors and
Omissions liability insurance appropriate to the
CONSULTANT'S profession in an amount no less than
$1,000,000.
(e) Endorsements: Each said comprehensive or commercial
general liability and automobile liability insurance policy
shall be endorsed with the following specific language:
1) The CITY, its officers and employees, is named as
additional insured for all liability arising out of the
operations by or on behalf of the named insured in
the performance of this Agreement.
OA
2) This policy shall not be canceled without first giving
thirty (30) days prior written notice to the CITY.
3) This policy shall not be canceled or materially
changed without first giving thirty (30) days prior
written notice by the insurer to the CITY by certified
mail.
4) The CITY, its elected officials, officers, employees,
and agents are named as additional insured for all
liability arising out of the operations by or on behalf
of the named insured in the performance of this
Agreement.
11. INDEMNIFICATION:
CONSULTANT agrees to hold CITY harmless from and against
liability arising out of CONSULTANT or CONSULTANT'S
subcontractor's negligence in connection with the performance of
the work described in Exhibit "B" of the Agreement.
12. ASSIGNMENT:
No Assignment of this Agreement or of any part or obligation of
performance hereunder shall be made, either in whole or in part, by
CONSULTANT without the prior written consent of CITY.
13. GOVERNING LAW:
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of California.
14. ARBITRATION:
All claims or disputes between the CITY and the CONSULTANT
relating to this Agreement shall be decided by arbitration in
accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association,
conducted in Marin County under the laws of the State of
California. The decision of the arbitrator shall be final and binding
on the parties. The arbitrator may make an award of costs and fees,
including attorney's fees necessitated by the arbitrator.
F -j
15. ALTERATIONS:
This Agreement may be modified, as necessary for the successful
and timely completion of the services to be provided. Any
alteration or variation shall be expressed in writing, as an
amendment to this Agreement, and shall be approved by both
parties.
16. ENTIRE AGREEMENT:
This Agreement supersedes all other agreements, either oral or in
writing, between the parties with respect to the subject matter
herein. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no
representation by any party which is not embodied herein nor any
other agreement, statement, or promise not contained in this
Agreement shall be valid and binding. Any modification of this
Agreement shall be effective only if it is in writing, and signed by
all parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of
the day and year first set forth above:
CONSULTANT
ATTEST:CITY
C�IZ� ,
yCkJeanne M. Leoncini City Manager Rod Gould
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Attu ey for tl
0�
61A'
:afael
�� r1
CITY OF y
, � MAYOR
�-
„ Albert J. Boro
t r COUNCIL MEMBERS
Paul M. Cohen
Barbara Heller
Gary Phillips
David J. Zappetini
July 23, 1996
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR PREPARATION OF A FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT
PROJECT: Master Plan for Dominican College, including a parking lot and recreation center
in Forest Meadows; a science and technology building and chapel in the campus core area; and
a new residence hall adjacent to Caleruega Hall.
The City of San Rafael seeks a proposal from your firm for preparation of an Environmental
Impact Report that complies with the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines
and this Request for Proposal. The EIR is to assess potential environmental impacts associated
with a proposed Master Plan for the Dominican College campus which will include
development of Forest Meadows for a recreation center and parking lot, a new science and
technology building and chapel in the campus core area, and a new residence hall adjacent to
the present dining hall. The attached Initial Study provides a description of the setting,
potential project impacts and mitigation.
PROJECT BACKGROUND
The Dominican College Campus Development Plan (DCCDP) project includes a General Plan
Amendment, Zone Change, Master Use Permit, Master Environmental and Design Review
Permit, and an Environmental and Design Review Permit for the Phase I Recreation Center
and parking lot.
The DCCDP plan will allow the College to construct four new buildings and associated site
improvements over the next two decades. The buildings and phasing are as follows:
• Phase I: Recreation Center and Grand Avenue parking lot. An Environmental and Design Review Permit for
the Recreation Center and parking lot has been submitted to the City.
• Phase H: Science and Technology Building, (Phase II -A), Parking lot near Caleruega Hall, (Phase II -A) and
Chapel (Phase II -B).
• Phase III: Residence Hall and related parking.
0 Phase IV: Forest Meadows outdoor facilities and related parking.
2
The Campus Plan area addressed by this submittal includes portions of the College property
locaied west of Deer Park Avenue. The hillside portions of College property located east of
Deer Park Avenue are not a part of the proposal.
The 55.1 acre Campus Master Plan area consists of three areas. A map is attached that shows
the areas of the proposed improvements.
• Forest Meadows (21.5 acres), located west of Grand Avenue and known for its ampitheater
where performances and commencement are held. The site also contains maintenance
facilities, tennis courts, a multi -use field, and an unimproved parking lot.
• The Academic Core (14.4 acres) defined by Acacia, Olive and Palm Avenues, where most
academic and administrative buildings are located; and
• The Residential area (19.2 acres) that includes Caleruega Dining Hall and Pennafort and
Fanjeaux residence halls.
The applicant has requested the following actions:
General Plan Amendment:
A General Plan Amendment is proposed to redesignate the Campus Master Plan area to a
single designation of Public/Quasi Public, which is consistent with the existing college campus
use. The proposed amendment will unify the land use designation for the campus property
and allow long-term development of the 55 + acres under a coordinated plan.
Zone Change:
A zone change would apply the City's Planned Development (PD) zoning to the entire 55.1
acres and thus allow development of the campus to take place in phases and in a manner
consistent with the development standards as outlined in the Campus Development Master
Plan.
Master Use Permit.
As required by the City's PD zoning district, the project includes a Master Use Permit for
phased development. The Master Use Permit will establish uses on the campus property as
exist at the time of the submittal of the Campus Development Plan (November 1995) plus the
new uses described in the application.
Environmental and Design Review Permits:
Two Environmental and Design Review Permits have been submitted to the City.
A: Required by the City's zoning ordinance, a Master Environmental and Design Review
Permit will establish design and landscaping standards for the placement and size of the four
proposed buildings and additional parking facilities.
B: Parking Lot and Recreation Center Building Environmental and Design Review Permit:
Environmental and Design Review Permits will also be required for each phase. At this point,
an Environmental and Design Review Permit has been submitted to the City for placement of
a Recreation Center building and parking lot on 4.5 acres in the Forest Meadows area of the
College. The application will allow a 215 car parking lot placed in the area of an
Planning Department
1400 Fifth Avenue, P.O. Box 151560, San Rafael, CA 94915-1560
Phone: (415)485-3085 Facsimile: (415)485-3184
3
archaeological resource, and a 36,300 gross square foot recreation center building which will
include a gymnasium, outdoor pool, weight room, locker facilities, lobby, ancillary offices and
other storage and athletic program offices.
SCOPE OF STUDY
The draft EIR and the Final EIR must contain the information outlined in Article 9 of the
CEQA Guidelines. The EIR is to provide an unbiased review and assessment of the reports
that have been submitted to date and to prepare new information for additional issues
identified by the Planning Commission in the initial scoping. Specific items to be reviewed
include:
Plan Review:
Discuss any inconsistencies with the City of San Rafael General Plan 2000 and the Zoning
Ordinance as well as regional policies on air quality.
Geology/Soils:
A geotechnical report was prepared for the parking lot/recreation center. This document will
need to be reviewed as part of the EIR. The consultant will be responsible for evaluating the
completed geotechnical report and preparing a report on the projects conformance with the
geotechnical policies identified in the General Plan 2000. Additionally, the consultant will be
responsible for the following:
1. A geotechnical investigation of the stream stabilization techniques that have been
proposed. The report recommends rip -rap, and this will have to be analyzed with
consideration of General Plan Policies and Department of Fish and Game Policies. The
consultant should analyze potential impacts from the proposed stream stabilization,
determine its feasibility and proposed alternatives.
2. The consultant should analyze the proposed Best Management Practices in order to assure
that erosion and water quality impacts are adequately addressed for the Recreation Center
project and for future development of the site.
HydrologylDrainage:
The proposed project will create large amounts of impervious surfaces. Runoff could affect the
water quality of the adjacent stream. The consultant will be responsible for evaluating the
Biological Assessment prepared by LSA Associates and evaluating the proposed drainage
plan. Standards will need to be proposed for future parking lots. Also, specific comments
need to be made on reasonable creek setback distances, and recommendations on maintaining
water quality of these streams.
Plant LifelAnifnal Life:
A tree study has been prepared which indicates that approximately 40 trees are proposed to be
removed for the parking lot and Recreation Center building. Most of these are non -
indigenous species, such as poplar and eucalyptus. The constraints map prepared for the
project indicates that the future soccer field, parking lot adjacent to Belle and Grand Avenues,
and the Residence Hall and parking lot on Magnolia Avenue are located in areas with
Planning Department
1400 Fifth Avenue, P.O. Box 151560, San Rafael, CA 94915-1560
Phone: (415)485-3085 Facsimile: (415)485-3184
4
significant trees. The consultant needs to analyze the cumulative impact of the removal of this
vegetation and recommend appropriate replacement species.
A building setback of 25 feet from the edge of the creek is proposed. A Biological Assessment
for the Recreation Center has been prepared by LSA Associates. This report stated that the
proposed setback was adequate, but did not evaluate the proposed stream stabilization project
which could impact the riparian habitat. The consultant needs to analyze the adequacy of the
stream bank setback and the proposed stabilization project.
Noise:
General Plan policies state that new commercial construction adjacent to residential areas
cannot increase noise levels in the residential area by more than 3 db (Ldn), or create noise
impacts which would increase noise levels to more than 60 db (Ldn) at the boundary of the
residential area, whichever is the more restrictive standard. The consultant will need to
prepare a noise study to evaluate noise impacts on the neighborhood from the proposed
recreation center, playing field and expansion of Forest Meadows facilities.
Light and Glare:
The new parking lots and buildings will have light standards to provide security lighting. The
consultant will be responsible for providing a review of the proposal and recommending
appropriate lighting standards so that the adjacent properties and residential areas are not
disturbed by light and glare.
Land Use:
The project proposes to change the land use designation on the Forest Meadows site from Low
Density Residential to Public/Quasi-Public. Portions of other parcels adjacent to the Campus
Core will be changed from Hillside Residential and Estate Residential to Public/Quasi-Public.
This represents an intensification of the use of the Forest Meadows site and a change in the
land use planned for the site by the General Plan. The consultant will need to evaluate this
change against General Plan Policies, including Housing and Residential Neighborhood
Policies.
Transportation:
A traffic study has been prepared by DKS which evaluates the potential traffic impacts of each
phase. The report concludes that all intersections except Grand Avenue/Mission Avenue
would operate at acceptable levels of service. This intersection will go to level of service E at
Phase III. Most of the deterioration in level of service would be generated by other growth in
the area. Signalization of this intersection is recommended to maintain adequate level of
service. The report also recommends that bicycle parking be incorporated into the project.
The report also evaluates traffic from athletic and special events. Local traffic and the pm peak
traffic would be exacerbated by soccer games which currently begin at 3:00 pm and end during
the peak hour. The Recreation Center is planned to have a capacity of 1,426 seats. A capacity
event would create congestion on Grand Avenue intersections after the event is finished. The
report recommends implementation of a traffic management program.
Planning Department
1400 Fifth Avenue, P.O. Box 151560, San Rafael, CA 94915-1560
Phone: (415)485-3085 Facsimile: (415)485-3184
5
The consultant shall perform a peer review of these documents and recommend changes to the
study and to proposed mitigation measures as required. In addition, the consultant evaluate
the following items:
1. An analysis of an AM peak hours generation, trip distribution and intersection level of
service analysis.
2. An intersection analysis should be performed that would include the Highway 101 ramps
including the intersections on Irwin Street from Second to Mission and Hetherton Street
from Mission to Second. This analysis should also include the intersections of Southbound
101 ramps and Lincoln Avenue and Lincoln and Linden Lane.
3. The submitted traffic management plan needs to be evaluated and expanded.
4. The City's Traffic Engineer recommends that the traffic signal installation of Grand and
Mission Avenues should have a pro rata share paid by the project sponsor. The consultant
should evaluate the feasibility of this request.
5. The Consultant should analyze possible changes to public transit in the area to
accommodate college schedules or special events.
Air Quality:
Potential air quality impacts from additional traffic should be evaluated.
Health:
The consultant should evaluate whether any hazardous or toxic substances will be used in the
Science -Technology building, and what experiments may be conducted there that may be
harmful to the adjacent residential neighborhood.
Parking:
The transportation study prepared by DKS also evaluates parking. The parking study
evaluates the Off-street and On -street parking supply and demand for each phase of the
project. The report concludes that 100% of the off-street parking capacity will be utilized in
phases I through IV. On street parking occupancy will vary from 34% to 58%. For capacity
events in the Recreation Center, the Forest Meadows lot will not provide adequate parking.
All college off-street parking would be utilized and almost all on -street parking. Proposed
mitigations for parking impacts include developing a Campus Parking Management Plan and
assigning a staff member to act as Transportation Coordinator for events. It is also
recommended that facility rentals for non -college events be restricted in size so as not to
exceed parking demands and that event scheduling be coordinated to prevent concurrent
events from exceeding parking supply. The parking situation for special events is of concern
to the neighborhood. The report also recommends that the 90 -degree parking spaces on
Grand Avenue are recommended to be converted to parallel spaces to avoid cars backing from
these spaces interfering with traffic flow, and that a residential parking permit program could
be initiated.
The consultant shall consider the following issues in the preparation of an EIR:
Planning Department
1400 Fifth Avenue, P.O. Box 151560, San Rafael, CA 94915-1560
Phone: (415)485-3085 Facsimile: (415)485-3184
6
1. The parking report needs to separate out private and public on -street parking. The private
on -street parking may be used as part of the college parking inventory, but the public on -
street parking should not. The consultant needs to analyze and consider this situation and
determine the appropriateness of considering on -street parking for existing development
only. In addition, the consultant shall verify parking counts.
2. The consultant needs to consider that all new uses have only off-street parking, or parking
on private streets. Public street parking should not be counted as meeting parking
requirements for proposed new development.
3. The consultant should further detail a complete campus traffic management plan.
4. The City Traffic Engineer cautions that the City does not have a residential neighborhood
parking permit program, and that it should not be considered as a mitigation measure nor
included as part of the parking program.
5. The consultant should evaluate the adequacy of parking adjacent to Calereuga Hall and
evaluate the proposed parking lot phasing to determine whether it is appropriate.
6. The consultant should evaluate and recommend additional parking lot locations.
Public Services/Safety:
The new parking facilities and buildings could create a need for additional police patrols. The
Police Department is particularly concerned about the lack of a clear view corridor into the
Forest Meadows lot. Providing this would conflict with the neighborhoods goal of screening
the site. The consultant should evaluate the feasibility of providing adequate security
measures, including a private security patrol.
The consultant should evaluate fire safety issues. The site is heavily vegetated with
eucalyptus, broom, and other exotic species. The consultant should provide guidelines for
reducing fuel loads, particularly in Forest Meadows and on Magnolia Avenue.
The consultant should also evaluate the adequacy of water service for fire protection to the
new facilities, whether there is sufficient water pressure to adequately service the additional
square footage proposed in the Master Plan. Evacuation routes and emergency service access
for fire disasters also needs to be analyzed.
The consultant also needs to analyze any hazardous substances that may be used in the
Science -Technology building that may involve risk of fire or explosion. Adequate data needs
to be provided in order to evaluate any potential hazards to the neighborhood.
Aesthetics:
The proposed Master Plan includes development standards, including setbacks, architectural
standards and landscaping standards for the Science and Technology Building. The building
is proposed to be located on the corner of Palm and Olive Avenues in an area which is
currently landscaping and parking. The adjacent neighborhood is single family residential.
The consultant should evaluate whether the proposed development standards for building
mass and scale are appropriate in this neighborhood. This shall be done by employing visual
analysis techniques such as photo montage, models, and photographic images.
Planning Department
1400 Fifth Avenue, P.O. Box 151560, San Rafael, CA 94915-1560
Phone: (415)485-3085 Facsimile: (415)485-3184
7
The proposed parking lot in Forest Meadows is located across from a residential
neig!iborhood. The project has been redesigned to incorporate a wider landscape buffer of
approximately 50 feet. The proposed Recreation Center is 35 feet in height on the Grand
Avenue elevation and is located within 55 feet of the curb. Grand Avenue provides the
primary entrance to the Dominican neighborhood and both projects will be highly visible. The
consultant should create a visual analysis to determine the impact of the parking lot,
Recreation Center, and Science -Technology Building, and propose appropriate development
standards, mitigation measures and alternatives.
Archaeological Resources:
An Archaeological Report has been prepared by Miley Holman & Associates to evaluate the
archaeological site in the area of the parking lot. A test excavation program established that
this is a unique site and requires review and mitigation under state law. The consultants are to
refer to the report on excavation which has been completed by Miley Holman & Associates.
The consultant should evaluate the proposed mitigation measures that involve paving over
the site for the parking lot and monitoring the site by archaeological and Native American
monitors during earth moving activities. The consultant should also evaluate other
appropriate mitigation measures and alternatives.
Project Alternatives:
The following project alternatives to be analyzed in the EIR. The consultant should also
consider the economic feasibility of the alternatives. These alternatives include:
• No project. This alternative would also include an analysis of the use of the Forest
Meadows property under its existing General Plan and zoning designations which allow
Low Density Residential use.
• The feasibility of relocating the Science and Technology building to the Chapel site at
Magnolia and Acacia Avenues.
• The feasibility of locating the Science -Technology Building in the location of the present
Science building with a construction schedule which allows a temporary science/lab
facility at the present location of the Angelico Hall parking lot to enable uninterrupted
continuation of the College's ongoing science program, demolition of the existing science
building and construction of a new permanent Science -Technology building at that present
location.
• The potential use of the college's vacant hillside parcels.
• An environmentally superior alternative to be further defined upon full evaluation of the
project's impact.
• The feasibility of locating the soccer field in an off-site location in order to limit parking
and traffic intensification of the site.
• The relocation of proposed facilities to the Forest Meadow's site. Under this alternative,
the following options should also be explored:
Option A: Locate the Science -Technology building on Grand Avenue (Recreation
Center site); locate the Recreation Center on the corner of Belle and Grand Avenues
(at the project's 90 space parking lot site); locate the 90 space parking lot on Palm and
Olive Avenues (at the project's Science -Technology building site).
Planning Department
1400 Fifth Avenue, P.O. Box 151560, San Rafael, CA 94915-1560
Phone: (415)485-3085 Facsimile: (415)485-3184
Option B: Locate the Science -Technology Building on Grand Avenue (at the project's
Recreation Center site); locate the Recreation Center on Belle Avenue (at the project's
new soccer field site); locate a new soccer field on the Palm and Olive Avenue corner
(at the project's Science -Technology building site).
Option C: Locate the Science -Technology building on Grand Avenue (at the project's
Recreation Center site); locate the Recreation Center on the corner of Belle and Grand
Avenues (at the project's 90 -space parking lot site); locate the Chapel and a parking lot
on the Palm and Olive Avenue corner (at the project's Science -Technology site); and
locate a parking lot on Magnolia and Acacia Avenues (at the project's Science -
Technology building site); and locate a parking lot on Magnolia and Acacia Avenues
(at the project's Chapel site) for a total of 90 parking spaces in the two lots.
Energy Conservation:
The consultant should discuss site orientation in terms of the desirability for passive design for
solar space heating and cooling and for active solar hot water heating systems.
Other CEQA Mandated Topics:
The EIR must also contain sections discussing other CEQA mandated topics, including 1) the
relationship between local short-term uses of man's environment and maintenance and
enhancement of long-term productivity; 2) any irreversible environmental changes which
would be involved in the proposed project should it be implemented; 3) the growth inducing
impacts of the proposed project; 4) effects not found to be significant; 5) organizations and
persons consulted; and 5) cumulative impacts.
Mitigation Monitoring Program:
The consultant should prepare a mitigation monitoring program as required by AB3180 as
part of the draft EIR. The program should identify measures which must be satisfied prior to
permit issuance, measurers that must be satisfied during project construction, and measures
which may require ongoing monitoring. The consultant shall work with staff to identify the
agency or department responsible for verifying compliance with each measure.
CONTACTS BY CONSULTANTS
As a minimum, the following agencies, groups, and individuals shall be contacted during
preparation of this environmental impact report. All required contacts will be coordinated
with the consultant and the Planning Department staff.
1. Dominican College, owner,
2. The SWA Group, project architect and landscape architect.
3. CSW/Stuber-Stroeh, project engineer
4. DKS Associates, project transportation engineer.
5. LSA Associates, Biologists
6. Michael Brooks, Surveyor.
7. The Ratcliff, Architects
8. Miller Pacific, Geotechnical Engineers.
9. ED2 International, Architects.
Planning Department
1400 Fifth Avenue, P.O. Box 151560, San Rafael, CA 94915-1560
Phone: (415)485-3085 Facsimile: (415)485-3184
N
10. The GNU Group, Sign Architects.
11. All Homeowners Associations surrounding subject property (list and contacts will be
provided by Planning Department.
12. California Department of Fish and Game.
13. Regional Water Quality Control Board.
14. Miley Holman & Associates, Archaeological Consultants
15. Historical Resources Information System, Native American Representative, Sonoma State
University.
16. City of San Rafael Departments including Public Works, Planning, Fire, Police and
Recreation
17. County of Marin Planning Department.
18. Marin Municipal Water District.
19. San Rafael Sanitation District.
20. San Rafael School District.
REQUIRED CONTENTS OF PROPOSAL
Responses to this request for proposal shall include, as a minimum, the following information:
1. The name of the project manager designated or assigned to this project.
2. The name and address of all persons, including their background and qualifications, who
will actually contribute to or work on this project. This includes all subcontractors. Any
substitutions or project staffing must be approved by the City in advance. Material
submitted in pre -qualification may be referenced.
3. A detailed scope of work for preparing the draft environmental document.
4. A schedule indicating the proposed commencement and completion dates for various
phases and progress reports for those phases of draft EIR preparation. This schedule shall
include submittal dates for the administrative draft and camera ready draft EIR's.
5. An estimate of all costs involved in preparing the draft environmental document. This
estimate shall include all costs relating to survey work, research, photography,
transportation, communication, clerical work, (including typing and reproduction) and
distribution (mailing, mailing list on file with the Planning Department). The estimated
cost shall include the following:
a. Attendance at two neighborhood meetings.
b. Attendance at four evening public meetings (Planning Commission and City
Council).
c. Reproduction and submittal of eight administrative draft focused EIR's for staff
review.
d. Reproduction and submittal of 75 draft reports with a camera-ready original.
e. An estimation of the cost and time scheduled for preparing a final Environmental
Impact Report.
Given that it is unknown how much time and work will be necessary to prepare a final EIR,
a base estimate shall be provided with the condition that the amount can be adjusted after
the public review period on the draft EIR. Itemize each task within the proposed budget,
and indicate the estimated hours and rates for each person participating.
Planning Department
1400 Fifth Avenue, P.O. Box 151560, San Rafael, CA 94915-1560
Phone: (415)485-3085 Facsimile: (415)485-3184
10
6. Evidence of compliance with any and all additional specific requirements as set forth in the
Request for Proposal.
7. Samples of any similar reports prepared by the company/firm in the recent past.
8. Public Agency references.
9. All consultants will be required to file a Statement of Economic Interest prior to finalization
of a contract with the City of San Rafael.
10. Consultants shall have no ongoing work interests with the applicant or other parties of
interest, including Fair, Issaac Company and the Law Office of Gary T. Ragghianti.
11. Consultants shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract the following types
of insurance: General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury
and property damage; Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and
property damage; Workers' Compensation Insurance; Errors and omissions liability:
$1,000,000 per occurrence.
Selection Process
Proposals will be ranked by the Planning Department staff using the following criteria and
submitted to the City Council for final approval:
1) Ability to perform tasks as described.
2) Experience and expertise.
3) Technical approach, clarity, and methodology.
4) Ability to complete the EIR in a timely manner.
5) Cost.
6) Interview (optional).
Deadline for Submittals
Five copies of the proposal are to be submitted to the San Rafael Planning Department, San
Rafael City Hall, 3`d Floor, 1400 Fifth Avenue, no later than August 23,1996. Mailing address
is City of San Rafael, P. O. Box 151650, San Rafael, CA 94915-1560. Direct your submittal and
any questions to Bill Tuikka, Associate Planner, at 415-485-3085.
Planning Department
1400 Fifth Avenue, P.O. Box 151560, San Rafael, CA 94915-1560
Phone: (415)485-3085 Facsimile: (415)485-3184
SEP 10 '96 13:43 KERNER•'::PPNER,KUbt.ViHUM
_ Vr
�1
SCOPE OF WORK
P.2
This part of our proposal describes the analyses we will conduct to address the main issues summarized
in the introductory Understanding of the Project and requested by RFP item 3. It also discusses the
other topics for analysis identified to date in the RFP, public comments, and our homework for this
proposal.
The product of this assignment will be a factual, objective, legally complete environmental impact
report (EIR.) which satisfies the legal requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines. It also will meet the public's and decision -makers' informational
needs.
We will prepare a series of administrative draft and public review EIRs before submitting the Final EIR
for certification by the City. As indicated in the Schedule and Tasks, these will include the following
reports:
• Administrative Draft EIR for staff review and comment
• Pre -Print Draft EIR for final staff review and last editing
• Draft EIR for public review
• Administrative Final EIR for staff review and comment
• Pre -Print Final EIR for final staff review and last editing
• Final EIR for public review and City certification
We will follow the City's desired EIR format to present all CEQA-mandated parts of the report and the
topics identified for analysis by the Initial Study, scoping process, and subsequently revealed by the ETR
study team. In all respects we will adhere to the CEOA Guidelines. For the purposes of our proposal's
completeness, however, the contents of the EIR are summarized below:
INTRODUCTION TO THE EIR
The.first part of the EIR will introduce readers to the purposes and organization of the report and will
summarize:
• The purpose and authority of the EIR
• The lead agency (City of San Rafael) and responsible agencies
• The process used by the City to determine the EIR's scope
• The level of detail and objectivity of the EIR analyses
• The reports and data used to prepared the EIR or incorporated by reference, the reason for
referencing them, the subject matter incorporated, and where the public can review the materials
• The dates of the public review period and how readers can comment on the adequacy of the EIR
• The approximate schedule for completing the Final EIR and the City's timetable for considering the
merits of the project
• The organization of the report
• Reference to the mitigation monitoring program
+ A list of acronyms used in the report
SEP 10 '96 13:44 KERNER,'•'P-'PPNER, ROSENBAUMmnoO P. 3
evised Scope of Work
Dominlcan Co/loge Mauer Plan FJR
SUMMARY OF PRINCIPAL FINDINGS
As environmental documents become longer and more complex in response to expanded requirements
and expectations, it is becoming increasingly important to provide readers with a comprehensive
summary of an EIR's most pertinent findings at the beginning of the report. The Summary of Principal
Findings will provide an overview for the entire EIR and will:
• Briefly describe the project
• List the project's significant impacts and required mitigation measures
• Identify alternatives considered and the environmentally superior alternative
• Outline areas of controversy
• Summarize the EIWs major conclusions and issues to be resolved
• List significant avoidable and unavoidable impacts
• Present the summary of impacts and mitigation measures in a table and indicate the significance of
each impact before and after mitigation
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
This part of the EIR will describe and illustrate the project location, project background, the City's
existing land use designations and zoning, all components of the project as proposed, assumptions about
the project identified to conduct the analysis, cumulative analysis assumptions selected for the EIR, and
administrative actions required by the planning and environmental review process.
Project location This section will briefly dancribe and illustrate the local and regional context of
thu Dominican College project site in relation to the City of San Rafael. We will show the local
and regional features in relation to the site, such as Grand Avenue, Belle Avenue, and Highway
101.
Existing land use and zoning We will briefly discuss and illustrate existing uses of the site and
surrounding lands:
Existing uses of the three subareas of the site -- Forest Meadows, Academic Core, and
Residential area -- including campus buildings, parking facilities, and recreational facilities
13 Existing land use designations of the site -- Low Density Residential, Public / Quasi -Public,
Estate Residential, and Hillside Residential
• Existing zoning of the site -- R-1 U, P / QP, ER, and R I a -H
• Land uses adjacent or nearby the site, including Coleman Elementary School (south of Forest
Meadows), the Marin Tennis Club and Korean Trinity Church (west of Forest Meadows), the
Sisters of St. Dominic Convent (north of the Academic Core), Sisters of St. Dominic Santa
Sabrina Center and open space (east), and residential areas (south west, and north)
Description of the proposed project In this section we will thoroughly describe and illustrate --
with plans, tables, and other graphic materials submitted to the City by the applicant -- all aspects
of the proposed project, including the campus development plan, site plan for the Recreation
Center, landscaping, and entitlements requested. (The Administrative Actions of the ETR,
described below, will outline all the approvals and permits required before the project could be
Revised Scope of Work
DoWnloan College MasterPlan EIR
implemented.)
We will identify the applicant, project objectives, the proposed phasing of development, and
relevant components of the project pertinent to the ETR analyses and readers' understanding of the
pending action. The Project I)mcription also will include:
A site plan of the proposed development
A description of all entitlements requested for the project, including those listed in the RIT or
identified during the study process, including a General Plan. Amendment, zoning change,
Master Use Permit, and Environmental and Design Review Permits
A discussion of the proposed General Plan designation of Public / Quasi -Public for the entire
site and a change to Planned Development zoning
A breakdown of proposed land uses for the entire + 55.1 -acre Campus Plan Area, for each of
the subareas (Forest Meadows, The Academic Core, The Residential Area), and for each of the
:Four phases of development.
13 infrastructure, utilities, grading, landscaping, and other site alterations within the proposed
development arca
Other relevant facets of the project, such as architectural and building standards, circulation
and parking plan, etc.
Aspects of the project not yet known. or defined and assumptions about those features of the
project identified for the EIR analyses
We will work with City staff members and the applicant to identify all pertinent features of the
project as proposed, clarify questions about application materials, and agree on development
assumptions the EIR study team may need to use in order to complete the analyses,
• Cumulative development assumptions In this section we will identify cumulative conditions
assumed throughout the EIR analyses. Based on City planning staff guidance, these will include
relevant projects listed in the Marin County Propdev (a listing of development projects in the
County), and any other cumulative projects in the City. We will assess the project's cumulative
effects in all relevant topical sections of the EIR. These may include the hydrology, biology,
traffic, air quality, public service, and, possibly, other analyses.
Administrative actions This section of the EIR will outline all the administrative actions and
procedures necessary before the project could be implemented and construction could begin. These
will include all steps required of the applicant by:
San Rafael as part of the City's development review and approval process
Other permit granting agencies, such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) / U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) in implementing Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act, and California Department of fish and Game (CDFG) in implementing Sections 1601.-
1603 of the Fish and Game Code
b • d wnueH3S0�I `H3Ndd3M `N3Nd3A bb : Eti 96, 0Z d3S
gevised Scope of- Work
Dominkan College iNasiar Plan EIR
This section will identify „rr,,. L.-ities for public review and continent throughout the
environmental, project review, and permit granting process.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS -- SET]7NG, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES
This section will present the topical analyses conducted for the EIR and will describe the environmental
setting, impacts, and mitigation measures for each environmental topic considered. Each topical section
will also identify the methodology used to conduct the analyses and the significance criteria used to
determine the magnitude of impact. Overall, we will:
• Assess effects in proportion to the significance of impact
• Distinguish between significant and less -than -significant impacts before and after mitigation
• Distinguish between temporary short-term and permanent long-term impacts
• Recommend measures to mitigate significant impacts and idcntify the effectiveness of. mitigation
• Identify who would be responsible for implementing and who would be responsible for monitoring
measures, together with, the duration and standards to measure their success
• Identify secondary effects of mitigation, if any
The topic -by -topic scopes of work are discussed below. They include:
• Land Use and Consistency with plans
• Geology and Soils
• Hydrology and Drainage
• Biotic Resources
• Visual and Aesthetic Quality
• Traffic and Parking
• Air Quality
• Noise
• Public Services / Health and Safety
• Archeological Resources
• Energy Conservation
The I'mPaect Overview (discussed below) will group topics of no significant impact and explain the
reasons for reaching that conclusion, whether in the Initial Study or after examination in the ETR.
LAND USE AND CONSISTENCY WITH PLANS
This analysis will provide an overview of the existing land uses and land use issues affecting the project
site and will discuss how the Dominican College project would affect these conditions. This analysis
will also:
Examine the conformance of the project with adopted plans and zoning, such as policies of the City
of San Rafael General Plan 2000, regulations of the City Zoning Ordinance, and policies of the
Bay Arca Air Quality Management District.
Analyse potential land use impacts of the project, such as compatibility with adjacent land uses.
S - A wnuew3SoN `d3Ndd3M `N3NN3A Sb : Eti 96, OT d3S
Revised Scope of :Work
Qomhn/can College MasterPlan OR
Consistency with Public Plans
The project must be consistent with the public planning policies, as articulated by the policies of the
City of San Rafael General Plan 2000, regulations of the City Zoning Ordinance, and other relevant
plans and policies. For example:
• Land Use goals and polices, such as to prescrve large trees (Policy LU -29), and policies which
consider project design (Policy LU -35)
• Housing goals and policies, such as to protect, conserve, and upgrade the existing housing stock
or existing residential areas where possible and appropriate (Policy H-14)
• Natural Environment goals and policies, such as creek setbacks (Policy NE -17) and
archaeological studies (Policy NE -23)
• Safety goals and polices, such as seeking to retain creek channels in their natural state (Policy S-
19), and providing access for emergency vehicles (S-24)
• Residential Neighborhoods goals and policies, such as to protect and conserve existing
neighborhoods by requiring that new development be harmoniously -integrated into existing
neighborhoods (Policy RES -1)
These documents embody the vision of the future development of the City and regulate the values and
priorities of the community. They also guide environmental analysis. It is not enough to examine these
documents as an afterthought to the process -- the regulations often provide an essential starting point
for the analyses that follow. For example, policies of the City of &n Rafael General Plan 2000 and
regulations of the City Zoning Ordinance will be used to develop the significance criteria used for -the
visual analysis, as described below in Ksual and Aesthetic Quality. The attached Easton Point EIR
includes a sample analysis of that project's consistency with applicable plans. We also can provide
samples of other approaches and formats for the City to examine.
Potential Land Use Conflicts
Site development could result in a number of potential land use conflicts which this section of the EIR
will examine. In many cases, this section will integrate and summarize impacts addressed in the various
topical analyses. These could include:
Incompatible land uses Some land uses could generate adverse -impacts on other land uses
nearby, such as recreational. use activities affecting nearby residential areas.
Loss of open space While the site is privately owned, some of it serves as visual open space for
the neighborhood. We will quantify and describe the loss of undeveloped land. We will describe
visual impacts in greater detail in the Visual Quality section of the EIR.
GEOLOGYAND SOILS
The Dominican College site lies in a small, gently southwest sloping valley in eastern San Rafael_ The
valley is underlain by colluvial and alluvial sediments derived from the: surrounding hills. The major
C1 - d wnb9N3S0d `N3Ndd3M `d3MN3A Sb : ET 96, 0T d3S
Povised Scope of :Work
9omhrlaen coffer liOSWPlan EJR
drainage flowing into the valley is Black Canyon Creek which flows through the Forest Meadows area
of the project site. In the developed part of the valley the creek has been altered by past residential
development and streets. An unnamed creek flows through the property from the northeast, across the
Academic Core and Residential areas of the site. This creek is incising the soft sediments of the valley
floor, and high winter flows are causing localized bank ;failure. Some slopes along Locust Avenue have
a lower stability because of steep banks, apparently related to creek erosion or downcutting.
The focus on this section will be on stream stabilization, drainage and flooding, grading, and
iandsliding.
Describe Existing Conditions
Research and review Review available literature from the U.S. Geological Survey, the USDA.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (formally the Soil Conservation Service), the Califomia
Division of Mines and Geology, and applicant materials. With the E1R study team's hydrologist,
consult with the City's Department of Pubic Works and the City Engineer, California Department
of Fish and Game (CDFG), and the U.S. Arany Corps of Engineers (Corps) regarding permitting
issues associated with the proposed crock stabilization measures.
Paer review Review the applicant reports, such as the Geotechnical Investigation .Dominican
College ,Recreation ,racility by Miller Pacific Engineering Group. l The conformance with the
gcotech nical policies in the San .Rafael General Plan 2000 will be discussed in the Land Use and
Consistency with ,Plans section (discussed above) and cross-referenced in this section.
Field review Perform a field review, focusing on the stream channels around the site, In addition,
examine the stream; conditions upstream of the site. A large portion of the Miller Pacific report
focused on off-site impacts, such as potential flooding damage.
Identify Impacts
Based upon our review of the site and local geology, and through consultation with the applicant's
geotechnical engineer (Gene Miller of Miller Pacific), we have identified some of the major impacts to
be examined in the EIR:
Stream stabilization The soils developed on the valley floor are of the Tocaioma Series which
are subject to erosion and slope failure in cuts or steep slopes. During our preliminary site
inspection, the principal central drainageway on the campus appeared to be generally stable.
However, Black Canyon Crock (which runs through the Forest Meadows area) is relatively
unstable and subject to bank slumping. A geotechnical report prepared by Miller pacific
recommended approximately 200 feet of bank stabilization to guard against such local instabilities.
The study team's geologist and hydrologist will examine the impacts of the stream stabilization
proposed by the applicant on both stream flow and 100 -year flood levels.
1
Preliminary Geotechnical Reponjor Ca
rpus Development Plan Dominican College ojSan Rafael, Miller Pacific
Engineering Group, November 10, 1995; review of Preliminary Geotechnical Report by Kleinfelder, Inc., December 12,
1996; Geotechnical Investigation Dominican College Recreadon Facility, San Rafael, CA, May 22, 1996.
z ' d w U9W3SON `N3Ndd3M `N3NN3A 9b : EZ 96, 0Z d3S
fteViSed Soaps of Work
Domhdcan Collage Mastar Plan E!R
Surface water runoff and drainage The increase in impervious surfaces would result in
increased quantities and peak flow volumes of water discharging into local creeks. Runoff would
contain silt, organic debris, and residual petroleum hydrocarbons from the parking lots. Evaluate
impacts of increased surface runoff, erosion at discharge points and along stream banks, and
compliance with water quality issues through proposed Best Management Practices. Consult with
the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Discuss erosion at discharge points and along erosion -
prone stream banks.
Grading The amount of proposed grading would be relatively minor. However, grading would
still be an interest of concern due to the potential impacts to the surrounding residential area.
Grading could create numerous secondary impacts, such as dust and traffic noise from trucks
carrying material to or from the site. In addition, examine the slope of proposed grading. Higher
sloping grades can create erosion problems and require proper drainage structures.
Seismic and landsliding Impacts Earthquakes could produce slope failures along creek banks,
and earthquake generated landslides could create flooding and mudflow damage to proposed
structures. Lateral spreading along creek banks can cause damage to nearby buildings. Review
current information on local areas of instability and recent historical failures in the arca. Review
foundation design recommendations, bank siting, and creek bank stabilization measures.
Debris flows A number of mapped landslides and debris basins are located in the upland creek
areas in the hills above the project site. Periods of intense rainfall or extremely wet winters can.
trigger mud and debris flows that can impact downslope development. According to Miller Pacific,
there is a low level of concern about the debris slides in the upstream drainages impacting the
property.
Develop Mitigation Measures
Potential mitigation treasures could include:
• Alternative stabilization plans Examine the use of gabions, regrading with gwtcxtilc mats and
vegetation, the use of retaining walls, and other designs. Examine alternative stabilization plans
from the standpoint of stream flow hydraulics, aesthetics, effects on wildlife, and other factors and
cross reference to other relevant sections of the EIR. Consult with the City, CDFG, and Corps
regarding the suitability of alternative stabilization plans.
• Steam velocity Recommend mitigations such as grouting of the proposed rip -rap or the
construction of small check dams, if 100 -year flood flows exceed specified limits.
• Runoff mitigations Examine the routing of surface runoff" to appropriate discharge locations,
construction of energy -dissipating structures, and construction of stormwater retention basins.
Seismic mitigations Examine the use of setbacks from potentially unstable banks, foundation
design, and bank stabilization.
HYDROLOGYAND DRAINAGE
This section will focus on. the increase in site peak flow rates, the potential of flooding, and storrnwater
8 ' d wnUgH3S0�1 `�13Ndd3M `N3NN3A Lb : EZ 96, 0Z d3S
Revisod Scope of Work
7ornfnlcan College ~or Plan EIR
quality.
Site peak flow rates The Dominican College expansion plan would increase the area of
impervious surface in the affected watersheds. The extent of new storm drain elements is likely to
be limited due to the close proximity of the proposed development to the drainagcways, These
combined influences would produce a minor increase in post -project peak flows from the site.
Flooding The 1984 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA.) Flood Insurance Rate Map
indicates that the entire campus is subject to shallow flooding during the 100 -year or greater events
(Zone B). Tbis means that flooding to depths of up to one foot can occur in the event of major
storms and / or obstructed culvert crossings. This flood hazard zone extends south-southwest from
the campus and covers a large residential area.
An initial site inspection revealed numerous small culvert crossings on the principal northeast -
southwest campus drainageway in front of the Residence Hall, Chapel, and Science and
Technology development sites. The small size of the culverts make them susceptible to debris
blockage during significant runoff events, While some in -channel debris deflectors have been
installed upstream of these culvert crossings, at Ieast one of these has partially failed. Any
obstruction of these small diameter (approximately 24 -inch) culvert inlets could lead to overbank
flooding on the roadways and adjacent floodplain areas.
Frequent flooding also occurs on Black Canyon Creek in the vicinity of the amphitheater which
would be expanded with implementation of the Master Plan. The creek channel actually runs
beneath the stage / pit area of the amphitheater in a 2.5- to 3.0 foot makeshift box culvert. In
contrast, the bed -to -bank channel depth upstream of the amphitheater area is upwards of 20 feet,
The combined effect of the constricted box undercrossing area and significant sediment deposition
upstream of the inlet produces an overland bypass flow through the pit area at the base of the
amphitheater seating arca. Creative alternatives exist for relocating the theater area and restoring
this portion of the creek. Such alteratives will be addressed as potential mitigations for on-site
flooding impacts.
Stormwater quality The potential conversion of gravel and other non -asphalted parking areas to
paved lots could increase the loading of petrochemical contaminants in the site's stormwater runoff.
Given the ultimate destination of watershed stormwater runoff (San Pablo Bay), any increase in
pollutant loading in site stormwater could be an issue of public concern,
Note that stream stabilization issues will be discussed in the Geology and Soils section of tho E1R. To
examine the above hydrologic concerns, we will:
Describe Existing Conditions
Research and review Obtain and review existing topographic maps, historical land use and
hydraulic structure design data, rainfall and runoff data, and geologic / hydrologic reports. Review
and document any existing information available from the FEMA Flood Insurance Program. Map
areas which could be susceptible to periodic flooding due to local culvert obstruction or
undersizing.
Contact intcrestcd agencies such as City departments, the Corps, CDFG, and Regional Water
Quality Control Board.
6' d wnU9H3S0N `N3Ndd3M `N3HN3A 8b : ET 96, 0T d3S
Revised Scope of Work
pomfnkan College Master Platy EIR
Available information on water quality is expected to be sparse. Compute concentrations of
representative urban stormwater pollutant constituents for prevailing area and site conditions, as
using studies published by the USEPA. These studies, related to the National Urban Runoff and
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) programs, target pollutants and
specify concentration thresholds for some of these pollutants.
Describe the existing hydrologic conditions inthe principal site watersheds and overall channel
conditions in the natural site draivagcways, including locations of significant bank erosion or
channel / culvert deposition. Obtain available information on the potential of an upstream
watershed landslide or debris flow and assess its implications on site culvert performance and flood
potential. Contact city engineering and maintenance personnel to de zrnnine if any existing on-site
or immediate downstream hydraulic structures are prone to clogging or malfunction.
Field review Visit the site to observe and document local charnel hydraulic conditions, .such as
evidence of hillslope erosion, landslides and debris flows in the upper watershed, riparian corridors,
existing land uses and watershed conditions, and the condition of potentially affected hydraulic
structures (e.g. culverts and debris deflectors) along both site drainages_ Map existing hydrologic
resources, including significant depositional areas for watershed sediment and debris (such as
culvert inlets and debris collection / deflector sites),
Peer review Conduct an independent assessment of any computations performed by the
applicant's civil engineer of storm drain system design and peak. flows_ Supplement with
independent computations of pre- and post -project peak flow rates for the ten-year, 25 -year, and
100 -year design rainstorms using the Rational Method. (Other .design rainstorms can be
substituted at the City's request.) Assess all existing site hydraulic structures for adequacy in
conveying project arca stormwater.
If additional information obtained during the site inspection and literature review indicates that
significant issues have not been addressed in the materials submitted by the applicant, these deficiencies
will be noted and further work recommended where necessary_
Identify Impacts
Review and evaluate the impacts of the proposed site plan on existing hydrologic conditions on the
project site and downstream; including building placement, grading, drainage, and channel stabilization.
Peak Clow and flooding potential Assess potential project impacts on peak flow rates and
flooding potential on-site and on peak flow and flooding impacts downstream,. Evaluate channel
and hydraulic structure capacity and flood potential resulting from increases in the 100 -year and
other selected design storm peak flow rates.
Water quality Computc and list post -project pollutant loadings for selected urban stormwater
pollutants.
,Develop Mitigation Measures
Develop mitigations to minimize or alleviate project impacts of peak flows and flooding to a less -than -
significant level or confirm impacts that are unmitigatable. Develop mitigations to satisfy NPDES and
,�T • wnuew2so�j `d3Ndd3M `�GHZd3A 6b :EZ 96, BZ d3S
"evlsed Scope of Work
Domink M Collage M&StW Plan EIR
other agency requirements. Mention all permits required for project construction, including the NPDES
General Construction Activity Permit, Corps Permit to Fill, and CDFG 1601 Stream Alteration
Agreements.
Assess both the need for and desirability of channel stabilization on Black Canyon Creek adjacent to the
proposed Recreation Center facility. Describe the hydrologic and habitat advantages and disadvantages
of various channel stabilization techniques. Examine alternative siting of the amphitheater and any
associated channel restoration work_
B/OTIC RESOURCES
This section will focus on the loss of mature trees and native vegetation, disturbance to the creek
corridors on the campus, and possible impacts on special -status spocics.
Prior reports on the site by LSA Associates include an inventory of trees with trunk diameters of ten
inches or greater, a Biological Assessment, and a Tree Evaluation. 2 LS.A.'s assessments conclude that
most tree removal would be Iimited to landscape ornamentals and that no special -status species would
be affected by proposed improvements, but the reports do not address the entire campus. Rather, LSA.
focuses on the proposed Recreation Center and parking in the Forest Meadows area.
In addition, the Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Miller Pacific Engineering Group is of
particular interest for future biological analyses. Although Miller Pacific indicates that the creek bank
west of the proposed Recreation Center is stable, the report recommends erosion protection along
approximately 200 feet of the east bank. Erosion protection is not described in detail but could involve
riprap, gabions, or sacked concrete. The RFP points out that LSA did not evaluate the impacts of
Miller Pacific's creek bank protection recommendations. No other modifications were proposed to this
or other creeks on the campus, and proposed development areas for other phases of the Master Plan
appear to be restricted outside creek. channels. Exceptions to this are two new bridges: one just north of
the amphitheater in the Forest Meadows area and one in the Academic Core to provide 'access to the
new Science and Technology building. It should be noted that the amphitheater actually sits on the
creek in the Forest Meadows area, with flows passing through a culvert and a cement bypass which
separates the stage from the seating area.
Describe Existing Conditions
Research and review Review existing sources of information about the project site and vicinity,
including environmental documentation for other development applications in the vicinity of the
project, USGS topographic maps, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetland
Inventory Maps, the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB), other technical literature,
and regional planning -documents and reports (including the San Rafael General Plan 2000).
Consult CDFG staff to determine concerns or specific knowledge of any sensitive resources in the
2 Biological Assessment Recreation Center and Creek, Dominican College of Sat Rafael, Marin County, Lit, I.SA
Associates, December 8, 1995; Tree Evaluation Dominican College San Rafael, Marin County, CA, ISA Associstos,
January 24, 1996; ,Biological Assessment Forest Meadows Parking.Pacility, Dominican College of San Rafael, Marin
County, CA, LSA Associates, November 30. 1995
Ib
w11jSN3S0�1 `Z13Ndc13M `N3M�3>1 6b : ET 96, OT d3S
Revised Scope of Work
Dominican College Mesnrr Plan FIR
project site vicinity, focusing on possible modifications to creek channels on the campus. Examine
records for occurrences of special -status species and sensitive natural communities maintained by
the CNDDB and information on sensitive or special -status species available from the City, County,
CDFG, USFWS, and California Native Plant Society (CNPS).
Biotic resources peer review Review all studies prepared by LSA to ensure all important issues
have been covered, the study methodology was adequate, that significant project impacts have been
identified, and that proposed mitigation would reduce impacts to less -than -significant levels.
Field review Conduct a field reconnaissance of the site, reviewing existing cover types, and
survey sensitive features, such as creek channels and areas of woodland cover. The reconnaissance
will determine existing vegetation types and wildlife habitat, the occurrence of possible wetland
features, and the presence of habitat suitable for special -status animal species. Determine the
adequacy of LSA's tree inventory and assessments for the Recreation Center vicinity. Although
detailed improvement plans and tree trunk mapping has not been prepared for other pbascs of the
Master flan, evaluate each area to provide a general sense of likely impacts on vegetation and tree
resources. Based on our initial visit to the site, wetlands appear to be limited to the creek channels,
and no detailed wetland delineation is proposed.
No detailed field surveys are proposed as part of this scope. Although it appears unlikely, there is
a remote possibility that supplemental surveys may be necessary to conclusively determine the
presence or absence of special -status species or seasonal wetlands located outside creek channels,
If considered necessary, the need for any supplemental surveys or wetland delineation will be made
following the field reconnaissance, and the revised scope and cost would be submitted for review
and authorization by the City.
Evaluate proposed bank modifications Evaluating the potential impacts from bank
modifications will be a major part of the EIR assessment of Recreation Center improvements. In
addition to possible tree loss associated with other phases of development, the major cumulative
biological issues appear to be disturbance of other creek segments by bridge crossings, possible
erosion control, and modifications to the amphitheater.
Identify biotic habitats Describe and illustrate biotic habitats, including the plant communities
and important biological features, such as creek corridors and mature trees, focusing on resources
in each of the proposed development areas. Identify potential habitats suitable for the occurrence
of special -status plant species (Federal- and Statc-listed threatened or endangered species and
CLAPS List 1B species). While the potential for special -status species appears remote due to the
extent of past disturbance, there remains a possibility that one or more raptor species may ;nest in
the mature trees on the campus which was not addressed by LSA. Inspecting proposed
development areas for active nests will be an important part of the EiR field reconnaissance,
Identify Impacts
Describe and quantify loss or impacts to biotic habitats, by acreage and / or number of species. This
will include:
Loss of mature trees and native vegetation Quantify the potential loss of trees in proposed
development areas and determine the impact.
M
_2T • ` - wnuEH3So�i `Z 13Mdd3M `d3MJ3A aS : E ti 96, OT d3S
Revised SCope of Work
Dmnlnk w College Master Plan E!R
Impacts to speciabstatus species Confirm the general absence of habitat to support special -
status species during the reconnaissance and focus the special -status species field effort on possible
nestil* activity by raptors.
Disturbance to creek corridors and riparian habitat Examine the potential impacts of erosion
protection along 200 feet of creek west of the proposed Recreation Caner, the construction of new
bridges, and any potential impacts associated with expansion of the amphitheater.
Develop Mitigation Measures
Identify mitigation measures in addition to applicant proposed measures, if necessary, This could
include control of public access, control of invasive exotics, or fencing and signing.
VISUAL AND AES1'HE7IC QUALITY
The Dominican College project site is somewhat unique in that it is surrounded largely by residential
uses. As is usually the case for projects near residences, homeowners are concerned about the effect of
new construction on the existing visual character of the neighborhood.
Visual analyses in E[Rs arc often criticized as being too subjective. For CEQA purposes, Nichols
Berman has developed a visual analysis methodology basad on U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land
Management systems originally developed to assess large-scale resource use and land management
programs on Federal land. 3 Our methodology attempts to objectively quantify a variety of changes in
certain visual elements and has been highly successful in recent Marin projects, such as the Lucasfrlm
and Easton Point EIRs. Four elements are commonly used to assess visual and aesthetic impacts:
• Form The shape or structure of something compared with the material of which it is composed
• Line The path, real or imagined, the eye follows when perceiving abrupt differences in form,
color, or texture, such as the edge of shapes or masses
• Color A hue contrasted with black, gray, or white
• Texture The visual or tactile surface characteristics of something
Formm is usually considered the most important of these elements, followed by line, color, and lastly
texture. A change in these visual elements can be considered significant depending on the degree of
change, the sensitivity of the area, and local conditions and policies.
Additionally, EIRs examine outer visual elements considered to be potentially significant, including light
and glare effects, and issues considered to be particularly important by the community. In San Rafael,
policies and plans have been adopted to protect the visual characteristics of the city_ Thesc will add or
modify the significance criteria and require an analysis of conformance with the project. These include
policies of the City of San Rafael General Plan 2000 and regulations of the City Zoning Ordinance.
3 National Forest Izwdscape Management Volume 2, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agrieultura Handbook Number
462, 1974; Irsual.Resource Management Program, Dcpartmcnt of the hiterior, Stock Number 074 -011 -Obi 16.6.
12
wnueH3Sod'�GHdd3W13W�13>i TS:ET 96, OT d3S
6T'd
Revised Scope of Work
Don#A101n College Nestor Man EJR
Policies and plans are discussed in the Land Use and Consistency with Plans section (above) and
embody a number of values and concerns of the City. A few important policies and requirements
include:
Policy LU -35 of the San Rafael General Plan 2000 addressing project design considerations, such
as sensitivity to natural landscapes and site features, compatibility with surrounding development,
and variation in building placement.
Policy LU -29 of the San Rafael Cseneral Plan 2000 addressing the visual effects of trec
preservation. Tree issues will also be covered in the .Biotic Rasourees section (also above) and
cross-referenced here.
Review Criteria for Design Review Permits in the City Zoning Ordinance, such as in Section
14.25.050. These criteria include preserving sensitive areas, such as creeks and drainageways,
acquiring materials and colors consistent with the surrounding area, and preventing exterior lighting
glare onto adjacent residential areas (in this case, the Dominican / Black Canyon neighborhood).
To examine the above issues, we will:
Describe Existing Conditions
+ Research and review Review background data on the site, including City plans, policies and
design guidelines, site plan maps, site topographic data, and architectural drawings,
• Field review Perform on-site reconnaissance to understand and verify data. Photograph the site
from a variety of potential simulation viewpoints. Verify site photography on £eld maps for use
with computer model. Additional field references will be identified and delineated on traps to help
verify computer modeling and viewpoint location.
• Visual characteristics of the site Describe existing visual characteristics including existing site
development, visual borders, prominent visual elements (such as trees and creeks), view corridors
and site lines with respect to pedestrian / vehicular circulation and from neighboring residential
areas,
• Visual characteristics of the city Describe visual characteristics, similarities, and contrasts of
commercial and residential neighborhoods in the city, focusing on properties such as the numerous
homes adjacent to the site.
• Plans and policies Describe and summarize relevant plan policies on visual impacts, including
the City of San Rafael General Plan 2000 and regulations of the City Zoning Ordinance,
Summarize Visual Changes
The Master plant covers the construction of buildings, parking areas, roadways, landscaping, lighting,
and grading. These would change a number of visual elements described above, such as form (through
building mass and locations), line (through the potential linear placement of buildings and landscaping),
and color and texture (through the building materials, type of landscaping, and vegetation to be used).
13
t7T • J wnuEiH3SOd `d3Ndd3M `�13N?13A TS : CZ 96, OT d3S
Re.vlsed Scope of. Work
Domintem College Mastar P/Qn ElR
Note that detailed architectural drawings exist only for the proposed Recreation Center. Detailed
drawings for other buildings are not available. Consequently we are recommending two levels' of detail
in photomontages in the ETR For the Recreation Ccnter, we will produce detailed, high-resolution
computer photo -simulations of the Recreation Center, using application materials such as site plans,
elevation plans, Iandscape plan,, grading plan, environmental and design review application materials,
ctc.
For the Science and Technology building, Chapel, and Residence Hall we will produce photomontages
that depict the buildings as solid models without architectural derail. For these buildings, we;will ask
the applicant to supply estimated building locations, footprints, and heights. If the applicant is unable
to supply this information, we will make assumptions on building locations, footprints, and heights in
conjunction with City staff. The tasks include:
Determine sensitive viewpoint locations Determine a number of sensitive viewpoints from
which the site is visible to a large number of people on a daily basis {during the field review
described above). With City staff select :final viewpoints based on the analysis of viewpoint
Iocations as described above, site reconnaissance, and public concerns.
Produce 3-0 computer models Produce 3-1) computer model of proposed Recreation Center
from topographic and architectural drawings supplied by the applicant. Produce 3-D conceptual
computer models of the proposed Science and Technology building, Chapel, and Residence Hall
from information supplied by the applicant (if available). If no information is available, we will
produce assumptions on building locations, footprints, and heights in conjunction with City staff.
Prepare visual simulations Prepare photomontages of the proposed project from sensitive
viewpoint locations, in order to compare the visibility and aesthetic character of the site under
present conditions ("before development") with simulations showing the approximate appearance
of the project ("after development"). Our budget provides for preparing six (6) color
photomontages. 'Me photomontages, as suggested by the City's Design Review Board,' are as
follows_
* The parking lot proposed for Forest Meadows should be viewed from ,the intersection of Watt
and Grand Avenues. The parking lot should be shown at the proposed finished grade and
silhouette the proposed and existing Iandscaping with five years growth.
• The recreation center building from a point on Acacia Avenue between Olive and Grand,
looking toward Grand Avenue.
• The science and technology building from a vantage point near the intersection of Palm and
Olive.
• The chapel, sited at the proposed location of the science and technology building from a point
near the intersection of Palm and Olive.
• The science and technology building at the site for the proposed chapel, from a vantage point
chosen by the consultant.
• The soccer field from a location on Belle Avenue.
to
.]T •J wnugN3S0z! `N3Ndd3M `N3Nd3A ZS :EZ 96, ati d3S
Rovlsed Scope of Work
pominkan Collego Master Plan EIR
It is anticipated that three photomontages will be done in a photo-rcalistic style and three
photomontages will be done as solid masses that present estimated building locations, heights and
masses. We can produce additional photomontages (color or black -and -white) if desired by the
City, at the rates discussed in the Budget section of the proposal. The final decision as to the
specific photomontages to be included in the EIR and the vintage points will be coordinated with
city staff and the Design Review Board.
Sample photomontages which illustrate our team's computerized graphic analysis methods and
simulation techniques are presented in the Easton Point EIR and in the appendix of this proposal,
Identify Impacts
We will describe visual impacts of the changes discussed above. The impact analysis will also serve to
develop the information needed to determine the conformance of the project with adopted plans and
policies, to be discussed in the Land Use and Consistency with Plans section of the EIR.
• Loss of visual open space Describe and illustrate how the project would affect the existing
visual open space character of the site (such as by development of the Forest Meadows area).
• Contrasts with the existing visible areas The scale, layout, or design of the project could
visually contrast with existing developmem in the area, including established nearby neighborhoods
and existing college facilities.
• Landscaping The Master Plan includes a conceptual landscape plan. Newly planted vegetation
could affect future views of the site and potentially could obstruct existing views.
• Alteration to topography Describe the visual effects from. alterations of site topography as a
result of project implementation, as discussed in the Geology and Soils section.
• Construction impacts Discuss short-term visual impacts from phased development of the entire
project and timing of buildout, such as incomplete or transitional appearance of the site while
construction occurs, only partial project screening until installation and / or maturity of
landscaping, etc.
Develop Mitigations
We will examine the cffectiveness of mitigations contained in the existing basic design concept of the
Recreation Center, such as landscaping. if necessary, we will develop additional mitigation measures.
Because no site plan is available for the remaining development proposed, more general mitigations will
be identified. Potential mitigation measures could include:
Siting of project buildings Successful mitigation would depend on sensitive siting of project
elements.
Visual screening Vegetative screening (either existing or future) could be used to hide or soften
the effects of development.
Buffers Mitigation could replace or enhance forest buffers.
15
�� • WfldHm3So�! `�OHdd3M `Z�3md3N ES : ET 96, eti d3S
SEP 10 '96 13:53 KERNER,11EPPNER,ROSENBRUM P.17
revised Scope of Work
Daminican college Master Plan ElR
Structurai restricC;ons Mitigation could limit the height, form, materials, or colors of buildings.
Cut and fill mitigation 'Visual mitigation for cutting and filling would depend on the severity of
land alterations. Obviously altered areas could be vegetated to soften or hide modifications, such
as by trailing ground covers or vides. Open areas of out and fill could be contoured to make a
smooth transition between earthwork and natural slopes and / or could be vegetated with native or
adapted local vegetation.
Design criteria Modifications or additions to project design criteria, if developed, could be
identified to reflect existing campus and other nearby structures. We will use or expand existing
City guidelines where possible, such as policies of the City of San Rafael General flan 000 and
regulations of the City Zoning Ordinance,
LIGHT AND GLARE STUDY
There would be an overall increase in the amount of light and glare produced on the project site once the
proposed project is completed. The major source of light would occur in the evening hours, as light is
produced by exterior lights and car headlights that could affect the nearby residential areas. The major
source of glare would be produced during daylight hours and would result from light reflecting off of
car windshields. A minor source of glare would be from the proposed buildings. Both light and glare
effects are discussed below.
Light
Nighttime sources of light can be extremely disruptive as they are highly visible interruptions in the
viewshed, and have the potential to be seen for miles if the geography and landscaping of the area does
not intervene. Complaints about night lighting are usually directed at 'light trespass" effects. Light
trespass is usually classed into three categories; light shining into windows, light shining into adjacent
property, and excessive brightness. 4
A landscape plan has been proposed to screen the Forest Meadows parking lot with "dense screen
plantings", including redwoods, pines, hedges, and groundcovers. 5 However, this screening could
conflict the .Police Deparunent goal of a clear view corridor into the parking lots for security: purposes.
Glare
Reflected light (glare) could be an impact during daylight hours, as light is reflected off of ground
objects, such as car windshields and building windows. Effects are different during different parts of
the year, as the elevation of the sun affects the direction of glare.
Describe Existing Conditions
Research and review Review background data on the site, including City plans, policies and
4 LiginingHandbookReferenee & Agpilexion, Illuminating Engineering Society of North America, Mark S. Rea, F.ditor,
1993, pagc 712.
5 Dorninican College of San Rafael Preluninary Site Plan, May 1, 1996, Fig. 7.
16
SEP 10 '96 13:54 KERNER,'cFPNER,ROSENBAUM P.19
wised Scope of Work
DomiMcan College MasterPlan OR
design guidelines, site plan maps, site: topographic data, and architectural drawings.
• Field review Perform on-site reconnaissance to understand and verify data. Identify view
corridors, with an emphasis on nearby residential homes.
Identify Impacts
Describe light and glare effects, including a discussion and graphics. Describe and illustrate how
reflected glare is influenced by the time of year and elevation of sun. Identify and illustrate areas where
light and glare effects would be apparent.
We will develop specific impacts from the Forest Meadows development. Because no site plan is
available for the remaining development proposed, more general impacts will be identified.
Light impacts could be expected from:
Exterior parking lat lights Exterior lights have been proposed for the Forest Meadows parking
lot. 6 These are high pressure sodium pole -mounted lights, with lights along Grand Avenue
utilizing shields to direct light into the parking light only.
Vehicle headlights During the evening hour, cars in the Forest Meadows parking lots would use
their headlights. Site plans indicate that some proposed parking spaces are directly facing
residential homes approximately 120 feet away. These lights could shine into adjacent residential
homes, especially if landscape screening is reduced or eliminated for security purposes.
Building lighting Building lighting could affect nearby residential areas, including interior
lighting, entrance lighting, and exterior floodlights or walkway lighting.
Glare impacts could be expected from:
Parked cars The Forest Meadows parking lot would be located south of the proposed Recreation
Center, and as a result would be exposed to sun throughout daylight hours. This could create glare
effects from parked cars. The whole body of a car could provide a potential source of glare, but
the most glare would occur from windshields. More glare from windshields would be expected to
result in the summer, as the sun is higher in the sky. This glare could affect nearby residences, and
possibly northbound traffic on Grand Avenue.
Building exteriors Building exteriors would be a minor source of glare. Lighter colors and some
materials (such as windows) reflect more light.
Note that the Dominican College Campus Development Plan (page 20) states that the proposed soccer
field will be used only during days and early evenings, and will only have security lighting. Therefore,
this scope does not include an analysis of any future soccer field illumination required for nighttime
games. Soccer is known for lighting purposes as a multidirectional aerial sport; this means that
players and spectators view the soccer ball from multiple viewing locations and positions. For aerial
sports, illuminating the area above the playing field is more important than ground -level illumination,
6 Dominican College of San flafagi PreliminarySile Plan, May 1, 1996. Fig. I
y►
SEP 10 '96 13:54 KERNER-'•IEPPNER, ROSENBAUM P.19
,evised Scope of Work
DCMMI Un Gallego Master Plan EIR
As this sport requires viewing a fast-moving object, high illumination is usually required. If the
applicant revises the project description to include nighttime lighting, then we can expand this scope as
required.
Develop Mitigations
We will develop specific mitigation for the Forest Meadows site. Because no site plan is available for
the remaining development proposed, more general mitigations will be identified. Mitigations could
include:
Restrictions on lighting intensity Fighting intensity could be selected to provide the minimum
sufficient security lighting. Security lighting can usually be at lower levels at times when the area
is not at use. For example, large open areas seldom require more than 0.5 to 2.0 foot -candies of
illumination. This would depend on the brightness of the surrounding area, and proposed goals of
the lighting (for example, to see anyone moving in the arca, or to allow the surveillance of an area
through close -circuit television cameras which require a minimum illumination depending upon
model).
Shielding of light sources frights can be focused downwards and / or shielded- Lighting
elements can be recessed within their fixtures, or concealing lights behind vegetation, to prevent
glare -
Orientation of parking spaces Outside parking areas could be oriented to ensure that car
headlights do not interfere with surrounding areas.
Construction material Roadway, pavement, and building surfaces (including windows) can be
selected to minimize reflected light.
• Screening Screening could block certain light effects. For instance, headlight -level hedges could
block car headlights while still allowing a visual line of sight for security purposes.
TRAFFIC AND PARKING
This section will focus on three major aspects of traffic:
Parking A major concern of residents is how the project would affect parking in the
neighborhood, especially during special events. The proposed project includes planned seating for
1,426 people in the Recreation Center and expanding the existing amphitheater in Forest Meadows
from 600 seats to as many as 1,000 seats. 7 DKS examined parking demand during weekday peak
hours and also for weekend demand from day students. We will confirm DKS findings,
However, it is likely that major events would occur at the new Recreation Center and expanded
amphitheater outside typical peak hours and weekend student hours. There is a substantial
potential for impacts due to the parking demand for such events which the EIR will also examine,
7 LcUr to Sheila Uelimont from Cccilia Bridges, July 10, 1996.
1s
Revised Scope of Work
Dominican Cortege Mascot Plan OR
Intersection level of service Expanding the college would increase traffic and further degrade
the level of service of intersections in the arca,
Emergency access routes A number of residents and County officials have expressed concern
about the availability of emergency access routes, both to provide access to the area for emergency
vehicles and an escape route for residents.
Describe Existing Conditions
• Research and review Review applicant materials, the San Rafael General Plan 2000
Circulation Element, and other relevant information, such as the most recent traffic counts
available from the City.
• Peer review Independently review the accuracy and adequacy of trip generation, distribution
assumptions, and parking assumptions in the Dominican College Transportation Study and
Dominican College Campus Parking / 7'raffrc Management ,Plan, 8
Field review Observe existing roadway and traffic conditions in the field.
• Collect turning movement counts Collect turning movement counts for the AM peak hour for
the eight existing intersections in the DKS analysis and the AM and PM peak periods for Lincoln
Avenue / Linden Lane. It is assumed that AM and PM peak hour counts will be available from the
City for the remainder of the intersections.
Describe study intersections Describe existing traffic conditions and level of service results for
the study intersections based on an evaluation of physical conditions and a review of existing
traffic volumes. Include a level of service summary table and figures showing peals hour and daily
traffic.
Analysis Methodologies and Significance Criteria
The traffic analysis wilt be based on critical traffic issues which include intersection level of service
(LOS), roadway capacity and level of service, turn lane warrants, and traffic signal warrants, It should
be noted that all of the intersection methodologies which will be used result in an average delay per
vehicle as the factor which determines level of service, This process is more understandable by non -
traffic engineers and more comparable to actual field conditions.
Study area and intersections to be analyzed The study area will consist primarily of Grand
Avenue from Linden Lane to 5th Street, Irwin Street from 2nd Street to Mission. Avenue,
Hctherton Street from Mission Avenue to 2nd Street, the intersections included in the previous
study performed by DKS, and the 12 additional intersections identified by City staff. The study
intersections are,
$ Dominican College Campus Development Flan Trow ortation Study, DKS Associates, May 1996, Dominican College
Campus Parking / Trak Management Platt, DKS Associates, May 1991.
19
02 • C2 wntjEN3S0�l `�13Ndd3M `�13NN3>1 SS :ET 96, ati d3S
Revised Scope of Work
Dominlwn GbNege 1D OMW Plan EIR
o Grand Avenue / Linden Lane -Elm Street
CT Grand Avenue / Mountain View Drive
13 Grand Avenue / Locust Street
• Grand Avenue / Acacia Avenue
• Grand Avenue / Jewell Street
• Grand Avenue / Belle Avenue (south)
• Grand Avenue / Mission Avenue
• Grand Avenue / 5th Avenue
• Grand Avenue / Forest Meadows Lot Driveway
• Irwin Street / 2nd Street
Irwin Street / 3rd Street
Irwin Street / 4th Street
Irwin Street / 5th Avenue
Irwin Street / Mission Avenue
Hetherton Street / Mission Avenue
Hetherton Street / 5th. Avenue
Hetherton Street / 4th Street
° Hetherton Street / 3rd Street
Hctherton Street / 2nd Street
Highway 1.01 South Ramps / Lincoln Avenue
Lincoln Avenue / Linden Lane
• Period of analysis Weekday AM and PM peak hours. It should be noted that a PM peak hour
analysis has been completed previously and will be reviewed and incorporated in the EIR, if
desired_
• Analysis scenarios Evaluate the following scenarios:
° Existing plus approved (baseline)
• Cumulative (General Plan buildout, including existing zoning designations)
• Baseline plus Phase I
13 Baseline plus Phases I and II
Cumulative plus Phases I, Il, and III
o Cumulative plus Phases I, II, III, and IV
Identify Impacts
• intersection level of service Determine future traffic conditions and levels of service for the
study intersections.
• Parking The transportation study prepared by DKS evaluates parking demand for weekday peak
hours and for weekend demand from day students_ In our analysis, consideration will be given to
use of on -street parking only .for existing uses, with all future uses providing adequate off-street
parking. The number of off-street parking spaces needed will be tied to the various phases of the
Master Plan. To review the DKS report, we will:
11 Verify the parking counts and inventory presented in the DKS report though additional counts
20
TE•J wnueN3SOd`dDNdd3M`d3Nd3A 99:EZ 96, OT d3S
revised Scope of Work
vmWcan C41IM a Mast Plan EIR
o Project the number of spaces needed in the future
d Evaluate the adequacy of parking adjacent to Calereuga Hall and evaluate proposed Parking 16t
phasing
In addition, we will analyze the parking supply which would be available during special events in
the evenings and on weekends. We will:
a Perform a parking occupancy count during the early evening hours and on a weekend afternoon
Estimate the maximum sized special cvent(s) which could be accommodated (singly or in
combination) based on the available parking supply
Using the above information, we will amend the Dominican College Campus Parking / Traffic
Management Plan to provide more complete details for handling traffic both on a daily basis and
for large events,
Emergency evacuation routes Evaluate the street system in the vicinity of the project site for
potential routes to be used in case of a fire or other emergency, Discuss any deficiencies of these
routes, such as restricted width due to on-strcct parking,
Develop Mitigations
• Traffic, measures Recommend specific traffic control and geometric mitigation measures which
would be necessary to maintain acceptable traffic conditions in the study area with the addition of
the project, according to standards established in the City of San Rafael General Plan 2000 or
other appropriate sti3ndards.
• Fair share issues Consider the fair -share contribution to the cost of installing a traffic signal at
Mission Avenue / Grand Avenue.
• Parking Evaluate and recommend additional parking lot locations, additional on-site parldng, and
other measures to address parking adequacy. Discuss the maximum sized event which could be
accommodated during evenings and weekends.
• Transit Evaluate potential changes to bus service to accommodate college schedules or special
events, including bus pullouts.
• PeelesWan Consider on-sitc pedestrian movement arrangements, including crosswalk locations.
Evacuation routes Recommend options for providing adequate emergency access.
AIR QUALITY
The major focus of this analysis will be to address construction air quality impacts from fine particulate
matter (PM -10) emissions, as well as localized air pollutant emissions at intersections associated with
traffic generated by special events, such as amphitheater shows and sporting matches.
zi
22,J
wnUEN3SOd `�13Ndd3M `Z13Nd3>1 9S : EZ 9G, OT d3S
SEP 10 '96 13:57 KERNER ''r-PPNER,ROSENBAUM r
revised Scope of (Mork
Dominican College Master Plan E!R
Describe Existing Conditions
Collect information Assemble and evaluate existing air quality data., analyses, and reports
published by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), the California AiF
R=urces Board (CARE), and other agencies on measured levels of air quality and the location of
air pollution sources.
Describe information Describe the climate and meteorology of the San Rafael area, existing air
quality environment (based on historical air quality monitoring data for the area), the regulatory
environment, and current efforts to attain and maintain State and Federal air quality ,standards.
Identify and describe criteria air pollutants. Identify existing major air pollution sources. Identify
and describe sensitive receptors which could be affected by the project (such as the nearby
Coleman Elementary School).
Identify Impacts
Local impacts Assess localized air quality impacts by modeling future carbon monoxide
concentrations at up to three major intersections affected by the project. Model roadside carbons
monoxide levels using the CALINE4 computer model along with emission factors generated from
the latest version of the EMFAC model. Predict future carbon monoxide concentrations by adding
roadside carbon monoxide levels to appropriate background levels' recommended by the
BAAQMD. Assess future carbon monoxide concentrations at receptors adjacent to proposed
parking -facilities. Evaluate the significance of future carbon monoxide concentrations against both
no development and State and Federal air quality standards.
Regional impacts Assess regional impacts to evaluate conformance with the San Rafael General
Plan 2000. Analyze regional changes in traffic emissions based on future travel and speed data.
Develop composite fleet vehicle emission rates using the most recent approved emission factor;
model. Evaluate the significance of the net change in emissions resulting from project buildout
against thresholds for significance recommended by the BAAQMD.
Construction Impacts Assess dust generation which could lead to localized exceedances of the;
fine particulate matter (PM -10) standard. Analyze the potential for adverse air quality impacts!
from equipment disturbance and wind blown dust, based on the size of the constructionareas, the i
duration of disturbance, prevailing winds, and proximity of sensitive receptors to construction
areas.
Toxic fumes impacts Discuss the potential of impacts of toxic fiunes from development, such as
from the proposed Science and Technology building. Contact the California Office of
Environmental Health Hazards Assessment (OEH HA) and National Air Toxics Information
Clearinghouse to assist this effort. Cross-reference this discussion with the Hazardous
Substances section of the EIR (described below).
Develop Mitigations
Develop mitigation measures, including appropriate measures to reduce PM -10 emissions from i
construction areas. Evaluate the effectiveness of mitigation measures based on published data presented
:3
i
Revised Scope of work
'10mlMean College Maxtor Plan E1R
by the 13AAQMD or other agencies.
NOISE
The focus of this analysis will be on special event noise (such as that associated with the expanded
amphitheater), noise created by sporting events (such as from the proposed soccer field on adjacent
residences across Belle Avenue and from the Recreation Center), noise associated with the proposed
Residence Hall, traffic noise, and construction noise.
Describe Existing Conditions
• Timmic noise Conduct background noise measurements at three or more locations for a period of
24 hours each. Conduct additional spot measurements as -accessary.
Sporting noise Visit the campus during a soccer game this fall to obtain data. Use data collected
to project noise exposures for the proposed soccer field.
• Special events Visit the amphitheater to make noise measurements during a performance or
event, if possible.
Identify Impacts and Develop Mitigation Measures
Project noise levels for all proposed activities, including soccer games, use of the amphitheater during
special events, activity in the Recreation Center (we have data obtained at similar recreation centers that
we can use to project noise levels into the adjacent community), the Residence Hall (we have data from
studies done in Berkeley at college residence halls), and construction noise. Compare projected noise
levels to existing background noise levels and applicable City of San Rafael criteria.
PUBLIC SERVICES /HEALTH AND SAFETY
A variety of public agencies would provide public services to the site. In this section of the Elft, we
will discuss increased demands on public service and utility providers to serve the proposed uses.
Water Supply
The Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD) treats and distributes water in the San Rafael area.
MMWD facilities include six area reservoirs, two water treatment plants, and various storagt tanks,
pumps, and water mains. Waxer sources include rainfall and some water £rom the North Marin Water
District's Russian River Supply. To analyze potential impacts on MMWD, we will:
Describe Existing Conditions
Use existing information and interviews with representatives of the MMWD to summarize the existing
distribution system in and adjacent to the project site (including locations, capacities, and sizes of mains
and water tanks), existing average daily flow, peak demand, water pressure, and annual use in -relation
to supply.
23
bZ ' d wnb9N3S0N `d3Ndd3M `N3W63A LS : ET 96, 0T 4-4q
'Revised Scope of Work
Dominkon t:o►►ege Master Plan EIR
identify Impacts
Estimate future water use Identify water use rates for planned uses based on estimates provided
by the MMWD, calculate average daily demand and annual use by future development, and
determine planned improvements (if any) to water distribution facilities and phasing of
improvements_
Detail necessary improvements Coordinate with both the MMWD and the San Rafael Fire
Department to determine and confirm necessary improvements (such as any improvements needed
to increase water pressure in the arca).
Identify Mitigations
If necessary, measures could include increased main sines or restrictions on activities or facilities which
would generate extremely high demands (such as irrigated landscaping). Measures designed to reduce
water use (including MMWD Water Conservation Ordinance 326) will be described in the Energy
Conservalion section (discussed below) and cross-referenced in this section.
Water supply and pressure for firefighting purposes are discussed in Emergency Services (immediately
below).
Emergency Services
The San Rafael Fire Department (SRFD) serves the City of San Rafael. The SRFD also provides
paramedic service for medical emergency calls_ The San Rafael Police Department (SRPF) provides
police service to the City of San Rafael. To assess emergency service impacts, we will:
,Describe Existing Conditions
Examine existing and projected conditions, service areas_ personnel, facilities, average response times
for emergency calls, planned acquisition of equipment, facilities, or personnel, any particular problems
or concerns the departments are currently encountering which may affect service provided to the site,
and sources of mutual aid.
24
SZ • J _ wnus 3so� `�oNdd3M `d3Nz 13N es : EZ 96, eZ d3S
Rev/sed Scope of Work
Dominlcan College Masher plan OR
Identify Impacts
Contact representatives of the San Rafael Fire and Police Departments to identify concerns, Identify
specific impacts associated with site development, such as:
Increased service demands Describe the estimated number of service calls the project would
generate and response times for emergency services (police, fire, and ambulance). Discuss
potential personnel or equipment needs (or proportionate need) attributable to development.
• Emergency water supply Address the adequacy or inadequacy of fire flows and water pressure
in the area and water distribution requirements, This section will be cross-referenced with the
Water Supply section of the FIR (described above).
• Fuel management Discuss the potential threat of wildfires, including the effects of slope,
vegetation types, introduced landscaping and vegetation, wildland-building fire exposure, and
defensible space, Identify any pyrophytes (extremely flammable plants with high oil or resin
contents) present or proposed for project landscaping (such as the numerous Eucalyptus trees in
the area), as well as any hazardous vegetative conditions.
• Security Consult with the SRPD about the lack of a clear view corridor into the proposed Forest
Meadows parking lot.
• Emergency access Analyze evacuation routes and emergency access. This section will be cross-
referenced with the Traffic anti Parking section of the EIR (described above).
• Construction impacts Assess emergency vehicular access in the event that existing roadways
could be partly or entirely closed during construction. Discuss the increased police calls which
could be generated during construction.
Develop Mitigations
Mitigation measures could include landscaping recommendations to reduce wildfire impacts or
construction period guidelines to minimize potential service level decreases in the area. Discuss the
feasibility of providing a private security patrol to the campus parking areas. Discuss the secondary
visual impact associated with decreased screening of parking lots as a mitigation for security concerns.
Hazardous Substances
The Sara Rafael Fire Department is also the lead agency in the Marin County Hazardous Materials
Response Team, a Joint Powers Agreement (IPA)_ The SRFD provides hazardous materials' inspection
and enforcement in the City of San Rafael. If any hazardous materials, emergency occurred at
Dominican College, the SRFD would respond. To assess hazardous materials impacts, we will:
Describe Existing Conditions
Describe San Rafael policies on hazardous wastes. Examine current hazardous materials currently used
on Dominican College. List representative materials, where they are stored, and their dangers from the
Hazardous Materials Management Plan on file at San Rafael Fire Department offices.
25
92 • c wnugNMO0 ] `d3Ndd3M `�13N?13A eg : Et 96, BZ d3S
Revised Scope of Work
Dominican College MasW Plan OR
IderJtify Impacts and Develop Mitigations
Contact representatives of the San Rafael Fire Department to identify potential impacts from
development. Contact Dominican College representatives to determine if any new materials are planned
to be used (for example, chemicals in the new Science building). In our experience, the major source of
new hazardous materials for developments such as these are associated with pool use.
ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Archeological field reconnaissance and subsurface test excavations by Holman and Associates have
established that a significant resource (CA -Mm -254) is preseut on the project site at a location
proposed for use as a parking lot. The focus of this section will be to determine the viability of the
applicant's mitigations and to assess the potential for additional archeological resources within the
proposed development arca.
Describe Existing Conditions
Peer review Conduct a peer review of existing archaeological investigation reports, including the
reports and auger boring logs of Holman and Associates.
Field review Conduct a field reconnaissance of the proposed development area and assess the
potential for additional archaeological resources. As discussed in the Holman and Associates'
report, additional field review is needed at two locations ("Edge Dill and the Meadowlands"),
where the new Science and Technology building is planned. If additional archeological resources
are discovered, discussions will likely include recommendations for subsurface investigations to
determine importance in accordance with CFQA Guidelines' Appendix K requirements.
Identify Impacts
impacts to resources Identify foreseeable impacts for any listed and / or inventoried resources,
using project information and graphic representations of resource locations. We will assess
impacts qualitatively.
Native American concerns Consult with local Native American representatives and designated
Most Likely Descendant(s) regarding mitigation plans and alternatives for CA -Mm -254 to ensure
that archeological resource plans are compatible with Native American concerns.
Develop Mitigations
Adequacy of applicant measures Determine the adequacy of the applicant's proposed
mitigation measures for potential impacts to CA -Mm -254. Explore the viability of alternative
mitigation and management plans.
Describe mitigation Discuss mitigation measures to be used should archeological or historical
resources be discovered during construction.
25
L3 _d Wnuew3Sod`d3Ndd3M`d3N�13A 6S:Sti 96, OT d3S
Devised Scope of Work
Dm"Inlean cwlege Master Plan EiR
ENERGY CONSERVATION
In this section of the EIR, we will describe the potential for energy conservation on the site, such as
through solar heating and cooling system. A number of factors influence the efficiency of solar
collectors:
odenhWon A rule of thumb is that any solar collector area should face within 20 degrees of true
south. However, in areas with morning fog, a slight southwest orientation may prove more
favorable.
Tilt The type of system influences the optimum tilt of the collectors. If heat in the winter is the
primary goal, the tilt should be at a higher angle, to catch the sun lower on the horizon. If summer
cooling is the primary goal, the tilt should be much less, to catch the sun higher in the sky. If both
heating and cooling is required, a more average tilt may be desirable.
Shading Adjacent building and landscaping which can block the sun must be taken into account.
This section will describe in more detail the potential for solar systems at the Recreation Center, since
this is the only Master plan element which includes a detailed site plan. The potential for solar systems
for other Master Plan elements will be described in more general terms.
Measures designed to reduce water use (including MMWD Water Conservation Ordinance 326) will
also be described in this section.
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT
The RFP lists nine diffe=t alternatives to be considered.. We have broken these alternatives into the
following broad categories:
No project altematfves CEQA, requires every EIR to evaluate a "no project" alternative. .Stare
CE'QA Guidelines' section 15I26, subdivision (d)(4) states that the "no project" analysis shall
discuss existing conditions, as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the
foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with
available infrastructure and community services, A "no project" alternative, therefore, must look
at both existing conditions and a future buildout scenario (that is, what likely would eventually
occur on-site if the project application is denied).
Therefore, we will evaluate two "no project" alternatives. The hast No Project Alternative will
assume that no new development would occur on the project site and there would be no changes to
existing conditions, thus maintaining the status quo. The second No Project Alternative will
evaluate what could be expected to occur based on current plans. In ties No Project Alternative,
we will assume that the Forest Meadows parcel would be developed consistent with the existing
General Plan and zoning designations.
Altematives to the loca fon of buildings in the Academic Core We will evaluate:
a Relocation of the Science and Technology Building to the Chapel site at Magnolia and Acacia
Avenues and relocation of the Chapel to an appropriate site
`J
LJ wnuaN3Sod `d3Ndd3M `�GNZ13>1 6S : Eti 96, aS d3S
Ravised Scope of Work
unAckan College Master Plan EIR
Relocation of the Science and Technology Building to the site of the present Science Building
with a construction schedule which allows a temporary science / lab facility at the present
Iocation of the Angelico Hall parking lot to enable uninterrupted continuation of the College's
ongoing science program, demolition of the existing Science Building, and construction of a
new permanent Science and Technology Building at that present location
Alternatives which relocate proposed facilities to the Forest Meadows site We will
evaluate -
An alternative which locates the new Science and Technology Building on Grand Avenue (at the
proposed Recreation Center site), locates the Recreation Center on the corner of Belle and
Grand Avenue (at the project's proposed 90 -space parking lot), and locates the 90 -space
parking lot on Palm and Olive Avenues (at the proposed Science and Technology site)
Cl An alternative which locates the new Science and Technology Building on Grand Avenue (at the
proposed Recreation Center site), locates the Recreation Center on the corner of Belle Avenue
(at the project's proposed soccer field), and Iocates a soccer field at Palm and Olive Avenues (at
the proposed Science and Technology site)
An alternative which locates the new Science and Technology Building on Grand Avenue {at the
proposed Recreation Center site), locates the Recreation Center on the corner of Belle and
Grand Avenue (at the project's proposed 90 -space parking lot), locates the proposed Chapel and
a parking lot on Magnolia and Acacia Avenue (at the proposed Science and Technology site),
and locates a parking lot on Magnolia and Acacia Avenues (at the proposed Chapel site) for a
total of 90 parking spaces in the two lots
Off-site altematives Since the proposed project would intensify an existing site, an off-site
alternative per se probably is not relevant for this project. However, we, will evaluate two aspects
of the project as part of the alternative site analysis. We will:
Evaluate the potential use of the college's vacant hillside parcels as a potential Iocation for one
or more elements of the proposed project
Evaluate the potential of locating the soccer field in an alternative site location in order to limit
parking and traffic intensification of the site
We will work with City staff to identify alternative off-site locations where project imacts could
be reduced. We will not have gathered environmental information for the off-site location, thus
necessarily requiring a qualitative assessment of the off-site alternative. Therefore, we will rely on
City staff and existing data to identify and assess off-site alternatives.
• Mitigated AHemadve A "mitigated design" or environmentally superior alternative.
Based on an initial evaluation of the alternatives we will test the feasibility of the alternatives to
determine which are feasible (and should be assessed in further detail) and which not feasible (and
should not be assessed further). For those alternatives considered feasible, we will:
Assess the alternatives in terms of differences in outcome compared with the proposed project
Compare the project and all alternatives in a summary table
Identify the environmentally superior alternative
28
62'd wnU9N3S0N'N3Ndd3M`N3NN3A 00:VT 96, 0T d3S
SEP 10 '96 14:01 KERNER,''c:PPNER,ROSENBAUM P.30
evised Scope of Work
Dominican College Master Plan E.1R
For those alternatives rejected as infeasible, we will explain why each alternative was considered
infeasible.
The RFP also requests that the EIR consider the "economic feasibility" of the alternatives. According to
CEQA, a economic impact itself is not considered to be a significant effect on the environment. Section
21068 of CEQA states that an effect is significant if it results in a "substantial, or potentially]
substantial, adverse change in the environment". Section 1513l(a) of the CEQA Guidelines states that
"economic or social effects shall not be treated as significant effects on the environment". However,
even if economic effects clearly would not result in direct or indirect physical impacts, such information
often is included in an EIR to facilitate later stages of the planning process. Section 1513l(c) of the
Guidelines states that "economic ... factors shall be considered by public agencies together with
technological and environmental factors in deciding whether changes in a project are feasible to reduce
or avoid the significant effects on the environment identified in the EIR".
Therefore, we will discuss the economic factors involved in the project and the alternatives to help the
public and decision -makers understand the costs of the project and whether proposed mitigations would
be "feasible". We will require information from the applicant for this analysis, such as the estimated
construction costs for the Recreation Center and assumptions regarding the construction of the other
facilities proposed in the Master Plan_
IMPACT OVERVIEW
This part of the EIR will focus on growth inducing and cumulative impacts of the project and will
summarize significant adverse impacts and effects of no significance. Senate Bill 749 (SB 749) in 1995
eliminated an analysis previously mandated for projects involving General Plan Amendments or
rezonings. Thus, the EIR will omit discussion of the "relationship between short-term uses of man's
environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity".
Any significant irreversible environmental changes which would be involved in the proposed
project. Section 15126(1) of the CEQA Guidelines requires Ellts to discuss irreversible
environmental changes. Depending on the ultimate framework of the Master Plan, development
could create an irreversible commitment to urban uses (including the loss of open space), increased
runoff due to an expansion of impervious surfaces, public service utility demands, visual changes,
and traffic generation requiring provision of permanent facilities not reversible during the "life" of
development. In addition, the use of non-renewable resources during the initial and continued
phases could be irreversible, since a large commitment of such resources would make removal or
non-use thereafter unlikely.
• Growth inducing impacts Section 15126(g) of the CEQA Guidelines requires EIRs to discuss
the ways in which a project could foster economic or population growth or the construction of
additional housing (either directly or indirectly) in the surrounding environment.
Other growth inducing effects arc also possible. A proposed project can have a growth inducing
impact if development of that project removes obstacles to future development. One type of
growth inducing impact is purely physical, by creating and making available infrastructure that can
lead to future development. This type of impact can include the construction of water, sewer, and
other urban services into previously unconnected areas. A second type of impact can be the setting
of precedents which might allow similar but unplanned development to occur in the future or
29
SEP 10 196 14:01 KERNER,Lk_PPNER,ROSENBAUM P.31
evised Scope of Work
Daminkm Colleg* Master Plan M
prematurely. Examples include a project which allows growth in an area previously closed to
development or allowed development in an area which was previously closed to that particular type
of use (such as allowing non-residential development in a residential area).
Significant adverse impacts and effects of no significance We will list these effects to
summarize the outcome of the project. This may include an explanation of topics eliminated From
analysis by the Initial Study or topics selected for review but, upon closer evaluation were found
to result in less -than -significant effects and, thus, were dismissed from further consideration.
Cumulative impacts This section of the EIR will summarize the findings of the topic -by -topic
cumulative impact analyses presented in the .Environmental Analysis. As noted above, we expect
that the hydrology, biology, traffic, air quality, and public service assessments and potentially other
topical evaluations could contain analyses of cumulative impacts.
APPENDICES
This final part of the Draft Elft will list and provide:
• Report preparers
• People and organizations contacted
• Bibliography
• 'Technical appendices supporting the EIR text
FINAL E1R
The Final EIR will consist of the Draft EIR (modified, as necessary, in response to comments on the
E[R) and will add Responses to Comments and Mitigation Monitoring Program chapters.
Responses to Comments In this section we will:
List all individuals and organizations who submitted comments on the City on the Draft EIR
during the public review period, including in writing or orally (at the public hearings)
Present each letter or meeting minutes' comment and respond to comments asking questions
about the project's environmental consequences or about the EIR's adequacy (but not respond to
comments on the project's merits)
Identify changes to the Draft EIR text in response to comments and make rhe appropriate text
changes
Append any additional analyses conducted in response to comments or indicate where such
background materials are available for public inspection
Mitigation Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Programs are designed to ensure compliance
during project implementation. The Mitigation Monitoring Program will be included as a part of
the Draft EIR and will:
a Indicate which measure(s) identified in the EIR would be required to mitigate a significant
30
�visedl'IScope of,Work
Dominkah CoNege Master Plan E R
adverse impact of the project
Identify the effectiveness of each measure and indicate the cxtcnt to which the measure would
be successful in reducing or eliminating significant adverse impacts
Identify secondary effects of measures (if any) and discuss the extent to which implementing
one measure to mitigate one impact could result in another unintentional but adverse impact
Provide standards or means to measure the effectiveness of mitigation
Designate who would be responsible for implementing each measure, whether the City, another
agency or special district, or the applicant
Identify reporting requirements and responsibility for monitoring their implementation acid state
when each measure should be initiated and should be considered complete
31
�E • d wnU9W3S0N `N3Ndd3M `d3HZ l3A 20 : V T 96, OT d3S
BUDGET
This section provides the information requested in RFP item 5. Our budget covers all professional
labor, support labor, direct costs, and attendance at meetings and hearings held on the EIR. The budget
is summarized as follows:
Profmional Labor
• Draft EIR
$76,580
• Final EIR
$17,847
Direct Costs
$11,700
Total EIR
$106,127
This budget is based on current hourly rates. The hourly rates of Nichols • Berman and our EIR study
team members are presented in the appendix. This budget is broken down on the following page.
BUDGET ASSUMPTIONS
Our budget is based on the assumptions listed below.
PRIN77MG OF REPORTS
We will print and deliver 168 reports, as follows:
• Eight (8) copies of the Administrative Draft EIR
• One (1) preprint copy of the Draft ETR
• 75 copies of the Draft EIR (plus one reproducible master)
• Eight (8) copies of the Administrative Final EIR
• One (1) preprint copy of the Final EIR
• 75 copies of the Final EIR (plus one reproducible master)
DISTRIBUTION OF DRAFT FIRS
We have assumed responsibility for delivering the Draft EIRs to the State Clearinghouse in Sacramento
and mailing Draft EMs to a maximum of 40 addresses. No costs for the distribution of the Final EIR
have been assumed.
TRAFFIC COUNTS
The direct costs include the cost to complete the AM and PM traffic turning movement counts and the
parking inventory described in the .Scope of Work.
ATTENDANCE AT MEETINGS AND HEARINGS
Bob Bcrman will represent Nichols • Berman, and the EIR preparers at mcctings and hearings on the
SS •d wnH9H3S0d `H3Ndd3M `a3H�1371 20:bT 96, 0T d3S
Revisod Budget
o►eink4n Cofkp Afts Bf Plan EIR
EIR.
Bob Berman will attend the following public meetings and hearings:
Two neighborhood meetings (one of which may be an information Planning Commission meeting)
Four (4) public hearings (Planning Commission and City Council)
Bob Berman will also meet with City staff at appropriate study checkpoints.
We have also assumed that a representative of Whitlock & Wienberger will attend the two
neighborhood meetings and two of the public hearings. A representative of each of the EIR study team
members will attend the kick-off meeting and site visit in Task 1.3. Their budgets include other
meetings and interviews as a normal part of their work.
if specifically requested, Nichols • Berman could attend additional hearings and / or other ETR study
team members could attend additional public hearings. We would do so on a time -and -materials' basis
according to our standard hourly rates.
INSURANCE
We have reviewed the City's insurance requirements (RFP item 11) and are committed to maintaining
the insurance requested for the duration of the contract.
PREPARATION OF FINAL EIR
As stated in RFP, it is extremely difficult to estimate the cost of preparing the Final EIR. It depends on
the number of comments, the scope of comments, and the need for additional analyses. For estimation
purposes, our budget allocates approximately 241 hours to respond to comments and prepare the Final
EIR. Because of the uncertainties in preparing the Response to Comments, we have found it desirable
to meet with staff after receipt of comments to discuss the level of effort required to prepare adequate
responses. Thcrcforc, we propose to meat with City staff (as outlined in Task 7.1) and determine if the
number and complexity of comments require additional effort beyond what we have estimated in this
budget.
OPTIONAL ITEMS
Our budget covers the cost to prepare a total of five photomontages of the proposed project. As an
option, the City could request us to prepare additional photomontages as a part of our scope of work.
Additional photomontages, using the computer models developed for the five montages noted above,
would cost $850 each for high resolution and $650 for solid model viewpoint. Should the City decide to
add or subtract the number of photomontages, this will affect the overall budget.
Our budget also covers the preparation of and reproduction of color photomontage in the Dram and
Final EMs. Presenting the photomontages in black and white, would reduce the printing cost by
approximately $1,200.
tic • d wnugWMC0 J `d3Ndd3M `�13HN3>1 E0 : bS 96, 0ti d3S
Gti C:D Cl
O w
RVP
~ {r9
M O
N
4s r4
k n CZ
00 b C-
•rr �
• „•'„
Ct '�' ChN m in �
' ~ i/9
CL
Q • N M in
4n O
CL
rA
ce
t] A Wat.�tx
0w
A£ rr;;:. � W � ►.� Vj A ts� � �i
eV en O d q
SE ' wnUEN3SON "�13Ndd3M `N3Nd13M EO : V L 9G, 2T d3S
"
7
NO
N N M N N &
. O N
j v:i
•'-� N M W in m :t 'S
„'�„ M in 10 .r VO h m
1j
ren
!�[
1
wr41!t %D
wp
N cc M N O
�n
N
:::e.:;•:
!' tN'f .�-�
64,
ar
11
N
en
go
Gti C:D Cl
O w
RVP
~ {r9
M O
N
4s r4
k n CZ
00 b C-
•rr �
• „•'„
Ct '�' ChN m in �
' ~ i/9
CL
Q • N M in
4n O
CL
rA
ce
t] A Wat.�tx
0w
A£ rr;;:. � W � ►.� Vj A ts� � �i
eV en O d q
SE ' wnUEN3SON "�13Ndd3M `N3Nd13M EO : V L 9G, 2T d3S
"
NO
j v:i
H
fA
•awn:•:
wr41!t %D
wp
N cc M N O
�n
N
!' tN'f .�-�
64,
ar
eq
Gti C:D Cl
O w
RVP
~ {r9
M O
N
4s r4
k n CZ
00 b C-
•rr �
• „•'„
Ct '�' ChN m in �
' ~ i/9
CL
Q • N M in
4n O
CL
rA
ce
t] A Wat.�tx
0w
A£ rr;;:. � W � ►.� Vj A ts� � �i
eV en O d q
SE ' wnUEN3SON "�13Ndd3M `N3Nd13M EO : V L 9G, 2T d3S
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AGE 3 FILE NO. GPA95-5, ZC95-8, UP°" -9, ED95-121, ED96-42
EXHIBIT "C"
APPROXIMATE SCHEDULE
The Nichols • Berman project team can begin work on the Dominican
College Master Plan EIR immediately upon contract approval. After
contract approval, the Administrative Draft EIR will be prepared in a 4 -
month period. The following is a brief chronology for the proposed
schedule for completing the EER.
Target Target
Commencement Completion
(Number of weeks after (Number of weeks after
Event Contract Approval) Contract Anvroval)
Nichols • Berman prepares
Admin. Draft EIR _ 17
City Reviews Admin.
Draft EIR 17 20
Nichols • Berman
prepares Draft EIR 20 24
45 day public review 24
41t,
Nichols • Berman prepares
Admin. Final EIR 30 34
City Reviews Admin.
Final EIR 34 36
Nichols • Berman prepares
Final EIR 36 40