HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Resolution 6822 (East SR Neighborhood Plan)RESOLUTION NO. 6822
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SIGNING OF A
CONTRACT, LEASE OR AGREEMENT
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL RESOLVES as follows:
The MAYOR and CITY CLERK are authorized to execute, on behalf
of the City of San Rafael, a contract with
Blaynev-Dyett for preparation of the East San Rafael Neighborhood
Plan generally consistent with the proposal submitted Play 4, 1984,
and for an amount not to exceed $90,000.
I, JEANNE r'P. LEONCINI, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby
certify that the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly intro-
duced and adopted at a REGULAR meeting of the City Council of
said City held on MONDAY the 21ST day of
MAY , 1984, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave, Russom & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILPIEMBERS : None
ABSENT: COUNCILr1EPIBERS None
JEANNE 11. LEONCINI, City Clerk
By:
LINDA S. DOWNEY, Deputy Cit Clerk
AGREEMENT
FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
The foregoing doctiment is a
correct copy of the original
on file in ibis office.
Aq•
J�°.yNE M. LEOi C'Ivl, City Clerk
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into the 21 day ofMay, 1984 by and
between the City of San Rafael, a Municipal Corporation of the State of California,
hereinafter referred to as "City," and BLAYNEY-DYETT, a California Corporation,
70 Zoe Street, Suite 100, San Francisco, California, 94107, hereinafter referred to as
"Consultant."
I. ADMINISTRATION
Determinations and authorizations required by the City under this Agreeement shall
be made by the City's Planning Director. The Consultant's Project Manager shall be
John Blayney.
II. SCOPE OF WORK
Consultant agrees to provide professional services for preparation of a Neighborhood
Plan for East San Rafael and a Draft Environmental Impact Report as described in
Attachment A "Approach" and Attachment B "Scope of Work." Attachment A is
intended to provide guidance and does not specify tasks or products other than those
specified in Attachment B.
The work to be done under this Agreement shall meet the requirements of Title 7,
Division 1, Chapter 3, Article 8 of the California Government Code as it pertains to
specific plans, provided that standards and intent shall be prescribed for development
regulations, but ordinance amendments will not be prepared. Environmental analysis
shall be consistent with the Guidelines adopted pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act, as amended.
III. SCHEDULE
The Consultant shall adhere to the schedule prescribed in Attachment C provided that
changes may be approved by the Planning Director who shall consult with the
San Francisco Foundation and the Canal Community Alliance.
IV. PAYMENT
The City shall pay Consultant in accord with Consultant's statements of time and
direct costs as listed in Attachment D, provided that the total amount for completion
of the Scope of Work shall not exceed $90,000, except as provided in this Agreement.
Funds to be expended are to be secured by the City from the San Francisco Foundation
and the Canal Community Alliance. Consultant shall submit the first statement 15
days following execution of this Agreement and at monthly intervals thereafter. Each
statement shall be accompanied by a progress report showing the percentage of com-
pletion of each task. Not more than 50 percent of the budget allocated to a task shall
-1-
be billed until that task is complete, provided that the Planning Director shall
authorize task payments exceeding 50 percent if, in the Director's judgment, more
than 50 percent of the work has been performed and completion of a task is delayed
through no fault of the Consultant.
For the purpose of determining maximum payment due, the task budgets shall be as
f ollows:
Task 1 $ 19,000
Task 2
101000
Task 3
181000
Task 4
141000
Task 5
171000
Task 6
121000
Total $ 90,000
Statements shall be due and payable within 15 days of receipt by the City. The City
shall notify the Consultant of any disputed item within 10 working days following
receipt of an invoice.
V. ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS
The following firms shall participate as described in this section as subcontractors to
Blayney-Dyett and shall be paid for time and expenses within the $90,000 maximum
budget. Substitutions or selection of firms other than those listed shall be only with
the approval of the Planning Director who shall consult with the San Francisco
Foundation and the Canal Community Alliance.
Kent Watson & Associates, Waterfront Planning and Design, Landscape Architecture,
will participate as prescribed in the Scope of Work within a maximum budget of
$6,000.
The following associated consultants shall participate if and to the extent needed as
determined by the Planning Director within a total budget not to exceed $17,000.
- Phillip Williams & Associates, Consultants in Hydrology, San
Francisco
- Donald Herzog & Associates, Inc., Mill Valley (Soils and geotechnical
engineering)
- Western Ecological Services Company (WESCO), Novato (Biology)
- JHK & Associates (Traffic)
Time and direct costs shall be billed as listed in Attachment D. Any portion of the
reserved budget not allocated to associated consultants shall be available to the
Consultant.
-2-
VI. ADDITIONAL WORK
It is understood and agreed by City and Consultant that maximum payment for
services is based upon normal professional service in preparing a Neighborhood Plan
and draft EIR as described in the attached Scope of Work. Any additional work
requested or required of the Consultant by the City shall be construed as an
amendment to this Agreement and shall be subject to negotiation. Said additional
work may include, but not be limited to, the following:
a. Public meeting attendance in addition to that specified in
Attachment B.
b. Meetings with interested parties at the direction of the Planning
Director other than meetings during the information gathering stage of
the planning process.
c. Unusual or unanticipated data collection, search, or analysis.
d. Preparation or testimony in defense of legal action against the
City in connection with the work.
VII. CONSULTANT STATUS
The Consultant is an independent contractor and shall not be deemed, directly or
indirectly, to be an officer or employee of the City. However, City shall assist
Consultant by providing timely response to Consultant's request for municipal data;
meeting with Consultant when necessary at mutually agreeable times; facilitating
necessary meetings with public officials and community associations; and providing
services and materials as outlined in the attached Scope of Work.
VIII. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The Consultant covenants that it has not previously and will not during the time of
this contract serve as consultant to any neighborhood organization or any individual,
organization or corporation representing major landowners in the area. Associated
consultants shall disclose all such relationships to the Planning Director prior to
execution of a subcontract with the Consultant and shall not accept additional work as
described in this paragraph for the duration of their subcontracts except with the
approval of the Planning Director. Existing work may be continued, but new clients
described in this paragraph shall be accepted during the period of work on the
Neighborhood Plan only with the approval of the Planning Director, which approval
shall be withheld only if the Director determines that the potential for conflict would
exceed that inherent in existing assignments and could interfere with an associated
consultant's ability to perform neighborhood planning tasks.
IX. TERMINATION
The City reserves the right to terminate this Agreement at any time by providing
written notice to the Consultant. Upon receipt of notice, all work under this contract
shall terminate, except for minor work required to provide the City with a clear
understanding of work completed and work remaining.
-3-
In the event of termination, City shall pay Consultant all sums then due and unpaid
under this Agreement, including sums for work not completed, but in preparation.
Payment by City of such compensation shall be considered full and final settlement
for all work performed by the Consultant under this Agreement.
X. ASSIGNMENT
Neither this Agreement nor any part thereof, nor any monies due or to become due
under this Agreement may be assigned by the Consultant without the written consent
of the City.
XI. CHANGES
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 in
writing, as an amendment to this Agreement, and shall be approved by all parties.
XII. INSURANCE
Contractor agrees to maintain in full force and effect during the course of this
Agreement bodily injury liability insurance in the amount of $500,000 per occurrence
and property damage liability insurance in the amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence.
Prior to the execution of this agreement Contractor will provide his insurance
company's endorsement evincing the above coverage and containing the following
language:
"It is understood and agreed that the City of San Rafael, its
officers, agents and employees are additional insureds under this
policy but only as respects liability arising out of the work
described in the Agreement between the City* of San Rafael and
Blayney-Dyett, a California Corporation, for the preparation of a
Neighborhood Plan for East San Rafael and the related documenta-
tion described in that Agreement.
This insurance coverage will not be canceled or reduced without
first giving the City of San Rafael 15 working days advance
notice."
In addition, Contractor shall be responsible for and pay for all Workers Compensation
Insurance.
-4-
IN WITNESS THEREOF, City and Consultant have caused their authorized
representatives to execute this Agreement the day and year first above written.
Lawrence Mulryan, Mayor Blay ey-Dyett, Urban and gion Planners
Attest:
5y --Cl
Jeanne M. Leoncini, City Clerk
By: Linda S. Downey, Deputy Ci y Clerk.
Approved as to content:
Anne Moore, San Rafael Planning Direc
an Francisco Foundation
rn.
Canal Community Alliance
Approved as to form:
1ST`- 1. 0-,L--
Peter J. Muzio, City Attorney
-5-
ATTACHMENT A
APPROACH
Since the mid 19501s, when development in San Rafael began to move eastward on an
already obsolete street and lot pattern, the future of the Canal area has been a
question mark. The demand for high density housing, and the myriad of commercial -
industrial enterprises which would seek space in Marin's central city was not foreseen
at that time, so the Canal Area, which had been a catchall, has remained one. While
the reasons that the City has failed to take full advantage of its shoreline site are
historically understandable, they should not now diminish remaining opportunities in
the neighborhood.
Access still is East San Rafael's number one problem, but the opportunities for a
stable and diverse community appear far better than might be expected. Marin
County's high buying power and limited choice of sites has stimulated relatively higher
priced and higher quality development in the neighborhood during the last few years.
Now, with the area approaching buildout, the issues that will determine long term
viability must be decided.
Needed are:
1. A traffic and transportation system design and assured means of implementation
that will provide acceptable levels of service at buildout.
2. A drainage system design and assured means of implementation that will prevent
flooding.
3. A land use and housing policy that will retain diversity of price and tenure while
preventing deterioration.
4. A combination—to be determined—of public amenities, public services, commercial
and cultural facilities, and design quality that will enhance community identity and
quality of life. How to do this while maintaining affordable housing will be one of
the most challenging issues to be resolved during the planning process.
5. Policies and regulations that will ensure that development intensity does not
exceed the capacity of public service systems.
6. Policies that will stabilize expectations about the future of East San Rafael and
that are specific enough to minimize the time and cost of processing development
proposals.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
To prepare a neighborhood plan that attracts wide support, the planning process must
include public participation at each stage. We propose a program designed so that
community members, business people, land owners, and developers will not act simply
as audience at meetings, or even commentors on proposed plan alternatives, but as
contributors to the plan and the planning process.
-i-
First Neighborhood Workshop
Initial public involvement will be at a workshop at which the scope of the plan is
explained. The aim of the workshop, however, will be to hear the participants express
their views of the problems, and to identify the concerns held by individuals and
different interest groups. The list of concerns developed at this stage will form the
basis of an Issues List presented in our Working Paper 2.
The breadth of participation in the first workshop will be particularly important.
Inclusion at this initial phase of all those who have a stake in the plan will demon-
strate the impartiality and openness of the planning process; give all participants a
sense of their "ownership" of the process, i.e., the fact that the plan can reflect the
desires of any one who chooses to contribute; and will educate the community about
how the plan will be developed. An extra effort to include people in the first work-
shop will likely result in a better plan, and reduce or eliminate later complaints
regarding decisions made behind closed doors, meetings that went unpublicized, etc.
To achieve wide participation at the first stage, we propose holding two "identical'
workshops - at different times and places, most likely with one scheduled during a
weekday and one in the evening or on a weekend. Both would be held in East San
Rafael.
We would design a leaflet announcing workshops, to be translated and distributed by
others by:
Posting throughout the community (telephone poles, bulletin boards, shop
windows, etc.),
Sending copies home with students at Bahia Vista School,
Notice in the publications of all community and neighborhood associations in East
San Rafael.
Mailing to landowners as shown on assessment roles.
Second Neighborhood Workshop
The purpose of the second neighborhood workshop will be to lay the groundwork for
making later decisions by establishing a system for evaluation of alternative land use
scenarios. At this session the concerns identified at the prior workshop will be
discussed in relation to one another so that priorities can be set and concerns weighted
to reflect relative importance. This step will establish a shared basis for evaluation of
alternatives which will enable plans to be measured against an agreed upon standard.
The process of developing the evaluation system will indicate the areas where trade-
offs are most likely to be acceptable to the parties involved, as well as highlighting
those concerns of paramount importance.
The evaluation system is developed early in the planning process for three reasons.
First, it educates all of those involved as to the concerns of other participants.
Second, it encourages collaboration among participants who may become members of
opposing factions later in the process, and third, it assures participants that the
W -C
remainder of the process will be fair. While the development of an agreed-upon
system of evaluation will be difficult, it should greatly reduce antagonism when
alternatives are being compared, because everyone will be using the same standard.
Subsequent Meetings
Holding too many meetings can thwart balanced participation because boredom or
other time demands will discourage many who may support middle ground choices. We
believe that six to eight public meetings should be held during the seven month
planning period. Following the development of an evaluation system, meetings will be
held to elicit responses to planning options, to consider alternative sketch plans, and,
if necessary, to refine the draft plan.
We also will be available to participate in meetings with individuals and small groups
to understand their points of view. In many instances we will seek their help.
Ways to Make Meetings Effective
Different meeting times (night, day, Saturday) may be needed to reach all groups.
Participation at the first meetings will be an indicator of popular times and places. In
all cases, schedules and agendas will be set well in advance and material to be
discussed will be mailed in sufficient time to be read by those who wish to come to the
meeting prepared to debate specific points.
We believe that the workshops should be conducted by the Planning Commission or
chaired by a member of the Commission. This accomplishes several purposes:
- The link between the meetings and the decision-making process is clearly
established in everyone's mind.
- The Planning Commission benefits from first-hand exposure to the debate.
- The staff and consultants are clearly presenters rather than
moderators/presenters with an ambiguous role.
Workshops will be planned and structured by the consultants in consultation with city
staff. Large, readable drawings are important, and will be used throughout the
planning process, as detailed in the scope of work. Prior to the meeting at which
sketch plans are evaluated, the alternatives will be displayed somewhere within East
San Rafael (perhaps the new community center or the school). Slides of existing
conditions will be used at early meetings to achieve a common reference for
discussion of specific urban design issues, and graphics illustrating concepts will be
employed when appropriate.
EMPHASIS ON PLANNING OPTIONS
Too many plans—even specific plans—offer little more than general goals or policies
with which few people would disagree. The East San Rafael Plan must be site-
specific, even though it may not fully resolve all development issues on all sites. Our
experience has been that the most efficient way to make useful decisions is to bypass
extensive general policy discussion and move quickly from a listing of issues to consid-
eration of planning options or choices.
-3-
Planning options, as we use the term, are specific actions that can be mapped or
measured. All potentially feasible planning options addressing a particular issue must
be examined. Thus for example, if "availability of affordable housing" is an issue, it
will be necessary to define "affordability" and to examine alternatives that would
affect supply. These might range from letting the market control to requiring a spe-
cific affordable share in each project, to requiring or encouraging mixed use projects,
to designating certain sites for higher densities, etc. The economic, social, fiscal and
environmental consequences of each choice must be evaluated.
Agreement on planning options clearly represents a much greater accomplishment
than acceptance of a vague policy, and it may be no harder or even less difficult to
attain. Many individuals on opposite sides of particular planning issues have
experienced having an adopted plan policy used as an argument against their position
although they felt the argument was not consistent with the intent at the time the
policy was adopted.
ATTENTION TO SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
In all our planning work we endeavor to stay aware of projects that have been
proposed or are likely to be proposed by reviewing plans and meeting with project
proponents. We will be prepared to review proposed projects on a schedule consistent
with the City's review process and to offer comments as requested.
To insure that all participants in the planning process are aware of the changing status
of development proposals, a display map of East San Rafael showing sites of proposed
projects will be displayed and updated at all public meetings.
DESIGN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD
While rigid compartmentalization is not a formula for the ideal neighborhood, East San
Rafael suffers from an excessive mixture of uses that, coupled with a street pattern
that is difficult to understand, create a disoriented feeling. The process will look for
ways to create order—to make the location of the water apparent, to point the way
from the freeways to the residential areas, and perhaps to mark these gateways with
resident -serving uses.
During the plan design process we will present specific ideas that may range from tree
planting to new lagoon or waterfront residential communities, office parks, or mixed
use complexes. Open space and landscape standards appropriate in one sector of the
neighborhood may be inappropriate in another.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AS AN INTEGRAL
PART OF THE PLANNING PROCESS
Although the EIR will be a separate report, at least 75 percent of its content will be
generated for the purpose of plan preparation and will appear in some form in working
papers. This reflects both the time schedule and our belief that a good planning
process requires early environmental assessment and automatically meets most CEQA
requirements.
-4-
COORDINATING WITH PUBLIC AGENCIES AND OTHER CONSULTANTS
Throughout the planning process, the consulting team will strive to minimize duplica-
tion of effort and unnecessary work by communicating with public agency personnel
and other consultants (primarily the team working on the traffic study). With the
assistance of City staff, key personnel at agencies active in East San Rafael will be
identified at the start of work.
Kent Watson Associates will utilize its expertise in dealing with the agencies having
jurisdiction over the Bay, shoreline and wetlands. Blayney-Dyett will contact pro-
viders of social services in the area; serve as the liason with the traffic engineering
team; and communicate with the City of Larkspur and conservation agencies regarding
preservation of Bartel Ridge. The traffic engineering team should keep us informed of
relevant agency actions regarding circulation and transit.
Contacts with agency personnel will be made early in the process so that information
on relevant policies and projects is taken into account, and so that staff will know that
they can contact us if they want to ask for or receive additional information at any
point.
WORKING WITH CITY STAFF
We endorse the concept of the consultant as an extension of the City staff.
Commitment of City staff time as proposed is, we believe, essential to obtaining full
value from the consultants' work and to preparation of an effective plan. We will
expect a full exchange of ideas, critical review of our work prior to publication, and
agreement on shared responsibility for specific tasks based on time available and
efficiency.
As the work moves toward the public hearing and adoption stage, the consultants'
public connection with the plan should diminish and it should become first a Planning
Department product and then Planning Commission and City Council policy.
ALLOCATING TIME AND BUDGET IN RESPONSE TO NEIGHBORHOOD NEEDS
Most of the existing documents specific to the Canal Area address environmental,
traffic and technical issues. We are proposing a budget that will allow for review of
relevant documents to establish those factors which will influence the plan. Most of
the budget, and the consultant's time, will be allocated to identifying and responding
to East San Rafael issues that have not previously been given close attention. We
believe that as allocated, the budget will provide for the coordination with agencies
and other consultants as described above, avoiding duplication of effort and allowing a
focus on original planning work in response to the needs and desires of the community.
-5-
ATTACHMENT B
SCOPE OF WORK
The following scope will result in a Specific Plan as described in Gov. Code Sec.
65451, provided that standards and intent will be prescribed for development regula-
tions, but ordinance amendments will not be prepared. The City staff will have
primary responsibility for preparation of traffic mitigation cost sharing proposals,
building on studies already completed.
Firm initials following tasks indicate primary responsibility.
Task 1: Data Collection and Analysis
The data collected in this task will serve as the information base for the entire
planning process.
a. Prepare base map from existing mapping. (B -D)
b. Prepare existing land use map. (B -D)
c. Determine approval status of all development projects; indicate on display
map. (B -D)
d. Determine ownership of uncommitted vacant land and plans, if any, of
owners. (B -D)
e. Map areas likely to be redeveloped based on low land payment capability of
current use or poor condition of existing structures. (B -D)
f. Map areas that have detrimental effects on the neighborhood due to poor
design or maintenance of structures on site. (B -D)
g. Develop profile of current resident population, working from 1980 Census
Neighborhood Statistics and available data that describe changes since 1980
Census (school data, electric meters, vacancies, postal data, interviews,
etc.). (B -D)
h. Review environmental documents and interview representatives of concerned
agencies and organizations to determine legal and environmental constraints
and opportunities affecting use and development of the canal and shoreline.
(KW & A)
i. Determine problems relating to flooding and utilities, prepare overview of
possible mitigation measures, and assess impacts on neighborhood plan. (PW &
A)
j. Review City, special district, state, and federal capital improvement
programs to determine type and timing of proposed projects affecting East
San Rafael. (Team)
-6-
k. Review published and in progress traffic studies and summarize problems and
proposed mitigations. (B -D)
1. Obtain a first cut indication of specific problems and needs as seen by
different interest groups by interviewing residents of different areas and
housing types, and operators of different sizes and types of businesses.
Interview proponents of major proposed projects and owners of vacant parcels
judged to have major importance for the neighborhood. (B -D)
m. Meet with representatives of school district and social services agencies to
understand current services, problems, and plans. (B -D)
n. Estimate spendable income available to support retail services desired by
residents, and interview potential providers to determine attitudes toward
East San Rafael locations. (B -D)
Product: Working Paper #1: East San R.afaeL• Eidsting Conditions 1984
Most of the material in this paper will be incorporated into the "setting" section of the
DEIR.
Completion Date: July 15, 1984
Meetings: As discussed in the public participation section of this proposal,
mid -way through Task 1 the first community meeting (held at two
different times) will inform participants about the process and
identify issues of concern. At the end of the task, following
public distribution of the Working Paper, the workshop to develop
a system for evaluation of alternatives will be held.
Task 2: Identification of Issues and Planning Options (B -D, team)
The issues contributed by participants at the first community meeting will direct this
task, which will result in two or more planning options designed to satisfy each of the
principal concerns identified. Subsequent community discussion will be focused on
choosing among options and alternatives, rather than debating the validity of the
concerns of participating individuals and organizations.
Options will be courses of action that can be mapped or measured and that are within
the scope of the Specific Plan. They will range from'land use designations and
development standards for specific sites to implementation programs designed to
achieve community goals such as affordable housing and improved services. The
relative merits, costs and effects of the various options, such as regulations for
heights and floor areas, or acquiring and maintaining additional open space, will be
discussed as necessary to facilitate decision making. Display graphics will be used to
illustrate design and regulatory concepts as appropriate.
Product: Working Paper # 2: East San R.afaeL• Issues and Planning Options
Completion Date: August 15, 1984
-7-
Meetings: Following distribution of the working paper, one or more meetings
will be needed to hear responses to the options and ideas
regarding how they would best be shown on alternative sketch
plans.
Task 3: Preparation of Alternative Sketch Plans (B -D)
Two to four sketch plans will be prepared, depending on the number of options which
received support. The plans will illustrate the feasible range of choice. Working
Paper 3, which will present the sketch plans, will compare their economic, fiscal,
social and environmental effects.
Product: Working Paper 13: East San Rafael:- Alternative Sketch Plans
The plan drawings will be prepared both at page size and as nonreproducible colored
display maps for use at meetings.
Completion Date: October 1, 1984
Meetings: An open workshop to review and compare the alternative sketch
plans will use the evaluation system developed as part of Task 1.
While the evaluation will highlight the relative merits of the
plans, their individual elements will also be assessed in case a
combination of options not illustrated on any one plan would best
satisfy the disparate interests of all concerned.
Task 4: Plan Refinement (B -D, team)
Following initial discussion of the alternative plans, revisions and refinements will be
made in response to comments and as a result of further study. At subsequent meet-
ings, points of disagreement among interest groups will be reviewed in an effort to
reach accommodation. Rather than presenting one preferred alternative, the draft
plan may contain two or more alternatives, all of which are technically feasible but
none of which has received full support from participants in the planning program. At
this stage the alternatives are likely to vary only in a few sectors.
We do not know now what level of agreement can be expected to be reached, but we
would not be surprised if some offers of accommodation are withheld until City
Council hearings. If this occurs, the consultants will prepare the plan in such a way
that major points of disagreement are clearly described and the effects of alternatives
on the community are apparent.
Necessary draft amendments to the San Rafael General Plan and Redevelopment Plan
will be prepared.
Product: Draft Specific Plan in form for public hearings by the Planning
Commission and City CounciL In addition to a plan diagram,
sketches and small area illustrative site plans will be included as
appropriate. A summary suitable for wide distribution will be
prepared, to be mailed to all households in East San Rafael.
-8-
Completion Date: December 31, 1984
Meetings: At least one open meeting will be held to determine the extent of
agreement on the plan and to attempt to resolve remaining
differences through modifications or mitigation requirements.
Task 5: Draft Master Environmental Impact Report (B -D, team)
Using previous EIRs and material developed during preparation of the Draft
Neighborhood Plan, including alternatives to the recommended proposal, a DEIR will
be prepared. Work done during tasks 2 and 3 to evaluate options and alternatives will
be incorporated in the impact analyses, and mitigation measures will be chosen with
regard for community preference. The EIR will meet all CEQA requirements and will
address the fiscal impacts of the alternatives on the City of San Rafael.
Assuming the traffic analysis prepared under a separate agreement is incorporated and
the Specific Plan draft contains development standards, it should not be necessary to
prepare EIRs for development projects consistent with the adopted Specific Plan.
Product- Draft Environmental Impact Report
Completion Date: December 31, 1984
Task 6: Implementation Program (B -D)
Work on the implementation program will begin during preparation of the alternative
sketch plans, because some implementation measures will be needed by all
alternatives and because the feasibility of certain implementation measures will
determine the feasibility of one or more alternatives. The implementation program is
to be published separately from the Draft Specific Plan, although the Specific Plan
will incorporate portions in the form of standards or policies.
The program will describe East San Rafael Specific Plan needs under each of the
following headings and will propose funding sources, program changes, or regulations
as appropriate.
Zoning
Code Enforcement
Redevelopment (if appropriate)
Capital Improvements
Zoning regulations will be proposed, if needed, to improve the quality of development,
prevent uses deemed detrimental, and control the intensity of uses.
A capital improvement program will include cost estimates (range only) for needed
public improvements. The program will recommend (or estimate) expenditures of
revenues from different funding sources, including:
Non -city public sources
City of San Rafael General Fund
-9-
Private grants
East San Rafael assessments
Redevelopment Agency funds
Mitigation payments by new development projects
subject to discretionary review
Mitigation payments by new development projects
permitted as of right
Mitigation payments as a condition of
intensification of use
The level of detail of this product will depend on material produced by the city staff
and concurrent work by the traffic analysis consultant. Significant City staff work
already completed on means of financing trafficways improvements will be updated
and incorporated as appropriate.
Product: Draft San Rafael Specific Plan Implementation Program
Completion Date: December 31, 1984
Products and Meetings
Camera-ready art will be provided for all reports. Display art will be provided for
m eetings.
John Blayney will attend up to seven public meetings and Kent Watson and JHK's
project director will attend up to two public meetings.
-10-
0 1
r•
w
C
C-1
o c
10 �o r
L f�/�j� -
:m
En
C.
z
0
d
a
!s1
d
c
9
hC
O
a
tz
b
0
z
hid
t�
co
a
z
a
r
z
C)
a
0
x
w
0
0
c
�o
r
z
C*
a
0
9
`<
ro �
b
77
b
C�
mr*
Gt
r
m r+
pq
-s CD
r+CD
0
a
;D
CD
CD
;r i3
�z
=r
r+
CDroma
�G
s
Oaq
`v, CD
En
PD
CD
CD
0
0
0
0
0
0 1
r•
w
C
C-1
o c
10 �o r
L f�/�j� -
:m
En
C.
z
0
d
a
!s1
d
c
9
hC
O
a
tz
b
0
z
hid
t�
co
a
z
a
r
z
C)
a
0
x
w
0
0
c
�o
r
z
C*
Personnel
John Blayney
Michael V. Dyett
Ellen Greenberg
Nicklaus von Rotz
Nicholas Gravina
Direct Charges
ATTACHMENT D - BILLING RATES
BLAYNEY-DYETT
Principal
$75.00 per hr.
Principal
70.00
Planning Analyst
32.50
Environmental Designer
32.50
Environmental Designer
27.50
Word Processing
25.00
Maps, graphics, reproduction, long distance telephone, local travel, out-of-town travel
and subsistence, additional insurance required for specific assignments, and miscella-
neous costs.
Mileage @ $.20 per mile
In-house xeroxing @ $.13 per page
(rates subject to revision January 1, 1985)
PHILLIP WILLIAMS & ASSOCIATES,
CONSULTANTS IN HYDROLOGY
Phillip Williams
Bob Coats
Vinod Prabnakar
Hydrologists
$85.00 per hr.
65.00
50.00
40.00
',�... �,. "� �a.:d.. ._ r - - . -,., a. ��-_�; � yr�c<;'-•'� .;,,w �. s •:.m.?• fix..,;:-z-,�
■: •gym n . '^i:•,.._ _ .. . _ _
- .� a �1 �� .w .. .. - .. fir. � `��_ �•,:y � �.�:-.
?`A, ._ 'WESTERN ECpL'C?G7A;�,ER;1%iCM A'NYr `
_ �� �- _ ��^_�-f ay.;F4'��. f. titin"�' 'J,x'� • . x'•
�' r?d'.:� ',�: a:: (4 -' ....1 :: `��S :r. � ��i�4+ •x1: a .��` _ "y.�. '� A �, ',# .
^�i� .�•.�; � . r"x�Ypyy�y�y . c .n�� ,,�M� _� .� � J��.° .a]�.� �'�� � __ =.'_f Y�• y�....'a _• -�:P '.- �; � + �.'S'ti ^�..
". i�3: . y�;�.. Irl y •; �.. rm![ •,�^ �Y��< r��'�•:r..�3."""vr!' - `. ry'• r� -'�'�i '=�- `�:+ is wi4 '�. 3
]rq�i•. X.{�7; . a a" )F4,
_.}� - '•� ,-;�hl:k Y .yx�".l.a i. �7A� 7.i ".k7.. .y ; t.L+- F"" .. _ Y •-• _ 'fid. y'Ai+•]1i:5-.
+"'�•iT"�F;•�.r'"� csix i+ .��-s=`-Fs-.^3:•,p.•.', �r ^"r'ti': •- "�iKiR_.'i,�•��-• '�-�7iLwrfr:'33�,.,-yt.. _ y�
..'.'� �-x, k. •b � �r.�. -.. 1. a.TM .c • :w'-ds� 7' 1 •�.+'•n ' �,r('te r
4ty45TAATD E� SCi� Eb[i
-x' 'E t_ ;.
_ y`� d,r F ,�•- { :,r.a. _ -LSF .F �J t�-;�
_•..:P' ��, 'C i f .
' .�1 �%� ,.f.. !r,-... f.� .� -11e iy FF ri ti. �r'• i.�'{:r. - - - moi.. f. ••.-.��� •'r ..•
.-D �E N T I _A L'
H urly
• •Priuc�,pa$�{.'M.:T. • � '`�.: _ - $5U,•00 $40..00 '
Senior Scttists 35.00 280.00
30.0.0 240.00
�'echaai an : 22.00 176.00
25.00 201).0D
-aCl•erIcAI/Wgra ''Processing 20.00 ifi0.00 _
EXPENSE -R - V
i i
-
'4x# Trucks $ '56AD .per dadpl us m ileage
or$600.00 per month p3us mileage
x4 Truck -mounted Soil Auger $100.00 per day plus ul- 1,eage
or $1,000 per month p3bs mileage a .
lfi' Btia ~and Motor $ 50.00 per day
El�ectrofishi'ng Equipment- $ 40.00 per day -
Gil3 'Nets
-/•e $ 15.00 per aay
Wet Suits $ 8 A OiD per, day
"Water Quality Test Kit.." $ 1.5.00 per day
Soil '.Zest Ric $ 20.00 per day
Survey.,Gea•i $ 20.00 per clay
Flow Meter . $ 20.00 per day
. 2 �
$ 2 per mile
CopyiTac �._ $ .10 per ropy
Report and Map Producti-nn
Telephone
4.:
All Eguipmenpurcase. or rental),,
upplies, heals, Loag`�,ng; and
.S -
Services Required for 'Performance
of Contr-a'c -
~Z��:,
4CONSULTANTSIN THEJI��R �-Nx'IRONMENTAL:SCiENCFS
"xY ` al resot�r e ocfvpivation applied environmerstal 3f'
.
y€ G - ►,-,; � lies m .ors aen,a] rnanorgemer�i #easi�,tiiyflr�alysIs r=
dares -' i ' fisheries boo lir, Uxa,n'yx-
)-, tUITEA- MNO�'.�1,TC�-CA4t1FORNIA 94947 TE -L' P -DONE,( 415) $B3-'�5
4 : '" '
�N z. ,:
JUNTAI_N OF.Fa ;,�FOR rCOL•LINS.cCOLORADCJ • bI�E. 30 )493 �
..�.:�a, _. ..-. ..., r....-.'�'.�aCS�:=.'�......x.i,:�r^!�-.JY..a`.�•�i�w...o..>'a3�.JJ a.�'.:..� ...... _..-, _�. __ .�.��.._.�r...-.. ...� ..t.. r,.w..r �. "
KentWatson Associates
Waterfront Planning & Design Landscape Architecture
1 August 1983
SCHEDULE OF FEES
The below schedule includes local travel and telephone expenses,
and incidental copying costs,.
Professional Services Hourly Rate
Principal (Registered Landscape Architect) $4500
Associate (Min. of 3 yrs. experience) $25.00
Double the hourly rate for professional appearances at
public bearings and court proceedings.
Technical Services
Landscape Architectural Draftsperson
Typing
Reproductions
Diazo prints, engineering reproductions,
photographs, slides and other materials at
Report copying
Outside Services
$18:.00
$10,.00
Cost plus 10%
Cost plus 10%
Contract services; rental of special vehicles, craft or
equipment not ordinarily furnished by the landscape architect;
and all travel by common carrier, subsistence, etc,., will be
charged at
Cost plus 102
Transportation
Use of office vehicles outside immediate Bay Area will be
charged at
.25/mile
Travel Time Will be charged at regular rates
A Minimum Fee of $200,.00 will be charged for an engagement of
services
Invoices are payable upon presentation and are past due thirty
(30) days from billing date. A charge of one and one half percent
(1,5%) per month will be applied against all past due items.
Kent E. Watson, ASLA 1550 Pacific Avenue Telephone Calif. Registration
Landscape Architect San Francisco, Ca. 94109 (415) 775-9153 No. 1304
�(Js Vii, l � �\�, 11 •I (\ / `2e ,�� i// '1 �� j( IKJe>`
DONALD
H Eff R` ' " ZC
& ASSMATES, INC.
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS
STANDARD SCHEDULE OF CHARGES
Principal Engineer
$80
- $98 per hour
Associate Engineer
$74
Senior Engineer or Geologist
$70
Engineer or Geologist
$54
Senior Field Engineer
$60
Field Engineer
$42
- $48
Laborer
$34
Drafting
$34
Technical Typing - Word Processing
$30
Slope Indicator
$10
Seismic Refraction Timer
$10
Portable Auger with Crew
$70
Nuclear Density Test
$ 6
each
Outside Services
Cost
plus 20%
No additional charges are made for vehicles, mileage,
standard test equipment, laboratory equipment, or for
clerical work.
Laboratory tests are charged on a unit cost basis in accord
with the Laboratory Schedule of Charges.
The charge for appearance as an expert witness is $400 per
half day, or fraction thereof.
Travel time is charged at normal billing rates.
Our work is performed in accordance with generally accepted
standards of engineering practice. We offer no other
guarantees or warranties, either expressed or implied.
These rates are in effect until 7/1/84.
Offices:
4275 Miller Avenue, Mill Valley, California 94941 (415) 383-7740 ■ Soil Engineering, Engineering Geology
❑ 3060 Cleveland Avenue, Santa Rosa, California 95401 (707) 523.3880 and Laboratory Testing for Buildings,
11 2180 Jefferson Street, Shite 107, Napa, California 94558 (707) 224-5411 Dams, Landfills, Bridges and Roads
JHK's 1984-85 Fee Schedule
Staff
Vice President (Charles M. Abrams)
Senior Associate (Jerry Kaplan)
Senior Engineer (Jin Wang)
Engineer (Erik Ruehr)
Clerical/Technician
Hourly Rate
$85.00
70.00
55.00
40.00
25.00
GERTIFICK,
-,• . «
Wurzburg and Company
#1 Maritime Plaza
San Francisco, Ca. 94111
6-12-B4
THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS .% MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS
NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND,
EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLJCIES BELOW.
COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE
Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED.
NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY
BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS, AND CONDI-
TIONS OF SUCH POLICIES.
A
COMPANY
LETTER
A
LETTER Y
KIP
LIABILITY LIMITS IN THOUSANDS
N SURED
Blayney-Dyett
Urban and Regional Planners
SER Y
DATE MWDDfffl
70 Zoe Street
EACH AGGREGATE
COMPANY
LETTER
San Francisco, Ca. 94107
COMPANY
LETTER
•
LIABILITY
COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE
Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED.
NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY
BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS, AND CONDI-
TIONS OF SUCH POLICIES.
A
TYPE OF INSURANCE
POLICY NUMBER
POLICY EFFECTIVE
POLICY EXPIRATION
LIABILITY LIMITS IN THOUSANDS
T
DATE MWDDfffl
DATE (MLtMNY)
EACH AGGREGATE
OCCURRENCE
GENERAL
LIABILITY
BODILY
$
$
X
COMPREHENSIVE FORM
05 SM 800506fca
1-1-83
1-1-86
INJURY
PROPERTY
$
$
X
PREMISES/OPERATIONS
UNDERGROUND
DAMAGE
EXPLOSION & COLLAPSE HAZARD
PRODUCTSICOMPLETED OPERATIONS
X
CONTRACTUAL
BI a PD
COMBINED
$ 500
$ 500
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS
X
BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE*+
X
PERSONAL INJURY
PERSONAL INJURY
$
500
a
AUTOMOBILE
LIABILITY
BOIXLY
KMY
$
ANY AUTO
(PER PEPSON)
ALL OWNED AUTOS (PRN. PASS.)
BUNLY
ALL OWNED AUTOS PRIV RPAHSANI
SS.
(PFF. Nx�oEhTf
PR,GMPGE�
HIRED AUTOS
X
NDN -OWNED AUTOS
05 SM 800506fca
1-1-83
1-1-86
$
4 ;k
GARAGE LIABILITY
BI 8 PD
COMBINED
$
� 7
500
EXCESS LIABILJTY
X UMBRELLA FORM
05XS 250356fca
1-1-84
1-1-85
BCOMPD
BNED
$
$ '
OTHER THAN UMBRELLA FORM
1000
1000 I
WORKERS' COMPENSATION
STATUTORY
"I- $ (EACH ACCIDENT)
AND
005JC15957840cca
1-1-84
1-1-85
4 (DISEASE -POLICY LlMll)
EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY
$ (DISEASE -EACH EMPLOYEE)
OTHER
ti
ESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONSILOCATIONSNEHICLES/SPECWL ITEMS It 1s understood and agreed that the City of San Rafae
its officers, agents and employees are included as additional insureds under 05SM800506fca but
only as respects liability arising out of work described in the Agreement between the City of
San Rafael and the named insured for the preparation of a Neighborhood Plan for East San Rafae
SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EX -
City of San Rafael PIRATJI� DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL 8h0"X41 >2CK
San Rafael, California MAIL 11 DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE
LEFT,
B� Rffi>a9NIX�+'1f��C]t�[11�4'Y��3�'�i!R J95PI�ER£�V
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATTjf��� (,"�.�' �J' /
WUrzbnrq' aAtiC'
edP