2010041907 - Dittos Lane Affordable Housing Projecy - Geier and Geier - Environmental Review~aW N ~~. MEETING DATE: 04/19/10
ITEM NO. ~j
AGENCY AGENDA REPORT
R
~OS,.GA'~~~'
DATE: Apri19, 2010
TO: CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
FROM: GREG CARSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: .DITTOS LANE AFFORDABLE. HOUSING PROJECT
A. ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT
WITH GEIER & GEIER CONSULTING TO CONDUCT
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
B. AUTHORIZE A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE AMOUNT OF $96,8741N
ACCOUNT 9301-6323'2
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt a resolution authorizing the Executive Director to execute an agreement with Geier
& Geier Consulting for preparation of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
2. Authorize a budget adjustment for environmental consultant services for the amount of
$96,874 in Account 9301-63232.
BACKGROUND.:
On December 23, 2009, the Agency purchased the Dittos Lane property to be used for Affordable
Housing. The conceptual design defnes the project for the environmental review and the land
use entitlement process.
PREPARED BY:
BL:
Reviewed by:
BUD LORTZ
Deputy Town Manager
Director
Community Development Revised: 4/9/10
Counsel Secretary -"~"'~ Finance
8:57 AM
PAGE 2
CHAIR AND MEMBERS ,OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
SUBJECT: DITTOS LANE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT
APRIL 7, 2010
DISCUSSION:
The Town's environmental consultant, Geier & Geier Consulting, submitted a proposal and cost
estimate for preparation of a focused EIR (see Exhibit 1 to Attaclunent 1). Expenditures greater
than $50,000 require Council approval.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The focused EIR is estimated to cost $96,874 (see attachment to Resolution). This includes the cost
of several contractors for preparation of studies- relative to aesthetics, hazardous materials, and
historical and cultural resources.
Sufficient funds are available for this budget adjustment in the RDA Low & Moderate Housing Fund
Balance of approximately $4.9 million as of March 21, 2010.
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends that the Agency Board adopt the resolution (Attachment 1) authorizing the
Executive Director to direct Geier & Geier Consulting to commence with the environmental review
for the Dittos Lane Affordable Housing Project.
Attachment: Resolution with detailed cost. estimate
Distribution:
Geier & Geier Consulting, P. O. Box 5054, Berkeley, CA 94705-5054
RESOLUTION 2010 -
RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIItECTOR TO DH2ECT
GEIER & GEIER CONSULTING TO CONDUCT
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR THE
.DITTOS LANE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT
RESOLVED, that the Redevelopment Agency of the Town of Los Gatos has reviewed conceptual plans for the
Dittos Lane Affordable Housing Project; and
RESOLVED, that the next step in the process is to commence with environmental review of the project; and
RESOLVED, that the Town has a contract with Geier & Geier Consulting (GGC) for envu onmental assessment
services; and
RESOLVED, that project managers Valerie and Frederick Geier of GGC have submitted a proposal and cost
estimate for preparation of a Focused Environmental Impact Report (EIR); and
RESOLVED, that the Redevelopment Agency of the Town of Los Gatos enter into an agreement for services by
the environmental consultant.
FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Redevelopment Agency Board that the Executive Director is authorized to
direct the consultant to conduct the environmental review, consistent with the scope of work attached hereto as Exhibit 1,
on behalf of the Town of Los Gatos.
PASSED .AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Redevelopment Agency held on the 19th day of April,
2010., by the following vote:
AGENCY BOARD MEMBERS:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIGNED:
ATTEST:
CHAIlZ OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
CLERK ADMII~]ISTRATOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
N:\MGR\AdminworkFiles\2010 Council Reports\4-19-10 RDA Geier Dittos Lane Reso.doc
3 t. "
€ F f
~.
i`s It.f~: ^~~1~I1~..1Z :~'t.1;1 1',;": , II`~C:;r
Memorandum
To: Bud Lortz and Joel Paulson, Town of Los Gatos Date: March 30, 2010
From: Valerie Geier and Frederick Geier
Subject: Proposal to Prepare an EIR: Dittos Lane Apartments, 20 Dittos Lane
Geier and Geier Consulting, Inc. (GGC) is pleased to submit this proposal to prepare a Focused
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Dittos Lane Apartments, located at 20
Dittos Lane. As indicated on the site plan prepared by ROEM and dated March 1, 2010, project
development would involve development of 32 apartment units and approximately 57 parking
spaces on the 1.58-acre project site. Project cross-sections indicate that the slope on the
southern and western portions of the site would be cut to accommodate Building A and the
southern portion of Building B.
For this project, Frederick Geier will serve as Project Manager, while Valerie Geier will be
Technical Director for this project. Our in-house capabilities will be complemented by the
expertise of the following subconsultants: Wood Biological Consulting will evaluate biological
resources and determine the riparian corridor boundary, Holman & Associates will be
responsible for the archaeological resources evaluation, and Ed Pack & Associates will
complete the noise evaluation. If visual simulations are required, they will'be prepared by
William Kanemoto & Associates (WKA). WKA completed the visual simulations for the Old Town
EIR, while Wood Biological has completed biological and riparian corridor studies for many
MNDs .recently prepared by GGC for the Town. Holman & Associates has also completed
archaeological studies for many of the MNDs and EIRs prepared by GGC (including the
Highlands of Los Gatos EIR as well as the Library EIR). Ed Pack & Associates has completed
noise evaluations for a number of projects in the Town including the Police Substation MND.
Scope of Work
Upon authorization by the Town, GGC will proceed with field studies to supplement technical
studies already completed by the Town for the project. GGC .assumes that the Town will provide
the following studies: geologic hazards evaluation, Phase I/II environmental site assessments,
traffic impact analysis, arborist's report, stormwater drainage calculations for C.3 compliance,
and visual simulations (if needed). GGC will supplement these studies with the following tasks
to complete the environmental documentation process for the proposed project.
~.~. ~.~. ~(3'C '771 ° AI Q~'-3'~£C~.C'. ~+ ~..~ ~J ~E ~•"~)~J^7~;~5 l~ ' .S .X~.~~~},ry ~,3y ° 7~1). ~3 ^#~k..w 3."~'~f~ ('i1}: ° ti4'444P,~4xL'I'C(Y4Y.S tY~tF Siz~.C<I9Ti
Memo to Bud Lortz and Joel Paulson
March 30, 2010
Page 2 of 11
Task 1: Initial Study (IS), Notice of Preparation (NOP), and Administrative Draft
Environmental Impact Report (ADEIR)
GGC will prepare the IS and NOP in accordance with CEQA Guidelines. The IS will include a
project description and evaluation of all environmental topics. For any impacts determined to be
potentially significant, the IS will include explanatory discussions identifying the environmental
issues that will need to be addressed in the EIR (providing justification for a focused EIR). The
decision to include an environmental topic in the focused EIR will be based on whether the
impact would be less than significant and/or whether there is sufficient information to make a
determination. For example, if a detailed technical study is required`to make an impact
determination (such as traffic), this topic will be deferred to the EIR so as not to delay
completion of the Initial Study and NOP and to keep the environmental review process moving
forward. This scope of work assumes that the Town will distribute the NOP as required by
CEQA.
Under each environmental topic of the focused EIR, the EIR will describe the existing
environmental setting, outline significance thresholds, describe methodologies employed to
assess impacts, identify significant impacts based on these thresholds, identify mitigation
measures proposed as part of the project or recommended by the EIR, and then define whether
or not the measures have mitigated significant impacts to a less than significant level. The EIR
will conform to all of the requirements identified by CEQA.
Based on preliminary discussions with Town staff, the Town will provide a number of technical
studies that will be required for the EIR, as indicated below. While the IS and focused EIR will
address all environmental topics required by CEQA, it is expected that detailed analysis will be
required under the following topics:
Aesthetics: Views of the project site are available from College Avenue (which overlooks
the site) and the Highway 17 freeway. However, existing trees along Los Gatos Creek (north
of the site.) screen most views of the site from the freeway. Trees located on the hillside on
the southern portion of the site would also partially screen views of the site from College
Avenue. It is expected that trees along Los Gatos Creek would continue to screen views of
the project from the freeway. However, visibility of the project from College Avenue would
depend on the extent of tree removal on the site's southern slope as well as the height of
proposed buildings. GGC will need to determine whether the proposed buildings could block
any overlook views from College Avenue and how proposed tree removal could affect
visibility of the proposed project from surrounding areas. Visibility of the project site from any
other public areas such as Los Gatos Creek Trail will also be assessed.
The visual analysis will assess the project's visual impact using CEQA significance criteria:
(1) changes in scenic vistas to the northeast from College Avenue (i.e. would the proposed
buildings block views of the Santa Clara Valley from College Avenue); (2) changes in visual
character due to proposed removal of existing buildings and trees; (3) impacts on scenic
resources from Highway 17; and (4) the project's introduction of light and glare and any
Memo to Bud Lortz and Joel Paulson
March 30, 2010
Page 3 of 11
impacts on .day or nighttime views in the area. In order to evaluate these impacts,, a visual
simulation will need to be prepared from one location on College Avenue (adjacent to the
site's southern boundary) in order to determine whether the project's will affect these views.
At present, filtered scenic vistas to the north (overlooking the site) are available from the
section of College Avenue located contiguous to the site.
At this preliminary stage, GGC assumes that the ROEM will produce an accurate and
realistic 3D computer-generated simulation from one viewpoint to be determined by GGC in
consultation with Town staff (likely from College Avenue). However, a contingency budget
has been included to cover the possible cost of retaining William Kanemoto & Associates
(WKA) to prepare this simulation in the event that ROEIVI cannot provide the simulation.
Air Quality: Under the proposed BAAQMD CEQA guidelines (adoption expected in April
2010)., the project's size falls below screening criteria for construction-related and
operational criteria pollutant emissions. Therefore, operational criteria pollutant emissions
will not be quantified, but the impact analysis will .qualitatively discuss air quality impacts.
Impact significance will be based on BAAQMD significance thresholds and recommended
mitigation measures. Since the project would involve development of a residential land use
within a few hundred feet of the Highway 17 freeway, the proposed BAAQMD guidelines will
require an analysis of community risks and hazards (i.e. potential exposure to toxic air
contaminants, TACs). For-any project involving siting of a new receptor, BAAQMD
guidelines require identification and evaluation of all TAC sources located within a 1,000-
foot radius. The EPA SCREENS Model will be used to estimate potential TAC exposure at
the project due to the adjacent Highway 17 freeway and other pollutant sources within 1,000
feet of the site. Potential health risks to project residents will be quantified and compared to
applicable BAAQMD criteria for TACs. Design measures will be recommended as necessary
to reduce health risks to aless-than-significant level.
Biological Resources: GGC assumes that the Town's consulting arborist, Arbor
Resources, will provide a tree evaluation that assesses the direct and indirect impacts of the
proposed project on the long-term health and vigor of existing trees on the site. However,
given the site's proximity to Los Gatos Creek, there is a potential that special-status species
and habitats could exist on undeveloped portions of the 1.58-acre site. Wood Biological
Consulting (WBC) will be responsible for evaluating the project's impact on existing
biological resources. WBC will conduct background research for special-status species and
habitats and a qualified wildlife biologist and botanist/wetlands ecologist will perform a
reconnaissance-level site assessment of existing habitats on the site and in the immediate
project vicinity. The EIR analysis will: 1) include a definition of impact types and significance
criteria; 2) identify direct, indirect and cumulative impacts to botanical resources (wetlands,
other special-status plant communities, and special-status plants) and wildlife species; and
3) present a table listing potential impacts. The EIR will provide conceptual mitigation
measures for regulated biological resources., recommending measures for avoidance and
mitigation that reduce biological impacts to aless-than-significant level.
Memo to Bud Lortz and Joel Paulson
March 30, 2010
Page 4 of 11
Based on our initial meeting, we assume that no project-related stormwater runoff will drain
directly to Los Gatos Creek nor will any new outfalls to the creek be created by the project.
The scope of this analysis is based on the proposed design concept that a storm drain will
be located in Dittos .Lane, extending from the site to East Main Street. At this point, it is
assumed that the project's storm drain will connect with an existing storm drain in East Main
Street. If this design concept changes and/or if it is determined that the project could directly
or indirectly affect aquatic habitats in Los Gatos Creek, a contingency budget has been
included to cover the cost for a fisheries biologist to evaluate impacts on the creek.
Cultural Resources: Since structures will have been removed from the site and are not a
part of this EIR analysis, there would be no historical resources issues associated with the
proposed project.
Holman & Associates will evaluate the project's potential effect on archaeological resources
(including historical archaeology), particularly due to the site's proximity to Los Gatos Creek.
Holman will complete a records search at the Archaeological Clearinghouse at Sonoma
State University and conduct a field reconnaissance to determine the potential to encounter
archaeological resources. Recommendations will be provided to ensure than any known and
unknown resources are adequately protected.
Geology, Seismicity, and Soils: A geologic hazards evaluation and soil engineering study
was completed by Earth Systems Pacific (ESP) in March 2010. This study did not identify
any significant geologic constraints except for seismic shaking, which is common to the
region, and possible slope stability concerns if oversteepening of site slopes in the
northwest margin of the site occurs as a result of project grading. It is assumed that this
study will be peer reviewed by the Town's geotechnical consultant and results of this review
and any subsequent information provided by ESP will be made available for use in the EIR.
GGC will summarize findings of this investigation, peer review comments, and any
subsequent investigations done in response to peer review comments.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Recent modifications to the CEQA Guidelines (March 2010)
include the addition of two new significance criteria related to greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions and climate change. These criteria require GHG emissions to be estimated for a
project and any conflicts with applicable GHG reduction plans, policies, or regulations.
Under the proposed BAAQMD CEQA guidelines (adopted expected in April 2010), the
project's size falls below the screening criteria for construction-related and operational
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Therefore, the project's GHG emissions will not be
quantified, but the impact analysis will qualitatively discuss the project's GHG/climate
change impacts. Impact significance will be based on BAAQMD significance thresholds and
whether BAAQMD recommended mitigation measures are being implemented. The impact
analysis will also evaluate project consistency with the Town's GHG policy and present the
project's GreenPoint Rated checklist, which is assumed to be provided by the Town/project
architect.
Memo to Bud Lortz and Joel Paulson
March 30, 2010
Page 5 of 11
Hazards: A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Phase II Environmental Soil
Sampling and Analysis were prepared by ES Geotechnologies (ESG). Preliminary review of
these reports and afollow-up clarification (email from Chris Cecile dated March 29'n)
indicates that there was an old buried trash pit (containing auto parts, metal and wood
debris, etc.) in the vicinity of Sample Location E3 and environmental characterization,
removal, and disposal are ongoing. In addition, other non-hazardous soil contaminants
(TPHo and nickel) were found in undocumented fill on the northeastern portion of the site
(samples E4, E5, and E6). While this fill will likely be stripped as part of geotechnical grading
operations at the site prior to receiving pavements or building pads, ESG recommended that
"non-hazardous soils exceeding residential screening levels should be capped, buried, or
removed from the site to either a Class II/III landfill or be used for fill on commercial or
industrial properties." The EIR will identify results of ESG studies and any subsequent
compliance reports by ESG to demonstrate the ESG recommendations were properly
implemented and potential public health risks are reduced to aless-than-significant level
(e.g. direct exposure of future residents for contaminated soil).
The General Plan's Fire Hazard Area Map indicates the project site is located within the Fire
Hazard Area. GGC will address wildfire hazards and review the project design for
consistency with applicable General Plan policies.
Hydrology and Water Quality: Since the project may involve the replacement of more than
10,000 square feet of impervious surface over the entire project site, GGC will identify
jurisdictional agencies and possible requirements, such as a storm water pollution
.prevention plan (SWPPP) and non-point source measures to minimize or eliminate pollutant
discharges from construction activities and from developed areas after construction
(pursuant to C.3.b.ii (3) requirements). GGC will complete this analysis, but will. rely on Town
Engineering to evaluate the adequacy of the proposed drainage plan to meet C.3
requirements and meet Town standards for downstream storm drain capacity in East Main
Street. While on-site infiltration/detention will be required to meet C.3 requirements, the
design of the proposed drainage system will also need to address the 100-year storm event
and Town Engineering drainage calculations will also need to address this storm event.
In addition, the proposed project site is located adjacent to Los Gatos Creek and could be
subject to flood hazards from storm events and inundation from potential failure of the
James J. Lenihan Dam. The EIR will rely on FEMA, County, and Town flood hazard
mapping to determine the potential for such hazards and identify available mitigation to
reduce any identified flood hazards on the site.
^ Land Use: The project site is currently designated by the General Plan as Medium Density
Residential (5 to 12 units/acre), but the Zoning Map designates this property as "R-1 D",
Single Family Residential Downtown. It appears that the project could require a General
Plan amendment and rezoning, although such amendments are not considered a significant
environmental impact. Nevertheless, the EIR will examine the project's consistency with
Memo to Bud Lortz and Joel Paulson
March 30, 2010
Page 6 of 11
existing General Plan policies and zoning requirements that pertain to the project site. In
addition, GGC will rely on land use density information provided by Town staff to assess the
consistency of the project's density with existing densities on surrounding lands. Based on
this and other criteria (e.g., project-related noise, aesthetics/visual, and traffic impacts), land
use compatibility with existing surrounding public and residential land uses will be evaluated.
^ Noise: The proposed residential development is considered anoise-sensitive use and it
would be subject to Title 24 requirements since it is amulti-family residential use. Edward L.
Pack Associates, Inc. will complete a detailed noise analysis. The analysis will include
conducting on-site noise measurements,. calculating existing and future 24-hour day-night
(Ldn) noise levels at the site, comparing these noise levels to Town and State noise
guidelines for residential uses, and estimating project-related noise increases along the
project's access road and evaluating noise impacts on adjacent residences. The noise
analysis will .also evaluate short-term noise impacts resulting from project-related
construction activities including operation of construction equipment on-site and increased
truck traffic on local streets. Potential impacts on any identified sensitive receptors will be
assessed, and measures to reduce the impacts of construction and operational noise will be
recommended as necessary to achieve compliance with noise guidelines and the Town's
Noise Ordinance.
^ Traffic, Circulation, and Parking: The Town's consulting traffic engineer, TJKM, will be
responsible for preparing the detailed traffic analysis. TJKM's findings and
recommendations will be presented in the EIR. GGC assumes that TJKM will adequately
address project-related and cumulative traffic impacts on local roadways and intersection
operations (including CMP intersections) as well as any traffic safety impacts associated
with the proposed access road (e.g., traffic conflicts with parking spaces and driveways
located along the proposed access road). Adequacy of proposed parking will be evaluated
by comparing the proposed number of parking spaces with Town code parking
requirements.
^ Topical Issues Required by CEQA: The EIR will include topics required by CEQA
including Effects Not Found to be Significant, Growth-inducing Impacts, Cumulative Impacts,
and Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. It is anticipated that the following topics will
be determined to have less-than-significant impacts and will not require detailed impact
analysis: Agriculture and Forest Resources, Mineral Resources, Population and Housing,
Public Services/Utilities, and Recreation.
Early in the process, GGC will work with Town staff to develop up to four alternatives for the
project. The following possible alternatives could be evaluated in the EIR: No Project
Alternative, Reduced Project Alternative, Off-site Project Alternative (only if there are other
suitable sites on Town-owned properties), and Modified Design Alternative. The latter
alternative would represent an alternative design that incorporates all the design-related
mitigation measures recommended in the EIR. Alternatives will be evaluated at a more
Memo to Bud Lortz and Joel Paulson
March 30, 2010
Page 7 of 11
general level of detail than the project, and the degree of impact will be compared to project
impacts.
Deliverables: Electronic Draft IS and NOP for Staff Review
25 Copies of the Final IS and NOP for Public Circulation
Electronic Administrative Draft EIR for Staff Review
Task 2: Prepare Draft EIR
After Town comments are received, GGC will incorporate requested changes and prepare the
Draft EIR. It is assumed the Town will be responsible for distributing the Draft EIR to all
agencies and individuals included on the distribution list, as well as preparation and distribution
of the Notice of Completion for the EIR.
Deliverables: 60 Copies of the Draft EIR
Task 3: Final EIR (Responses to Comments Document) and Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program
After all written and oral comments are received, GGC will respond to all relevant comments
and prepare the Responses to Comments document (RTC), or Final EIR, consistent with CEQA
Section 15132. This document will include a summary of comments received at the Planning
Commission public hearing, copies of all written comments, and responses. to all CEQA-relevant
comments. GGC assumes that the Town will provide transcripts of the public hearings.
In accordance with AB 3180, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) will be
prepared. The MMRP will specify the timing and issues that need to be adequately addressed
in this program. The MMRP will be provided as an attachment to the Responses to Comments
document.
Deliverables: Electronic Draft Response to Comments document for Staff Review
60 Copies of the Response to Comments document
Task 4: Attend Public Hearings
Under the terms of this proposal, GGC (Frederick and Valerie Geier) will attend up to three
public hearings: two meetings before the Planning Commission and one before the Town
Council. Attendance at any additional meetings or hearings, or attendance by other specialist
subcontractors will be on an extra-service basis.
Schedule
GGC will be able to commence work upon authorization by the Town. We estimate the following
schedule for completion of the work program:
Mema to Bud Lortz and Joel Paulson
March 30, 2010
Page 8 of 11
Task Duration
Receive Authorization to Proceed
Task 1: IS, NOP, ADEIR
Staff Review
Complete Final IS
IS/NOP Comment Period
Prepare Administrative Draft EIR
Staff Review
Task 2: Prepare Draft EIR
Public Review Period
Task 3: Prepare Response to Comments Document
and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Public Review
Task 4: Attend Public Hearings
April 16, 2010
May 14 (4 Weeks)
May 21 (1 Week)
May 28 (1 Week)
June 1 to June 30 (30 Days)
July 1 to August 26 (8 Weeks)
August 27 to September 10 (2 Weeks)
September 10 to September 24 (2 Weeks)
September 27 to November 12 (45 Days)
November 12 to December 10 (4 Weeks)
December 13 to December 29 (15 Days)
According to Town Hearing Schedules
The amount of time required by Town staff for document review is assumed and subject to
variation at the discretion of the Town. The schedule for the ADEIR assumes responses to the
NOP do not raise any substantial new issues and that technical studies being prepared by the
Town are provided no later than July 15`, when the ADEIR is scheduled to begin. This schedule
also assumes that comments are typical in volume and do not require any new technical studies
in addition to those already anticipated.
COStS
GGC proposes to undertake the scope of work described above, including the preparation of
administrative and public review environmental documents and attendance at up to three public
hearings for a fee of labor and expenses not to exceed $79,614 plus $17,260 as contingency
(totaling $96,874). Contingency costs are specified in the above scope of work and summarized
below under Town Responsibilities, Assumptions, and Contingencies. Any services beyond
those specified in this proposal will be billed on a time-plus-expenses basis or negotiated under
a separate contract. Fees will be billed on a monthly basis. A breakdown of costs by personnel,
time, and expenditures for each of the tasks identified in this proposal is provided as follows:
Memo to Bud Lortz and Joel Paulson
March 30, 2010
Page 9 of 11
.. _ ____ _ .... T _,~ _...._. _.. ~.v. _.....M __. ~ .. , ...
Hours . .
__...__... Biologica Jeff
Tasks F. Geier V. Geier H. Giroux Staff WKA I Holman Pack Total Hours
(Needed to focus out topi
1 Initial Study cs)
_
Prepare Initial Study 16 16 _ 32
- Cultural Resources 4 $1,800 4
- Population and Housing 8 8
_.. .....
2, Admirnstrative Draft E1R
._
__
__
Project ManagementlEdding .._._... . 30..... _ _: 30__...... .. _ 60
Editing
~. _. 40
- 40
n.
~_...._ _
Graphics 30 30
Introduction 4 4
Summary
....__ _. ~6 ...
_.
~ __
_
_ a....~ , . u. _.... ._....__
Protect Description 6 6
.. ___
Mitigatio
Environmental Settmgflmpactsl n __
_
Aesthetics 12
_
. 12
Alr Quality and Climate Change
_ _........... __
.: _16 _.... _
8 _:.._ _..... _. _ ..24
_...
__.....
Biological Resources
12
_~..._
$9,610
_ 12
Geology and
Seismici~ ~..~~ x ~._.. ,. _......_.8~ 8
,
Hazards and Hazardous Materials 8 ;;
Hydrology acid Water Quality ~~ _...
16 _
16
Land Use and Planning 8 8 _ 16
_
Traffic, Circulation, and Parking 8
_ _ _ 8
..Noise _.._.._ _._ __ 8 _ _
__ $2,800 8
Public Services and Utilities 8 8
Required Considerations 12 12 24
3. Draft E1R
.
_~_. _M, ~
~ _.,
_
Prepare Draft EIR ' 16 16 8 40
4. Responses fo Comments Document and Mitigati on Monitoring Program
m..W _ _...~....
_ . .._
_...,.
__...
.Prepare Responses to Commerifs 40 40 16 96
5. Public Hearings
__._. __
_ __
Attend Three Hearings 20 20 40 ,
i
-r,+~r u,..~~~ 91R 190 8 94 510
Labor Costs ..._. ~...... _..
094
'Town/Public Comment, and Fisheries Biologist) $12,000 $5,260 $17,260
'Total Gost (With Optional Tasks) $96,874
-^ _._ -._
NOTES: Printing and distribution costs include 25 ISs, 60 DEIRs, and 60 Final RTCs. Labor estimate for Task 3 assumes about 75
comments are received and require responses. If an excessive number of comments are received or additional analysis is required,
there may be additional costs.
Town Responsibilities, Assumptions, and Contingencies
Town Responsibilities
1. The Town's Project Architect (ROEM) will provide the following information:
^ Two hard copy sets of project plans (including a grading and drainage plan) and
electronic files containing project plans in pdf format.
Memo to Bud Lortz and Joel Paulson
March 30,.2010
Page 10 of 11
^ Visual simulation of project from one viewpoint location to be determined by GGC in
consultation with Town staff.
^ GreenPoint Rated Checklist for the project.
2. The Town will provide the following detailed studies, as outlined in the above scope of work:
^ Arborist's Report (Arbor Resources)
^ Peer review results by the Town's geotechnical consultant of the geologic hazards report
by Earth Systems Pacific, and any subsequent information submitted by Earth Systems
Pacific will be made available for use in the EIR
^ Traffic and Parking Study (TJKM)
3. Existing surrounding residential densities (compiled by Town staff)
4. Town Engineering will demonstrate adequacy of existing storm drain capacity in East Main
Street and Dittos Lane (if applicable.) to accommodate increased runoff associated with the
proposed project.
5. Town Engineering will calculate runoff volumes to demonstrate compliance with C.3
requirements and any increases in 100-year flood flows downstream of the site.
These items need to be provided at least six weeks prior to completion of the EIR.
Assumptions
Since this proposed scope of work and cost estimate is based on a conceptual design, GGC
has made the following design assumptions:
1. Based on our initial meeting, GGC assumes that no project-related stormwater runoff will
drain directly to Los Gatos Creek nor will any new outfalls to the creek be created by the
project. The scope of this analysis is based on the proposed design concept that a storm
drain will be located in Dittos Lane, extending from the site to East Main Street, and
connecting with an existing storm drain in East Main Street.
2. GGC assumes that ESG will provide clarification as necessary to address issues presented
above in this proposal.
3. GGC assumes that this site will have no structures at the commencement of the CEQA
environmental review process, but the environmental analysis will acknowledge that the site
was previously developed, describe background studies (Phase I and II studies), and
demonstrate compliance with these studies' recommendations (presumably demonstrated
by ESG).
Memo to Bud Lortz and Joel Paulson
April 5, 2010
Page 11 of 11
Aesthetics: If the project architect does not provide a visual simulation of the .project from
one viewpoint location (to be determined by GGC in consultation with Town staff), WKA will
prepare the simulation.
2. Biological Resources: If the project's stormwater drainage system concept varies from the
above assumed concept and a detailed analysis of impacts on Los Gatos Creek (and
aquatic habitats) is required, a fisheries biologist will be retained to complete this analysis.
Geier & Geier Consulting, Inc.
,~ m m
~„ `" '
~,
Valerie Chew Geier
~µ~ ~~
Frederick Geier