Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-11-18; City Council; 19629; Request for Approval- Bridges at AviaraCITY OF CARLSBAD - AGENDA BILL 19.629AB# MTG- 11/18/08 DEPT. PLN REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF AGREEMENTS FOR THE PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE BRIDGES AT AVIARA EIR 06-01 DEPT. HEAD CITY ATTY. CITY MGR. RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council ADOPT Resolution No. 2008-302 , APPROVING agreements with BRG Consulting Inc. and Acacia Investors, LLC., for the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR 06-01) for the Bridges at Aviara (GPA 05-07/ZC 05-04/LCPA 05-04/LFMP 87- 21(B)/CT 05-11/PUD 05-06/CDP 05-26/HDP 05-06/SDP 08-04/CUP 08-14). ITEM EXPLANATION: Acacia Investors, LLC. has submitted applications for the approval of a senior housing development on property generally located north of Aviara Oaks Elementary School, south of Cassia Road, east of Ambrosia Lane, and west of Skimmer Court as shown on the attached location map. The project includes mass grading and the construction of 428 market rate senior condominiums with underground parking, 65 income restricted senior apartments, common indoor and outdoor recreation facilities, and Reach "E" of Poinsettia Lane. Based on a preliminary review of the project, staff has concluded that the project could result in potentially significant environmental impacts. Consequently, the project will require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report. Staff sent requests for proposals for the preparation of the Bridges at Aviara Environmental Impact Report (EIR 06-01) to 14 consulting firms, five (5) of which submitted formal proposals to the Planning Department. A review panel made up of staff members from the Planning and Engineering Departments conducted a thorough review of each proposal, the responses to the scope of work, the experience of the individuals involved and the firm itself, and performance and product delivery schedules. The BRG proposal was rated the highest of all of the submittals by the review panel. It is well prepared, exhibited a thorough understanding of the scope of the work, and includes an acceptable schedule and cost proposal. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the attached consulting agreement with BRG Consulting, Inc. and the agreement with Acacia Investors, LLC, as the applicant. DEPARTMENT CONTACT: Christer Westman 760-602-4614 cwest@ci.carlsbad.ca.us FOR CITY CLERKS USE ONLY. COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED CONTINUED WITHDRAWN AMENDED X D D D D CONTINUED TO DATE SPECIFIC CONTINUED TO DATE UNKNOWN RETURNED TO STAFF OTHER - SEE MINUTES D D D D Page 2 FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of the consulting services to prepare the EIR is $211,702. The applicant, Acacia Investors, LLC, will pay for the EIR per the attached agreement. EXHIBITS: 1. Location Map 2. City Council Resolution No. 2008-302. with Exhibit 1: Agreement with BRG Consulting, Inc., for the Preparation of an EIR, and Exhibit 2: Agreement between the City and Acacia Investors, LLC. for payment of the EIR consultant. 3. Proposal to prepare an EIR for the Bridges at Aviara development project, without appendix, prepared by BRG Consulting Inc. (on file with the Planning Department). EXHIBIT 1 WO7 TO SCALE SITEMAP Bridges atAviara EXHIBIT 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 follows: RESOLUTION NO.2008-302 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A CONSULTING AGREEMENT WITH BRG CONSULTING INC. FOR THE PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH ACACIA INVESTORS, LLC. FOR PAYMENT OF THE FEES ASSOCIATED WITH THE BRG CONSULTING INC. AGREEMENT. CASE NAME: BRIDGES AT AVIARA CASE NO.: EIR 06-01 The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does hereby resolve as 1. That a consulting agreement with BRG Consulting Inc. for consulting services to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Bridges at Aviara (Exhibit 1), and an agreement with Acacia Investors, LLC. for the payment of the EIR consultant services (Exhibit 2) are hereby approved and the City Manager is authorized to execute said agreements. 2. Following the City Manager's execution of said agreements, the City Clerk is directed to forward copies of this resolution and said agreements to BRG Consulting Inc. Attention: Tim Gnibus, 304 Ivey Street, San Diego, CA 92101; Acacia Investors, LLC. Attention: Don Augustine, 1650 Hotel Circle North Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92108; and, the Planning Department. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad on the i«ti-. day of NnvpmhPT- 2008, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Lewis, Hall, Packard and Nygaard. NOES: None. ABSENT: Council Member Kulcbin. , Mayor ATTI E M. yvOpD/City Clerk O (SEAL)>. ••TVggP' ,>V,,*>' AGREEMENT WITH CONSULTANT FOR THE PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT BRIDGES AT AVIARA EIR THIS AGREEMENT, made this / 9dav of mmAgpi 20 OK between the CITY OF CARLSBAD, a municipal corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as "CITY," and BRG Consulting Inc. hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR". RECITALS WHEREAS, the CITY has entered into an agreement with Acacia Investors LLC. hereinafter called applicant, wherein the CITY agrees to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed project identified as The Bridges at Aviara which is generally located south of Cassia Road, east of Ambrosia Lane, north of Aviara Oaks Elementary School, and west of Skimmer Court and more precisely shown on the plat marked Attachment 1 , attached hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the CONTRACTOR has the qualifications to prepare the required Environmental Impact Report; and WHEREAS, it is understood that the CONTRACTOR shall be an independent contractor of the CITY; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual covenants and conditions, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. CONTRACTOR OBLIGATIONS CONTRACTOR shall prepare an Environmental Impact Report on the subject project in accord with the California Environmental Quality Act as implemented by the 1 Rev. 07-28-08 State Guidelines and by CITY in Title 19 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code and its implementing resolutions. In carrying out this obligation the CONTRACTOR'S duties shall include the following: (a) The CONTRACTOR shall, consistent with the Work Program contained in Attachment 2, (1) make all necessary and required field explorations, reviews and tests; (2) make all necessary and required laboratory tests and analyses; (3) appear and be prepared to answer questions and prepare testimony on the final Environmental Impact Report at all public hearings before the Planning Commission and the City Council prior to the certification of the report; (4) make all reports necessary to comply with the requirements of this section. Before preparing the draft report, the CONTRACTOR shall submit copies of a preliminary report (screen check EIR) to the Planning Director for staff review as stipulated in Attachment 2. The CONTRACTOR shall revise the preliminary report as requested by staff in order to make it suitable for draft EIR review. (b) CONTRACTOR shall prepare a draft report in compliance with the Work Program contained in Attachment 2 on file at the Planning Department (unless otherwise stated in this agreement), attached hereto and made a part hereof and with applicable state law and CITY ordinances. The CONTRACTOR shall submit to CITY copies of the EIR as stipulated in Attachment 2 plus a reproducible master of the draft Environmental Impact Report to the CITY. (c) CONTRACTOR shall attempt to determine as soon as possible in the study of the area involved, those factors which could severely inhibit or prohibit the proposed project. If it appears that such factors are present, CONTRACTOR shall so inform the Planning Director who in turn will discuss with the applicant the feasibility of continuing with the report. The objective of this subsection of the agreement is to 2 Rev. 07-28-08 minimize the cost if these adverse factors exist. (d) CONTRACTOR shall prepare and file with the CITY written responses to all comments received subsequent to public notice that the draft Environmental Impact Report has been filed. CONTRACTOR shall also prepare any response necessary to matters raised at the public hearings. The written responses shall be prepared in a form that will permit the responses to be incorporated into the final Environmental Impact Report. 2. CITY OBLIGATIONS (a) The CITY will make payment to the CONTRACTOR as provided for in this agreement. (b) The CITY will make available to the CONTRACTOR any documents, studies, or other information in its possession related to the proposed project. (c) The CITY will review the Preliminary Report presented by the CONTRACTOR within fifteen working days of their receipt and make written comments to the CONTRACTOR within that time period. (d) The CITY shall provide the CONTRACTOR with copies of all written comments received on the draft Environmental Impact Report subsequent to public notice that the draft Environmental Impact Report has been filed and is available for public review. 3. TIME OF COMPLETION Time is of the essence in carrying out the terms of this agreement. It is understood that inclement weather conditions may delay the completion of field work. The CONTRACTOR will be allowed as many additional days as are necessary to 3 Rev. 07-28-08 compensate for days lost due to inclement weather. The CONTRACTOR shall submit to the CITY copies of the Preliminary Environmental Impact Report within that period of time stipulated in Attachment 2 upon the signing of this agreement by both concerned parties. The CONTRACTOR shall submit to the CITY the draft Environmental Impact Report as stipulated in Attachment 2. 4. PAYMENT The CONTRACTOR will be paid a maximum of $211,702.00 dollars for all work necessary to carry out the requirements of this agreement. Actual payment shall be based on the cost of the report based on the costs as set forth in Attachment 2 on file at the Planning Department. The CONTRACTOR shall be paid within 14 days, in response to invoice, for compensable services toward the completion of the Environmental Impact Report in accordance with Paragraph 1 above. 5. LIMITS OF THE OBLIGATION The limits of the obligation of the CITY under this agreement is the sum of $211,702.00 which amount is estimated to be sufficient to compensate the CONTRACTOR for all services performed hereunder during the terms of this agreement. In the event at any time it appears to the CONTRACTOR that said sum may not be sufficient, he shall immediately so notify the Planning Director. He will not perform any work or incur any obligation beyond said sum of $211,702.00 without appropriate amendment to this agreement. 6. CHANGES IN WORK If, in the course of this contract, changes seem merited by the CONTRACTOR or the CITY and informal consultations indicate that a change in the conditions of the 4 Rev. 07-28-08 contract is warranted, the CONTRACTOR or the CITY may request a change in the contract. Such changes shall be processed by the CITY in the following manner. A letter outlining the required changes shall be forwarded to the CITY or CONTRACTOR to inform them of the proposed changes along with a statement of estimated changes in charges or time schedule. After reaching mutual agreement on the proposal, a supplemental agreement shall be prepared by the CITY and approved by the CITY according to the procedures described in Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.28.080. Such supplemental agreement shall not render ineffective or invalid unaffected portions of the agreement. Changes requiring immediate action by the CONTRACTOR or the CITY shall be ordered by the Planning Director who will inform a principal of the CONTRACTOR'S firm of the necessity of such action and follow up with a supplemental agreement covering such work. The lump sum amounts detailed in this agreement shall be adjusted for changes, either additive or deductive, in the scope of work, provided such changes are processed according to the procedures in this paragraph. 7. COVENANTS AGAINST CONTINGENT FEES The CONTRACTOR warrants that their firm has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working for the CONTRACTOR, to solicit or secure this agreement, and that CONTRACTOR has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or any other consideration contingent upon, or resulting from, the award or making of this agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, the CITY shall have the right to annul this agreement without liability, or, in its 5 Rev. 07-28-08 discretion, to deduct from the agreement price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fees, gift, or contingent fee. 8. NONDISCRIMINATION CLAUSE The CONTRACTOR shall comply with the state and federal laws regarding nondiscrimination. 9. TERMINATION OF CONTRACT The CITY may terminate this agreement at any time by giving written notice to the CONTRACTOR of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at least fifteen days prior to the effective date of the termination. In the event of termination, all finished or unfinished documents and other materials prepared pursuant to this agreement shall become its property. Upon termination for reasons other than breach of this agreement CITY shall pay CONTRACTOR the reasonable value of the services completed to the date of notice of determination. 10. DISPUTES If a dispute should arise regarding the performance of work under this agreement, the following procedure shall be used to resolve any question of fact or interpretation not otherwise settled by agreement between parties. Such questions, if they become identified as a part of a dispute among persons operating under the provisions of this contract, shall be reduced to writing by the principal of the CONTRACTOR or the CITY Planning Director. A copy of such documented dispute shall be forwarded to both parties involved along with recommended methods of resolution which would be of benefit to both parties. The CITY Planning Director or 6 Rev. 07-28-08 principal receiving the letter shall reply to the letter along with a recommended method of resolution within ten (10) days. If the resolution thus obtained is unsatisfactory to the aggrieved party, a letter outlining the dispute shall be forwarded to the City Council for their resolution through the office of the City Manager. The City Council may then opt to consider the directed solution to the problem. In such cases, the action of the City Council shall be binding upon the parties involved, although nothing in this procedure shall prohibit the parties seeking remedies available to them at law. 11. CLAIMS AND LAWSUITS The CONTRACTOR agrees that any contract claim submitted to the City must be asserted as part of the contract process as set forth in this agreement and not in anticipation of litigation or in conjunction with litigation. The CONTRACTOR acknowledges that if a false claim is submitted to the City, it may be considered fraud and the CONTRACTOR may be subject to criminal prosecution. The CONTRACTOR acknowledges that California Government Code Sections 12650 et seq.. the False Claims Act, provides for civil penalties where a person knowingly submits a false claim to a public entity. These provisions include false claims made with deliberate ignorance of the false information or in reckless disregard of the truth or falsity of information. If the City of Carlsbad seeks to recover penalties pursuant to the False Claims Act, it is entitled to recover its litigation costs, including attorney's fees. The CONTRACTOR acknowledges that the filing of a false claim may subject the CONTRACTOR to an administrative debarment proceeding wherein the CONTRACTOR may be prevented to act as a contractor on any public work or improvement for a period of up to five (5) years. The CONTRACTOR acknowledges debarment by another jurisdiction is 7 Rev. 07-28-08 grounds for the City of Carlsbad to disqualify the CONTRACTOR from the selection process. £^2^ (Initial) The provisions of Carlsbad Municipal Code Sections 3.32.025, 3.32.026, 3.32.027 and 3.32.028 pertaining to false claims are incorporated herein by reference. (Initial) 12. STATUS OF THE CONTRACTOR The CONTRACTOR shall perform the services provided for herein in CONTRACTOR'S own way as an independent contractor and in pursuit of CONTRACTOR'S independent calling, and not as an employee of the CITY. CONTRACTOR shall be under control of the CITY only as to the result to be accomplished, but shall consult with the CITY as provided for in the request for proposal. The persons used by the CONTRACTOR to provide services under this agreement shall not be considered employees of the CITY for any purposes whatsoever. The CONTRACTOR is an independent contractor of the CITY. The payment made to the CONTRACTOR pursuant to the contract shall be the full and complete compensation to which the CONTRACTOR is entitled. The CITY shall not make any federal or state tax withholdings on behalf of the CONTRACTOR or his/her employees or subcontractors. The CITY shall not be required to pay any workers' compensation insurance or unemployment contributions on behalf of the CONTRACTOR or his/her employees or subcontractors, on behalf of the CONTRACTOR. The CONTRACTOR agrees to indemnify the CITY for any tax, retirement contribution, social security, overtime payment, or workers' compensation payment which the CITY may be required 8 Rev. 07-28-08 to make on behalf of the CONTRACTOR or any employee of the CONTRACTOR for work done under this agreement. The CONTRACTOR shall be aware of the requirements of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 and shall comply with those requirements, including, but not limited to, verifying the eligibility for employment of all agents, employees, subcontractors and CONTRACTORS that are included in this agreement. 13. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS All documents and materials prepared pursuant to this agreement are the property of the CITY. The CITY shall have the unrestricted authority to publish, disclose, distribute and otherwise use, in whole or in part, any reports, data, or other materials prepared under this agreement. 14. REPRODUCTION RIGHTS The CONTRACTOR agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of the work pursuant to this contract shall be vested in CITY and hereby agrees to relinquish all claims to such copyrights in favor of CITY. 15. RELEASE OF INFORMATION BY CONTRACTOR Any reports, information or other data, prepared or assembled by the CONTRACTOR under this agreement shall not be made available to any individual or organization by the CONTRACTOR without prior written approval of the CITY. 16. HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT CONTRACTOR agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City of Carlsbad and its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses including attorney fees arising out of the performance of the work 9 Rev. 07-28-08 described herein caused in whole or in part by any willful misconduct or negligent act or omission of the CONTRACTOR, any subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them or anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable, except where caused by the active negligence, sole negligence, or willful misconduct of the City of Carlsbad. CONTRACTOR shall at its own expense, upon written request by the City, defend any such suit or action brought against the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. CONTRACTOR'S indemnification of City shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the CONTRACTOR. 17. ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT CONTRACTOR shall not assign this contract or any part hereof or any monies due or to become due thereunder without prior written consent of the CITY. 18. SUBCONTRACTING If the CONTRACTOR shall subcontract any of the work to be performed under this contract by CONTRACTOR, the CONTRACTOR shall be fully responsible to the CITY for the acts and omissions of its subcontractor and of the persons either directly or indirectly employed by its subcontractor, as it is for the acts and omissions of persons directly employed by it. Nothing contained in this contract shall create any employee or contractual relationship between any subcontractor of CONTRACTOR and the CITY. The CONTRACTOR shall bind every subcontractor and every subcontractor of the subcontractor by their terms of this contract applicable to its work unless specifically noted to the contrary in the subcontract in question approved in writing by the CITY. 10 Rev. 07-28-08 19. PROHIBITED INTEREST No official of the CITY who is authorized in such capacity on behalf of the CITY to negotiate, make, accept or approve, or to take part in negotiating, making, accepting or approving any architectural, engineering, inspection, construction, or material supply contract or subcontract in connection with the construction of the project, shall become directly or indirectly interested personally in this contract or in any part thereof. No officer, employee, architect, attorney, engineer or inspector of or for the CITY who is authorized in such capacity and on behalf of the CITY to exercise any executive, supervisory or other similar functions in connection with the performance of this contract shall become directly or indirectly interested personally in this contract or any part hereof. 20. VERBAL AGREEMENT OR CONVERSATION No verbal agreement or conversation with any officer, agent or employee or the CITY, either before, during or after the execution of this contract, shall affect or modify any of the terms or obligations herein contained, nor shall such verbal agreement or conversation entitle the CONTRACTOR to any additional payment whatsoever under the terms of this contract. 21. SUCCESSOR OR ASSIGNS Subject to the provision of Paragraph 10, "Hold Harmless Agreement", all terms, conditions, and provisions hereof shall inure to and shall bind each of the parties hereto, and each of their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns. 11 Rev. 07-28-08 22. EFFECTIVE DATE This agreement shall be effective on and from the day and year first written above. 23. CONFLICT OF INTEREST The CONTRACTOR shall file a Conflict of Interest Statement with the City Clerk in accordance with the requirements of the City of Carlsbad Conflict of Interest Code. The CONTRACTOR shall report investments or interests in all four categories. 24. INSURANCE The CONTRACTOR shall obtain and maintain for the duration of the contract and any and all amendments insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may arise out of or in connection with performance of the work hereunder by the CONTRACTOR, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. The insurance will be obtained from an insurance carrier admitted and authorized to do business in the State of California. The insurance carrier is required to have a current Best's Key Rating of not less than "A-:VII". OR with a surplus line insurer on the State of California's List of Eligible Surplus Line Insurers (LESLI) with a rating in the latest Best's Key Rating Guide of at least "A:X". A. Coverages and Limits. CONTRACTOR shall maintain the types of coverages and minimum limits indicated herein, unless a lower amount is approved by the City Attorney or City Manager: 1. Comprehensive General Liability Insurance. $1,000,000 combined single-limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If the 12 Rev. 07-28-08 submitted policies contain aggregate limits, general aggregate limits shall apply separately to the work under this contract or the general aggregate shall be twice the required per occurrence limit. 2. Automobile Liability (if the use of an automobile is involved for CONTRACTOR'S work for the City). $1,000,000 combined single-limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability. Workers' Compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employer's Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury. B. Additional Provisions. CONTRACTOR shall ensure that the policies of insurance required under this agreement contain, or are endorsed to contain, the following provisions. 1. The City shall be named as an additional insured on all policies excluding Workers' Compensation. 2. The CONTRACTOR shall furnish certificates of insurance to the City before commencement of work. 3. The CONTRACTOR shall obtain occurrence coverage. 4. This insurance shall be in force during the life of the agreement and any extension thereof and shall not be canceled without 30 days prior written notice to the City sent by certified mail. 5. If the CONTRACTOR fails to maintain any of the insurance coverages required herein, then the City will have the option to declare the CONTRACTOR in breach, or may purchase replacement insurance or pay the premiums that are due on existing policies in order that the required coverages may be 13 Rev. 07-28-08 n maintained. The CONTRACTOR is responsible for any payments made by the City to obtain or maintain such insurance and the City may collect the same from the CONTRACTOR or deduct the amount paid from any sums due the CONTRACTOR under this agreement. 25. RESPONSIBLE PARTIES The name of the persons who are authorized to give written notices or to receive written notice on behalf of the City and on behalf of the CONTRACTOR in connection with the foregoing are as follows: For City: Title: Senior Planner Name: Christer Westman Address: 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad. CA 92008 For Contractor: Title: Vice President Name: Tim Gnibus. AICP Address: 304 Iw Street San Diego. CA 92101-2030 Architect/License Number: N/A Architect/License Number: N/A 26. BUSINESS LICENSE CONTRACTOR shall obtain and maintain a City of Carlsbad Business License for the duration of the contract. 27. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This agreement, together with any other written document referred to or 14 Rev. 07-28-08 \ tT"?' I ft contemplated herein, embody the entire agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Neither this agreement nor any provision hereof may be amended, modified, waived or discharges except by an instrument in writing executed by the party against which enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought. Executed by CONTRACTOR this JO*** day of OC/o4></~ 20 CONTRACTOR: BRG Consulting Inc. (Name of Contractor) CITY OF CARLSBAD, a municipal corporation of the State of California By: City'MaViager or Moyor^ (sign here) ERICH R LATHERS, PRESIDENT (print name/title) Byj (sign here) (print name/title) (Proper notarial acknowledgment of execution by CONTRACTOR must be attached). (Chairman, president or vice-president and secretary, assistant secretary, CFO or assistant treasurer must sign for corporations. Otherwise, the corporation must attach a resolution certified by the secretary or assistant secretary under corporate seal empowering the officers) signing to bind the corporation.) (If signed by an individual partner, the partnership must attach a statement of partnership authorizing the partner to execute this instrument). APPROVED AS TO FORM: RONALD R. BALL, City Attorney By: Assistant City Attorney 15 Rev. 07-28-08 \fi STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO On A9-/V- o& _ before me, U.CtfoMe.'Z- Notary Public, personally appeared <fr <€ tC.fr fZ. L /» X"vy ^g.S _ , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the_p«fson(s) whosejiame(s)Lis/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me thatjbe/she/they executed the same inJiis/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by .his/her/their sjgnaturefs^ on the instrument the Betsoa(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the.pens£in(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal.COMM. §18083734 Notary PuMicSanDitgo (Signature of Notary) Rev. 12/17/2007 CORPORATE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of BRG Consulting, Inc., having been duly assembled; and, WHEREAS, said Board of Directors does wish to install Erich R. Lathers as President of the corporation; and, WHEREAS, Mr. Lathers having accepted the office and responsibilities of the office of President of the Corporation; it is RESOLVED, that Erich R. Lathers be, and is, installed as President of BRG Consulting; and, RESOLVED FURTHER that, Mr. Lathers, as President, may bind the Corporation to any action to come before the Corporation by affixing his singular signature. The undersigned hereby certifies that she is the duly elected and qualified Secretary and the custodian of the books and records and seal of BRG Consulting, Inc., a corporation duly formed pursuant to the laws of the State of California and that the foregoing is a true record of a resolution duly adopted at a meeting of the Board of Directors and that said meeting was held in accordance with state law and the Bylaws of the above-named Corporation on April 18,2000, and that said resolution is now in full force and effect without modification or rescission. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have executed my name as Secretary and have hereunto affixed the corporate seal of the above-named Corporation this September 29.2003. Teresa Torices Secretary NOT TO SCALE SITEMAP Bridges atAviara EIR Scope of Work tor the Bridges at Aviara Project SCOPE OF WORK AND DELIVERABLES BRG will prepare an EIR for the proposed project that addresses all project components as well as current and future discretionary actions associated with implementation of the project. We understand that the CEQA document must ultimately be certified as reflecting the independent judgment of the City. We understand that City staff will review screencheck documents and provide comments, and our work will be responsive to the guidance provided by the City. BRG wili work closely with the City throughout the CEQA process and follow the City Environmental Review Procedures. BRG will prepare environmental documents that comply with the criteria, standards and procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq.) as amended, the Carlsbad Environmental Protection Ordinance (Title 19 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code), and the regulations, requirements and procedures of any other responsible public agency or any agency with jurisdiction by law over the project. If there are any conflicts between the City of Carlsbad's requirements and those of any other agency, the City's shall prevail because the City is the CEQA Lead Agency. The EIR will assemble all available data, provide an independent evaluation of any existing data, originate new studies (where applicable), and provide an assessment of the probable short and long-term significant impacts and cumulative impacts of the project. The EIR will provide an evaluation of all feasible mitigation measures that could be carried out to reduce or eliminate adverse impacts of the proposed project. BRG will work closely with City staff to identify project alternatives, which avoid or reduce project-related impacts and provide a quantitative, comparative analysis of each alternative. The following provides a detailed description of our proposed scope of services: Task 1 Protect Initiation Project initiation will involve attendance at a kick-off meeting (see Task 10), initial data collection, and a site visit. In preparation for the kick-off meeting, BRG will prepare a list of data needs and a refined project schedule. As an outcome of the meeting, the project team will have a clear understanding of the roles of each team member. The overall program approach will be discussed and the schedule will be refined. Project goals and objectives will be identified as well as potential alternatives to be evaluated in the EIR. Subtask 1.1 Data Collection and Site Visit BRG will conduct initial data collection for the project (e.g., obtain current ambient air quality data, obtain farmland mapping categories from the Department of Conservation, etc.) and review the existing environmental database. We will conduct a site visit to obtain a full understanding of the existing environmental setting of the project site and surrounding land uses and determine potential locations for view simulations. Site photos will also be taken of the project area. Subtask 1.2 Project Description BRG will prepare a Project Description of the proposed project, suitable for inclusion in the EIR. The purpose of this task is to ensure that we have a complete understanding of the project prior to commencing September 17.2006 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project environmental analysis. The City will be responsible for the preparation and distribution of the Notice of Preparation (NOP). Task 2 First Screencheck Pratt EIR BRG will prepare a First Screencheck Draft EIR for the project. We understand the need for the environmental analysis to follow the thread of logic from beginning to end (i.e., setting, threshold of significance, impact, mitigation and conclusions) and that conclusions must be supported by fact. We understand that the role of an EIR is to identify substantial evidence that there may be a significant effect and where there is disagreement among experts, disclose the disagreement and state the lead agency's position. The EIR will include the sections listed below. Table of Contents The EIR will begin with a list of its contents including identification of all tables, figures and Technical Appendices. Introduction The Introduction will define the purpose, scope and legislative authority of the EIR, requirements of CEQA and other pertinent environmental rules and regulations. This section will also describe the EIR process, structure, intended uses of the EIR, required contents and its relationship to other potential responsible or trustee agencies. Supporting maps and figures will be provided. Executive Summary The Executive Summary will be prepared in accordance with CEQA Guideline §15123. This section will summarize the proposed project including the project's technical and economic characteristics. This section will identify each significant effect of the project, with proposed mitigation measures which would reduce that effect; known areas of controversy including issues raised by agencies and the public; and, issues to be resolved including the choice among alternatives and whether or how to mitigate significant effects. The Executive Summary will also include a list of required discretionary approvals and corresponding agency with approval authority. Project Description The Project Description will be prepared in accordance with CEQA Guideline §15124, and provide the project location, including project location maps, within the regional context, and a description of the proposed project, including the proposed land use site plan and circulation. This section will provide an overview of the project's background and history. The Project Description will list the basic goals and objectives of the project. In addition, the section will identify the scope of the proposed project that will serve as the "Basis of Analysis." Lastly, the Project Description will include a discussion of the environmental procedures and intended uses of the EIR, as well as list the discretionary permits and approvals required for project implementation. Maps and figures will be provided to support text descriptions as necessary. Iff September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project Environmental Setting The Environmental Setting will be prepared in accordance with CEQA Guideline §15125. The section will provide an overview of the local and regional physical environmental conditions. This section will describe the existing site conditions, including a description of the existing land uses and natural resources occurring on the project site. The Environmental Setting section will be detailed enough to constitute the baseline physical conditions by which impact significance can be determined. Environmental Impact Analysis The Environmental Impact Analysis section will address all the environmental topics listed as potentially significant in the City's CEQA checklist, some of which will be readily identified as having no potential for an adverse environmental effect and can be treated briefly as "effects found not to be significant" (CEQA Guidelines §15128). Each of the environmental topics with the potential for significant impacts will be fully addressed pursuant to CEQA Guideline §15126, with the EIR analysis including a description of the relevant environmental setting, criteria for determining significance of environmental impacts, potential environmental impacts, level of significance of environmental impacts, recommended mitigation measures to significantly reduce or avoid the significant impacts, and an analysis of significance or residual impacts after mitigation measures are applied. The EIR will provide an evaluation of feasible mitigation measures that could be carried out to reduce or eliminate adverse impacts of the proposed project. Where several mitigation measures are available, the basis for selection from among these measures will be discussed. The discussion of mitigation measures will provide the background for findings under CEQA Guidelines §15091 (a). Mitigation measures will be discussed in sufficient detail to provide the basis for the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and comply with CEQA Guideline § 15126.4. The following section summarizes the BRG Team approach to the primary technical analyses for the EIR. All text will be supported by figures, tables, and charts as appropriate. BRG will perform all EIR analyses, with the assistance of its subconsultants for specific technical studies, as identified below. Aesthetics. The project site is visible from Poinsetttia Lane. Surrounding land uses include townhomes to the north, single-family homes to the east, and apartments to the west. These land uses currently have views of the project site. Potential aesthetic impacts associated with the proposed project include public viewsheds and the design and orientation of the proposed project. The following approach is envisioned: 1. The existing aesthetic setting will be described in terms of public viewsheds, elevations, and topography, and existing views onto the site, landscape features, and applicable plans and ordinances related to visual aesthetics and grading (e.g., Scenic Corridor Guidelines, General Plan policies. Local Coastal Program policies). 2. Photos will be taken of the project area from public viewshed areas, including Poinsettia Lane facing both east and west at the existing terminus and Ambrosia Lane to help characterize the existing aesthetic setting of the project area. September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work tor the Bridges at Aviara Project 3. Up to five (5) visual simulations will be prepared showing existing conditions and the proposed development conditions including proposed graded pads and graded pads with the proposed maximum building heights depicted. We assume the project engineer will provide existing and proposed topographical information to BRG in CAD format. A maximum of five views/visual simulations have been assumed for this scope of work. 4. Thresholds to determine the significance of impact will be identified. 5. The potential impact of the project will be evaluated including compliance with the City's General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Scenic Corridor Guidelines, and Local Coastal Program. 6. Mitigation measures will be identified for any significant aesthetic impacts. 7. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures (if applicable] will be clearly stated. Agricultural Resources. The project site is disturbed and has been in agricultural use in the recent past. The site is located within the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program and will require compliance with the agricultural conversion requirements. The following approach is envisioned: 1. The agricultural setting will be described in terms of the historical context of farming activity on the site, County-wide trends in agricultural conversion, the acreage of each of the various important farmlands inventory mapped farmland on the site, the economic value of any farmland that will be converted to non-agricultural use. BRG will contact the Department of Conservation and obtain Important Farmlands Maps for the site. The areas of important farmlands will be quantified using CIS Arcview. 2. The agricultural soils on site will be evaluated using U.S. Department of Agriculture Soils Survey data for the project site. The soils Capability Classes and Storie Index ratings will be identified. 3. Thresholds to determine the significance of impact will be identified. 4. The potential agricultural impact associated with implementation of the proposed project will be evaluated. This evaluation will include a discussion of the agricultural conversion requirements of the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program, conversion of agricultural lands, and the project's consistency with City of Carlsbad General Plan policies related to agricultural uses. 5. Mitigation measures will be identified (if applicable) for any significant agricultural impacts. 6. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures will be clearly stated. Air Quality (Including Greenhouse Gas Analysis). BRG will utilize Brian F. Smith & Associates (BFSA) to prepare an air quality impact assessment will analyze air quality impacts from the proposed project. A Greenhouse Gas (GHG) analysis will also be included in the air quality assessment. All air quality impacts will be based upon Federal, State and Local Significance Thresholds. The following approach is envisioned: September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project Existing Ambient Site Vicinity Air Quality Levels • Existing ambient air quality data will be collected from the California Air Resources Board. Identified ambient pollutants will be quantified to show attainment status under the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). Construction Modeling Identify air quality construction impacts per the methodologies within the 1993 CEQA Air Quality Handbook developed by South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). A list of construction grading equipment, earthwork quantities and phasing will need to be provided for the analysis to commence. • Calculate the health risk associated from the particulate matter due to diesel emissions as generated from either assumed or proposed construction equipment at each phase of the development. • Best Management Practices (BMPs) and or mitigation measures will be recommended to control onsite construction emissions and dust levels. Project related Vehicular Trip Assessment • Operational impacts utilizing related to the proposed project trip generation will be identified. The average trip generation and aniicipated round trip distance for the proposed project will be needed. Air Quality impacts will be determined utilizing the URBEMIS 2007 model which utilizes emission assumptions obtained from the EMFAC 2007 model. Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Provide a greenhouse gas emission analysis for the proposed project consistent with the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB32), which requires that by 2020 the state's greenhouse gas emissions be reduced to 1990 levels. The California Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32) requires that the California Air Resources Board (CARB) adopt regulations requiring the reporting and verification of statewide (GHG) emissions and requires that CARB adopt statewide greenhouse gas emissions limits equivalent to the statewide greenhouse gas emissions in 1990, to be achieved by year 2020. CEQA is not explicitly addressed in AB 32. However, because a key objective of CEQA is public disclosure of the reasons for agency approval of projects with significant environmental effects, case law has established that CEQA documents should disclose a project's contribution to climate change. Furthermore, the Attorney General's office argues that AB 32 requires a climate change analysis. The Attorney General's position is that AB 32 is an "adopted air quality plan" requiring the state to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. Any project that adds to emissions, conflicts with the goal of reducing those emissions, according to the Attorney General. September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project Projects that conflict with or obstruct implementation of an "applicable air quality plan" should analyze that conflict in an EIR. This argument is based on Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, which lists one factor for determining if an air quality impact is significant the consideration of whether the project would conflict with or otherwise obstruct implementation of an air quality plan. The dilemma for EIR practitioners and CEQA Lead Agencies is that there are no statewide significance criteria or approved mitigation methods concerning GHG emissions. BRG would look to other Agencies and recently prepared EIRs throughout the State to develop an appropriate, legally-defensible threshold for significance. This threshold would be presented to the County of Imperial for approval prior to beginning detailed analysis in the EIR. BRG will present feasible measures to offset or reduce project GHG emissions, as identified in AB 32. We will work with the County of Imperial and Imperial County Air Pollution Control District to identify features that can be incorporated into the project that would reduce the project related greenhouse emissions (e.g.'s, solar, energy efficiencies). Other potential impacts associated with potential climate change issues, such as flooding, drought, wildfire hazards), would be addressed within the context of the appropriate EIR section, such as Hydrology, the Water Supply Assessment, and Hazards. • The proposed greenhouse gas emissions of the business-as-usual plan and recommend mitigation measures to reduce emissions as required by AB 32 will be estimated. Criteria used to determine significance will be identified, and significant, less than significant, direct, and indirect impacts resulting from the projects. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures (if applicable) would be clearly stated. Biological Resources. BRG will utilize Merkel & Associates (M&A) to conduct a third party review of the applicant-provided 2006 Dudek and Associates biological survey and Habitat Management Plan (HMP) compliance report will be conducted. The review would include: evaluation of the methodologies and conclusions contained in the reports for legal and scientific adequacy and accuracy to ensure that the analyses are of a scale and level of effort appropriate to the requirements of the project; and identification of any flaws in the methodologies and/or conclusions. We will rely on the HMP consistency analysis provided in the HMP compliance report to evaluate the project's consistency with the HMP in the EIR. We also assume that the biological survey addresses the whole project; however, as part of the third party review, any additional impact to open space and habitat areas resulting from the project will be identified. Criteria used to determine significance will be identified, and significant, less than significant, direct, and indirect impacts resulting from the projects. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures (if applicable) would be clearly stated. We assume that Dudek and Associates will be responsible for making any necessary changes to the biological survey and HMP compliance report and that the survey and report will be suitable for inclusion in the EIR. September 17,2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project Cultural Resources. BRG will utilize ASM Affiliates (ASM) to prepare a cultural resources study for the proposed project. The study will consist of a review of the literature and site records on file with the South Coastal Information Center (Information Center) at San Diego State University, followed by an intensive survey of the proposed project area. All existing and newly identified prehistoric and historic archaeological sites, features and isolates identified during the survey will be appropriately mapped, documented and recorded with the Information Center for assignment of permanent trinomials. If potentially significant archaeological sites are identified, evaluation may be necessary and the scope of any such work will be provided to the City for review and approval prior to initiating work. Upon completion of the survey (and, if necessary, evaluation), a draft technical report will be prepared and submitted for review. This report will consist of a description of the project's natural and cultural setting, study methods, results, potential impacts, and mitigation recommendations. Following review and comment, prepare the final technical report for incorporation in overall submittal. The California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) will be contacted to conduct a search of their files for any recorded Traditional Cultural Properties or Native American heritage sites located within one mile of the project property. NAHC will respond with records of any such sites and will provide a listing of all Native American tribal representatives that may have further knowledge of such sites within the project. This information will then be provided to the City of Carlsbad for its SB-18 Tribal consultation. Tribal consultation under SB-18 is necessary when a project requires a general plan amendment and/or a specific plan. SB-) 8 requires the City to provide opportunities for the involvement of citizens, California Native American Indian tribes, public agencies, public utility companies, and civic, education, and other community groups, through public hearings and any other means the county deems appropriate. The proposed project requires a general plan amendment; therefore, consultation under SB-18 is required. Criteria used to determine significance will be identified, and significant, less than significant, direct, and indirect impacts resulting from the projects. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures (if applicable) would be clearly stated. Contingency - As part of this scope of work and cost estimate, we have included a cost contingency in the proposed budget to test and evaluate up to one (1) potentially significant archaeological site, if identified on the project site. Geology/Soils. BRG will utilize Petra Geotechnical (Petra) to conduct a third party review of the applicant-provided Geotechnical Constraints and Opportunities Report (June 22, 2006). The review would include: evaluation of the analysis and conclusions contained in the report and evaluate the adequacy of the impact analysis, particularly with regard to unstable soils, remedial earthwork, landslides, rocky soils, fault rupture, seismic ground shaking, subsidence, settlement, surcharging, liquefactions, proposed slope stability, and groundwater impacts. Petra will identify any flaws/inadequacies in the analyses and conclusions. September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges gl Aviara Project Criteria used to determine significance will be identified as significant, less than significant, direct, and indirect impacts resulting from the project. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures (if applicable) will be clearly stated. We assume that Geocon will be responsible for making any necessary changes to the Geotechnical Constraints and Opportunities Report and that the report will be suitable for inclusion in the EIR. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. The project site and vicinity has the potential to be impacted by a number of different types of hazards including past agricultural hazardous materials and high fire hazard areas. BRG will utilize Environmental Resources Management (ERM) to prepare a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for the project area. The following approach is envisioned: 1. Prepare Phase I ESA ERM proposes to perform the Phase I ESA in conformance with ASTM E 1527- 05 and AAI standards. ERM will seek to identify conditions indicative of releases and threatened releases of hazardous substances and petroleum products at, in, on or under the subject property through gathering information regarding: (1) current and past property uses and occupancies; (2) current and past uses of hazardous substances and petroleum products; (3) waste management and disposal activities; (4) current and past corrective actions and response activities at the subject property; (5) engineering controls at the subject property, (6) institutional controls at the subject property; and (7) properties adjoining or located nearby the subject property. 2. The City's Fire Marshall will be contacted to determine the acceptability of proposed development sites adjacent to any high fire hazard areas. 3. Thresholds to determine the significance of impact will be identified. 4. The potential impact of the project will be evaluated including fire hazards and hazardous materials. 5. Mitigation measures will be identified for any significant hazards or hazardous materials impacts. 6. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures (if applicable) will be clearly stated. Hydrology and Water Quality. BRG will utilize Fuscoe Engineering (Fuscoe) to conduct a third party review of the applicant-provided Hydrology and Preliminary Drainage Reports (PDC, May 2007). Fuscoe will identify any flaws/inadequacies in the analyses and conclusions. We assume that PDC will be responsible for making any necessary changes to the Hydrology and Preliminary Drainage Reports and that the reports will be suitable for inclusion in the EIR. BRG will utilize Fuscoe to prepare a CEQA-level Storm Water Management Plan for the proposed project. Fuscoe will prepare a CEQA-level Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) consistent with the EIR level analysis and City of Carlsbad standards. SWMP shall include source control, site design and treatment control Best Management Practices (BMPs) for use by the City to certify temporary and permanent onsite water quality control. SWMP will include impact analysis per CEQA guidelines. September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project Criteria used to determine significance will be identified for hydrology and water quality, and significant, less than significant, direct, and indirect impacts resulting from the project. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures (if applicable) will be clearly stated. land Use Planning. Surrounding land uses include townhomes to the north, vacant land and an elementary school to the south, single-family homes to the east, and apartments and single-family homes to the west. The project covers an area consisting of approximately 61 acres. The project includes the proposal to change the General Plan designation from Residential Low-Medium Density (0-4 du/ac) and Open Space to Residential High Density (15-23 du/ac) and Open Space. A significant increase in density above the RLM density range would result if the proposal is approved. The project will require the approval of numerous discretionary actions, with the major actions including a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Local Facilities Management Program Amendment, Tentative Map, Planned Development Permit, Coastal Development Permit, Hillside Development Permit, Site Development Plan, and Habitat Management Plan Permit. The following approach is envisioned; 1. The land use setting will be described in terms of all applicable land use plans and policies, existing on-site and off-site land uses, and planned on-site and off-site land uses. Exhibits will be provided depicting the location of existing and planned land uses, and the project's context to other applicable plans. 2. Thresholds to determine the significance of impact will be identified. 3. The project's consistency with land use plans will be analyzed. This analysis will include a detailed project with respect to the project's consistency with the General Plan, Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan, Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance (Title 21) including the Growth Management Chapter, McClellan Palomar Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Landscape Manual, Open Space and Conservation Resource Management Plan, Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 21, and Local Coastal Program. A detailed analysis of the project's consistency with Coastal Act policies including coastal access, recreation, and the preservation of coastal resources will be provided. 4. The project's compatibility with surrounding existing and proposed development will be addressed. This analysis will focus on the single-family residential development to the east and southwest and the apartment project located to the west. In addition, we understand that from the RFP, a 90-unit multi-family residential project has been approved north of the site. The future views of these residences will be considered during the compatibility evaluation. The project's compatibility will be assessed in terms of types of land uses, proposed densities, and buffer techniques. Of particular concern is the significant increase in density proposed by the project as compared to the current allowable density. 5. The Land Use section will identify all significant, less than significant, direct, and indirect impacts resulting from project implementation. September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project 6. Mitigation measures will be identified tor any significant land use impacts. 7. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures (if applicable) will be clearly stated. Noise. It is anticipated that portions of the project will experience noise from the extension of Poinsettia Lane. During the construction phase of the project, the area will experience a temporary increase in the ambient noise level and due to the project's increase in traffic volumes, the ambient noise level may be increased on some adjacent roadways. BRG will utilize BFSA to prepare a noise study for the proposed project. The study prepared by BFSA will provide an exterior site assessment that focuses on both the project related noise impacts to offsite land uses as well as potential offsite construction noise impacts generated during construction. The study will also provide exterior noise predictions due to the future roadway geometries and volumes for the residential uses proposed onsite. The following approach is envisioned. Field Monitoring • Ambient sound levels will be taken at four separate locations onsite. Each monitoring position will be selected based upon the locations of future noise sensitive areas shown within proposed project site plan. Traffic counts will also be taken simultaneously during the monitoring event for noise modeling calibration. • Ambient sound levels along two nearby offsite roadways will be taken in order to quantify existing offsite noise levels. Traffic counts will also be taken during the monitoring event. • Acoustical noise monitoring will conform to the City of Carlsbad's general plan. Construction Noise Assessment • BFSA will coordinate with the project manager to get a list of construction equipment and phasing. This information will be utilized in order to quantify construction noise levels along any nearby sensitive land uses. Construction related noise contours will be generated based upon these assumptions. Traffic Noise Modeling (Residential Areas) • Future Traffic noise will be predicted at sensitive residential receptor locations within the proposed site. BFSA will utilize the proposed project traffic study and proposed grading plans for future input assumptions. • Noise modeling will be conducted utilizing either the TNM 2.5 noise prediction software or the CALTRANS Sound32 noise prediction software. 10 September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project • Once the initial noise model is set up, BFSA will calibrate the prediction model utilizing the ambient noise measurements, geographical locations of those measurements and the simultaneous traffic counts performed above. Traffic Noise Modeling (Offsitel • BFSA will utilize the CALVENO noise emission regression equations to calculate offsite noise impacts. A comparison analysis will be performed between sound predictions between both the existing traffic volumes and the future predicted traffic volumes. These calculations will be performed on roadway segments within the project traffic study. Mitigation Design • BFSA will utilize the TNM 2.5 noise prediction software to develop noise mitigation (as needed) for the special education school site. Noise mitigation will be designed per the procedures outlined within the City's Noise Element within the General Plan. The acoustical design will be based upon both economic and functional goals. • Should mitigation be required, BFSA will provide 11x17 attachments to the final acoustical report for easier identification of the exact locations for each proposed barrier. Criteria used to determine significance will be identified, and significant, less than significant, direct, and indirect impacts resulting from the projects. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures (if applicable) would be clearly stated. Population/Housing, The proposed project may indirectly induce growth through the provision of the Poinsettia Lane road extension. An amendment to the Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) for Zone 21 is required to update the existing and future development potential for the zone and the anticipated infrastructure necessary to support the proposed project. The following approach is envisioned: 1. The existing population/housing setting will be described in terms of existing population and housing on-site, General Plan, LFMP Zone 21, and the Local Coastal Program allowances for the site, and housing/populations for the project area and the City and region as a whole. We will utilize information in the City's existing database and supplement this information with census data as appropriate. 2. Thresholds to determine the significance of impact will be identified. 3. The potential impact of the project will be evaluated. This will include quantification of the increase of housing and population on the project site, and a comparison to the General Plan, LFMP Zone 21 unit allowances, and the Local Coastal Program. Based on a conversation with City staff, we understand that the Applicant has conducted the LFMP Zone 21 Amendment analysis and that it will be available for assessment and inclusion in the EIR. 11 September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviora Project 4. An analysis of whether the project will induce, either directly or indirectly, substantial growth in the area will be provided. 5. An analysis of whether the project will displace a substantial number of existing dwelling units or people will be provided. 6. An analysis of whether the project will result in exceeding the City's growth control point will be provided. 7. Mitigation measures will be identified for any significant population/housing impacts. 8. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures will be clearly stated. 9. An analysis of the project's impact to public services and utilities will be provided in the ensuing section. Public Services and Utilities. The project site is located within Local Facilities Management Zone 21. An amendment to the LFMP for Zone 21 is required to update the existing and future development potential for the zone and the anticipated infrastructure necessary to support the proposed project. The following approach is envisioned: 1. The existing public services and facilities setting will be described in terms of existing services and facilities serving the site and shall determine the demands of the project for fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, other public facilities, water facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, solid waste facilities, and gas and electric service. 2. This section will evaluate water, wastewater treatment facilities, solid waste facilities, gas and electric service, fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, and other public facilities. Stormwater drainage facilities will be addressed in the Water Quality/Hydrology section of the EIR. 3. Thresholds to determine the significance of impact will be identified, including LFMP Zone 21 requirements. 4. The potential impact of the project will be evaluated. This will include quantification of the increase of demand on the various public services and utilities, the ability to meet the demand, and any expansion or new construction of facilities created by this demand that may cause a physical impact to the environment. Based on a conversation with City staff, we understand that the Applicant has conducted the LFMP Zone 21 Amendment analysis and that it will be available for assessment and inclusion in the EIR. 5. The City's emergency response plans will be evaluated in conjunction with the proposed project to determine if the project will interfere with existing plans. 6. Mitigation measures will be identified for any significant public services and utilities impacts. 7. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures will be clearly stated. 12 September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviaro Project Recreation. The project site is located within the LFMP for Zone 21. BRG will analyze and compare the proposed project's impacts to the Zone 21 LFMP. The following approach is envisioned: 1. The existing recreational setting will be described in terms of existing facilities serving the project area, and their locations. 2. The ability of the agencies providing the recreational services to meet the demands of the proposed project will be provided. 3. The project's potential impacts on recreation will be analyzed and compared against the Zone 21 LFMP. Based on a conversation with City staff, we understand that the Applicant has conducted the LFMP Zone 21 Amendment analysis and that it will be available for assessment and inclusion in the EIR. 4. Thresholds to determine the significance of impact will be identified, including the LFMP Zone 21 requirements. 5. The potential impact of the project will be analyzed and compared to the Zone 21 LFMP. This will include quantification of the increase of demand on the existing facilities, the ability to meet the demand, and any expansion or new construction of facilities created by this demand that may cause a physical impact to the environment. 6. Mitigation measures will be identified for any significant public services and utilities impacts. 7. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures will be clearly stated. Irafflc I Circulation / Parking. BRG will utilize LOS Engineering (LOS) to conduct a third party review of the Applicant provided traffic impact analysis for the proposed project. LOS will identify any flaws/inadequacies in the analysis and conclusions. We assume that the Applicant's traffic engineering consultant will be responsible for making any necessary changes to the traffic impact analysis report and the report will be suitable for inclusion in the EIR. Other CEQA Mandated EIR Sections The EIR will contain the following CEQA mandated sections: Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes - In accordance with Article 9 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the EIR will contain a discussion of the irreversible environmental changes that will result from the proposed project and unavoidable significant impacts. This section will discuss uses of nonrenewable resources, long-term commitments of resources, and potential irreversible environmental damage that may result from environmental accidents associated with the project. (mpacfs Found Nof To Be Significant - Areas of no significant impact identified in the Initial Study and subsequent analysis for the EIR will be listed. The justification for such findings will be based on the Initial Study and results of the Draft EIR analysis. 13 September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project Cumulative Impacts - The discussion of cumulative effects is an increasingly important analysis in EIRs. The Cumulative Impacts section will evaluate whether individual project impacts are cumulatively significant when viewed in combination with other projects. The section will discuss the potential of the proposed project to compound or increase adverse environmental impacts when added to other closely related past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects and project impacts. BRG will work closely with City staff to identify cumulative projects. This section will discuss any indirect, cumulative impacts and evaluate compliance with adopted threshold standards and applicable policies and programs. Growfh-/nduc/ng Impacts - The Growth Inducement section will assess the potential of the proposed project to induce economic or population growth and the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. The analysis will evaluate the project relative to the phasing of community services and facilities to serve new development. An analysis of the LFMP/Growth Management Plan and its ability to provide adequate infrastructure to meet the demand as the project builds out will also be included. The section will discuss the potential for the use of large amounts of fuel or energy and evaluate the project's compliance with regional and local growth management policies. Alternatives The Alternatives section of the EIR will identify a reasonable range of alternatives that could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project, but reduce significant impacts. Alternatives evaluation will be a critical component of the environmental review and mandated by CEQA. The alternatives will be fully defined and analyzed in the First Screencheck Draft EIR submitted to the City. This section will include, at a minimum, three project alternatives: 1) the "No Project" which analyzes what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on the current General Plan and consistent with available infrastructure and community services; 2) a "Thirty Townhomes", which would analyze the alternative of developing the southwestern most proposed area with 30 market- rate townhomes instead of the 65 age restricted apartments; and 3) a "Reduced Project", which would include an analysis of a reduced level of development intensity on the project site. BRG assumes that the Thirty Townhome and Reduced Project alternatives would be developed in consultation/coordination with City staff. The analysis for each alternative will include a qualitative and qualitative comparative analysis for the relative environmental impacts and merits of each. References, Persons and Agencies Contacted and EIR Preparation This section will include lists of all references and persons and agencies contacted in the preparation of the EIR. This section will also list all persons involved in the preparation of the document, their title and role. Technical Appendices The EIR Appendices will include an Initial Study (if prepared, and provided by the City), a copy of the NOP, public comments on the NOP, and any technical studies prepared for the project. 14 September) 7, 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges al Aviara Project Task 3 Second Screencheck Draft EIR BRG will revise the First Screencheck Draft EIR in response to City comments and provide five (5) copies of the Second Screencheck Draft EIR in three-ring binders (including Appendices) for City review and comment. Task 4 Draft EIR BRG will incorporate City comments on the Second Screencheck Draft EIR and perform a quality control review. BRG will then provide the City with the required amount of copies of the Draft EIR and Technical Appendices. The Draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program will be available for public review. Our scope of work assumes the City will be responsible for the preparation and posting of the Notice of Completion and Notice of Availability of the Draft EIR, and distribution of the EIR to the appropriate agencies and individuals. TaskS Screencheck Final EIR BRG will prepare five (5) copies of the Preliminary Final EIR including Responses to Public Comments (not to include the Technical Appendices unless revised) for City review and comment. Upon close of public review of the Draft EIR, BRG understands our role will be to review all comments and prepare a summary of general comment categories. We will meet with City staff to discuss the general approach to responding to public comments. After agreeing to the approach, BRG will number each individual comment and prepare corresponding responses, including identification of responses that affect or supplement information contained in the Draft EIR. BRG will modify the text of the Draft EIR or add footnotes to the margins identifying relevant responses to comments. Of course, City staff shall make final determination on the adequacy of responses to comments. The fee proposal included herein assumes a total of 200 individually numbered comments will be received on the Draft EIR. Please note a single comment letter may contain numerous numbered comments. The estimate of the level of effort in responding to comments is based on a moderate to high level of controversy. Contingency - As part of this scope of work and cost estimate, we have included a cost contingency to provide responses to comments if the number of individual comments exceeds 200. Task 6 Draft Final EIR BRG will incorporate City comments on the Screencheck Final EIR in response to City comments. Task 7 Final EIR BRG will incorporate City comments on the Draft Final EIR and perform a final quality control review. 15 September 17, 2008 :'.) EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project Task 8 CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations Subtask 8.1 Screencheck CEQA Flndings/SOC BRG will prepare the Candidate CEQA Findings pursuant to CEQA Guideline §15091 for ultimate submittal to the City Planning Commission and City Council. BRG will prepare draft Candidate Findings to be submitted for City staff review at the Second Screencheck Draft EIR. BRG will identify project changes, alterations and required mitigation identified in the Draft EIR, which avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects. If there are mitigation measures or alternatives to the project identified in the EIR which could reduce the adverse consequences of the project but which are determined infeasible, BRG will provide the required CEQA findings, giving the specific economic, social or other conditions which render the mitigation measure or alternatives infeasible. Please note that development of these findings of infeasibility will likely require the active participation of the City and/or applicant to provide sufficient facts to support the findings. BRG will coordinate development of the necessary arguments to support CEQA Findings. In addition, the Candidate Findings will identify any changes or alterations that are within the jurisdiction of another public agency. Should the EIR conclude an impact is significant and unmitigable, BRG will prepare a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) in accordance with CEQA Guidelines §15093. BRG will work closely with the City to identify the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project, which outweigh the unavoidable environmental effects. BRG will coordinate with the City to establish the evidence in the record to support overriding considerations. The Findings will follow the format and style specified by the City. Subtask 8.2 Final CEQA Flndings/SOC BRG will prepare a final set of CEQA Findings/SOC based on City review and changes to the Draft EIR that may have resulted from public comment. Task 9 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program fMMRPl Subtask 9.1 Screencheck MMRP We understand the need for preparation of an MMRP in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(l) and California Code of Regulations Section 15091. The MMRP will include a brief summary of the environmental impact. However, the associated mitigation measure will be included verbatim from the EIR in order to provide sufficient detail to address impacts at the project level. Each mitigation measure will reference the appropriate implementing permits to facilitate mitigation monitoring. For each project change, condition, or mitigation measure the program will include the following: • Specific monitoring activities; • Implementation phase or milestone; • Identification of the party responsible for implementation; • Identification of the party responsible for monitoring; • Criteria for evaluating the success of each mitigation measure; and, • Compliance verification criteria. 16 September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project Subtask 9.2 Draft MMRP BRG will prepare a Draft MMRP incorporating City comments on the Screencheck MMRP. The Draft MMRP will be available for public review with the Draft Program EIR. Subtask 9.3 Final MMRP BRG will prepare a Final MMRP based on any changes to mitigation measures as a result of public review and comment on the Draft EIR. Task 10 Meetings and Hearings BRG understands that project management and staff support are crucial elements to preparation of a legally-defensible EIR. BRG commits attendance of our Project Manager for the following meetings: • One (1) kick-off meeting with City staff to initiate the project, discuss work products and overall project schedule. • One (1) public scoping meeting to solicit input from the public on the scope and content of the EIR. • Two (2) staff meetings to discuss and resolve issues related to preparation of the Screencheck Draft EIR, etc. • Two (2) staff meetings to review comments on the First and Second Screencheck Draft EIRs. • Two (2) staff meetings to review the responses to comments and Final Draft EIR. • Up to three (3) public hearings with presentations as necessary as determined by City staff. • One (1) additional meeting as necessary. In addition to providing our Project Manager, BRG commits principal-level attendance at the three (3) required public meetings/hearings. BRG assumes a maximum of four (4) hours each for the project initiation, scoping meeting, and public hearings. DELIVERABLES BRG anticipates the following deliverables to be submitted to the City. All documents will be readable by Microsoft Word 2000: (5) Copies of the first Screencheck Draft EIR in three-ring loose-leaf binders (5) Copies of the second Screencheck Draft EIR in three-ring loose-leaf binders (includes appendices) (5) Copies of the Screencheck MMRP (5) Copies of the Screencheck Candidate CEQA Finding of Fact (50) Copies of the City-approved Draft EIR, Exhibits and MMRP consisting of: - 25 spiral-bound copies - 25 digital copies on CD 17 September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project (30) Copies of the Technical Appendices consisting of: - 15 spiral-bound copies - 15 digital copies on CD (1) Master CD Copy of the Draft EIR with appendices, exhibits, and MMRP for City's website (5) Copies of the first Screencheck Final EIR (including Response to Comments, Final EIR and any amendments to the technical appendices) (5) Copies of the second Screencheck Final EIR (including Response to Comments, Final EIR and any amendments to the technical appendices) (51) Copies of the City-approved Final EIR, Exhibits and MMRP consisting of: - 25 spiral-bound copies - 25 digital copies on CD - 1 camera-ready copy (30) Copies of any amended Technical Appendices consisting of: - 15 spiral-bound copies - 15 digital copies on CD (1) Digital copy on CD of the Findings of Fact (1) Digital copy on CD of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (1) Master CD Copy of the Final EIR with any amended appendices, exhibits, and MMRP for City's website (5) Copies of the Certified Final EIR, Appendices, Exhibits, MMRP, and CEQA Findings of Fact, which incroporate any changes made to the Final Draft EIR during the public hearing and certification process, if necessary (1) Master CD copy of the Certified Final EIR with appendices, exhibits, and MMRP 5.0 SCHEDULE This section presents BRG's proposed task-by-task work schedule to complete the services requested by the City. The attached schedule assumes a start-date in September 8, 2008; however, this date will be revised upon further direction by the City. BRG's schedule to complete the CEQA process according to our proposed scope of work is provided on the following page. BRG and our subcontractors have the resources and commitment to the City to complete the CEQA process in approximately one year. 18 September 17, 2008 Bridges at Aviara EIR Cost Estimate Task 1- Prelect Initiation 1.1 Data Collection and Site Visit 1.Z Protect DescriDtten Subtotal Task 1 Task 2 - First Screencheck Draft EIR Visual Simulations (5) Subtotal Task 2 Task 3 - Second Screencheck Draft SIR Task 4 - Draft EIR Task 5 - Sereencheck Final EIR' Task 6 - Draft Final EIR Task 7 - Final EIR Task 8 - CEQA Flndinos of Fact/SOC 8.1 Screencheck Flndings/SOC 8.2 Final Flndings/SOC Subtotal Task 8 Task9MMRP 9.1 Sereencheck MMRP 9.2 Draft MMRP 9.3 Final MMRP Subtotal Task 9 Task 10 Meetings and Hearings Kickoff Heebna Staff Meetings • Issue Resolution Staff Meetina -Review Sereencheck £/R comments Staff Meet/no • Review ScteenchecX EIR comments Hearings Subtotal Task 10 TOTAL Rate (S/hr) Principal 2 2 4 8 2 10 6 4 4 4 2 2 2 4 1 1 1 3 2 2 I I 8 Id 59 315 Prefect Manager 4 S 12 40 4 44 24 16 IS a 4 4 4 8 2 J ; 4 2 2 2 2 8 11 152 170 Envwoo Analyst 11 0 32 40 60 o 60 32 16 24 16 S 0 0 0 4 2 2 S 0 0 0 0 4 4 208 100 Environ Analyst U 12 0 12 120 0 120 32 4 16 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 192 90 CADO/GIS 0 a S 40 120 160 24 16 a 4 2 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 222 95 Environ Analyst 1 24 0 24 140 0 140 SO 32 0 e 8 16 S 24 a 2 2 12 0 0 0 0 4 4 332 75 LOS Engineering (traffic) Merkel and Associates (biological resources - thwd-partyreview) ASM Affiliates (cultural resources) Brian F, Smith & Associates (air quality (including GHG) and noise] Petra Geotedmical, Inc. (geolofly/soils - third part review) Fuscoe Engineering (Water Quality and HydVdooy - third-party review) Environmental Resource Management (Phase 1 ESA) Administrative Cost (10%) Total Contingency Tasks - Included In Sudoet Total ASM Affiliates - Cultural resources evaluation and test ng (one archaeological site) BRG Consulting • Responses to Comments Total Oth«f Direct Cora Mileage & Postage, delivery, miscellaneous printing First Screen Draft EIR (5 copies - 3-ring binders) Second Screen Draft EIR (S copies - 3-ring binders) Soreencheck MMRP (5 copies) Screencheck CEQA Findings (5 copies) Draft OR t Technical Appendices (25 spiral-bound »nd 25 CDs « 15 spiral-bound and 1 5 CDs -t 1 Master CD) Draft MMRP (5 copies) Sereencheck Final EIR (5 copies) Draft Final EIR (5 copies) Final EiR + Any Amended Technrial Appendices (25 spiral-bound and 25 CDs + IS spiral-bound and 1 5 CDs + 1 Master CD) Final MMRP. CEQA Findmgs/SOC (1 CO) Certified Final EIR + Any Amended Technical Appendices * Final MMRP, CEQA Findings (5 copies and 1 Master CO) Total Expenses TOTAL EIR COST production 4 4 S 40 0 40 IS IS 16 e a 2 2 4 4 2 2 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 128 as S 1,800 S4,!6? (4,443 $10,100 52,500 J10.100 S3.800 53,690 J40.595 120.000 $350 J425 $425 $10 $10 $4,750 $10 $500 $500 $3,000 12 $1,750 $11,732 $ 211,702 Total BRG Hours 54 54 10S 448 126 574 21S 106 34 56 32 24 16 40 IS S a 35 4 4 4 4 24 32 1^59 TOTAL COST JS.3JO 16.290 111,520 $43.820 $12.710 $56.530 $22,430 $11.310 $9.940 $6.600 13.580 $2,630 $2.oao $4,760 {1.995 11.005 $1.005 $4,005 $970 $970 $970 $370 $4.SSO ta.460 139,375 11ndudes time/cost for respoodmq to 200 individual comments. STANDARD HOURLY RATES AND TERMS ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING SERVICES BRIDGES AT AVIARAEIR STAFF RATE Principal - Tim Gnibus $315 Project Manager - Patrick O'Neill $170 Environmental Analyst/Planner III - Kathie Washington $100 Environmental Analyst/Planner II - Mary Bilse $90 Environmental Analyst/Planner I - John Addenbrooke $75 GIS Specialist - Totran Mai $95 Documents Manager - Mary Brady $85 The following standard terms apply unless otherwise agreed: All subconsultants and other direct project-related expenses are reimbursable at cost plus ten percent. Invoices will be presented monthly for work completed during the preceding 30 days, and are due and payable upon receipt. Invoices aged more than 60 days will be increased by 1.5 percent per month carrying charges. Effective January 1, 2008 Rates will increase by 10% per year effective January 1 of each year. £ Khib.it <0- 60 .5 elusion Mo. AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY AND APPLICANT FOR PAYMENT OF EIR CONSULTANT BRIDGES AT AVIARA EIR 06-01 THIS AGREEMENT is made this / ^ day of f}fKm L^.2QO %. between the CITY OF CARLSBAD, a municipal corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as CITY, and Acacia Investors, LLC. hereinafter referred to as "APPLICANT". RECITALS WHEREAS, the APPLICANT has filed with the CITY a request for approval of a proposed project identified as The Bridges at Aviara requiring an Environmental Impact Report; and WHEREAS, CITY has determined that its current staff is inadequate in number to process the Environmental Impact Report in a timely and thorough manner; and WHEREAS, APPLICANT in order to ensure the expeditious processing of said Environmental Impact Report desires to pay to CITY the amount necessary to hire a CONSULTANT. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and conditions, it is agreed as follows: 1. The CITY will engage the firm of BRG Consulting Inc. hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR" to perform the necessary work in the processing and monitoring of the Environmental Impact Report for that area more particularly depicted upon a site map attached as Attachment 1 and made a part of this agreement. 2. It is understood that the CONTRACTOR services shall conform to 1 Rev. 07/31/00 the Proposal attached as Attachment 2 and made a part of this agreement, and may require: a) Field exploration; b) Weekly communication with the City staff; c) Written reports; and d) Such other work necessary to properly evaluate the proposed project as directed by the Planning Director. 3. It is understood that the CITY will direct the CONTRACTOR to complete a draft and final Environmental Impact Report at the earliest feasible time. The CITY will advise the APPLICANT in writing of any impacts which may render the proposed project infeasible within a reasonable time after CITY has received the CONTRACTOR 's conclusions in writing. 4. The APPLICANT shall pay to the CITY the actual cost of the CONTRACTOR 's services. Such cost shall be based on the costs set forth in Attachment 3. The APPLICANT has advanced the sum of $211,702.00 as payment on account for the actual cost of the CONTRACTOR'S services. In the event it appears, as the work progresses, that said sum will not be sufficient to cover the actual cost, the CITY will notify the APPLICANT of the difference between the amount deposited and the new estimated cost. CITY will ensure, to the extent feasible, that no further work will be performed by the CONTRACTOR incurring an obligation beyond the amount advanced without an appropriate amendment to this Agreement. If the actual cost of preparing the report is less than the APPLICANT'S advance, any surplus will be refunded to APPLICANT by CITY. 5. It is understood that the CONTRACTOR shall be an independent 2 Rev. 07/31/00 contractor of the CITY and CITY shall not be liable for any negligent acts or omissions of the CONTRACTOR. The APPLICANT agrees to permit the CONTRACTOR to enter upon his property and to perform all work thereon as the CONTRACTOR deems necessary to complete the Environmental Impact Report. It is agreed that the APPLICANT will not interfere with the CONTRACTOR in the performance of such work or attempt to influence such CONTRACTOR during the course of his investigation and report. 6. It is understood that the CITY will attempt to bring the Environmental Impact Report to Planning Commission and City Council as soon as possible, barring no delays from the APPLICANT. 7. The City shall not be required to defend any third party claims and suits challenging any action taken by the City with regard to any procedure or substantive aspect of the City's environmental process and approval of development of the property. If the City, in its sole and absolute discretion defends such action or proceeding, the Applicant shall be responsible and reimburse the City for whatever legal fees and costs, in their entirely, may be incurred by the City in defense of such action or proceeding. The City shall have the absolute right to retain such legal counsel as the City deems necessary and appropriate. Applicant shall reimburse the City for any award of court costs or attorney fees made against City in favor of any third party challenging either the sufficiency of a negative declaration or EIR or the validity of the City's approval of the application. This obligation survives until all legal proceedings have been concluded and continues even if the City's approval is not validated. Rev. 07/31/00 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement on the day and year first above written. Executed by APPLICANT this 29th day of September, 2008. APPLICANT: ACACIA INVESTORS, LLC (Name of Applicant) By: Its Manager, Arlen Capital, LLC By: Its. Manager, Don Augustine CITY OF CARLSBAD, a municipal corporation of the State of California City Manager or Mayor ATTEST: DON AUGUSTINE, Manager .ORRALNJE M. WOOp/City Clerk By: Its Manager, Vantaggio Management Partners, LLC By: Its Manager, Homeplace Investment Corporation By: Stephen L. Taylor, President STEPHEN L. TAYLOR,'President (Proper notarial acknowledgment of execution by Contractor must be attached.) (Chairman, president or vice-president and secretary, assistant secretary, CFO or assistant treasurer must sign for corporations. Otherwise, the corporation must attach a resolution certified by the secretary or assistant secretary under corporate seal empowering the officers) signing to bind the corporation.) (If signed by an individual partner, the partnership must attach a statement of partnership authorizing the partner to execute this instrument). APPROVED AS TO FORM: RONALD R. BALL, City Attorney ant City Attorney Rev. 07/31/00 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO On October 1, 2008 before me, Judith M. Glasgow Notary Public, Don Augustine _, who proved to me on the basispersonally appeared of satisfactory evidence to be the person(X) whose namejX) is/ai* subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they- executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(*es), and that by his/her/their signature^ on the instrument the person^, or the entity upon behalf of which the person(/5 acted, executed the instrument. 1 certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Sj^nature of Notary) CommMilon * 1737530 nolle - California | San DI*QO County Rev. 12/17/2007 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO On October 2, 2008 before me, Judith M. Glasgow Notary Public, personally appeared Stephen L. Taylor , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person^ whose name(p) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(i©s)T and that by his/her/their- signature(?) on the instrument the person(g), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(#) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. CommlMion * 1737530 Notary PubHc - California iSon OteQO County - MyComm.fap>»i/»f8.20n | Rev. 12/17/2007 NOT TO SCALE SITEMAP Bridges atAviara EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project SCOPE OF WORK AND DELIVERABLES BRG will prepare an EIR for the proposed project that addresses all project components as well as current and future discretionary actions associated with implementation of the project. We understand that the CEQA document must ultimately be certified as reflecting the independent judgment of the City. We understand that City staff will review screencheck documents and provide comments, and our work will be responsive to the guidance provided by the City. BRG will work closely with the City throughout the CEQA process and follow the City Environmental Review Procedures. BRG will prepare environmental documents that comply with the criteria, standards and procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq.) as amended, the Carlsbad Environmental Protection Ordinance (Title 19 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code), and the regulations, requirements and procedures of any other responsible public agency or any agency with jurisdiction by law over the project. If there are any conflicts between the City of Carlsbad's requirements and those of any other agency, the City's shall prevail because the City is the CEQA Lead Agency. The EIR will assemble all available data, provide an independent evaluation of any existing data, originate new studies (where applicable), and provide an assessment of the probable short and long-term significant impacts and cumulative impacts of the project. The EIR will provide an evaluation of all feasible mitigation measures that could be carried out to reduce or eliminate adverse impacts of the proposed project. BRG will work closely with City staff to identify project alternatives, which avoid or reduce project-related impacts and provide a quantitative, comparative analysis of each alternative. The following provides a detailed description of our proposed scope of services: Task 1 Project Initiation Project initiation will involve attendance at a kick-off meeting (see Task 10), initial data collection, and a site visit. In preparation for the kick-off meeting, BRG will prepare a list of data needs and a refined project schedule. As an outcome of the meeting, the project team will have a clear understanding of the roles of each team member. The overall program approach will be discussed and the schedule will be refined. Project goals and objectives will be identified as well as potential alternatives to be evaluated in the EIR. Subtask 1.1 Data Collection and Site Visit BRG will conduct initial data collection for the project (e.g., obtain current ambient air quality data, obtain farmland mapping categories from the Department of Conservation, etc.) and review the existing environmental database. We will conduct a site visit to obtain a full understanding of the existing environmental setting of the project site and surrounding land uses and determine potential locations for view simulations. Site photos will also be taken of the project area. Subtask 1.2 Project Description BRG will prepare a Project Description of the proposed project, suitable for inclusion in the EIR. The purpose of this task is to ensure that we have a complete understanding of the project prior to commencing I September 17. 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project environmental analysis. The City will be responsible for the preparation and distribution of the Notice of Preparation (NOP). Task 2 First Screencheck Draft EIR BRG will prepare a First Screencheck Draft EIR for the project. We understand the need for the environmental analysis to follow the thread of logic from beginning to end (i.e., setting, threshold of significance, impact, mitigation and conclusions) and that conclusions must be supported by fact. We understand that the role of an EIR is to identify substantial evidence that there may be a significant effect and where there is disagreement among experts, disclose the disagreement and state the lead agency's position. The EIR will include the sections listed below. Table of Contents The EIR will begin with a list of its contents including identification of all tables, figures and Technical Appendices. Introduction The Introduction will define the purpose, scope and legislative authority of the EIR, requirements of CEQA and other pertinent environmental rules and regulations. This section will also describe the EIR process, structure, intended uses of the EIR, required contents and its relationship to other potential responsible or trustee agencies. Supporting maps and figures will be provided. Executive Summary The Executive Summary will be prepared in accordance with CEQA Guideline §15123. This section will summarize the proposed project including the project's technical and economic characteristics. This section will identify each significant effect of the project, with proposed mitigation measures which would reduce that effect; known areas of controversy including issues raised by agencies and the public; and, issues to be resolved including the choice among alternatives and whether or how to mitigate significant effects. The Executive Summary will also include a list of required discretionary approvals and corresponding agency with approval authority. Project Description The Project Description will be prepared in accordance with CEQA Guideline §15124, and provide the project location, including project location maps, within the regional context, and a description of the proposed project, including the proposed land use site plan and circulation. This section will provide an overview of the project's background and history. The Project Description will list the basic goals and objectives of the project. In addition, the section will identify the scope of the proposed project that will serve as the "Basis of Analysis." Lastly, the Project Description will include a discussion of the environmental procedures and intended uses of the EIR, as well as list the discretionary permits and approvals required for project implementation. Maps and figures will be provided to support text descriptions as necessary. September 17. 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project Environmental Setting The Environmental Setting will be prepared in accordance with CEQA Guideline §15125. The section will provide an overview of the local and regional physical environmental conditions. This section will describe the existing site conditions, including a description of the existing land uses and natural resources occurring on the project site. The Environmental Setting section will be detailed enough to constitute the baseline physical conditions by which impact significance can be determined. Environmental Impact Analysis The Environmental Impact Analysis section will address all the environmental topics listed as potentially significant in the City's CEQA checklist, some of which will be readily identified as having no potential for an adverse environmental effect and can be treated briefly as "effects found not to be significant" (CEQA Guidelines §15128). Each of the environmental topics with the potential for significant impacts will be fully addressed pursuant to CEQA Guideline §15126, with the EIR analysis including a description of the relevant environmental setting, criteria for determining significance of environmental impacts, potential environmental impacts, level of significance of environmental impacts, recommended mitigation measures to significantly reduce or avoid the significant impacts, and an analysis of significance or residual impacts after mitigation measures are applied. The EIR will provide an evaluation of feasible mitigation measures that could be carried out to reduce or eliminate adverse impacts of the proposed project. Where several mitigation measures are available, the basis for selection from among these measures will be discussed. The discussion of mitigation measures will provide the background for findings under CEQA Guidelines §15091 (a). Mitigation measures will be discussed in sufficient detail to provide the basis for the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and comply with CEQA Guideline § 15126.4. The following section summarizes the BRG Team approach to the primary technical analyses for the EIR. All text will be supported by figures, tables, and charts as appropriate. BRG will perform all EIR analyses, with the assistance of its subconsultants for specific technical studies, as identified below. Aesthetics. The project site is visible from Poinsetttia Lane. Surrounding land uses include townhomes to the north, single-family homes to the east, and apartments to the west. These land uses currently have views of the project site. Potential aesthetic impacts associated with the proposed project include public viewsheds and the design and orientation of the proposed project. The following approach is envisioned: 1. The existing aesthetic setting will be described in terms of public viewsheds, elevations, and topography, and existing views onto the site, landscape features, and applicable plans and ordinances related to visual aesthetics and grading (e.g.. Scenic Corridor Guidelines, General Plan policies. Local Coastal Program policies). 2. Photos will be taken of the project area from public viewshed areas, including Poinsettia Lane facing both east and west at the existing terminus and Ambrosia Lane to help characterize the existing aesthetic setting of the project area. September 17,2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project 3. Up to five (5) visual simulations will be prepared showing existing conditions and the proposed development conditions including proposed graded pads and graded pads with the proposed maximum building heights depicted. We assume the project engineer will provide existing and proposed topographical information to BRG in CAD format. A maximum of five views/visual simulations have been assumed for this scope of work. 4. Thresholds to determine the significance of impact will be identified. 5. The potential impact of the project will be evaluated including compliance with the City's General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Scenic Corridor Guidelines, and Local Coastal Program. 6. Mitigation measures will be identified for any significant aesthetic impacts. 7. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures (if applicable) will be clearly stated. Agricultural Resources. The project site is disturbed and has been in agricultural use in the recent past. The site is located within the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program and will require compliance with the agricultural conversion requirements. The following approach is envisioned: 1. The agricultural setting will be described in terms of the historical context of farming activity on the site. County-wide trends in agricultural conversion, the acreage of each of the various important farmlands inventory mapped farmland on the site, the economic value of any farmland that will be converted to non-agricultural use. BRG will contact the Department of Conservation and obtain Important Farmlands Maps for the site. The areas of important farmlands will be quantified using GIS Arcview. 2. The agricultural soils on site will be evaluated using U.S. Department of Agriculture Soils Survey data for the project site. The soils Capability Classes and Storie Index ratings will be identified. 3. Thresholds to determine the significance of impact will be identified. 4. The potential agricultural impact associated with implementation of the proposed project will be evaluated. This evaluation will include a discussion of the agricultural conversion requirements of the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program, conversion of agricultural lands, and the project's consistency with City of Carlsbad General Plan policies related to agricultural uses. 5. Mitigation measures will be identified (if applicable) for any significant agricultural impacts. 6. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures will be clearly stated. Air Quality (including Greenhouse Gas Analysis). BRG will utilize Brian F. Smith & Associates (BFSA) to prepare an air quality impact assessment will analyze air quality impacts from the proposed project. A Greenhouse Gas (GHG) analysis will also be included in the air quality assessment. All air quality impacts will be based upon Federal, State and Local Significance Thresholds. The following approach is envisioned: September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project Existing Ambient Site Vicinity Air Quality Levels • Existing ambient air quality data will be collected from the California Air Resources Board. Identified ambient pollutants will be quantified to show attainment status under the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). Construction Modeling • Identify air quality construction impacts per the methodologies within the 1993 CEQA Air Quality Handbook developed by South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). A list of construction grading equipment, earthwork quantities and phasing will need to be provided for the analysis to commence. • Calculate the health risk associated from the particulate matter due to diesel emissions as generated from either assumed or proposed construction equipment at each phase of the development. • Best Management Practices (BMPs) and or mitigation measures will be recommended to control onsite construction emissions and dust levels. Project related Vehicular Trip Assessment • Operational impacts utilizing related to the proposed project trip generation will be identified. The average trip generation and anticipated round trip distance for the proposed project will be needed. Air Quality impacts will be determined utilizing the URBEMIS 2007 model which utilizes emission assumptions obtained from the EMFAC 2007 model. Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Provide a greenhouse gas emission analysis for the proposed project consistent with the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB32), which requires that by 2020 the state's greenhouse gas emissions be reduced to 1990 levels. The California Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32) requires that the California Air Resources Board (CARB) adopt regulations requiring the reporting and verification of statewide (GHG) emissions and requires that CARB adopt statewide greenhouse gas emissions limits equivalent to the statewide greenhouse gas emissions in 1990, to be achieved by year 2020. CEQA is not explicitly addressed in AB 32. However, because a key objective of CEQA is public disclosure of the reasons for agency approval of projects with significant environmental effects, case law has established that CEQA documents should disclose a project's contribution to climate change. Furthermore, the Attorney General's office argues that AB 32 requires a climate change analysis. The Attorney General's position is that AB 32 is an "adopted air quality plan" requiring the state to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. Any project that adds to emissions, conflicts with the goal of reducing those emissions, according to the Attorney General. September 17,2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project Projects that conflict with or obstruct implementation of an "applicable air quality plan" should analyze that conflict in an EIR. This argument is based on Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, which lists one factor for determining if an air quality impact is significant the consideration of whether the project would conflict with or otherwise obstruct implementation of an air quality plan. The dilemma for EIR practitioners and CEQA Lead Agencies is that there are no statewide significance criteria or approved mitigation methods concerning GHG emissions. BRG would look to other Agencies and recently prepared EIRs throughout the State to develop an appropriate, legally-defensible threshold for significance. This threshold would be presented to the County of Imperial for approval prior to beginning detailed analysis in the EIR. BRG will present feasible measures to offset or reduce project GHG emissions, as identified in AB 32. We will work with the County of Imperial and Imperial County Air Pollution Control District to identify features that can be incorporated into the project that would reduce the project related greenhouse emissions (e.g.'s, solar, energy efficiencies). Other potential impacts associated with potential climate change issues, such as flooding, drought, wildfire hazards), would be addressed within the context of the appropriate EIR section, such as Hydrology, the Water Supply Assessment, and Hazards. • The proposed greenhouse gas emissions of the business-as-usual plan and recommend mitigation measures to reduce emissions as required by AB 32 will be estimated. Criteria used to determine significance will be identified, and significant, less than significant, direct, and indirect impacts resulting from the projects. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures (if applicable) would be clearly stated. Biological Resources. BRG will utilize Merkel & Associates (M&A) to conduct a third party review of the applicant-provided 2006 Dudek and Associates biological survey and Habitat Management Plan (HMP) compliance report will be conducted. The review would include: evaluation of the methodologies and conclusions contained in the reports for legal and scientific adequacy and accuracy to ensure that the analyses are of a scale and level of effort appropriate to the requirements of the project; and identification of any flaws in the methodologies and/or conclusions. We will rely on the HMP consistency analysis provided in the HMP compliance report to evaluate the project's consistency with the HMP in the EIR. We also assume that the biological survey addresses the whole project; however, as part of the third party review, any additional impact to open space and habitat areas resulting from the project will be identified. Criteria used to determine significance will be identified, and significant, less than significant, direct, and indirect impacts resulting from the projects. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures (if applicable) would be clearly stated. We assume that Dudek and Associates will be responsible for making any necessary changes to the biological survey and HMP compliance report and that the survey and report will be suitable for inclusion in the EIR. September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project Cultural Resources. BRG will utilize ASM Affiliates (ASM) to prepare a cultural resources study for the proposed project. The study will consist of a review of the literature and site records on file with the South Coastal Information Center (Information Center) at San Diego State University, followed by an intensive survey of the proposed project area. All existing and newly identified prehistoric and historic archaeological sites, features and isolates identified during the survey will be appropriately mapped, documented and recorded with the Information Center for assignment of permanent trinomials. If potentially significant archaeological sites are identified, evaluation may be necessary and the scope of any such work will be provided to the City for review and approval prior to initiating work. Upon completion of the survey (and, if necessary, evaluation), a draft technical report will be prepared and submitted for review. This report will consist of a description of the project's natural and cultural setting, study methods, results, potential impacts, and mitigation recommendations. Following review and comment, prepare the final technical report for incorporation in overall submittal. The California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) will be contacted to conduct a search of their files for any recorded Traditional Cultural Properties or Native American heritage sites located within one mile of the project property. NAHC will respond with records of any such sites and will provide a listing of all Native American tribal representatives that may have further knowledge of such sites within the project. This information will then be provided to the City of Carlsbad for its SB-18 Tribal consultation. Tribal consultation under SB-18 is necessary when a project requires a general plan amendment and/or a specific plan. SB-18 requires the City to provide opportunities for the involvement of citizens, California Native American Indian tribes, public agencies, public utility companies, and civic, education, and other community groups, through public hearings and any other means the county deems appropriate. The proposed project requires a general plan amendment; therefore, consultation under SB-18 is required. Criteria used to determine significance will be identified, and significant, less than significant, direct, and indirect impacts resulting from the projects. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures (if applicable) would be clearly stated. Contingency - As part of this scope of work and cost estimate, we have included a cost contingency in the proposed budget to test and evaluate up to one (1) potentially significant archaeological site, if identified on the project site. Geology/Soils. BRG will utilize Petra Geotechnical (Petra) to conduct a third party review of the applicant-provided Geotechnical Constraints and Opportunities Report (June 22, 2006). The review would include: evaluation of the analysis and conclusions contained in the report and evaluate the adequacy of the impact analysis, particularly with regard to unstable soils, remedial earthwork, landslides, rocky soils, fault rupture, seismic ground shaking, subsidence, settlement, surcharging, liquefactions, proposed slope stability, and groundwater impacts. Petra will identify any flaws/inadequacies in the analyses and conclusions. September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project Criteria used to determine significance will be identified as significant, less than significant, direct, and indirect impacts resulting from the project. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures (if applicable) will be clearly stated. We assume that Geocon will be responsible for making any necessary changes to the Geotechnical Constraints and Opportunities Report and that the report will be suitable for inclusion in the EIR. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. The project site and vicinity has the potential to be impacted by a number of different types of hazards including past agricultural hazardous materials and high fire hazard areas. BRG will utilize Environmental Resources Management (ERM) to prepare a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for the project area. The following approach is envisioned: 1. Prepare Phase I ESA ERM proposes to perform the Phase I ESA in conformance with ASTM E 1527- 05 and AAI standards. ERM will seek to identify conditions indicative of releases and threatened releases of hazardous substances and petroleum products at, in, on or under the subject property through gathering information regarding: (1) current and past property uses and occupancies; (2) current and past uses of hazardous substances and petroleum products; (3) waste management and disposal activities; (4) current and past corrective actions and response activities at the subject property; (5) engineering controls at the subject property, (6) institutional controls at the subject property; and (7) properties adjoining or located nearby the subject property. 2. The City's Fire Marshall will be contacted to determine the acceptability of proposed development sites adjacent to any high fire hazard areas. 3. Thresholds to determine the significance of impact will be identified. 4. The potential impact of the project will be evaluated including fire hazards and hazardous materials. 5. Mitigation measures will be identified for any significant hazards or hazardous materials impacts. 6. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures (if applicable) will be clearly stated. Hydrology and Water Quality. BRG will utilize Fuscoe Engineering (Fuscoe) to conduct a third party review of the applicant-provided Hydrology and Preliminary Drainage Reports (PDC, May 2007). Fuscoe will identify any flaws/inadequacies in the analyses and conclusions. We assume that PDC will be responsible for making any necessary changes to the Hydrology and Preliminary Drainage Reports and that the reports will be suitable for inclusion in the EIR. BRG will utilize Fuscoe to prepare a CEQA-level Storm Water Management Plan for the proposed project. Fuscoe will prepare a CEQA-level Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) consistent with the EIR level analysis and City of Carlsbad standards. SWMP shall include source control, site design and treatment control Best Management Practices (BMPs) for use by the City to certify temporary and permanent onsite water quality control. SWMP will include impact analysis per CEQA guidelines. September 17,2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project Criteria used to determine significance will be identified for hydrology and water quality, and significant, less than significant, direct, and indirect impacts resulting from the project. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures (if applicable) will be clearly stated. Land Use Planning. Surrounding land uses include townhomes to the north, vacant land and an elementary school to the south, single-family homes to the east, and apartments and single-family homes to the west. The project covers an area consisting of approximately 61 acres. The project includes the proposal to change the General Plan designation from Residential Low-Medium Density (0-4 du/ac) and Open Space to Residential High Density (15-23 du/ac) and Open Space. A significant increase in density above the RLM density range would result if the proposal is approved. The project will require the approval of numerous discretionary actions, with the major actions including a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Local Facilities Management Program Amendment, Tentative Map, Planned Development Permit, Coastal Development Permit, Hillside Development Permit, Site Development Plan, and Habitat Management Plan Permit. The following approach is envisioned: 1. The land use setting will be described in terms of all applicable land use plans and policies, existing on-site and off-site land uses, and planned on-site and off-site land uses. Exhibits will be provided depicting the location of existing and planned land uses, and the project's context to other applicable plans. 2. Thresholds to determine the significance of impact will be identified. 3. The project's consistency with land use plans will be analyzed. This analysis will include a detailed project with respect to the project's consistency with the General Plan, Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan, Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance (Title 21) including the Growth Management Chapter, McClellan Palomar Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Landscape Manual, Open Space and Conservation Resource Management Plan, Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 21, and Local Coastal Program. A detailed analysis of the project's consistency with Coastal Act policies including coastal access, recreation, and the preservation of coastal resources will be provided. 4. The project's compatibility with surrounding existing and proposed development will be addressed. This analysis will focus on the single-family residential development to the east and southwest and the apartment project located to the west. In addition, we understand that from the RFP, a 90-unit multi-family residential project has been approved north of the site. The future views of these residences will be considered during the compatibility evaluation. The project's compatibility will be assessed in terms of types of land uses, proposed densities, and buffer techniques. Of particular concern is the significant increase in density proposed by the project as compared to the current allowable density. 5. The Land Use section will identify all significant, less than significant, direct, and indirect impacts resulting from project implementation. September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project 6. Mitigation measures will be identified for any significant land use impacts. 7. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures (if applicable) will be clearly stated. Noise. It is anticipated that portions of the project will experience noise from the extension of Poinsettia Lane. During the construction phase of the project, the area will experience a temporary increase in the ambient noise level and due to the project's increase in traffic volumes, the ambient noise level may be increased on some adjacent roadways. BRG will utilize BFSA to prepare a noise study for the proposed project. The study prepared by BFSA will provide an exterior site assessment that focuses on both the project related noise impacts to offsite land uses as well as potential offsite construction noise impacts generated during construction. The study will also provide exterior noise predictions due to the future roadway geometries and volumes for the residential uses proposed onsite. The following approach is envisioned. Field Monitoring • Ambient sound levels will be taken at four separate locations onsite. Each monitoring position will be selected based upon the locations of future noise sensitive areas shown within proposed project site plan. Traffic counts will also be taken simultaneously during the monitoring event for noise modeling calibration. • Ambient sound levels along two nearby offsite roadways will be taken in order to quantify existing offsite noise levels. Traffic counts will also be taken during the monitoring event. • Acoustical noise monitoring will conform to the City of Carlsbad's general plan. Construction Noise Assessment • BFSA will coordinate with the project manager to get a list of construction equipment and phasing. This information will be utilized in order to quantify construction noise levels along any nearby sensitive land uses. Construction related noise contours will be generated based upon these assumptions. Traffic Noise Modeling (Residential Areas) • Future Traffic noise will be predicted at sensitive residential receptor locations within the proposed site. BFSA will utilize the proposed project traffic study and proposed grading plans for future input assumptions. • Noise modeling will be conducted utilizing either the TNM 2.5 noise prediction software or the CAL.TRANS Sound32 noise prediction software. 10 September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviaro Project • Once the initial noise model is set up, BFSA will calibrate the prediction model utilizing the ambient noise measurements, geographical locations of those measurements and the simultaneous traffic counts performed above. Traffic Noise Modeling (Offsite) BFSA will utilize the CALVENO noise emission regression equations to calculate offsite noise impacts. A comparison analysis will be performed between sound predictions between both the existing traffic volumes and the future predicted traffic volumes. These calculations will be performed on roadway segments within the project traffic study. Mitigation Design BFSA will utilize the TNM 2.5 noise prediction software to develop noise mitigation (as needed) for the special education school site. Noise mitigation will be designed per the procedures outlined within the City's Noise Element within the General Plan. The acoustical design will be based upon both economic and functional goals. Should mitigation be required, BFSA will provide 11x17 attachments to the final acoustical report for easier identification of the exact locations for each proposed barrier. Criteria used to determine significance will be identified, and significant, less than significant, direct, and indirect impacts resulting from the projects. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures (if applicable) would be clearly stated. Population/Housing. The proposed project may indirectly induce growth through the provision of the Poinsettia Lane road extension. An amendment to the Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) for Zone 21 is required to update the existing and future development potential for the zone and the anticipated infrastructure necessary to support the proposed project. The following approach is envisioned: 1. The existing population/housing setting will be described in terms of existing population and housing on-site. General Plan, LFMP Zone 21, and the Local Coastal Program allowances for the site, and housing/populations for the project area and the City and region as a whole. We will utilize information in the City's existing database and supplement this information with census data as appropriate. 2. Thresholds to determine the significance of impact will be identified. 3. The potential impact of the project will be evaluated. This will include quantification of the increase of housing and population on the project site, and a comparison to the General Plan, LFMP Zone 21 unit allowances, and the Local Coastal Program. Based on a conversation with City staff, we understand that the Applicant has conducted the LFMP Zone 21 Amendment analysis and that it will be available for assessment and inclusion in the EIR. 11 September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project 4. An analysis of whether the project will induce, either directly or indirectly, substantial growth in the area will be provided. 5. An analysis of whether the project will displace a substantial number of existing dwelling units or people will be provided. 6. An analysis of whether the project will result in exceeding the City's growth control point will be provided. 7. Mitigation measures will be identified for any significant population/housing impacts. 8. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures will be clearly stated. 9. An analysis of the project's impact to public services and utilities will be provided in the ensuing section. Public Services and Utilities. The project site is located within Local Facilities Management Zone 21. An amendment to the LFMP for Zone 21 is required to update the existing and future development potential for the zone and the anticipated infrastructure necessary to support the proposed project. The following approach is envisioned: 1. The existing public services and facilities setting will be described in terms of existing services and facilities serving the site and shall determine the demands of the project for fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, other public facilities, water facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, solid waste facilities, and gas and electric service. 2. This section will evaluate water, wastewater treatment facilities, solid waste facilities, gas and electric service, fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, and other public facilities. Stormwater drainage facilities will be addressed in the Water Quality/Hydrology section of the EIR. 3. Thresholds to determine the significance of impact will be identified, including LFMP Zone 21 requirements. 4. The potential impact of the project will be evaluated. This will include quantification of the increase of demand on the various public services and utilities, the ability to meet the demand, and any expansion or new construction of facilities created by this demand that may cause a physical impact to the environment. Based on a conversation with City staff, we understand that the Applicant has conducted the LFMP Zone 21 Amendment analysis and that it will be available for assessment and inclusion in the EIR. 5. The City's emergency response plans will be evaluated in conjunction with the proposed project to determine if the project will interfere with existing plans. 6. Mitigation measures will be identified for any significant public services and utilities impacts. 7. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures will be clearly stated. 12 September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work (or the Bridges at Aviara Project Recreah'on. The project site is located within the LFMP for Zone 21. BRG will analyze and compare the proposed project's impacts to the Zone 21 LFMP. The following approach is envisioned: 1. The existing recreational setting will be described in terms of existing facilities serving the project area, and their locations. 2. The ability of the agencies providing the recreational services to meet the demands of the proposed project will be provided. 3. The project's potential impacts on recreation will be analyzed and compared against the Zone 21 LFMP. Based on a conversation with City staff, we understand that the Applicant has conducted the LFMP Zone 21 Amendment analysis and that it will be available for assessment and inclusion in the EIR. 4. Thresholds to determine the significance of impact will be identified, including the LFMP Zone 21 requirements. 5. The potential impact of the project will be analyzed and compared to the Zone 21 LFMP. This will include quantification of the increase of demand on the existing facilities, the ability to meet the demand, and any expansion or new construction of facilities created by this demand that may cause a physical impact to the environment. 6. Mitigation measures will be identified for any significant public services and utilities impacts. 7. The level of significance after implementation of mitigation measures will be clearly stated. Traffic/C/rcu/afion/Parkfng. BRG will utilize LOS Engineering (LOS) to conduct a third party review of the Applicant provided traffic impact analysis for the proposed project. LOS will identify any flaws/inadequacies in the analysis and conclusions. We assume that the Applicant's traffic engineering consultant will be responsible for making any necessary changes to the traffic impact analysis report and the report will be suitable for inclusion in the EIR. Other CEQA Mandated EIR Sections The EIR will contain the following CEQA mandated sections: Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes - In accordance with Article 9 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the EIR will contain a discussion of the irreversible environmental changes that will result from the proposed project and unavoidable significant impacts. This section will discuss uses of nonrenewable resources, long-term commitments of resources, and potential irreversible environmental damage that may result from environmental accidents associated with the project. Impacfs Found Not To Be Significant - Areas of no significant impact identified in the Initial Study and subsequent analysis for the EIR will be listed. The justification for such findings will be based on the Initial Study and results of the Draft EIR analysis. 13 September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project Cumulative Impacts - The discussion of cumulative effects is an increasingly important analysis in EIRs. The Cumulative Impacts section will evaluate whether individual project impacts are cumulatively significant when viewed in combination with other projects. The section will discuss the potential of the proposed project to compound or increase adverse environmental impacts when added to other closely related past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects and project impacts. BRG will work closely with City staff to identify cumulative projects. This section will discuss any indirect, cumulative impacts and evaluate compliance with adopted threshold standards and applicable policies and programs. Growth-Inducing Impacts - The Growth Inducement section will assess the potential of the proposed project to induce economic or population growth and the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. The analysis will evaluate the project relative to the phasing of community services and facilities to serve new development. An analysis of the LFMP/Growth Management Plan and its ability to provide adequate infrastructure to meet the demand as the project builds out will also be included. The section will discuss the potential for the use of large amounts of fuel or energy and evaluate the project's compliance with regional and local growth management policies. Alternatives The Alternatives section of the EIR will identify a reasonable range of alternatives that could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project, but reduce significant impacts. Alternatives evaluation will be a critical component of the environmental review and mandated by CEQA. The alternatives will be fully defined and analyzed in the First Screencheck Draft EIR submitted to the City. This section will include, at a minimum, three project alternatives: 1) the "No Project" which analyzes what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on the current General Plan and consistent with available infrastructure and community services; 2) a "Thirty Townhomes", which would analyze the alternative of developing the southwestern most proposed area with 30 market- rate townhomes instead of the 65 age restricted apartments; and 3) a "Reduced Project", which would include an analysis of a reduced level of development intensity on the project site. BRG assumes that the Thirty Townhome and Reduced Project alternatives would be developed in consultation/coordination with City staff. The analysis for each alternative will include a qualitative and qualitative comparative analysis for the relative environmental impacts and merits of each. References, Persons and Agencies Contacted and EIR Preparation This section will include lists of all references and persons and agencies contacted in the preparation of the EIR. This section will also list all persons involved in the preparation of the document, their title and role. Technical Appendices The EIR Appendices will include an Initial Study (if prepared, and provided by the City), a copy of the NOP, public comments on the NOP, and any technical studies prepared for the project. 14 September 17, 2008 y EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project Task 3 Second Screencheck Draft EIR BRG will revise the First Screencheck Draft EIR in response to City comments and provide five (5) copies of the Second Screencheck Draft EIR in three-ring binders (including Appendices) for City review and comment. Task 4 Draft EIR BRG will incorporate City comments on the Second Screencheck Draft EIR and perform a quality control review. BRG will then provide the City with the required amount of copies of the Draft EIR and Technical Appendices. The Draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program will be available for public review. Our scope of work assumes the City will be responsible for the preparation and posting of the Notice of Completion and Notice of Availability of the Draft EIR, and distribution of the EIR to the appropriate agencies and individuals. Task 5 Screencheck Final EIR BRG will prepare five (5) copies of the Preliminary Final EIR including Responses to Public Comments (not to include the Technical Appendices unless revised) for City review and comment. Upon close of public review of the Draft EIR, BRG understands our role will be to review all comments and prepare a summary of general comment categories. We will meet with City staff to discuss the general approach to responding to public comments. After agreeing to the approach, BRG will number each individual comment and prepare corresponding responses, including identification of responses that affect or supplement information contained in the Draft EIR. BRG will modify the text of the Draft EIR or add footnotes to the margins identifying relevant responses to comments. Of course. City staff shall make final determination on the adequacy of responses to comments. The fee proposal included herein assumes a total of 200 individually numbered comments will be received on the Draft EIR. Please note a single comment letter may contain numerous numbered comments. The estimate of the level of effort in responding to comments is based on a moderate to high level of controversy. Contingency - As part of this scope of work and cost estimate, we have included a cost contingency to provide responses to comments if the number of individual comments exceeds 200. Task 6 Draft Final EIR BRG will incorporate City comments on the Screencheck Final EIR in response to City comments. Task 7 Final EIR BRG will incorporate City comments on the Draft Final EIR and perform a final quality control review. 15 September 17, 2008 EIR Scope of Work (or the Bridges at Aviara Project Task 8 CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations Subtask 8.1 Screencheck CEQA Findings/SOC BRG will prepare the Candidate CEQA Findings pursuant to CEQA Guideline §15091 for ultimate submittal to the City Planning Commission and City Council. BRG will prepare draft Candidate Findings to be submitted for City staff review at the Second Screencheck Draft EIR. BRG will identify project changes, alterations and required mitigation identified in the Draft EIR, which avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects. If there are mitigation measures or alternatives to the project identified in the EIR which could reduce the adverse consequences of the project but which are determined infeasible, BRG will provide the required CEQA findings, giving the specific economic, social or other conditions which render the mitigation measure or alternatives infeasible. Please note that development of these findings of infeasibility will likely require the active participation of the City and/or applicant to provide sufficient facts to support the findings. BRG will coordinate development of the necessary arguments to support CEQA Findings. In addition, the Candidate Findings will identify any changes or alterations that are within the jurisdiction of another public agency. Should the EIR conclude an impact is significant and unmitigable, BRG will prepare a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) in accordance with CEQA Guidelines §15093. BRG will work closely with the City to identify the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project, which outweigh the unavoidable environmental effects. BRG will coordinate with the City to establish the evidence in the record to support overriding considerations. The Findings will follow the format and style specified by the City. Subiask 8.2 Final CEQA Findings/SOC BRG will prepare a final set of CEQA Findings/SOC based on City review and changes to the Draft EIR that may have resulted from public comment. Task 9 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP1 Subtask 9.1 Screencheck MMRP We understand the need for preparation of an MMRP in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(l) and California Code of Regulations Section 15091. The MMRP will include a brief summary of the environmental impact. However, the associated mitigation measure will be included verbatim from the EIR in order to provide sufficient detail to address impacts at the project level. Each mitigation measure will reference the appropriate implementing permits to facilitate mitigation monitoring. For each project change, condition, or mitigation measure the program will include the following: • Specific monitoring activities; • Implementation phase or milestone; • Identification of the party responsible for implementation; • Identification of the party responsible for monitoring; • Criteria for evaluating the success of each mitigation measure; and, • Compliance verification criteria. 16 September 17,2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project Subtask 9.2 Draft MMRP BRG will prepare a Draft MMRP incorporating City comments on the Screencheck MMRP. The Draft MMRP will be available for public review with the Draft Program EIR. Subtask 9.3 Final MMRP BRG will prepare a Final MMRP based on any changes to mitigation measures as a result of public review and comment on the Draft EIR. Task 10 Meetings and Hearings BRG understands that project management and staff support are crucial elements to preparation of a legally-defensible EIR. BRG commits attendance of our Project Manager for the following meetings: • One (1) kick-off meeting with City staff to initiate the project, discuss work products and overall project schedule. • One (1) public scoping meeting to solicit input from the public on the scope and content of the EIR. • Two (2) staff meetings to discuss and resolve issues related to preparation of the Screencheck Draft EIR, etc. • Two (2) staff meetings to review comments on the First and Second Screencheck Draft EIRs. • Two (2) staff meetings to review the responses to comments and Final Draft EIR. • Up to three (3) public hearings with presentations as necessary as determined by City staff. One (1) additional meeting as necessary. In addition to providing our Project Manager, BRG commits principal-level attendance at the three (3) required public meetings/hearings. BRG assumes a maximum of four (4) hours each for the project initiation, scoping meeting, and public hearings. DELIVERABLES BRG anticipates the following deliverables to be submitted to the City. All documents will be readable by Microsoft Word 2000: (5) Copies of the first Screencheck Draft EIR in three-ring loose-leaf binders (5) Copies of the second Screencheck Draft EIR in three-ring loose-leaf binders (includes appendices) (5) Copies of the Screencheck MMRP (5) Copies of the Screencheck Candidate CEQA Finding of Fact (50) Copies of the City-approved Draft EIR, Exhibits and MMRP consisting of: - 25 spiral-bound copies - 25 digital copies on CD 17 September 17,2008 EIR Scope of Work for the Bridges at Aviara Project (30) Copies of the Technical Appendices consisting of: - 15 spiral-bound copies - 15 digital copies on CD (1) Master CD Copy of the Draft EIR with appendices, exhibits, and MMRP for City's website (5) Copies of the first Screencheck Final EIR (including Response to Comments, Final EIR and any amendments to the technical appendices) (5) Copies of the second Screencheck Final EIR (including Response to Comments, Final EIR and any amendments to the technical appendices) (51) Copies of the City-approved Final EIR, Exhibits and MMRP consisting of: - 25 spiral-bound copies - 25 digital copies on CD - 1 camera-ready copy (30) Copies of any amended Technical Appendices consisting of: - 15 spiral-bound copies - 15 digital copies on CD (1) Digital copy on CD of the Findings of Fact (1) Digital copy on CD of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (1) Master CD Copy of the Final EIR with any amended appendices, exhibits, and MMRP for City's website (5) Copies of the Certified Final EIR, Appendices, Exhibits, MMRP, and CEQA Findings of Fact, which incroporate any changes made to the Final Draft EIR during the public hearing and certification process, if necessary (1) Master CD copy of the Certified Final EIR with appendices, exhibits, and MMRP 5.0 SCHEDULE This section presents BRG's proposed task-by-task work schedule to complete the services requested by the City. The attached schedule assumes a start-date in September 8, 2008; however, this date will be revised upon further direction by the City. BRG's schedule to complete the CEQA process according to our proposed scope of work is provided on the following page. BRG and our subcontractors have the resources and commitment to the City to complete the CEQA process in approximately one year. 18 September 17, 2008 Bridges at Aviara EIR Cost Estimate Task 1- Project Initiation 1 .1 Data Collection and Site Vtsrt 1 .2 Project Description Subtotal Task 1 Task 2 - First Screencheck Draft EIR Visual Simulations (5) Subtotal Task 2 Task 3 - Second Screencheck Draft EIR Task 4 - Draft EIR Task 5 - Screencheck Final EIR1 Task 6 - Draft final EIR Task 7 - Final EIR Task 8 - CEQA Findings of Faet/SOC 8.1 Screencheck Findinos/SOC 8.2 Final Flndinas/SOC Subtotal Task 8 Task 9 MMRP 9.1 Screencheck MMRP 9.Z Draft MMRP 9.3 Final MMRP Subtotal Task 9 Task 10 Meetings and Hearings Kickoff Mm-tina Staff Meetinos • Issue Resolution Staff Meetinn - Review Screencheck EIR comments Staff Medina - Review Screencheck EIR comments Hearintjs Subtotal Task 10 TOTAL Rate ($/t>r) Principal 2 ^ 4 8 Z 10 8 4 4 4 2 2 2 4 1 1 1 3 2 2 2 2 8 16 59 315 Project Manager 4 e 12 10 4 44 24 16 16 8 4 4 4 s 2 i '4 2 2 2 2 8 16 152 170 Environ Analyst HI 8 32 40 60 0 60 32 16 24 16 S 0 0 0 4 2 2 8 0 0 0 0 4 4 208 100 Environ Analyst I 12 0 12 120 0 120 32 4 16 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 192 30 CADD/GIS 0 8 8 40 120 160 24 16 e 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 222 95 Analyst t 24 0 24 140 0 140 30 32 0 8 8 16 a 24 8 2 2 '2 0 0 0 0 4 4 332 75 Subconsultints LOS Engineering (traffic) Merkel and Associates (biologicaE resources - trwd-partyreview) ASM Afnfiates (cultural resources) Brian F. Smith & Associates (air quality (induing GHG) and noise) Petra Gcoxectinical. Inc. {neology /soils - third- part review) Fuscoe Engineering (Water Quality and Hydrology - third-party review) Environmental Resource Management (Phase 1 ESA) Admtmsirative Cost (10%) Total Contlnaencv Tasks - Indudad In BudtKt Total ASM Affiliates - Cultural resources evaluation and testing (one archaeological site) BRG Consulting - Responses to Comments Total Other Direct Costs Mileage & Postage, delivery, miscellaneous printing First Screen Draft EIR (5 copies - 3-ring binders) Second Screen Draft EIR (S copies - 3-ring binders) Screencheck MMRP (5 copies) Screencheck CEQA Findings (5 copies) Draft EIR + Technical Appendices (25 spiral -bound and 25 CDs t 15 spiral-bound and IS CDs + 1 Master CD) Draft MMRP (5 copies) Screencheck Final EK (5 copies) Draft Final EIR (5 copies) Final EIR + Any Amended Tedinoal Appendices (25 spiral-bound and 25 CDs +15 spiral-bound and 1 5 CDs + 1 Master CO) Final MMRP, CEQA Fmdings/SOC (1 CO) Certified Final EIR -t Any Amended Technical Appendices + Fmat MMRP, CEQA Findings (5 copies and 1 Master CO) Total Expenses TOTAL EIR COST Production 4 4 8 40 0 40 18 18 16 8 8 2 2 4 4 2 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 128 85 51,800 $4,162 54,443 510,100 52,500 510,100 53,800 13,690 540,595 520,000 5350 54Z5 S42S 510 5)0 54.750 510 5500 5500 53,000 52 51,750 511.732 t 211,702 Total BRG Hours 54 54 108 448 126 574 218 106 84 56 32 24 16 40 19 S 8 55 4 4 4 4 24 32 1,159 TOTAL COST S5.330 S6.2SO S1L620 S43.820 S12.710 156.530 122.430 111,390 fS.940 S6.600 13,580 32.680 12.080 i 4.760 SIMS il.005 S1.005 S4.00S 1970 SS70 SS70 1970 54.580 S8.460 139,375 11nduces time/cost for icspondng to 200 individual comm September 17, 2006 STANDARD HOURLY RATES AND TERMS ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING SERVICES BRIDGES AT AVIARAEIR STAFF RATE Principal - Tim Gnibus $315 Project Manager - Patrick O'Neill $170 Environmental Analyst/Planner III - Kathie Washington $100 Environmental Analyst/Planner II - Mary Bilse $90 Environmental Analyst/Planner I - John Addenbrooke $75 GIS Specialist - Totran Mai $95 Documents Manager - Mary Brady $85 The following standard terms apply unless otherwise agreed: All subconsultants and other direct project-related expenses are reimbursable at cost plus ten percent. Invoices will be presented monthly for work completed during the preceding 30 days, and are due and payable upon receipt. Invoices aged more than 60 days will be increased by 1.5 percent per month carrying charges. Effective January 1, 2008 Rates will increase by 10% per year effective January 1 of each year.