HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgr 2001-11-06 (Nicols/Berman)
)7~
AGREEMENT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
PLANNING SERVICES - TIBURON GLEN
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, lnade and entered this (Oihday of /'JDUe.MBER ,2001 by and between the
TOWN OF TIBURON, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called "Town," and NICHOLS-
BERMAN, hereinafter referred to as "Consultant,"
RECITALS
A. The Town is considering a proposal to construct an 8-unit housing development on a 26-acre
site in the Town ofTiburon, commonly known as the Tiburon Glen project ("Project").
B. The Town has determined that under the California Environmental Quality Act, Public
Resources Code ~~ 21000 et seq. ("CEQA"), the Project requires an Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) to analyze potential adverse environmental impacts resulting from the project.
C. The parties wish to contract for the Consultant to provide the services described in Exhibit A
("Services"), which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, in accordance
with CEQA.
AGREEMENT
1. Scope of Consultant Services. Consultant shall perform those Services described in
Exhibit A. Consultant may subcontract out certain of the Services to other Consultants only
as may be approved in advance in writing by Town. In the event of such subcontracting,
Consultant shall remain responsible for the full performance of such services.
2. Compensation. Consultant's fee for the Services shall be as set forth in Exhibit A. Payments
shall be due thirty days after submission of an itemized invoice showing work actually
cOlnpleted. Consultant shall submit invoices on a monthly basis for time and materials
actually expended. Consultant shall not exceed the fee set forth in Exhibit A without prior
Town approval of an amendment to this agreement.
3. Standard of Work: Indemnity. Consultant shall perform the services in a skillful and
professional manner compatible with the usual, customary standard of Consultant's
profession. Consultant shall indemnify, defend and hold Town harmless from and against
claims, liabilities, suits, loss, cost, expense and damages arising from Consultant's willful or
negligent acts relating to the performance of the Services pursuant to this Agreelnent.
4. Consultant as Independent Contractor: Indemnity. Consultant (including its agents and
employees) is not an agent or employee of the Town but is an independent contractor not
subject to the direction and control of the Town. Without limiting the foregoing, Consultant
Agreement for EJR Selvices, Tihu/"OJJ Glell.doc
shall maintain complete control of its operations and personnel and shall be solely liable and
responsible to pay all required salaries, wages, expenses, taxes and other obligations,
including, but not lilnited to, withholding and Social Security. Consultant shall indemnify,
defend and hold the Town harmless from any such liability that it may incur to the Federal
or State Governments as a consequence of this contract.
5. Attendance at Hearings. If requested by the Town Planning Director, Consultant shall
appear at litigation and/or administrative hearings that pertain to the Project. Town shall
reimburse Consultant for such appearance(s) at the hourly rate specified in Exhibit A.
6. Audit of Books and Records. Town may, in its sole discretion, undertake an independent
audit and/or evaluation of the Consultant's records and accounts of expenditures and
program activities at its own expense. Consultant shall furnish all items necessary in the
Town's discretion to complete said audit and/or evaluation subject to restrictions on
confidentiality limited to expenditure or receipt of program funds, and program quality.
7. Insurance. Consultant shall maintain insurance as set forth below. Town shall be added as
an additional insured to all required insurance policies:
A. Comprehensive General Liability: Combined single limit of $1,000,000 for each
single occurrence and $2,000,000 annual aggregate.
B. Comprehensive Automobile Liability: Combined single limit of $1 ,000,000 for each
single occurrence and $2,000,000 annual aggregate.
8. Ownership of Documents: Re-Use: Indemnity. All documents, including drawings and
specifications prepared by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement shall be the property of
Town. Town acknowledges that said documents are prepared for use only in connection
with the Project described in the Exhibit A. Consultant makes no representation that said
documents are suitable for re-use on any other project or on any expansion of the
Project. Any such re-use by Town without specific written approval by Consultant shall
be at Town's sole risk. Town shall indemnify and hold Consultant harmless frOln all
claims, losses, damages and expenses, including attorneys fees, that may arise from
Town's unauthorized re-use of said documents for another project or for any expansion
of the Project.
9. Stop Work Order. Town may at any time, by written notice to Consultant ("Stop Work
Order"), require Consultant to stop or suspend performance of the Services, in whole or in
part, for a period of up to ninety days after such notice is delivered to Consultant. Upon
receipt of the Stop Work Order, Consultant shall immediately comply therewith and take all
reasonable steps to minimize the incurrence of costs allocable to the Services covered by the
Stop Work Order during the period of work stoppage. Within ninety days of the delivery
of the Stop Work Order, or such later time as may be agreed to by the parties, Town shall
either cancel the Stop Work Order or tenninate this Agreement as provided in Paragraph 13.
Consultant shall resume work upon the cancellation of the Stop Work Order. To the extent
Agreement for EJR Services, Tilm/'On Glen. doc
2
that the Stop Work Order results in a documentable increase in the cost of perfonning the
Services or the time required for such performance, Consultant shall receive an equitable
adjustment in compensation or an extension of time for performance, as appropriate.
10. Delinquency. In the event that a proper invoice remains unpaid for more than 45 days after
submittal, Consultant may commence to charge interest of the unpaid amounts at the lesser
of 1.5% per month or the maximum rate allowed under applicable usury laws. In addition,
Consultant may suspend the peIformance of the Services after giving Town 10 days notice
of its intent to do so. In the event of such suspension, the Base Fee shall be increased to
include Consultant's reasonable costs of suspending and restarting the Services.
11. Termination of Contract. It is expressly understood that either party shall have the right to
terminate this agreement within five (5) days written notice to the other party. In such event,
Consultant shall deliver to the Town copies of all finished and unfinished surveys, studies,
documents, computer disks, and/or reports pertaining to the contract, and Consultant shall
be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any satisfactory work completed
as determined by the Town.
12. Discrimination. In the performance of the terms of this Agreement, Consultant shall not
engage in nor permit others he may employ to engage in discrimination in the employment
of such persons based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual preference, age, or handicapped
conditions.
13. Miscellaneous.
A. Other Contract Provisions. Other contract provisions are set forth in Exhibit A. To
the extent that there are any inconsistencies with such Exhibit and the other portions
of this Agreement, the latter shall prevail.
B. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of
California.
C. Severability. If any prOVISIon of this Agreement is found to be invalid or
unenforceable, the validity and enforceability of the remaining portions shall not be
affected unless the effect thereof would materially change the economic burden on
either party.
D. Successors in Interest: Assignment. This Agreement shall be binding on the assigns
and successors in interest to both parties. Neither party may assign their obligations
under this Agreement without the written consent of the other party.
E. Entire Agreement: Amendment. This Agreement represents the entire Agreement
between the parties. This Agreement may only be amended in writing.
Agreement for EJR S'ervices. Tihu/"On Glen. doc
")
J
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the paIiies hereto have caused their duly authorized representatives to
execute this Agreement the day and year above written.
CONSUL T ANT
TOWN OF TIBURON
Louise Nichols, Nichols-Berman
wn Manager
r
lJ
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
#/~
Ann R. Danforth, Town Attorney
AgreementfoJ' EJR Selvices, Tibu/"On Glell.doc
4
EXHIBIT
lFUILf! @@fPJi
Nichols. Berman
Environmental Planning
142 Minna Street
San Francisco California
94105
Tiburon Glen
Eight-Lot
Residential Development
Revised
Proposal to the
Town of Tiburon
to Prepare an
Environmental
Impact Report
A.
SEPTEMBER 21, 2001
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Tiburon Glen EIR
Page
Team Quallficauons 1
Nichols · Berman 1
Live Oak Associates 3
Snyder Smith Associates 4
Clearwater Hydrology 5
Crane Transportation Group 6
Other Specialists 7
References 7
Revised Scope of Work 9
Issues for Analysis 9
Products of Analysis 23
Schedule 26
Tasks to Prepare the EIR 26
Schedule Assumptions 32
Schedule to Complete the Tasks 33
Revised Budget 34
Budget Assumptions 34
TEAM QUALIFICA TIONS
This section of our proposal introduces Nichols . Berman and our EIR study team members and
presents an organization chart on the following page.
Nichols · Berman's approach to each assignment is to provide our clients with the firm's in-house
planning, environmental, and project management capabilities and to augment those skills with the
technical expertise of specialized consultants whose input is required for the individual project. As a
result, we routinely form, collaborate with, and manage multi-disciplinary consultant teams and have
developed many successful and longstanding professional relationships with a variety of consultants
experienced in the whole array of planning and environmental issues. We all are small firms and sole
entrepreneurs whose principals, like Nichols · Berman's, are directly engaged in the day-to-day work
and all the details of projects. We and our participating specialists are all experienced in preparing
environmental review documents in Tiburon and elsewhere in Marin County. Main participants will
be:
. Live Oak Associates biologists
. Snyder & Smith Associates geologists
. Clearwater Hydrology hydrologists
. Crane Transportation Group traffic consultants
We also will have the assistance of Vallier Design Associates (visual simulation), lllingworth &
Rodkin (air quality and acoustical consultants) and Archaeological Resource Service (archaeologists).
We and our study team members are committed to carrying out the scope of work and completing all
the products of this assignment.
NICHOLS. BERMAN
Nichols · Berman is an environmental planning firm which specializes in preparing environmental
documents which fulfill both the legal requirements of State and Federal law and the informational
expectations of decision-makers and the public-at-Iarge. During the past 20 years, Nichols · Berman
has successfully completed more than 80 environmental impact reports, assessments, and technical
studies in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). These analyses have examined all types of public planning and
private development projects and have involved urban, suburban, and rural areas in the San Francisco
Bay Area and elsewhere in northern California.
Our experience in Tiburon includes preparation of the:
Easton Point EIR on residential development of the Martha Company site located on Paradise Drive.
We analyzed a 49-lot project proposed on 125 acres in 1996. After the applicant revised the project,
we assessed a 34-lot project on 110 acres. We will be publishing. the Draft EIR shortly.
Tiburon Court IS on the four-lot residential development of a 13.34-acre site located on Trestle Glen
Boulevard. We prepared Draft and Final Initial Study Environmental Checklists, including responses
to comments reflecting project revisions, and a Draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
TEAM QUALIFICATIONS
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
ORGANIZA TION CHART
Tiburon Glen EJR
Town of Tiburon
Scott Anderson, Planning Director
Jayni Allsep, Environmental Coordinator
I
Nichols. Berman
Louise Nichols, Project Manager
I
Conformance with Plans
Nichols · Berman
Louise Nichols
I
I I l
Geology / Soils Traffic / Transportation Aesthetic / Visual Quality
Snyder & Smith Associates Crane Transportation Group Vallier Design Associates
Dave Snyder Carolyn Cole / Mark Crane Matt Brockway /
Jordan Harrison
I I I
Biological Resources
Live Oak Associates Air Quality Public Services / Utilities
Rick Hopkins / Illingworth & Rodkin Nichols. Berman
Dave Hartesveldt / James Reyff Jordan Harrison
Mark Jennings
I I I
Hydrology / Water Quality Noise Cultural Resources
Clearwater Hydrology Illingworth & Rodkin Archaeological Resource
Bill Vandivere Rich Illingworth Service
Bill Roop
2
TEAM QUALIFICATIONS
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
We currently are under contract to Marin County to provide environmental input and prepare the EIR
on the update of the Marin Countywide Plan now underway. We similarly are assisting the City of
San Rafael in meeting its environmental review requirements for the City's new San Rafael General
Plan 2020. Other past and current assignments in Marin County involving proposed residential
developments on environmentally complex sites include the following:
Baywood Canyon EIR for Marin County on development of 28 new units, redevelopment of existing
equestrian facilities, and restoration of the degraded 48-acre Circle V Ranch.
Bel Marin Keys Unit 5 analyses for Marin County of the conformance with public plans and the
public service and utility constraints to residential development of the Bay plain site.
Daphne-Bacciocco and Oakview EIRs for the City of San Rafael and Marin County on successively
revised residential-office development of a 106-acre unincorporated site contiguous to the City.
French Ranch Master Plan EIR and subsequent environmental documents for Marin County on
development of 28 residential units and redevelopment of equestrian facilities on a 533-acre site.
Madera del Presidio EIRs for the Town of Corte Madera on the controversial residential development
of a complex 85-acre site at the foot of Ring Mountain and on a subsequently revised plan.
MarinCrest Master Plan EIR for Marin County on an 84-unit residential development of a 152-acre
steep, unstable, and visually prominent Marin City ridgeline site adjacent to the Golden Gate National
Recreation Area.
Skye Ranch EIR for Marin County on development of 149 residential lots on 1,600 acres of
environmentally complex ridge1ands.
Louise Nichols will manage the Tiburon Glen EIR. She is an environmental planner with 30 years of
experience in environmental impact analysis, legislation, and rulemaking as a private consultant,
public interest advocate, and in government, including the last 20 years at Nichols · Berman. She was
project manager of the Baywood Canyon, Bel Marin Keys, Easton Point, Madera del Presidio,
Marin Crest, and Skye Ranch assignments noted above. For non-residential assignments in Marin
County, she has managed and / or conducted technical analyses for the 2150 Kerner Boulevard Initial
Study for the City of San Rafael, Lucasfilm /ILM EIR for Marin County, and the Marin General
Hospital EIR also for Marin County. She currently is preparing EIRs on two office projects proposed
in Novato. She will be assisted by Jordan Harrison whose Marin County experience includes analyses
of the Easton Point, Hanna Oaks Center, Oakview, Olema Campground projects.
LIVE OAK ASSOCIA TES
Live Oak Associates is a biological and ecological consulting firm with a practice extending from
Kern County to Sonoma County. The firm's expertise in biotic resource issues includes vegetation,
wildlife, and habitat management and in assisting clients in complying with local, State, and Federal
regulations protecting scarce or sensitive biotic resources. Specific areas of expertise include:
CEQA and NEPA Compliance The finn prepares biotic assessments and vegetation and wildlife
sections for Initial Studies, environmental assessments, and EIRs, including more than 70 CEQA
J
TEAM QUALIFICATIONS
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
studies in the past five years. Projects have ranged from parcel maps to a large new town proposed on
more than 4,000 acres in Contra Costa County.
Clean Water Act and California Fish and Game Code Compliance The firm delineates
jurisdictional waters and assists in permit requirement compliance, performs reconnaissance level
wetland assessments, prepares delineations in sufficient detail for regulatory agency verification, and
assists in securing necessary permits and / or letters of approval to construct projects involving
wetland impacts.
Endangered Species Act Compliance The firm conducts surveys for species listed by the State or
Federal governments and assists clients in complying with both, including performing specific surveys
and / or mitigation plans for threatened and endangered species.
Habitat Management / Mitigation Plans The firm has prepared conceptual habitat management
plans and mitigation plans for a variety of projects involving impacts to wetlands and endangered
species. It currently is in the process of setting up a mitigation bank for Merced County which
involves both the baseline studies necessary to document the biotic resources present and a habitat
management plan which maximizes the credit available for sale.
Principals of Live Oak Associates prepared the biological impact analyses for Nichols · Berman's
Baywood Canyon EIR for Marin County, Big Ranch Specific Plan EIR for the City of Napa, Blue Oaks
EIR for the Town of Portola Valley, both Easton Point EIRs for the Town of Tiburon, the Los Trancos
Road Subdivision EIR for the City of Palo Alto, and Silicon Valley Diversified Subdivision EIR in
Santa Cruz County, all residential development projects. The firm currently is participating with
Nichols · Berman on both the Marin County and City of San Rafael general plan updates, also recently
completed biological analyses for the 2150 Kerner Boulevard Initial Study, and performed biological
studies with us for the joint Marin County / San Rafael St. Vincent's / Silveira Planning Study.
Rick Hopkins PhD is a mammologist and noted expert on California mountain lions. He has prepared
a variety of EIRs and has conducted surveys for endangered mammals, including supervising studies
of the San Joaquin kit fox and salt marsh harvest mouse. He is familiar with all aspects of biological
resource issues on the Tiburon Peninsula from his involvement in the Easton Point project, including
directing the special-status species surveys and investigating the status of research on the
phenomenon, sudden oak death syndrome (SOD).
Dave Hartesveldt is an experienced botanist and wetlands ecologist whose qualifications encompass
complete biological resource evaluations for environmental impact assessments, analysis of special-
status species issues, wetland delineations, and permit assistance for a variety of projects, including
land development and transportation projects.
SNYDER & SMITH ASSOCIA TES
Snyder & Smith Associates, Inc., provides a full range of geologic and geotechnical engineering
services throughout California, including site investigations, geologic evaluations, structural
engineering evaluation and design, fault and seismic hazard studies, flooding and groundwater
evaluations, landslides, geophysical investigations, laboratory testing, geotechnical design, and
construction services. The firm specializes in land use planning and remediation of geotechnically
difficult site conditions. This includes landsliding, difficult groundwater control conditions, critical
seismic considerations (such as liquefaction potential), slope stability issues, and soft soil site
settlement and stabilization.
4
TEAM QUALIFICATIONS
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
Dave Snyder and Eric Smith have prepared numerous geology impact analyses for inclusion in
Nichols · Berman EIRs and also have directed additional site-specific explorations recommended by
their EIR assessments in addition to their other EIR assignments. Some of the firm's recent EIR
collaborations with Nichols · Berman include the following:
Easton Point EIR Snyder & Smith geologists performed field mapping and prepared the geology and
soil sections for both Easton Point EIRs. These assignment involved providing field and office peer
review of additional geologic exploration performed by the applicant's geologists to determine the
stability of several large ancient landslides. The stability of the landslides proved to be the most
critical factors for study in the EIRs.
Los Trancos Road Subdivision EIR Snyder & Smith performed field mapping and prepared the
EIR's soils and geology section on this major hillside development in the City of Palo Alto. Geologic
concerns included faulting, seismicity, and slope stability. It was important to evaluate the potential
for on-site surface ground rupture because the San Andreas fault system is complex and wide in the
area.. The stability of part of the site was low due to past construction cuts and also had to be
evaluated in detail for the ErR.
Oakview Master Plan EJR Snyder & Smith geologists prepared the EIR geology and soils sections
for two development concepts proposed for this 106-acre site in Marin County. Of particular concern
was the stability of several large landslides and their potential for reactivation. Snyder & Smith
provided peer review services for the ErR including geologic review of performed by the (,lpplicant's
geotechnical consultant. This work determined the site's stability so that a new development plan
could be formulated.
Snyder & Smith Associates currently is providing geologic input for the Marin Countywide Plan
update.
Dave Snyder is a registered geologist, certified engineering geologist, and registered environmental
assessor with more than 15 years of experience in preparing and managing geotechnical analyses for
EIRs. A geologic hazard specialist, he received five award grants in five successive years from the
U.S. Geological Survey and the National Science Foundation to study earthquake hazard potential.
Dave has managed dozens of large high profile ErRs throughout California. Recent EIR assignments
in the Bay Area include Easton Point in Tiburon, Gateway Valley 90 / 10 Plan in Orinda, South
Livermore Valley Specific Plan in Livermore, Los Trancos in Palo Alto, Oakview in Marin, Prado
Way in Lafayette, and Palos Colorados in Moraga
CLEARWATER HYDROLOGY
Clearwater Hydrology is a hydrologic and water resources engineering firm experienced in providing
technical services and conducting environmental assessments in the areas of stormwater drainage
analysis and design, flood assessments and flood control engineering design, watershed hydrologic
analysis, stream stabilization and restoration, wetland hydrologic analysis and delineation of wetlands
under U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) regulatory jurisdiction, and seasonal wetland and salt I
brackish marsh mitigation and restoration. The firm specializes in watershed hydrologic and erosion
control investigation, urban stormwater management and hydraulic structure design, stream and wetland
restoration projects, and hydrology, drainage, erosion I sedimentation, and water quality analyses for
ErRs. The firm also is experienced in working constructively with State and Federal resource and
regulatory agencies, municipalities, and the public to develop workable solutions to flood control I
5
TEAM QUALIFICATIONS
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
habitat preservation / enhancement conflicts and in completing hydrology analyses for environmental
impact documents under CEQA.
Clearwater Hydrology provides the engineering hydrology and environmental analysis expertise of the
firm's founder, a registered engineer, and on-call engineers and hydrologic technicians.
Bill Vandivere, a registered civil engineer in California, is an engineering hydrologist with 20 years of
experience in the San Francisco Bay Area in hydrology and water resources engineering. He has
significant experience in urban stormwater management and hydraulic structure design. He
specializes in integrating geomorphologic and engineering perspectives in the assessment of stream
behavior and stability and in wetland design and restoration. Bill prepared the hydrology analyses for
the environmental documents on the Baywood Canyon, Dominican College Campus Development
Plan, Easton Point, French Ranch, Oakview Master Plan, and Tiburon Court projects, among his
many collaborations with Nichols. Berman in Marin County. He also is engaged in the current Marin
County and San Rafael general plan updates.
CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP
The Crane Transportation Group (CTG) is a traffic and transportation planning and engineering firm
which has completed more than 700 projects in 150 California cities and counties and in the western
United States. The firm has extensive background in preparing traffic studies required by local
jurisdictions on behalf of public and private clients and equally is familiar with addressing the
technical requirements of the permit process and sensitivities of the concerned community. CTG's
broad range of studies includes traffic network modeling for cities and counties, working with newly
developed Congestion Management Plans, general plan and specific plan circulation elements, EIR
circulation sections, and impact studies for industrial, commercial, residential, resort, and special
purpose facilities.
CTG's recent and ongoing assignments in Tiburon include developing traffic projections for the
Town's General Plan update and analyzing traffic, bicycle, and pedestrian impacts of the Easton Point
and Tiburon Court residential projects for Nichols. Berman's environmental documents. The Easton
Point analysis involved assessments of traffic hazards, including sight distance and vehicle conflicts
along Paradise Drive and steep, narrow, and winding residential streets in the Old Tiburon and Hill
Haven neighborhoods.
Of the firm's other frequent collaborations with Nichols. Berman, those in Marin County include
traffic input for the Baywood Canyon, French Ranch, Novato Skate Park, and Olema Campground
environmental documents.
Mark Crane is registered as both a traffic engineer and civil engineer in California. He has 25 years of
experience in traffic engineering, planning, and management of more than 600 transportation studies
and CEQA reports in California and western United States.
Carolyn Cole is an AICP-certified planner and transportation planner with more than 20 years of
experience in urban, regional, and environmental planning and impact analysis, She has managed
numerous planning projects with significant traffic and transportation planning components.
6
TEAM QUALIFICATIONS
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
OTHER SPECIALISTS
Matt Brockway of Vallier Design Associates is a visual simulation, visual analysis, mitigation design,
and computer graphics specialist with more than 12 years of experience in the fields of landscape
planning and design including for regional, national, and international projects. He has been preparing
computer-aided viewshed analyses and high resolution photographic simulations of proposed
development projects beginning with the 1996 and continuing with the present Easton Point EIR. The
Town retained him directly to prepare simulations of the proposed Tiburon Court project, and he
similarly prepared simulations and presentation boards for the City of San Rafael to assist the Planning
Commission in reviewing the Vista Marin residential development. Other assignments in Marin
County for Nichols · Berman include preparing photographic simulations for the Dominican College
Campus Development Plan EIR for the City of San Rafael and Oakview EIR for Marin County.
Rich Illingworth of Illingworth & Rodkin is an acoustical consultant and registered civil engineer in
Colorado and California. At Caltrans, he was responsible for preparing highway noise impact reports,
training staff, and developing traffic noise mitigation measures. At the Office of Noise Control of the
California Department of Health Services he aided in developing the Model Noise Ordinance and the
"Noise Element Guidelines". As an acoustical consultant, he has prepared environmental noise
studies for a wide variety of projects and General Plan Noise Elements for many communities, Rich
conducted the noise analyses for both Easton Point EIRs and the Dominican College Campus
Development Plan, Hanna Oaks Center, 2150 Kerner Boulevard, and San Marin Business Park
assignments.
James Reyff of Illingworth & Rodkin is a project scientist with more than ten years of experience
conducting air quality and environmental noise studies. James has managed numerous large
transportation air quality and noise studies for Caltrans. He is familiar with Federal, State, and local
air quality and noise regulations and has developed effective working relationships 'with many
regulatory agencies. James also is familiar with air quality and noise technical and policy issues
which affect transportation projects, especially projects with Federal involvement. He prepared the air
quality analyses for the current Easton Point and San Marin Business Park EIRs, in addition to other
collaborations on Nichols · Berman assignments.
Bill Roop of Archaeological Resource Service is an archaeologist with more than 25 years of
experience in project management and archaeological methods, including cultural resource
management and development procedures in compliance with CEQA. He has completed more than
1,000 reports evaluating the potential for or impacts to cultural resources, including sites on the
Tiburon Peninsula. Experience includes developing new methodologies for data recordation and
recovery, preparing the Novato Cultural Resources Ordinance and the Cultural Resources Element of
the 1995-2005 Downtown San Jose General Plan, and developing computerized systems for data
retrieval and manipulation. With Nichols · Berman he prepared the archaeology analyses for the
French Ranch EIR for Marin County and currently is providing cultural resources input for the Marin
Countywide Plan update.
REFERENCES
We invite you to check our performance with Nichols · Berman's current and past clients who are
directing or oversaw work on the sample projects summarized above and other Marin County
assignments.
7
TEAM QUALIFICATIONS
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
Scott Anderson, Town Planner, Town of Tiburon, 415-435-7392. As you know, we have worked
with Scott on two recent residential development projects. For the Easton Point project, we prepared a
Draft EIR in 1996 on a 49-10t proposal and are nearing completion of a new Draft EIR on a 34-10t
revised development concept. We also prepared an Initial Study Environmental Checklist and
Mitigated Negative Declaration for the four-lot Tiburon Court subdivision.
Carol Branan, Community Development Director, City of Novato, 415-897-4341. Carol was
responsible for our Bahia Homeowners Lagoon Dredging, Novato Skate Park, and San Marin
Business Park EIRs, together with a number of environmental documents for downtown planning
efforts, including a Specific Plan and Redevelopment Area Plan. She previously directed several EIRs
we prepared for the City of Sacramento.
Bob Brown, Panning Director, and Linda Jackson, Principal Planner, City of San Rafael, 415-485-
3085 . We are assisting the City of San Rafael on environmental aspects of updating its General Plan
and will oversee preparation of the General Plan EIR. We previously prepared the Dominican College
Campus Development Plan EIR, 2350 Kerner Boulevard Initial Study, and a specialized biological
study of the St. Vincent's / S il veira property for the City.
Tim Haddad, Environmental Coordinator, Marin County, 415-499-6269. We presently are finalizing
a second Oakview EIR on the mixed-use office and housing project revised to reflect our previous
mitigated design alternative and the Olema Campground Initial Study. Prior assignments for the
County include the completed Baywood Canyon, French Ranch, and Lucasfilm EIRs.
8
REWSED SCOPE OF WORK
We will prepare the Tiburon Glen Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines (State Guidelines), and
Town of Tiburon Environmental Review Guidelines (Town Guidelines). The EIR will contain all
elements mandated by CEQA, including but not limited to a project description, impact summary,
analysis of significant impacts and mitigation measures, a list of impacts found not to be significant,
analysis of cumulative impacts, and analysis of alternatives. The major focus of this assignment will
involve analysis of the project's significant impacts and mitigation measures, as described below.
A critical element of this (and every) EIR's preparation will be to carefully and independently review
the many specialized consultants' reports prepared for the applicant and submitted to the Town. When
verified, updated, or supplemented by unbiased third parties, already collected information regarding
existing site conditions can provide useful background information and research materials. The
availability of such materials can avoid unnecessarily repetitive analyses and focus investigations
where new data gathering is required.
This section focuses on describing issues identified for analysis by the Initial Study, additional
evaluations which may be appropriate, based on our recent experience in the Town, and the scope of
work we propose to perform to prepare the EIR. Following the issues for study, we list the products of
our work and outline the contents of the EIR.
ISSUES FOR EIR ANAL YSIS
Aesthetics
The Initial Study determined that the project would result in potentially significant visual and aesthetic
impacts which require analysis in the EIR. Topography and vegetation contribute to the site's visual
prominence from some viewing locations but also appear to limit its visibility from other viewpoints
accessible to the public on a routine basis. Project implementation would involve grading for
landslide repair, tree removal to construct the two site access roads, lots' driveways, and individual
building envelopes, and development of housing units and accessory structures. Proposed two- to
three-story buildings would be situated within lower elevation woodlands, and upper elevation
woodlands and grasslands would remain undeveloped. According to the Initial Study, light colors are
contemplated for exterior building materials.
The amount of site alteration to be involved in clearing and grading, the relation of proposed building
heights to the remaining woodland canopy, and potential contrasts between exterior building colors
and prevailing tones in the landscape would be expected to influence the visibility of development and
degree of change as seen by viewers. The EIR will evaluate the extent to which these and other
relevant project features, such as building mass or volume, would be visible and will concentrate on
identifying the extent to which such changes could be substantially reduced through mitigation.
The EIR will involve the preparation of five photographic simulations and then will rely on the
simulations to describe the visual changes expected to result from implementing the project. In order
to represent the proposed project accurately, our visual analyst will develop a three-dimensional (3D)
CAD model. The model will include the project's structural and topographic elements and will be
constructed using the two dimensional site plan, prototypical floor plans and elevations of housing
9
SCOPE OF WORK
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
units which might be developed on proposed lots, and samples of exterior building materials available
from the applicant / applicant's consultants.
If such designs are not available during the EIR's preparation, it is possible to create photographic
simulations which illustrate project site development conceptually but which use designs of other
recent projects approved in Tiburon. The simulation budget may need to be adjusted depending on the
detail of site and project development information actually available from the applicant.
Assuming the project application contains a proposed landscaping plan, the simulations also will
illustrate such landscaping at seven to ten years' maturity. Depending on tree removal to create
building envelopes, future landscaping may not be readily apparent in simulations.
We will perform the following tasks to prepare simulations:
· Discuss potential viewing locations with Town staff, conduct a site reconnaissance, and
photograph the site from potential simulation viewpoints. We currently understand that the
simulations will be from the five following general viewpoints to be finalized with staff:
l:J Two (2) from Paradise Drive (one simulation of each proposed access point).
l:J Two (2) from Norman Way Estates.
l:J One (1) from the Bay (such as from the Larkspur Ferry).
· Accurately verify site photography locations on field maps for use with computer model of the
project, identify additional field references, and delineate them on maps to help verify computer
modeling and viewpoint location.
· Review visual simulation viewpoint photographs with Town staff, digitize color negatives from
selected viewpoints for use as baseline photographs for the simulations, and produce color images
for review.
· Produce a realistic 3D computer model of the proposed project from topographic and architectural
data available from the applicant.
. Verify viewpoint accuracy using computer plot overlays on base photographs.
. Digitize base photographs for each selected viewpoint.
· Produce administrative draft visual simulations which accurately show the project from the five
simulation viewpoint locations assumed by this proposal, review draft visual simulation with
Town staff, produce draft color hardcopy prints for review purposes.
· Make minor revisions to administrative draft simulations based on written review comments.
· Produce final color photographic prints ("before" and "after" images) for each selected viewpoint
For the site as a whole and for each view selected, the EIR text will describe visual characteristics
under existing conditions, identify elements of the project which would alter the site's appearance with
implementation, assess the nature and determine the significance of that change, and recommend
modifications and assess their effectiveness in mitigating any adverse visual impacts, We will address
each of the visual and aesthetic items listed in the Initial Study. We propose to use analysis techniques
similar to those we applied in 1996 and recently repeated for the Town's soon-to-be-published EIR
assessing the nearby Easton Point (Martha Company) site and which we have used widely elsewhere
in Marin County and other Bay Area communities. We welcome Town input on refining or adjusting
this approach for the particular needs of the Tiburon Glen project or, for consistency with the visual
10
SCOPE OF WORK
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
analyses underway for the several other Town EIRs on Paradise Drive projects, adopting another
methodology for the Tiburon Glen project.
Air Quality
The Initial Study determined that the project would result in potentially significant air quality impacts
related to construction activities on the site. Such impacts would be expected from generation of dust
primarily during grading for site preparation, utility trenching, and road building and for individual lot
development (Checklist Item C.2). Effects of uncontrolled dust generation include health and
nuisance impacts and, while representing potentially significant effects for people downwind of
construction sites, generally can be mitigated. Impacts to air quality also could occur from disturbance
of asbestos, a carcinogenic substance which occurs naturally in some (but not all) serpentine rock and
which poses a health hazard when released into the atmosphere (Checklist Items CA and G.2).
Based on Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) data, 24-hour PMJO levels
monitored at the San Rafael station closest to Tiburon periodically exceeded the State standard of 50
micrograms per cubic meter C1.l.g / m3) during the last several years. (Equivalent data for the same
years are not available for "fine particulate matter" (PM2.5) because the San Rafael station was not
measuring PM2.5.)
Serpentine rock is present on the site. Asbestos is not found in all serpentine rock, but, when it does
occur, it typically is present in amounts ranging from less than one percent to about 25 percent and
sometimes more. When present, asbestos is released with breaking or crushing of serpentine rock,
such as during grading for development, but also can be released naturally through weathering and
erosion. Once released, asbestos can become airborne and may remain suspended for long periods.
We have experience, from analyzing other similar sites in Tiburon, in characterizing these impacts
and, particularly, in identifying appropriate mitigation measures to control emissions of "respirable
particulate matter" (PMIO) and asbestos. BAAQMD regulations do not address emissions of naturally
occurring asbestos from construction sites. For such activities, the District recommends implementing
enhanced dust suppression measures.
Our involvement with the nearby Easton Point (Martha Company) project found concerns about
objectionable odors emanating from operation of force mains which transport wastewater flows.
Comments at the July 25, 2001 Tiburon Glen scoping meeting expressed similar concerns. With force
main systems, mixing or aeration of effluent is reduced, thus increasing anaerobic activity which can
result in local odors. In addition, Sanitary District #5 (SD #5) receives complaints about odors which
occur during spring and fall when a bacterium becomes predominant for brief periods at its main
treatment plant at Tiburon Point in Old Tiburon. We understand that the applicant proposes to connect
the Tiburon Glen site the Tiburon Point plant via a new force main segment in Paradise Drive. It may
be that public scoping for the Tiburon Glen EIR, not to be completed until after August 8, 2001
Planning Commission meeting, identifies similar concerns for examination in this EIR as raised for the
Easton Point project. In that case, the Tiburon Glen EIR may need to discuss the causes and
treatments of these odor sources.
Biological Resources
The project would result in potentially significant impacts to biological resources. The EIR will focus
on impacts of special-status species, their habitats, other sensitive natural communities, and wetlands,
II
SCOPE OF WORK
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
its interference with wildlife movement or use of the site, and conflicts with local policies and
ordinances adopted to protect biological resources (Checklist Items D.I through D.S). In the absence
of other adopted plans relevant to the site or project, no additional analysis of Checklist Item D.6 is
warranted, and this topic is dismissed from the EIR. The EIR will analyze the project by:
· Reviewing available information about the site (Diane Renshaw's report), results of studies
conducted on nearby sites (such as Easton Point, Marinero Estates, etc.), and available information
from more recent studies which may be underway in the immediate vicinity of the Tiburon Glen
site.
. Reviewing the status of the species in the region. Special-status species considered for this EIR
will include those species included on recognized State and Federal lists, along with the lists of
special-status plants produced by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). Some species
which previously were of note in the region have been removed from the Federal candidate list and
no longer appear on any State or Federal list (such as the Tiburon micro-blind harvestman) while
other species have been up-listed to Federally threatened in the last few years and are known to
occur in the Tiburon Peninsula (such as the California red-legged frog).
The EIR will thoroughly review all of the relevant studies for the project. These will include both site-
specific and regional documents. A database search and review will be conducted of relevant resource
agencies publications (such as the Federal Register) to determine the suite of special-status species
which need to be reviewed for the EIR.
Once the background review and data base search is complete, we will conduct reconnaissance surveys
of the site to map the biological habitats of the site. These surveys also are critical to provide a
complete and proper peer review of the studies conducted for the applicant. We will produce a habitat
map using site map CAD files available from the applicant.
We will map the location, size, and distribution of any rare plants. The Marin dwarf flax and Tiburon
Indian paintbrush are known to occur on site, and their populations will be mapped based on the
results of Diane Renshaw's June 2000 report. It will not be possible for us to confirm the distribution
of these two plant species if surveys are to occur outside the blooming period (spring). (The schedule
contained in our proposal assumes publication of the Draft EIR early next year, thus during the
winter.) Additional surveys during the blooming period may be necessary if we are not able to
ascertain the full extent of impacts to these two plant species from the existing information. This
scope of work does not presently propose these surveys. (Our surveys for Marin dwarf flax on the
Easton Point site showed substantial variation in coverage between 1996 and 2001.)
We will evaluate the site for impacts to the California red-legged frog because this species is known to
occur in Keil Pond on the Bay (downslope) side of Paradise Drive. The best time to survey for the
frog is the spring and summer months. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has established a
survey protocol for determining the presence / absence of the frog on a site. Protocol surveys are to be
conducted between May I and November 1. These surveys typically consist of four surveys during
this time (two nocturnal and two diurnal surveys). At this time we are not proposing protocol-level
surveys for the frog. Instead Dr. Mark Jennings (noted expert on the frog) will evaluate the suitability
of the site during the initial start up of the EIR.
We also will assess potential tree loss both directly through removal to implement all aspects of the
project (clearing to repair landslides, construct roads, create building envelopes, provide defensible
space for fire protection, etc.) and indirectly insofar as the future health of the site's coast live oak
woodlands can be anticipated. The former considerations relate to removal of trees covered by the
12
SCOPE OF WORK
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
Town of Tiburon Tree Ordinance and overall fragmentation of habitat. The latter considerations
would reflect the potential for initial development activities or long-term residential maintenance
(including landscape irrigation) in close proximity to oak trees to damage individual trees. These latter
considerations also would reflect the effects of the sudden oak death (SOD) epidemic. It is interesting
to note that finding suitable sites to establish oak woodlands as mitigation for outright tree removal
typically can be challenging because most (but not all) suitable sites already support oak woodland
habitat. However, due to the SOD phenomenon in Marin County, there actually may be increased
opportunities to locate and restore sites which have been devastated by SOD.
The impact assessment will compare the site development plans (including grading and construction
limits) with the distribution of the existing habitat. Our scope assumes that a CAD file of the base
topography and project will be available from the applicant for this analysis. This will facilitate and
improve the precision of the impact assessment. This assessment, combined with the tasks described
above, will evaluate the impacts of the project on the biotic resources of the site.
The biological section of the EIR will provide a detailed discussion of the biotic resources on the site,
potential project impacts, and adequate mitigation measures to reduce any project impacts to a less-
than-significant level. In addition to the preparing an existing conditions' section for the site, the EIR
will analyze the elements of the proposed project to determine if the project would result in adverse
significant impacts to the biotic resources discussed above. All impacts will be identified as
significant or less-than-significant. CEQA and the State Guidelines provide guidance for evaluating
project impacts and determining which impacts would be significant. CEQA defines "significant
effect on the environment" as "a substantial adverse change in the physical conditions which exist in
the area affected by the proposed project". Under Section 15065 and Appendix G of the State
Guidelines, a project's effects on biotic resources may be significant when they would:
· Substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, including causing a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining levels or threatening to eliminate an animal community.
. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) or USFWS.
· Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the CDFG or USFWS.
· Have a substantial adverse effect on Federally-protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.
· Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites.
In addition to the significance criteria identified in the Guidelines, removal or disturbance of nesting
raptors, as discussed in Fish and Game Code section 3503.5, would also be considered significant.
Whether or not the project would have a "substantial" impact on a biotic resource will depend on the
general scarcity or abundance of the resource regionally and to what extent (if at all) the project would
adversely affect it. Indirect effects also will be identified, in part by examining the proximity of
proposed development to naturally occurring biotic habitats. This analysis will include a discussion of
13
SCOPE OF WORK
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
short- and long-term effects of the project on biotic resources of the site, as well as any significant
irreversible environmental changes.
The EIR will contain measures (if necessary) to mitigate all significant environmental effects on biotic
resources of the project site. Mitigation measures are actions which are intended to reduce both on-
and off-site significant adverse effects to a less-than-significant level. These measures may include
one or more of the following:
. A voiding the impact.
. Minimizing the impact by decreasing the magnitude of the action.
. Restoring the biotic resource to its former condition after the impact has occurred.
. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by appropriate preservation and maintenance
operations during the life of the project.
. Compensating for the impact by replacing elsewhere those habitats or those biota which have been
affected adversely.
The EIR will discuss required mitigation measures (if any) at a conceptual level. We will describe
measures to decrease a given impact over time, restore the biotic resource to its former condition,
compensate for the loss of a biotic resource by replacing it elsewhere in sufficient detail to permit the
Town, reviewing agencies, and other commenting parties to assess the feasibility of the mitigation
identified and its likely effectiveness in reducing the effects of the project to a level of insignificance,
However, the EIR will not present detailed drawings (plan views, cross-sections, etc.) and construction
specifications. In some cases, insufficient information will be available to determine which areas of
the project site could feasibly be used for mitigation.
Cultural Resources
According to the Initial Study, a cultural resources investigation was conducted for the project site and
consisted of a literature review and records search followed by a reconnaissance level surface survey.
It concluded that topography and vegetation appear to have made the site inhospitable to prehistoric or
historic use and detected no surface evidence of cultural materials. However, the site is sensitive
archaeologically, as is much of Tiburon, due to the proximity to Ring Mountain, the location of three
extant archaeological sites (CA-Mm-52, -53, and -54), an archaeological site recorded in 1907 but
determined in 1975 to exist no longer (CA-Mrn-31), and bedrock outcroppings which contain
prehistoric rock art. Other rock outcroppings exhibiting unique rock art are known elsewhere on the
Tiburon Peninsula. Moreover, additional resources (shellmounds) are recorded nearer the site in the
El Campo area (CA-Mm-48, -49, and -50) located just downhill from the Tiburon Glen site across
Paradise Drive.
While petroglyphs were not identified on outcrops present on the site, the Initial Study could not rule
out the potential that such materials or other cultural deposits, including human burials, exist in the
subsurface and could be uncovered during site development activities. If present, grading, excavating,
and other land alteration operations could damage or destroy these materials accidentally and result in
a significant impact. In these situations, it is customary to require developers, as a condition of project
approval (if approved), to inform their contractors of a site's potential sensitivity before work
commences and to provide all involved in site development activities with procedures to be followed
in the event that construction workers encounter materials of potential cultural significance.
In view of these considerations, we will perform an independent peer review of the cultural resources
investigation conducted for the project and will visit the site to field check and / or augment the
14
SCOPE OF WORK
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
conclusions. Based on the peer review, we will be able to verify the conclusions or determine what
additional research or investigation (if necessary) would be warranted. Ultimately, we will use the
existing report, combined with other background information as may be collected and the field
inspection, to describe the site's cultural setting, summarize the potential impacts primarily affecting
subsurface artifacts of archaeological or paleontological significance, and identify the measures
required to mitigate such impacts should project implementation encounter cultural materials. Such
measures normally involve inspection by an archaeologist and Native American representative to
assess the significance of the find and determine the proper procedures warranted, such as to
document, excavate, archive, rebury, etc., the resources.
Geology and Soils
The Initial Study determined that the project would result in potentially significant geologic and soils
impacts) related to strong seismic ground shaking (Checklist Item F.1 (b)), landslides (Checklist Item
F.I (d)), soil erosion, slope instability, and loss of topsoil (Checklist Items F.2 and F.3), and expansive
soils (Checklist Item FA). In addition, other potentially significant impacts (such as rockfall,
groundwater, artificial fill areas, and maintenance of geotechnical and hydrologic mitigation measures)
should be evaluated and addressed in the EIR. Therefore, the EIR will focus on these topics, but no
additional analysis of Checklist Items F.l (a), F.l (c), and F.5 is warranted.
The area of proposed development is underlain by highly weathered meta-sedimentary rocks of
Jurassic to Cretaceous age. The steep hillside site is located in a part of the Tiburon Peninsula
susceptible to geotechnical hazards primarily associated with slope instability, including seismically-
triggered landslides. Such site conditions and the measures needed to mitigate them can cause
secondary effects. Examples include grading for landslide repair and / or construction of retaining
walls which, in turn can result in loss of vegetation, including trees, erosion and sedimentation, and
associated visual impacts. Other site conditions, when found present through site-specific
investigations, can dictate the incorporation of specific foundation design or construction practices in
planning or implementing development.
Herzog Geotechnical Engineers prepared a preliminary geologic investigation for the applicant which
included subsurface excavation of test pits. This report identifies the presence of landslides on some
parte s) of six proposed lots (all except proposed Lots 5 and 6). It also recommends measures to
stabilize them through landslide repair (slope reconstruction) or cut slope buttressing. The report also
documents the presence of colluvial soils. Depths of slide debris and / or colluvial material are
reported to reach up to 14 feet in places.
The EIR analysis will focus on performing an independent peer review of the Herzog investigation,
compiling and reviewing previously performed field maps and aerial photographs, conducting a
thorough lot-by-Iot evaluation of the potential impacts and hazards of landsliding to evaluate proposed
building envelope and access road locations in relation to areas of slope instability, and assessing the
feasibility of the mitigation measures proposed by the applicant's consultant. We will visit the site to
field check previously prepared reports and our independent research.
It also will be necessary for the EIR to evaluate the potentially significant impact of seismic ground
shaking. This evaluation will involve a review of recently published studies on local faults and
earthquake recurrence probabilities and estimates from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and other
study groups. The EIR also will evaluate the potential effects of reactivation of existing landslides.
The potential impacts of expansive soils will also be evaluated in detail using the Soil Survey of Marin
County.
15
SCOPE OF WORK
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The project would result in potentially significant hazards from release of naturally occurring asbestos
during construction (Checklist Item G.2), interference with an emergency response plan (Checklist
Item G.7), and potentially significant impacts from exposure to wildland fires (Checklist Item G.8).
The Tiburon Glen EIR will focus on these three topics and present their analyses, respectively, in the
Air Quality, Transportation, and Public Services (Fire Services) sections. (Impacts on Tiburon Police
Department response -- indicated by the Initial Study conclusion's reference to Checklist Item M.2 --
relate to emergency response and will be addressed by the traffic and transportation evaluation, since
the Initial Study dismissed Police Services from consideration in the EIR.)
Hydrology and Water Quality
The project would result in potentially significant water quality (Checklist Items H.I and H.6),
groundwater (Checklist Item H.2), erosion and siltation (Checklist Item H.3), and drainage and
drainage system capacity (Checklist Items H.4 and H.5) impacts. The EIR will focus on these topics,
and no additional analysis of Checklist Items H.7, H.8, H.9, and H.IO is warranted.
The steep hillside site consists of several watersheds which drain overland via natural swales and at
least one incised channel ("blue-line" stream) mapped as intermittent. These features convey surface
water downslope, under Paradise Drive through County-maintained stormwater inlets and culverts, and
discharge via natural drainageways into San Francisco Bay. At least one spring is present on the site.
Steep grades in watersheds such as the site's evacuate stormwater quickly during major rainstorms,
especially when shallow soils minimized opportunities for rainfall infiltration. Sediment loading is
expected to be variable, corresponding in magnitude to the intensity of rainfall and antecedent soil
moisture conditions. Stormwater can carry sediment and debris which periodically plugs developed
drainage structures, such as roadway inlets and culverts. Culvert obstructions can cause backups. In
infrequent extreme cases, landslides or debris flows cause catastrophic flooding, downslope
sedimentation, and culvert obstruction.
The Initial Study indicates that Clayburg Engineering has prepared an hydrology study which contains
calculations of peak flow increases after project implementation. We will independently review the
engineer's computed peak discharge rates for the IOO-year design rainstorm for both pre- (existing)
and post-project conditions in conformance with Marin County rainfall-runoff methodology, a locally-
tailored version of Caltrans' Rational Method. In order to perform this review, we will need accurate
assumptions about site coverage by impervious surfaces and the engineer's runoff data. The EIR
hydrology assessment will involve a field inspection to evaluate hydraulic conditions and capacities of
existing drainage facilities in order to ensure that potential impacts on downstream drainageways
where culverts discharge are fully identified and (if necessary) are mitigated.
The quality of site runoff under existing watershed conditions is expected to be good, except as may be
compromised somewhat by automotive pollutants and chemicals used in home and landscape
maintenance in the Normal Way Estates subdivision. Site development would increase concentrations
of normal urban pollutants carried in runoff discharged in the Bay, including the potential for
increased asbestos concentrations, a concern expressed at the July 25, 2001 scoping meeting. Natural
weathering of serpentine by wind and water can release asbestos where this substance is contained in
these rocks. Without mitigation, site development could intensify these contributions.
16
SCOPE OF WORK
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EI R
The Initial Study indicates that the applicant has prepared a water quality management plan for the
project. The ErR will independently evaluate the effectiveness of the plan to control erosion, off-site
sedimentation, and impairment of water quality from episodic discharges of contaminated stormwater.
This will include an assessment of the feasibility of proposed stormwater conveyance designs to
reduce water quality impacts.
To assess the significance of project impacts on the spring or other seeped areas and, conversely, the
effects of high groundwater levels on development, the EIR will assess the effects of impervious
surface placement and dewatering measures which would be installed or would be recommended to
ensure the integrity of residential foundations.
Land Use and Planning
Before the Town of Tiburon considers the merits of proposed development projects, it is essential to
review and assess their conformance with all relevant adopted public plans and policies. This is
necessary in order to ascertain that these relationships will be consistent or to document any specific
inconsistencies. In the latter case, it will be important to assess the measures available to bring the
project into conformance, such as through implementation of mitigation measures identified by the
various technical analyses in the EIR.
We will concentrate primarily on examining the project's potentially significant conflicts with the
Town of Tihuron General Plan and Chapter 16 of the Tiburon Town Code (Checklist Item 1.2). We
also will review with the Town the extent to which conformance with the Town of Tiburon Resolution
2859, Significant Ridgelines, would be relevant to the Tiburon Glen project. Based on an initial
review, we believe that the site straddles Secondary Ridgeline 8, thus dictating that we address the
project in relation to the development setback and other provisions of Resolution 2859.
The Town eventually would use the TO'rvn of Tiburon Design Guidelines for Hillside Dwellings to
review detailed home development proposals for individual Tiburon Glen lots, upon approval or
conditional approval (if approved) of the pending application. However, it is our experience that these
Guidelines duplicate the overall intent of General Plan policies and Zoning Ordinance regulations.
Examining the Guidelines results in repetition of what is known about project features and cannot
provide more specific information about potential impacts until proposed housing unit siting and
design details are well defined.
The Town's scoping process for the Easton Point (Martha Company) project identified public interest
in the Paradise Drive Visioning Plan prepared by the Marin County Community Development
Agency in 1999. Indeed, reference was made to this plan at the July 25, 2001 Tiburon Glen scoping
meeting in relation to minimizing the number of driveways built on Paradise Drive. Unlike the
unincorporated Easton Point site (contiguous to but outside the Town of Tiburon), the Tiburon Glen
site is located inside the incorporated boundary of the Town. Nevertheless, it still may be appropriate
to consider reviewing the Tiburon Glen project in relation to the Visioning Plan for the overall
Paradise Drive area.
Comments made at the July 25, 200 I scoping meeting identified a number of interrelated planning and
land use issues for discussion in the ErR. One consideration involved defining "prime" or "potential"
open space and determining what parts of sites may qualify for such designations, including the
relationship of private open space on one site (such as the Tiburon Glen property) to public or private
open space on adjacent land (such as uphill from the Tiburon Glen site or protected in the Norman
Way Estates subdivision. Based on direction from staff, the ErR will:
17
SCOPE OF WORK
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
· List the OSC-g criteria (if established) or the Open Space Element's evaluation topics.
· Describe features of the project site and surrounding lands in relation to the criteria / topics.
. Make a preliminary determination of consistency.
We will present this as an issue in the Planning Context, not as an analysis of impacts. Thus, we will
not make a determination of significance but present the information for decision-makers to reach
conclusions about the project's conformance with the General Plan. We will describe the
characteristics of the site and discuss their general location but do not propose to delineate specific
areas of the site on a map or site plan which may constitute, in the EIR preparers' judgment, "prime"
open space. Thus, we will present information available from the General Plan for Town officials to
interpret the existing policies in relation to this project.
Noise
The noise environment of project site generally is quiet. Noise levels are dominated by traffic
traveling along Paradise Drive, jet and general aviation over-flights, and natural sounds. According to
the Initial Study, on-site noise measurements made for the applicant in 1999 recorded a Community
Noise Equivalent (CNEL) level of 48 to 58 decibels (dB). Long-term (24-hour) monitoring we
conducted adjacent to Paradise Drive near the Easton Point site measured an average day-night noise
level (Ldn) of 51 dBA in both 1995 and 2000, indicating no change in noise levels in five years.
Projections made by the San Francisco and Oakland International Airports estimate that future noise
levels attributable to their aircraft operations will remain below an Ldn of 55 dBA. The Noise Element
of the Town of Tiburon General Plan contains Noise and Land Use Compatibility Guidelines for
residential development. Based on the maximum outdoor Ldn of 60 dB established by the Element,
project development would be compatible with the site's ambient noise environment, as concluded by
the Initial Study discussions (but checked as a potential impact).
Project implementation would result in substantial periodic short-term increases in ambient noise
levels in the vicinity of the Tiburon Glen site generated by operation of construction equipment to
clear and grade for landslide repair, site preparation, infrastructure installation, road building, and
individual lot construction. Existing residents of nearby Norman Way and, possibly, some Paradise
Drive homes would be exposed to high temporary noise increases, depending on distance to the
activity underway, the equipment in use, duration, and potential shielding due to terrain. The Initial
Study concluded that such impacts would be potentially significant.
We will collect and review noise measurement data available from the Town in other environmental
documents recently completed (such as the Parente Road Subdivision EIR) or currently being prepared
in the vicinity of the Tiburon Glen site (such as for the Sorokko Tiburon Cove project). We also
propose to take short (I5-minute) spot measurements on the Tiburon Glen site adjacent to the rear yard
property lines of contiguous Normal Way homes in order to quantify existing noise levels. We will
use these sources either to independently review and verify or to adjust information prepared for the
applicant in 1999 regarding then-existing and projected future conditions. We will describe noise
levels at different distances from sensitive receptors (Norman Way or other nearby residents)
estimated to be generated by the types of activities and equipment expected to be used during project
implementation and determine the significance of impact, in terms of sleep or speech interference
indoors (with windows open or closed) or outdoors. The EIR ultimately will focus on identifying
measures to mitigate temporary construction noise impacts, establishing procedures to implement and
monitor measures, and assessing their effectiveness.
18
SCOPE OF WORK
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
Public Services
The Initial Study determined that the project would result in potentially significant public service
impacts on fire protection (and emergency medical response), public schools, and publicly-regulated
providers of urban services and utilities (energy and communications) and focused the EIR analyses
on these topics.
Fire Protection The Tiburon Fire Protection District (TFPD) would provide fire protection to the
Tiburon Glen project site from its two stations. The site is located closest to the TFPD's Trestle Glen
substation. Response time to the site is constrained by the narrow winding Paradise Drive alignment
which restricts emergency vehicle speeds to 25 miles per hour. The TFPD responds to approximately
1,200 incidents a year. The most common incidents are calls for medical aid (65-70 percent). All paid
firefighters have emergency medical training (EMT), and an ambulance is available at the Trestle Glen
substation. From our recent experience assessing the four-lot Tiburon Court project on Trestle Glen
Boulevard and 34-lot Easton Point (Martha Company) project on Paradise Drive, the TFPD is less
concerned about fire service demands of new development per se than it is about wildland-building
exposure, site access in an emergency, and adequacy of water supply and pressures to fight fires.
Wildland-building fire exposure concerns (Checklist Item G.8 above) result from the site's vegetative
cover and steep terrain. Vegetation provides a natural fuel source for fire. Of oak woodland species,
coast live oaks are more fire resistant and California Buckeye are less so. Nevertheless, lower
elevation woodlands generally would be less susceptible to fire than upper elevation grasslands. They
may ignite more easily and burn faster but also generate less heat and are easier to extinguish.
However, the TFPD expresses concern about potential effects of the sudden oak death (SOD)
epidemic because dead trees pose a significant fire threat unless removed immediately. The TFPD
gauges the possible fire of an individual unit based on standard criteria presented in its Hazard Matrix.
For the Tiburon Glen EJR, we will calculate the number of "hazard points" for each of the eight
proposed lots and suggest the related fuel modification zones to create adequate defensible space. We
also will review species which the landscaping plan would permit to be planted and determine their
fire resistance.
The TFPD requires projects to design internal roadways to accommodate traffic and provide access in
emergency situations and requires every structure to be accessible to fire apparatus via roadways with
all-weather driving surfaces meeting minimum width (20 feet), vertical clearance (13.5 feet), grade (18
percent), and curve radii (30 feet) capable of supporting the imposed load of fire equipment. The EIR
will examine on-site roadways and dri veways related to these TFPD emergency access standards and
recommend revisions (if needed) to the project, site plan, and individual lot development concepts.
According to the Initial Study, Tiburon Glen units are proposed to connect to existing Marin
Municipal Water District (MMWD) facilities which currently serve Norman Way Estates'
development via an eight-inch water line from Gilmartin Drive and potentially could be augmented by
additional storage which may be available at the exiting Mount Tiburon tank. The TFPD requires
developers to install eight-inch water mains capable of supplying 1,500 gallons per minute (gpm) to
homes larger than 3,600 square feet for two hours. (Developers also are required to install approved
fire hydrants spaced at 350-foot intervals throughout new subdivisions.) The TFPD's standard for
homes smaller than 3,600 square feet is 1,000 gpm for two hours. Tiburon Glen units are proposed to
have a maximum floor area of 7,000 square feet We understand that the TFPD's Fire Inspector
currently is concerned about the development of houses larger than 3,600 square feet in this area. The
EIR will discuss the adequacy of the proposed water system in relation to the TFPD's fire flow
requirements.
19
SCOPE OF WORK
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
We understand that the site is proposed to be subdivided into eight lots, accessed by a two private
roads connecting to Paradise Drive (one serving six and the other serving two lots). The applicant
sponsored the preparation of a traffic study by Nickelson Associates which addresses project trip
generation and existing-plus-project level of service at the two proposed access intersections on
Paradise Drive, as well as field determination of sight lines at these intersections,
The Town has requested a peer review of the applicant's study and analysis of weekend and summer
recreational traffic. The Initial Study specifically identifies the need to analyze weekend bicycle
traffic, and vehicle traffic related to weekday and weekend summer camp sessions at Paradise Park.
Also requested is an analysis of construction traffic safety issues, as well as the determination of
weekday AM and PM peak hour intersection level of service operation for existing-plus-cumulative
growth (traffic cumulative volume conditions upon buildout of the Town of Tiburon General Plan
horizon without the project) and cumulative-plus-project conditions. Evaluating General Plan
buildout conditions would cover the cumulative impacts of the project and other development
proposed along Paradise Drive which is of concern to residents, as expressed at the July 25, 2001
public scoping meeting on the project.
Because this is an EIR analysis, this proposal includes consideration of on-site circulation and review
of the site plan. Our ErR traffic analyst, Crane Transportation Group (CTG) assumes it will cite EIR
significance standards and Town Code standards such as those CTG used recently for the nearby
Parente Road Subdivision EIR. This Tiburon Glen EIR proposal includes new traffic counts at the
Trestle Glen intersections with Tiburon Boulevard and Paradise Drive and along Paradise Drive at one
of the two project access road intersections because of the request for proposals' (RFP's) emphasis on
bicycle volumes and summer recreational traffic. CTG has fairly recent (year 2000) counts for the
Trestle Glen intersections with Tiburon Boulevard and Paradise Drive, but these were conducted
during winter months. We indicate in the our Schedule to Complete the Tasks that starting up the EIR
(assumed to be some time in September) would not permit us to take counts at a time when such
summer recreation travel would be reflected. We ask that the Town authorize CTG to perform these
counts in August, in advance (if necessary) of finalizing the EIR contract.
In order to accomplish these objectives, we will:
. Conduct a peer review of the applicant's traffic and sight line analysis prepared by Nickelson
Associates.
. Contact Town staff to discuss the report, as well as EIR significance standards, summer camp
activities, and cumulative buildout assumptions.
. Make a field trip to the project site, by a registered traffic engineer, during a PM peak traffic
period to evaluate sight lines at proposed project roadway intersections. This review also will
assess the proposed proximity of two new site access roads to Norman Way in terms of the
potential for turning movement conflicts or sight line hazards.
. Conduct weekday AM and PM peak period and weekend peak period bicycle, pedestrian, and
vehicle traffic counts at one of the proposed site access intersections along Paradise Drive:
Cl Weekday AM and PM peak period bicycle, pedestrian, and vehicle traffic counts will be
conducted at the Trestle Glen / Paradise Drive and Trestle Glen / Tiburon Boulevard
intersections.
21
..
SCOPE OF WORK
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
[J The weekend bicycle, pedestrian, and vehicle count will be conducted over a four-hour period
on a Saturday or Sunday, whichever day is determined to be most active based on talks with
Town and Parks Planning Department staff.
. Because intersection level of service would not be an issue at the project access driveways,
determine existing weekday AM and PM peak hour intersection levels of service at two
intersections -- the Trestle Glen / Paradise Drive and Trestle Glen / Tiburon Boulevard
intersections -- and determine the percent increase in traffic on Paradise Drive due to the project.
. Determine existing-plus-cumulative without project weekday AM and PM peak hour intersection
levels of service assuming General Plan buildout traffic volumes at the Trestle Glen / Paradise
Drive and Trestle Glen / Tiburon Boulevard intersections. Note that only weekday volumes are
available.
. Using the peer-reviewed Nickelson Associates' report, determine project trip generation and
distribution on the local roadway system.
. Determine level of service operation for existing-plus-project and cumulative-plus-project
conditions at the Trestle Glen / Paradise Drive and Trestle Glen / Tiburon Boulevard intersections
for weekday AM and PM peak hour time periods.
. Review the site plan and on-site circulation for conformance with Town standards and good
engineering practice and assess the adequacy of parking which, according to the Initial Study, is
proposed along the Paradise Drive right-of-way rather than on the project's roadways or lots'
driveways.
. Address construction impacts to the extent possible based on construction details and schedules
provided by the project applicant. Based on the estimate of 9,700 cubic yards of cutting and
10,750 cubic yards of filling, it appears that project implementation would require importation of
about 1,050 cubic yards of fill material in addition to the need to transport construction
equipment, building materials, and construction workers to the site during buildout.
. Recommend mitigation measures for significant project impacts identified (if any).
Utilities and Service Systems
According to the Initial Study, the Tiburon Glen project would result in potentially significant direct
and indirect (secondary) utility impacts related to water (Checklist Item P.2) and stormwater drainage
(Checklist Item P.3) and focused the EIR on these two topics. Stormwater drainage originating
upslope of Paradise Drive flows under the roadway via inlets and culverts and eventually discharges in
San Francisco Bay. The Tiburon Glen EIR will analyze existing and proposed storm drainage
facilities in the Hydrology and Water Quality section.
Water The Tiburon Glen project would be connected to upper elevation water storage and distribution
facilities which currently serve Norman Way development via an eight-inch water line. It will be
important to confirm that these facilities would have adequate capacity and provide sufficient pressure
for both the domestic and fire flow requirements of the project. It similarly will be necessary to verify
that the Mount Tiburon water tank would be adequate as a supplemental supply or to determine if
facility improvements would be required to serve the project (such as upgrading, replacing, or
augmenting existing water storage tanks). We will contact Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD)
22
..
SCOPE OF WORK
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
to determine the existing condition of its facilities, how the project would be served by the District,
and what secondary environmental impacts could be created by modifications or expansion (if
required). For instance, short-term construction impacts to upgrade existing overland distribution lines
could include potential loss of vegetation, increased erosion and sedimentation, generation of dust
(and airborne asbestos), attendant visual impacts, and disturbance of designated open space (if only
temporary) .
When contacting MMWD, we also will verify the availability of planned supply. We will determine
the status of a Sonoma County Water Agency (SeW A) pipeline planned to be built to transport water
purchases from the Russian River which we understand MMWD negotiated with SCW A to augment
Marin's locally-collected supply.
Wastewater We understand that the project proposes to connect to the main Sanitary District #5 (SD
#5) Wastewater Treatment Plant, located at Tiburon Point in Old Tiburon, via a sewage force main in
Paradise Drive and would build the necessary segment from the site. This would bypass the District's
smaller Paradise Cove treatment plant, built in 1968 and not designed to attain current discharge
requirements for various substances.
An existing six-inch force main presently extends in Paradise Drive from approximately the Town
boundary to the Tiburon Point plant. Landowners located along Paradise Drive are responsible for
building new lines from their sites to the nearest existing line. Building new lines is done in a
piecemeal fashion and generally only takes into consideration the immediate capacity needs of the
landowner or landowners building their own extensions. For this reason, inconstancies can arise
between pumping systems and line sizes which make future additions to already installed lines
difficult.
When we were conducting research for the Easton Point (Martha Company) project, that applicant
proposed to build a four-inch force main extension between the Easton Point site and existing six-inch
main near the Tiburon Town boundary. We understood that another Paradise Drive owner was
discussing building an approximately mile-long connection to the proposed Easton Point segment.
Environmental review has been completed or is underway for at least two other subdivisions on the
northeast side of the Tiburon Peninsula. It may be advisable to review the Tiburon Glen Utility Plan
together with the status of these and subsequent projects with SD #5 to ensure, for instance, that
adequate connection valves would be installed to facilitate future construction of additional segments
or to determine whether this project would be subject to a "flow study" to confirm that existing
downstream facilities would be adequate to accommodate new flows.
PRODUCTS OF ANAL YSES
The Town has completed an Initial Study and has circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the
Tiburon Glen project. We anticipate helping the Town review comments received in response to the
NOP and determine to what degree the EIR scope should be adjusted to address public agency and
public input. During the ErR's preparation we may provide you with working papers or memoranda
to aid staff-level discussions or document decision-making, such as to identify candidate significance
criteria or potential alternatives. Then the products of this assignment will include:
. Administrati ve Draft ErR for staff review and comment.
. Pre-Print Draft EIR for final staff review.
. Draft ErR for public review and comment.
. Administrative Final ErR for staff review and comment.
23
SCOPE OF WORK
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
. Pre-Print Final EIR for final staff review.
. Final EIR for public review and ultimate Town certification,
. Draft Findings of Fact.
Contents of the Draft EIR
The Draft EIR will consist of the following sections:
Introduction identifying the purposes and organization of the EIR,
Project Description
. Discussing the location of the project site and existing site and surrounding land uses.
. Listing the applicant's project objectives and providing a complete description of the project as
proposed.
. Identifying cumulative development assumptions used in the EIR.
. Listing all actions proposed and the intended uses of the EIR.
Summary of Findings
. Listing the significant impacts, cumulative impacts, and growth inducing effects.
. Summarizing alternatives evaluated and identifying the environmentally superior alternative.
. Discussing areas of controversy and issues to be resolved.
Environmental Analysis for each of the topics discussed above, as finalized in the contract:
. Discussing existing and reasonably expected future conditions (environmental "setting").
. Presenting impacts and determining their significance.
. Recommending measures to mitigate (avoid or substantially reduce) significant impacts and
determining their effecti veness.
. Identifying who would be responsible for implementing mitigation measures and monitoring
them.
Alternatives
. Assessing the mandatory no project and other reasonable alternatives to the project as proposed
and comparing the outcome with the effects of implementing the project.
. Discussing other alternatives considered (if any) and describing the reasons for dismissing them.
. Identifying the environmentally superior alternative.
Appendices identifying report preparers, persons contacted, and sources and presenting background
information supporting the main text.
Contents of the Final EIR
The Final EIR will consist of the following sections:
Introduction describing the EIR process to date and the organization of the Final EIR.
Public Review listing people and organizations who commented on the Draft EIR.
24
SCOPE OF WORK
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
Response to Comments presenting all comments received and responses to those addressing
environmental issues.
Draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program containing EIR mitigation measures,
25
-j
I;
SCHEDULE
Proposal to Prepare the Tiburon Glen EIR
SCHEDULE
TASKS TO PREPARE THE EIR
We have identified 12 tasks to conduct the scope of work and prepare thorough, objective, legally
complete environmental documents, We will coordinate with Town staff throughout the process both
to review substantive questions or findings and to keep staff informed of our progress on regular basis,
Task 1.0 Confirm Scope
In Task 1, we will review comments the Town received in response to the Notice of Preparation
(NOP) currently being circulated. The purpose of this task will be to identify any altogether new
issues raised and determine whether our proposed scope will address these topics adequately or
whether additional analyses would be required. We will:
Task 1.1 Collect and review NOP comments and compare them with the findings of the Initial Study
and this proposed scope. Summarize comments and their disposition in a draft memo for inclusion in
the project file and / or to present in the EIR appendix which will indicate where in the EIR comments
are addressed or, if they are not, why not.
Task 1.2 Confer with Town staff about past experiences regarding the issues raised insofar as local
sensitivities and concerns of current interest may warrant consideration of topics which otherwise
would not necessarily be considered significant or potentially significant. This will include
determining how and to what level of detail to analyze planning topics not routinely addressed in EIRs
(such as interpretations of Town of Tiburon General Plan policies).
Task 1.3 Expand the scope and (if necessary) adjust the budget to reflect altogether new work or
added efforts required to address NOP comments. Finalize the Task 1.1 memo to reflect the decisions
made in Task 1.2.
Task 1.4 Of public agency contacts or other individuals or organizations who submitted NOP
comments, identify those to be consulted during the EIR's preparation in order to accurately reflect
their concerns and present specialized information relevant to the project they have available.
Task 2.0 Kick Off Project
In Task 2, we will collect and review data and will hold an EIR kick-off meeting. This will include
the following tasks:
Task 2.1 Collect and review data from the applicant, Town, and (if needed) other sources. We will
request background materials from the applicant and Town, including all application materials, and
other relevant information. Among these requests, we will ask for plans and other applicant-prepared
documents:
. A complete description of the proposed project, including the applicant's project objectives,
anticipated phasing. and development schedule (including estimated first full year of operation).
26
&.
SCHEDULE
Proposal to Prepare the Tiburon Glen EIR
. Copies for Nichols. Berman and all study team members of report-sized and full-sized project
plans, including:
e Base map, site plan showing proposed access, driveways, and building envelopes.
e Utility and drainage plans, etc.
e Landscaping plan and plant list.
e Draft CC&Rs (if available).
e Prototypical floor plans, building sections, and elevations of units by lot, sample exterior
fa~ade and roofing materials.
e Other available plans (such as tree removal plan).
. Electronic files of plans and illustrations.
. Copies of all technical background reports prepared for the applicant including the following and
any others completed or still underway (such as a reported arborist's survey):
e Sensitive species survey, Diane Renshaw, Consulting Ecologist, June 2000.
e A wetlands delineation (if available), Diane Renshaw, Consulting Ecologist, June 1998.
e Cultural resources report, David Chavez & Associates, June 1998.
e Preliminary geologic investigation, Herzog Geotechnical Engineers, 1999.
e Sanitary sewer plan, Claybar Engineering.
e Hydrology study, Claybar Engineering.
e Acoustical analysis, Lumina Technologies, March 1999.
e Traffic analysis, Nickelson Associates.
We also will request materials from the Town, including environmental reports recently completed or
being prepared for projects on nearby sites, other specialized Town-prepared reports, etc.
Task 2.2 Hold a kick-off meeting and field trip with the EIR preparers, Town staff, and applicant /
applicant's representative. This will provide an opportunity to:
. Introduce all participants.
. Allow the applicant to describe the project and answer participants' questions.
. Pick up information requested in Task 2.1.
. Determine when promised information (if not yet available) will be forthcoming.
. Confirm the scope of work.
. Discuss preliminary significance criteria, possible study assumptions, and potential alternatives
for consideration.
. Visit the site as a group to discuss existing conditions or specific aspects of the project together in
the field.
Task 2.3 Review completeness of the project description for the EIR analyses (as distinguished from
the Town's acceptance of the application as complete), identify data gaps (if any), and request
necessary clarification, explanation, or additional information. Provide the draft project description to
the Town and applicant for the applicant's written corrections and concurrence.
Task 3.0 Identify EIR Assumptions
The efforts listed in Task 3 will occur at different intervals during the technical analyses beginning at
the kick-off meeting and continuing throughout the EIR analyses. We will:
27
.
SCHEDULE
Proposal to Prepare the Tiburon Glen EIR
Task 3.1 Agree with the Town on the criteria to use in determining the significance of impact for the
environmental topics selected for analysis. We typically begin with Appendix G of the State CEQA
Guidelines (State Guidelines) to determine the significance of impact and refine the State Guidelines
to address local conditions, as warranted. We will work closely with staff to ensure that we accurately
reflect and properly apply Town standards and practices for consistency with other EIRs on nearby
projects. Criteria selected initially may evolve or be refined as our analyses progress,
Task 3.2 Identify assumptions relevant for this EIR. Examples include unresolved or undefined
aspects of the project (if any), the time horizon for project implementation or planning period for
cumulative analyses, geographical study area around site, etc. We will confirm the most recent
cumulative development assumptions used elsewhere in Tiburon, based on input provided by staff and
essentially reflecting the development capacity remaining within the Tiburon Planning Area until
buildout. (This approach would address concerns expressed at the July 25, 2001 scoping meeting
about the cumulative effect of the several projects at different planning stages on the northeast side of
the Tiburon Peninsula.) We also will contact San Francisco State University's Romberg Tiburon
Center for Environmental Studies to determine if future plans have progressed for its site and the
adjacent former National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) site.
Task 3.3 Determine alternatives for analysis. The EIR must assess feasible reasonable alternatives
which would substantially reduce or avoid the project's significant impacts and meet applicant
objectives for the project. ThiS task may involve several steps to initially identify, refine, and
ultimately agree on basic concepts and individual components of alternatives or set priorities among
mitigation approaches (should several competing objectives conflict) for inclusion in alternatives.
Potential alternatives include:
. No project alternative mandated by CEQA. This alternative would assume no development of the
project at this time but would not foreclose future development consistent with site zoning.
. Mitigative design alternative. This alternative would incorporate mitigation measures identified
in the EIR into site planning and design. It would be a conceptual alternative, although we could
expand the scope of work to prepare alternative site plans for the site, if requested to do so.
Potential issues to be addressed include the extent of grading for landslide repair and site
development, biological and visual effects of tree removal, and site access.
. Off-site alternative. This alternative would assume development of the proposed project at
another location in order to avert significant impacts expected from its implementation at the
project site.
For all alternatives ultimately selected for evaluation, the EIR analyses will:
. Assess alternatives in terms of differences in outcome, compared with the project as proposed.
. Compare the project and all alternatives in a summary table.
. Identify the environmentally superior alternative.
Task 4.0 Analyze Impacts of the Project and Alternatives
This task will be devoted to conducting the individual topical analyses, as finalized in Task 1.3. It will
involve all study team members performing our respective scopes work. We will:
. Prepare the EIR's "existing conditions" sections to accurately describe prevailing conditions.
28
. I
Il""
SCHEDULE
Proposal to Prepare the Tiburon Glen EIR
. Contact agencies and organizations to follow-up their NOP comments or obtain their additional
input (as may have been identified in Task 1.4 ).
. Confirm the permits and administrative actions required for the project and the sequence In
obtaining all approvals needed before the project (if approved) could be implemented.
. Perform on-site evaluations and conduct technical environmental analyses.
. Identify the project's direct, indirect, short-, and long-term impacts and determine the significance
of impact.
. Prepare maps, illustrations, and other graphic materials.
. Identify mitigation measures and write measures using language and format suitable for ultimate
inclusion in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP):
c Identify mitigation measures proposed by the applicant.
c Identify other mitigation measures required to reduce significant impacts.
c Identify standards the measures must satisfy.
c Determine effectiveness of mitigation (significance of impact after mitigation).
c Identify secondary impacts of measures.
c Determine responsibility for implementing and monitoring measures.
c Identify timing of implementation and completion.
Task 5.0 Prepare Administrative Draft EJR
In this task, we will prepare the Administrative Draft EIR (ADEIR) for Town staff review. We will:
Task 5.1 Synthesize technical input from Task 4 and analyze alternatives finally identified in Task
3.3. The analyses will cover the scope of work finalized in Task 1.3 and address comments submitted
to the Town in response to the NOP or obtained by direct contacts during follow-up performed in Task
4.0.
Task 5.2 Assess the conformance of the project with relevant Town planning documents and zoning
provisions (such as policies of the Town of Tiburon 's General Plan, regulations of the Town's Zoning
Ordinance (Chapter 16 of the Tiburon TO'rvn Code), provisions of the Town Resolution 2859,
Significant Ridgelines, and, possibly, the Paradise Drive Visioning Plan).
Task 5.3 Conduct all other CEQA-required assessments and prepare the summary of findings. If
requested, we will include the draft MMRP in the ADEIR, However, this proposal assumes that we
will present it in the Final EIR at which time mitigation measures may have been revised to reflect
responses to comments on the Draft EIR. Depending on comments received during the scoping
process, the EIR will summarize the disposition of topics raised but not analyzed. These would
include impacts found by the Initial Study to be less-than-significant or outside the scope of an EIR,
Task 5.4 Submit ten copies of the ADEIR for Town staff review and comment.
Task 6.0 Review ADEJR
Town staff will review the ADEIR in this task. We ask to receive one set of written staff comments
on the ADEIR which (if necessary) resolves any conflicts or disagreements among reviewers.
29
- i
l.
SCHEDULE
Proposal to Prepare the Tiburon Glen EIR
Task 7.0 Prepare Draft EIR
In this task, we will make the revisions and other corrections requested by Town staff and publish the
Draft EIR for formal public review and comment. We will:
Task 7.1 Meet with Town staff (if needed) to discuss comments or how to respond. Then respond to
comments, correct, and revise the ADEIR.
Task 7.2 Submit a "pre-print Draft EIR" or email revisions to Town staff for final review before
publishing the Draft EIR. As an alternative, we invite the Town's contract planner to spend all or part
of a day in our office to oversee changes.
Task 7.3 Respond to last staff comments, make appropriate revisions, and print and deliver 50 Draft
EIRs. We also will deliver electronic text files of all digital documents in MS Word,
Task 8.0 Public Review
During this task our role will be confined to preparing for and participating in the public hearing(s)
held on the Draft EIR. We will:
. Consult with Town staff about the agendas and our role.
. Prepare presentations to highlight the findings of the Draft EIR.
. Answer questions, respond to comments, and record comments which will reqmre written
responses in the Final EIR.
One representative of Nichols. Berman will attend the public hearing(s) on the Draft EIR held by the
Planning Commission. Our budget assumes two Draft EIR (and, later, two Final EIR) hearings, as
identified by the Town's request for proposals (RFP).
Task 9.0 Prepare Administrative Final EIR
In this task, we will respond to comments on the Draft EIR and submit an Administrative Final EIR
(AFEIR). Our proposal assumes that the Final EIR will consist of a Response to Comments
Addendum, including the MMRP, and will not involve revisions to and republication of the full Draft
EIR. We will:
Task 9.1 Meet or confer with Town staff when all comments have been received to:
. Review comments on the Draft EIR.
. Determine which require responses (or are on the merits of the project),
· Identify whether additional work beyond our scope would be required to respond and decide how
to proceed.
. Discuss staff direction about responding to comments.
We cannot speculate about the nature and tenor of comments on the Draft EIR. Therefore, we cannot
anticipate whether it may be necessary to conduct additional analyses to respond to specific
comments. Once determined, we may need to revise our scope and budget accordingly.
30
r;'
SCHEDULE
Proposal to Prepare the Tiburon Glen EIR
Task 9.2 Respond to comments, revise Draft EIR mitigation measures as required to reflect responses
for inclusion in the MMRP, and prepare the AFEIR. The AFEIR will include:
. A description of the EIR process to date and the organization of the document.
. A list of all people and organizations commenting,
. Copies of all written comments received.
. Minutes of comments made orally at the public hearing(s).
. Responses to all comments on the project's environmental effects and the adequacy of the EIR in
addressing them.
. Errata to the Draft EIR.
. Any additional supporting documentation or appendices.
. Draft MMRP.
Task 9.3 Submit ten AFEIRs to the Town for staff review and comment.
Task 10.0 Review AFEIR
Town staff will review the AFEIR in this task. As in Task 6 for the ADEIR, we ask that the Town
supply us with one set of written staff comments which reflects all Town input and (if necessary)
resolves conflicts or disagreements among reviewers.
Task 11.0 Prepare Final EIR
In this task, we will make the revisions and other corrections requested by Town staff and publish the
Final EIR containing responses to comments on the Draft EIR and the project's MMRP. During this
task we also will prepare the Findings of Fact. After receiving one integrated set of comments on the
AFEIR, we will:
Task 11. 1 Make staff-directed changes and any additional corrections to the AFEIR. If desired by
the Town, we will email changes to the staff (or invite the contract planner to our office) for one last
review before publishing the Final EIR.
Task 11.2 Prepare Administrative Draft Findings of Fact and submit for staff review and comment,
Task 11.3 Respond to any final comments received from the Town staff, make corrections or
revisions identified, and print and deliver 50 copies of the Final EIR for Town distribution,
Task 11.4 Revise the Findings to reflect staff direction and submit the project's Draft Findings.
Task 12.0 Public Review
Our last task will be to participate in the public hearing(s) held on certification of the Final EIR. As
identified in Task 8, we will coordinate with staff in advance of attending hearings. We will be
prepared to make presentations, answer questions raised about the project's environmental impacts,
and respond to comments about the adequacy of the CEQA documents in addressing the project's
significant impacts. Our budget assumes that a representative of Nichols · Berman will attend one
hearing each of the Planning Commission and Town Council.
31
SCHEDULE
Proposal to Prepare the Tiburon Glen EIR
After the Town certifies the Final EIR as complete, we will return reports and materials loaned to us
for use r during the report's preparation. We also will provide the Town with background information
developed during the study to place in the project file or have available for public review in the future.
SCHEDULE ASSUMPTIONS
The Town has requested a schedule to complete the EIR and consider the merits of the Tiburon Glen
project within six months. In response to this timetable, we have prepared the schedule presented
below (Schedule to Complete the Tasks) which is based on the following assumptions about the
focused scope of the EIR, availability of information from the applicant and Town, turn-around times
for Town staff to review administrative draft documents, and the number and substance of comments
received on the Draft EIR. We assume that:
Receipt of Data We assume that we will receive all data required to conduct our analyses at the
project kick-off meeting in Task 2.2 (or the date agreed to at that meeting). We assume that the
project description will not deviate from that established at the conclusion of Task 2.3. We will notify
the Town immediately if there are any significant omissions or delays in receiving promised
information, including from the applicant or applicant's consultants.
Scope of Work We assume that responses to the NOP will not raise altogether new topics beyond the
issues the Initial Study identified for analysis and those reflected in this Scope of Work. We also
assume that agency and organization contacts we pursue as a normal part of our work will not reveal
issues which require substantial expansion of the scope of work currently requested by the Town and
identified above.
Town Comments We assume that the Town will provide us with one consolidated set of comments
in writing on administrative documents which integrates comments from staff or departments,
reconciles conflicts (if any), and determines the Town's position on applicant comments (if solicited).
These include the Administrative Draft EIR (ADEIR), Administrative Final EIR (AFEIR) , and "pre-
print drafts" of the Draft or Final EIRs.
Administrative Drafts We assume that we will respond to one round of Town comments on the
administrative drafts of documents, Neither the schedule nor budget accounts for preparation of
second administrative drafts of documents and would require amendments to both the schedule and
budget to perform these additional tasks.
Delays We assume that no delays will occur for reasons beyond our control. Examples include
failure to receive requested information or revisions to a changing project description. We will
continue to the extent possible in spite of delays but may need to adjust the schedule when resuming
work. Please note that putting down, picking up, and restarting work also can increase costs.
Draft EIR Comments We assume that comments on the Draft EIR will not require new analyses. We
further assume that we can realistically respond to the number and complexity of the comments
received in the time allotted to finalize them. No matter how carefully the scope of the EIR is
determined and appropriate concerns are addressed, it is not possible to know how many comments
will be received or how detailed they will be.
32
l.
SCHEDULE
Proposal to Prepare the Tiburon Glen EIR
SCHEDULE TO COMPLETE THE TASKS
The following schedule presents the timetable which we believe will be required to perform all of the
technical analyses described in the scope of work and provide for public review . We recognize the
Town's aim to move ahead with environmental review without delay in order to make decisions about
the merits of the project. While the schedule presented below provides opportunities for tightening,
we also know that the suggested timeline more realistically reflects the actual time necessary to
complete an environmental document which, for consistency, must be coordinated with a number of
other analyses being performed for the Town and, as with all Tiburon EIRs, will be subject to intense
public scrutiny.
There are occasions when independently reviewing applicant-prepared technical reports can help
expedite analyses, but careful examination does not necessarily shorten the overall report preparation
process. This is because some tasks cannot be abbreviated and may depend on obtaining outside
input. While there are tasks which ideally could overlap, they cannot always proceed in tandem and
be finalized until supporting analyses are available.
We will work diligently according to the final schedule ultimately agreed to for this project. We also
will keep the Town advised of our progress as we proceed, especially insofar as whether we encounter
any delays caused for reasons beyond our control or to discuss approaches to performing surveys the
analyses may indicate would need to be performed before publishing the Draft EIR,
We finally should reiterate our note in the Scope of Work regarding the timing of traffic counts to
reflect summer recreational travel. Assuming start-up of this EIR some time in September, we request
that the Town authorize our traffic analyst, Crane Transportation Group (CTG), to perform the counts
in August while details of the contract or other aspects of starting up the project may still be
underway.
EIR SCHEDULE
Tiburon Glen EI R
Task Weeks / Task Elapsed Time
1 Confirm Scope 1 week Week 1
2 Kick Off Project I 1 week Week 2
3 Identify EIR Assumptions 3 weeks Week 6
4 Analyze Impacts of the Project 8 weeks Week 10
5 Prepare ADEIR 4 weeks Week 12
6 Review ADEIR 2 weeks Week 16
7 Prepare Draft EIR iJ 4 weeks Week 18
8 Public Review" 7 weeks Week 25
9 Prepare AFEIR 4 weeks Week 29
10 Review AFEIR 2 weeks Week 3 1
11 Prepare Final EIR II 4 weeks Week 35
12 Public Review - -
a Assumes two weeks to prepare the pre-print draft (to make revisions to the ADEIR and email responses), one week to
finalize the EIR for printing. and one week to produce and deliver 50 public distribution copies.
b Assumes 45-day public review period.
33
l.
BUDGET
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
REVISED BUDGET
Our budget covers the labor and direct costs to prepare the Administrative Draft, Draft, Administrative
Final, and Final EIRs, including the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) and draft
Findings of Fact, based on the scope identified to date and assumptions about the Final EIR. It also
identifies a budget for attendance at public hearings.
We will conduct the analyses presented in the Scope of Work. This will involve reviewing the
outcome of the formal public scoping process now underway, initiating the EIR analyses with our
technical specialists and the Town, identifying study assumptions and alternatives for evaluation, and
preparing complete and unbiased environmental documents.
We do not anticipate that the scoping process will identify altogether new topics with which we are
not already familiar, which are not reflected in the Initial Study Environmental Checklist, or which
would require substantially different emphases from concerns raised at the July 25, 2001 public
scoping meeting or about other nearby projects. However, we will finalize and, if necessary, refine the
scope after reviewing responses to the Notice of Preparation in Task 1.
We ultimately will conduct the analyses and prepare the EIR to fulfill the Town's legal requirements
under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and to provide Town officials and the public-
at-large with sufficient information to make decisions about the project.
Our total estimated budget through completion of the Final EIR is $102,900. This amount is
summarized below, and a further breakdown of the professional labor is provided at the end of this
section.
BUDGET SUMMARY
Tiburon Glen EIR
Budget Summary ADEIR DEIR FEIR Total
Professional Labor cJ $63,298 $9,580 $21,422 $94,300
Direct Costs h 1.500 3,500 3,600 8,600
Total EIR $64,798 $13,080 $25,022 $102,900
a See Professional Labor Breakdown on following two pages. Draft and Final EIR subtotals include attendance at two
public hearings on the Draft EIR (Task 8) and two public hearings on the Final EIR (Task 12) by one representative of
Nichols · Berman.
b Includes printing of 120 reports (ten ADEIRs. 50 DEIRs, 10 AFEIRs, and 50 FEIRs), other blue print and reproduction,
postage and delivery, phone, travel, etc.
34
I;
BUDGET
Proposal to Prepare Tiburon Glen EIR
BUDGET ASSUMPTIONS
Our budget is based on assumptions about attendance at public hearings, printing of reports, and
production of the Final EIR.
Attendance at Hearings
Our budget covers Nichols . Berman's attendance at four public hearings. The Professional LAbor
Breakdown shows these as two Planning Commission hearings on the Draft EIR (Task 8) and two
hearings on the Final EIR (Task 12), assumed to consist of one each at the Planning Commission and
Town Council. Meetings to consult with regulatory agencies are a normal part of our work and are
reflected in the labor budget. Attendance at meetings in addition to those described in the Scope of
Work (routine staff level meetings and consultation with agency representatives) or hearings by
additional team members (if requested) will be according to the current hourly rates listed in the
Professional LAbor Breakdown.
Printing of Reports
In response to the Town's RFP, our budget estimates the potential cost to print copies of 120 reports
(ten Administrative Draft ErRs, 50 Draft EIRs, ten Administrative Final EIRs, and 50 Final EIRs). As
you know, these costs cannot be anticipated accurately. The $8,600 direct cost budget shown in the
Budget Summary includes $5,100 for report printing. Therefore, we could substitute the approach we
have used successfully for our other Tiburon assignments lately which is to print, deliver, and bill the
applicant for report reproduction and to be reimbursed for the direct out-of-pocket cost to us. This
would reduce the total EIR budget to $97,800.
Final EIR
As you know, it is difficult to estimate costs to prepare Final EIRs before the close of public review
period. We know to expect intense scrutiny of every environmental document prepared in Tiburon
and realize there may be many comments. However, we cannot anticipate the substance of comments
or accurately gauge the time needed to respond. Therefore, our budget provides 230 hours to respond
to comments and prepare the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). (Please note
that the additional 16 hours budgeted in Task 12 are for attendance at the two Final EIR hears noted
above in Attendance at Hearings.) Our estimate assumes that the Final EIR will be a Response to
Comments Addendum to include comments received, responses to comments, and MMRP but that we
will not revise the Draft ErR text under this budget. At the close of the public review period, we will
evaluate the level of effort required, the adequacy of this budget to respond to comments, and will
meet with you to determine whether an amendment would be required and agree on how to proceed
with the Final EIR.
35
r-
f-9:
LULU ~ 00 \0 \0 00 00 \0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ \0 ~ \0 0 ~C'l C'l 00 0 \0 \0 C'l 0
c:: - - 00 - - ~ ~ C'l - C'l \0 - lIi ~ 0 0'\ 0'\ - -
<!)~ ~ - - f""- C'l~ - 00
a<!) lIi
('f"l 0\
c:: \0
~ e -
CO :;]
~ l.O 000 00000000000 000000000 0 0000 0
~ \0
~ ('f"l
C\]
li} -
ct a 0000 C'l 0000000 ~ 0 000 \0 0~C'l \0 0 0 0 0 0 0
('f"l C'l - 00 \0 ~ ~ 0
.9 co - ~
<U iii C'l~
CJ) -
0
2- l.O 000 00 C'l 0000000 0000000 C'l 0 0000 0
0: co ('f"l ('f"l 00
O~
f-- C'l
000 \0 0 C'l 0000000 0000000 00 8 00000
~ iii ('f"l 00
- - -
-.:i
-
r----
l.O 000 00000000000 000000000 0 00000
'3 co 00
Q) \0
-
<<s-
a:: 00
~~ 000 000 ~ 000000 0000000 ~ 00 00000
,-I - - C'l~
:1~ -
~ 0
~l.O 00 00 \01 OO~O~~ ~ OO~ ~ \0 ~ 0 0 00 \0 0 0 \0 \0 0
- C'l - ~ ~ f""- ('1 ~ - iii C'l
.QO) - f""- C'<"l..
e ..a iii
-
:1-
~~ 000 00000 0 0000 0000000 0 0 O~O~ 0
~ ~ 0 C'l
,.-. C'l ~
- -.:i
I
a 01 i
00 0 01C'l 010 o OiO 0 0 010 00000 C'l 0 o~o~ 0
,.-. I ('f"l, I ('f"l C'l ~
,.-. iii.. ~
I , I ! 10
, l"<i ~
-
I
Il.O 00 01 10000 0 00000 00 00000 0 0 o~o~ 0
,.-. ~ I ~ 0 \0
,.-. ~ ~
- ~
,
, 0
~ 00 0 oooooooo~oo 0000000 C'l 0 00000
,.-. - iii..
-
-
l.O 000 000000000 0 0000000 0 0 o~o~ 0
cY) \0 \0 0 ~
,.-. - iii
00
-
~ 000 0000000\000 0000000\0 0 00000
0'\
,.-. 0'\
r---- -
~
o
e
~
a::
~
a::
o
~
~
...J
...J~
~~
~ ~
C/)G
C/)
~ ~
O~
~E::
cc
-
Lu
Vl
iU
.~ .~
C e;
.~I~ 0 ~
~I"O ~ ~'al
:::l~ ~~~~c
<1> u ~I ~ gl ~ 0 0:1
~~'~-<I~ ~:::l~
o 0 ~'Ok :... ~
u"';"'_I';"" >:, iU C ~
~ - UJ Q.. 'I ~.<:= ~ ~ ~ iU
E ~ ~".'" -gl.go ~ "O~~~oe ~
4:: ~ :-<::1 ~N .,g 0 0 :::l .2 ;... "0 ~
ee:l e; ~ ;... "0 .=: 0 "0 C '0-
o .~ iU C iU ._ ._ :::l iUl ~
U ~ :3 -<1-< -< ~ U 0 :r: ....J Z
I
- C'l ('f"ll~
~ ~ ~ ~
(I') Vl VlI Vl
~ ~ ~I ~
E- E- E-IE-
:...
~ '-'
:~ ~
:: ~
..... ~
~~
"0"0
C C
~ ~
~ c e::
.~ .S UJ _
> ..... 0 -
ti ~ -< .S
~ ~ iU g
U ;...
._ Vl ~ "0
:0 ~I Q) 2
:::l l..1 l.. c:
Q.. E-J Q.. -
iii
~
Vl
~
E-
-
....
~
~
Q
C iU
o U
.~ ~I
'6 E
~ .2 ~
o C c >
_ ~ 0 c::i
~I E U E
'01 E ~ ~
Q:'~ 0: ~
~
Uje::~
o UJ .;;
-<OiU
,..,.. ~ iU ~
...... 'l..u_
- .~ ~:.: S!
Lu ~~.g ~
_ ~o..o.. ~
c;)
Q::
ki
Q
~
iU
.;;
l..
iU Vl
> iU
o~
i~]
.5~~
c;)
Ct::
-
L.t.1
Q
~
'-
~I~ .~
-'-.:-
~I~ (J)
o i:SO '-
'Ci) I 0 .::
.i!1~ E:
~! 8 "b
Cl,CI)-c:r::
I
....\Of""-oo
ctl~~~
~ (I') Vl (I')
Q~~~
o
0Al
cu
C.
0Al
C
.~
..9
~
c
o
en
iU
'0
c
'0
o
~
\3
- I
1-0:
LU
IJ.J c:
Q)~
aQ)
::::> c:
e
co ;:]
~
~
(1]
g.
It
.2
(ij
II)
o
g-
O::
~
~
f..;;
:c:
o
(.)
~
o
e
-~
LlikJ
a: s:::
rn~
....c:..:J
UJ
~ ~
~~
rnlE::
~ - 0 0 'I:) r-IN ~18
0'\ ~ - ~N
.s: - N ~~ O~I~
- - ~
N 0'\
I-- ~i---
1.0 00 0 00 0 00 0
~ 'I:)
M
I-- e-- ~
a 0 0 'I:) 0 'I:) 0 N 0
'I:) - r- 'I:) 0 N
<0 V'l N -
~ N
I-- I-- ~
~ ~o 0 O~ 0 'I:) 0
'I:) M ~
N M
- - ..ci
~ ~o 0 0 ~ 0 C"l 0
I~ 0'\ 0
- ~
~
- - >-=
1.0 ~o 0 O~ 0 0
N N
<:: co ~ - o~
.! M -
~ - - I--
~ ~ - 00 O- N 0
V'l 00
'- 0'\ - ~
::s -
~- - -
~~ 0 0 ~ 'I:) 0 8 N 0
00 N - N V'l ~
- ~~ MI;:
~ -
1t -
010 I tr:
a ~ 0 ~Io
.,... C"l ~12;~
~
f.-- ~
a I !
.,... 00 0 00 0010 ~:o
.,... 00 ~ ~
00 00
I-- f-- ~
1.0 'I:) 0 00 'I:) 0 0 0
.,...
.,... - - ~ 'I:) 0
00 0'\
- - - ~
~ N 0 0 0 N 0 0
~ V'l
.,... V'l - r-~
N -
I-- ~ -
1.0 00 0 0 0 00 0 N 0
C"")
.,... 00 r- N
o~ r-
I-- - I-- ~
1.0 0 0 0 00 0 'I:) 0
<0
.,... 0'\
0'\
- - I-- f--
~
0
.QI
51 0::0:: ~ ~I
~~ 0:: 0 ~
.Q Gj ';> ~ rJ'j
c:: !::
~ << t.L. 0 0 0 "'0
..... 0:: :3
~ct ~ ~ 0 "- :I: o:l
- ~ .~ <I)
~O_ a.~ ~ <I) - -
"~ I ~ lJ.J :0 ~ ~ ~
~I r; 0 c o 0
'- :3 0
0..0:: 0.. 0.. ~ E-E-
(1)10 - Q:
.!,~ ~ 0 - N C;;
0'\ - - - -
c:: ~ ~ ~ ~ Q:: ~
010 rJ'j rJ'j rJ'j rJ'j -
Q:i (..) . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I
'i CI) LL E- E- E-E- I
(\)
-0
:..c
~
.~
(\)
~
;i c
~.~
~~
c: :;j
~ E
~ .~
(\) :;j
~-o
u ~
2~
o~
oo~
c: (\)
'c '0
.:: c:
oo(\)
(\) ....
.0 (\)
(\) ~
.:; ~
c;a e
Vl
(\) (\)
~ ~
.......c:
~E-
o
~2
.~ c
~ 8
~~
~ 0
E~
o (3
c: ~
(\).!:)
~ Vl
...c: 5
oo(/)
:;j ~
~ ~
~2
vi]
C :;j
~ :':l
c..u
g ~
.... ~
~-8
E:..=
~ ~
:;j
u
u
o
-.:
:;j
o
...c:
'-
(\)
c..
o
\0
~ -:.
....
c: :;j
o 0
Vl ...c:
'E ....
~ (\)
:I: 0.
c: ,-:.~
~ ....-
'E 5~-:.
o ...c:'-....
:;; ~'>.5
c: 0. (\) ...c:
~ lrlO:::....
~ ~ ~ g,
.,g-.: ~~;::.
....::l V .... - 'i:' ,-:.
v 0 . c:~t0'7::l ~
o..c 'i:' r:! .... '-' 0 0
~~5U5:g-:...c:
to'7 o....c: ~ ...c: v v ~
'-'N....a~~O'o.
~ ~ g,~ 0. ~ ~ ~
-5 ~V') v"':2 ~ ~~
.- 0;:: '0 - :I: '-' >.
ZOt0'7ut0'7(\)....~
~O:::~c::;-~~~
'5 ::: ~ b t:: 0 >. ~
O~>Oovic:O
..J .-.... ~ c: en ....
~ .~ "g u ~ ~ ~ ~
a c ~....:.= o.~ c;a
E ~> :::-=~o~
~~::~-8~~"I
~~~CjC2U~~
"8 ~ ro ::: ... C2 'i:j .:=
~ S;..9 .9 ~ ~ Sl g
~ c:l 'i:i ""';::s ... "I "I
_...6 Q::: {; t: c:l.:= ~ ~
~ ;:"'c:lQ:::~-
~ .~::t:: ~ ~ Sl .... .0<,
~Q()l",:::ool::~~;;;
...9~~t:~~~
"I c:l '::3 ~ c:l '::3 '-l .....
c~c~::al",l",
.....:;::i:3:::~~{l~
"ti ~ ~ ~ .::; :.. ;....-
~~GG:::;,:j~~
0:::
Ci3
'- (/)
o >.
Vl ~
(\)~
e-o
b~
.... -
:;j c:
.,g~
~.g
_ Vl
~ ~
=-'2
.2 ::l
(\) U
-5 r:!
c: =
o 0
" U
~ (/)
~~
~
'-
o
Wo.2
-g c;a
.0 ~
0-0
~-5
c;2
c:
o Vl
Vi (\)
en ~
<E
e ~
c.....c:
v -
~E
~
o
o
Ulrl
-6.,;
c:t0'7
0'-
U 0
c~
o 00
.: -g
~.o
E ~
.2 c:
.S 0::
u~
'5> ~
5..::9
~ 5
.~ ~
> .
v t::
~.2
a'ti
u ~
~.:;
000
U .::
Be
~ 0
v e-
> 0
o U
> .::
.:: d'
t: .2
@c;a
(\)::;
v E
oS 'v;
'- v
o c:
(\) 0
c;a 00
.g 'G
Vl ::l
(\)~
.... 0
50:
Vl
u~
(\)~
c 0
~ E
go
~6
~ca
c: c:
.2 .~
c;a c:
::; v
E E
'Vi :.a
(\) ~
,r::. ~
t-...c:,-:.
-0
vivo
U.:;N.
~~~
E~'-'
;: @" 5
o c.':
.~ ~ ~
(/) c: ::l
b ~ E
~ E'Vi
v 2 ~
...c:-o.
.;e::8
c:t.lJoo
~v...:
Vl...c:t0'7
c: - ....
.g "g .2
~~"
::l ::: ~
E ~ :;j
"c.;; Vi -0
o c: 0
'0 ~ 5..
-a~]
~-5::9
'= .- ::l
...... ~ 0
o v U
c: c;a ~
o c: (\)
.~ ~'>
agca
fru5
5.. .:.i :;:
~o:g
" ~ ~
:;j--::J...c:
u~g
-='=t.lJ
-t:l
U
'=
......
~
e::
~
~
c:
.2
c;a
t:
o
0.
Vl
c:
~
e::
"
c:
~
~
~
Vl
V
U
'>
....
v
en
.~
:0
::l
0..
.~
ca
::l
CI
....
<:
v
.:;
.S
Vl
Vl
(\)
U
U
~
>.
U
c:
v
00
....
v
E
v
~
'=
"
c:
~
32
.~
v"'
....
::l
Vl
o
0.
><
V
Vl
B
Vl
v
.0
Vl
~
Vl
'E
~
N
~
:I:
r--
~
Vl
~
>.
"
::l
~
~
]
v
-5
.::
"
v
~
C
v
:9
Vl
V
::l
Vl
.~
......
o
Vl
'Vi
>.
~
c:
~
Vl Vl
V c:
-g .2
uu
-= ~
~