Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-09-03 - AGENDA REPORTS - ENVIRON GP CIRCULATION ELEMENT (2)City Manager ApproN Item to be presented Jeffrey Lambert NEW BUSINESS DATE: September 3, 1996 SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR THE AMENDMENTS TO UPDATE THE GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT DEPARTMENT: Community Development The current Circulation Element was approved by the City Council along with the General Plan in June of 1991. As detailed more fully in the attached timeline, ever since the City Council rejected the north and south alignments of State Route 126 in October 1992, the City has been engaged in a planning process aimed at developing an amended Circulation Element which: addresses the impacts of the removal of Route 126; incorporates amendments to the General Plan resulting from such projects as the Porta Bella project, and; is based on an evaluation of circulation alternatives. The City Council's direction to remove State Route 126 from the Circulation Element of the General Plan removed the capacity for 100,000 daily trips through the city. This action and direction to amend the Circulation Element meets the definition of a "project" which may have a significant impact; as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Because of the potentially significant impacts of these amendments to the Circulation Element, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required. Although the EBR is required, it is also an important full public disclosure document and procedure which will ensure a proactive public participation process. Completion of the environmental process will require the City to enter into a contractual arrangement with (1) an environmental consultant to prepare the EIR, and conduct the associated public participation process and (2) Meyer, Mohaddes Associates, Inc. to provide the traffic analysis for the alternatives, at alevel of detail which is appropriate for the EIR: On May 29, 1996, the City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) to assist in the preparation of the Environmental Impact Report (EBR) for the Circulation Element. Potential consultants were PPR 11k ED Agenda Item. told that the EIR process and EIR document: 1. Would be used as a way to inform the decision -makers, responsible agencies, and the public about the various alternatives for the circulation system and to provide information regarding the trade-offs among the alternatives; 2. Would analyze up to five alternatives, at an equal level of detail, in order to provide information about the trade-offs among alternatives. These alternatives would include refined versions of three of the roadway network options addressed in the Center City Traffic and Modeling Study, a land use alternative designed to clarify trade-off questions, and a fifth alternative which would be identified through the public scoping meeting for the EIR; 3. That the traffic analysis for the EIR would be prepared by Meyer, Mohaddes Associates, Inc., and would constitute a final stage of the analysis already performed by this traffic consulting firm; 4, Should include an extensive public information and participation component, and; 5. Should help the City to arrive at a consensus regarding the choice of a roadway network for inclusion in the Amended Circulation Element. Consultants were asked to address a list of public involvement options in their proposals. They were also asked to include a recommended public involvement program, which in their professional opinion, would help the City to meet its objectives. Proposals were received from five environmental consulting firms. Staff conducted interviews with all five firms and has identified the firm staff feels is best qualified to provide both a legally adequate EIR and a quality public participation process. The recommended firm is Rincon. Environmental Consultant Rincon has provided the City with a choice of three levels of public participation in the environmental process, which are detailed more fully in the attached Scope of Work. The three levels are as follows: 1. Tier 1 - Rincon's Scope of Work would include: preparation of the Initial Study; conducting a public scoping meeting for the EIR.; preparation of the EIR and associated Mitigation Monitoring Program, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations; attendance at three public hearings on the EIR; and, meetings with an EIR Steering Committee. The EIR Steering Committee would consist of key staff, two City Councilmembers and two Planning Commissioners. The purpose of the EIR Steering Committee would be to assist with making two key decisions during the EIR process: the choice of a fifth alternative for analysis and, once the EIR is completed and ready for certification, the formulation of a recommendation regarding the choice of roadway network to include in the Circulation Element Amendment. EIR Steering Committee members would also assist in reviewing the preliminary draft of the EIR, in order to ensure that it provides information about the alternatives in a way which clarifies the trade-offs. Tier 1 thus provides only the standard level of public involvement in the EIR process The fee for the Tier 1 Scope of Work is $120,677. 2, Tier 2 - This is Rincon's recommended public participation level. In addition to the Tier 1 Scope elements, this tier would include: preparation of an EIR newsletter which would serve as an "at -a -glance" guide to the EIR and EIR process, at two key points in the process; conducting three open house informational workshops on the Draft EIR; and preparation of a graphic display which would be used in the workshops and which can be set-up at City Hall or the local library to further inform citizens about the process and the choice of roadway alternatives. The Tier 2 public participation component would be run by the public participation specialty firm of Moore Iacofano Goltsman (MIG). This firm is included on the Rincon team. The fee for including the Tier 2 public participation program in the approved Scope of Work would be an additional $48,740, for a total cost of $169,417. 3. Tier 3 - Rincon has also provided costs for the other elements mentioned by the community as desired components of a public participation program.. The additional components, along with their associated fee, are as follows: • Development of an EIR Home Page - $4,195 • A series of three video educations programs suitable for broadcast - $26,820 • Ad Hoc Community Meetings - $2,630 per meeting • Slide presentation - $4,880 (fee for the slide presentation would be reduced 50% if both slide presentation and video program components are selected) • Press Packet- $2,980 • Additional Newsletters - $5,570 each On December 12, 1995, Council appropriated $100,000 to begin the environmental process. Council previously authorized the City Manager to execute an agreement with Willdan Associates to oversee the General Plan Amendment process for an amount not to exceed $30,000. Thus, $70,000 of the appropriation remains which can be applied to preparation of the EIR. INKINJUT DI10�: •� Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Rincon for an amount not to exceed $169,417, to prepare the EIR for the Circulation Element Update ($120,677) and conduct the Tier 2 public participation process for the update ($48,740) and authorize a contingency of $17,583 (10%) for a total amount of $187,000. 2. Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Meyer Mohaddes Associates, Inc., for an amount not to exceed $18,235, to prepare the traffic analysis and authorize a contingency of $4,765 (26%) for a total amount of $23,000, Appropriate $140,000 to Account No. 01-5422-227 from General Fund Contingency Account No. 01-4101-290; and; 4. Designate two City Councilmembers and two Planning Commissioners to serve on a Steering Committee for the amendment process. ATTACHMENTS Timeline of Events related to the Circulation Element Update Contract for Rincon, with attached Scope, Schedule and Fee (Available for review in the City Clerk's Reading File) Scope of Work for Meyer, Mohaddes Associates, Inc., with attached Schedule and Fee (Available for review in the City Clerk's Reading File) JL`.LHS:Iep munciAgpcircl.rpt TIMELINE OF EVENTS CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE 6/25/91 City's first General Plan Circulation Element Adopted. 11/10/92 City Council adopted General Plan Amendment 92-02 (Master Case 92-154) which amended the Circulation Element for clarity and to identify the Lyons Avenue Extension, 10/92 Council passed a motion to reject the north and south alignments of State Route 126 as they were proposed in the Caltrans' Draft EIR. City Council made a referral to the newly formed Citizens Transportation Advisory Committee (CTAC) to receive further community input regarding an alternative east/west roadway network in the City. 7/93 CTAC recommendations were presented to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission conducted public hearings on this topic, made refinements in the alternative roadway patterns to be studied, and forwarded its recommendation to the City Council. 12/21/93 Planning Commission recommended a network that the City Council should consider in studying an amendment to the Circulation Element. 9/13/94 Council awarded a contract to Meyer Mohaddes Associates, Inc. to conduct a traffic study (the Center City Traffic and Modeling Study) for the purpose of examining the existing circulation system and four alternative road networks in an effort to recommend a superior and acceptable highway system which would eliminate "the super truck" State Route 126 from the City's General Plan, while providing a suitable alternative east/west connector with a network of supporting arterial highways, essential to mobility in the Clarita Valley. 1/3/95 At the City Council Study Session, staff presented the preliminary findings of the Center City Traffic and Modeling Study to be used in the environmental document for the proposed aniendments to the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The presentation included highlights of the traffic study for the four alternative circulation networks recommended or endorsed by the CTAC, the Planning Commission, and the City Council. The study at that time concluded that neither the current Circulation Element nor any of the four potential circulation plans would meet the City's General Plan minimum level of service goal (LOS -D). The City Council directed staff to prepare additional analysis and try to develop a network that best meets the future circulation goals of the Valley. Two additional alternatives were ultimately analyzed as part of an iterative process to develop a superior alternative. The scenarios and the conclusions of the traffic study are described in the Draft Final Center City Circulation FlMnantBlUdy (June 1995). THAELINE OF EVENTS CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE Cont'd 10/10/95 Council authorized staff to proceed with recruiting an EIR consultant. At that time, it was anticipated that Scenario 5 from the Center City Circulation Element Study would be treated as the preferred alternative for purposes of environmental analysis. 11/13/95 At City Council request, staff held a community meeting to discuss the adoption of a new circulation system. The purpose of the meeting was to present the City's proposed circulation system amendment to the General Plan to citizens and to ask their assistance in identifying the most appropriate way to involve the community in the adoption of a new citywide circulation system which would help to solve the on-going problem of traffic. congestion. Two things became clear through this process: (1) that it was premature to consider Scenario 5 as the preferred alternative, and (2) that there was a need to keep the community informed and involved in all activities, studies, input opportunities and recommended actions relating to altering the City's future circulation system. 12/12/95 City Council appropriated $100,000 for the public participation process and preparation of the legally required environmental impact report and authorized an agreement with Willdan Associates to oversee the General Plan Amendment process for an amount not to exceed $30,000.00. 5/29/96 The City issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) to prepare the EIR and to conduct an expanded public participation process. 6/26/96 The City received bids from five firms: Rincon, Ultrasystems, LSA, P&D ` Environmental Services and Cotton/Beland. 7/18/96 Staff conducted interviews with the five firms following a comprehensive review and ranking of the written proposals. Based on the written proposals and interviews, staff determined that 2 of the firms were qualified to preform the requested work effort anA entered into negotiation with Rincon, which was chosen as the #1 ranked firm by staff participating in the interview process. S: \ed\advance \gprdchrt.lhs