HomeMy WebLinkAboutEA - Longacres Master Plan - DRAFT SOW Sched Cost - 4.1.24_City CommentsPROJECT APPROACH
EA proposes that certain elements of the environment to be analyzed in the Longacres Master Plan EIS will utilize the technical information and analysis to be prepared by the Applicant
Team, subject to thorough peer review by the EA Team. The EA Team will provide new technical analysis for those elements of the environment that will not be supported by Applicant-prepared
technical analysis and information. The table below summarizes this approach for the EIS technical analyses. It is anticipated that the EIS will analyze two action alternatives and
the No Action Alternative.
ELEMENT WITH EA TEAM PEER REVIEW
ELEMENT WITH EA TEAM NEW ANALYSIS
Earth – Peer Review by EA Team Member AESI
Air Quality – EA New Analysis
Water – Peer Review by EA
Env. Health (Noise) – Coffman Eng. New Analysis
Critical Areas – Peer review by EA Team Member Raedeke
Historic – Fieldwork Studio New Analysis
Transportation – Peer Review by EA Team Member Transpo
Cultural – CRC New Analysis
PEER REVIEW
An integral task for the Longacres Master Plan EIS will be to coordinate with the City of Renton regarding the technical analysis and information that will be prepared for the project
that then can be used in the EIS (i.e. Geotech Report by GeoEngineers, Drainage Report by CPL, Critical Areas/Wetland Report by PACE, Arborist Report by Salish Forestry, and Transportation
Report by TENW).
The EA Team proposes to use the technical information and analysis to be prepared by the Applicant’s team to form the basis of the Earth, Water, Critical Areas and Transportation Sections
of the Longacres Master Plan EIS. Our proposal assumes that the technical reports are generally complete and adequate for purposes of SEPA review and that there will be no further
explorations/investigations or technical analysis required by the EA Team for the peer reviewed elements. The EA Team will confirm this through a thorough peer review of the Applicant
team’s technical studies at the onset of the project and, as appropriate, through a visual reconnaissance of the site and vicinity.
EA has developed a Peer Review Comment and Response Form that provides for a comprehensive and consistent tracking of the peer review comments by the EA Team and corresponding report
updates by the Applicant Team. The Peer Review Comment and Response Form allows for the efficient compiling of specific peer review comments and tracking of the status of corresponding
Applicant Team report updates (an example of our Peer Review Comment and Response Form is included as Appendix A to this Proposal). Should the peer review determine that additional
technical analysis is required, the EA Team will provide detailed comments to direct any additional work required by the Applicant’s team to complete a technical analysis that is suitable
to support the EIS. However, if directed by the city, the EA Team is fully capable of conducting the additional analysis in an expeditious and cost-effective manner.
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
For the elements of the Environment where the Applicant Team is not anticipated to be preparing supporting technical reports (Air Quality, Noise, Historic Resources, and Cultural Resources)
technical reports will be necessary.
PHASED APPROACH
We propose to provide environmental services for the Longacres Master Plan EIS using a phased approach. This will allow us to pinpoint the scopes of work more effectively, prior to
initiating each phase. The primary EIS phases will be: Phase 1 – Project Initiation and EIS Scoping; Phase 2 – Draft EIS; and Phase 3 – Final EIS. More detailed descriptions of the
phases follow.
Phase 1 | Project Initiation & EIS Scoping
EA will implement several First Steps during Phase 1 - Project Initiation & EIS Scoping to facilitate an organized start to the EIS and ultimate completion in an efficient manner.
Coordinate with the City of Renton to confirm the City’s goals.
Prepare a draft Protocol Document outlining the process for coordination/communication between the project Applicant, the EA Team, and the city during preparation of the EIS. Revise
the Protocol Document based on any comments from city.
Participate in a meeting with the City and the applicant in order to determine the feasibility of beginning the EIS process before a complete application is formally submitted to the
City.
Coordinate with the City regarding support materials for EIS Scoping (including for a potential meeting), including slides/boards, information on the SEPA process/EIS Elements/EIS Alternatives/schedu
le/opportunities to comment, handouts, and Scoping comment forms.
Attend and participate in an EIS Scoping meeting, if held.
Coordinate with the City of Renton during the EIS Scoping comment period, and prepare a Scoping Document summarizing comments received, and discussion on the elements of the environment
and alternatives to be analyzed in the Draft EIS.
Participate in a project Kick-off Meeting with the City, the Applicant, and the EA Team key personnel and technical leads to meet (virtually or in-person) and gain a full understanding
of the proposal and the City’s expectations as SEPA lead agency.
As available, complete initial round of peer review of the existing Applicant technical analyses for the project (including: Geotech Report by GeoEngineers, Drainage Report by CPL, Critical
Areas/Wetland Report by PACE, Arborist Report by Salish Forestry, and Transportation Report by TENW ). If draft technical reports are not completed at this point in the process, coordinate
with the City and Applicant technical team to review technical
report outlines documenting methodologies to the utilized and topics of analysis. The Peer Review Comment and Response Form will be provided and discussed.
After completion of EIS scoping and initial round of coordination with the Applicant Team, prepare a “Scope of Work/Methods and Assumptions Memo” describing the methods to be used and,
if any additional investigations and technical analysis suggested, for all the elements of the environment to be studied in the EIS, and arrive at a consensus with the City. We propose
to meet with the City and Applicant’s team to discuss the Scope/Methods Report.
Create an “Information Needs Memo” (This Memo will be the framework moving forward with the EIS analyses and has been a proven and valuable tool to achieve an efficient start to the
SEPA process. It ensures a consistent understanding of data needs, responsible parties, and due dates).
Establish a Detailed EIS Schedule with team milestones, and circulate to the EA Team, City, and Applicant.
Prepare Draft EIS Chapter 2 (Description of the Proposed Action and Alternatives) for distribution to the City and Applicant for review/concurrence. Upon completion, Chapter 2 will be
distributed to the EA Team and Applicant Team to provide a consistent understanding of the proposal for SEPA analysis.
Prepare an EIS Work Plan that includes: the Protocol Document, description of the project and alternatives, Detailed EIS Schedule, Detailed Scope of Work/Methods and Assumptions Report,
and, Information Needs Memo. In a sense, the Work Plan will consolidate the results of the initial phase in a single document. The Final Work Plan will be circulated to the city, EA
Team, and Applicant Team.
Phase 1 Deliverables
Protocol Document.
Support Materials for EIS Scoping.
Scoping Document.
Scope of Work/Methods and Assumptions Memo.
Information Needs Memo.
Detailed EIS Schedule.
Draft EIS Chapter 2.
EIS Work Plan.
Phase 2 | Draft EIS
EA will manage preparation of the Draft EIS, under the direction of the City. Tasks that EA will accomplish during this phase include:
Serve as the principal author of the Draft EIS. This will include preparing the Fact Sheet, Chapter 1 (Summary Chapter), Chapter 2 (Description of the Proposed Action and Alternatives),
Chapter 3 (Affected Environment, Environmental Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts). The Draft EIS will consist of the analysis by the EA Team
(Air Quality, Noise, Historic Resources, and Cultural Resources), and incorporation of peer review analyses prepared by the Applicant Team (Earth, Water, Critical Areas, and Transportation).
Conduct two rounds of peer review of the Applicant Team prepared technical Reports. The Peer Review Comment and Response Form will be utilized to document and track comments.
Prepare the 1st Preliminary Draft EIS for review by the City of Renton (and as defined in Phase I, possibly also by the Applicant).
Based on comments received, prepare the 2nd Preliminary Draft EIS for final review by the City.
Based on comments received, coordinate production of the For-issuance Draft EIS.
Help prepare for and assist the City in conducting the Draft EIS public meeting, if held, (either in-person or virtually) during the Draft EIS public comment period to obtain verbal
comments and additional written comments (e.g., EA can produce meeting handouts and boards, help set up the meeting, and make a presentation).
Regularly meet and coordinate with the city, and as allowed the Applicant (via email, phone, and virtual meetings).
EA will directly prepare or oversee preparation of the SEPA analyses required for the Draft EIS, in accordance with the Detailed Scope of Work/Methods and Assumptions concurred to with
the City in Phase 1 of the EIS. The EA Team will ensure that the technical analyses that support the EIS are conducted in accordance with applicable regulations, industry standards,
and best management practices. EIS sections will be prepared by the EA Team that will describe existing conditions, analyze the EIS alternatives, and identify mitigation measures.
Certain technical analyses will be prepared directly by the EA Team (Air Quality, Noise, Historic Resources, and Cultural Resources), or be peer reviewed analyses prepared by the Applicant
Team (Earth, Water, Critical Areas, and Transportation). The technical reports will be included in the Appendices to the Draft EIS and summarized in the Draft EIS text.
Based on the project information provided by the City, EA has identified the following key approaches for the areas to be studied in the EIS.
Earth – AESI
Technical Analysis prepared by Applicant Team; Peer Review provided by EA Team member AESI
For the Earth element of the EIS, AESI will perform peer review services of the Applicant-prepared information, including the Geotechnical Report to be prepared by GeoEngineers. AESI
will: 1) attend a kickoff meeting with the City and team members; 2) coordination and meetings with team members, the applicant, and City of Renton staff, as needed; 3) obtain and review
available, relevant information, including the applicants geotechnical report, historic mapping/imagery of the site and surrounding areas, recent geologic mapping, geological hazards
maps, and development plans; (4) perform a site reconnaissance to field verify data presented in the applicant geotechnical report and other site features relevant to the study; (5)
review and assess the subsurface characterization, engineering analysis and recommendations for the project Alternatives provided in the applicant geotechnical report, identify and
data gaps, and provide comments utilizing the Peer Review and Response Form (two rounds assumed); and, 7) summarize findings in the Draft EIS section.
Water Resources – EA
Technical Analysis prepared by Applicant Team; Peer Review provided by EA
For the Water Resources element of the EIS, EA will perform peer review services of the Applicant-prepared information, including peer review of the Drainage Report to be prepared by
Coughlin Porter Lundeen (CPL). For this peer review effort, EA will follow a similar process to that describe for Earth, including: 1) obtain and review available, relevant information,
including the Drainage Report to be prepared by CPL, critical areas maps, and development plans; 2) review and assess available data and identify data gaps; 3) perform a site reconnaissance
to field verify data presented CPL report, and other site features relevant to the study, as necessary; 4) complete an assessment of water resources/stormwater drainage, and assess
impacts associated with development, and identify any needed mitigation, and provide comments utilizing the Peer Review Comment and Response Form (two rounds assumed); and 5) summarize
findings in the Draft EIS section.
Air Quality – EA
New Technical Analysis prepared by EA
For the Air Quality element of the EIS, EA will provide air quality impacts analysis for each of the three Alternatives. Renton is located in King County, which is in attainment for
the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for all criteria pollutants and is therefore not subject to the requirements of General Conformity (40 CFR Part 93). Direct air emissions
from the alternatives under consideration will arise largely from demolition and construction activities. After completion of construction, indirect air emissions will arise largely
from vehicle traffic to and from the site and on-site fuel burning equipment used for building heat (if any). EA will model and create an annualized inventory of direct and indirect
emissions for all project years using ACAM (Air Conformity Assessment Model) or a similar application. Although General Conformity does not apply to the project, its de minimis emission
threshold will be used as benchmarks for assessing the significance of air quality impacts. EA will also evaluate climate changes based on GHG emissions calculations. The findings
of the Air Quality analysis will be summarized in the Draft EIS section.
Noise – Coffman Engineering
New Technical Analysis prepared by Coffman Engineering
Coffman Engineering will prepare preliminary draft, draft, and final reports describing the noise impact analysis. The analysis will: 1) characterize the affected environment including
noise-sensitive properties, applicable noise limits, and baseline conditions; 2) calculate sound levels from proposed operations, associated traffic, and construction activities to
identify environmental noise impacts; 3) recommend noise mitigation measures for operations and construction; and, 4) identify significant unavoidable adverse noise impacts. The findings
of the Noise analysis will be summarized in the Draft EIS section.
Critical Areas – Raedeke Associates
Technical Analysis prepared by Applicant Team; Peer Review provided by Raedeke Associates
For the Critical Areas element of the EIS, Raedeke Associates will perform peer review services of the Applicant-prepared information, including the Critical Areas/Wetland Assessment
to be prepared by PACE and the Arborist Report to be prepared by Salish Forestry. Raedeke Associates will: 1) attend a kickoff meeting with the City and team members; 2) coordination
and meetings with team members, the applicant, and City of Renton staff, as needed; 3) obtain and review available, relevant information, including - City code requirements for wetlands,
streams, and wildlife, the applicants critical areas/wetland and arborist reports, GIS mapping/imagery of the site and surrounding areas, mapping of habitat conditions, vegetation cover
types, and wildlife/fish species (including listed and priority species), and development plans; (4) perform a site reconnaissance to field verify data presented in the applicant reports
(including wetland delineation and stream OHWM boundary). and other site features relevant to the study; (5) review and assess the critical areas and vegetation characterization, impact
analysis and recommendations for the project Alternatives provided in the applicant reports, identify and data gaps, and provide comments utilizing the Peer Review and Response Form
(two rounds assumed); and, 7) summarize findings in the Draft EIS section.
Historic Resources – Fieldwork Studio
New Technical Analysis prepared by Fieldwork Studio
Fieldwork Studio will prepare preliminary draft, draft and final reports addressing Historic Resources. Fieldwork Studio will gather relevant background information and pertinent similar
studies/planning documents, identify the APE and coordinate with DAHP as needed. Historical research and data collection will be performed to identify historic properties and broad
historic context(s), in order to analyze any probable significant adverse impacts of Alternatives (including direct, indirect, and cumulative). Sources for research would include DAHP’s
WISAARD, King County Historic Preservation Program records, previous documentation of the Longacres property, Renton History Museum, HistoryLink, Puget Sound Regional Archives, and
archival newspapers online. Work would include a site visit and visual survey of the study area, to identify and appropriately record any potentially historic buildings with HPI forms
in WISAARD. All of these aspects would be provided in a technical report for Historic Resources. The findings of the Historic Resources analysis will be summarized in the Draft EIS
section.
Cultural Resources – CRC
New Technical Analysis prepared by CRC
CRC will prepare preliminary draft, draft and final reports addressing Cultural Resources. To produce the cultural resources assessment, CRC will conduct a recorded sites files search
using the DAHP database; review relevant correspondence between the client, stakeholders, and DAHP; and
conduct a literature and archival review of review of environmental, archaeological, ethnographic, and historical sources appropriate to the project area. CRC will also contact the cultural
resources staff of the affected tribes on a technical staff–to–technical staff basis for relevant project information. Following background research, CRC will conduct field investigations
of the project location for identification of cultural resources. If previously unrecorded archaeological sites are identified within the project area, CRC will document and record
these using Washington State archaeological site forms per DAHP standards. CRC will prepare a technical report describing background research, field methods, results of investigations,
and mitigation recommendations. The report will provide supporting documentation of findings, including maps and photographs, and will conform to DAHP reporting standards. CRC will
provide a redacted version of the technical report as an appendix to the EIS. The findings of the Cultural Resources analysis will be summarized in the Draft EIS section.
Transportation – Transpo
Technical Analysis prepared by Applicant Team; Peer Review by EA Team member Transpo
For the Transportation element of the EIS, Transpo will perform peer review services of the Applicant prepared information, including peer review of the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA)
to be prepared by TENW.
Review of the transportation discipline report will focus on City standards and policies, technical analysis completed, and mitigation recommendations identified to offset impacts as
determined through city standards are defined. The following outlines the primary steps in the technical review process: 1) review/confirm the study area and analysis scope; 2) review
core assumptions such as trip generation methodology and calculations, trip distribution patterns, and forecast traffic volumes; 3) conduct review of the technical analysis including
review of intersection geometry, signal timing, LOS calculations; 4) review documentation and confirm consistency with technical results; 5) confirm mitigation requirements based on
City of Renton standards; 6) provide list of corrections/concerns based on the technical review utilizing the Peer Review Comment and Response Form ; and, 7) review corrections executed
by the applicant and finalize peer review process. The findings of the Transportation analysis will be summarized in the Draft EIS section.
Phase 2 Deliverables
Peer Review Documentation (Peer Review Comment and Response Form).
Preliminary and Finalized Technical Reports (Air, Noise, Historic, Cultural).
1st Preliminary Draft EIS.
2nd Preliminary Draft EIS.
For Issuance Draft EIS.
Draft EIS Public Meeting Support Material (if conducted).
Phase 3 | Final EIS
EA has developed many effective tools for managing and responding to Draft EIS comments in Final EISs, including:
A Summary chapter with a question and answers section to respond to questions the public may have (e.g., on the SEPA review and approval processes);
“Key Topic Areas” chapter that addresses the major comment areas to avoid repetitive responses;
Comment Matrix that ties comments to collected responses; and
Cross-referencing by topic to avoid repetition of responses.
Key tasks that will be performed during the Final EIS phase include:
Review, key, and assign all comments received during the Draft EIS public comment period to the appropriate EA Team members.
Prepare a “Response Strategy Memo” describing the EA Team’s proposed approach to addressing the Draft EIS comments.
Meet with the City of Renton to confirm the appropriate response strategy and any potential for need for additional alternatives and/or analysis.
Prepare the 1st Preliminary Final EIS for review by the city (and as allowed, the Applicant).
Based on comments received, prepare the 2nd Preliminary Final EIS for final review by the city.
Based on comments received, produce the For-Issuance Final EIS.
Phase 3 Deliverables
Response Strategy Memo.
1st Preliminary Final EIS
2nd Preliminary Final EIS
For Issuance Final EIS
PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE
The general schedule below shows that we estimate that the EA Team could complete the Longacres Master Plan EIS in less than one year (8-11 months). This could be accomplished by: proper
up-front planning, beginning work on the Draft EIS during Phase 1 (e.g., initiating the Project Description), and gaining buy-in on Preliminary Draft EIS and Final EIS review cycles
from the city (and possibly the Applicant). The actual EIS schedule will depend on the amount and nature of any additional technical analysis that is required (based on EIS Scoping
and detailed peer review), the number/duration/substance of review cycles of the preliminary Draft and Final EISs, and whether the DEIS public comment period is extended beyond the
required 30 days.
Project Schedule
2024
2025
April
May
June
July
August
Sept
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan
Feb
Mar
Phase 1 – Project Initiation/Scoping
Kick Off /Review Existing Info.
Public Scoping
Phase 2 – Draft EIS
Compile Preliminary Draft EIS
Prepare and Issue Draft EIS
Phase 3 – Final EIS
Compile Preliminary Final EIS
Prepare and Issue Final EIS
Public Comment Period
* Public Meeting/Hearing
Complete EIS Scoping and Issue Scoping Summary
Issue Draft EIS
Issue Final EIS
PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE
The EA team’s estimated costs to provide environmental consulting services for the Longacres Master Plan EIS are presented in the Cost Table below; cost assumptions are listed following
the table. The total amount represented in the Cost Table will not be exceeded without prior authorization from City of Renton and the Applicant. Pricing is based on the tasks described
in Section 2– Experience & Approach; information provided in the Request for Proposals, and EA’s experience on similar EIS projects. Beyond the hourly rates charged for staff time,
EA does not charge for the incidental costs which are part of providing our services including: fees for small in-house black and white and color printing; staff computer user fees;
and GIS, CAD, MS Project, and SharePoint user fees.
Phase I
Team Member
Hours
Hourly Rate
Cost
EA
R. Schipanski
2
$250
500
G. Brunner
5
$230
1,150
M. Sarlitto
32
$195
6,240
K. Hollinger
48
$155
7,440
J. Kumm
1
$295
295
S. Barr
4
$120
480
R. Price
2
$240
480
Subtotal
$16,585
Expenses (mileage, copying, printing, etc.)
$500
$550
Subtotal
$17,135
EA Team1
Cost
Raedeke
1,100
AESI
1,612
CRC
875
Fieldwork Studios
853
Transpo Group
1,524
Coffman
1,228
Subtotal
$7,190
TOTAL
$24,325
1 Costs include EA’s 10% handling charge. EA team members providing peer review services for the Preliminary Draft EIS include AESI, Raedeke, and Transpo Group. Remaining team members
will be providing technical analysis in support of EIS sections.
Phase II
Team Member
Hours
Hourly Rate
Cost
EA
R. Schipanski
15
$250
3,750
G. Brunner
24
$230
5,520
M. Sarlitto
175
$195
34,125
K. Hollinger
200
$155
31,000
J. Kumm
6
$295
1,770
S. Barr
40
$120
4,800
R. Price
20
$240
4,800
Subtotal
$85,765
Expenses (mileage, copying, printing, etc.)
$450
$495
Subtotal
$86.260
EA Team1
Cost
Raedeke
28,050
AESI
27,727
CRC
36,551
Fieldwork Studios
18,073
Transpo Group
37,472
Coffman
24,121
Subtotal
$171,993
TOTAL
$258,253
1 Costs include EA’s 10% handling charge. EA team members providing peer review services for the Preliminary Draft EIS include AESI and Transpo Group. The remaining team members will
be providing technical analysis in support of EIS sections.
Phase III
Team Member
Hours
Hourly Rate
Cost
EA
R. Schipanski
5
$250
1,250
G. Brunner
8
$230
1,840
M. Sarlitto
32
$195
6,240
K. Hollinger
75
$155
11,625
J. Kumm
2
$295
590
S. Barr
8
$120
960
R. Price
4
$240
960
Subtotal
$23,465
Expenses (mileage, copying, printing, etc.)
450
$495
Subtotal
$23,960
EA Team1
Cost
Marked Up
Raedeke
$11,050
5,555
AESI
$3,500
3,850
CRC
$1,904
2,094
Fieldwork Studios
$4,030
4,433
Transpo Group
$9,580
10,538
Coffman
$6,602
7,262
Subtotal
$33,733
TOTAL
$57,693
PROJECT TOTAL
$340,270
1 Costs include EA’s 10% handling charge. EA team members providing peer review services for the Preliminary Draft EIS include AESI and Transpo Group. Remaining team members will be
providing technical analysis in support of EIS sections.
Budget Assumptions
EIS duration (through issuance of the FEIS) not-to-exceed 12 months.
Analysis of three alternatives: Proposed Action, another Action Alternative, and No Action.
Comments on the PDEIS from the City will be edit-level and will not require additional analysis or alternatives.
Response to up to 30 unique comments on the DEIS.
No new elements of the environment, EIS alternatives, or analysis will be required for the FEIS.
Initial responses to public comments on the DEIS will be provided by the applicable applicant project team member with edits and comments provided by the EA Peer Review Team.
The published DEIS and FEIS will be prepared as electronic files and USBs (no hardcopies are assumed).
CONTACT INFORMATION – DESIGNATED PROJECT MANAGER
Michele Sarlitto | Senior Planner
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc., PBC
2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 707
Seattle, WA 98121
Voice: 206.452.5357 (direct)
Mobile: 425.623.9066
Fax: 206.443.7646
Email: msarlitto@eaest.com
Web: www.eaest.com
CONTACT INFORMATION – SIGNATORY
Jennifer Martin Bouchard, P.G., PMP
Vice President and Pacific Business Unit Director
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc. PBC
2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 707
Seattle, WA 98121
Voice: 206.452.5360 (direct)
Mobile: 315.382.0479
Fax: 206.443.7646
Email: jmartin@eaest.com