APPENDIX A • SCOPE OF SERVICES

TABLE OF CONTENTS

APPENDIX A • ARTICLE AI • INTRODUCTION	1

A.	PROJECT Description	1

B.	Location	1

C.	Coordination	1

D.	Phases	1

E.	Standards	1

F.	Key Personnel	2

ARTICLE AII • SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED	2

T1	Research and Data Gathering	2

T2	Right of Entries	2

T3	GIS Data Acquisition	2

T4	Design Surveys	3

T5	Environmental Documentation	4

Preparation of Document and Map Templates	4

Review NOP Comments/Refine Scope of Environmental Document	5

Prepare Screencheck CEQA Document	5

Land Use and Planning	6

Landform Alteration/Aesthetics	6

Transportation, Circulation and Access	6

Air Quality	9

Noise	11

Biological Resources	12

Response to Joint Project Review (JPR) Comments	19

Section 404 Permit Application	20

Section 401 Water Quality Certification Application	21

Section 1600 et seq. Streambed Alteration Agreement	21

Cultural Resources	22

Hydrology and Drainage/Water Quality	23

Geology and Soils	23

Public Heath/Safety	24

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA)	24

Mandatory Findings of Significance	25

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)	26

Open House Information Meeting	26

Screencheck Preparation	26

Distribute Draft CEQA Document	26

Prepare Final CEQA Document	26

Certification	27

Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations	27

T6	Preliminary Right-of-Way Requirements	27

T7	Utilities	27

T8	Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report	31

T9	Water Quality Management Plan	32

T10	Preliminary Geotechnical Report	33

T11	Preliminary Alignment Plan	33

T12	Preliminary Cost Estimate	34

T13	Preliminary Engineering Report	34

Contract Deliverables	35

APPENDIX A • ARTICLE AI • INTRODUCTION

A.	PROJECT Description

< description >

B.	Location

< written description or vicinity map>

C.	Coordination

ENGINEER shall coordinate with other involved agencies for compatible design and phasing of construction with existing conditions. Coordination may include, but will not necessarily be limited to the following:

County of Riverside

California Department of Fish and Game

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

US Fish and Wildlife Service

Regional Water Quality Control Board

California Office of Historic Preservation

Regional Conservation Authority

Utility Companies

All meetings with other outside agencies will be scheduled by ENGINEER with approval of COUNTY.

D.	Phases

The services performed by ENGINEER will be accomplished in one Phase split into the following to functional areas:

Phase IA – Preliminary Engineering

Phase IB – Environmental Document

Phases I will proceed upon written notice to proceed. The remaining phases will not proceed until authorized in writing by COUNTY.

E.	Standards

Standards where applicable) using English standards and dimensions. All CADD work will be performed in Microstation and in conformance with the latest version of the Caltrans CADD Users Manual. Other standards include, but are not limited to:

Invoice Submittals and Progress Reports – Invoices and Progress Reports will be prepared monthly in the COUNTY’s format.

Project Filing System – ENGINEER will maintain files based on the Caltrans Uniform File System.

Survey-Riverside COUNTY Survey Requirements

All Documents shall be prepared using English standards and dimensions.

F.	Key Personnel

The ENGINEER has represented to the COUNTY that certain key personnel will perform the services and if one or more of such personnel should become unavailable, ENGINEER may substitute other personnel of at least equal competence only after prior written approval by the COUNTY PROJECT MANAGER has been secured. The key personnel for performance of this PROJECT are:

< list of key personnel >

ARTICLE AII • SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED

T1	Research and Data Gathering

1.1	Obtain and review existing plans, photos, bridge reports, study reports, assessor maps and any other pertinent data from any sources including but not limited to the agencies involved, for the entire project area. Data owned by COUNTY will be provided at no cost to the ENGINEER. COUNTY will establish center line control and stationing.

1.2	Assemble all existing property descriptions and ownerships involved along the proposed alignment of the roadway within the proposed Right-of-Way.

Note:	A field review shall be conducted by the Consultant prior to initiating the design process, in order to confirm the accuracy of any existing drawings, streets and utility location data obtained.

T2	Right of Entries

ENGINEER will identify right of entries required to perform design surveys, environmental studies and other project needs. COUNTY will process the request and obtain required right of entries. ENGINEER will produce spreadsheet and map using COUNTY GIS data of all property owners right of entry is needed from. Map shall show aerial, parcel lines, alignment corridors, assessor’s parcel numbers and owner name. Spreadsheet and map will be used for right of entry process and will be updated as needed.

T3	GIS Data Acquisition

ENGINEER will acquire GIS data from COUNTY GIS. This data will include current assessor’s database to identify property owner’s names and addresses.

T4	Design Surveys

COUNTY will perform design survey and prepare Aerial Map. Layout control targets to be used as the basis for the aerial map which will be prepared at Scale 1” = 40’ with 1-foot contour intervals. The map will be a strip ± 500’ wide centered along the centerline and extending from Auld Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road and extending to a minimum of 200’ beyond the existing and future curb returns at all intersecting streets.

CONTROL

Control must be based on the California Coordinate System 83 (CCS 83). Use of Continuously Operated Reference Stations (CORS) is recommended provided the 2000.35 epoch is available for the station used.

The COUNTY Surveyor shall approve any deviation.

For all projects, use a control point by static observations in the beginning, middle and end of each project. Each observation with no less than 45 minutes observations each. No less than 8 minutes of static observation for traverse points, found monuments or any control used for alignment purposes.

Traverse points will be placed at no more than 1,000 foot intervals. Traverse points will be placed where they can be used for future construction. The traverse points shall be placed in a position unlikely to be disturbed by future construction or any other activity in the area. Unless traverse points are set in concrete or asphalt, they shall be set down 0.5 feet in areas likely to be graded or driven over. The position will be one of the following: Standard “C” Monument (1/2” rebar w/ plastic cap), Standard “D” Monument (3/4” IDIP), or Standard “E” Monument (steel pin) per Riverside COUNTY Road Improvement Standards and Specifications, Ordinance 461. The description will also include: ground position, distance from existing road intersections,

distance from road improvements and distance from a visible utility; such as a power pole or riser.

Vertical Control must be based on the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929.

A differential level loop will be used to determine elevation of all GPS static control points.

Elevations must be derived using a Riverside COUNTY Bench Mark, any deviation will be authorized by the COUNTY Surveyor.

Bench Marks will be placed with no more than 1,000 feet spacing between each position. If possible, the position will be placed where it could be used for proposed construction. The position can be interchangeable with traverse point noted in Paragraph C above, and similar specification.

ALIGNMENT

Locate those positions necessary for establishing roadway and intersecting roadways alignment. Use the actual survey monument for alignment purposes, not the reference or surface position. If the monument is below the ground surface, references will be set on the surface. The ground position, record or non-record information, reference(s) and what the position is accepted as, will all be stated in the description.

Stationing will increase from a southerly to northerly or westerly to easterly direction. If the project is a continuation of a previously constructed or stationed project then continue with that stationing. Begin with 10+00 if no other is to be continued. Set nail and tin on centerline station, i.e. 10+00, 11+00, 12+00, etc. At the +50 location, a paint mark is acceptable. If a metric project, the stationing is based on 100 meters for one full station i.e., beginning of project is 10+00.000 then a distance of 1,202.250 meters to a BC, the station affixed to the BC would read 22+02.250.

NOTES

Original field notes must be submitted and show information including but not limited to; project name, township, range, and section, work order number, date of survey, pages numbered in sequence, survey crew, etc.

Field notes must be submitted for alignment and show information such as; monuments found and accepted, record references, record distances, stationing, etc.

Field notes must be submitted for Horizontal Control Network.

Field notes must be submitted for the Level Run.

The observation log sheets for all GPS sessions along with all accompanying files must be submitted; RAW files, DAT files, TXT files, etc. The Least Squares Adjustment summary and processing along with .SSF and SSK files must be submitted.

All other calculations and adjustments necessary for the use on the project will be submitted.

T5	Environmental Documentation

Preparation of Document and Map Templates

Prior to the initiation of the work effort, the CONSULTANT will submit to the COUNTY for review and approval, the proposed base map layouts and outline for the EIR and the various technical studies.

Initial Study/Notice of Preparation/Scoping Meeting

ENGINEER will be responsible for the Environmental Documentation, preparing a Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Initial Study. It is the intent of ENGINEER to prepare the Initial Study to support a “focused Environmental Impact Report (EIR)”.

Assuming an EIR would be necessary; issues will be eliminated, where feasible, from further analysis in the initial study. The Initial Study will be appended to the EIR to substantiate the rationale for not discussing those issues found not potentially significant. A Screencheck draft will be provided to the COUNTY for review. Revisions will be made and 50 copies of the Initial Study will be printed. Copies will be transmitted to the COUNTY for their distribution to the State Clearinghouse and to the appropriate stakeholders.

Once the NOP has been distributed, a scoping meeting will be conducted during the 30-day review period.

The scoping meeting will be in a workshop format to allow a more interactive discussion with the community.

Review NOP Comments/Refine Scope of Environmental Document

Upon receipt of any comment letters and review of the issues identified during the Initial Study/ scoping meeting, ENGINEER will meet with the COUNTY to refine the scope of the EIR. This could include issues to be discussed, focus of the analysis, and alternatives. The scope of the CEQA document will be refined to address comments and concerns received.

Prepare Screencheck CEQA Document

The Screencheck EIR content and format will be consistent with CEQA statues and guidelines. The goal is to prepare a focused EIR.

The EIR will analyze alternatives that are identified in the planning phase. To contain cost, ENGINEER will first screen out alternatives that do not meet the purpose and need for the project objectives. If an alternative is not feasible or practicable, it does not need to be addressed. Typically, during the alternatives analysis phase, ENGINEER work to substantiate the rationale for eliminating alternatives from further consideration. This results in reducing the cost of the EIR preparation. At a minimum the No Project Alternative, Road at Grade Alternative (filling the canyon), and a Bridge over the Canyon Alternative will be discussed in the EIR. Based on the results of the scoping process additional alternatives may be discussed. ENGINEER suggests the preparation of an “alternatives evaluated and rejected” technical paper. As the project design, scoping process and engineering feasibility is conducted, ENGINEER will document the process as it progresses. The first step will be the identification of the purpose and need/ project objectives. Preliminary plans, concept, and bubble diagrams will be maximally used to support the analysis. The goal of this task is to provide an adequate number of alternatives to meet the regulatory finding of “reasonable range of alternatives” while being cost conscious. This technical paper will be used for both the CEQA process and the Section 404 Permit process.

Land Use and Planning

It is assumed that this issue will be eliminated from further analysis in the Initial Study. If substantial changes to the land uses are proposed, resulting in land use inconsistencies, this issue would need to be addressed at the plan-to-plan and plan-to-ground perspectives. This could include agricultural land losses, etc.

Landform Alteration/Aesthetics

The Landform alteration will be excluded based upon the grading plan. The post project aesthetics will be addressed using a combination of text and computer generated simulations. Three simulations will be prepared. The location of the simulations will be discussed with staff to determine the most appropriate view shed.

Transportation, Circulation and Access

ENGINEER will receive available turning movement and segment counts that are less than one year old from available sources. If not available, ENGINEER will conduct counts at the required study area elements to prepare an analysis of existing traffic conditions. Based upon counts collected by ENGINEER during the data collection effort described above, ENGINEER will include an estimate of vehicles and percentages for all intersections and segments.

ENGINEER will also conduct a field reconnaissance survey of the segments along Butterfield Stage Road and all connecting roads and at each major intersection to obtain current geometrics and other related information such as speeds.

Intersection turning movement traffic counts, by vehicle classification, will be conducted on weekdays at the following intersections:

????

Signal warrants for each unsignalized intersection studied will be conducted using the State Traffic Manual, Figure 9-4 methodology. The signal warrant analysis will utilize the peak hour signal warrants, 4-hour warrants and ADT warrants.

ENGINEER will calculate AM and PM peak hour level-of-service (LOS) for up to twelve (12) intersections and LOS of all connecting segments (approximately 12 roadway segments using the ADT counts) based upon the Highway Capacity Software, which follows the U.S. Department of Transportation (FHWA) Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodologies. Segment LOS analysis will be conducted using the Modified HCM LOS Tables (originally developed by the Florida Department of Transportation and applied to estimate segment LOS conditions for the Riverside COUNTY Congestion Management Program (CMP). The Tables have been revised to reflect Riverside COUNTY conditions) that are HCM-based.

The Modified HCM LOS Tables (excel spreadsheet) will to be applied for segment LOS along the segments to determine segment LOS.

The results of each of these technical analyses will include daily and peak hour segment and intersection LOS estimates, signal (if appropriate) along each segment and at each study intersection, as appropriate. Existing intersection geometrics will be included in the analysis.

For the roadway segments, the COUNTY will provide ENGINEER all available accident data and statewide

averages for similar roadways for comparison and analysis purpose.

ENGINEER will prepare five (5) copies of a working paper summarizing the results of the existing conditions (Year 2009) LOS analysis and safety comparison, as detailed below. In addition, ENGINEER will provide one (1) electronic copy using MSWORD software as well as one (1) original camera-ready document. A single camera-ready original of all maps, charts, figures, and graphs will be included.

ENGINEER will prepare an opening day (Year 2012) and future year (Year 2035) LOS analysis of each major intersection and street segment referenced. Traffic volumes will be obtained from COUNTY RCIP model. The following describes the methodology to develop future traffic forecasts:

Build-out traffic volumes (ADT, AM peak hour & PM peak hour) for roadway segments by direction will be obtained from the COUNTY

COUNTY will provide the “year” for Build-out model volumes

Socio-economic date from the Build-out year and for Year 2035 for the project area will be obtained from the COUNTY

Yearly growth between the Build-out year and Year 2035 will be calculated using the socio-economic data

Using the above calculated yearly growth rate, the Build-out year traffic volumes will be adjusted downward to determine Year 2035 traffic volumes (ADT, AM peak hour, and PM peak hour) for roadway segments by direction

Determine the Year 2035 intersection turning movements using the 2035 directional peak hour volumes on roadway segments, existing traffic counts and B-turns model

Obtain a growth rate from the COUNTY for growth between existing and year 2035

Use the growth rate and adjust the year 2035 traffic volumes (intersection and roadway segments) downward to determine the opening year (2012) traffic volumes

The forecasts for the opening year (2012) will be compared to the existing traffic counts for reasonableness and adjusted accordingly.

The above methodology assumes that the traffic forecasts coming out of the model are accurate and good to use without any post processing. Hence this scope does consider any post processing effort nor any traffic modeling effort by the ENGINEER.

ENGINEER will prepare forecasts of AM and PM peak hour intersection volumes based on the above described methodology. An estimate of truck percentages for all intersections and segments will be included, if RCIP model provides one. If not, COUNTY will provide an estimate of truck percentage for the study area for the future year conditions. LOS will be calculated using HCS Methodology, either using HCS software or Synchro software.

The various project scenarios evaluated will include:

Existing conditions (Year 2009)

No-Build conditions (Opening Year 2012 )

Build conditions (Opening Year 2012)

No-Build condition (Horizon Year 2035)

Build condition (Horizon Year 2035)

It is assumed that the evaluation of the study intersections and roadway segments will include only one Build Condition.

ENGINEER will identify appropriate mitigation measures to reduce traffic impacts associated with the Project and No Project Alternatives to acceptable levels, to the fullest extent possible.

The resultant traffic (vehicle speed, vehicle volume, truck volume) for each intersection and street segment considering implementation of effective mitigation measures will be developed to determine the degree to which such mitigation measures will be effective.

ENGINEER will prepare five (5) copies of the working paper summarizing the results of the opening day and future conditions LOS analysis. In addition, ENGINEER will provide one (1) electronic copy using MSWORD software as well as one (1) original camera-ready document. A single camera-ready original of all maps, charts, figures, and graphs will be included.

Air Quality

Baseline Air Quality Conditions

Baseline and project setting meteorological and air quality data in the South Coast Air Basin area, developed through the California Air Resources Board (ARB) and climatological and air quality profile data gathered by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD), will be utilized for the description of existing ambient air quality. Air quality data from the Riverside and Lake Elsinore air quality monitoring stations published for the past three years will be included to help highlight existing air quality local to the proposed project site. Other sources such as regulatory documents, professional publications, and the CONSULTANT’’s experience in the project area will supplement background information. A summary of current air quality management efforts that may be related to the proposed project will be provided.

Short-Term Construction Emissions and Construction-Related GHG Emissions

Construction would occur during implementation of the proposed project. Air quality impacts from demolition, grading, and construction sources will be analyzed based on the equipment used, length of time for a specific construction task, equipment power type (gasoline or diesel engine), equipment emission factors approved by the EPA (AP-42 Handbooks), horsepower, load factor, and percentage of time in use. Exhaust and dust emissions from worker commutes and equipment travel will be calculated based on available information regarding these activities. Fugitive dust (PM2.5 and PM10) emissions would result from wind erosion of exposed soil and soil storage piles, grading operations, and vehicles traveling on paved and unpaved roads. The project will comply with the existing SCAQMD Rule 403 for reduction of fugitive dust emissions. Emissions associated with asphalt paving will be calculated when specific data are available. Emission factors included in the AQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook will be used for construction dust emission estimates. In addition, short-term project construction CO2 emissions and Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (CO2 (e)) impacts will be estimated using the URBEMIS 2007 Version 9.2.4 computer model. GHG emission results will be compared with the regional and localized SCAQMD significance thresholds. These emissions will be calculated based on construction information available and provided to the CONSULTANT

Odor Impacts

The impact of odors generated by short-term construction and long-term operation impacts on surrounding sensitive land uses will be evaluated.

Long-Term Mobile and Stationary Source Emissions

The proposed project is not expected to generate new vehicular traffic trips. However, there is a possibility that some traffic currently utilizing other routes would be attracted to use the improved road. It is anticipated that project-related traffic trips included in the traffic study will be provided for this air quality analysis. Emissions will be calculated with the ARB's EMFAC2007 air quality model and the AQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook. . ENGINEER will evaluate the proposed project’s impacts to long-term particulate matter concentrations (PM2.5 and PM10). It is not expected that there will be stationary source emissions as a result of the proposed project.

Long-Term CO Hot Spot Impact Analysis

Vehicular traffic on Washington Street would be affected by the proposed improvements. Traffic in the project area is expected to increase due to area growth with population expansion. There is also a possibility that some traffic currently utilizing other routes would be attracted to the improved road. A detailed carbon monoxide (CO) hot spot analysis will be conducted based on the peak traffic hour along this road and turn volumes projected at key affected intersections in the project vicinity that would be affected by the project. The CALINE4 model will be used for the CO hot spot analysis.

Localized Significance Impact Analysis

Consistent with the SCAQMD’s environmental justice program and policies, localized air quality impacts on nearby sensitive receptors (e.g., residences, schools, day-care centers, and hospitals) will be evaluated. Either the Localized Significance Threshold (LST) methodology developed by the SCAQMD, if appropriate, or an analysis using an air dispersion model such as SCREEN3 or ISCST3 will be used.

Climate Change and GHG Emissions

An analysis of the proposed project’s generation of greenhouse gases and its contribution to global warming and climate change will be provided, based on the requirements identified in the Governor’s Executive Order S-3-05 and AB32, The Global Warming Solution Act to Reduce Green House Gases. Per SB 97 and the Resource Agency’s adoption of the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) revised CEQA Guideline, the revised Guidelines require CEQA projects to issue GHG emissions, mitigation measures, threshold and cumulative impact analysis

The CONSULTANT will quantify greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (i.e., CO2 and CH4) resulting from construction and operation of the proposed project to assess potential project-related climate change impacts.

Methodology for Construction-related Impacts

The Urban Emission Model (URBEMIS) 2007 Version 9.2.4 will be used to quantify construction-related CO2 and Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (CO2 (e))emissions resulting from short-term project construction impacts. Emission results will be compared with the regional and localized SCAQMD significance thresholds.

Operational-related Impacts

Project operation impacts will be determined by quantifying GHG emissions at each intersection for the AM and PM Peak scenarios for the project’s opening year, and under the Build and No-Build Scenarios. GHG emissions will be estimated using the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) On-Road Emission Factors Model (EMFAC). The EMFAC output will be based on vehicle idling using roadway level of service (LOS), intersection volumes, and delays as included in the subject project’s Traffic Operations Analysis Report.

GHG Evaluation Thresholds and Cumulative Impact Analysis

In the current absence of formalized significance criteria thresholds, the CONSULTANT will use recommended methodologies within the CAPCOA White Paper (January 2008) and compliance with the CCAT and/or CARB Early Action Strategies to assess the potential significance of GHG emissions associated with the proposed project.

Construction Control Measures

To mitigate fugitive dust, particulate matter and pollutant emissions, the CONSULTANT will reference the 2004 Rule 403 Fugitive Dust Implementation Handbook (SCAQMD 2004) to identify control measures. Per impacts identified in sections 5.3.2, SCAQMD Rule 402 Table 2 and 3 control actions will be implemented and SCAQMD will be notified by submitting the Form 403N for “large operations”. The CONSULTANT will work with the COUNTY to identify feasible mitigation measures. Mitigation measures will be developed as indicated in the impact analysis.

Noise

The intent of the Noise Impact Analysis (NIA) is to compile existing noise data and the associated current noise levels, and to develop an existing conditions analysis. Additional analysis will also identify opening-day impacts associated with the Project and future (Year 2030) impacts with the Project. If needed, a detailed program identifying appropriate mitigation measures required to maintain the COUNTY of Riverside noise criteria and standards will be developed. To accomplish these necessary objectives, the following subtasks would be undertaken:

Develop an analysis of existing noise by field-testing noise level measurements with sufficient sampling periods and locations to adequately describe local conditions and the predominant noise sources. Note: The NIA will be conducted where appropriate traffic data (counts/model projections) are available considering results of the Traffic Impact Study (TIS). A maximum of ten (10) noise measurements near sensitive receptors will be conducted for purposes of this NIA.

Based upon data gathered, existing, opening day and future (Year 2030) noise impacts will be identified. Existing noise for each receptor will be based upon FHWA noise methodologies using an appropriate model (STAMINA, OPTIMA or Sound2000). Tabular and graphic results will identify AM, PM, or other peak hour noise impacts associated with the Project and the No Project Alternatives. Estimated existing plus project and future noise levels will be compared to those levels in the adopted polices of the Noise Element.

Where noise estimates exceed significance criteria, appropriate mitigation measures will be developed and implemented where feasible.

In addition, appropriate mitigation measures that would potentially lessen the impact of construction noise from the Project and the No Project Alternative on sensitive existing and future land use developments will be developed.

The resultant noise exposure after the prescribed mitigation measure has been implemented will be estimated and reported.

Biological Resources

ENGINEER will conduct a biological resources evaluation for the use in the Project EIR and regulatory permitting. Initial tasks for preparation of the biological resources evaluation will include; (1) conducting a CNDDB database search and literature search of all materials which document existing conditions and potential critical issues in the project area; (2) identifying surrounding areas that contain biological resources that may need to be evaluated as part of any Endangered Species Act consultation required for the project; (3) conducting site visits (survey corridor shall be 500 feet) to determine habitat suitability for sensitive species.

The proposed project is a Covered Activity under the MSHCP as part of the General Plan Circulation Element. The project is subject to plan-wide MSHCP requirements including Narrow Endemic Plant Species, Riparian/Riverine/Vernal Pools and Additional Surveys Needs and Procedures. The project alignment will pass through Public/Quasi-Public lands and MSHCP Criteria Cell 5982. The project must therefore comply with the MSHCP requirements for Urban/Wildlands Interface, Criteria Area Surveys, and Guidelines for Facilities within the Criteria Area and Public/Quasi-Public lands (Sec. 7.5). The project is also subject to provisions of the AD 161 Sub-Area Plan specific to this segment of Butterfield Stage Road. The proposed scope of services will address potential biological resources issues required for the project review process under the MSHCP and the CEQA species which may occur within the Project Area.

Based upon an initial review of the COUNTY’s habitat conservation plan, protocol surveys will need to be conducted for burrowing owls are plants and vernal pools/fairy shrimp. Additionally, a cursory review of the topographic features indicates that there is likely to be two jurisdictional features that could be affected by the project. A wetland delineation (both the US Army Corps of Engineers and California Department of Fish and Game) will be conducted. A biological technical report will be prepared and the findings incorporated into the EIR. These proposed services are detailed below.

This scope and cost estimate anticipates that complete right-of-entry for the required field surveys will be acquired prior to the commencement of the work effort.

Biological Resources Survey and Habitat Suitability Assessment

Prior to the field survey, a review of the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Electronic Inventory will be conducted to identify sensitive species known or reported to occur within the project site. Based on preliminary review of aerial photographs, topographic maps, and COUNTY GIS data, all or portions of the road improvement project is located in or adjacent to Burrowing Owl Survey Area, Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area (NEPSSA), Criteria Area Species Survey Area (CASSA), and potential jurisdictional waters of the U.S. A biological resources survey and habitat suitability assessment (HSA) will be conducted by the CONSULTANT’s biologists familiar with the habitats and sensitive resources of the region. The field survey will include:

Delineating and mapping habitat types;

Evaluating suitability of habitat for sensitive resources identified in the MSHCP;

A general plant and wildlife inventory;

A survey for vernal pools;

A preliminary identification of any areas that may be considered wetlands or waters of the U.S. as defined by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), or streambeds as defined by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG); and

Noting other pertinent features or conditions of the site and adjacent lands.

The field survey will be conducted over the entire project footprint consisting of right-of-way and an additional buffer area to be agreed on after consultation with COUNTY to determine if the project site has habitat potentially suitable for NEPSSA or CASSA plants or other sensitive resources identified in the MSHCP. A survey area map must be approved by the COUNTY prior to the start of any field survey work and will not be less than 100’ on either side of all alternatives alignments to account for any necessary adjustments. If suitable habitat is found on-site, then focused surveys are required.

Focused Plant Surveys

The MSHCP requires that focused surveys be conducted for the NEPSSA and CASSA species if potentially suitable habitat exists on the project site. For some species, survey results may not be considered valid if surveys are conducted during years of below average rainfall. Surveys for most species must be conducted during the flowering seasons of those species. A focused plant species survey will be conducted as needed in accordance with MSHCP requirements. Survey methods and results will be integrated into the Biological Resources Report or attached as an appendix. A DBESP may be required if results of focused plant surveys are positive. The proposed scope of services does not include a DBESP for impacts to sensitive plant species.

Burrowing Owl Focused Survey

If it is determined during the general biological survey and burrow survey that burrowing owl may inhabit the site, then a complete focused burrowing owl survey will be conducted according to survey guidelines adopted by Regional Conservation Agency (RCA). All burrowing owl sightings, occupied burrows, burrows with owl sign, and foraging areas (if known) will be counted and mapped. Survey methods and results will be integrated into the Biological Resources Report or attached as an appendix. If owls are found within the project impact footprint, relocation efforts may be required. This scope and cost estimate does not include the relocation of burrowing owls.

Vernal Pool/Fairy Shrimp Survey

If focused surveys are determined to be required, a focused wet-season fairy shrimp survey will be conducted of all seasonal pools believed to provide suitable habitat for the fairy shrimp. This scope assumes up to six locations in the study area. The survey will be conducted according to USFWS guidelines (Interim Survey Guidelines to Permittees for Recovery Permits under Section 10(a) (1) (A) of the Endangered Species Act for the Listed Vernal Pool Branchiopods, April 19, 1996), as appropriate. For vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi), the MSHCP states that a single-season dry or wet season survey for this species shall be conducted by a qualified biologist in accordance with accepted protocol. A wet season survey is generally considered to provide more comprehensive data. A wet season survey consists of several site visits for seasonal pool sampling. The first site visit must occur no later than two weeks after pools are initially inundated to a depth of at least 3 centimeters (cm) for 24 hours after a storm event. Additional site visits will occur every two weeks for 120 days or until the pools are no longer inundated. If the pools dry and then refill within the wet season, sampling must be reinitiated within eight days of refilling. If seasonal pools do not have standing water at the time of the conduct of the HSA, and suitable habitat is determined to exist, biologists will briefly visit the site after each storm event to determine when initial sampling must begin. It is estimated that no more than six site visits will be required to check for each pool filling/refilling after storm events and that no more than eight additional site visits will be required for pool sampling.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Waters of the U.S.) and California Department of Fish and Game (Waters of the State) Jurisdictional Delineation and Report

Under Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA), the ACOE regulates discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands. Waters of the United States include essentially any drainage course with defined banks or other evidence of flow of water. The CDFG, through provisions of the California Fish and Game Code, is empowered to issue agreements for any alteration of a river, stream or lake. Streams (and rivers) are defined by the presence of a channel bed and banks, and at least an intermittent flow of surface or sub-surface water. We will complete focused wetland delineation according to the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and the Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region. We anticipate that a routine delineation, tailored to the site characteristics, will be adequate. We will also complete a jurisdictional “waters of the U.S.” determination according to the current ACOE standards. The determination will involve a discussion of whether any waters on the site have a “significant nexus” and will consider the ACOE Joint Guidance with the EPA on Compliance with the US Supreme Court Ruling in Rapanos and Carabell Cases. Finally, we will determine the extent of any streambed and associated riparian areas subject to review by CDFG under Section 1600 et. seq. of the California Fish and Game Code. The results of the delineation will be presented in a detailed report that will include mapping of any wetland and jurisdictional areas. Please note the results of the determination are subject to verification by the ACOE and CDFG. This report will define the project constraints associated with non-wetland waters, wetlands, and riparian habitat. Our approach is to provide appropriate technical documentation for use in any required regulatory compliance procedure. The respective agencies require that wetland delineation be submitted along with the permit applications required to obtain authorization for work in waters of the U.S. This scope of work includes preparation of permit applications and coordination with regulatory agencies regarding Fish and Game Code Section 1600, CWA Section 401, and CWA Section 404 project authorizations. The jurisdictional delineation report will be attached to the Biological Resources Report as an appendix.

DBESP for Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools

The MSHCP Section 6.1.2 describes procedures that ensure the riparian/riverine habitat functions and values in the Plan Area are maintained. Compliance with MSHCP Section 6.1.2 is required for vegetated streams, rivers, wetlands, and also unvegetated ephemeral drainages, if alterations that affect the functions and values of the drainage have the potential to impact Covered Species within the Conservation Area. This MSHCP requirement will entail some additional planning and documentation for the riparian and wetland habitat on the project site. Alternatives to the proposed site plan will be evaluated by the project team to demonstrate efforts to avoid and then minimize direct and indirect effects to jurisdictional waters and riparian habitat. If avoidance is not feasible, then a practicable alternative, which minimizes effect to riparian/riverine areas and associated functions and values is proposed through a Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) report.

The DBESP shall include the following information to be reviewed by the COUNTY of Riverside, Regional Conservation Authority (RCA), CDFG, and USFWS:

Definition of the project site;

Project description, demonstrating why an avoidance alternative is not possible;

Biological information including biological resources map;

Map of riparian/riverine/vernal pool areas;

Analysis of project alternatives (100% avoidance, and other alternatives), minimization of direct and indirect effects, hydrologic regime, flood storage, flood flow retention, nutrient retention and transformation, sediment trapping and transport, toxic trapping, public use, wildlife habitat, and aquatic habitat;

Quantification of unavoidable impacts to riparian/riverine areas including direct and indirect effects;

Functions and values assessment shall focus on how the project would affect downstream values related to Conserved Species, particularly within the P/QP lands and Criteria Cells;

Habitat assessments for least Bell’s vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher, western yellow-billed cuckoo, Riverside fairy shrimp, and vernal pool fairy shrimp (if the site has suitable habitat, then focused surveys will be required);

Discussion of the edge treatments (project design features and mitigation measures that reduce indirect effects, such as landscaping, elevation differences, minimization and compensation through restoration or enhancement) and relation to functions and values to be conserved, similar to MSHCP Section 6.1.4 — Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban/Wildlands Interface;

Long-term conservation will be ensured through deed restriction, conservation easement, or other appropriate mechanism (mitigation may be on-site or off-site);

A finding demonstrating the project design and mitigation will be biologically equivalent or superior to an avoidance alternative without these measures based on effects to Conserved Habitats, Covered Species, riparian linkages, and the function of the MSHCP Conservation Area even though the project will not avoid impacts;

Topography and hydrology assessment; and

Soils description/analysis/map.

If vernal pools or similar habitats are found on the site, two years of fairy shrimp surveys may be required.

Biological Resources/MHSCP Consistency Report

The CONSULTANT will prepare a report including a summary of the results of the literature review, biological resources inventory, and habitat assessments. The report will include the following:

A summary of survey methodology and results;

Representative site photographs;

A list of species observed during the site visit;

A discussion of plant communities and mapped soils;

Results of focused species surveys;

Identification of areas wetlands or waters of the U.S. as defined by the ACOE, or streambeds as defined by the CDFG;

A discussion of project consistency with MSHCP Reserve assembly, including Urban/Wildlands Interface requirements, project relationship to Cores and Linkages,

A discussion and analysis of project consistency with and implementation of Covered Activity requirements (MSHCP Vol. I: Section 7.5).

DBESP for Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools (and plants if needed)

A discussion of impacts of the proposed project to sensitive biological resources; and

Graphics as needed to show the project location and vicinity, project relationship to designated critical habitat areas, and locations of any biological resources or habitat areas on the site that may require additional study or review for MSHCP or CEQA compliance.

WR MSHCP JPR Public Works checklist (attached as an appendix) summarizing project consistency with the MSHCP;

Jurisdictional Delineation (attached as an appendix)

Focused Surveys (attached as appendices)

Consultation and Coordination

Consultation and coordination for the biological studies may be required with members of the project team. We have assumed this coordination will take place by telephone, fax, and mail. The proposed schedule and cost estimate include attendance to two meetings by the CONSULTANT’s biologists.

Output: The following reports will be produced as a result of this work effort:

Biological Resources/MSHCP Consistency Report: 5 copies

Including Appendices that will contain the following:

Focused Survey Reports

Jurisdictional Delineation

Client Responsibilities for Completion of Biological Studies

The following items will be required from the client before the proposed scope of services can be initiated:

A conceptual drawing of the proposed project showing site limits and maximum extent of ground disturbance; and legal right of entry and physical access to the survey area.

Response to Joint Project Review (JPR) Comments

The CONSULTANT will assist in response to agency comment resulting from Joint Process Review (JPR) of the project. The scope and budget include up to a maximum of 40 hours for this purpose.

Excluding Cultural studies, all technical studies produced, including relevant engineering studies (e.g. Traffic and Drainage studies) will be bound into a Volume II. A minimum of 20 copies will be provided to the COUNTY, including a print-ready version on CD/DVD.

Clean Water Act and California Streambed Alteration Permit Applications

The team will conduct meetings with the regulatory agencies periodically during the program development. Two meetings with the regulatory agencies have been included as well as one field meeting. It will be important to identify fatal flaws or issues that have economic ramifications. ENGINEER will document important decision points throughout the process to reduce problems during the actual permitting phase. As noted above, there are a number of agencies which will need to be contacted and applications submitted for the preferred project alternative to be undertaken. ENGINEER recommends that the COUNTY attend an Interagency Meeting scheduled by the Army Corps of Engineers so that full comments can be received from the separate agencies. ENGINEER will prepare the application packages, as well as coordinate the permits through the applicable agencies. Specifically, ENGINEER will prepare the required application to the Army Corps of Engineers for a Section 404 Permit, to the California Department of Fish and Game for a Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement and the Regional Water Quality Control Board for a Section 401 Water Quality Certification once the preferred alteration is selected. Based on the current design it is assumed that an Individual Permit will be required from the Corps of Engineers so we have included the development of a Section 404 (b)1 Alternatives Analysis that will be based on the alternatives developed as part of the CEQA process. We will also submit the “Rapanos” forms to the Corps in order to expedite processing of the wetland delineation. Mitigation planning for these impacts may also be necessary. ENGINEER will prepare a conceptual mitigation plan but a final plan cannot be prepared until exact impact acreages are determined and the location of the mitigation is determined.

Based on the outcome of the initial coordination with the involved agencies, the CONSULTANT will prepare and submit the necessary permit application materials. We anticipate that:

The Corps will provide Section 404 authorization under an individual permit; a Section 401 water quality certification will be issued by the RWQCB; and the CDFG will provide a Streambed Alteration Agreement under Section 1600 et seq. of the Fish and Game Code.

The CONSULTANT will prepare permit applications accordingly. Each application packet will be reviewed with the project team and any required changes will be made prior to submittal to the respective agencies. The CONSULTANT will schedule, arrange, and prepare any necessary materials for a “pre-application consultation” with the Corps and other involved agencies. Objectives of the meeting would be to verify the jurisdictional delineation and to describe the proposed project, discuss permitting approach, and identify potential mitigation options. Additionally, the CONSULTANT may arrange to meet with the RWQCB, if necessary, to determine its requirements for a water quality certification which will include impacts to beneficial uses that may be caused by discharges of fill material into jurisdictional waters of the U.S. These meetings will be in conjunction with the Corps meeting if schedules allow; otherwise, a separate meeting time will be set. The CONSULTANT will summarize and document the results of agency coordination in a letter format. The letter will be submitted to the respective agencies with copies to project team members.

Section 404 Permit Application

The jurisdictional determination report prepared by the CONSULTANT will be the basis of the existing documentation of site conditions. Either NWP 14 – Linear Transportation Projects, or an individual permit will be required if impact triggers acreage thresholds. The CONSULTANT will submit the Request for Authorization, which includes a cover letter to the Corps, an explanation of the project, description of impacts, site plan, and graphics. The applications for the Streambed Alternation Notification and the Section 401 water quality certification will be similar to the NWP 14. The CONSUTLANT will coordinate with the project team and prepare a written statement explaining how avoidance and minimization of losses of waters of the U.S. can be achieved on the project site per General Condition 13. The CONSULTANT will prepare a preliminary mitigation and monitoring plan based on Corps guidelines. The plan will include information on how on-site impacts will be mitigated to replace jurisdictional areas that will be lost. A final mitigation plan will be prepared and submitted following Corps review of the application packet. The final mitigation plan will incorporate appropriate conditions based on the Federal and State agency review and comment. Complete copies of the Sections 401 and 1600 applications will be included.

The CONSULTANT will prepare all necessary graphics and other supporting materials. Wherever feasible, existing materials will be used to minimize costs. Project site photographs showing typical conditions of the site will be provided per Regional Condition 2. A copy of the final environmental (CEQA) document and Biological Resources/MSHCP Consistency Report for the project must be included, including the certification of the final document. Many of the same materials used for the Section 404 application can be submitted as part of the application materials for the Section 401 Certification and CDFG Streambed Alteration Agreement.

Section 401 Water Quality Certification Application

The CONSULTANT will prepare written correspondence requesting certification or waiver and including the following materials:

The CONSULTANT will use information prepared for the Section 404 application to provide a complete project description. This will include the purpose, location, total site acreage, types of water bodies within the site, total acres of waters of the U.S., wetland acres, and types of riparian habitats present.

The CONSULTANT will prepare an assessment of water quality impacts addressing types of fill material to be discharged, impacts to beneficial uses of the water body, and expected water diversions.

Standard Regional Water Quality Control Board Application form with SWPPP, WQMP (where applicable according to Santa Ana and San Diego Regional Board Permanent BMP requirements) and the proposed Monitoring and Reporting Program.

A complete copy of the Section 404 application will be included.

A complete copy of the CDFG Streambed Alteration application will be included.

A copy of the final environmental (CEQA) document and Biological Resources/MSHCP Consistency Report for the project must be included, including the certification of the final document.

A copy of the proposed mitigation plan for impacts to waters of the U.S. (on-site and/or off-site mitigation measures).

Other appropriate material as may be required by the RWQCB.

The RWQCB bases its fees on a per linear foot calculation, or on acreage of fill material to be deposited in jurisdictional waters.

Coordination with the project’s hydraulic engineer may be required to ensure that the proposed project does not result in an increase in the rate at which the volume of runoff (the “Q”) to be discharged from the site and to ensure that all runoff from developed surfaces is treated for water quality purposes before it is discharged into waters of the U.S.

Section 1600 et seq. Streambed Alteration Agreement

The CONSULTANT will submit the following materials to the CDFG:

A standard CDFG Notification of Lake or Streambed Alteration form.

A CDFG Lake and Streambed Alteration Program – Project Questionnaire.

A copy of the report on the delineation of wetlands and jurisdictional waters prepared for the Section 404 application.

A copy of the Section 404 application packet to the Corps.

A copy of the preliminary mitigation and monitoring plan prepared for the Section 404 application with a provision to submit the final plan upon its completion.

A copy of the Section 401 application to the RWQCB.

A copy of the final environmental (CEQA) document and Biological Resources/MSHCP Consistency Report for the project must be included, including certification of the final determination.

Appropriate plans, exhibits, and maps.

Two complete copies of all permit packages will be provided to the COUNTY.

Cultural Resources

Records Search

An archaeological record search/literature review will be conducted at the Eastern Information Center (EIC) housed at University of California, Riverside. The purpose of this search and review is to examine any existing cultural resources survey reports, archaeological site records, and historic maps to determine whether documented archaeological sites whether prehistoric or historic are listed on or determined eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places or the California Register of Historic Places within the proposed project area.

Engineer will conduct the records search at EIC for the project area and a one-mile radius. Sources to be consulted during the records searches will include:

7.5’ topographic maps depicting recorded site locations;

early period historic plat maps;

California Historic Landmarks listings;

California Register of Historic Properties;

National Register of Historic Places

Native American Consultation

An initial letter of inquiry will be sent to the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) regarding the potential presence of Sacred Land on or near the subject property. Upon receipt of response from the NAHC, independent letters of inquiry will be sent to specific Native American groups familiar with the project area. Any responses or concerns received from these groups will be included as an appendix to the report.

Pedestrian Survey

An archaeological pedestrian survey will be conducted on the proposed Area of Potential Effects (APE) (500 foot corridor). The project area will be closely examined for the presence of archaeological (both prehistoric and historic-period) sites or features. The survey will consist of a systematic alignment sample in 10 meters increments.

For the purposes of costing, it is assumed that no cultural resources (e.g., archaeological site, historic structure or feature) will be encountered within the project area (new or updating previously recorded archaeological sites). If any cultural resources are found, additional funds may be required for the field documentation of the resource(s) and preparation of appropriate DPR records. Furthermore, if any resources are encountered in the project area that would require test excavation, a separate scope of work and cost estimate can be submitted for that level of work.

Report Preparation

A draft report will be prepared based on the Archaeological Resource Management Report guidelines documenting the methods and results of the archaeological record search and field survey. The report will contain a summary of the environmental setting and cultural background of the project area, including prehistory and history. The report will also include a discussion of potential impacts to cultural resources from the proposed project and will provide recommendations for additional work, as appropriate. A draft report will be prepared for review and one round of comments will be incorporated into a final report.

Hydrology and Drainage/Water Quality

It is anticipated that hydrology/water quality will be eliminated from further study in the Initial Study. It is anticipated that the hydrology/hydraulic analysis necessary for site engineering will adequately address this issue. It is also assumed that a Water Quality Management Plan will be prepared for the project that will adequately address the water quality (during and post-construction impacts) including BMP and use of bio-swales.

Geology and Soils

It is anticipated that geology and soils will not be a substantial issue other than that associated with erosion. Depending upon the findings, this issue may be eliminated in the Initial Study process.

Public Heath/Safety

It is not anticipated at this time that health and safety issues will be significant. ENGINEER will review this aspect, as necessary for analysis in the Initial Study.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA)

The scope of services proposed for this Phase I ESA has been developed to assist in identifying environmental concerns associated with hazardous materials or petroleum products that may have impacted properties adjacent to, or within the road right-of-way. It should be noted that this Phase I does not include any investigation, or determination, for the presence of lead-based paint, asbestos containing materials, or the potential extent of thermoplastic tape in the area. Any work related to aerially deposited lead, lead-based paint, asbestos containing materials, or thermoplastic tape would have to be addressed in a separate scope of work. This proposed Phase I ESA will be completed in general accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) E1527-00 Standard Practice for ESAs.

The following is a description of ENGINEER's tasks:

Historic Site Uses: An evaluation of the historic land uses will be conducted concerning the parcels either within, or adjacent to the road right-of-way. The radius of this investigation generally extends to ASTM specifications, which may extend from one-half mile to up to one-mile from the subject property (or more or less as deemed necessary by ENGINEER based on other available information). These historic land uses will be evaluated in the context of the potential for hazardous materials, or hazardous waste, use or disposal on or adjacent to the subject parcels.

Historic aerial photographs will be the main tool used to determine the historic land use for the area. ENGINEER will obtain these historic photographs from a commercial vendor (Environmental Data Resources, Inc.). These photographs will include one per decade as specified by ASTM, and will cover all the subject parcels.

Regulatory Records Search: A review of reasonable available regulatory and governmental records will be performed. These records will be for the subject parcels and any identified within the specified radius. The records requested will be according to ASTM requirements for Federal, State and local agencies. The results of this record search will be supplied as an appendix to the Phase I report.

Site Reconnaissance: A site inspection (one site visit) and documentation of the properties within the right-of-way will be performed, including a review of perimeter sites and legally accessible adjacent and area properties which, in ENGINEER's opinion, constitute potential sources of contamination to the subject properties. The site inspection will focus on accessible areas of the parcels, where the likelihood is highest of finding something left by “midnight dumpers”, or from previous use of the site.

Draft and Final Report: ENGINEER will prepare a Draft and Final Report presenting all of the pertinent data discovered during the Phase I ESA process. This report documents all activities undertaken in the preparation of the report and all findings resulting from the- Phase 1 ESA performed at the subject site. The report consists of the following elements:

Cover letter;

Executive Summary;

Conclusions/Findings;

Recommendations;

Chronological Land Use for the Right-of-way and Adjacent Areas with references aerial photographs, and other sources;

Apparent site Geology and Hydrogeology;

Site investigation and Area Review with references to site reconnaissance, findings for each area, record searches, and site photographs (dates of site visits and interviews conducted, if any, will be included as references); and

Copies of Supportive Information as Attachments or Appendices.

If there are areas of concern identified during the preparation of the report, you will be initially notified by telephone, and then within the report. The report will also contain any recommendations for further study based on these areas of concern.

It should also be noted that a 50-year Chain-of-Title is not included in this scope of work. If a 50-year Chain-of-Title is required, it will be conducted under a separate scope of work.

Mandatory Findings of Significance

In accordance with Section 15065 of CEQA Guidelines, significant unavoidable adverse impacts, if any, will be addressed and Mandatory Findings of Significance will be made for each. ENGINEER will work with COUNTY staff and legal counsel as necessary.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)

ENGINEER will prepare a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the EIR in accordance

with CEQA. The MMRP will be included in the Technical Appendices of the EIR or as specified by the COUNTY. The monitoring program will specify the impacts to be mitigated, performance standards, responsibility, qualifications, timing, and other specifications as necessary.

Open House Information Meeting

ENGINEER will participate in one Open House for this project. This will include preparation, travel and attendance. ENGINEER shall also provide up to four staff to attend/participate in a Open House Information meeting. It is assumed that the COUNTY shall identify the site, prepare all advertisements and contact for all room changes (if any), ENGINEER will provide aerial photographs, display boards of preliminary project alignments/alternatives (2 sets), project description, copies of NOP, and an information paper. Sign-in-sheets and comment forms will also be provided to record participants and comments received.

Screencheck Preparation

ENGINEER will revise the Screencheck Draft EIR (two screenchecks and a “final” check print) based on COUNTY staff comments to produce a Draft EIR for public review. Revisions do not include substantial changes to the project that require new analysis. This task assumes one meeting with staff to review comments.

Distribute Draft CEQA Document

ENGINEER will reproduce and distribute the Draft EIR for public review and provide copies of the environmental document on CDs in addition to the printed form.

Prepare Final CEQA Document

Upon receipt of the comment letters, the letters will be organized by the entity that submits the letter (all federal, state and local agencies will be grouped, recognized interest associations or groups, local groups and individuals). The comment letters and issues within the letter will be numbered. A matrix will be developed identifying the issue, responsible party and status (response drafted or not). A copy of the letters and the matrix will be distributed prior to a strategy meeting. Attendees will include all persons responsible for preparation of the responses.

ENGINEER will prepare a set of responses to comments received on the Draft EIR and submit them to the COUNTY for review. ENGINEER will revise the responses, if necessary, based on staff comments. This task assumes one meeting with staff to review comments. ENGINEER will also revise the Draft EIR, if needed, to revise information as errata to the Draft EIR. Revisions, include clarifications to analyses already done, but do not include new analyses or revisions from project changes. It is not feasible to estimate the actual level of effort until ENGINEER has received the comments. Therefore, at this time, a contingency “placeholder” is proposed until after the public review period is completed. At that time, a refined cost estimate may be necessary.

The ENGINEER project team is fully available to assist the COUNTY with presentations, preparation and copying of documents and documentation submittal to finalize various actions.

ENGINEER will assemble a Final EIR, which will include a list of comments to the Draft EIR, the responses to comments, the errata, a MMRP, and the “revised” Draft EIR.

Certification

ENGINEER will attend the public hearings for certification, and make a presentation to the COUNTY (if requested). A total of 24 hours is allocated for preparation and attendance.

Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

Should the EIR conclude that significant, unavoidable, adverse impacts result from the proposed project, ENGINEER will prepare the Findings and Statements of Overriding Considerations (SOC) in consultation with COUNTY staff. ENGINEER will work closely with COUNTY staff and counsel to ensure that the Findings are legally defensible and are consistent with COUNTY protocol. ENGINEER will meet with the COUNTY to draft the Findings and produce 5 copies for staff review. A contingency estimate is provided.

T6	Preliminary Right-of-Way Requirements

COUNTY shall prepare the necessary surveys and identify existing Right-of-Way and easements.

ENGINEER shall provide preliminary identification of required ultimate Right-of-Way and easements for each of the alternatives.

For the preferred alternative, ENGINEER shall prepare right-of-way strip map at 1”=40’ scale for the entire project showing existing and proposed right-of-way lines, slope easements and temporary construction easements (TCE).

T7	Utilities

ENGINEER shall coordinate with utility owners and COUNTY utility coordination staff with respect to utility related matters. ENGINEER shall provide copies of correspondence with utility companies and other utility related information to the COUNTY.

ENGINEER shall coordinate with COUNTY staff to obtain record copies of utility maps from each utility owner within the project limits for existing and/or proposed utility facilities. ENGINEER shall include mapping and/or exhibits that clearly define the project limits as part of the requests for utility information.

ENGINEER shall Identify utility companies affected by the project and delineate utilities within the project’s sphere of influence on the plans. ENGINEER shall prepare preliminary plans, which shall include existing utilities (above ground and below ground) identified by location, size, type, and owner, as appropriate. ENGINEER shall check horizontal and vertical clearances for utilities and coordinate design with the various utility companies to address conflicts. In addition to information provided by the owning utility companies and through research of other record maps, field surveys shall be used to locate utility features such as manholes, valves, fire hydrants, poles, risers, etc., which shall be reflected on the plans.

If it is necessary to pothole existing utilities at critical locations, ENGINEER shall coordinate with COUNTY staff to arrange with the respective utility owner to pothole its facility (at utility owner or ENGINEER cost).

Eighty (80) potholing of both high and low risk utilities shall be anticipated by the ENGINEER. This will require potholing exhibits to be prepared, and for appropriate permits to be obtained from all appropriate jurisdictions prior to the start of work. For potholing work within COUNTY right of way, COUNTY will incur the permit fee.

The contract between the ENGINEER and the potholing contractor shall name the ENGINEER, COUNTY, and any other affected jurisdictions as additionally insured with respect to the contractor’s general liability, excess liability and automobile liability policy. The contractor shall meet COUNTY’S standard insurance requirements, stated below.

ENGINEER shall evaluate the potholing data, and shall include the information on the utility plans in table format, with numbered or letter references to the location of the location of the potholes. The Consultant shall determine whether or not the facilities are in conflict, and the limits of the conflict, both of which shall be shown on the utility plans with construction notes.

COUNTY's standard insurance requirements are summarized as follows, which must be shown on the contractor’s certificate of insurance and endorsements:

All insurance must have a 30 days minimum cancellation notice, with no exceptions or limitations.

Comprehensive General Liability Insurance in the amount of $2,000,000 combined single limit (or $2,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate (minimum)). Higher limits may be required for projects with higher risk exposure, and higher limits, if required, will be included in the contract documents.

Automobile Liability Insurance in the amount of $1,000,000 combined single limit (or $1,000,000 per occurrence and $1,000,000 aggregate (minimum)).

Statutory Workers Compensation coverage including Employers Liability in the amount of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence.

Comprehensive General Liability Insurance shall be provided by insurance carrier(s) that have an A.M. Best rating of at least “A” and a financial size rating of “VIII” (8) or greater (both primary and excess policies). Comprehensive General Liability Insurance coverage, both primary and excess, shall be provided by carriers that are admitted (licensed) in the State of California.

“Additional Insured” endorsements shall be issued for Comprehensive General Liability Insurance policy, any excess liability / umbrella policies listed to meet the contract requirements, and the automobile liability policy. These endorsements shall name the “County of Riverside, its Directors, Officers, Special Districts, Board of Supervisors, employees, agents and representatives” as additionally insured. The endorsements shall be signed and executed by the carrier or an authorized broker and shall include a reference to the policy by type and number that it is endorsing.

An acceptable alternative to the Additional Insured endorsement for excess liability policies is a letter, signed by an authorized representative of the insurance carrier, confirming in writing that the policy follows form with respect to the primary Comprehensive General Liability policy.

Endorsements to the Worker’s Compensation policy that waives subrogation in favor of COUNTY. The endorsement shall be signed and executed by the carrier or by an authorized broker.

Review and approval by the County's representative shall be obtained prior to the start of potholing work.

ENGINEER shall coordinate with COUNTY field survey crews to locate potholed utilities by coordinates and elevations based on the project’s survey controls.

Known utility conflicts shall be shown on the plans with construction notes indicating action to be taken and by whom. Inventory numbers of poles, vaults and other surface facilities shall be shown on the plans for those facilities that have such numbers attached to the facility and as provided on the owner’s inventory maps. ENGINEER shall send preliminary design plans through COUNTY staff to owning utility companies within the project limits with request for review and comments on the plans relevant to their respective facilities, and other project specific information.

ENGINEER shall monitor responses of utility notices received and make recommendations for mitigating conflicts. ENGINEER shall provide written responses to utility companies with regard to stated concerns and conduct design coordination meetings with utility companies as needed. Unresolved issues shall be brought to the attention of the COUNTY PROJECT MANAGER as early as practical. Utility conflict issues shall be resolved prior to the completion of the final design plans as follows:

ENGINEER, through COUNTY staff, shall request and obtain a written acknowledgement of any conflicts from the respective utility owners.

Reasonable efforts shall be taken to accommodate utility company requests for minor design changes to accommodate their facilities. ENGINEER understands that the utility companies are generally operating within the COUNTY right-of-way, but may have prior rights to that of the COUNTY in some cases.

ENGINEER shall coordinate inclusion of special provisions in COUNTY’s bid documents for adjustments and relocations of utility facilities as alternate bid items, if requested by the owning utility. Said work may require that cooperative agreements be prepared by COUNTY between the COUNTY of Riverside and the owning utility companies. ENGINEER shall provide information and exhibits as required to support the preparation of cooperative agreements, if needed.

ENGINEER shall conduct utility coordination meetings, as needed, regarding adjustments and relocations, to resolve conflict issues, and with respect to performing work for utility companies by COUNTY contractors. For utility conflicts that require relocating, COUNTY staff will submit the official notice / order to the utility companies to relocate conflicting facilities.

ENGINEER shall make recommendations for special provision language with regard to utility issues, recommendations for construction windows of time for utility relocation activities, recommendations for inclusion of utility bid items, etc.

If new electrical service will be needed, ENGINEER shall provide support as directed by COUNTY. Such support includes, but is not limited to, the following responsibilities:

Obtain approved electrical service point from the serving electric company for each service equipment enclosure to be installed, and identify requirements that the serving electric company has for the provision of service. Fulfill serving electric company requirements as appropriate, and advise COUNTY of requirements that are beyond the scope of the consultant (e.g.: applications for service).

Serving electric company shall be notified that Electrical Safety Orders clearance requirements must be met (10' radial clearance between 12kv overhead electrical facilities and signal poles and mast arms, and greater clearance for higher voltage electrical facilities). Show such clearance conflicts on the plans with construction notes.

Submit preliminary plans indicating proposed service connection locations to serving electric company for approval (service equipment enclosure, conduit runs, riser quadrant, pole number, and connections to vaults as appropriate).

Provide detailed load calculations to serving electric company, with a copy to the COUNTY, which provides calculations of the normal and maximum expected loads.

ENGINEER shall assist with the resolution of utility related issues that may arise during the bidding process and during construction, including design modifications as needed and as approved by the COUNTY PROJECT MANAGER.

Specific issues and utility company requirements may result in deviation from the procedures outlined herein.

T8	Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report

The ENGINEER team will meet with the Riverside COUNTY Flood Control & Water Conservation District (RCFC/WCD) to discuss interface of Butterfield Stage Road drainage facilities with adjacent land area projects.

The RCFC/WCD has estimated the flow rate and water surface elevation at Tucaloca Creek to be Q100 = 5,930 cfs and WS100= 1325.18. These are the values that will be used.

The suitability of existing culverts and storm drains for ultimate flows based on future land uses/cover will also be evaluated.

A Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) will be prepared including appropriate BMPs will be investigated to:

determine whether drainage outfalls are adequate outlets for increased runoff or whether detention will be required to reduce peak flows;

verify drainage design criteria, and

discuss options for meeting drainage design criteria.

ENGINEER will then summarize drainage deficiencies, proposed drainage design and justification in the Hydrology Report.

ENGINEER will conduct research, obtain and review existing Master Drainage Plans, previous hydrologic and hydraulic reports (including drainage reports from adjacent properties), as-builts for existing storm drains and culverts and other drainage background information. ENGINEER will also conduct a field visit to confirm hydrologic and hydraulic conditions and parameters for the project area.

ENGINEER will prepare hydrology drainage area maps. Peak discharges for roadway drainage design will be determined for two, possibly three, culvert crossings, according to RCFC/WCD hydrologic standards and practices. The hydrology maps will utilize RCFC/WCD 4-foot contour interval flood control topographic maps, supplemented by USGS topographic maps, as necessary.

The ENGINEER team will design curb inlets on grade, curb inlets in sump conditions, and storm drain laterals for roadway drainage. ENGINEER will label the design discharge and maximum velocity for each storm drain reach on the design plans.

Appropriate energy dissipation will be designed, such as rock riprap, for all storm drain and culvert outlets.

ENGINEER can design post-construction storm water quality BMPs if needed to capture and treat first flush runoff from the pavement drainage.

A Hydrology/Hydraulics Report will be provided that includes a summary of all background investigation, field reconnaissance, design calculations and results.

Conduct a thorough field reconnaissance prior to developing the hydrology report and conduct research, obtain and review available documents pertinent to this hydrology report.

Perform any necessary hydrology studies to identify surface run off coming from adjacent areas to the project area. The computation of the off-site peak runoff will be for 10 and 100- year storm.

Prepare a preliminary hydraulic analysis in accordance with the Riverside COUNTY Flood Control & Water Conservation District (RCFC/WCD). This analysis will be coordinated and approved by RCFC/WCD.

Incorporate drainage design on construction drawings.

T9	Water Quality Management Plan

ENGINEER shall prepare a Water Quality Management Plan in complete compliance with the Riverside County Water Quality Management Plan for Urban Runoff, Santa Ana Region and Santa Margarita River Region, dated September 17, 2004. The plan will include a concept SWPPP outlining construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) as well as recommendations for operational BMPs. Given the surrounding area, it is anticipated that the BMP’s will be limited to natural means such as bioswales, biostrips and possibly basins.

Obtain clearances and permits from the various district jurisdictions and regulatory agencies, including environmental. COUNTY will incur all permit fees. A RCFC/WCD permit will not be required.

T10	Preliminary Geotechnical Report

The purpose of our investigation will be to estimate subsurface conditions and provide geotechnical input to conceptual planning and preparation of a Preliminary Geotechnical Report. Limited field investigation will be performed during the Preliminary Engineering Phase to identify areas with critical geotechnical issues. Three days of field borings are proposed during this phase to obtain up to six borings with approximate depth of 75 feet or refusal, whichever occurs first. The preliminary boring locations will be shared with COUNTY prior to initiating the field investigation. COUNTY will incur all COUNTY permit fees related to the field investigation. In addition, a field reconnaissance will be performed to observe existing site. A preliminary geotechnical report will be prepared to provide preliminary recommendations for AC overlay, new AC pavement, PCC pavement, retaining wall foundations and slope stability. The scope of services specifically excludes any investigation needed to evaluate the presence or absence of hazardous or toxic materials at the site in the soil, surface water or groundwater. However, these services can be provided upon request.

Conduct a field reconnaissance and reviews of existing materials reports for the project area.

Perform borings at selected locations of the project to identify potential critical geotechnical issues that could impact the project cost.

Prepare a Preliminary Geotechnical Report to document the Geotechnical data required for the design of the roadway and retaining walls.

Design preliminary structural section required for the 20 year future ADT (2035).

Identify all removal areas and perform preliminary slope stability analysis.

Provide input to environmental investigations.

Minimum traffic index (TI) from the COUNTY standard 114 will be evaluated to determine if the available values are adequate for this project.

T11	Preliminary Alignment Plan

The ENGINEER team will prepare two (2) preliminary and conceptual roadway designs in addition to “No-Build” alternative as part of a Project Report for approval by the COUNTY.

The following selection criteria will be used to define possible alternatives for the geometric design of Butterfield Stage Road:

Environmental impacts

Right-of-Way Impacts

Difficult excavation in rock cut section and/or high embankment

Traffic Impacts

Need for Retaining Walls

Utility Impacts

Construction Costs

After the selection criteria is applied and the design approved by the COUNTY, then the ENGINEER team will move forward to develop the Conceptual Engineering Plans with a construction cost estimate.

Afterwards, the ENGINEER team shall complete the geotechnical, Hydrology/Hydraulics, and traffic reports. In addition, a preliminary set of plans, with that utility highlighted, shall be sent to each utility company showing the horizontal and vertical location of their utility and conflicts clouded.

All documents shall go through ENGINEER’s rigorous Quality Control (QC) Plan before being submitted.

Prepare plan and profile sheets at a scale of 1" = 80' which reflects existing improvements, physical and legal constraints, median island locations, number of lanes and widths, required right-of-way and proposed centerline profile. Typical cross sections will also be included.

T12	Preliminary Cost Estimate

Prepare a conceptual cost estimate for each of the alternatives.

Prepare a preliminary cost estimate for the preferred alternative.

T13	Preliminary Engineering Report

A Preliminary Engineering Report will be prepared to include:

Executive Summary

Background

Objectives and Goals

Existing Facilities

Right-of-Way

Traffic Data

Deficiencies and Justifications

Proposal Description

Non-Standard Features

Project Costs and Funding

Scheduling

Engineering Considerations

Other Considerations

Future Considerations

Project Reviews

Environmental Clearance

Evaluation Matrix for the alternative alignments

Conclusions and Recommendations

A total of five (5) copies of draft and final preliminary engineering report will be submitted.

Contract Deliverables

Listed deliverables below will be delivered in hard copy. One (1) set of final plan set will be delivered in mylar along with the computer generated drawings on a CD. A total of four (4) copies as part of intermediate submittals (including, 65%, 95% and 100% plan set) for review will be hard copy on bond.

Description	Number of Drawings/Documents
General:
Schedules updated monthly	2 copies
Phase I: Preliminary Eng. & Env. Document
Surveying Data (by COUNTY)	1 set
Aerial Mapping (by COUNTY)	1 copy
Potholing Exhibit	1 copy
Utility Base Mapping	1 copy
Right-of-Way Base Mapping (by COUNTY)	1 copy
Traffic Analysis Report	5 copies and pdf file
Geotechnical Report	5 copies and pdf file
Preliminary Hydrology/Hydraulics Report	5 copies and pdf file
Initial Study	50 copies and pdf file
Biological Technical Reports	3 copies and pdf file
Air Quality Technical Reports	3 copies and pdf file
Noise Technical Reports	3 copies and pdf file
Cultural Resource Report	3 copies and pdf file
Screencheck 1 plus technical app. (250 pages)	10 copies and pdf file
Screencheck 2 plus technical app. (250 pages)	10 copies and pdf file
Check print plus technical appendices (250 pages)	2 copies and pdf file
Draft EIR plus technical appendices (250 pages)	50 copies and pdf file
Certification Screencheck 1 (50 pages)	10 copies and pdf file
Certification Screencheck 2 (50 pages)	10 copies and pdf file
Final EIR (200 pages)	50 copies and pdf file
Public Meetings Exhibits	1 set
Preliminary Engineering Report (including Prelim Eng. Plans & estimates)	5 copies and pdf file