Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-07-2012 C3 RFP Requesting EIR Consultantu council Ac cn OA REpo ]Zt C I T Y OF S A N L U I S O B I S P O FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director; Prepared By: Pam Ricci, Senior Planner. Meting Dates 2/17/12 Item Number C3 SUBJECT: RFP REQUESTING EIR CONSULTANT FOR THE JOHNSON AVENUE HOUSING PROJECT (ER 56 -08). RECOMMENDATION A. Approve the scope of work for Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and authorize staff to proceed with the issuance of a Request for Proposal (RFP) to qualified environmental consulting firms. B. Authorize the City Manager to award the contract to a qualified environmental consulting firm for the EIR, contingent upon the developer depositing with the City the amount of the contract plus a 30% administrative fee. DISCUSSION The San Luis Coastal Unified School District has submitted project plans to develop 88 residential units in seven separate buildings on a 4.36 -acre site adjacent to San Luis High School on Johnson Avenue and the old junior high school off of Lizzie Street (Attachment 1). Rincon Consultants was hired by the City to prepare an initial study of environmental impact which evaluates certain issue areas in detail where technical studies have been prepared and mitigation measures could be developed. For some issue areas that are more complex, the initial study provides a scope of work for the ultimate evaluation of items in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the project. City staff from various City departments reviewed the initial study and provided comments and edits which the consultant incorporated into the final version of the initial study. The initial study is currently posted on the Community Development Department's website. Based on a determination by the Community Development Director that significant impacts would occur with the project in the issue areas of aesthetics, noise and traffic, an EIR must be prepared. An RFP has been developed that reflects the scope of work required to address areas of significance. Staff is requesting Council's authorization to proceed with the RFP process. Following authorization, the RFP would be distributed to qualified environmental consultants. Background The Johnson Avenue Housing Project was submitted to the City on May 1, 2008. Since initially submitted, plans have been substantially modified to respond to staff comments and neighborhood input. Changes to plans address drainage concerns and provide for the protection of grasslands and other sensitive natural features. The latest version of project plans submitted C3 -1 Council Agenda Report — .,uhnson Avenue Housing Project EIR k- P (ER 56 -08) Page 2 and reviewed by City staff in September 2011 addressed prior comments and was the version evaluated by Rincon Consultants in the initial study. The initial study provides a scope of work for the EIR, which is incorporated as Section A of the RFP excerpts attached to this report (Attachment 2). The scope of work was developed from the initial study prepared by Rincon Consultants and outlines the required work tasks to fully evaluate the project's areas of significance. The initial study, and standard City RFP attachments outlining general terms and conditions, insurance requirements, and forms for the consultant to prepare, will be mailed out to consultants, but are not attached to this report. This additional information is available for review in the Council Reading File. Schedule for EIR Preparation With City Council authorization to issue the RFP and scope of work, RFPs would be sent out to qualified consultants (Attachment 3) on February 13t1'. Consultant proposals will be due to the City on March 14th. The RFP schedule anticipates interviews on March 27th and a consultant contract awarded on April 8, 2012. The RFP specifies that the Administrative Draft EIR would be delivered to the City by July 16, 2012. A Draft EIR would be released on September 20, 2012. CONCURRENCES Other City departments were actively involved and consulted in the preparation of the project's initial study of environmental impact from which the EIR scope of work was derived. FISCAL IMPACT Once a qualified consultant is selected and a contract negotiated, the project applicant will pay all of the costs for the consultant services to prepare the EIR, plus a 30% administrative fee. The Community Development Department will administer the consultant contract in coordination with the Finance Department. This is the approved procedure for EIRs. Therefore, the project will have no direct fiscal impact. ALTERNATIVES 1. Approve the scope of work, but direct staff to prepare the EIR. If a consultant were not retained to prepare the EIR, it would be the responsibility of the City to do so. City staff does not typically prepare EIRs. Additional staff would need to be hired to prepare and manage the EIR. These costs would likely exceed the cost for a consultant to prepare the EIR. 2, Continue consideration of the scope of work and RFP with direction to staff on necessary changes. C3 -2 Council Agenda Report = Johnson Avenue Housing Project EIR rcFP (ER 56 -08) Page 3 ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: Vicinity map Attachment 2: Excerpts from Draft RFP including the Scope of Work Attachment 3: Proposers List Available in Council Reading File.— Initial Study ER 56 -08 and Entire Draft UP \ \chstore4 \team \counci1 agenda reports\2012 \2012 -02 -07 \johnson eir rfp (Johnson- ricci) \ecar - johnson eir rfp.doc C3 -3 s �G iP Attachment 1 Approximate Project Boundary ER 5 N Project Location Map C3 -4 ATTACHMENT 2 A city of san lws oBispo 990 Palm Street ■ San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Notice Requesting Proposals for Johnson Avenue Housing Project EIR Specification No. 91146 The City of San Luis Obispo is requesting sealed proposals to prepare an environmental impact report (EIR) for the Johnson Avenue Housing Project. The EIR must comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and address the topics identified in the Request for Proposals (RFP). All proposals must be received by the Department of Finance by 3 :00 p.m. on Wednesday, March 14, 2012 when they will be opened publicly in the City Hall Council Chambers. Proposals received after said time will not be considered. To guard against premature opening, each proposal shall be submitted to the Department of Finance, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401, in a sealed envelope plainly marked with the proposal title, specification number, proposer name, and time and date of the proposal opening. Proposals shall be submitted using the forms provided in the specification package. A pre - proposal conference will be held in Conference Room No. 1 at 919 Palm Street on Wednesday, February 22, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. to answer any questions that the prospective bidders may have regarding the City's request for proposals. Additional information may be obtained by contacting Pam Ricci, Senior Planner at (805) 781 -7168. ®The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to including disabled persons in all of our services, programs and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781 -7490. C3 -5 ATTACHMENT 2 Specification No. 91146 TABLE OF CONTENTS A. Description of Work — attached 1 -3 B. General Terms and Conditions - not attached 4 -7 Proposal Requirements Contract Award and Execution Contract Performance C. Special Terms and Conditions — attached 8-12 Proposal Content Proposal Evaluation and Consultant Selection Proposal Review and Award Schedule Start and Completion of Work Accuracy of Specifications D. Agreement - not attached 13 -14 E. Insurance Requirements - not attached 15 -16 F. Proposal Submittal Forms - not attached 17 -19 Proposal Submittal Form References Statement of Past Contract Disqualifications C3 -6 ATTACHMENT 2 Section A DESCRIPTION OF WORK Y v. �K"•R 7"I ''' 1 �' 1 � �' _ -` 1 ,� e � �r�j ..C' �' � Mh � '� Y-h.. �'"'�`. �' �._.. :_.� �� r="?�''�,c..;�� v'�d�, `i� -��s+F r,yry�r.�t �, ih �''��.c• t�y1k' k^�',� %��'�t.�°'.i� t� &� �'� -�tk �"s '��� r= � 'j� "�'_— ����i�.. Project Description The proposed project would develop an 88 -unit high density residential complex on a 4.36 -acre hillside property. A total of seven buildings would be constructed with a maximum height of 35 feet. The 88 total units would consist of 14 one - bedroom units and 74 two- bedroom units. The housing complex would cover approximately 49,040 square feet of the project site, which is equivalent to 25.8 percent of the site area. There would be approximately 11,020 square feet of private open space provided and approximately 40,240 square feet of common open space. A recreational amenity room would also be included, totaling approximately 2,260 square feet. In addition, approximately one acre of natural open space area would be preserved on -site. Parking would be provided on -site in subterranean garages, with 174 residential stalls and 18 guest stalls. Ten stalls would also be provided for motorcycle parking. Bicycle parking would consist of 15 public racks, 88 in -unit storage areas, and 83 bicycle storage spaces near the parking area. Private storage units would also be located in parking garages, providing a total of 18,600 square feet of storage space. There would be two pedestrian sidewalks that connect the housing complex to Johnson Avenue. The proposed project also includes a multi -use path with connections at Fixlini Street and San Luis Drive. The multi- use path would travel along the northeast boundary of the project site, around the open space, and curve west toward San Luis Drive. Site Description The property is surrounded by residential and public facility uses on all sides. San Luis Obispo High School and San Luis Adult School border the property to the north and east. Multi - family and single - family residences border the project site to the south and west, with an additional, isolated single - family residence located on a private parcel between two portions of the project site. The project site surrounds this parcel, which fronts San Luis Drive. The housing complex would be constructed to the south and southeast of this parcel, while open space will be preserved to the north and northeast. Johnson Avenue and San Luis Drive run along the project site to the southwest, while vehicle access is obtained via Fixlini Street to the southeast. A mixture of multi- family and single family residences is also located across Johnson Avenue to the southwest. In addition, there is a small island between the Johnson Avenue and San Luis Drive roadway fork with multifamily residences and an office building that is currently occupied by State Farm Insurance. The project site currently consists of an undeveloped hillside, sloping upward from Johnson Avenue and San Luis Drive. Elevations on site range from 250 and 330 feet above mean sea level, and slopes are generally from east to west. Vegetation onsite is a mixture of grassland and ornamentals, such as eucalyptus trees and pines. Drainage from the San Luis Adult School is diverted around the site to existing storm drains. On -site drainage flows westerly across the sidewalk to the curb and gutter along Johnson and San Luis Drive. Scope of Work An Initial Study of Environmental Impact (attached) was completed for this project, which concluded that there may be significant environmental impacts associated with development and that an environmental impact report (EIR) is required. The applicant is not disputing the need for preparation of an EIR. The C3 -7 ATTACHMENT 2 workscope more specifically identifies issues and tasks that need to be performed to evaluate potential impacts of the project. EIR Workscope Items The selected consultant shall incorporate the Initial Study of Environmental Impact that was completed for this project into the EIR. The following list of workscope issues was extracted from that initial study. The numbers used below that identify issue areas are consistent with the system from the initial study. For those issue areas included in the initial study, which concluded that there were no impacts, or that impacts could be mitigated with identified mitigation measures, no workscope items appear. #1 AEsTHFTres A. To evaluate the potential visual impacts of the project, the consultant shall prepare photo simulations of conceptual project elevations from various key viewing locations. Recommendations shall be developed to reduce identified visual impacts. General design guidelines shall be identified to assist the potential developer in terms of design features and elements of the project to assure visual compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. #l2 NDISE: A. The proposed project would be a noise sensitive use, and the impact of ambient noise levels on sensitive receptors shall be evaluated in the EIR. Sound level measurements shall be taken on the project site and the level of significance shall be determined using the City's noise level thresholds. In addition, the proposed project would generate traffic that would contribute to noise levels in the project area that exceed City thresholds. The EIR shall quantify the increase in vehicle noise levels resulting from project- generated traffic at sensitive receptors along Johnson Avenue /San Luis Drive and Fixlini Street and determine the level of significance based on the City's noise level thresholds. The EIR shall identify any mitigation necessary to reduce significant noise impacts to less than significant levels. B. The EIR shall quantify the level of construction noise based on anticipated construction equipment. The level of construction noise generated by the proposed project shall be compared to the City's existing noise level thresholds to determine the level of significance. The EIR shall identify any mitigation necessary to reduce significant noise impacts to less than significant levels, A traffic study will need to be prepared by a licensed Traffic Engineer and incorporated into the EIR. Project trip generation characteristics and distributions are to be submitted to the City for review and comment /approval prior to proceeding with the traffic analysis. The EIR will highlight the project setting related to traffic issues, summarize the impact analysis, and outline appropriate mitigation measures. The traffic study would eventually become a technical appendix to the EIR. The following paragraphs note tasks for the consultant to evaluate in the traffic study: A. The traffic analysis shall comply with the City's 2000 Traffic Impact Study Guidelines and shall include both the AM and PM peak periods because of the project's proximity to the City's only public high school. The analysis shall include but is not limited to: • Intersection analysis of Fixhm/Lizzie, Lizzie /Johnson, San Luis Drive /Johnson, Pismo /Johnson, Marsh/Johnson, Ella/Johnson, Fixiini /Johnson, and San Luis Drive /California. dA C3 -8 ATTACHMENT 2 • Gap analysis of traffic on Johnson Ave • Cut - through traffic analysis on Fixlini. B. City staff has also observed the following traffic issues which could be worsened with this project and therefore should be analyzed: • Vehicles stacking on NB Johnson (Bishop Street to Marsh Street) during the AM peak and when the high school lets out in the afternoon. • Vehicles stacking in left turn lane of SB Johnson at Lizzie during the AM and PM peak. • Vehicles using Fixlini Street (Johnson Ave to Adult School) to bypass traffic and signals on Johnson Avenue during AM peak. • Vehicles stacking on WB Lizzie at Johnson Avenue in the AM and PM peak. C. Traffic analysis shall also evaluate project design including line of sight, parking design (including tandem and autolift features), on -site circulation, potential for vehicle conflicts, and impacts during construction. Applicant shall provide traffic engineer with estimated construction truck traffic (including trucks exporting dirt) and their anticipated route to and from site. D. The EIR shall analyze the results from the traffic study to determine if traffic generated by the proposed project would exceed thresholds set forth in the City's General Plan Circulation Element. The EIR shall also determine if traffic generated by the proposed project would have cumulative impacts on area roadways. The EIR shall identify mitigation necessary to reduce any traffic impacts to less than significant levels. Additional EIR Workscone items In addition to the above - mentioned significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed development, the EIR should discuss any other significant environmental impacts that are discovered by the consultant while preparing a proposal, public input from the scoping meeting, or comments made by other agencies after circulation of the Notice of Preparation. If the EIR analysis concludes that there are Class I, significant and unavoidable impacts, then mitigation measures shall be proposed to offset impacts to the degree feasible and language provided to assist the City with making appropriate findings of overriding consideration to be considered with the review of the Final EIR. In order to be sure the EIR is a comprehensive list of all the potential significant items, a discussion of standard CEQA items that were not considered significant should be included. A description of each of these items, including justification of why they were deemed less than significant, including proposed mitigation measures, should be provided. Alternatives Alternatives need to clearly indicate how they would address identified project impacts and should at minimum evaluate the following: 1. The "no" project alternative; 2. A project of a more limited size and scope; and 3. Other comparable sites where the project might be developed. Mitigation Monitoring Program The consultant shall prepare the Mitigation Monitoring Program consistent with CEQA Section 21081.6. -3- C3 -9 ATTACHMENT 2 Section C SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS � ;: x4�x.. ax0.�:�i�:�� �a�S�1�r. 'k��c.�.,ihi�.a- °d��``u�"`1�4. f ����' '�s"Y� +'n,. -,. ... ' +- ^F1.k�'" -''.z• Proposal Content. Your proposal must include the following information: Submittal Forms a. Proposal submittal summary. b. Certificate of insurance. C. References from at least three firms for whom you have provided similar services. Qualifications d. Experience of your firm in performing similar services. e. Resumes of the individuals who would be assigned to this project, including any sub - consultants. With this project, it is critical that the consultant's professional team include: 1) A planner or architect with particular expertise in preparing photo simulations; 2) An acoustical engineer or architect or planner with extended experience in the preparation of noise evaluations; and 3) A licensed civil engineer with a background in traffic, or registered traffic engineer. f. An organizational and manpower chart to show the names of all key personnel assigned to the project should also be included. g. Standard hourly billing rates for the assigned staff, including any sub - consultants. It, Statement and explxrration of any irfstauces where your firm has been removed from a project or disqualified from proposing on a project. work Program Description of your approach to completing the work which expands on, the workscope contained in Section A of this Request for Proposals (RFP). The work program shall itemize major tasks and work products, responsible staff, special information or studies required, and special methods or equipment, if any, you anticipate using. Procedures should be included showing how the consultant plans to coordinate with key City staff. The work program should identify all other elements of the EIR needed to assure CEQA compliance, which may not be listed in the workscope, and should explain how this will be accomplished. The consultant, in consultation with the Project Manager, shall be responsible for the preparation of the required Notice of Preparation, Notice of Completion & Environmental Transmittal, and Notice of Completion of Draft EIR. The consultant will also be responsible for mailing these documents to relevant agencies and interested citizens, as well as distributing Draft EIRs. The costs for these tasks and mailing costs should be factored into the total EIR budget. J_ Tentative schedule by phase and task for completing the work. Examples of key tasks are: data collection, data verification and analysis, completion of the Draft EIR, responses to comments, attendance at public hearings, and certification of the Final EIR. It is the City's intent that an administrative draft of the EIR would be prepared by July 16, 2012. The schedule was based on using the typical 90 -day timeframe for production of the administrative draft of the EIR from signed agreement between the City and the consultant. •-8- C3 - 10 ATTACHMENT 2 k. Estimated hours for your staff in performing each major phase of the work, including sub - consultants, organized by major task to be accomplished and by Ievel of employee who will be assigned to do this work. The time for firm members to attend public hearings where the EIR is considered (minimum of four) should be included as part of the hours estimate. 1. Services or data to be provided by the City that is not already identified in the workscope. m. Any other information that would assist us in making this contract award decision. Proposal Length and Copies n. Proposals need to provide all of the requested information, but not be excessively long. o. Five copies of the proposal must be submitted. Proposal Evaluation and Consultant Selection. Review of the project by City decision - makers is dependent on completion of the Draft EIR. Therefore, timely completion and circulation of the Draft EIR is essential to expeditious processing of the project consistent with CEQA and will be considered in evaluating consultant proposals. Proposals will be evaluated by a review committee using a two -phase selection and contract award process as follows: Phase 1— Written Proposal Review /Finalist Candidate Selection A group of finalist candidates (generally the top 3 to S five proposers) will be selected for follow - up interviews and presentations based on the following criteria as evidenced in their written proposals: a. Understanding of the work required by the City. b. Quality, clarity and responsiveness of the proposal. C. Demonstrated competence and professional qualifications necessary for successfully performing the work required by the City. d. Recent experience in successfully performing similar services. e. Proposed approach in completing the work. f. References. g. Background and experience of the specific individuals to be assigned to this project. Phase 2 — Oral Presentations/Interviews and Consultant Selection Finalist candidates will make an oral presentation to the review committee and answer questions about their proposal. The purpose of this second phase is two -fold: to clarify and resolve any outstanding questions or issues about the proposal; and to evaluate the proposer's ability to clearly and concisely present information orally. As part of this second phase of the selection process, finalist candidates will submit proposed compensation costs for the work, including a proposed payment schedule tied to accomplishing key project milestones or tasks. After evaluating the proposals and discussing them further with the finalists or the tentatively selected contractor, the City reserves the right to further negotiate the proposed workscope and/or method and amount of compensation. Contract award will be based on a combination of factors that represent the best overall value for completing the workscope as determined by the City, including: the written proposal criteria described above; results of background and reference checks; results from the interviews and presentations phase; and proposed compensation. -9- C3 -11 ATTACHMENT 2 Proposal Review and Award Schedule. The following is an outline of the anticipated schedule for proposal review and contract award: a. Issue RFP February 13, 2012 b. Conduct pre - proposal conference February 22, 2012 C. Receive proposals March 14, 2012 d. Complete proposal evaluation March 20, 2012 e. Conduct finalist interviews March 27, 2012 f. Finalize staff recommendation March 29, 2012 g. Award contract April 8, 2012 h. Execute contract/Start work April 15, 2012 i. Complete admin. draft July 16, 2012 The above schedule, as well as meeting dates needed in the future, may be modified with the mutual consent of the City and the Consultant. If you have any questions about this RFP, schedule, or attachments, please calls Pam Ricci at (805) 781 -7168. 4. Pre - Proposal Conference. A pre- proposal conference will be held at the following location, date, and time to answer any questions that prospective bidders may have regarding this RFP: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 from 10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. Conference Room No. 1, 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Ownership of Materials. All original drawings, plan documents and other materials prepared by or in possession of the Contractor as part of the work or services under these specifications shall become the permanent property of the City, and shall be delivered to the City upon demand. 6. Release of Reports and Information. Any reports, information, data, or other material given to, prepared by or assembled by the Contractor as part of the work or services under these specifications shall be the property of City and shall not be made available to any individual or organization by the Contractor without the prior written approval of the City. Copies of Reports and Information. If the City requests additional copies of reports, drawings, specifications, or any other material in addition to what the Contractor is required to furnish in limited quantities as part of the work or services under these specifications, the Contractor shall provide such additional copies as are requested, and City shall compensate the Contractor for the costs of duplicating of such copies at the Contractor's direct expense. 8. Required Deliverable Products. The Contractor will be required to provide: a. Five (5) copies of the Administrative Draft EIR addressing all elements of the workscope. City staff will review any documents or materials provided by the Contractor and, where necessary, the Contractor will be required to respond to staff comments and make such changes as deemed appropriate. b. 60 copies (utilizing two -sided copying) of the Draft EIR. 50 copies of the Final EIR, which incorporates changes to the draft document as a result of its review at pubic hearings, and includes responses to comments. -10- C3 - 12 ATTACHMENT 2 One camera -ready original, unbound, each page printed on only one side, including any original graphics in place and scaled to size, ready for reproduction. e. When computers have been used to produce materials submitted to the City as a part of the workscope, the Contractor must provide the corresponding computer files to the City, compatible with the following programs whenever possible unless otherwise directed by the project manager: • Word Processing Word • Spreadsheets Excel • Desktop Publishing CorelDraw, PageMaker • Computer Aided Drafting (CAD) AutoCAD Computer files must be on 3' /z ", high - density, write- protected diskettes, formatted for use on IBM- compatible systems. Each diskette must be clearly labeled and have a printed copy of the directory. Alternatively, files may be emailed to the City. 9. Attendance at Meetings and Hearings. As part of the workscope and included in the contract price is attendance by the Contractor at up to four public meetings to present and discuss its findings and recommendations. The cost should also include a public scoping meeting to be held at a Planning Commission meeting tentatively scheduled for May 9, 2012. Contractor shall attend as many "working" meetings with staff as necessary in performing workscope tasks. 10. AIternative Proposals. The proposer may submit an alternative proposal (or proposals) that it believes will also meet the City's project objectives but in a different way. In this case, the proposer must provide an analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of each of the alternatives, and discuss under what circumstances the City would prefer one alternative to the other(s). If an alternative proposal is submitted, the maximum length of the proposal may be expanded proportionately by the number of alternatives submitted. 11. Accuracy of Specifications. The specifications for this project are believed by the City to be accurate and to contain no affirmative misrepresentation or any concealment of fact. Bidders are cautioned to undertake an independent analysis of any test results in the specifications, as City does not guaranty the accuracy of its interpretation of test results contained in the specifications package. In preparing its proposal, the bidder and all subcontractors named in its proposal shall bear sole responsibility for proposal preparation errors resulting from any misstatements or omissions in the plans and specifications that could easily have been ascertained by examining either the project site or accurate test data in the City's possession. Although the effect of ambiguities or defects in the plans and specifications will be as determined by law, any patent ambiguity or defect shall give rise to a duty of bidder to inquire prior to proposal submittal. Failure to so inquire shall cause any such ambiguity or defect to be construed against the bidder. An ambiguity or defect shall be considered patent if it is of such a nature that the bidder, assuming reasonable skill, ability and diligence on its part, knew or should have known of the existence of the ambiguity or defect. Furthermore, failure of the bidder or subcontractors to notify City in writing of specification or plan defects or ambiguities prior to proposal submittal shall waive any right to assert said defects or ambiguities subsequent to submittal of the proposal. To the extent that these specifications constitute performance specifications, the City shall not be liable for costs incurred by the successful bidder to achieve the project's objective or standard beyond the amounts provided there for in the proposal. -11- C3 - 13 ATTACHMENT 2 In the event that, after awarding the contract, any dispute arises as a result of any actual or alleged ambiguity or defect in the plans and/or specifications, or any other matter whatsoever, Contractor shall immediately notify the City in writing, and the Contractor and all subcontractors shall continue to perform, irrespective of whether or not the ambiguity or defect is major, material, minor or trivial, and irrespective of whether or not a change order, time extension, or additional compensation has been granted by City. Failure to provide the hereinbefore described written notice within one (1) working day of contractor's becoming aware of the facts giving rise to the dispute shall constitute a waiver of the right to assert the causative role of the defect or ambiguity in the plans or specifications concerning the dispute. _19- C3 - 14 PROPOSERS LIST JOHNSON AVENUE HOUSING PROJECT EIR — SPECIFICATION NO. 91146 A/E Consultants Information Network PO Box 417816 Sacramento, CA 95841 Douglas Wood & Associates, Inc. 1461 Higuera St., Suite A San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 LFR Levine Fricke 301 Miller St., Ste. 210 Santa Maria, CA 93454 Leighton and Associates, Inc. 711 Daily Dr. 7amarillo, CA 93010 Rincon Consultants, hie. 1530 Monterey Street, Suite D San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 TPG Consulting, Inc. 560 Higuera Street Suite E San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 AMEC Earth & Environmental 104W. Anapamu St., Ste. 204A Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Dudek & Associates, Inc. 621 Chapala St. Santa Barbara, CA 93101 LSA Associates, Inc. 1998 Santa Barbara Street, Ste. 100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Oliveira Environmental Consulting 1645 Hillcrest Place San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 SWCA 1422 Monterey St., Ste. C200 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Wallace Group 612 Clarion Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 ATTACHMENT 3 Design, Community & Environment /The Planning Center 88 North Oak St, Ste. 2B Ventura, CA 93001 Envicom 28328 Agoura Rd. Agoura Hills, CA 91301 LWC 983 Osos Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 PMC 860 Walnut Street, Suite B San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Tetra Tech, Inc. 4213 State Street, Suite 205 Santa Barbara, CA 93110 Woodward Clyde Consultants 130 Robin Hill Rd., Ste. 100 Santa Barbara, CA 93117 C3 - 15 Page intentionally left blank. C3 -16