HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 01301990 - 1.3 i
s
1-3
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: J. MICHAEL WALFORD, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
DATE: JANUARY 30, 1990
i
SUBJECT: APPROVE A CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH
ENVIRONMENTALCONSULTING SERVICES TO CONDUCT NOISE
STUDIES FOR HIGHWAY 4 WIDENING PROJECTS FROM STATE
ROUTE 160 TO OAKLEY ROAD.
PROJECT NOS. 4660-6X4014-89 AND 4660-6X4029-89.
Specific Request(s) or Recommendations) & Background & Justification
I. RECOMMENDEDACTION:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director to execute the Consulting
Services Agreement with Environmental Consulting Services to conduct noise studies for
Highway 4 Widening Projects, in the amount of $3,800.00.
II. FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The estimated contract cost of the project is $3,800, funded by Oakley Area of Benefit
funds.
Continued on attachment: i X yes
Signature:
Recommendation of County Administrator
Recommendation of Board Committee
Approve Other:
Signature(s):
Action of Board on: JAN 3 0 1990
Approved as Recommended__ Other
Vote of Supervisors I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS
A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON
X Unanimous (Absent ) THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
Ayes: Noes: SUPERVISORS ON DATE SHOWN.
Absent: Abstain:
Attested JAN 3 0 1990
Orig. Div.: PW (Design) Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the Board
cc: County Administrator of Supervisors and County
Attn: E. Kuevor Administrator
Auditor-Controller
PW Accounting By
Deputy Clerk
i
i
i
BO:CSA-Environmental Consulting Services I
Page Two
III. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONBACKGROUND:
The negative declaration of environmental significance for Highway 4 Widening/Big Break
Road to Oakley Road Project No. 4660-6X4014-89 identified a potential noise impact as
a result of.the project and recommended a noise study be done to identify impacts and
suggest mitigation measures. A noise study is also required for Highway 4 Widening-State
Route 160 to Big Break Road, Project No. 4660-6X4029-89.
IV. CONSEQUENCES OF NEGATIVEACTION
The environmental documentation would be incomplete without the noise study; therefore,
the California Environmental Quality Act (C:E.Q.A.) would not be satisfied.
i