Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Meeting 08-06-09 (Reso 2684-2009) - Centrum EIR 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2684-2009 PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, INCLUDING FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT AND POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS, FINDINGS CONCERNING ALTERNATIVES, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, FOR AN APPROXIMATELY 624,048 SQUARE FOOT MULTI-TENANT INDUSTRIAL FACILITY SITUATED AT 1070 AND 1080 SAN MATEO AVENUE WHEREAS, Centrum has applied to demolish an existing commercial airport parking lot on the approximately 5.23-acre parcel located at 1080 San Mateo Avenue, and construct in their place 5 new one-story buildings, with a combined area of 52,300 square foot, the retention of an existing 571,748 square foot industrial building on an approximately 19.79-acre parcel at 1070 San Mateo Avenue, creating a multi-tenant industrial facility, and construct an open, landscaped at-grade parking lot containing up to 544 parking spaces (“Project”); and WHEREAS, a Notice of Preparation for a Draft Environmental Impact Report (“DEIR”) was issued on January 14, 2009, informing all interested parties of the City’s intention to prepare an Environmental Impact Report; and WHEREAS, a DEIR was prepared evaluating the significant and potentially significant impacts of the development, the growth inducing impacts of the development, the cumulative impacts of the development, and alternatives to the proposed project; and WHEREAS, the DEIR analyzes two alternatives to the Project, including a no project alternative; and WHEREAS, the public review period on the DEIR commenced on June 3, 2009, and closed on July 24, 2009; and WHEREAS, the City prepared responses to comments on significant environmental issues received during the public review period and at the public comment hearing, which responses clarify and amplify the information contained in the DEIR, providing a good faith reasoned analysis supported by factual information. The comments and responses to comments were published in a Final Environmental Impact Report (“FEIR”) dated August 3, 2009, which incorporated the DEIR; and WHEREAS written responses to comments received from agencies were provided to such agencies on July 27, 2009, and copies of the FEIR, including all responses to comments, were distributed or otherwise made available to the Planning Commission, responsible agencies, and other interested parties; and WHEREAS, based on the FEIR and other information in the record, there are impacts of the Project which are not environmentally significant and which require no findings or mitigation upon approval; and WHEREAS, based on the FEIR and other information in the record, there are certain significant and potentially significant environmental impacts of the Project which could be mitigated to a level of insignificance, therefore mitigation findings are required pursuant to CEQA §21081 and CEQA Guidelines §15091 upon Project approval; and WHEREAS, based on the FEIR and other information in the record, there are significant and potentially significant impacts of the Project which could not be mitigated to a level of insignificance, therefore the alternatives to the Project as proposed were examined to determine if they would be feasible and would avoid any of the unmitigated significant impacts; and 2 WHEREAS, based on the FEIR and other information in the record, there are significant and potentially significant environmental impacts of the Project which could not be reduced to a level of insignificance, therefore a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required upon Project approval; and WHEREAS, CEQA §21081.6 requires that where mitigation findings are made for significant and potentially significant environmental impacts, a mitigation monitoring and reporting program shall be adopted upon Project approval to ensure compliance with the mitigations during project implementation; and WHEREAS, the location and custodian of the documents which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City’s decision on entitlements relating to the FEIR is the City of South San Francisco Planning Division, 315 Maple Avenue, South San Francisco; and, WHEREAS, the mitigation measures identified in the FEIR will be imposed and enforced as conditions of Project approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this resolution, and that the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco hereby adopts the following findings based upon the entire record for the Centrum development, including without limitation, the South San Francisco General Plan; the Centrum Initial Study, DEIR and FEIR; the comments received in response to the DEIR; site plans, floor plans and elevations dated June 30, 2008 prepared by Ware Malcomb; Design Review Board meeting and minutes of June 17, 2008; Design Review Board meeting and minutes of July 15, 2008; Planning Commission meeting of June 18, 2009, including minutes and all staff reports and other testimony received; Planning Commission meeting of July 16, 2009, including minutes and all staff reports and other testimony received; and Planning Commission meeting of August 6, 2009, including minutes and all staff reports and other testimony received: 1. Environmental Impact Report. As required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) [Pub. Res. Code §§ 21000 et seq.], the following findings are made in approval of a Final Environmental Impact Report and Statement of Overriding Considerations, allowing development of a multi-tenant industrial facility and an open, landscaped at-grade parking lot situated at 1070 & 1080 San Mateo Avenue in the Industrial Zoning district, subject to making the findings of approval and, based on public testimony and the materials submitted to the City of South San Francisco Planning Commission which include, but are not limited to: the Centrum Initial Study, DEIR and FEIR, and the comments received in response to the DEIR, site plans, floor plans and elevations prepared by Ware Malcomb, dated June 30, 2008; Design Review Board meeting of June 17, 2008; Design Review Board meeting of July 15, 2008;; Planning Commission staff report, testimony received, and meeting of June 18, 2009, Planning Commission staff report, testimony received, and meeting of July 16, 2009, and Planning Commission staff report, testimony received and meeting of August 6, 2009: (a) The Planning Commission has independently reviewed and considered the information contained in the FEIR, including the written comments received during the DEIR review period and the oral and written comments received at the public hearings, prior to making its decision on the proposed Project. (b) The FEIR reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis on the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Project. The FEIR provides information to the decision-makers and the public on the environmental consequences of the proposed Project. (c) The FEIR adequately describes the proposed Project, its significant environmental impacts, mitigation measures and a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed project. 3 (d) The public review period provided all interested jurisdictions, agencies, private organizations, and individuals the opportunity to submit comments regarding the DEIR. (e) The mitigation measures which have been identified for the Project were identified in the FEIR. The final mitigation measures are described in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”). Each of the mitigation measures identified in the MMRP, and contained in the FEIR, is incorporated into the Project. The impacts of the Project have been mitigated to the extent feasible by the mitigation measures identified in the MMRP, and contained in the FEIR. (f) The responses to comments in the FEIR are adequate and complete. (g) The FEIR contains additions, clarifications, modifications and other information in its responses to comments on the DEIR and also incorporates revisions to the DEIR based on information obtained since the DEIR was issued. The Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that such changes and additional information are not significant new information (as that term is defined under the provisions of CEQA) because such changes and additional information do not indicate that any new significant environmental impacts not already evaluated in the DEIR would result from the Project and they do not reflect any substantial increase in the severity of any environmental impact. Further, no feasible mitigation measures considerably different from those previously analyzed in the DEIR have been proposed that would lessen significant environmental impacts of the Project and that have not been incorporated, and no feasible alternatives considerably different from those analyzed in the DEIR have been proposed that would lessen the significant environmental impacts of the Project. Accordingly the Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that recirculation of the FEIR for further public review and comment is not required under CEQA. (h) The Project will result in some significant and potentially significant impacts. As required by CEQA, findings regarding these significant and potentially significant impacts, including mitigation measures, are set forth in Exhibit A, and incorporated herein by reference. (i) A Statement of Overriding Considerations has been prepared for those significant impacts which are unavoidable. The Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached as Exhibit C, and incorporated herein by reference, concludes that significant and unavoidable impacts resulting from the development, specifically, certain air quality and traffic impacts, are outweighed by the specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the Centrum development. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco does hereby: 4 A. Certify, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the Final Environmental Impact Report and approve and adopt the following, relating to environmental impacts of the proposed development of a multi-tenant industrial facility and an open, landscaped at-grade parking lot: i. Findings Concerning Significant and Potentially Significant Impacts, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference; ii. Findings Concerning Alternatives, attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference; iii. The Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached hereto as Exhibit C and incorporated herein by reference; iv. The Mitigation Monitoring Program, attached hereto as Exhibit D and incorporated herein by reference. I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco at the regular meeting held on the 6th day of August , 2009, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Bernardo, Commissioner Giusti, Commissioner Gupta, Commissioner Ochsenhirt, Commissioner Zemke, Vice Chairperson Prouty and Chairperson Moore NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None ATTEST: Commission Secretary Susy Kalkin Exhibit A Findings Concerning Significant and Potentially Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines sections 15091, the Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings with respect to the potential for significant environmental impacts and means for mitigating those impacts. Many of the impacts and mitigation measures in the following findings are summarized rather than set forth in full. The text of the Draft and Final EIRs should be consulted for a complete description of the impacts and mitigations. Findings pursuant to section 21081(c) relating to Project alternatives are made in Exhibit B. SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS THAT CANNOT BE MITIGATED TO A LEVEL LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT Impact Air-3: Cumulative Air Quality Impacts. The proposed Project would contribute to regional air quality emissions and exceed BAAQMD emissions thresholds for NOx. (DEIR pg 4-11 – 4-13.) Although mitigation measures have been identified to reduce this impact, due to the volume of traffic associated with the project, and the fact that the tenant mix for the site is not yet known, the effectiveness of the mitigation measures cannot be quantitatively assessed. Therefore, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Impact Traf-2: Cumulative (2020) Intersection Impacts – San Bruno Avenue at US 101 Southbound Ramps (2020 PM). Under cumulative (Year 2020) conditions, the addition of Project traffic would result in a significant and unavoidable impact to the San Bruno Avenue / US 101 SB Ramps interchange in the PM peak hour condition. This interchange is located within the City of San Bruno. Although a mitigation measure has been identified to reduce the impact to less than significant, the City of South San Francisco, as lead agency for the Project, cannot require or guarantee that the mitigation measure will actually be implemented because it is in the jurisdiction of another agency; therefore, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. (DEIR pg 10-18 – 10-20.) Impact Traf-3: Cumulative (2030) Intersection Impacts - San Bruno Avenue at US 101 Southbound Ramps (2030 AM). Under cumulative (Year 2030) conditions, the addition of Project traffic would result in a significant and unavoidable impact to the San Bruno Avenue / US 101 SB Ramps interchange intersection in the AM peak hour condition. This interchange is located within the City of San Bruno. Although a mitigation measure has been identified to reduce the impact to less than significant, the City of South San Francisco, as lead agency for the Project, cannot require or guarantee that the mitigation measure will actually be implemented because it is in the jurisdiction of another agency; therefore, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. (DEIR pg. 10-21.) Impact Traf-4: Site Circulation. The Project’s circulation plan would contribute additional large commercial vehicular turn movements to the San Bruno Avenue and San Mateo Avenue intersection which has insufficient turning radius. Taking into account the economic, jurisdictional and technological factors required to facilitate the truck turning movement, there is no feasible mitigation that would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Therefore, this impact is considered significant and unavoidable. (DEIR pg. 10-26.) FINDINGS ON SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS Impact Air-3: Cumulative Air Quality Impacts. The proposed Project would contribute to regional air quality emissions and exceed BAAQMD emissions thresholds for NOx. This would be considered a significant impact. (DEIR pg. 4-11.) Mitigation Measures Air-3a: Tractor-Trailer Idling. Pursuant to California Code of Regulations Title 13, Chapter 10, Section 2485 – Mobile Source Operational Controls, Article 1 – Motor Vehicles, Division 3, the Applicant shall prohibit all diesel trucks and other delivery vehicles from idling their engines for more than five minutes when making deliveries to or from the Project site. Signage shall be posted throughout the facility displaying the requirement that engines shall not idle for more than five minutes. (DEIR pg. 4-12) Air-3b: Transportation Demand Management Program. Implementation of a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program is required, as described in Mitigation Measure Traf-1 of the Transportation and Circulation chapter. This Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit A Findings Concerning Significant and Potentially Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures 2 Program would reduce the number of vehicle trips to and from the Project site. The following components shall be included in the TDM Program to further reduce Project impacts to air quality: • Provide bicycle amenities so that employees could bicycle to the Project. Such amenities could include safe onsite bicycle access and convenient storage (bike racks). Amenities for employees could include secure bicycle parking, lockers, and shower facilities. • For all buildings, provide outdoor electrical outlets and encourage the use of electrical landscape maintenance equipment. • Provide electrical outlets for recharging electrical vehicles in commercial and industrial parking lots/structures. • Provide 110 and 220 Volt outlets at all loading docks and prohibit trucks from using their auxiliary equipment powered by diesel engines for more than 5 minutes. • Provide new trees that would shade buildings and walkways in summer to reduce the cooling loads on buildings. (DEIR pg. 4-12 to 4-13) Finding For this significant cumulative air quality impact, feasible mitigation measures as set forth in the EIR and MMRP have been required in, or incorporated into, the project. The required mitigation measures would substantially reduce the Project’s air quality impacts. However, even with these reductions, the Project’s cumulative air quality impact on NOx would remain significant and unavoidable. There are no other mitigation measures that are feasible and would reduce the Project impact to less than significant. The evidence to support the above finding is set forth in the FEIR, City staff reports and other evidence in the record as a whole. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations as set forth in Exhibit C make infeasible additional mitigation measures or project alternatives to reduce this impact to less than significant. Impact Traf-2: Cumulative (2020) Intersection Impacts - San Bruno Avenue at US 101 Southbound Ramps (2020 PM). Under cumulative (Year 2020) conditions, the addition of Project traffic would result in a significant and unavoidable impact to the San Bruno Avenue / US 101 SB Ramps interchange in the PM peak hour condition. This interchange is located within Caltrans’ jursidiction. (DEIR pg.10-18.) Mitigation Measures Traf-2c: San Bruno Avenue at US 101 Southbound Ramps (2020 PM). In order to mitigate this impact, the Project applicant shall be responsible for restriping the existing southbound-through lane to accommodate a southbound through- right lane. With this improvement, the delay at the intersection would be reduced to 28.7 seconds, such that the “with project” delay would be reduced to below the “without project” condition. This improvement would effectively mitigate the Project's impact at this intersection to a less than significant level. Finding Mitigation Measure Traf-2c would reduce the impact to less than significant. The intersection is located within Caltrans’ jurisdiction, and is not within the jurisdiction or responsibility of the City of South San Francisco. While the mitigation measure could be implemented to ensure that this impact is reduced to a less than significant level, the City of South San Francisco, as lead agency for the Project, cannot require or guarantee that the measure will actually be implemented. Under CEQA, the City as lead agency may find that these mitigation measures can and should be adopted by such other agency (Public Resources Code sec. 21081(a)(2); CEQA Guidelines sec. 15091(a)(2)). For this traffic impact, the City finds that the mitigation measures are feasible and can and should be adopted by the agency with responsibility and jurisdiction of over the intersection and improvement. However, to the extent that the other agency does not approve and implement the above mitigation measure, the cumulative impact of the Project on the intersection would be significant and unavoidable. Therefore, the City makes the following finding for any resulting significant and unavoidable impact due to the failure of another agency to implement the traffic improvements described in the above mitigation measure: Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations as set forth in Exhibit C make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives to reduce this impact to less than significant. Therefore, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. (DEIR pg. 10-19.) Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit A Findings Concerning Significant and Potentially Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures 3 Impact Traf-3: Cumulative (2030) Intersection Impacts. Under cumulative (Year 2030) conditions, the addition of Project traffic would result in a significant and unavoidable impact to the San Bruno Avenue / US 101 SB Ramps interchange intersection in the AM peak hour condition. This interchange is located within the City of San Bruno.. (DEIR pg. 10-21) Mitigation Measures Traf-3b: San Bruno Avenue at US 101 Southbound Ramps (2030 AM). In order to mitigate this impact, the Project applicant shall be responsible for restriping the existing southbound-through lane to accommodate a southbound through- right lane. With this improvement, the delay at the intersection would be reduced to 28.7 seconds during the AM and 41.8 during the PM, thereby restoring the level of service to a level below the “without project” condition. This improvement would effectively mitigate the Project's impact at this intersection to a less than significant level. (DEIR pg. 10-23.) Finding Mitigation Measure Traf-3b would reduce the impact to less than significant. The intersection is located within Caltrans’ jurisdiction, and is not within the jurisdiction or responsibility of the City of South San Francisco. While the mitigation measure could be implemented to ensure that this impact is reduced to a less than significant level, the City of South San Francisco, as lead agency for the Project, cannot require or guarantee that the measure will actually be implemented. Under CEQA, the City as lead agency may find that these mitigation measures can and should be adopted by such other agency (Public Resources Code sec. 21081(a)(2); CEQA Guidelines sec. 15091(a)(2)). For this traffic impact, the City finds that the mitigation measures are feasible and can and should be adopted by the agency with responsibility and jurisdiction of over the intersection and improvement. However, to the extent that the other agency does not approve and implement the above mitigation measure, the cumulative impact of the project on the intersection would be significant and unavoidable. Therefore, the City makes the following finding for any resulting significant and unavoidable impact due to the failure of another agency to implement the traffic improvements described in the above mitigation measure: Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations as set forth in Exhibit C make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives to reduce this impact to less than significant. Impact Traf-4: Site Circulation. The Project’s circulation plan would contribute additional large commercial vehicular turn movements to the San Bruno Avenue and San Mateo Avenue intersection which has insufficient turning radius. Taking into account the economic, jurisdictional and technological factors required to facilitate the truck turning movement, there is no feasible mitigation that would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Therefore, this impact is considered significant and unavoidable. (DEIR pg. 10-26.) Mitigation Measure There are no feasible mitigation measures beyond those already incorporated into the Project site design.. (DEIR pg.10-27) Finding The project proponent has revised the site plan to reduce some of the impacts and improve circulation. The plans now reflect the provision of a wide main entry driveway on San Mateo Avenue providing better and safer site access for both trucks and passenger vehicles and reducing the impact. However, even with these reductions, the Project’s impact would remain significant and unavoidable. There are no other mitigation measures that are feasible and would reduce the Project impact to less than significant. The evidence to support the above finding is set forth in the FEIR, City staff reports and other evidence in the record as a whole. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations as set forth in Exhibit C make infeasible additional mitigation measures or project alternatives to reduce this impact to less than significant. FINDINGS ON SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS THAT ARE REDUCED TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AFTER MITIGATION Impact Air-1: Construction Dust and Exhaust. Construction activity involves a high potential for the emission of air pollutants. Construction activities would generate exhaust emissions from vehicles/equipment and fugitive particulate matter emissions that would affect local air quality. This would be a potentially significant impact. (DEIR pg.4-7) Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit A Findings Concerning Significant and Potentially Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures 4 Mitigation Measures Air-1: Dust Suppression and Exhaust Reduction Procedures. During construction, the project applicant shall require the construction contractor, through terms included in the construction contract, to implement the following basic, enhanced and additional measures to control fugitive dust emissions during construction. Measures to reduce construction exhaust will additionally reduce particulate matter from the exhaust of diesel-powered construction vehicles. Basic Measures • Water all active construction areas at least twice daily. • Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction site. • Water or cover stockpiles of debris, soil, sand or other materials that can be blown by the wind. • Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. • Sweep daily (preferably with water sweepers) all paved access road, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. • Sweep streets daily (preferably with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets. • Limit construction equipment idling time. • Properly tune construction equipment engines, and install particulate traps on diesel equipment. Enhanced Measures • Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for ten days or more). • Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply (nontoxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.). • Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph. • Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways. • Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. Additional Measures • Install wheel washers for all exiting trucks, or wash off the tires or tracks of all trucks and equipment leaving the site. • Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds (instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 mph. Measures to Reduce Construction Exhaust The measures listed below should be implemented to reduce diesel particulate matter and NOx emissions from on-site construction equipment: • At least 50 percent of the heavy-duty, off-road equipment used for construction shall be CARB certified off-road engines or equivalent, or use alternative fuels (such as biodiesel or water emulsion fuel) that result in lower emissions. • Use add-on control devices such as diesel oxidation catalysts or particulate filters. Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit A Findings Concerning Significant and Potentially Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures 5 • Opacity is an indicator of exhaust particulate emissions from off-road diesel powered equipment. The Project shall ensure that emissions from all construction diesel powered equipment used on the Project site do not exceed 40 percent opacity for more than three minutes in any one hour. Any equipment found to exceed 40 percent opacity (or Ringelmann 2.0) shall be prohibited from use on the site until repaired. • The contractor shall install temporary electrical service whenever possible to avoid the need for independently powered equipment (e.g., compressors). • Diesel equipment standing idle for more than two minutes shall be turned off. This would include trucks waiting to deliver or receive soil, aggregate or other bulk materials. Rotating drum concrete trucks could keep their engines running continuously as long as they were on site. • Properly tune and maintain equipment for low emissions. Issues of toxic air contaminants related to construction activities are further addressed with mitigation measures Haz-3b and Haz-4a. (DEIR pg. 4-8 to 4-10) Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the environmental effect to a less than significant level, as identified in the final EIR. Impact Air 4: Future Emissions Near Sensitive Receptors. Although not proposed at this time the Project could include stationary combustion equipment or laboratory facilities that emit air pollution. These sources could emit small amounts of toxic air contaminants with the potential to affect sensitive receptors. This impact, however, would be reduced to a less than significant level with standard BAAQMD permitting requirements. Mitigation Measure Mitigation Measure Air-4: Compliance with Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Standards. Each independent tenant or facility operating on the property shall obtain necessary permits and comply with monitoring and inspection requirements of the BAAQMD. Future operations shall comply with all local, state and federal requirements for emissions. Each facility shall also meet OSHA and California OSHA standards for R&D facilities. This includes plan review by the City of South San Francisco to examine if the proposed development plans meet the same standards as for other similar facilities. Engineering controls such as exhaust hoods, filtration systems, spill kits, fire extinguishers, and other controls shall be incorporated to meet OSHA and California OSHA requirements. These standards are primarily designed to maintain worker safety, but also function to reduce the risk of accidental upset and limit potential hazardous emissions. Finding. The above changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project, and avoid or substantially lessen the environmental effect to a less than significant level, as identified in the final EIR. Impact Geo-1: Geologic Hazards. According to CEQA guidelines, exposure of people or structures to major geological hazards is a significant adverse impact. The primary seismic hazards affecting the Project are strong seismic ground shaking and potentially liquefiable fill soils, each of which are considered a potentially significant impact. (DEIR pg. 5-12) Mitigation Measure Geo-1a: Completion of and compliance with recommendations of a Geotechnical Investigation and in conformance with Structural Design Plans. Completion of and compliance with recommendations of a Geotechnical Investigation and in conformance with Structural Design Plans. A design level geotechnical investigation shall be completed that includes subsurface investigation in areas to be occupied by structures (currently a paved parking lot). The design level geotechnical report shall include recommendations for site preparation and grading, foundation design, concrete slabs-on-grade, pavement section design, surface and subsurface drainage measures and site-specific seismic Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit A Findings Concerning Significant and Potentially Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures 6 response criteria (shown in Table Geo-3 below). The design level geotechnical investigation shall be reviewed and approved by the City’s Geotechnical Consultant and the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of building permits. Approved plans shall incorporate those design level geotechnical investigation recommendations approved and required by the City Engineer. The design level geotechnical investigation shall evaluate liquefaction potential of underlying fill and native soil. Should liquefiable or densifiable materials be encountered in the fill, mitigation measures to reduce their impact shall be formulated. These strategies may include excavation and replacement as engineered fill, reduced foundation loading, and ground improvement by methods such as stone columns or pressure grouting. Grading recommendations shall include specifications for engineered fill, including moisture conditioning, relative percent compaction, and suitability of materials as engineered or structural fill. Recommendations shall also establish maximum steepness of cut and fill slopes. Any cuts to be made adjacent to the property line shall be evaluated for potential adverse impact to neighboring properties. Drainage recommendations shall include provisions to prevent the ponding of water, prevent seepage under structures, including pavements, and generally direct flow away from structural foundations. Drainage recommendations shall incorporate proposed will to be necessary for any proposed retaining walls to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the walls. Recommendations for foundations shall include soil bearing capacity or skin friction values, and lateral pressures. The design plans shall identify specific mitigation measures to reduce or otherwise mitigate the liquefaction potential of surface soils. Mitigation measures may include excavation and replacement as engineered fill, reduced foundation loading, and ground improvement by methods such as stone columns or pressure grouting. Geotechnical recommendations shall also provide the depth of footings or pile foundations necessary for the planned structures. During construction, a Registered Geotechnical Engineer, Civil Engineer experienced in Geotechnical Engineering, or authorized representative shall observe all foundation excavations and pier drilling. A letter indicating that all foundation construction meets with the intent of the geotechnical recommendations shall be provided to the Building Official prior to concrete pouring. Recommendations for concrete slab construction shall identify measures to mitigate expansive soils and minimize shrink/swell potential, such as moisture conditioning or replacement with select non-expansive fill, as well as concrete thickness and reinforcement. The feasibility report recommended that where moisture through the floor slabs is a concern, a capillary moisture break consisting of at least four inches of clean, free-draining gravel or crushed rock, and a water vapor retarder should be installed beneath floors to reduce water vapor transmission thorough floor slabs. The design level report shall either corroborate this recommendation or identify an alternative to be implemented. Recommendations for pavement areas shall include compaction and moisture conditioning requirements, as well as pavement section thickness and construction design based upon a Resistance-value (R- value) determined for sub-grade soils in the areas to be paved. The design report shall include specific drainage criteria behind any retaining walls, and identify retaining wall foundation design and design parameters. In general, the design report shall either corroborate or provide alternative recommendations to the feasibility report based upon actual soil and rock conditions in the areas where structures are proposed. (DEIR pg. 5-12 to 5-15) Measure Geo-1b: Compliance with 2007 California Building Code (CBC). Project development shall meet requirements of the California Building Code Vol. 1 and 2, 2007 Edition, including the California Building Standards, 2007 Edition, published by the International Conference of Building Officials, and as modified by the amendments, additions and deletions as adopted by the City of South San Francisco, California. Incorporation of seismic construction standards would reduce the potential for catastrophic effects of ground shaking, such as complete structural failure, but will not completely eliminate the hazard of seismically induced ground shaking. (DEIR pg. 5-15) Measure Geo-1c: Obtain a building permit and complete final plan review. The Project applicant shall obtain a building permit through the City of South San Francisco Building Division. Final Plan Review of planned buildings and structures shall be completed by a licensed structural engineer for adherence to the seismic design criteria for planned commercial and industrial sites in City of South San Francisco. (DEIR pg. 5-15) Finding. The above changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project, and avoid or substantially lessen the environmental effect to a less than significant level, as identified in the final EIR. Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit A Findings Concerning Significant and Potentially Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures 7 Impact Geo-2: Soil Erosion. The Project would involve mass grading in a location that could facilitate stormwater-related soil transfer to the San Francisco Bay. This could potentially impact vicinity drainages such as Colma Creek and the San Francisco Bay. This would be a potentially significant impact during and following site construction activities. (DEIR pg. 5- 15) Mitigation Measure Geo-2a: Erosion Control Plan. The Project applicant shall complete an Erosion Control Plan to be submitted to the City in conjunction with the Grading Permit Application. The Erosion Control Plan shall be approved, in conjunction with the Grading Permit Application, prior to grading activities. The Erosion Control Plan shall include winterization, dust, erosion and pollution control measures conforming to the ABAG Manual of Standards for Erosion and Sediment Control Measures, with sediment basin design calculations. The Erosion Control Plan shall describe the "best management practices" (BMPs) to be used during and after construction to control pollution resulting from both stormwater and construction water runoff. The Erosion Control Plan shall include locations of vehicle and equipment staging, portable restrooms, mobilization areas, and planned access routes. Recommended soil stabilization techniques include placement of straw wattles, silt fences, berms, and gravel construction entrance areas or other control to prevent tracking sediment onto city streets and into storm drains. Public works staff or its representatives shall visit the site during grading and construction to ensure compliance with the grading ordinance and plans, and note any violations, which shall be corrected immediately. (DEIR pg. 5-15 to 5-16) Geo-2b: Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). In accordance with the Clean Water Act and the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), the Applicant shall file a SWPPP prior to the start of construction. The SWPPP shall include specific best management practices to reduce soil erosion. This is required to obtain coverage under the General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit, 99-08-DWQ). (DEIR pg. 5-16) Finding. The above changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project, and avoid or substantially lessen the environmental effect to a less than significant level, as identified in the final EIR. Impact Geo-3: Unstable Soils. The Project site is potentially underlain by fill soils of unknown quality, which may be expansive, prone to settlement, or susceptible to seismically induced liquefaction or dynamic densification. This is a potentially significant impact. (DEIR pg. 5-16) Mitigation Measure Geo-3: Compliance with Mitigation Measures Geo-2 for Seismically Induced Ground Failure and Geo-5 for Expansive Soils. Compliance with these mitigation measures will reduce the impact of unstable geologic unit to a level of less than significant. (DEIR pg. 5-17) Finding. The above changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project, and avoid or substantially lessen the environmental effect to a less than significant level, as identified in the final EIR. Impact Geo-4: Potentially Expansive and Compressible Soils. The Project site is potentially underlain by fill soils of unknown quality. These materials may contain expansive clay minerals subject to shrinking and swelling in response to changes in water content. These expansive soils could cause damage to foundations, concrete slabs, and pavements. The impact due to expansive soils is potentially significant. (DEIR pg. 5-17) Mitigation Measure Geo-4: Completion of and Construction in Accordance with a Design Level Geotechnical Investigation. The design level geotechnical report shall investigate the presence of expansive clay soils and, should they be identified, recommend appropriate mitigation measures. Potential measures for control of expansive clay soils include the following: Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit A Findings Concerning Significant and Potentially Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures 8 a) Placing and compacting potentially expansive soils at high moisture contents (at least 5 percent above optimum moisture content in accordance with ASTM D1557) and compaction within selected ranges of 88 to 92 percent. b) Using thickened concrete slabs with increased steel reinforcement. c) Replacing clayey soils underlying foundations and concrete slabs with select structural fill that is nonexpansive or has a low expansion index. d) Treating site soils with lime to reduce the expansion potential and increase the strength. e) Utilize pier-and-grade-beam foundation systems where appropriate; f.) Grade around structures to assure positive drainage away from structures. (DEIR pg. 5-17) Finding. The above changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project, and avoid or substantially lessen the environmental effect to a less than significant level, as identified in the final EIR. Impact Haz-1: Routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. The risk of accidental upset and environmental contamination from routine transport, storage, use and disposal of hazardous and potentially hazardous materials to the public and environment is a potentially significant impact. (DEIR pg. 6-8) Mitigation Measure Haz-1a: Plan Review for Adherence to Fire and Safety Codes. All building spaces must be designed to handle the intended warehouse, commercial, and retail use, with sprinklers, alarms, vents, and secondary containment structures, where applicable. Prior to occupancy, these systems must pass plan review through the City of South San Francisco Planning, Building and Fire Departments. (DEIR pg. 6-9) Haz-1b: Construction Inspection and Final Inspection Prior to Occupancy. During construction, the utilities, including sprinkler systems, shall pass pressure and flush tests to make sure they perform as designed. At the end of construction, occupancy shall not be allowed until a final inspection is made by the Fire Department for conformance of all building systems with the Fire Code and National Fire Protection Agency Requirements. The inspection shall include testing of sprinkler systems, alarm systems, ventilation and airflow systems, and secondary containment systems. The inspection shall include a review of the emergency evacuation plans. These plans shall be modified as deemed necessary. (DEIR pg. 6-9) Haz-1c: Hazardous Materials Business Plan Program. Businesses occupying the development and intending to store, use, or dispose of hazardous materials must complete a Hazardous Materials Business Plan for the safe storage and use of chemicals. The Business Plan must include the type and quantity of hazardous materials, a site map showing storage locations of hazardous materials and where they may be used and transported from, risks of using these materials, material safety data sheets for each material, a spill prevention plan, an emergency response plan, employee training consistent with OSHA guidelines, and emergency contact information. Businesses qualify for the program if they store a hazardous material equal to or greater than the minimum reportable quantities. These quantities are 55 gallons for liquids, 500 pounds for solids and 200 cubic feet (at standard temperature and pressure) for compressed gases. Exemptions include businesses selling only prepackaged consumer goods; medical professionals who store oxygen, nitrogen, and/or nitrous oxide in quantities not more than 1,000 cubic feet for each material, and who store or use no other hazardous materials; or facilities that store no more than 55 gallons of a specific type of lubricating oil, and for which the total quantity of lubricating oil does not exceed 275 gallons for all types of lubricating oil. Businesses occupying and/or operating at the proposed development must submit a business plan prior to the start of operations, and must review and update the entire Business Plan at least once every two years, or within 30 days of any significant change including, without limitation, changes to emergency contact information, major increases or decreases in hazardous materials storage and/or changes in location of hazardous materials. Plans shall be submitted to the San Mateo County Environmental Health Business Plan Program, which may be contacted at (650) 363- 4305 for more information. The San Mateo County Environmental Health Department (SMCEHD) shall inspect the business at least once a year to make sure that the Business Plan is complete and accurate. (DEIR pg. 6-9 to 6-10) Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit A Findings Concerning Significant and Potentially Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures 9 Haz-1d: Hazardous Waste Generator Program. All applicable businesses shall register and comply with the hazardous waste generator program. The State of California Department of Toxic Substances Control authorized the SMCEHD to inspect and regulate nonpermitted hazardous waste generators in San Mateo County based on the Hazardous Waste Control Law found in the California Health and Safety Code Division 20, Chapter 6.5 and regulations found in the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4.5. Regulations require businesses generating any amount of hazardous waste as defined by regulation to properly store, manage and dispose of such waste. Division staff also conducts surveillance and enforcement activities in conjunction with the County District Attorney's Office for businesses or individuals that significantly violate the above referenced law and regulations. (DEIR pg. 6-10) Haz-1e: Compliance with Applicable Laws and Regulations. All transportation of hazardous materials and hazardous waste to and from the site shall be in accordance with Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, US Department of Transportation (DOT), State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and local laws, ordinances and procedures including placards, signs and other identifying information. (DEIR pg. 6-10) Haz-1f: Proper Disposal of Household Hazardous Waste. For businesses not requiring registration in the San Mateo County Hazardous Material Business Plan Program, batteries, as well as fuel and lubricant oils, cleaning products, and other commonly used household hazardous materials shall be properly stored so as to reduce the chance of spillage. These businesses shall also participate in the San Mateo County Very Small Quantity Generator Program to dispose of household hazardous wastes through the San Mateo County Environmental Health Division. (DEIR pg. 6-10 to 6-11) Finding. The above changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project,and avoid or substantially lessen the environmental effect to a less than significant level, as identified in the final EIR. Impact Haz-2: Accidental Hazardous Materials Release. According to previous investigations, petroleum products and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are present in site soils. During demolition operations hazardous materials could be released from structures at the site or from the underlying soils. Following construction, operations at the proposed facilities are expected to represent a continuing threat to the environment through accidental release of hazardous materials since the site is proposed for industrial uses, where use, storage and disposal of hazardous materials may occur. This represents a potentially significant impact. (DEIR pg. 6-11) Mitigation Measure Haz-2a: Demolition Plan and Permitting. A Demolition Plan with permit applications shall be submitted to the City of South San Francisco Building Department for approval prior to demolition of the paved parking lot and existing structures. The Demolition Plan shall provide for safe demolition through measures including, but not limited to, dust control for potentially contaminated subsurface soils and asbestos containing materials related to existing structures. All contaminated building materials shall be tested for contaminant concentrations and shall be disposed of to appropriate licensed landfill facilities. Prior to building demolition, hazardous building materials such as peeling, chipping and friable lead based paint and asbestos containing building materials shall be removed in accordance with all applicable guidelines, laws, and ordinances. The Demolition Plan shall include a program of air monitoring for dust particulates and attached contaminants. Dust control and suspension of work during dry windy days shall be addressed in the plan. Prior to obtaining a demolition permit from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), an asbestos demolition survey shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements of BAAQMD Regulation 11, Rule 2. The Demolition Plan shall also address both on- site Worker Protection and off-site resident protection from both chemical and physical hazards. All removed soil shall be tested for contaminant concentrations and shall be disposed of to appropriate licensed landfill facilities. The Demolition Plan shall include a program of air monitoring for dust particulates and attached contaminants. Dust control and suspension of work during dry windy days shall be addressed in the plan. (DEIR pg. 6-11) Haz-2b: California Accidental Release Prevention Program (CalARP). Future businesses at the development shall check the state and federal lists of regulated substances available from the San Mateo County Environmental Health Department (SMCEHD). Chemicals on the list are chemicals that pose a major threat to public health and safety or the environment because they are highly toxic, flammable, or explosive. Businesses shall determine which list to use in consultation with the SMCEHD. Should businesses qualify for the program, they shall complete a CalARP registration form and submit it to Environmental Health. Following registration, they shall submit a Risk Management Plan (RMP). RMPs are designed to Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit A Findings Concerning Significant and Potentially Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures 10 handle accidental releases and ensure that businesses have the proper information to provide to emergency response teams if an accidental release occurs. All businesses that store or handle more than a threshold quantity (TQ) of a regulated substance must develop a RMP and follow it. Risk Management Plans describe impacts to public health and the environment if a regulated substance is released near schools, residential areas, hospitals and childcare facilities. RMPs must include procedures for: keeping employees and customers safe, handling regulated substances, training staff, maintaining equipment, checking that substances are stored safely, and responding to an accidental release. (DEIR pg. 6-11 to 6-12) Haz-2c: Notify San Mateo County Health Services Agency of Proposed Re-Development. As part of the case closure agreement for the removal of the underground storage tank leaking gasoline, dated October 8, 1998, SMCHSA shall be informed of any development or proposed change in land use. New buildings will be constructed over the area in question, currently a paved parking lot, and approval of SMCHSA is a prerequisite for construction. (DEIR pg. 6-12) Finding. The above changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project, and avoid or substantially lessen the environmental effect to a less than significant level, as identified in the final EIR. Impact Haz-3: Exposure to contaminated soil and groundwater. During demolition and construction, workers could be exposed to contaminated soil and groundwater. Disturbance of the subsurface also increases the potential for contamination to spread through surface water runoff, creation of seepage pathways, and through wind blown dust. These impacts are potentially significant. (DEIR pg. 6-12 to 6-13.) Mitigation Measure Haz-3a: Notify San Mateo County Health Services Agency of planned development. The applicant shall notify the San Mateo County Health Services Agency that demolition/construction work at the project site has the potential to disturb soil impacted by petroleum products. Prior to demolition or construction permit issuance by the City of South San Francisco, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall provide written evidence of San Mateo County Health Services Agency notification and approval. Approval by SMCHSA is a prerequisite for construction. (DEIR pg. 6-13.) Haz-3b: Development and Implementation of Site Management Plans. The Site Management Plans shall build upon any existing draft Site Management Plan and shall address the exposure risk to people and the environment resulting from future demolition, construction, occupancy, and maintenance activities on the property. The plans shall be in accordance with recommendations of the Environmental Consultant, and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Toxic Substances Control, the San Mateo County Environmental Health Department Groundwater Protection Program and the City of South San Francisco Public Works Department, Planning Division and Fire Department. In accordance with DTSC recommendations there should be two separate plans: (1) ongoing Operations and Maintenance Activities, and (2) a specific plan addressing the future proposed site development basedon actual proposed grading, excavation and construction. The plans are required to be more specific than the draft plan. Specific mitigation measures designed to protect human health and the environment shall be provided in the plan. At a minimum, the plan shall include the following: 1) Requirements for site specific Health and Safety Plans (HASP) shall be prepared in accordance with OSHA regulations by all contractors at the Project site. This includes a HASP for all demolition, grading and excavation on the site, as well as for future subsurface maintenance work. The HASP shall include appropriate training, any required personal protective equipment, and monitoring of contaminants to determine exposure. The HASP will be reviewed and approved by a Certified Industrial Hygienist. The plan shall also designate provisions to limit worker entry and exposure and shall show locations and type of protective fencing to prevent public exposure to any hazards during demolition, site grading, and construction activities. 2) Standards for treatment of impacted soil excavated from beneath the site shall be established. Depending upon the extent and depth of foundation and utility excavations, a significant volume of contaminated soils may be generated during construction; and to a lesser extent during future maintenance work. These soils must be characterized for reuse as fill, reburial, or disposal off-site. Only soil with contaminant levels approved by the DTSC shall be allowed for reuse as fill. All other soil must be disposed of off-site. To avoid the spread of contamination, on-site soils excavated from below the pavement in the vicinity of Building Six shall be segregated from any imported clean fill. Soils shall be placed on a plastic tarp, covered and bermed to reduce the risk from windblown dust or surface water runoff spreading contamination. Then soil Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit A Findings Concerning Significant and Potentially Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures 11 must be tested to determine the levels of remaining contamination and suitability for re-use. Contaminated soils unable to be placed under buildings or pavement, or re-buried under at least one-foot of clean soil must be off-hauled and disposed of by a licensed hazardous materials contractor under the proper manifesting documents. A report shall document the volume, concentration and nature of contaminants in the off-hauled material. 3) Requirements for site-specific construction techniques that would minimize exposure to any subsurface contamination shall be developed. This shall include treatment and disposal measures for any contaminated groundwater removed from excavations, trenches, and dewatering systems in accordance with local and Regional Water Quality Control Board guidelines. Groundwater encountered in trenches and other excavations shall not be discharged into the neighboring storm drain, but into a closed containment facility, unless proven to have concentrations of contaminants below established regulatory guidelines. Contaminated groundwater will be required to be stored in Baker tanks until tested. If testing determines that the water can be discharged into the sanitary sewer system, then the applicant must acquire a ground water discharge permit from the City of SouthSan Francisco Sanitary Sewer District and meet local discharge limits before being allowed to discharge into the sanitary sewer. Water must be analyzed for the chemicals of concern at the site, which include petroleum hydrocarbons and VOCs. 4) General sampling and testing plan for excavated soils shall determine suitability for reuse or acceptability for disposal at a state licensed landfill facility. Testing shall include the California Title 22 Hazardous Metals (CAM 17 metals), TPH as gasoline, TPH as diesel, and TPH as motor oil. Testing results shall be compared to DTSC California Human Health Screening Levels and RWQCB Environmental Screening Levels to determine suitability to remain on-site as engineered fill or landscape fill. Any soils determined to exceed DTSC criteria for site cap material shall be deemed as unsuitable for re-use as fill. 5) Future subsurface work plan. The plan shall document procedures for future subsurface landscaping work, utility maintenance, etc., with proper DTSC notification, where applicable. The plan shall include a general health and safety plan for each expected type of work, with appropriate personal protective equipment, where applicable. Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the environmental effect to a less than significant level, as identified in the final EIR. (DEIR pg. 6- 13to 6-15) Impact Hydro-1: Erosion and Sedimentation On- or Off-site. Construction operations associated with the Project would present a threat of soil erosion from soil disturbance by subjecting unprotected bare soil areas to the erosion forces of runoff. This is a potentially significant impact. (DEIR pg. 7-7) Mitigation Measure Hydro-1a: Preparation and Implementation of Project SWPPP. Preparation and Implementation of Project SWPPP. Pursuant to NPDES requirements, the applicant shall develop a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to protect water quality during and after construction. The Project SWPPP shall include a description of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be applied to minimize the discharge of pollutants from the site during construction. These construction-period BMPs shall include, but are not limited to the following: 1) No grading work exceeding 200 cubic yards shall be performed between November 1 and May 1 (the wet season) unless authorized in writing by the City Engineer. 2) Erosion control/soil stabilization techniques such as straw mulching, erosion control blankets, erosion control matting, and hydro-seeding, shall be utilized in accordance with the regulations outlined in the Association of Bay Area Governments “Erosion & Sediment Control Measures” manual. Silt fences shall be installed down slope of all graded slopes. Hay bales shall be installed in the flow path of graded areas receiving concentrated flows and around storm drain inlets. 3) BMPs shall be used for preventing the discharge or other construction-related NPDES pollutants beside sediment (i.e. paint, concrete, trash etc) to downstream waters. Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit A Findings Concerning Significant and Potentially Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures 12 4) After construction is completed, all drainage facilities shall be inspected for accumulated sediment and these drainage structures shall be cleared of debris and sediment. 5) Trash management measures shall be incorporated to prevent trash from entering storm drainage facilities and downstream water courses. (DEIR pg. 7-7 to 7-8) Hydro-1b: NPDES General Construction Permit Requirements. The Project applicant is required to submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to the State Water Resource Control Board’s (SWRCB) Division of Water Quality to obtain coverage under a NPDES General Construction Permit. The General Construction Permit includes general information on the types of construction activities that will occur on the site as well as specific requirements that will apply to clearing, grading, and disturbances to the ground such as excavation. It is the responsibility of the property owner to obtain coverage under the permit prior to site construction. (DEIR pg. 7-8 to 7-9) Finding. The above changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project, and avoid or substantially lessen the environmental effect to a less than significant level, as identified in the final EIR. Impact Hydro-2: Non-Point Source Pollutants. The project will involve an intensification of land-use by increasing floor area and number of occupants, and will add potential new sources of non-point source pollutants to the area. This may increase nonpoint source pollution to receiving waters. This is a potentially significant impact. (DEIR pg. 7-9) Mitigation Measure Hydro-2a: Compliance with NPDES General Industrial Permit Requirements. The NPDES General Industrial Permit Requirements apply to the discharge of storm water associated with industrial sites. The permit requires the implementation of management measures that will achieve the performance standard of best available technology (BAT) economically achievable, and best conventional pollutant control technology (BCT). Under the statute, operators of new facilities must implement industrial BMPs in the Project SWPPP, and perform monitoring of storm water discharges and unauthorized non- storm water discharges. An annual report must be submitted to the RWQCB each July 1. Operators of new facilities must file an NOI at least 14 days prior to the beginning of operations. (DEIR pg. 7-10) Hydro-2b: Long-Term Requirements under the SWPPP. The Project SWPPP to accompany the NOI filing will outline erosion control and storm water quality management measures to be implemented both during and following construction. The SWPPP will also provide the schedule for monitoring performance. Long-term mitigation measures to be included in the Project SWPPP shall include, but are not limited to, the following: • Description of potential sources of erosion and sediment at the Project site. Industrial activities and significant materials and chemicals that could be used at the proposed Project site should be described. This will include a thorough assessment of existing and potential pollutant sources. • Identification of BMPs to be implemented at the Project site based on identified industrial activities and potential pollutant sources. Emphasis shall be placed on source control BMPs, with treatment controls used as needed. • Development of a monitoring and implementation plan. Maintenance requirements and frequency shall be carefully described including vector control, clearing of clogged or obstructed inlet or outlet structures, vegetation/landscape maintenance, replacement of media filters, regular sweeping of parking lots and other paced areas, etc. Wastes removed from BMPs may be hazardous, therefore, maintenance costs should be budgeted to include disposal at a proper site. • The monitoring and maintenance program shall be conducted at the frequency agreed upon by the RWQCB and/or City of South San Francisco. Monitoring and maintenance shall be recorded and submitted annually to the SWRCB. The SWPPP shall be adjusted, as necessary, to address any inadequacies of the BMPs. • The applicant shall prepare informational literature and guidance on industrial and commercial BMPs to minimize pollutant contributions from the proposed development. This information shall be distributed to all employees at the Project site. At a minimum, the information shall cover: a) proper disposal of commercial cleaning chemicals; b) proper use of landscaping Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit A Findings Concerning Significant and Potentially Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures 13 chemicals; c) clean-up and appropriate disposal of hazardous materials and chemicals; and d) prohibition of any washing and dumping of materials and chemicals into storm drains. (DEIR pg. 7-10 to 7-11) Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the environmental effect to a less than significant level, as identified in the final EIR. Impact Noise-1: Construction Related Noise. Project construction could result in temporary short-term noise increases due to the operation of heavy equipment. This would be a potentially significant impact associated with Project development. (DEIR pg. 9-6) Mitigation Measure Noise-1: Noise Abatement. The Project applicant shall require by contract specification that construction best management practices be implemented by contractors to reduce construction noise levels to the noise limit specified in the City Noise Ordinance (90- dBA at 25 feet). Best management practices include: • Ensuring that construction equipment is properly muffled according to industry standards. • Implementing noise attenuation measures which may include but are not limited to noise barriers or noise blankets. • Requiring heavily loaded trucks used during construction to be routed away from noise and vibration sensitive uses such as Scott Street (South San Francisco) and Walnut Street (San Bruno). (DEIR pg. 9-6 to 9-7) Finding. The above changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project , and avoid or substantially lessen the environmental effect to a less than significant level, as identified in the final EIR. Impact Traf-1: Project Trip Generation Exceeds 100 Trips During Peak Hours. The Project would generate more than 100 net new trips during the AM and PM peak hours. The San Mateo City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG) Agency Guidelines for the implementation of the 2003 Draft Congestion Management Program (“C/CAG Guidelines”) specifies that local jurisdictions must ensure that the developer and/or tenants will mitigate all new peak hour trips (including the first 100 trips) projected to be generated by the development. This would be a potentially significant impact. (DEIR pg. 10-13) Mitigation Measure Transportation Demand Management Program. The Project sponsors shall implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program consistent with the City of South San Francisco Zoning Ordinance Chapter 20.120 Transportation Demand Management, and acceptable to C/CAG. These programs, once implemented, must be ongoing for the occupied life of the development. (DEIR pg. 10-16) Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the environmental effect to a less than significant level, as identified in the final EIR. Impact Traf-2: Cumulative (2020) Intersection Impacts. Under cumulative (Year 2020) conditions, the addition of Project traffic would result in significant impacts to two study intersections during the PM peak hour: a) East Grand Avenue / Airport Boulevard; and b) San Mateo Avenue / Airport Boulevard. This would be a potentially significant impact. (DEIR pg. 10-18) Mitigation Measure Traf-2a: East Grand Avenue / Airport Boulevard (2020 PM). In order to mitigate this impact, the Project shall be responsible for re-striping one northbound through lane to a through-right lane, and re-striping one westbound left lane to a left-through lane. (DEIR pg. 10-19) Traf-2b: San Mateo Avenue / Airport Boulevard (2020 PM). In order to mitigate this impact, the Project shall be responsible for re-striping one of the eastbound left through lanes to a through-right lane. (DEIR pg. 10-19 to 10-20) Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit A Findings Concerning Significant and Potentially Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures 14 Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the environmental effect to a less than significant level, as identified in the final EIR. Impact Traf-3: Cumulative (2030) Intersection Impacts. Under cumulative (Year 2030) conditions, the addition of Project traffic would result in significant impacts to two study intersection: a) East Grand Avenue /Airport Boulevard (2030 AM and PM); and b) San Mateo Avenue / Airport Boulevard. (DEIR pg. 10-21) Mitigation Measure Traf-3a: East Grand Avenue at Airport Boulevard (2030 AM and PM). In order to mitigate this impact, the Project applicant shall be responsible for re-striping and modifications to both intersection geometry and traffic signals, to change the westbound approach from a shared left-through lane and a right-only lane to a left-only lane and a shared through-right lane would need to occur. (DEIR pg. 10-23) Traf-3c: San Mateo Avenue at Airport Boulevard (2030 PM). In order to mitigate this impact, the Project applicant shall be responsible for re-striping one of the eastbound left-through lanes to a through-right lane. (DEIR pg. 10-23 to 10-24) Finding. The above changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project, and avoid or substantially lessen the environmental effect to a less than significant level, as identified in the final EIR. Impact Util-1: Wastewater Generation and Infrastructure Capacity. The Project would contribute wastewater which the WQCP has adequate capacity to treat, and line and facilities conveying Project wastewater are adequate size to accommodate increased flows. However, the Project would utilize an existing 24-inch sewer line currently impeded. Therefore, the Project would have a potentially significant impact relative to increased wastewater flows. (DEIR pg. 11-6 to 11-7) Mitigation Measure Util-1: Sewer Line Repair and/or Replacement. In the event that the City of San Bruno Public Works Director, in consultation with the City of South San Francisco Public Works Director, reasonably determines the Project’s wastewater may degrade or further degrade the condition of the existing sanitary sewer line, the Project applicant, in consultation with the City of San Bruno and the City of South San Francisco, shall participate in any necessary repairs and/or replacement of the exiting 24-inch sanitary sewer line to accommodate the Project’s wastewater. The City of San Bruno Public Works Director shall determine the extent to which such repairs or replacement is required. (DEIR pg. 11-8) Finding. The above changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project, and avoid or substantially lessen the environmental effect to a less than significant level, as identified in the final EIR. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS WITH NO MITIGATION REQUIRED Conflict with Air Quality Plan. The Projects is required to implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program to reduce project trips. This is identified as part of the Project Description on Page 3-2 and discussed within Chapter 10 (Transportation and Circulation). The TDM program, along with General Plan policies and Mitigation Measures identified in Chapter 10 (Transportation and Circulation), would reasonably implement TCMs consistent with those contained in the latest approved Clean Air Plan. There would, therefore, be no impact related to a conflict with the applicable air quality plan. Carbon Monoxide. Mobile emissions generated by Project traffic would increase carbon monoxide concentrations at intersections in the Project vicinity. However, these increases would be below significance thresholds of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District so would be considered a less than significant impact. Future Emissions Near Sensitive Receptors. Although not proposed at this time, the Project could include stationary combustion equipment or laboratory facilities that emit air pollution. These sources could emit small amounts of toxic air contaminants with the potential to affect sensitive receptors. This impact, however, would be reduced to a less-than significant level with standard BAAQMD permitting requirements. Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit A Findings Concerning Significant and Potentially Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures 15 Operational-Related Objectionable Odors (Impact Air-6). While it is not known at this time what specific businesses will occupy the completed Project, these businesses will be required to conform to applicable air quality regulations in order to ensure that any odors resulting from operations will remain at a less than significant level. (DEIR pg. 4-14). No mitigation required. However, the following condition of approval is recommended to further reduce this less than significant impact: Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for a food preparation use, the owner shall provide an Odor Control Program which includes measures to eliminate odors associated with the food use. Such measures may include, but are not limited to, frequent trash pickup, indoor trash enclosure and state of the art odor and filtration controls. The program shall be subject to the review and approval of the City’s Chief Planner in consultation with the Building Official. (Air-3a: Odor Control, DEIR pg.4-15) Construction-Related Diesel Odors. During construction, the various diesel-powered vehicles and equipment in use on the site would create odors. These odors would be temporary and not likely to be noticeable much beyond the Project site’s boundaries. As the potential for diesel odor impacts would not affect a substantial amount of people, this impact is less than significant and is further reduced by Measures to Reduce Construction Exhaust in Mitigation Measure Air-1. Septic Systems. No impact would occur, because a sewer system is present in the area and septic systems are not required at the site. Hazardous Materials near Schools. Belle Air Elementary School, located at 450 3rd Avenue in San Bruno is the nearest school or childcare facility to the project. This school is located approximately 0.8 miles southeast of the site, therefore hazardous materials within ¼ mile of a school is a less than significant impact. Airport Land Use Plan. No buildings in the Project would exceed 150 feet in height; therefore, the structures would be in compliance with the Airport Land Use Plan. The impact of the Project on the Airport Land Use Plan is less than significant with no mitigation warranted. The Project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Private aircraft are sometimes granted air space in the South San Francisco area, but buildings and structures are expected to conform to design guidelines for visibility and meet aviation requirements. Therefore, the Project would have no impact relating to a private airstrip. Adopted Emergency Response Plan. No changes to the major access and evacuation routes along San Mateo Avenue and Shaw Road are planned since the Project calls for redevelopment rather than reconstruction or new development of an entire area. Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact relating to an adopted emergency response plan. Wildland Fires. The Project area is urbanized and is not in an area adjacent to wildland subject to wildfires. Therefore the Project would have no impact from wildland fires. Changes in Storm Water Runoff. Development of the proposed Project would result in an approximate 10 percent decrease in impervious surfaces at the Project site. A decrease in impervious surface area, with a corresponding decrease in peak discharge and related polluted runoff from the Project site. However, storm flows will be re-directed so that there will be a net increase in flows to the San Mateo Avenue stormdrain. These increased flows to the San Mateo Avenue Stormdrain would be accommodated by on-site storage, resulting in a less than significant impact. Groundwater Depletion / Recharge. The proposed Project will not draw on, or otherwise reduce groundwater resources. The impact of groundwater depletion/recharge would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. Flooding. The Project does not include housing and is located outside of the 100-year flood hazard zone of Colma Creek as delineated by the current Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs). The Project site is not located in an area that would expose persons to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Consequently, this impact would be less than significant. Dividing Established Community. The Project would involve renovation of an existing building and construction of five new buildings within an existing developed area substantially utilized for industrial land use. All properties adjoining the Project site are developed and utilized for commercial and/or industrial purposes. The nearest residential neighborhood is Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit A Findings Concerning Significant and Potentially Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures 16 approximately 550 feet to the west (beyond existing railroad tracks) or 1,350 feet to the south (past Interstate 380) Therefore, the Project would have no impact related to the division of an established community. Conflict with Plans and Policies. The proposed Project would be consistent with and would not conflict with or impede achievement of applicable City of South San Francisco General Plan land use policies, thereby constituting no impact. Conflict with Conservation Plan. The Project would be consistent with the requirements of the Tree Protection Ordinance and would mitigate any adverse impacts to “protected” trees. Accordingly, the Project would have a less than significant impact regarding conflicts with conservation policies, ordinances or plans protecting biological resources. Permanent Noise Increases. Project-generated traffic noise and other operational noise sources such as HVAC equipment would not exceed noise standards and would not significantly increase ambient noise levels nor substantially impact noise- sensitive receptors. This would be a less-than-significant impact with no mitigation warranted. Groundborne Vibration. It is not expected that future land uses at the Project site would generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise. It is expected that the Project would have no impact related to excessive groundborne vibration or excessive groundborne noise. Airport Noise. Based on the City’s land use criteria, the proposed Project’s industrial land use would be compatible with future noise level projections in the Project vicinity of 70 dBA (CNEL) or less, thereby representing no impact. Wastewater Treatment. There is sufficient capacity in the treatment plant for the additional flows from the Project, the Project would have a less than significant impact relative to wastewater treatment capacity. Water Supply and Infrastructure. The Project’s increase in demand for potable water resulting from the Project can be fulfilled by the California Water Service Company and City of San Bruno. The new demand can be accommodated with existing facilities or planned upgrades. The Project would, therefore, have a less than significant impact on water supplies and infrastructure with no mitigation warranted. Storm Drainage Infrastructure. The Project will not result in an increase peak stormwater runoff from the site. Therefore, the Project will have a less than significant impact on storm drainage infrastructure. Landfill Capacity. The Project would be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the Project’s solid waste disposal needs, and would not require or result in construction of landfill facilities or expansion of existing facilities nor would it impede the ability of the City to meet the applicable federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. The Project would have a less-than-significant impact with no mitigation warranted. Energy. The Project is expected to be served with existing capacity and would not require or result in construction of new energy facilities or expansion of existing off-site facilities and would not violate applicable federal, state and local statutes and regulations relating to energy standards. The Project would have a less than significant impact relating to energy consumption with no mitigation warranted. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The Project would not conflict or obstruct implementation of any of the early actions for reducing greenhouse gas emissions under the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32). The projected volume of Project emissions would not trigger the need to report greenhouse gas emissions to the state. There are elements of the Project, recommended mitigation measures, and required City policies and requirements that contribute to the efficiency of the Project and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The TDM Plan for the Project as required by City Ordinance would serve to reduce emissions The enhanced measures to reduce construction exhaust (see Mitigated Measure Air-1) would also reduce greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the use of alternative fuels, electrical service for powered equipment and reduced diesel engine idling times frames. Exhibit B Findings Concerning Alternatives CEQA requires that an EIR identify alternatives to a project as proposed. CEQA Guidelines section 15126.6, subdivision (a), specifies that the EIR consider alternatives that would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project, but would avoid or substantially lessen many of the significant environmental effects of the project. “Feasible” means capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors. The Centrum EIR identified two alternatives: No Project and Reduced Intensity Alternative. The following findings are for both the No Project and Reduced Intensity Alternative as discussed in the EIR. These two alternatives would all have the same or only slightly lessened impacts on Traffic and Circulation and Air Quality than the proposed Project. Including the significant and unavoidable impacts on air quality and traffic identified in Exhibit A. Impacts in the other topic areas of Aesthetics, Geology and Soils, Hazardous Materials, Noise, and Utilities would be the same or minimally reduced by these alternatives. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the two alternatives identified and described in the EIR were considered and finds them to be infeasible for the specific economic, social, or other considerations set forth below pursuant to CEQA section 21081(c). No Project Alternative (EIR Chapter 3 Page 13-14 – 13-15) Under the No Project Alternative the Project site would remain as it is today—developed with a commercial airport parking lot and an existing 571,748 square feet building that potentially may house a variety of industrial uses, including use by the current tenants - United States Postal Service and the Drug Enforcement Agency. This Alternative would maintain the site’s Mixed Industrial General Plan use designation, but the office and industrial uses would not be as intense or economically beneficial to the City as it would be if the Project as proposed were implemented. The No Project Alternative is not consistent with the General Plan policy towards increasing property tax revenues and generating new sources of sales tax revenue. The No Project Alternative would not result in the environmental impacts described in this EIR, particularly those identified as significant and unavoidable. There would be approximately 276 daily vehicle trips, resulting in lower air pollutant vehicle emissions and traffic levels of service. The No Project site would also not introduce several of the hazardous materials that would be stored and used on the site as part of the Project, and would preserve the protected trees that will otherwise need to be replaced. As such, the No Project Alternative would be environmentally superior. The No Project Alternative would not change the existing condition of the site, and so would not meet any of the Project’s basic objectives to the same degree as the proposed Project. Finding: This alternative is found to be infeasible and rejected for the following reasons: 1. The Planning Commission specifically finds that the No Project Alternative is rejected as an alternative, because it would not achieve any of the Project’s objectives. 2. Though this alternative would avoid most of the significant impacts of the Project, this alternative would not generate additional tax revenue, would not generate additional sales tax revenue, would not generate additional property tax revenue, and would not create net new jobs. 3. The No Project Alternative is inconsistent with at least some of the policies of the General Plan. Reduced Intensity Alternative (EIR Page 13-5) The Reduced Intensity Alternative proposes reducing the square footage of the Centrum facility by eliminating 4 of the new single-story buildings (Buildings #1 through #5) and construction of Building # 6 - 9,100 square feet of commercial and retail area. Such a reduction would slightly decrease the floor area ratio (FAR) from 0.057 to 0.053. The applicant has indicated that it would not be as economically feasible to construct a smaller amount of square footage. The reduced development intensity would produce fewer vehicle trips and less air pollutant emissions. Fewer vehicle trips would result in slightly less traffic impacts near the Project site than the proposed Project. It would not however, completely Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit B Findings Concerning Alternatives 2 mitigate the significant impacts detailed in the Transportation and Circulation Chapter. Rather, like the proposed Project, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would also result in significant and unavoidable impacts relative to cumulative air quality and transportation and circulation. However, overall, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would be environmentally superior to the proposed Project due to slightly lessened impacts as compared to the proposed Project. The Reduced Intensity Alternative would still provide extensive landscaping on the site, and would also require a smaller amount of vehicle parking facilities. This Alternative would generate a lower level of economic benefit for the City. Finding: This alternative is found to be infeasible and rejected for the following reasons: 1. The Planning Commission specifically finds that the Reduced Intensity Alternative is rejected as an alternative because it would not achieve most of the basic objectives of the Project. 2. As this alternative would prohibit the Applicant from occupying the site, the alternative would not satisfy the desirability of relocating industrial uses in the area East of US Highway 101 freeing up more land area for conversion to research and development, to the west side South San Francisco and the surrounding area. 3. This alternative would not successfully mitigate all of the significant impacts, but would greatly reduce the economic benefits to the City. EXHIBIT C STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 1. General. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15093, the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco, as the decision-making body for the lead agency for the Centrum Logistics Project at 1070-1080 San Mateo Avenue in South San Francisco (“Project”), adopts a Statement of Overriding Considerations for those impacts identified in the Centrum Logistics Project EIR as significant and unavoidable. (Resolution No. 2685-2009, August 6, 2009, incorporated herein by reference.) The Planning Commission carefully considered all aspects of the proposed Project, including each environmental impact, in its decision to approve the Project. The proposed Project consists of the conversion of an existing 571,748 square foot building and the construction of five single-story buildings, containing a total of 52,300 square feet, into a multi-tenant industrial complex. Four of the new buildings located within the interior of the site are intended for general industrial use, while the new one-story 9,100 square foot building at the street frontage is designed to be utilized for commercial retail, limited and convenience restaurant and business services. On-site parking is proposed for up to 544 passenger vehicles and trucks in an open, at-grade landscaped parking lot. Loading docks and wells will also be constructed accommodating up to 30+ tractor trailers. The Project will also include a merger with the abutting lot (1080 San Mateo Avenue) containing a commercial airport parking lot, and will necessitate the demolition of the existing entry canopy and a small one-story office building. The construction of the new buildings and linking of the parking areas will necessitate grading a portion of the 25.02 acre merged site. Pursuant to CEQA, the City prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Centrum Project, which identified several environmental impacts that were determined to be less than significant or which could be mitigated to a less than significant level. The EIR also identified some significant impacts that could not be mitigated or avoided. As the decision- maker for the Centrum Project, and pursuant to a 2002 court decision, the Planning Commission hereby adopts specific overriding considerations for the Centrum Project.1 The Planning Commission believes that at least some of the significant and unavoidable impacts of the Project could be substantially reduced through the implementation of mitigation measures identified in the EIR. However, because these mitigation measures would require improvements to property that is not within the City’s jurisdiction, the City cannot require compliance with the mitigation measures or guarantee that they will be implemented. Accordingly, the Planning Commission recognizes that there are not feasible, enforceable mitigation measures that will avoid or substantially reduce all of the Project impacts, and that the Project may result in some “significant and unavoidable” impacts, as that term is defined in CEQA. The Planning Commission, however, specifically finds that to the extent potentially significant environmental impacts of the Project cannot be mitigated to acceptable levels, there are specific economic, social, environmental, technological, land use, and other considerations that support approval of the project. 2. Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts. The following summarizes the unavoidable significant environmental impacts identified in the Centrum Logistics Project EIR: Impact Air-3: Cumulative Air Quality Impacts. The proposed Project would contribute to regional air quality emissions and exceed BAAQMD emissions thresholds for NOx. The EIR identifies two mitigation measures, which will operate to reduce emissions, as well as the significance of this impact. However, because the site’s occupants are not known at this time, the effectiveness of the mitigation measures cannot be quantitatively assessed. Therefore, in accordance with BAAQMD standards, this cumulative air quality impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. Impact Traf-2: Cumulative 2020 Intersection Impacts. Under cumulative Year 2020 conditions, the addition of Project traffic would result in a significant and unavoidable impact to the San Bruno Avenue / US 101 Southbound ramps interchange in the PM peak hour condition. The EIR identifies mitigation that could reduce this impact to a less than significant level; however, as the interchange is located within Caltrans’ jurisdiction, the City of South San Francisco, as lead agency for the Project, cannot require or guarantee that the improvements identified in the mitigation measure will actually be implemented. Therefore, in accordance with CEQA standards, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. 1 “…public officials must still go on the record and explain specifically why they are approving the later project despite its significant unavoidable impacts.” (emphasis original.) Communities for a Better Environment v. California Resources Agency (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 98. Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit C Statement of Overriding Considerations 2 Impact Traf-3: Cumulative 2030 Intersection Impacts. Under cumulative Year 2030 conditions, the addition of Project traffic would result in a significant and unavoidable impact to the San Bruno Avenue / US 101 southbound ramps interchange intersection in the AM peak hour condition. The EIR identifies mitigation that could reduce this impact to a less than significant level; however, as the interchange is located within Caltrans’ jurisdiction, the City of South San Francisco, as lead agency for the Project, cannot require or guarantee that the improvements identified in the mitigation measure will actually be implemented. Therefore, in accordance with CEQA standards, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Impact Traf-4: Site Circulation. The Project’s circulation plan would contribute additional large commercial vehicular turn movements to the San Bruno Avenue / San Mateo Avenue intersection, which has insufficient turning radius. Taking into account the economic jurisdictional and technological factors required to facilitate the truck turning movement, there is no feasible mitigation that would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Therefore, this impact is considered significant and unavoidable. 3. Overriding Considerations. The Planning Commission now balances the unavoidable impacts that apply to the Centrum Project, against it benefits, and hereby determines that such unavoidable impacts are outweighed by the benefits of the Centrum Project as further set forth below. Land use considerations. In addition to its consistency with both the General Plan land use designation and zoning, the Project will further several General Plan principles, policies and goals, including providing opportunities for continued economic growth (Policy 2-G-2) and operation of older industrial facilities at certain locations (Policy 2-G-4). Economic considerations. The Project proposes conversion of an under-utilized industrial facility into a multi-tenant industrial complex. Given the increased use of the site, and the types of historical uses of the site versus those proposed by the applicant, approval of the Project would generate significant revenue for the City’s general fund. It would also generate increased sales revenue for the City from employee spending, and significant property tax revenue. The Project is also expected to create approximately 700 net new jobs, not including additional construction jobs. Particularly in light of current economic constraints, the Planning Commission finds that the benefits of the Project, including land use and economic considerations, outweigh the significant unavoidable impacts of the Project. Centrum Logistics Project Exhibit D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 18 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program INTRODUCTION This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) fulfills Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 which requires adoption of a mitigation monitoring program when mitigation measures are required to avoid or reduce a proposed projects significant environmental effects. The MMRP is only applicable if the City of South San Francisco decides to approve the proposed Project. The MMRP is organized to correspond to environmental issues and significant impacts discussed in the EIR. The table below is arranged in the following five columns: • Recommended mitigation measures, • Timing for implementation of the mitigation measures, • Party responsible for implementation, • Monitoring action, • Party or parties responsible for monitoring the implementation of the mitigation measures, and • A blank for entry of completion date as mitigation occurs. This page intentionally left blank. Centrum Logistics Project Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed Air-1: Dust Suppression and Exhaust Reduction Procedures. Dust Suppression and Exhaust Reduction Procedures. During construction, the project applicant shall require the construction contractor, through terms included in the construction contract, to implement the following basic, enhanced and additional measures to control fugitive dust emissions during construction. Measures to reduce construction exhaust will additionally reduce particulate matter from the exhaust of diesel-powered construction vehicles. Basic Measures • Water all active construction areas at least twice daily. • Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction site. • Water or cover stockpiles of debris, soil, sand or other materials that can be blown by the wind. • Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. • Sweep daily (preferably with water sweepers) all paved access road, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. • Sweep streets daily (preferably with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets. • Limit construction equipment idling time. • Properly tune construction equipment engines, and install particulate traps on diesel equipment. Enhanced Measures • Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for ten days or more). Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits and During Construction Applicant Verify that Requirements are Included in Grading Contracts; Confirm Receipt of BAAQMD Forms SSF Building Division & City Public Works Department Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 2 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed • Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.). • Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph. • Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways. • Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. Additional Measures • Install wheel washers for all exiting trucks, or wash off the tires or tracks of all trucks and equipment leaving the site. • Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds (instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 mph. Measures to Reduce Construction Exhaust The measures listed below should be implemented to reduce diesel particulate matter and NOx emissions from on-site construction equipment: • At least 50 percent of the heavy-duty, off-road equipment used for construction shall be CARB-certified off-road engines or equivalent, or use alternative fuels (such as biodiesel or water emulsion fuel) that result in lower emissions. • Use add-on control devices such as diesel oxidation catalysts or particulate filters. • Opacity is an indicator of exhaust particulate emissions from off-road diesel powered equipment. The Project shall ensure that emissions from all construction diesel powered equipment used on the Project site do not exceed 40 percent opacity for more than three minutes in Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 3 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed any one hour. Any equipment found to exceed 40 percent opacity (or Ringelmann 2.0) shall be prohibited from use on the site until repaired. • The contractor shall install temporary electrical service whenever possible to avoid the need for independently powered equipment (e.g., compressors). • Diesel equipment standing idle for more than two minutes shall be turned off. This would include trucks waiting to deliver or receive soil, aggregate or other bulk materials. Rotating drum concrete trucks could keep their engines running continuously as long as they were on site. Properly tune and maintain equipment for low emissions. Air-3a: Tractor-Trailer Idling. Pursuant to California Code of Regulations Title 13, Chapter 10, Section 2485 – Mobile Source Operational Controls, Article 1 – Motor Vehicles, Division 3, the Applicant shall prohibit all diesel trucks and other delivery vehicles from idling their engines for more than five minutes when making deliveries to or from the Project site. Signage shall be posted throughout the facility displaying the requirement that engines shall not idle for more than five minutes. On-going for Life of Project The Applicant Confirmation of no idling. SSF Building Division Air-3b: Transportation Demand Management Program. Implementation of a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program is required, as described in Mitigation Measure Traf-1 of the Transportation and Circulation chapter. This Program would reduce the number of vehicle trips to and from the Project site. The following components shall be included in the TDM Program to further reduce Prior to Issuance of Final Plans; Ongoing for Life of Project The Applicant Determine Consistency with City TDM Ordinance; Approval of SSF Planning Division Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 4 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed Project impacts to air quality: • Provide bicycle amenities so that employees could bicycle to the Project. Such amenities could include safe onsite bicycle access and convenient storage (bike racks). Amenities for employees could include secure bicycle parking, lockers, and shower facilities. • For all buildings, provide outdoor electrical outlets and encourage the use of electrical landscape maintenance equipment. • Provide electrical outlets for recharging electrical vehicles in commercial and industrial parking lots/structures. • Provide 110 and 220 Volt outlets at all loading docks and prohibit trucks from using their auxiliary equipment powered by diesel engines for more than 5 minutes. • Provide new trees that would shade buildings and walkways in summer to reduce the cooling loads on buildings. Final Plans Air-3a: Odor Control. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for a food preparation use the owner shall provide an Odor Control Program which includes measures to eliminate odors associated with the food use. Such measures may include, but are not limited to, frequent trash pickup, indoor trash enclosure and state of the art odor and filtration controls. The program shall be subject to the review and approval of the City’s Chief Planner in consultation with the Building Official. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits The Applicant Approval of Building Permit SSF Planning & Building Divisions Air-4: Compliance with Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Standards. Each independent tenant or facility operating on the property shall obtain necessary permits and comply with monitoring and inspection requirements of the BAAQMD. Future operations shall comply with all local, state and federal requirements for emissions. Each facility On-Going Life of the Project The Applicant and Future Tenants Approval of Building Permit SSF Building Division Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 5 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed shall also meet OSHA and California OSHA standards for R&D facilities. This includes plan review by the City of South San Francisco to examine if the proposed development plans meet the same standards as for other similar facilities. Engineering controls such as exhaust hoods, filtration systems, spill kits, fire extinguishers, and other controls shall be incorporated to meet OSHA and California OSHA requirements. These standards are primarily designed to maintain worker safety, but also function to reduce the risk of accidental upset and limit potential hazardous emissions. Geo-1a: Completion of and compliance with recommendations of a Geotechnical Investigation and in conformance with Structural Design Plans. A design level geotechnical investigation shall be completed that includes subsurface investigation in areas to be occupied by structures (currently a paved parking lot). The design level geotechnical report shall include recommendations for site preparation and grading, foundation design, concrete slabs-on-grade, pavement section design, surface and subsurface drainage measures and site-specific seismic response criteria (shown in Table Geo-3 below). The design level geotechnical investigation shall be reviewed and approved by the City’s Geotechnical Consultant and the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of building permits. Approved plans shall incorporate those design level geotechnical investigation recommendations approved and required by the City Engineer. The design level geotechnical investigation shall evaluate liquefaction potential of underlying fill and native soil. Should liquefiable or densifiable materials be encountered in the fill, mitigation measures to reduce their impact shall be formulated. These strategies may include excavation and replacement as engineered fill, reduced foundation loading, and ground improvement by methods such as stone columns or pressure grouting. Grading recommendations shall include specifications for engineered fill, Prior to Issuance of Building Permits The Applicant Approval of Building Permit SSF Building & Engineering Divisions Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 6 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed including moisture conditioning, relative percent compaction, and suitability of materials as engineered or structural fill. Recommendations shall also establish maximum steepness of cut and fill slopes. Any cuts to be made adjacent to the property line shall be evaluated for potential adverse impact to neighboring properties. Drainage recommendations shall include provisions to prevent the ponding of water, prevent seepage under structures, including pavements, and generally direct flow away from structural foundations. Drainage recommendations shall incorporate proposed landscaping elements. Permanent subsurface drains will to be necessary for any proposed retaining walls to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the walls. Recommendations for foundations shall include soil bearing capacity or skin friction values, and lateral pressures. The design plans shall identify specific mitigation measures to reduce or otherwise mitigate the liquefaction potential of surface soils. Mitigation measures may include excavation and replacement as engineered fill, reduced foundation loading, and ground improvement by methods such as stone columns or pressure grouting. Geotechnical recommendations shall also provide the depth of footings or pile foundations necessary for the planned structures. During construction, a Registered Geotechnical Engineer, Civil Engineer experienced in Geotechnical Engineering, or authorized representative shall observe all foundation excavations and pier drilling. A letter indicating that all foundation construction meets with the intent of the geotechnical recommendations shall be provided to the Building Official prior to concrete pouring. Recommendations for concrete slab construction shall identify measures to mitigate expansive soils and minimize shrink/swell potential, such as moisture conditioning or replacement with select non-expansive fill, as well as concrete thickness and reinforcement. The feasibility report recommended that where moisture through the floor slabs is a concern, a capillary moisture break consisting of at least four inches of clean, free- Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 7 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed draining gravel or crushed rock, and a water vapor retarder should be installed beneath floors to reduce water vapor transmission thorough floor slabs. The design level report shall either corroborate this recommendation or identify an alternative to be implemented. TABLE 5-3: SEISMIC DESIGN CRITERIA PER CBC Site Class D Soil Profile Name Stiff Soil Profile Occupancy Category II Seismic Design Category E Mapped Spectral Response for Short Periods- 0.2 Sec (Ss) 2.031 g Mapped Spectral Response for Long Periods- 1 Sec (S1) 1.091 g Site Coefficient- Fa, based on the mapped spectral response for short periods 1.0 Site Coefficient- Fv, based on the mapped spectral response for long periods 1.5 Adjusted Maximum Considered EQ Spectral Response for Short Periods (SMS) 2.031 Adjusted Maximum Considered EQ Spectral Response for Long Periods (SM1) 1.637 Design (5-percent damped) Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters at short periods (SDS) 1.354 Design (5-percent damped) Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters at long periods (SD1) 1.091 Recommendations for pavement areas shall include compaction and moisture conditioning requirements, as well as pavement section thickness and construction design based upon a Resistance-value (R-value) determined for sub-grade soils in the areas to be paved. Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 8 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed The design report shall include specific drainage criteria behind any retaining walls, and identify retaining wall foundation design and design parameters. In general, the design report shall either corroborate or provide alternative recommendations to the feasibility report based upon actual soil and rock conditions in the areas where structures are proposed. Measure Geo-1b: Compliance with 2007 California Building Code (CBC). Project development shall meet requirements of the California Building Code Vol. 1 and 2, 2007 Edition, including the California Building Standards, 2007 Edition, published by the International Conference of Building Officials, and as modified by the amendments, additions and deletions as adopted by the City of South San Francisco, California. Incorporation of seismic construction standards would reduce the potential for catastrophic effects of ground shaking, such as complete structural failure, but will not completely eliminate the hazard of seismically induced ground shaking. Measure Geo-1c: Obtain a building permit and complete final plan review. The Project applicant shall obtain a building permit through the City of South San Francisco Building Division. Final Plan Review of planned buildings and structures shall be completed by a licensed structural engineer for adherence to the seismic design criteria for planned commercial and industrial sites in City of South San Francisco. Geo-2a: Erosion Control Plan. The Project applicant shall complete an Erosion Control Plan to be submitted to the City in conjunction with the Grading Permit Application. The Erosion Control Plan shall be approved, in conjunction with the Grading Permit Application, prior to grading activities. The Erosion Control Plan shall include winterization, dust, Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits The Applicant Approval of Grading Permit SSF Building & Engineering Divisions Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 9 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed erosion and pollution control measures conforming to the ABAG Manual of Standards for Erosion and Sediment Control Measures, with sediment basin design calculations. The Erosion Control Plan shall describe the "best management practices" (BMPs) to be used during and after construction to control pollution resulting from both stormwater and construction water runoff. The Erosion Control Plan shall include locations of vehicle and equipment staging, portable restrooms, mobilization areas, and planned access routes. Recommended soil stabilization techniques include placement of straw wattles, silt fences, berms, and gravel construction entrance areas or other control to prevent tracking sediment onto city streets and into storm drains. Public works staff or its representatives shall visit the site during grading and construction to ensure compliance with the grading ordinance and plans, and note any violations, which shall be corrected immediately. Geo-2b: Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). In accordance with the Clean Water Act and the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), the Applicant shall file a SWPPP prior to the start of construction. The SWPPP shall include specific best management practices to reduce soil erosion. This is required to obtain coverage under the General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit, 99-08-DWQ). Geo-4: Completion of and Construction in Accordance with a Design Level Geotechnical Investigation. The design level geotechnical report shall investigate the presence of expansive clay soils and, should they be identified, recommend appropriate mitigation measures. Potential measures for control of expansive clay soils include the following: Prior to Issuance of Building Permits The Applicant Approval of Building Permit SSF Building & Engineering Divisions Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 10 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed a) Placing and compacting potentially expansive soils at high moisture contents (at least 5 percent above optimum moisture content in accordance with ASTM D1557) and compaction within selected ranges of 88 to 92 percent. b) Using thickened concrete slabs with increased steel reinforcement. c) Replacing clayey soils underlying foundations and concrete slabs with select structural fill that is non-expansive or has a low expansion index. d) Treating site soils with lime to reduce the expansion potential and increase the strength. e) Utilize pier-and-grade-beam foundation systems where appropriate; f.) Grade around structures to assure positive drainage away from structures. Haz-1a: Plan Review for Adherence to Fire and Safety Codes. All building spaces must be designed to handle the intended warehouse, commercial, and retail use, with sprinklers, alarms, vents, and secondary containment structures, where applicable. Prior to occupancy, these systems must pass plan review through the City of South San Francisco Planning, Building and Fire Departments. Haz-1b: Construction Inspection and Final Inspection Prior to Occupancy. During construction, the utilities, including sprinkler systems, shall pass pressure and flush tests to make sure they perform as Prior to Issuance of Building Permits The Applicant Approval of Building Permit SSF Fire Department Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 11 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed designed. At the end of construction, occupancy shall not be allowed until a final inspection is made by the Fire Department for conformance of all building systems with the Fire Code and National Fire Protection Agency Requirements. The inspection shall include testing of sprinkler systems, alarm systems, ventilation and airflow systems, and secondary containment systems. The inspection shall include a review of the emergency evacuation plans. These plans shall be modified as deemed necessary. Haz-1c: Hazardous Materials Business Plan Program. Businesses occupying the development and intending to store, use, or dispose of hazardous materials must complete a Hazardous Materials Business Plan for the safe storage and use of chemicals. The Business Plan must include the type and quantity of hazardous materials, a site map showing storage locations of hazardous materials and where they may be used and transported from, risks of using these materials, material safety data sheets for each material, a spill prevention plan, an emergency response plan, employee training consistent with OSHA guidelines, and emergency contact information. Businesses qualify for the program if they store a hazardous material equal to or greater than the minimum reportable quantities. These quantities are 55 gallons for liquids, 500 pounds for solids and 200 cubic feet (at standard temperature and pressure) for compressed gases. Exemptions include businesses selling only pre-packaged consumer goods; medical professionals who store oxygen, nitrogen, and/or nitrous oxide in quantities not more than 1,000 cubic feet for each material, and who store or use no other hazardous materials; or facilities that store no Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 12 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed more than 55 gallons of a specific type of lubricating oil, and for which the total quantity of lubricating oil does not exceed 275 gallons for all types of lubricating oil. Businesses occupying and/or operating at the proposed development must submit a business plan prior to the start of operations, and must review and update the entire Business Plan at least once every two years, or within 30 days of any significant change including, without limitation, changes to emergency contact information, major increases or decreases in hazardous materials storage and/or changes in location of hazardous materials. Plans shall be submitted to the San Mateo County Environmental Health Business Plan Program, which may be contacted at (650) 363-4305 for more information. The San Mateo County Environmental Health Department (SMCEHD) shall inspect the business at least once a year to make sure that the Business Plan is complete and accurate. Haz-1d: Hazardous Waste Generator Program. All applicable businesses shall register and comply with the hazardous waste generator program. The State of California Department of Toxic Substances Control authorized the SMCEHD to inspect and regulate non-permitted hazardous waste generators in San Mateo County based on the Hazardous Waste Control Law found in the California Health and Safety Code Division 20, Chapter 6.5 and regulations found in the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4.5. Regulations require businesses generating any amount of hazardous waste as defined by regulation to properly store, manage and dispose of such waste. Division staff also conducts surveillance and enforcement activities in conjunction with the County Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 13 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed District Attorney's Office for businesses or individuals that significantly violate the above referenced law and regulations. Haz-1e: Compliance with Applicable Laws and Regulations. All transportation of hazardous materials and hazardous waste to and from the site shall be in accordance with Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, US Department of Transportation (DOT), State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and local laws, ordinances and procedures including placards, signs and other identifying information. Haz-1f: Proper Disposal of Household Hazardous Waste. For businesses not requiring registration in the San Mateo County Hazardous Material Business Plan Program, batteries, as well as fuel and lubricant oils, cleaning products, and other commonly used household hazardous materials shall be properly stored so as to reduce the chance of spillage. These businesses shall also participate in the San Mateo County Very Small Quantity Generator Program to dispose of household hazardous wastes through the San Mateo County Environmental Health Division. Haz-2a: Demolition Plan and Permitting. A Demolition Plan with permit applications shall be submitted to the City of South San Francisco Building Department for approval prior to demolition of the paved parking lot and existing structures. The Demolition Plan shall provide for safe demolition through measures including, but not limited to, dust control for potentially contaminated subsurface soils and asbestos containing materials related to existing structures. All contaminated building materials shall be tested for contaminant concentrations and shall be disposed of to appropriate licensed landfill facilities. Prior to building demolition, hazardous building materials such as peeling, chipping and Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits and During Grading and Construction Activities The Applicant Approval of Grading Permit and During Construction and Grading Activities City Engineering Division Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 14 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed friable lead based paint and asbestos containing building materials shall be removed in accordance with all applicable guidelines, laws, and ordinances. The Demolition Plan shall include a program of air monitoring for dust particulates and attached contaminants. Dust control and suspension of work during dry windy days shall be addressed in the plan. Prior to obtaining a demolition permit from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), an asbestos demolition survey shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements of BAAQMD Regulation 11, Rule 2. The Demolition Plan shall also address both on-site Worker Protection and off-site resident protection from both chemical and physical hazards. All removed soil shall be tested for contaminant concentrations and shall be disposed of to appropriate licensed landfill facilities. The Demolition Plan shall include a program of air monitoring for dust particulates and attached contaminants. Dust control and suspension of work during dry windy days shall be addressed in the plan. Haz-2b: California Accidental Release Prevention Program (CalARP). Future businesses at the development shall check the state and federal lists of regulated substances available from the San Mateo County Environmental Health Department (SMCEHD). Chemicals on the list are chemicals that pose a major threat to public health and safety or the environment because they are highly toxic, flammable, or explosive. Businesses shall determine which list to use in consultation with the SMCEHD. Should businesses qualify for the program, they shall complete a CalARP registration form and submit it to Environmental Health. Following registration, they shall submit a Risk Management Plan (RMP). RMPs are designed to handle accidental releases and ensure that businesses have the proper information to provide to emergency response teams if an Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 15 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed accidental release occurs. All businesses that store or handle more than a threshold quantity (TQ) of a regulated substance must develop a RMP and follow it. Risk Management Plans describe impacts to public health and the environment if a regulated substance is released near schools, residential areas, hospitals and childcare facilities. RMPs must include procedures for: keeping employees and customers safe, handling regulated substances, training staff, maintaining equipment, checking that substances are stored safely, and responding to an accidental release. Haz-2c: Notify San Mateo County Health Services Agency of Proposed Re-Development. As part of the case closure agreement for the removal of the underground storage tank leaking gasoline, dated October 8, 1998, SMCHSA shall be informed of any development or proposed change in land use. New buildings will be constructed over the area in question, currently a paved parking lot, and approval of SMCHSA is a prerequisite for construction. Haz-3: Development and Implementation of Site Management Plans. The Site Management Plans shall build upon any existing draft Site Management Plan and shall address the exposure risk to people and the environment resulting from future demolition, construction, occupancy, and maintenance activities on the property. The plans shall be in accordance with recommendations of the Environmental Consultant, and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Toxic Substances Control, the San Mateo County Environmental Health Department Groundwater Protection Program and the City of South San Francisco Public Works Department, Planning Division and Fire Department. In Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 16 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed accordance with DTSC recommendations there should be two separate plans: (1) ongoing Operations and Maintenance Activities, and (2) a specific plan addressing the future proposed site development based on actual proposed grading, excavation and construction. The plans are required to be more specific than the draft plan. Specific mitigation measures designed to protect human health and the environment shall be provided in the plan. At a minimum, the plan shall include the following: 1) Requirements for site specific Health and Safety Plans (HASP) shall be prepared in accordance with OSHA regulations by all contractors at the Project site. This includes a HASP for all demolition, grading and excavation on the site, as well as for future subsurface maintenance work. The HASP shall include appropriate training, any required personal protective equipment, and monitoring of contaminants to determine exposure. The HASP will be reviewed and approved by a Certified Industrial Hygienist. The plan shall also designate provisions to limit worker entry and exposure and shall show locations and type of protective fencing to prevent public exposure to any hazards during demolition, site grading, and construction activities. 2) Standards for treatment of impacted soil excavated from beneath the site shall be established. Depending upon the extent and depth of foundation and utility excavations, a significant volume of contaminated soils may be generated during construction; and to a lesser extent during future maintenance work. These soils must be characterized for reuse as fill, reburial, or disposal off-site. Only soil with contaminant levels Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 17 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed approved by the DTSC shall be allowed for reuse as fill. All other soil must be disposed of off-site. To avoid the spread of contamination, on-site soils excavated from below the pavement in the vicinity of Building Six shall be segregated from any imported clean fill. Soils shall be placed on a plastic tarp, covered and bermed to reduce the risk from windblown dust or surface water runoff spreading contamination. Then soil must be tested to determine the levels of remaining contamination and suitability for re-use. Contaminated soils unable to be placed under buildings or pavement, or re-buried under at least one-foot of clean soil must be off-hauled and disposed of by a licensed hazardous materials contractor under the proper manifesting documents. A report shall document the volume, concentration and nature of contaminants in the off-hauled material. 3) Requirements for site-specific construction techniques that would minimize exposure to any subsurface contamination shall be developed. This shall include treatment and disposal measures for any contaminated groundwater removed from excavations, trenches, and dewatering systems in accordance with local and Regional Water Quality Control Board guidelines. Groundwater encountered in trenches and other excavations shall not be discharged into the neighboring storm drain, but into a closed containment facility, unless proven to have concentrations of contaminants below established regulatory guidelines. Contaminated groundwater will be required to be stored in Baker tanks until tested. If testing determines that the water can be discharged into the sanitary sewer system, then the applicant must acquire a ground water discharge permit from the City of South San Francisco Sanitary Sewer District and meet local discharge Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 18 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed limits before being allowed to discharge into the sanitary sewer. Water must be analyzed for the chemicals of concern at the site, which include petroleum hydrocarbons and VOCs. 4) General sampling and testing plan for excavated soils shall determine suitability for reuse or acceptability for disposal at a state licensed landfill facility. Testing shall include the California Title 22 Hazardous Metals (CAM 17 metals), TPH as gasoline, TPH as diesel, and TPH as motor oil. Testing results shall be compared to DTSC California Human Health Screening Levels and RWQCB Environmental Screening Levels to determine suitability to remain on-site as engineered fill or landscape fill. Any soils determined to exceed DTSC criteria for site cap material shall be deemed as unsuitable for re-use as fill. 5) Future subsurface work plan. The plan shall document procedures for future subsurface landscaping work, utility maintenance, etc., with proper DTSC notification, where applicable. The plan shall include a general health and safety plan for each expected type of work, with appropriate personal protective equipment, where applicable. Hydro-1a: Preparation and Implementation of Project SWPPP. Preparation and Implementation of Project SWPPP. Pursuant to NPDES requirements, the applicant shall develop a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to protect water quality during and after construction. The Project SWPPP shall include a description of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be applied to minimize the discharge of pollutants from the site during construction. These construction-period BMPs shall include, but are not limited to the following: During Construction The Applicant Final Inspection SSF Engineering Division & Public Works Department Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 19 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed 1) No grading work exceeding 200 cubic yards shall be performed between November 1 and May 1 (the wet season) unless authorized in writing by the City Engineer. 2) Erosion control/soil stabilization techniques such as straw mulching, erosion control blankets, erosion control matting, and hydro- seeding, shall be utilized in accordance with the regulations outlined in the Association of Bay Area Governments “Erosion & Sediment Control Measures” manual. Silt fences shall be installed down slope of all graded slopes. Hay bales shall be installed in the flow path of graded areas receiving concentrated flows and around storm drain inlets. 3) BMPs shall be used for preventing the discharge or other construction-related NPDES pollutants beside sediment (i.e. paint, concrete, trash etc) to downstream waters. 4) After construction is completed, all drainage facilities shall be inspected for accumulated sediment and these drainage structures shall be cleared of debris and sediment. 5) Trash management measures shall be incorporated to prevent trash from entering storm drainage facilities and downstream water courses. Hydro-1b: NPDES General Construction Permit Requirements. The Project applicant is required to submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to the State Water Resource Control Board’s (SWRCB) Division of Water Quality to obtain coverage under a NPDES General Construction Permit. The Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 20 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed General Construction Permit includes general information on the types of construction activities that will occur on the site as well as specific requirements that will apply to clearing, grading, and disturbances to the ground such as excavation. It is the responsibility of the property owner to obtain coverage under the permit prior to site construction. Hydro-2a: Compliance with NPDES General Industrial Permit Requirements. The NPDES General Industrial Permit Requirements apply to the discharge of storm water associated with industrial sites. The permit requires the implementation of management measures that will achieve the performance standard of best available technology (BAT) economically achievable, and best conventional pollutant control technology (BCT). Under the statute, operators of new facilities must implement industrial BMPs in the Project SWPPP, and perform monitoring of storm water discharges and unauthorized non-storm water discharges. An annual report must be submitted to the RWQCB each July 1. Operators of new facilities must file an NOI at least 14 days prior to the beginning of operations. Hydro-2b: Long-Term Requirements under the SWPPP. The Project SWPPP to accompany the NOI filing will outline erosion control and storm water quality management measures to be implemented both during and following construction. The SWPPP will also provide the schedule for monitoring performance. Long-term mitigation measures to be included in the Project SWPPP shall include, but are not limited to, the following: • Description of potential sources of erosion and sediment at the Project site. Industrial activities and significant materials and chemicals that could be used at the proposed Project site should be described. This Prior to Final Inspection The Applicant Final Inspection SSF Engineering Division & Public Works Department Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 21 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed will include a thorough assessment of existing and potential pollutant sources. • Identification of BMPs to be implemented at the Project site based on identified industrial activities and potential pollutant sources. Emphasis shall be placed on source control BMPs, with treatment controls used as needed. • Development of a monitoring and implementation plan. Maintenance requirements and frequency shall be carefully described including vector control, clearing of clogged or obstructed inlet or outlet structures, vegetation/landscape maintenance, replacement of media filters, regular sweeping of parking lots and other paced areas, etc. Wastes removed from BMPs may be hazardous, therefore, maintenance costs should be budgeted to include disposal at a proper site. • The monitoring and maintenance program shall be conducted at the frequency agreed upon by the RWQCB and/or City of South San Francisco. Monitoring and maintenance shall be recorded and submitted annually to the SWRCB. The SWPPP shall be adjusted, as necessary, to address any inadequacies of the BMPs. The applicant shall prepare informational literature and guidance on industrial and commercial BMPs to minimize pollutant contributions from the proposed development. This information shall be distributed to all employees at the Project site. At a minimum, the information shall cover: a) proper disposal of commercial cleaning chemicals; b) proper use of landscaping chemicals; c) clean-up and appropriate disposal of hazardous materials and chemicals; and d) prohibition of any washing and dumping of materials and chemicals into storm drains. Noise-1: Noise Abatement. The Project applicant shall require by SSF Building Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 22 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed contract specification that construction best management practices be implemented by contractors to reduce construction noise levels to the noise limit specified in the City Noise Ordinance (90-dBA at 25 feet). Best management practices include: • Ensuring that construction equipment is properly muffled according to industry standards, • Implementing noise attenuation measures which may include but are not limited to noise barriers or noise blankets. Requiring heavily loaded trucks used during construction to be routed away from noise and vibration sensitive uses such as Scott Street (South San Francisco) and Walnut Street (San Bruno). Division Traf-1: Transportation Demand Management Program. The Project sponsors shall implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program consistent with the City of South San Francisco Zoning Ordinance Chapter 20.120 Transportation Demand Management, and acceptable to C/CAG. These programs, once implemented, must be ongoing for the occupied life of the development. TDM Approval Prior to Final Building Inspection; On- going for Life of Project The Applicant Approval of TDM; Issuance of Final Inspection Approval SSF Planning Division Traf-2: East Grand Avenue / Airport Boulevard (2020 PM). In order to mitigate this impact, the Project shall be responsible for re-striping one northbound through lane to a through-right lane, and re-striping one westbound left lane to a left-through lane. San Mateo Avenue / Airport Boulevard (2020 PM). In order to mitigate this impact, the Project shall be responsible for re-striping one of the eastbound left-through lanes to a through-right lane. San Bruno Avenue at US 101 Southbound Ramps (2020 PM). In order to mitigate this impact, the Project shall be responsible for re-striping the existing southbound-through lane to accommodate a southbound through- Prior to Occupancy and Operations The Applicant Caltans and City of South San Francisco Engineering Division Resolution 2684-2009 Exhibit D Page 23 of 12 Centrum Logistics Project: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed right lane. Traf-3: East Grand Avenue at Airport Boulevard (2030 AM and PM). In order to mitigate this impact, the Project applicant shall be responsible for re-striping and modifications to both intersection geometry and traffic signals, to change the westbound approach from a shared left-through lane and a right-only lane to a left-only lane and a shared through-right lane would need to occur. San Bruno Avenue at US 101 Southbound Ramps (2030 AM). In order to mitigate this impact, the Project applicant shall be responsible for re- striping the existing southbound-through lane to accommodate a southbound through-right lane. San Mateo Avenue at Airport Boulevard (2030 PM). In order to mitigate this impact, the Project applicant shall be responsible for re- striping one of the eastbound left-through lanes to a through-right lane. Prior to Occupancy and Operations The Applicant Caltans and City of South San Francisco Engineering Division Util-1: Sewer Line Repair and/or Replacement. In the event that the City of San Bruno Public Works Director, in consultation with the City of South San Francisco Public Works Director, reasonably determines the Project’s wastewater may degrade or further degrade the condition of the existing sanitary sewer line, the Project applicant, in consultation with the City of San Bruno and the City of South San Francisco, shall participate in any necessary repairs and/or replacement of the exiting 24-inch sanitary sewer line to accommodate the Project’s wastewater. The City of San Bruno Public Works Director shall determine the extent to which such repairs or replacement is required. Prior to Occupancy and Operations The Applicant Payment of Proportionate Share of Improvement, Line Repair or Line Replacement City of San Bruno and City of South San Francisco Public Works Department