Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.N._Utilities-Service_Systems IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS N. UTILITIES/SERVICE SYSTEMS INTRODUCTION This section of the Draft EIR analyzes the potential for adverse impacts related to utilities and service systems resulting from implementation of the proposed Gateway Business Park Master Plan (Master Plan) and Phase 1 Precise Plan (Precise Plan). This section of the Draft EIR describes utilities and service systems serving the project site, information on regulations relating to this issue, and an analysis of potential program-level impacts to utilities and service systems associated with the Master Plan development and project-level impacts associated with the Precise Plan. Where appropriate, this section provides project level analysis for the Phase 1 Precise Plan, and program level analysis for the remainder of development proposed by the Gateway Business Park Master Plan. A regulatory framework is also provided in this section describing applicable agencies and regulations related to utilities and service systems. Preparation of this section used data from various sources. These sources include the Water Supply Assessment (WSA) prepared by the California Water Service Company (Cal Water) on December 2, 2008; City of South San Francisco General Plan prepared by Dyett & Bhatia and adopted in October 1999; the East of 101 Area Plan prepared by Brady and Associates and adopted in July 1994; and communications with local service providers. No comment letters related to utilities were received in response to the June 16, 2008 Notice of Preparation (NOP) or the Revised October 22, 2008 NOP circulated for the project. The NOP and comment letters are included in Appendix A of this Draft EIR. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Water Domestic Water Cal Water's South San Francisco District (SSF District) is located in northern San Mateo County approximately six miles south of the City of San Francisco. The SSF District serves the communities of South San Francisco (where the project site is located), Colma, a small portion of Daly City, and an unincorporated area of San Mateo County known as Broadmoor, which lies between Colma and Daly City. The SSF District water supply is a combination of purchased water and groundwater from Cal Water- owned wells. This project is not specifically covered in Cal Water's 2006 SSF District Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), which was adopted on December 15, 2006. Therefore, the project's water requirements and how they would be met are addressed in the WSA prepared for the project included as Appendix I to this Draft EIR. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN. Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-l City of South San Francisco October 2009 Cal Water purchases treated surface water from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC). This supply is predominantly from the Sierra Nevada, delivered through the Hetch Hetchy aqueducts, but also includes treated water produced by the SFPUC from its local watersheds and facilities in Alameda and San Mateo Counties. In 1984, Cal Water, along with 29 other Bay Area water suppliers, signed a Settlement Agreement and Master Water Sales Contract (Master Contract) with San Francisco, supplemented by an individual Water Supply Contract. These contracts, which expire in June 2009, provide for 184 million gallons per day (mgd), expressed on an annual average basis of supply assurance to SFPUC wholesale customers collectively. Cal Water's supply assurance is 35.39 mgd or 39,642 acre feet per year. Although the Master Contract and accompanying Water Supply Contract expire in 2009, the Supply Assurance (which quantified San Francisco's obligation to supply water to its individual wholesale customers) survives their expiration and continues indefinitely. The SFPUC can meet the demands of its retail and wholesale customers in years of average and above average precipitation. The Master Contract allows the SFPUC to reduce water deliveries during droughts, emergencies and for scheduled maintenance activities. The SFPUC and all wholesale customers adopted an Interim Water Shortage Allocation Plan in 2000 to address the allocation of water between San Francisco and wholesale customers in aggregate and among individual wholesale customers during water shortages of up to 20 percent of system-wide use. This plan, which also expires in June 2009, is described in more detail in the SSF UWMP. Groundwater is extracted from Cal Water-owned wells in the Merced Formation of the Colma Creek Basin, a sub-basin of the Merced Valley Groundwater Basin. Groundwater supplies ten to fifteen percent of the SSF District's water demand. In June 2003, Cal Water entered into an agreement with the SFPUC to conduct a conjunctive use test program its practicality and potential impact on the regional groundwater basin and Lake Merced recovery. The conjunctive use program was for a three-year duration. In 2008, Cal Water's wells are being put back into operation. Active wells in the SSF District have total capacity of 1,534 AFY. The total supply capacity of SSF District wells is expected to increase slightly over time as new wells are installed. For the purpose of this WSA analysis, groundwater supply projections are based on current well capacity. Based on historical data and future demand projections, contracted treated water deliveries from SFPUC are expected to increase by about 1,200 AF between 2008 and 2028 or about 60 AF per year. Therefore, SSF District annual demand of SFPUC supply in 2028 is 8,496 AFY, resulting in a total supply of 10,030 acre feet per year (AFY) in 2008 during a normal hydrologic year. The 2008 estimated average demand for the SSF District is 8,830 AFY. The estimated average annual demand for the SSF District in 2013 is 9,070 AFY or 8.09 mgd. Therefore, the forecasted increase in average day demand from 2008 to 2013 (5-year period) is 240 AFY or 214,000 gpd. The estimated average annual demand for the SSF District in 2028 is 10,030 AFY or 8.95 mgd. Therefore, the increase in average day demand from 2008 to 2028 (20-year period) is 1,200 AFY or 1.07 mgd. The water distribution system in the East of 101 Area was designed and constructed to meet industrial water demands. Existing water distribution mains within the site include a 12-inch main along Gateway Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-2 City of South San Francisco October 2009 Boulevard and 16-inch mam along Oyster Point Boulevard. There is no eXlstmg on-site public distribution system. Private on-site services for the existing six buildings include typical domestic water, fire and irrigation service. The City's historical water use patterns illustrate the differences between residential or commercial and industrial water use. Industrial water use is most prevalent in the East of 101 Area.1 While industrial water consumption showed no consistent pattern of decrease during the drought in the late 1980s and early 1990s, residential and commercial water use levels declined considerably. Therefore, compared to the historic reduction of residential and commercial water use during drought, industrial water use appears inelastic and therefore represents a critical issue for drought planning. Fire Protection Discussion of fire protection services is included in Section IV.L (Public Services). This section addresses the infrastructure to deliver the required water used for fire protection. Fire protection is currently provided on the site by water provided by CWSc. The water system consists of a network of 12 and 10- inch lines. Waste Water Waste Water Collection System Sewage and wastewater generated within the City is collected through the City's sewer system and is disposed of and treated at the South San Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant (WQCP). The City's sanitary sewer system, east of Highway 101, has an interconnecting network of approximately 13 miles of 6-inch to 30-inch diameter gravity sewer mains, force mains, and nine pump stations, which function together to bring wastewater from individual homes and businesses to the WQCP. Some pump stations act as tributaries to a few stations that handle most of the wastewater from large portions of the community. Older portions of the City's sewer system are subject to infiltration and inflow (III) problems. III problems occur when leaks and breaks in sewer pipes, or cross connection with the storm drain system, result in the entrance of rainfall and other water from the storm drain system into the sewer pipes. There are also some reliability issues at pump stations and areas where sewer lines have sunk, decreasing hydraulic capacity and increasing the potential deposit of solids. Existing facilities serving the site and the East 101 Area are described as follows: . Oyster Point Boulevard has a 10 and 12-inch pipe installed circa 1982 as part of the Gateway Assessment District improvements discharging to Pump Station 2. This pipe collects all flows from the Oyster Point basin and existing Buildings 800, 850, 900, and 1000 Gateway Boulevard. City of South San Francisco, City of South San Francisco General Plan: Existing Conditions and Planning Issues, 1997. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-3 City of South San Francisco October 2009 . Pump Station 2 is located southwest of the Oyster Point Boulevard and Gateway Boulevard intersection. Water flows through a lO-inch force main to the existing 15-inch pipe located in Gateway Boulevard. The current final Sewer System Master Plan (SSMP) prepared by Carollo Engineers, dated September 2002, recommends that the pump station capacity be increased by replacing the existing pumps to handle future peak wet weather flows, increasing the firm capacity to 1,400 gpm. . Gateway Boulevard has a 15-inch pipe installed circa 1982 as part of the Gateway Assessment District improvements which discharges south to Pump Station 4. This pipe collects flows from existing Buildings 700 and 750 Gateway Boulevard. . Pump Station 4 is located northeast of the intersection of Mitchell Avenue and Harbor Way. This station collects and pumps almost all flows from the East of 101 Area sub-basins to the WQCP through an existing 21-inch force main. The current SSMP recommends that the pump station capacity be increased by replacing the existing pumps to increase future firm capacity of 9,000 gpm. Based on the SSMP, Pump Station 2, located at 955 Gateway Boulevard, has an existing firm capacity of 1,000 gallons per minute (gpm? and currently does not meet the existing peak sewer discharge. In addition, Pump Station 4 needs to be upgraded to improve reliability. The upgrade of Pump Station 4 is critical to serving the proposed growth under the East of 101 Area Plan, and has been included in the Downtown/Central Redevelopment plan for funding. Necessary system improvements, including Pump Stations 2 and 4, are identified in the SSMP, which also establishes a program for implementing the improvements. The SSMP estimates cost share of the improvements, with respect to how they relate to existing users and future users. Costs from existing users are recovered through rates. Impact fees, collected prior to the issuance of a building permit, fund the improvements as they relate to future users. The SSMP lists the 2002 average dry weather flow in 2001 as 1.5 mgd? The SSMP also identified deficiencies in the current system to handle current and projected flows. An addendum to the SSMp4 recalculated demands based on the planning assumptions that have changed. These changes include land use, development densities and intensities, and population growth rates assumptions. The revised flow estimates were less than previously calculated. Other than adding upgrades to Pump Station 6 and Pump Station 8, the recommendations did not change. As a result, the project list in the SSMP is still applicable. Further development in the East of 101 Area may require that the City undertake extensive improvements to the existing sewer treatment facilities above and beyond those sewer system improvements already budgeted in the Capital Improvement Program. Although required by increased development in the East of 101 Area, most of the sewer treatment improvements will result in citywide benefits. For this reason, the City has determined that it is appropriate that most of these improvements be financed through the 2 3 Carollo Engineers, 2002 East of Highway 101 Sewer System Master Plan, page 4-7. Carollo Engineers, 2002 East of Highway 101 Sewer System Master Plan, page 5-1. Carollo Engineers for the City of South San Francisco, Addendum to the City of South San Francisco East of Highway 101 Sewer Master Plan, May 2007. 4 Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-4 City of South San Francisco October 2009 issuance of sewer revenue bonds. The revenues required to pay off the bonds would be collected through increased rates charged to current and future users of the sewer system. Solids from wastewater treatment process are referred to as sludge. Sludge consists of inert solids from the wastewater and microbial biomass created during treatment. Sludge is thickened, anaerobically digested, and then dewatered. Final disposal of sludge is by trucking to a landfill for disposal. The City currently does not limit the amount of flow or the peak pollutant concentrations that industries can discharge. However, the East of 101 Area Plan requires projects in the East of 101 Area that are likely to generate large quantities of wastewater to lower their treatment needs through recycling, on-site treatment, graywater irrigation, and other programs where feasible. Onsite utilities are primarily located within buildings and underground. Water Quality Control Plant The South San Francisco and San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant (WQCP), located in South San Francisco, will serve the proposed project. The WQCP operates under NPDES No. CA0038130 and Waste Discharge Requirements R2 2003-0010. The current facility has an average dry weather flow capacity to provide secondary level treatment for 13 mgd of domestic, commercial, and industrial wastewater from the cities of South San Francisco and San Bruno, portions of the city of Daly City, and the Town of Colma.5 The WQCP can handle a peak hourly wet weather flow of 62 mgd and the current average dry weather flow is 9 mgd.6 The cities of South San Francisco and San Bruno are each entitled up to 50 percent of the available treatment capacity. Treated wastewater is pumped through a 54-inch force main located along the Lower Campus, then discharged 2 miles out into San Francisco Bay via a joint outfall pipe operated by the North Bayside System Unit (NBSU), which is the joint powers authority responsible for operation of certain shared transport, treatment, and disposal facilities. The NBSU includes the Cities of Millbrae, Burlingame, South San Francisco and San Bruno, and the San Francisco International Airport (SIFA) (both the Airport's Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant and Water Quality Control Plant). The treatment facility consists of bar screens, grit chambers, primary sedimentation, aeration tanks, final clarifiers and disinfection equipment. NBSU de chlorinates the combined effluent prior to discharging via the joint NBSU outfall off Point San Bruno. The WQCP had five discharge violations during 2003, as reported in RWQCB Order No. R2 2004-0075. Since 2003 there have been a total of four violations; three occurred in 2005 and one in 2006. Effluent concentrations of oils and grease, cyanide, and biological oxygen demand (BOD), settleable solids, and fecal coliform were exceeded. These results are summarized in Table IV.N-1. No violations have been reported during the 2004 and 2007 annual reports. 5 Ken Navarre, Assistant Superintendant, South San Francisco Water Quality Control Plant, written response to request for service information, July 10, 2008. Ibid. 6 Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-5 City of South San Francisco October 2009 Table IV.N-l WQCP Violations (2003-June 30, 2008) alate ......... ri...... Lhnit .".,; . Value ...".. 20031 4/1/2003 Oil and Grease daily 20 mg/L 35 mgIL maXImum 7/1/2003 Cyanide daily maximum IOg/L 19 gIL 10/4/2003 BOD weekly average 45 mg/L 52 mg/L 10/11/2003 BOD weekly average 45 mg/L 54 mg/L 10/31/2003 BOD monthly average 30 mg/L 37 mg/L 20052 1/5/2005 Test! Specie Eff llSamp 70% 0% 90th% %Sur minimum 2/15/2005 Total Settleable Solids Eff 0.2 mL/hour 3.5 mL/hour Instant Max 3/23/2005 Fecal Coliform Eff 400 mpn/100mL 490 mpn/100mL IOSamp 90th% 20062 10/30/2006 Oil and Grease monthly 10 11.10 average Sources: 1 RWQCB NO R2-2004-0075. 2 Johnson Lam, ERS Program Manager and Water Resources Control Engineer, Regional Water Quality Control Board - San Francisco Bay Region, em ail correspondence with CAJA staff August 27, 2009. Surface Water and Storm Drainage The project site is located near the eastern shoreline of the City overlying artificial fill and Bay mud. The East of 101 Area generally slopes downward to the east, toward San Francisco Bay. The project site is relatively flat. Average annual precipitation is between 18 and 22 inches per year, increasing to 26 inches in the upper watersheds west of the City. Approximately 90 percent of the precipitation is received between November and ApriC Runoff in the hills is relatively rapid because of the steep slopes and clay soils, and is slower in the flat lowland areas. Some infiltration into the ground occurs, but because the City is largely developed with a high proportion of impermeable surface, runoff is relatively high. Runoff throughout the City is collected in the City's storm drainage system, which discharges to Colma Creek or San Francisco Bay.8 Colma Creek is the City's main natural drainage system. The Colma Creek watershed is bounded on the northeast by San Bruno Mountain and on the west by the ridge traced by Skyline Boulevard.9 It discharges to San Francisco Bay south of the project site near Belle Air Island. However, Colma Creek does not intersect the project site, nor does the project site drain to Colma Creek. No other creeks or natural surface drainages are in the master plan area. Instead, surface water and stormwater runoff in the 8 9 Dyett & Bhatia, City of South San Francisco General Plan: Existing Conditions and Planning Issues, September, 1997. Ibid. Ibid. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-6 City of South San Francisco October 2009 master plan area are collected by the City's storm drainage system and discharged to San Francisco Bay to the east of the project site. The existing drainage system in the East of 10 1 Area is generally designed and constructed for industrial development.1O The storm drainage system for the project site consists of underground pipes and outfalls emptying into San Francisco Bay at various locations. The pipes are reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) or high-density polyethylene (HDPE). The outfalls to the San Francisco Bay are both above and below the mean high tide elevation of 3.1 feet. Outfalls below the mean high tide water elevation are likely to experience flooding when a heavy storm event happens during high tide water elevations. The storm drainage system in the master plan area is gravity flow and does not require pumps to transport the flows. The majority of the project site consists of developed land, with approximately 22 percent pervious surfaces. Stormwater point and non-point source discharges are a major source of pollution in San Francisco Bay from the City, as the City's storm drainage system discharges directly into the Bay. Stormwater quality in the master plan area, and in the East of 101 Area as a whole, is generally influenced by typical urban pollutants, such as construction sediments, vehicular fuel and oil, household cleaning surfactants, and landscape pesticides, fertilizers, and herbicides. However, Bay water in the vicinity of the City is considered to be generally good because this area of the Bay tends to be well-mixed.]] Commercial development could degrade water quality through industrial pollutant discharges. Indirect degradation of surface water quality could affect fish and wildlife species in local water bodies. To combat this problem, the San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (STOPPP), a partnership of the City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG), each incorporated city and town in the county, and the County of San Mateo, has prepared a Best Management Practices (BMPs) plan to control pollutants in their stormwater system. Compliance with the permit requirements for non-point source stormwater discharge under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) also requires the property owner of all construction projects over 1 acre in size to obtain a stormwater discharge permit. The WQCP operates under STOPPP's Joint Municipal NPDES Permit. The Regulatory Framework section, below, further describes the STOPPP and NPDES programs. According to the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Region (Basin Plan), beneficial uses of South San Francisco Bay, to which the project site discharges, include wildlife habitat, shellfish harvesting, fish spawning, preservation of rare and endangered species, fish migration, estuarine habitat, navigation, water contact and non-contact recreation, commercial and sport fishing, and industrial service supply.12 However, the Bay is listed on the 2002 CW A 303(d) list as an impaired water body. The various pollutants and stressors listed as inflicting the Lower and Central San Francisco Bay are chlordane, dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane (DDT), diazinon, dieldrin, dioxin compounds, exotic species, furan 10 Brady and Associates for the City of South San Francisco, East of 101 Area Plan, July, 1994. Dyett & Bhatia, City of South San Francisco General Plan: Existing Conditions and Planning Issues, September, 1997. California Regional Water Quality Control Board - San Francisco Bay Region, Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), January 18,2007, Table 2-1. 11 12 Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-7 City of South San Francisco October 2009 compounds, mercury, mercury (sediment), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), PCBs (dioxin-like), and selenium. Causes contributing to impairment include urban runoff, other non-point sources, ballast water (exotic species), municipal point sources, industrial point sources, resource extraction (mercury) and agriculture. Solid Waste Solid waste is collected from the City's homes and businesses, including the project site, by the South San Francisco Scavenger Company.13 The Scavenger Company also serves the City of Brisbane, the City of Millbrae, and the San Francisco International Airport.14 After collection, waste is brought to the Scavenger Company's Blue Line Transfer, Inc. facility, a public disposal and recycling center located just south of the project site at 500 East Jamie Court. The Blue Line Transfer facility has a permitted capacity of 2,000 tons per day, but currently receives an average of approximately 800 tons per day,15 approximately 0.9 tons (0.1 percent) of which are currently from the project site.16 From the Blue Line Transfer facility, non-recyclable wastes are then deposited at the Ox Mountain Sanitary Landfill near the City of Half Moon Bay. The Ox Mountain Sanitary Landfill is the only remaining landfill in the County that will accept South San Francisco Scavenger Company waste. In 2005, the City landfilled approximately 85,091 tons.17 The landfill has a permitted maximum disposal of 3,598 tons per day.18 As of 2000, the landfill has exceeded its permitted capacity of 37.9 million cubic yards by approximately 6.7 million cubic yards (17.8 percent). However, the closure date is planned for 2018. The project site's existing baseline generation is 329 tons of non-hazardous waste per year,19 of which 220.43 tons (67 percent) are landfilled and 108.57 tons (33 percent) are recycled. No solid waste is incinerated in the master plan area?O The master plan area's contribution to the amount of solid waste landfilled by the City is approximately 0.003 percent. 13 Formosa, Paul, Chief Financial Officer, South San Francisco Scavenger Company, phone conversation with CAJA staff, July 28, 2008. South San Francisco Scavenger Company, Inc., website: http://www.ssfscavenger.com/transfer/index.cfin. accessed August 3, 2008. Formosa, Paul, Chief Financial Officer, South San Francisco Scavenger Company, phone conversation with CAJA staff, July 28, 2008. City of Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation, Solid Waste Generation, 1981. Generation factor for office land use is 6 lbs per 1,000 sf The existing daily solid waste generation is calculated as follows: 284,000 existing sf x (6 lbs / 1,000 sf! day) = 1, 704lbs / day (or 0.852 tons). California Integrated Waste Management Board, Jurisdiction for the City of South San Francisco, website: http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Profiles/Juris/JurProfile2. asp? RG=C&JURlD= 511 &JUR=South +San + Francisco, accessed August 29, 2008. California Integrated Waste Management Board, Active Landfills Profile for Ox Mountain Sanitary Landfill (41-AA-0002), website: http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Profiles/F acility/Landfill/LFProfile 1. asp ?COID= 7 &F ACID =41-AA -0002, accessed September 4, 2008. The existing annual solid waste generation is calculated as follows: (0.9 tons / day) x (365 days / year) = 329 tons. Chamberlin Associates, 2008. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-8 City of South San Francisco October 2009 A description of hazardous waste generation, collection, and disposal services in the master plan area is provided in Section IV.G Hazards/Hazardous Materials. Electricity and Natural Gas Electricity Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) provides natural gas to the master plan area. The underground 12.47 kV distribution system that serves the area is configured in a looped network from the East Grand Avenue substation. This enables PG&E some flexibility to continue to provide service to buildings through switching, should problems be encountered with cabling. Each building or a cluster of buildings is metered at either the primary or secondary rates. Most buildings are metered at the secondary 480 or 208 volt rates. PG&E has confirmed the ability to provide sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed . 21 project. Natural Gas PG&E provides natural gas to the master plan area. The high pressure gas distribution system is metered at each building and is configured in a loop system that is served from three interconnected underground pipelines; 3-inch Pipeline at Grandview; 4-inch pipeline at Forbes Avenue; 8-inch pipeline at East Grand Avenue. PG&E has confirmed that it has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed project.22 Regulatory Setting Federal Clean Water Act The CW A is the principal statute governing water quality. The statute's goal is to end all discharges entirely and to restore, maintain, and preserve the integrity of the nation's waters, with an interim goal of providing water that is both fishable and swimmable. The CW A regulates both the direct and indirect discharge of pollutants into the nation's waters. It mandates permits for wastewater and stormwater discharges, regulates publicly owned treatment works that treat municipal and industrial wastewater, requires states to establish site-specific water quality standards for navigable bodies of water, and regulates other activities that affect water quality, such as dredging and the filling of wetlands. The CW A was enacted in 1977 as a series of amendments to the federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1948. Section 303(d). Section 303(d) of the CW A requires each state to identify waters that will not achieve water quality standards after application of effluent limits. For each water and pollutant, the state is required to propose a priority for development of load-based (as opposed to concentration-based) limits called total maximum daily loads (TMDLs). The TMDL determines how much of a given pollutant can 21 Bueb, Paul, Industrial Power Engineer, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, written correspondence with BKF Engineers Surveyors Planners, May 2, 2008. 22 Ibid. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-9 City of South San Francisco October 2009 be discharged from a particular source without causing water quality standards to be violated. Priorities for development of TMDLs are set by the state, based on the severity of the pollution and uses of the waters. National Pollutant Dischan!e Elimination System (NPDES) The NPDES permit system was established in the CW A to regulate both point source discharges and non- point source discharges from construction, industrial, and municipal activities to surface waters of the US. For point source discharges, each NPDES permit contains limits on allowable concentrations and mass emissions of pollutants contained in the discharge. For non-point source discharges, the NPDES program establishes a comprehensive stormwater quality program to manage urban stormwater and minimize pollution of the environment to the maximum extent practicable. As permitted under the CW A, authority for issuing NPDES permits has been delegated by the EPA to the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) in the San Francisco Bay Area. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) has adopted a separate NPDES General Permit for stormwater discharge associated with construction activity (NPDES Permit No. CAS000002). Under this permit, developers proposing construction activity that disturbs more than 1 acre of land must submit a Notice of Intent (NOI), develop a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), conduct monitoring and inspections, retain records of the monitoring, report incidences of noncompliance, and submit annual compliance reports. The SWPPP must address both grading/erosion impacts and non-point source pollution impacts of the development project, including post-construction impacts and sampling/monitoring requirements. Individual development proposed under the project that would disturb more than 1 acre of land would be required to obtain and comply with a NPDES General Permit for construction activity. Stormwater NPDES permlttmg for certain classes of industrial activities, including manufacturing activity, are regulated under the Industrial Activities General Permit adopted by the SWRCB (NPDES Permit No CAS000001). To comply with the conditions of this permit, facility operators are required to submit a NOI, develop a SWPPP, and conduct stormwater monitoring, in addition to submitting annual reports by July 1 of each year. Municipal stormwater in the City is regulated by STOPPP's Joint Municipal NPDES Permit (No. CAS0029921, Order No. R2-2004-0060, originally issued in 1999) for stormwater quality management. STOPPP and its NPDES Permit are described further in "San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program," below. State Urban Water Mana2:ement Plannin2: Act The Department of Water Resources (DWR) provides urban water management planning services to local and regional urban water suppliers. In 1983, the California Legislature enacted the Urban Water Management Planning Act (Water Code Sections 10610 through 10656). The Act states that every urban Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-10 City of South San Francisco October 2009 water supplier that provides water to 3,000 or more customers, or that provides over 3,000 acre-feet of water annually, should make every effort to ensure the appropriate level of reliability in its water service sufficient to meet the needs of its various categories of customers during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. The Act describes the contents of the Urban Water Management Plans (UWMPs) as well as how urban water suppliers should adopt and implement the plans. It is the intention of the Legislature, in enacting this part, to permit levels of water management planning commensurate with the numbers of customers served and the volume of water supplied. Water Supply Assessments (SB 610) Effective January 1, 2002, California, through Senate Bill 610 (SB 610), requires that a city or county, and the associated public water system, prepare a Water Supply Assessment (WSA) for projects that meet certain criteria. Three criteria include (1) a project creating the equivalent demand of 500 residential units, (2) a proposed shopping center or business establishment employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 500,000 sf of floor space, and (3) a commercial office building employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 250,000 sf of floor space. The project meets the criteria for requiring a WSA because the project is projected to employ over 1,000 persons and would include development of approximately 1 million additional square feet of office, research and development, amenities, and parking structures. The purpose of the WSA is to assess the adequacy of water for the proposed project over a 20-year horizon during normal, single dry, and multiple dry year conditions. The WSA completed for the project is attached as Appendix G to this Draft EIR. Water Qualitv Control Act (Porter-Colo2:ne Act) The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act is the primary state regulation that addresses water quality. The requirements of the Act are implemented by the SWRCB at the state level, and the RWQCB at the regional level. The SWRCB, as authorized by the Act, has promulgated regulations in Subchapter 15 of Title 23 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) designed to protect water quality from the effects of waste discharges to land. Under Subchapter 15, wastes that cannot be discharged directly or indirectly to waters of the state (and therefore must be discharged to land for treatment, storage, or disposal) are classified to determine specifically where such wastes may be discharged. Pretreatment Pro2:ram and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Pro2:ram The City's Office of Environmental Compliance administers a Pretreatment Program and a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program mandated by the state. The two programs regulate and control the concentrations of wastewater and stormwater pollutants discharged by industrial, commercial, and residential dischargers. Pollution prevention information is distributed to residents as well as schools and businesses within the service area. These programs are enacted under Chapter 14.08 (Water Quality Control) ofthe SSFMC, which is described in "City of South San Francisco Municipal Code," below. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-11 City of South San Francisco October 2009 California Inte2rated Waste Mana2ement Act of 1989 (AB 939) To minimize the amount of solid waste that must be disposed of by transformation and land disposal, the State Legislature passed Assembly Bill 939, the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939), effective January 1990. According to AB 939, all cities and counties in California are required to divert 25 percent of all solid waste to recycling facilities from landfill or transformation facilities by January 1, 1995, and 50 percent by January 1,2000. The City of South San Francisco has not yet met this goal. Between 2001 and 2004, the City has achieved a diversion of rate ranging between 40 and 48 percent. The City has submitted an application for a time extension with the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) until December 2005 to meet the 50 percent goal, but the CIWMB's review of the City's application has been delayed. Solid waste plans are prepared by each jurisdiction to explain how each city's AB 939 plan is integrated with its county plan. The plans must promote in order of priority: source reduction, recycling and composting, and finally, environmentally safe transformation, and land disposal. Waste disposal efforts in the County of San Mateo are governed by the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan. The County's Health Department, Environmental Health Division, acts as the solid waste disposal enforcement agency, coordinating efforts and granting waste disposal permits. California Code of Re2ulations (CCR) Title 24 New buildings in California are required to conform to energy conservation standards specified in Title 24 of the CCR. The standards establish "energy budgets" for different types of residential and nonresidential buildings, with which all new buildings must comply. The energy budget has a space conditioning component and a water-heating component, both expressed in terms of energy (British thermal units, BTU) consumed per year. The regulations allow for trade-offs within and between the components to meet the overall budget. Energy consumption of new buildings in California is regulated by the State Building Energy Efficiency Standards, embodied in Title 24 of the CCR. The efficiency standards apply to new construction of both residential and nonresidential buildings, and regulate energy consumed for heating, cooling, ventilation, water heating, and lighting. The building efficiency standards are enforced through the local building or individual agency permit and approval processes. The City requires all new buildings to meet Title 24 standards. Regional Water Qualitv Control Plan for the San Francisco Bav Re2ion Prepared by the RWQCB, the Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the San Francisco Bay Region identifies surface waters in the region as consisting of inland surface water (freshwater lakes, rivers, and streams), estuaries, enclosed bays, and ocean waters. Historic and ongoing wasteload contributions to surface water bodies in the region come from upstream discharges carried into the region via Delta outflow, direct input in the forms of point and nonpoint sources, and indirect input via groundwater seepage (SFB RWQCB 1995). The Basin Plan describes the water quality control measures that Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-12 City of South San Francisco October 2009 contribute to the protection of the beneficial uses of the Bay watershed. The Basin Plan identifies beneficial uses for each segment of the Bay and its tributaries, water quality objectives for the reasonable protection of the uses, and an implementation plan for achieving these objectives. Local San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Pro2:ram (STOPPP) The STOPPP is a partnership of the City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG), each incorporated city and town in the county, and the County of San Mateo. Many of STOPPP's activities are coordinated through the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County. The STOPPP functions under a Joint Municipal NPDES Permit (No. CAS0029921) for stormwater quality management, as authorized by the RWQCB. This partnership also relies on each of the municipalities to implement local stormwater pollution prevention and control activities for their local storm drain systems. The STOPPP includes the following: . Provisions for a model ordinance . Identification of BMPs, including street sweeping, storm drain stenciling, spill clean-up, and annual catch basin maintenance . Measures for extensive public education and public awareness . Pollutant source identification and water quality measurement, and elimination of illicit discharges . Structural and non structural controls for commercial and residential areas, and controls for industrial facilities . Controls for new development and construction sites and other elements The STOPPP Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) describes measures for the prevention and control of stormwater pollution. The SMWP serves as part of the basis of STOPPP's third NPDES permit to be reissued by the RWQCB (NPDES Permit No. CAS0029921), which expires in 2009. The SWMP, in conjunction with the reissued permit adopted by the RWQCB, is designed to enable STOPPP to meet requirements of the CW A. Because individual projects proposed under the project would apply for coverage under the STOPPP NPDES Municipal Permit, the SWPPP prepared for each individual project must to be consistent with the SWMP. Because much of Colma Creek flows through private property, the City has also adopted BMPs aimed at private land owners to control litter, gain compliance from industrial dischargers, reduce pollutants at commercial sites, minimize construction sediment, and clean and maintain privately-owned watercourses. San Mateo County Hazardous Waste Generator Pro2:ram The County Health Department, Environmental Health Division, has maintained a Hazardous Waste Generator Program since 1984 aimed at protecting public health and the environment. The California Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-13 City of South San Francisco October 2009 Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) authorized the Division at that time to inspect and regulate non-permitted hazardous waste generators in the 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. The above referenced regulations require businesses generating any amount of hazardous waste as defined by regulation to properly store, manage and dispose of such waste. Division staff members conduct annual inspections at over 1,900 businesses in order to assess compliance with state law and regulations. Division staff members also conduct 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. Furthermore, staff members respond within 24 hours to complaints filed with the Division regarding potential violation ofthe aforementioned law and regulations. City of South San Francisco General Plan The City's General Plan, which contains implementing policies regarding public services and utilities, is discussed below. Water and Wastewater General Plan Policies 5.3-1-1 and 5.3-1-2 of the Parks, Public Facilities, and Services Element call for the City to work with CWSC and Westborough Water District to do the following: . Ensure coordinated capital improvements . Establish guidelines and standards for water conservation . Actively promote the use of water-conserving devices and practices in both new construction and major alterations and additions to existing buildings, including conservation as it relates to any industrial or commercial construction Industrial-related conservation measures regarding monitoring of industrial discharges to ensure that wastewater quality continues to meet various federal, state, and regional standards and to encourage new projects in the East of 101 Area (such as the MEIR Study Area and vicinity) that are likely to generate large quantities of wastewater to lower treatment needs through recycling, pretreatment, or other means as necessary are intended to help limit the demand for wastewater treatment plant capacity. Policy 5.3-1-6 Monitor industrial discharges to ensure that wastewater quality continues to meet various federal, state, and regional standards; treatment costs would remain affordable. Policy 5.3-1-7 Encourage new projects in East of 101 area that are likely to generate large quantities of wastewater to lower treatment needs through recycling, pretreatment, or other means as necessary. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-14 City of South San Francisco October 2009 Solid Waste General Plan Policy 8.3-1-1 of the Health and Safety Element calls for the City to continue working toward reducing solid waste, increasing recycling, and complying with the San Mateo County Integrated Waste Management Plan. The City has a responsibility to meet regional source reduction and recycling initiatives in order to achieve state-mandated waste reduction targets and to extend the useful life of existing landfill facilities. Under this policy, builders are encouraged to incorporate interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables into new or remodeled buildings (both residential and commercial) to make recycling activities more convenient for those who use the buildings. Also, the City is encouraged to explore the feasibility of installing recycling receptacles in parks and public areas, such as the public open space areas in the project site. Commercial and business parks are encouraged to install recycling receptacles on their premises. The City is encouraged to explore incentives for businesses to establish recycling programs. East of 101 Area Plan Public Facilities Element The East of 101 Area Plan's overall intent regarding water, sewer, drainage, and utility facilities for the East of 101 Area is to provide adequate municipal services to serve all development, and to limit development ifit would exceed available service capacity. Policy PF-l The City shall allow development in the East of 101 Area only if adequate water supply to meet its needs can be provided in a timely manner. Policy PF-2 Low flow plumbing fixtures and drought tolerant landscaping shall be installed as part of all new developments in the area. Policy PF-7 Projects in the East of 101 Area that would generate large quantities of wastewater shall be required to lower their wastewater treatment needs through water recycling, on-site treatment, gray water irrigation and similar programs where feasible. Policy PF-8 Specific development proposals in the East of 101 Area shall be evaluated individually to determine drainage and flood protection requirements. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-15 City of South San Francisco October 2009 Policy PF-9 All development in the East of 101 Area shall comply with the NPDES discharge program. Developments over 5 acres in size shall obtain a storm water discharge permit from the NPDES, which may require inclusion of on-site treatment of stormwater from parking areas. Policy PF-iO During the rainy season, developers shall be required to place appropriate erosion control devices, such as silt fences, hay bales, etc. during construction activities to minimize the amount of silt directly entering the Bay or other wetlands. Policy PF-ll Utility companies shall be provided early notification for any proposed project that could have an unusual requirement for water, sewer, gas, electric, or telephone services. DesiJ!n Element The overall design policy of the City is to promote quality design; promote a functional, safe, and attractive environment; preserve the character of the City's heritage; protect public investment and land values; protect the natural environment; and facilitate evaluation of individual development proposals through the use of Design Guidelines. Policy DE-i3 New construction projects shall be required to supply and install street trees and landscaping and landscaping to meet the City's specifications for the frontages. . Streetscape planting, irrigation, and hardscape should be designed for minimum maintenance by City staff. . Medians should be cobbled and grouted or landscaped with low maintenance plants with automatic irrigation. Policy DE-i8 Paths with durable, all-weather surfaces should be located in medians and other landscaped areas within parking lots to provide convenient pedestrian routes, and reduce wear on landscaped areas. Policy DE-30 Utility lines serving new development shall be installed underground, unless the City finds that undergrounding would be financially infeasible for a specific project. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-16 City of South San Francisco October 2009 Financinf! Element Policies in the Financing Element of the East of 101 Area Plan are intended to form an overall approach to future discussions about who will pay for improvements and how sources of revenues will be used. In addition, these policies provide some element of certainty to developers and property owners in terms of what types of facilities and/or fees they will be expected to provide in conjunction with plans for future development with the East of 101 Area. Policy FIN-l Costs of new infrastructure and public amenities shall be borne by both existing and future development. Policy FIN-4 Ongoing operating and maintenance costs for new East of 101 Area improvements shall be financed through ongoing revenues collected as fees, assessments, and taxes generated by future development in the Area. City of South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.16 (Solid Waste-Scavenf!er Services) Chapter 8.16 of the SSFMC contains health and sanitation rules and regulations applicable to all lands and premises within the City. The purpose of Chapter 8.16 is to prevent the accumulation of quantities of solid waste within the boundaries of the City, except for approved dump sites, in order to protect and preserve the public health and welfare of City and neighboring communities. The Scavenger Company is identified in this chapter as the entity with whom the City has contracted to collect, receive, carry and/or transport solid waste in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. Chapter 8.28 (Recvclable Materials) The purpose of Chapter 8.28 is to increase participation rates, improve recyclable material recovery rates, reduce landfill dependency, and ultimately maintain a cost-effective overall solid waste and recycling program for the citizens, businesses, and institutions of the City. While the current SSFMC does not appoint an authorized recycling agent, the Scavenger Company is responsible for providing recycling services in the City. Also, the SSFMC does not establish recycling goals for the City. Chapter 14.04 (Stormwater Manaf!ement and Discharf!e Controls) Chapter 14.04 was created to ensure the future health, safety, and general welfare of the City and to protect and enhance water quality pursuant to the CW A. The controls include measures to eliminate non- stormwater discharges to the municipal separate storm sewer; control discharges to the municipal storm sewer from spills, dumping, or disposal of materials other than stormwater; protect watercourses from modifications to natural flow; and reduce pollutants in stormwater discharges to the maximum extent practicable. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-17 City of South San Francisco October 2009 Chapter 14.08 (Water Qualitv) Chapter 14.08 sets forth requirements for direct and indirect contributors into the City's wastewater collection and treatment system and enables the City to comply with all applicable state and federal laws required by the CW A and the General Pretreatment Regulations. The objectives of Chapter 14.08 are the following: . To prevent the introduction of pollutants into the municipal wastewater system which will upset or interfere with the operation of the system or contaminate the resulting sludge . To prevent the introduction of pollutants into the municipal wastewater system which will pass through the system, inadequately treated, into receiving waters or the atmosphere or otherwise be incompatible with the system . To improve the opportunity to recycle and reclaim wastewaters and sludges from the system . To provide for equitable distribution of the cost of the municipal wastewater system . To prevent the exposure of workers at the publicly owned treatment works and the collection system to chemical hazards This chapter provides for the regulation of direct and indirect contributors to the municipal waste- water system through the issuance of permits to certain non-domestic users. Further, through enforcement of general requirements for all users, the chapter authorizes monitoring and enforcement activities, requires user reporting, assumes that existing customer's capacity will not be preempted, and provides for the setting of fees for the equitable distribution of costs. Under this chapter, the superintendent of the WQCP is responsible for administering, implementing, and enforcing the provisions of Chapter 14.08. Chapter 14.12 (Sewer Rates) Under this chapter, the City establishes a system of sewer rentals and charges for all domestic, commercial, and industrial uses of the municipal sewer system. This chapter also contains the charges for sewer service and facilities as provided by the City. Chapter 13.16 (UndeTf!round Utilitv Installations) Under this chapter, the City Council may call public hearings to determine whether existing overhead utilities should be relocated underground. It is the responsibility of the person owning, operating, leasing or renting the property with the utility in question to follow the provisions set forth as a result of the public hearing. Chapter 15.08 (California Buildim! Code) Under Chapter 15.08, the City adopts and modifies the 2001 California Building Code for application to developments within the City. This chapter contains construction standards for weather protection, Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-18 City of South San Francisco October 2009 foundations, drainage, and grading. Grading activities require a permit from the City Engineer. To obtain the grading permit, a soils engineering report and engineering geology report must be approved by the City Engineer. Recommendations in these reports must be incorporated in the grading plans or specifications. Under Section 15.08.170, construction work is restricted during the rainy season (November 1 to May 1) so as to minimize erosion. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Methodology Thresholds of Significance The following thresholds of significance are based on Appendix G of the 2006 CEQA Guidelines. For purposes of this Draft EIR implementation of the proposed project could result in potentially significant impacts to utilities ifthe proposed project would result in any ofthe following: . Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. . Require or result in the construction of new water treatment, distribution, or conveyance facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. . Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. . Have insufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources or are new or expanded entitlements needed. . Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments. . Be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs. . Fail to comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Project Impacts Impact IV.N-l: The proposed project would create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Surface and stormwater runoff in the project area is collected by the City's storm drainage system and is discharged to San Francisco Bay east of the project area. The existing storm drainage system in the project area is designed to accommodate flows from office development and the amount of existing impervious surfaces in the area. The proposed project would remove existing buildings on the site and Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-19 City of South San Francisco October 2009 redevelop the area with similar uses. The project consists of the phased removal and replacement of existing buildings on the 22.6 acre project site and construction of five to six new office buildings and two to four parking structures. As a result of increased traffic, increased stormwater pollutants, such as copper and zinc from break pads23 or oil from leaking engines, may result in a potentially significant change in storm water quality. To comply with the Clean Water Act (CW A), STOPPP was formed. STOPPP holds a joint municipal NPDES permit from the San Francisco Bay RWQCB. The permit includes a comprehensive plan to reduce the discharge of pollutants to creeks, San Francisco Bay, and the ocean to the maximum extent possible. The San Mateo Countywide STOPPP has a Site Design Standards Checklist to evaluate proposed projects against guidelines intended to reduce stormwater pollution. These guidelines are regulated by the SSFMC, General Plan, or other best management practices guidelines. The project site is divided into three separate sub-drainage areas: North (Portion of Building 1000), Central (Portion of Buildings 800 and 1000) and South (Buildings 700, 750, 850, 900 and a portion of Building 800). The on-site storm drainage system varies in size from 12-inch to 30-inch in diameter. The three sub-drainage areas discharge to the City's public storm drainage system as follows: North Sub- Drainage Area, Central Sub-Drainage Area, and South Sub-Drainage Area. The North sub-drainage area discharges to the existing 18-inch to 24-inch public storm drainage system on Oyster Point Boulevard. The Oyster Point Boulevard storm drainage system outfalls to the San Francisco Bay at the Oyster Cove Marina (north of the Master Plan Area) via a 24 by 30-inch box storm drain line. The Central sub- drainage area discharges to the existing 18-inch public storm drainage line on Gateway Boulevard. The existing 18-inch Gateway Boulevard line connects to the Oyster Point Boulevard public storm drainage system at the intersection of Oyster Point and Gateway Boulevard. The South sub-drainage area discharges to the existing 30-inch public storm drain line on Gateway Boulevard. The Gateway Boulevard public storm drainage system collects and conveys storm runoff from the site and outfalls south of the site to Colma Creek. The outfall is located east of the intersection of Harbor Way and Mitchell Avenue. The Gateway Boulevard public system varies in size from 30-inch to 72-inch. Construction impacts to water quality are mitigated through soil stabilization and erosIOn control techniques as described in Mitigation Measure IV.H-1.1 and IV.H-1.2 in Section IV.H (HydrologylWater Quality) of this Draft EIR. However, operation of the proposed project could contribute to polluted stormwater runoff. This would be a potentially significant impact. However, as described below, mitigation measures, such as the installation of a storm drain interceptor to capture oil and heavy particulates before entering stormwater drainage systems, would minimize pollutant contributions to stormwater drainage systems. Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measures IV.N-l.l through IV.N- 1.4 would reduce operation impacts associated with polluted runoff to a less-than-significant level. 23 Woodward-Clyde Consultants, Contribution of Heavy Metals to Storm Water From Automotive Disc Brake Pad Wear, Woodward-Clyde Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Program, City of Palo Alto Public Works Department, 2501 Embarcadero Way, Palo Alto, CA 94303,1994. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-20 City of South San Francisco October 2009 Mitigation Measure IV.N-1.1 Operational SWPPP The project applicant shall develop an operational SWPPP for all drainage to the Central and South Sub- Drainage areas prior to construction of the Precise Plan and for the North Sub-Drainage area prior to construction of the subsequent phases of the Master Plan to protect water quality after construction. These project SWPPPs shall include, but not be limited to, the following measures for project operation: . Description of potential sources of erosion and sediment at the project site for each phase of the Master Plan. Industrial activities and significant materials and chemicals that could be used for each phase of the Master Plan at the proposed project site shall be described. This shall include a thorough assessment of existing and potential pollutant sources. . Identification of BMPs to be implemented for the Precise Plan and for each phase of the Master Plan at the project site based on identified industrial activities and potential pollutant sources. Emphasis shall be placed on source control BMPs, with treatment controls uses as needed. . Development of a monitoring and implementation plan for the Precise Plan and for each phase of the Master 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 shall be budgeted to include disposal at a proper site. Parking lot areas shall be cleared on a daily basis of debris that may enter the storm drain system. . 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 in coordination with the STOPPP. The SWPPP shall be adjusted, as necessary, to address any inadequacies of the BMPs. . The project applicant shall prepare informational literature and guidance on industrial and commercial BMPs for the Precise Plan and each phase of the Master Plan 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: (1) proper disposal of commercial cleaning chemicals; (2) proper use of landscaping chemicals; (3) clean-up and appropriate disposal of hazardous materials and chemicals; and (4) prohibition of any washing and dumping of materials and chemicals into storm drains. Mitigation Measure IV.N-1.2 Storm Drain Interceptors The project applicant shall install a storm drain interceptor (also known as an oil/water or oil/grit separator) on-site to remove oils and heavy particulates from stormwater at appropriate storm drains for the Precise Plan and each phase of the Master Plan. Appropriate sizing of the unit relative to the impervious surface drainage area is important and should be taken into consideration when choosing the interceptor unit model and size. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-21 City of South San Francisco October 2009 Mitigation Measure IV.N-l.3 Impervious Area Drainage Retention Devices The project applicant shall incorporate alternative drainage solutions around surface parking lots and near large areas of impervious surfaces such as public plazas to increase pervious surfaces on the site and increase infiltration. This shall be done for the Precise Plan and each phase of the Master Plan. Such solutions may include, but are not limited to, vegetated swales, bioretention areas, planter/tree boxes, and ponds. Mitigation Measure IV.N-l.4 Rooftop Retention Devices The project applicant shall incorporate rooftop or downspout retention into all building plans proposed by the Precise Plan and each phase of the Master Plan to capture all roof runoff. Impact IV.N-2: The proposed project would require or result in the construction of new water treatment, distribution, or conveyance facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. The project consists of the phased removal and replacement of existing buildings on the 22.6 acre project site and construction of five to six new buildings and two to four parking structures. The project would be constructed in five or fewer phases from 2011 to 2020, resulting in a gradual increase the project's impacts related to the need for new water facilities or the expansion of existing facilities. The proposed project would involve increasing density at the site by developing the site up to an FAR of 1.25. This change in FAR translates to an increase in development at the site from approximately 284,000 sf to approximately 1,230,570 sf., or a net change of 946,570 sf. As a result, the proposed project could have a potentially significant impact on the water system that delivers the required fire flows. Water for fire flow would be provided in 12 inch mains that would be constructed with the Precise Plan and each phase of the project. The water distribution system is owned and operated by CWSc. The water system consists of a network of 12- and 10-inch lines which should be adequate to serve the required flows?4 To avoid impacts to the water system's ability to serve peak flow demands, fire flow testing as well as analysis and certification by fire protection personnel as described in Mitigation Measures IV.N-5 through IV.N-2.l below would reduce the impacts associated with increased fire flow demands to a less- than significant level. Mitigation Measure IV.N-2.1 Fire Flow Analysis Report In order to assure that the water system has the ability to serve peak flow demands including for fire flow, prior to first building permit for all buildings constructed for the Precise Plan and each phase of the Master Plan, the project applicant shall consult a NCEES certified Fire Protection Engineer to prepare an analysis of the proposed project and determine the required design fire flow and fire duration. A certified report shall be submitted to the South San Francisco Fire Department for review and comment to ensure that all required design fire flow and fire duration requirements are met. 24 Brady and Associates for the City of South San Francisco, East of 101 Area Plan, July, 1994. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-22 City of South San Francisco October 2009 Mitigation Measure IV.N-2.2 Fire Flow Testing In order to assure that the water system has the ability to serve peak flow demands including for fire flow, prior to receiving a building permit for all buildings constructed for the Precise Plan and each phase of the Master Plan, the project applicant shall perform fire flow tests for all hydrants within 500 feet of the project site pursuant to American Water Works Association filed testing standards25 to verify if adequate fire flows defined in Mitigation Measure N-5 are achieved. Any deficiency measured shall be corrected and retested prior occupancy. Mitigation Measure IV.N-2.3 Fire Protection Water Supply In order to assure that the water system has the ability to provide water supply for fire protection, prior to occupancy of all buildings constructed for the Precise Plan and each phase of the Master Plan, California Water Service Company shall certify that reservoir storage, beyond their operational and emergency allotments, required for adequate protection identified in Mitigation Measure IV.N-2.l will be maintained at all times. Impact IV.N-3: The proposed project would not require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. The drainage system in the East of 101 Area is generally designed and constructed for industrial development and the associated large areas of impervious surfaces. The project would connect to existing drainage lines that drain directly to San Francisco Bay. All stormwater drainage is regulated by the RWQCB. The proposed project would redevelop an area of the project area that is already populated by buildings and impervious surfaces. The project would require new drainage structures and localized on- site storm drain systems. As construction proceeds through the Precise Plan and each phase of the Master Plan, impervious area would be incrementally reduced. Ultimately, the amount of stormwater created in the project area would decrease from existing conditions because the amount of impervious area would be reduced from approximately 70 percent to approximately 61 percent. Because no additional stormwater runoff would be created, no additional stormwater would need to be accommodated in existing stormwater drainage facilities, and no expansion of stormwater drainage facilities would be warranted. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are required. Impact IV.N-4: The proposed project would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources and no new or expanded entitlements are needed. The project consists of the phased removal and replacement of existing buildings on the 22.6 acre project site and construction of five to six new buildings and two to four parking structures. The project would be constructed in five or fewer phases from 2011 to 2020, resulting in a gradual increase the project's demand on water supply. 25 AWWA .1989. AWWA M17-Installation, Field Testing, & Maintenance of Fire Hydrants, American Water Works Association. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-23 City of South San Francisco October 2009 At completion of construction of all buildings constructed for the Precise Plan and each phase of the Master Plan, the project would result in a net area increase of 946,570 square feet. It is assumed that use of the existing 284,000 square feet will be the same in the new development. Therefore, the only change in water demand will be that due to the net increase in building space over each phase of the project. For the period from July 2007 through June 2008, the total internal metered water use for the five existing buildings (700, 1000, 750, 800 and 850) was 3,392,180 gallons (approximately 9,294 gpd) for an area of 234,013 square feet. Therefore, overall average daily water use was 0.04 gpd per square foot. For the proposed development project, it is assumed that water usage rates for new office space, new R&D laboratories and landscape irrigation will remain the same (.036 gpd per square foot for office space and .063 gpd per square foot for biotechnology research and development laboratory space use). For the July 2007 through June 2008 period, total landscape irrigation water use was 7,219,192 gallons for an area of 250, 143 square feet. Therefore, average daily irrigation water use was 0.079 gallons/day/ft2. The existing landscaped area, mainly grass, is 295,100 square feet. The proposed build out landscaped area will be mainly drought tolerant plantings. The landscaped area is expected to increase by 88,500 square feet to a total area of 383,500 square feet. This is an increase in area of 30 percent. The landscape architect estimates a reduction in irrigation rate of at least .33 percent due to conversion from grass to drought tolerant plants. Hence, in the WSA it is assumed that there is no change in total quantity of water use for irrigation due to proposed project. The project proposes office uses on the site. The WSA was prepared using the assumptions that approximately 40 percent of the proposed new building space will be used for offices and the remaining 60 percent of space for biotechnology research and development laboratories. R&D uses typically consume more water than office uses. Therefore, the estimated increase in water demand due to the proposed project of 49,411 gpd is more conservative than what would be demanded under full buildout of the Precise Plan and all subsequent phases of the Master Plan?6 The project would employ a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)-equivalent standard for the design of the new buildings and would use water consumption. In addition, Cal Water concluded that for the next 20 years, the SSF District will have adequate water supplies to meet projected demands associated with the proposed project along with those of all existing customers and all other anticipated future users for normal, single dry year and multiple dry year conditions. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are required. While the proposed project's effect on water supply is not a significant effect under CEQA, there are measures that the City could encourage the project applicant to implement or impose as conditions of approval. Measures such as the installation of water-conserving appliances including dishwashers, washing machines, toilets, and faucets and the use of drought-resistant plants in landscaping would minimize the project site's water demand. Therefore, Mitigation Measure IV.4.l below would reduce the proposed project's contribution to the total water demand. 26 This calculation is based on the following equation: 0.036 gallons/day/sq ft x 946,570 sq ft x 0.40 + 0.063 gallons/day/sqft x 946,570 sqft x 0.60 = 13,631 + 35,780 = 49,411 gallons/day. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-24 City of South San Francisco October 2009 Mitigation Measure IV.N-4.1 Water Conservation In order to reduce water demands of all phases of the proj ect, the proj ect applicant shall include methods of water conservation in the proposed proj ect' s buildings and landscaping for the Precise Plan and each phase ofthe Master Plan. These methods shall include, but not be limited, to the following: . Install water-conserving dishwashers and washing machines, and water-efficient centralized cooling systems in all new buildings (this method would not apply to process development or research development laboratory equipment); . Install water-conserving irrigation systems (e.g., drip irrigation and evaportranspiration-based irrigation controllers); . Design landscaping with drought-resistant and other low-water-use plants; and . Install water-saving devices such as water-efficient toilets, faucets, and showerheads. Impact IV.N-5: The proposed project would not result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments. The project consists of a Precise Plan and Master Plan, which would result in the phased removal and replacement of existing buildings on the 22.6 acre project site and construction of five to six new buildings and two to four parking structures. The project would be constructed in five phases from 2011 to 2020, resulting in a gradual increase the project's impacts related to wastewater treatment. There are no uses proposed for the site that would use or produce wastewater containing contaminants that cannot be treated at the WQCP or that would require on-site treatment. An addendum to the 2002 East of 101 Sewer System Master Plan27 recalculated demands based on the planning assumptions that have changed. These changes include land use, development densities and intensities, and population growth rates assumptions. The wastewater flows were set equal to the water demands estimated in the WSA included as Appendix I to this Draft EIR. Therefore, the average dry weather flow from the project site is estimated to increase by 49,411 gpd (0.049 mgd) for a total of 58,705 gpd (0.058 mgd).28 Current average dry weather flows east of Highway 101 are approximately 1.7 mgd. Several deficiencies identified in the 2002 East of 101 Sewer System Master Plan have been remedied including: Harbor Trunk, Swift Subtrunk, and Pump Station 3. Additional improvements were identified in the 2002 Sewer System Master Plan and are included in a capital improvement plan that would allow for capacity up to 5.5 mgd average dry weather flow. Based on a capacity of 5.5 mgd and a current flow 27 Carollo Engineers for the City of South San Francisco, Addendum to the City of South San Francisco East of Highway 101 Sewer Master Plan, May 2007. This calculation is based on the following equation: 49,411 gallons/day + (3,392,180 gallons /365 days) = 58,705 gallons/day. 28 Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-25 City of South San Francisco October 2009 of 1.7 mgd, the remaining capacity in the east of Highway 101 collection systems is 3.8 mgd. As a result, the incremental increase of 0.049 mgd to the collection system is less than significant. As discussed previously, current flows to the WQCP are approximately 9 mgd, while the permitted capacity of the plant is 13 mgd. As shown in Table IV.N -1, no water quality violations have occurred within the last two years, and as a result, the projected 0.049 mgd percent increase in dry weather flows from the proposed project to the WQCP would not exceed the WQCP capacity. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are required. Impact IV.N-6: The proposed project would be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs. The project consists of a Precise Plan and Master Plan, which would result in the phased removal and replacement of existing buildings on the 22.6 acre project site and construction of five to six new buildings and two to four parking structures. The project would be constructed in five or fewer phases from 2011 to 2020, resulting in a gradual increase in the project's impacts related to solid waste generation. The Scavenger Company is contracted by the City of South San Francisco as the sole hauler of solid waste and operator of recycling services for the City. The Scavenger Company transports all solid waste from the master plan area to the Blue Line Transfer facility. The Blue Line Transfer facility has a permitted capacity of 2,000 tons per day, but currently receives an average of approximately 800 tons per day. Once the useable materials have been separated at the Blue Line Transfer facility, the remaining trash is then transported to the Ox Mountain Sanitary Landfill. The landfill has a permitted maximum disposal of 3,598 tons per day?9 As of 2000, the landfill has exceeded its permitted capacity of 37.9 million cubic yards by approximately 6.7 million cubic yards (17.8 percent). However, the closure date is planned for 2018. Because the proposed project would roughly quadruple in size the development at the site, the project would result in an approximate quadrupling of solid waste to the Blue Line Transfer facility and Ox Mountain Sanitary Landfill from the master plan area?O Development under the proposed project would result in an additional 3,731,379 pounds (1,866 tons) of solid waste per year (approximately 10,223 pounds [5 tons] per day), representing approximately 0.25 percent and 0.14 percent of the permitted maximum amount accepted daily at the Blue Line Transfer facility and Ox Mountain Sanitary Landfill, respectively. The remaining capacity of the Blue Line Transfer facility would be able to accommodate the 29 California Integrated Waste Management Board, Active Landfills Profile for Ox Mountain Sanitary Landfill (41-AA-0002), website: http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Profiles/F acility/Landfill/LFProfile 1. asp ?COID= 7 &F ACID =41-AA -0002, accessed September 4, 2008. 30 According to the Guidelines for Preparation of Environmental Assessments for Solid Waste Impacts (Ventura County Solid Waste Management Department, May 1998), a solid waste generation rate of O. 01 08 pounds per square foot per day is applicable to office, manufacturing, and eating/drinking establishments sectors. Thus, if this rate is applied to the project, the solid waste generation rate would directly relate to the increase in development proposed under the project. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-26 City of South San Francisco October 2009 additional solid waste?! Furthermore, the Scavenger Company has stated that a quadrupling of the development at the project site and subsequent increase in solid waste generation would not impact Scavenger's current available capacity?2 While the Ox Mountain landfill is currently in excess of its permitted capacity, BPI continues to accept waste as the landfill gradually settles and new space becomes available. As discussed previously, BPI is permitted until 2016 to expand the Ox Mountain landfill. Thus, the increase in solid waste generated under the proposed project would be sufficiently served by the Blue Line Transfer facility and the Ox Mountain Landfill. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are required. Impact IV.N-7: The proposed project would comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Solid waste disposal and recycling in the City of South San Francisco is regulated by the City's SSFMC, particularly Chapters 8.16 and 8.28. As neither of these chapters establishes quantitative disposal or recycling rates, the project site, under the Gateway Business Park Master Plan, would not be subject to diversion requirements. However, under the SSFMC, the project would be required to have its solid waste, including construction and demolition debris, and recyclable materials collected by the Scavenger Company. The master plan area currently complies with this provision and would continue to do so under the implementation of the proposed proj ect. Additional health and sanitation requirements set forth in the SSFMC would be met by the Scavenger Company. As described in the Regulatory Framework, AB 939 requires that local jurisdictions divert at least 50 percent of all solid waste by 2000. Prior to 2004, the City of South San Francisco was not been able to meet the AB 939 requirement.33 However, the CIWMB has repeatedly granted the City time extensions to achieve the 50 percent diversion goal. Between 2004 and 2006, the City met the AB 939 requirement. The results for 2007 are not yet available. As analyzed above, the master plan area is not a substantial contributor to the City's generation of solid waste disposal at the Ox Mountain Sanitary Landfill. Implementation of the proposed project could quadruple the master plan area's solid waste contribution to Blue Line Transfer facility and Ox Mountain Sanitary Landfill, but the master plan area's contribution would remain relatively small. Consequently, because the proposed project would not impede the City's compliance with AB 939, there would be no impact and no mitigation measures are required. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The geographic context for a discussion of cumulative impacts to utilities is the service area of the utility in question. For instance, the geographic context for cumulative impacts to water supply is the CWSC and SFPUC service areas; to wastewater, it is the East of 101 Area; and to the storm drainage system, the geographic context is the local watershed. The cumulative impacts analysis for each utility includes all 31 Formosa, Paul, Chief Financial Officer, South San Francisco Scavenger Company, phone conversation with CAJA staff, July 28, 2008. 32 Ibid. Formosa, Paul, Chief Financial Officer, South San Francisco Scavenger Company, phone conversation with CAJA staff, September 25, 2008. 33 Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-27 City of South San Francisco October 2009 cumulative growth within its respective service area, as identified by the providers' demand projections. Growth and utility demand forecasts for each utility are presented above. The existing drainage system in the East of 10 1 Area is generally designed and constructed for industrial development, which has a high ratio of impervious surfaces?4 The project site's storm drainage system consists of underground pipes and outfalls that empty to drain lines on Oyster Point Boulevard and Gateway Boulevard. Stormwater point and non-point source discharges are a major source of pollution in San Francisco Bay from the City, as the City's storm drainage system discharges to the Bay. As redevelopment in the East of 101 Area continues, industrial and commercial development could degrade water quality through industrial pollutant discharges or simply as a result of increased traffic. To combat this problem, the STOPPP has prepared a BMPs plan to control pollutants in their stormwater system. Compliance with the permit requirements for non-point source stormwater discharge under the NPDES also requires the property owner of all construction projects over one acre in size to obtain a stormwater discharge permit. The WQCP operates under STOPPP's Joint Municipal NPDES Permit. Cumulative impact and redevelopment may result in a significant increase of pollutant load in the runoff. The proposed project represents 22.6 acres or approximately 2 percent of the 1,177 acres in the East of 101 Area. Therefore, the proposed project would not be cumulatively considerable. However, compliance with Mitigation Measures IV.N-1.1 through IV.N-1.4 would ensure that the project's contribution to stormwater pollutants flows would be minimized and would help reduce the amount of potentially harmful toxins on City streets. The 2002 East of 10 1 Sewer System Master Plan35 required sewer system upgrades and allocated construction costs to existing and future users. Projected flow rates were calculated to a 2020 planning horizon based on redevelopment of 32 parcels to research and development. An addendum to the 2002 East of 101 Sewer System Master Plan36 recalculated demands based on the planning assumptions that have changed. These changes include land use, development densities and intensities, and population growth rates assumptions. Current average dry weather flows in the East of 101 Area are approximately 1.7 mgd. The recalculated sewer flow rates assume the wastewater flow rates are equal to the water demands. The recalculated average dry flows were 2.4 mgd in 2015 and 3.2 mgd in 2030. The previous flow projections were 12.1 mgd in 2020, 3.8 times greater than the revised flow. Deficiencies in the collection identified in 2002 East of 101 Sewer System Master Plan still need to be repaired to provide for future capacity,37 but the lower projected flows may result in a larger connection charge per unit of capacity. Since planned improvements to the collection will adequately the serve the cumulative growth, the impact to the collection systems is less than significant. 34 35 Brady and Associates for the City of South San Francisco, East of 101 Area Plan, July, 1994. Carollo Engineers for the City of South San Francisco, City of South San Francisco East of Highway 101 Sewer Master Plan, September 2002. Carollo Engineers for the City of South San Francisco, Addendum to the City of South San Francisco East of Highway 101 Sewer Master Plan, May 2007. 37 Ibid. 36 Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-28 City of South San Francisco October 2009 Current flows to the WQCP are approximately 9 mgd, while the permitted capacity ofthe plant is 13 mgd. No water quality violations have occurred within the last two years. Projected growth for the East 101 Area is 3.2 mgd, an increase of 1.5 mgd. The resulting increase for the East of 101 Area does not exceed the capacity of the WQCP, as the cumulative impact would be less than significant. Table IV.N-2 SSF District Supply Versus Demand (AFY) Normal Total Supply 8,830 9,070 9,370 9,690 10,030 Hydrologic Annual Ave Day Demand 8,830 9,070 9,370 9,690 10,030 Year Difference 0 0 0 0 0 Total Supply 8,830 9,070 9,370 9,690 10,030 One Dry Year Annual Ave Day Demand 8,830 9,070 9,370 9,690 10,030 Difference 0 0 0 0 0 Multiple Dry Total Supply 7,140 7,330 7,570 7,825 8,100 Year Period Annual Ave Day Demand 7,064 7,256 7,496 7,752 8,024 Difference +76 +74 +74 +73 +76 I Assessment or Gatewa Business Park Pro 'ect, December 2, 2008 Table IV.N-2 demonstrates the supply reliability and projected future demands by varying hydrologic conditions over the 20-year planning horizon through 2028 as required by SB 610. The analysis of supply and demand shows that Cal Water has sufficient water supplies to meet normal year, single dry year, and multiple dry year periods With respect to either the 5-year or 20-year forecasts, the project does not represent a significant percentage in the projected increase in SSF District demand. For 2013, it leaves 94 percent of the projected increase in demand for other projects and general growth within the District. For 2028, it leaves 95.5 percent for other projects and general growth. Therefore, the proposed project would not be cumulatively considerable. SFPUC and Cal Water are dedicated to implementing conservation and water recycling measures. In addition, Cal Water is a member of the California Urban Water Conservation Council (CUWCC). The CUWCC was created to increase efficient water use statewide through partnerships among urban water agencies, public interest organizations, and private entities. The Council's goal is to integrate urban water conservation BMPs into the planning and management of California's water resources. Implementation of water conservation BMPs will help limit water demand from customers within the SSF District's service area and reduce water supply requirements. However, compliance with Mitigation Measure IV.N-4.1 would ensure that the project's contribution to water supply demand would be minimized. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-29 City of South San Francisco October 2009 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Implementation of Mitigation Measures IV.N -1.1 through IV.N -4.1 identified in this section would adequately mitigate all potential impacts related to utilities and service systems. These impacts would also be reduced to a less than significant level. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVN Utilities/Service Systems Page IVN-30