Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 171-1984 RESOLUT I ON NO. 171- CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PLANNING CORPORATION TO PREPARE AN E IR FOR SHEARWATER DEVELOPMENT ON THE FORMER U. S. STEEL AND GSA PROPERTIES BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that: 1. Approval of Agreement. The Agreement entitl ed "Consul ting Agreement" between Environmental Impact Planning Corporation and the City of South San Francisco is hereby approved, and a copy of said Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit "A." 2. Execution of Agreement. The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute said Agreement on behalf of the City, and the City Clerk attest his signature thereto. I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting held on the24th day of October , 1984, by the following vote' AYES' NOES' Councilmembers Mark N. Addiego, Fmanu~lp N. r)amnntm, Richard A. Haffey, Gus Nicolopulos; and Roberta Cerri Teglia None ABSENT' None ATTEST' - EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION NO. 171-84 CONSULTING AGREEMENT THIS CONSULTING AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 24th day of October 1984, by and between ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PLANNING CORPORATION,. a California corporation, located at .319 Eleventh Street, San Francisco, California ("Consuitant"), and CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, a munieipal corporation, located at 400 Grand Avenue, P.O. Box 711, South San Francisco, California, 94080 ("Client){ WITNESSETH THAT, in consideration of the premises and covenants hereinafter set forth, the parties agree as follows: 1: Consultin~ Serviees. (a) Consultant agrees, during the term of this ! Agreement, to perform the consulting services set forth in Exhibit A relating to the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report ("Report") with respect to U.S. Stee! Site Project. (b) In addition to the services described in Subparagraph (a) above, the parties may from time to time agree in writing' during the term of this Agreement that Consultant aha J1 perform additional services in eonneetion with the Report or the Project. Such additional services may include, but are not limited to (i) changes in the services set '-' forth in Exhibit A because of design changes in the Project; (ii) preparation of..speeial detailed graphics; (iii) research and analysis in addition to the requirements therefor set forth in Exhibit A; (iv) additional studies or modifications of existing documents because ., ,of chang;es in any laws, rules, reg~llations or polieies of any state, federa~ or loea~ governmenta~ authority having jurisdiction over the Project, or additionsd work on the Environmenta~ Impact Statement if required beyond the scope of services set forth in Option 2 of Exhibit A; (v) attendance by Consultant at more than 4 public hearings eoneernin~ the Report. (e) Nothing in this Agreement shall operate or be construed to preclude or inhibit Consultant' from rendering similar serviees to any other t~erson or entity. Consultant shs21 be obligated to devote only so mueh of its attention, skil! and effort as ': may be reasonably required to perform the serviees deseribed herein in a professional and timely manner. 2. Duties of Client. la order to permit Consultant to tender the services required hereunder, Client shall, at its expense and in a timely m~nner~ (i) provide such information concerning the Project as Consultant may require from time to time to ---- enable Consultant to formulate a description of .he Project for purposes of Consultant's Page 1 of 7 Pages study ahd eValuation of the Project's environmental effects; (ii) assist Consultant in the development of a description of alternatives to the Project based on the requirements set forth by client; (iii) assist Consultant in the coordination and exchange of such planning and design information relating to the Project as Consultant may require from time to time; (iv)promptly inform Consultant of any'pending or confirmed changes in the design of the Project; (v) promptly, review any and all documents and materials submitted to Client by Consultant for client's comment in an effort to avoid unreasonable delays in the progress of Consultant's services; and (vi) promptly notify Consultant of any fault or def~et in the Project in any way relating to the performance of Consultant's services hereunder. : 3. Personnel' (a) Consultant agrees that it will employ, at its own expense, all personnel reasonably necessary in its discretion to perform the services required by this Agreement ~md in no event shall such personnel be the employees of Client. Ail of the sePvices required hereunder shall be performed by Consultant or under its direction and all personnel engaged therein shall be fully qualified under applicable state, federal and local law to undertake the work'performed by them. (b) In addition to Personnel employed directly by Consultant, Consultant shall have the right to engage such subcontractors as it may deem necessary to the performance of its services hereunder with the prior approval of Client, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. · 4. Comoensationo Client shall pay to Consultant an amount not to exceed the sum of $46,500 as consideration for the performance of the services under the Base Work- Program set forth in Exhibit A. In the event that an EIS on the project is ~equired the compensation for such. services is estimated to be $50,000 to $58,125. The sum of $50,000 would cover the cost of services provided in Option 1 of the Work Program contained in. Exhibit A. The sum of $58,125 would cover the cost of services provided in Option 2 of the Work Program in Exhibit A. Such compensation shall be payable in the following manner: .~ (i) A work retainer of $1,000 shall be paid to Consultant'at the time Consultant commences the performance of services hereunder. Sueh work retainer shall be applied against the monthly statements described in Subparagraph (ii) below until exhausted. (ii) Client shall pay within thirty (30) days of receipt the amount set forth in monthly statements submitted to Client by Consultant describing in reasonable and understandable detail the .services rendered, and fees charged and expenses incu,'red by Page 2 of 7 Pages Consultant during the previous month in accordance with the billing standards set forth in Ekhibit B, including fees and expenses for additional services authorized by Subpara- graph (b) of Section I above. (iii) Upon Client's failure to pay within thirty (30) days' of receipt the full amount set forth in 'any monthly statement submitted to Client by Consultant, said unpaid balance will beat- interest at. the rate of 'one (1) Percent per month until the amount of said. unpaid balance plus interest thereon shall be paid in full. · (iv) Consultant shall, at its sole discretion, have the right to suspend work on ~he services performed hereUnder, if Client has any monthly statements as described in subparagraph (i) above more than 60 days past due. Consultant shall recommence work upon p/~yment of all statements then past due. 5. Time of Performance. Consultant shall commence the performance of its services under this Agreement forthwith as of the date of execution thereof, and shall diligently proceed therewith in accordance with the following schedule: · st~bmittal of the Administrative Draft EIR (ADEIR) on December 5, 1984 · submittal of the Draft EIR (DEIR) two weeks following receipt of com- ments on the ADEIR · submittal of the Final EIR two weeks following the close of the public r_e. view- period and ree_eipt of all comments on the Draft EIR. 'The schedule is subject to delays for causes beyond the reasonable control of Consultant or occasioned by changes in the design of the Project or the failure of Client to perform its obligations hereunder in a' timely fashion. Time is of the essence in completion of this agreement. 6. Term. (a) The term of this Agreement shall commence as of the date first- above written and shall continue until the earliest to occur of the following: (i) the date on which Consultant notifies Client in writing that it has completed all of the services required hereunder;, or (ii) five (5) working days after written notice by either party of substantial failure-by the other party to fulfill its obligations under'this Agreement in a timely manner through no fault of the terminating party. (b). The City may for its own convenience terminate this agreement at any time by giving written notice to the consultant of such termination and. specifying effective date thereof, which notice shall be given at least twenty days prior to the effective date of such termination. Page 3 of 7 Pages (e) If this Agreement is terminated prior to the completion of Consul- tan:'s work, in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this Agreement, Consultant shall be entitled to compensation for all services performed and' costs incurred hereunder through and including the date of termination.' 7. Ownership of Documents. Consultant agrees to return to Client. upon .termination of'this Agreement all documents, drawings, Photographs and other written or graphic material, however produced, received from Client and used by Consultant in the performance of its services hereunder.' All documents of any kind Which are included in the EIR or which provide technical back-up of any kind to the EIR shall become the property of the Client at the completion of Consultant's work on said EIR or upon .termination of this agreement pm;suant to Paragraph 6 above. The Consultant may retain a copy of all material produced under this Agreement for its use in its general business · activities. 8. Indeloendent Judgment. Client understands and acknowledges that the preparation and presentation of the Report may invite criticism, controversy and litigation which may be motivated {~y public or private opposition to the Project although based on the adequacy or accuracy of the Report. Client agrees that any such criticism, controversy or litigation with respect to the Report will not cause Client to withhold payments due to Consultant hereunder. 9. Litigation. In the event that either party brings an action under this Agreement for the breach or enforcement thereof, the prevailing party in such action shall be entitled to its reasonable attorneys' fees and costs if such action is prosecuted to ' .. judgment. 10. 'Insuranc.e. The Consultant shall take out and maintain during the life of' this Agreement the following policies of insurance:. (a) Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability Insurance providing full statutory coverage. In signing this Agreement, the Consultant makes the following certification, required by Section 1861 of the California Labor Code: "I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Workers' Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions 'of the Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Agree-. ment?~ Page 4 of ? Pages (b) Public Liability Insurance. In an amount not less than FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) for injuries including but not limited to death to any one person and subject to the same limit for each person, in an amount not less than ONE · MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) on account of any one occurrence. (c) Prol~ertv Damage Insurance. In an amount not less than FIVE HUNDRED 'THOUSAND DOLLARS ($$00,000.00) for damage to the property Of each person on account of any one occurrence. (d) Contractual Liability Insurance. Consultant shall take out and main- rain during the life of this Agreement an insurance policy in the amount of at Iea~st ONE 'MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00), insurin~ City, its elective and appointive boards, .commissions, officers, agents and employees, and Consultant against damages sustained by reason of any. action or actions at. law or in equity~ a_nd/or any claims or demands by reason of any alleged breach of any contract, or provisions thereof, or by reason of any contractual liability, or alleged contractual liability on any contraet~ entered into by Consultant and/or any of its agents or. employees. (e) It is agreed that 'the insurance required by Subsections b, c and d shall be extended to include as additional insureds the City of South San Francisco, its elective and appointive boards, officers, agents and employees, with respect to operations performed by the ConSultant, as described herein. Evidence of this insurance described above shall be provided to City upon exeeutior[ of this agreement and shall be subject to approval by the City Attorney as to form~ amount and earriero The policy of insurance shall also contain a provision indicating that such insurance shall not be reduced or cancelled except upon thirty (30) days' written notice to City. In addition, the following endorsement shall be nlade on said policy of insurance: "Notwithstanding any other pt;ovision~ in this policy, the insurance afforded hereunder to the City of South San Francisco shall be primary as to any other insurance or reinsurance covering or available to the City of South San Francisco, and such other insurance or reinsurance shall not be required to contribute to any liability or loss until and unless the approximate limit of liability afforded hereunder is exhausted." I1. Notices. Any notice or demand desired or required to be given hereunder shall be in writing and deemed given when personally delivered or deposited in the mail, postage prepaid, sent certified or registered, and addressed to the p~zties as set forth above or to such other address as either party shall have previously designated by such a notice. Any notice so delivered personally shall be deemed to be received on the date of Page 5 of ? Pages deli.ver~." and.any notice so mailed shall be deemed to be received five ($) days after the d~te on which it was mailed. '12. Waivers. Waiver of any breach or default hereunder shall not constitute a continuinl~ waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach either of the same or of another proviSion of this Agreement. '13. 'Modification. No waiver, ~alteration, modification or termination of.this Agreement shall be valid unless made 'in writing- 14. Assi.~ment. 'Neither party shall assign, transfer or' otherwise dispose of thi~ Agreement in whole or in Part to any individual, firm or corporation without the prior written consent of the other party. Subject to the provisions of the preceding sentence, this AKreement shall be binding upon, and inure to the benefit of~ the respective successors and assi~.s of the parties hereto. 15. Governing' Law. This A~reement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 16. Counterl~arts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counter- parts, each of which shall be deemed to be an ori~inal~ but all of which to~ether shall constitute but one and the same instrument. 17. Further Assurances. The parties agree to have executed any-and all documents and take any and all actions which may be necessary or advisable to effectuate the purposes of this A~reement. 18. Caotions. The headings or captions to the sections of this A~Teement are not a part of this Agreement and shall have no effect upon the construction or interpretation of any part thereof. 19.' Severabilit¥, If any term, covenant or condition of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the ~emainder of this A~reement shall remain in effect. 20. Resoonsibilit¥; Indemnification. Consultant shall indemnify, hold harmless, and at Clienbs request, defend Client, its employees, at'ents and representatives from and against all claims, demands~ actions~ causes of action, losses, damages, liabilities~ costs and expenses includint' reasonable attorneys fees or obligations, for Or in connection with personal injury (including' but not limited to death) or damage to property which arises out of or is in any way connected with the negligent act, error or omission of Consultant and its a!ients~ subeontractors~ or employees as a result of Consultant's rendering.of services under this A~reement. Page 6 of 7 Pages 21. Entire ARTeement. This Agreement sets forth the entire understanding -between the parties as to the subject matter of this A~eement and merges all prior discussions,, negotiations, letters of understanding or other promises, whether oral or in writing. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement the day and year first-above written. "Consultant" "Client" ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PLANNING CORPORATION, a California corporation Doug~fis Donaldson Chie~ Ad ministrative Officer ATTEST' CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO a municipal corporation By Page 7 of ? Pages I. INTHODUCTION . The City of South San Francisco has received an application for a mixed-use development on.the former United States Steel/American Bridge and former G.S.A, properties located on the north side of Oyster Point Boulevard east of Highway 101o The site comprises approximately 47.2 acres of dry land and 133 acres of water-covered land. The former. pipe and Steel manufacturing' facility has been demolished, leaving' only asphalt pavement~ concrete slabs and docks and a deep water channel entry that provides access to the Bay. One large warehouse building' owned by the City of South. San Francisco (formerly owned by G.S.A.) still remains, but it will also be demolished and the land developed as part of the overall Master Plan. . . The applicant proposes a master planned, mixed-use community, consistin~ of 'a 1.00,000- square-foot Convention Center, a 4§0-room, first-class hotel, 500 marina berths, a yacht club, 1.5 million square feet of offices, retail shops and restaurants, and-3b-0-residential units. Based on the findings of the initial study, the City of South San Francisco has determined that an environmental impact repot-t will be required. IL APPROACH · · The proposed project represents a unique opportunity to achieve a high quality develop- m~nt which contributes to a positive future image for the City in addition to enhancing the City's fiscal outlook. Our approach to the EIR is based on a number of principles allOwing' for the preparation of technical environmental information which can be Useful to the City in achieving its objectives. 'l:he following key points summarize the principles that have guided our study design and which will characterize our participation as consultants to the City. . COMPR~.H~,N'SIVE UNDERSTANDING OF LOCAL ISSUES The RIP Team is thoroughly versed in the range of technical issues to be studied in the EIR. Each firm comprising' the RIP Team has worked on or is currently working on significant projects in_.the site._vieinity. 'With this background we are able to provide a comprehensive assessment of critical issues at the outset of the study, ensuring that n'o issue will be left unresolved. (See Chapter IV for a detailed discussion of issues.) PROBLEM SOLVING APPROACH A mere description of 'environmental consequences of the project is not enough. Because of the significance of the project to the City anc~ the developer, it is vital that feasible mitigation measures be developed to minimize or eliminate significant impacts. We view the EIR proce.ss as more than an academic exercise; our .approach is based on the application of practical and effective solutions to identified problems. EFFICIENT PREPARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS All of the RIP study team members have worked on projects on or in the vicinity of the U.S. Steel site. Because of this we are thoroughly prepared to undertake, the study immediately, and to complete the study in a timely manner in full conformance with the City's and developer's preferred schedule. OI~JI~CTIV~ UNBIASED APPROACH Participants in the study will consist of decision makers and other interested parties with a range of professional perspectives and priorities~ It is essential that the environmental consultant's contribution be trusted as reliable and unbiased. Our approach will be based on the application of sound professional and scientific methods to the identification of problems and development of solutions. To the extent feasible we will quantify the 'impacts of the proposed project and alternatives. Those impacts that cannot be quantified (i.e. visual conditions) will be clearly and explieity defined so that assumptions are understood. CLF.,AR COMMUHICATION OF TI~CHNICAL FLND~G8 ' The best technical analysis available is useless if it cannot be communicated. Clearly identifying~ impacts and potential mitigation measures to a diverse audience requires a practical approach that takes the mystery out of numbers, especially those relating; to traffic and economic considerations. Our team believes in backing up technical findings with clear explanations SO that necessary tradeoffs are easily understood by key decision makers and other involved parties. While much of the technical work in preparing' tl~e environmental analysis and the EIR wiI1 . be straightforward, some unknowns could influence the [~rocess. Some of these include the numbee of final alternatives to be studied anti whether an ElS will also be required. (See Work Program discussion in Chapter IV.) What is needed beyond straightforward environmental analysis is an understanding of the environmental review and planning L~rocess, which ira@lies flexibility to changing conditions as new ideas and requirements emerge. LEGAL ADEQUACY .. It is imperative that the EIR meet all standards of legal adequacy as prescribed by the California Environmental Quality Act. Douglas Donaldson, environmental attorney and Principal-in-Charge of the Study, will review all EIR sections to ensure their legal adequacy. SENSITI"FIT~ TO POLICY FACTORS AND POLITICAL CONDITIONS · Final/y, the EIP team has a practical orientation to the environments/ process which involves sensitivity to local policy mat~:e~s and political issues. While much of our work will be technics/in nature, our experience in community involvement and the forms/. EIlt public hearing process will allow us 'to determine with the City which community concerns are legitimate and which ones are' purely p~litical or inappropriate for consideration in. the environmental process. At the same time, our role will be vital to facilitating the decision-making process at the Council level, by providing reliable data, articulation of potential impacts, and definition of mitigation options. HI. WOrK pROGRAM A number of regional, state and federal agencies will review and comment on the environmental documentation prepared for the project. Because of the potential concerns of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers~ it is conceivable that an Environmental Impact Statement could be required on the project. Should this need arise, we would recommend that a joint EIS/EIR be prepared. Based on our past exluerienee, we feel it is more efficient in the long run to prepare a joint document initially rathe~ than to produce a second environmental document to satisfy federal requirements at: a later date. The proposed work program for preparation of an environmental im@aet report, in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, state guidelines and t.he environmental guidelines of the City of South San Francisco, is set forth below under Base Work Program. Should an EIS be required, we would recommend additional work tasks for preparing a joint EIS/EIR document. These work tasks are outlined in the Optional Work Program at the end of this chapter. BASE WORK PROGRAM TASK 1. IDEl~'£11f~. ISSUES William Ziebron, EIP's Project ManaIIer, will meet with the City to further discuss the issues in the environmental impact report. Our specific approach to each issue, as outlined in Chapter IV, will be verified. Any additional information that City staff, the public or concerned agencies may have to assist the study process will be transmitted at this time. , . It is expected that the EIR will address all issues as outlined in the Initial Study and Request for Proposals. The precise emphasis to be placed on each issue, however, will be determined iol!0wing the outcome of this task. TASK 2. COLLECT DATA AND INVESTIGATE SITE An intensive review of ail existing' plans, reports, studies, reg.ulations and doeuments relating to the site will be eondueted, lneluded will be offieial documents fz;om the City such as the General Plan, the Zoning and subdivision ordinance and EiRs prepared by EIP on projects in the vicinity of the site (Terrabay Development and Gateway RedeveloLu- ment). Other sources of data will be provided from traffic studies in the area. by. PRC Voorhees and toxic waste monitoring studies c°ndueted on the site by Brown and Ca]dwell. This material will be supplemented by site data provided by the project sponsor. Site investigations will also be undertaken in this task. The site will be investigated for' all relevant issues and information will be collected, organized and displayed on maps for · use in conducting the impact analysis in Task 3. TASK 3. CONDUCT IMPACT ANALYSIS Different environmental characteristics are likely to exhibit varying degrees of sensitivity to alteration. The criteria for determining constraints to'construction will be based on evaluation of site and local area characteristics and response of these characteristics to disturbance. EIP will fully investigate and evaluate all direct, indirect and cumulative impacts associated with the proposed project, in accordance with CEi~A requirements. · · TASK 4. PREPARE ADMINISTRATIVE DRAYT EIR The EIR will be~in with a Summary listing impacts and mitigation measures suggested by tilP; a detailed Project Description; and Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Measures relating' to Traffic, Toxic Wastes, Public Services, Fiscal, Noise, Water Quality, Housing,. Air (~uality, Aesthetics and Vegetation and Wildlife.-The EIR will also include all statutory sections required by CEQA: Unavoidable Adverse tmpacts~ Mternatives to the Project; Short-term versus Long-term Effects{ Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes; and Growth-Inducing Impacts of the project. , . The EIR will address alternatives to the prOposed project in a separate chapter of the EIR. Although [~recise aldtrnatives have not yet been defined, it is possible that a modified density alternative could be studied along with the no-project alternative. The complete set of alternatives to be analyzed will be determined with the City and project sponsor at the outset oi~ the study. TASK 5. PI1EPAlllE DP. AFT EIlt Following review .and comment on the Administrative Draft by City staff, EIP will prepare a Draft /:IR responding to those comments. One hundred copies of the Drgft will be printed and delivered to the City of South San Francisco ~or distribution. TASK $. PUBLIC HEARINGS The City of South San Francisco will advertise for and conduct at least four public hearings on the Draft and Final EIlls. At such public hearings, William Ziebron, EIP's . Project Manager~ will summarize and explain the document as necessary. If it is deemed appropriate by the City, other EIP staff specialists and consultants will attend the hearings to explain particular issues of importance. TASK ?. PRI~PAllIE RESPONSES TO COMMENTS EIP will respond to written comments on the Draft EIP. and comments made in the public hearings. Bill Ziebron will meet w_ith the City ~ollowing completion of..t_h_e resp_onses to comments to ensure that the material is adequately prepared. One hundred copies of the Responses to Comments (the Final Silt) will be delivered to the City. OPTIONAL WOltK PllOGRAM Option 1: Assist Corps of Engineers in Preparation of an ElS If an Environmental Impact Statement is required, and said document is to be prepared by the Corps, it may be advantageous for EIP to work closely with the Corps to ensure that information from the EIR is properly incorporated into the EIS. The services to be provided would be limited to coordination meetings and clarification of information , contained in the EIR document as necessary. Option 2: Prepare Joint ElS/Eli{ Document This option assumes that an ElS will b_e required and that. a joint ElS/Ell{ will be prepared by EIP. The precise tasks in the work program for preparation of a joint document will be determined following an initial meeting with the Corps of Engineers and following further discussions with the City of South San Francisco. ANALYSIS OF KEY ISSUES A. THAN~ORTA~ON A ~ange of transportation issues will be. studied including offsite roadway capacity, on-site circulation and access requirements, on-site parking,, transit usage, and pedestrian circulation. The proposed workscope for assessing these issues consists of four major · tasks: 1. Review of Existing Transportation Conditions, Plans and Policies - w{th special attention to committed development and roadway projects and MTC's corridor- level highway and transit issues. 2. Assessment of Impacts of U.S. Steel Site Development - with special attention to the. effects on the planned Oyster Point Interchange. - 3. Impacts of Cumulative Developments - including a review of long range corridor issues identified by MTC and Caltrans. 4. Development and Appraisal of Mitigation' Measure - including; stree{ and inter- change designs, on-site circulation, and a TSM Plan. These tasks are described below. 1. Review of Ttan.sL~ation Conditions, Plans and Policies The evaluation of existing transportation conditions will include analysis of current traffic facilities, volumes and service levels, transit services, and Transportation Systems Manag;ement (TSM) programs in force in the area. Conditions will be investigated not only as they exist. 'in late 1984 but also as they will be followin~ completion of committed projects. Regional and corridor-wide transportation plans and policies that affect the site will also be discussed. a. Traffic Conditions Existing traffic facilities, including access freeways and interchanges, arterial Streets and intersections, will be inventoried, and their geometric characteristics and traffic controls will be described. described, including: · The City's preferred desiKn for' the new Oyster Point interchange. Proposed and committed improvements will als~ be identified and · The Hillside Boulevard extension. · The new ramps to/from U.S. 101 ~rom/to Bayshore Boulevard at the Te~rabay entrance. · The southerly e~ension of Gateway Boulevard. The effects of these modifications on traffic circulation patterns will be discussed. Traffi'c counts ~ill be conducted for the AM and PM peak periods at key intersections and , tamps along Oyster Point BouleVard and Airport Boulevard. it is anticipated that up to five locations will need to be counted in each time period. Counts and capacity analysis from recent (198:1/1984) traffic studies in the area will be reviewed so that any additional critical locations can be identified. Traffic level of service analysis will be per/ormed to identify the late-1984 AM and PM peak hour operating ratings of: · Oyster Point/Dubuque/101 Ramps · Oyster Point/.Airport Boulevard · Airport Boulevard/Scissors Ramps · Airport Boulevard/. Linden On-Ramp · Oyster Point/Gateway Boulevard · Other critical locations. The effects of the planned roadway improvements identified above will also be deter- mined. Traffic touting changes will be predicted and resulting service level changes calculated. At the same .time, approved cumulative developments will be considered. Traffic generated by The Gateway, Terrabay, Oyster Point Business Center and other major committed projects will be added to the planned street network's volume and service level analysis. b. ' -Transit and 'ISM Conditions l!:xisting. Samtrans bus and Caltran commuter rail services in the area will be described, and planned service changes will be discussed. Regional and corridor-level transit improvement prospects will be discussed, including MTC's on-going' transit alternatives analysis. 'ISM facilities (such as e.~l~ress bus and rail park-ride lots) and programs (includintI the Gateway's and Oyster Point Business Centetas shuttle services) will also be described. Key elements of the MTC Coordinated Traffic Mitigation Plan for the Route 101 corridor will be discussed as the~ apply to the proposed project. Bicycling and pedestrian access to the site will be described. Assessment of Impacts of U,S. Steel Site Development .... The amount of traffic that would be generated by the proposed uses at the U.S. Steel Site will be predicted on the basis of empirical data from comparable land uses. Trip generation studies by Caltrans and the Institute of Transportation Engineers will be consulted along' with traffic studies for t!:IR's on similar nearby projects such as the Gateway and Terrabay and market studies on special uses proposed for the site. a. Traffic Impacts Traffic volumes generated in the am and pm peak hours will be distributed on the ~oadway network according to travel patterns derived from recent surveys of nearby work places~ U.S. census data, and observed traffic routing' though the area. In the course of its ongoing involvement in traffic studies in the area, PRC Engineering' has developed a traffic network for the entire eastern sector of South San Francisco covering the Oyster Point peninsula and the Highway 101/Airport Boulevard corrdior from Brisbane to SFO. Using its microcomputer-based traffic model IMPAX, PRC is able to simulate traffic flows and determine levels' of service for all of the key streets and interchanges serving · the U.S. Steel site.. This model wiII be used to forecast the traffic volume increases and congestion impacts associated with the U.S. Steel development plan, as well as for buildout of committed projects and future cumulative development. Particular attention will be paid to turning conflucts, weaving maneuvers, traffic delays and safety associated with the planned Oyster Point interchange. b. Transit and' TSM The residence locations of new employees and the work places of new residents will be predicted, along with preicted trip lengths, modal splits and auto occupancy rates. Transit ridership.f~e'nerated by the proposed developoment will also be estimated, and the 'need for additional services will be determined alon~ with the effects on corridor-level transit objectives.' ' 3. Impaet~ of Cumulative Development Other proposed, but not yet committed, development in the area will be included in the assessment of cumulative impacts. These projects will be identified through discussions with City and County staffs. Their traffic and transit impacts will be predicted using the same process as applied in the analysis of U.S. Steel site impacts. Long-term ~TC . objectives fo~ TSM and transit improvements will be taken into consideration. 4. Development and Appz. aisal of Mitigation Measures Measures to mitigate the traffic and transit impacts for the U.S. Steel site proposal, in particular, and cumulative development, in general, will be. formulated and approved. These will inel~de traffic flow improvements (including street and intersection design concepts) and measures to reduce traffic generation. Key amon~ the circulation issues will be the eonfiguation of the Oyster Point interehang;e. The approved design will be evaluated in terms of its ability to handle projected traffic flows and serve the general circulation patterns in the area. If suitable service levels cannot be provided, conceptual solutions will be sugl~ested and evaluated. Solutions that use part of the U.S.' Steel site may be considered, if traffic flows can be significantly improved. Methods to meet the MTC/Caltrar, s goal of providing surface street capacity parallel to Route 101 for sho~: distance trips will be investigated as well. .. Proposed eom@onents of the on-site circulation system will also be evaluated and mitigation measures sul~ested if needed. This evaluation' will cover roadway widths, intersection configurations, spacing between' intersections, driveway locations, si~n~ and. stop-siipa locations, parking garage layo.uts, provision of bus turn-outs and other features. Special attention will be paid to TSM-oriented site desist features that make transit, bieye!e and pedestrian movement as easy and attractive as possible. The effects of various TSM and transit commitments will also be determined. A TSM plan will be prepared.in accordance with the recommendations of the MTC ~Coordinated Traffic Mitigation Plan for the Route 101 Corridor. It will include measures to increase use of non-automobile modes (transit, vanpools, carpools, bicycle, walk) and measures to better distribute traffic' flow (variable wo.rk hours, flex-time, coordination of land uses). The program will represent an action plan for implementation by the developer, the compo- nents of whietm the developer may elect to commit to as specific mitigations for the project's impacts. TSM measures that will be considered for inclusion in the program if they pass standard tests of applicability and efficiency include: _ · transit, pedestrian and bicycle amenities · transit/earpool information services · RIDES campaigns · transportation coordinator services · preferential parking programs · ~mployee surveys and incentive programs · work-hour adjustments · formal transit access plan~ priority treatments · transit, vanpool, carpool brokerage · transit, vanpool subsidies · parking management programs · shuttle bus services. The TSM plan will also contain techniques to monitor the program and enforce compli-. aP. ce. The program, including monitoring and enforcement terms, will be structured to .o translate directly into a list of conditions for approval of the project to assure that the City Will ultimately benefit from an early commitment by the project sponsor. · · · o Suggestions will be made regarding funding options and responsibilities for the proposed mitigation measures. The effects of TSM and transit measures on trip lengths, modal splits and auto occupancies will be predicted. The effectiveness of the proposed TSM plan in improving traffic levels of ervice in the area will be estimated. For the cumulative traffic assessment~ the consequences of a successful Corridor-wide TSM pro,ram as envisioned by MTC (With 25-30% ~eduction in single-occupant auto communities) will be predicted. Also, in the long-range' ret~ional context~ the effects of MTC's proposed Route 101 Corridor highway and transit improvement pro,Tams will be estimated. B. TOXIC WASTES Previous studies indicate a limited presence of soil and groundwater contamination at specific locations on the property. Contaminants of concern include lead, chromium, nickel, copper, tin and low and trace concentrations of priority' pollutant organic chemicals. To properly characterize toxic waste conditions on the site and to satisfy the. requirements-of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency~ the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the Hazardous Waste Management Branch of the California Depart- ment of Health Services, two approaches are .proposed. The first approach (Base Approach) assumes that existing data ~or the site is adequate and analysis will be limited to reviewing and assessing this information to determine the potential for impact to the project. The second approach (Optional Approach) assumes that additional data collection is required.. A full scale and systematic sampling program is included in this option. 1. Base Approach Available information on the previous use of the property would be reviewed to determine the potential presence of hazardous materials. The existing data would be evaluated relative to existing and proposed re~oulations to determine the existence and e.~cent of any potentital environmental problem. Appropriate r~medial or mitigative measures will be o. developed and, evaluated if necessary based on agency requirements, planned long-term property use and other criteria. These measures could include excavation and removal, on-site treatment, or containment and long-term monitoring. · - 2. Optional Approach - Detailed Sampling Program · Existing data may not be sufficient l{o evaluate the eavironmental impact of potential. hazardous materials throughout the property~ The following approach assumes that regulatory agencies will require a systematic sampling program to define and mitigate any potential hazard. This approach could be refined using existing data and specific. requirements of the developer, California Department of Health Services, and Regional Water Quality Con.trdl .Board. a. Surfaee Soil Samples A number of surface soil sample sites would be located throughout the unpaved portion' of the property on a 100 by 100 foot grid. Ten percent of the 0 to 6-inch interval samples (20) would be analyzed-Trot-13 priority pollutant metals, including antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, and zinc. Based on these data, the remaining 0 to 6-inch samples would be analyzed for the metals identified as being of major concern. Hazardous concentrations of these metals may require additional soil samples using a smaller grid pattern to define their horizontal and vertical extent. All samples obtained during the investigation will be saved so ttmt additional analyses can be performed if necessary. These samples will be stored at the laboratory until comments are received on' the findings of the investigation. b. Monitoring Wells Five shallow monitoring wells would be located on the property' to determine geohydro- logic conditions of the shallow groundwater beneath the property. These wells will provide information on groundwater quality and the direction and volume of groundwater flow. This analysis would focus o~ five Environmental Protection Agency priority pollutants, including purgeable and e.~raetable organic chemicals, 'pesticides, metals, cyanide, and phenols. Following installation, all monitoring wells will be developed to remove fine materials and water affeted by well installation. Deve!gpment will be done by a combination of bailing and .pum@in~. Following. development, the monitoring,' wells will be sampled usin/; a positive-displace- ment o'r peristaltic sampling, pump. Water samples will be collected in ~lass containers. Prior to taking the sample, a minimum volume equal to four times the volume of fluid in the ,~ell will be flushed from the well to provide a representative water sample. Each water sample will be appropriately marked and assigned a consecutive identification number. Water samples will be refrigerated on site before transfer to the laboratory for analysis. .. c. Summarize Findinfl;s .. Information obtained during' this investigation will be presented in a brief report. The report will present the findings~ data, and methods and will include necessary maps, fiffures, and table. This report will be summarized for inclusion in the EIR and atlacl~ed as an appendLx to the EIR, and will describe probable impacts and mitif~ation strategies as discussed under the base approach above. C. PUBLIC SERVICES AND FISCAL IMPACTS 1. Public Serviees The proposed. 'mixed-use development proieet would pose new demands for a range of e°mmunity services, including, fire and police protection, public sehools, water suppl)-, wastewater transport and treatment, and stormwater drainage. Provision of these services may involve important concerns for eapital and operating, cost impacts. A preliminary evaluation of existing services su~ests that some services wiU definitely be more affected than others, and the level of effort in the analysis will be focused accordingly. An improvement plan for Oyster Point Boulevard is bein~ developed by Wilsey Ham and Associates. The plan includes two sanitary server lines that will accommodate the U.S. Steel property. The final size of the sewer lines will be determined when verification of the projected sewage contributors for the development is given. Currently a 24 x 36 inch oval storm drain pipe crosses the project site. This pipe is. very old and in a deteriorated state, it must be 'relocated and upgraded prior to development of the site. AdditiOnal catch basins will be added along the south side of Oyster Point Boulevard as improvements occur. Presently, a 16-inch water line is located in Oyster Point Boulevard adjacent to the site. An 18-inch pipe has been proposed to connect the water line at Grand Avenue with the existing line. The water will be provided by the Califorr~ia Water Service Company. Domestic water supply and fire-flow requirements for the .U.S. Steel site can probably be adequately served by the existing system. o. Wastewater transpor~ and treatment will be evaluated with regard to the proposed development. Presently the wastewater treatment facilities are not operating at capacity level. · Fire services to the project area will most likely be adequate upon completion of the new station on Hillside Boulevard. The existing stations on Harbor Way and Baden Avenue would also provide services to the U.S. Steel property. Police protection needs will increase, but a security plan developed by the applicant should minimize security impacts. School enrollment has de. elined in South San Francisco in recent years, and eurrently is estimated at 9,400 (capacity level for the district is over 13,000). The generation of school-age children could be beneficial to the district. As in many school districts along . · the peninsula, an increase in enrollment could be recognized as a positive impact resulting from the project. The public services impact analysis will describe and quantify all service demands anticipated for .the proposed project. Service demand estimates will be calculated using local engineering and administrative standards wherever.appropriate. Service provision plans incorporated into the proposed project will be described and analyzed against local standards and our demand level projections. The impact of the project's service demands upon existing .City services will be discussed and significant adverse impacts that are identified. 2. ' Fiscal Imuacts mitigation measures proposed for The fiscal analysis will be based upon the information described above. Capital ex.~enditures required to extend services to the site and to accommodate the needs of the project will be reported and capital finance options will be discussed. The financial responsibilities of the project sponsor and the City under each finance option will be identified. The operating and mairttenance expenses incurred by the City will be determined by major function or activity. This will involve identifying current costs per unit of service under existing service leve]B and assessing the increment of service costs related to the provision of public services to the proposed project. One-time revenues will be identified bY major source, including special contributions toward (or actual provision of) public infrastructure as discussed in the capital finance analysis above, building permits, processin~ fees and other developer contributions. Recurring revenues will be calculated by source, including property taxes, sales and use taxes, licenses and permits, charges for current services (fee and permit revenue) and other sources. . Finally, a summary public sector "cash flow" analysis will be developed to summarize one- time capita.[ costs and revenues and recurring public costs and revenues generated by the proposed development. These costs and revenues will be related to the proposed phasing plan for the' project. A discussion of phasing is important if significant public , . expenditures are required early in the development of the project and later revenues are depended upon to recoup initial costs. Adverse fiscal impacts will be identified and m.itigation measures proposed to ensure that a significant cost burden does not fall on the public sector. D. NOISE The noise section of the EIR will include a description of the existing noise environment of the site, potential impacts due to construction and operation of.the propo.sed..p.roject, the consistency of the site with the proposed development and mitigation· measures to reduce significant impacts. The project site's acoustic environment is dominated by noise from motor vehicle traffic, .. particularly from US-Highway 101, nearby aircraft flyove~ and the Southern Pacific Railroad track west of the site. According to the San Mateo County Airport Land Use Plan, the project is exposed to Community Equivalent Noise Level (CNEL) 65-70 dBA due to aircraft. The Airport Land Use Plan reeommendi~ maximum ~Oise levels considered compatible with residential, commercial, industrial and open space development as does the Noise Element of the · South San Francisco General Plan. · In addition, Title 25 of_the California Administrative Code (CAC) governs the maximum noise levels compatible with development of multiple dwellings, including hotels, 'motels and apartment buildinTs. Specifically, Title 25 requires that noise levels in any inhabitable interior room with closed windows not exceed a CNEL (a measure of 24-hour average noise with a penalty built in for nighttime noise) of 45 dB. Residential structures to be located within a CNEL 60 dB contour due to an airport are required to have an acoustical analysis demonstrating an' adequately quiet interior environment. Similarly, an acoustic analysis is required if residential spaces are to be located within a CNEL 60 dB contour of a road or railroad. The residential portion of the proposed development is located within'the 65-70 dBA contours for the airport as noted above, and is adjacent to the railroad tracks and the freeway. The location of this land use will be a critical issue for the noise analysis in the EIR. The Federal H!ghway Administration's Traffic Noise model will be used to predict future noise levels as influenced by project-generated traffic. These noise levels will be used to determine the'alters compatibility with the proposed mixed-use development in terms of CAC Title 25 and local noise guidelines. . · EIP will recommend Specific mitigation measures'that can be incorporated as elements of · . the project design. F.. H'TDROLOGY A_ND WATER QUALITY At pre~ent, Oyster Point Boulevard and the'site itself drain to the Bay through a large~ old and probably deteriorated pipe that bisects the site and discharges to the shoreline near the dockini; area at the north end. The City believes that this old pipe will have to be replaced and relocated'as part of the development. EIP staff will review the [~roposed grades a_nd storm drainage design t'or the development and estimate the probability of flooding. Although the site is rather low lyin~ it appears probable that the flood hazard can be kept to a minimum by [~roper engineering design, taking account of possible future settlement. The development may affect water quality in three ways. Pollutants generated as a result of human activities, domestic pets and vehicles will be flushed out into the Bay by storms. EIP staff wil/ estimate the mass emission of pollutants to the Bay from this source. Mitigation .measures such as pollutant-trapping eatehbasins and street-sweeping' will be considered if justified.' Second, vessels occupying the marinas may affect water quality as a result of 'illicit discharge of waste, fuel spills and. debris from boat maintenance activities. Mitigation measures to be considered will include marina regulations that prohibit live-aboards and restrict the types of maintenance acitivites that can be conducted. .Finally, the leaching of toxic substances from the soil could affect groundwater quality and the quality of Bay water. This issue is addressed in detail in Section B of this chapter. HOUSING AND LAND USE The proposed project includes 350 dwelling units in addition to 1.5 million square feet of office space, the convention center and other facilities. The non-residential uses will be major employment generators; the relation of this new employment to proposed real- dential uses and to the existing housing market in South San Francisco and San Mateo County are.important issues to be addressed in the EIR. · . · o The setting, portion of the section will discuss the current and projected housing market in · terms of both housing availability (units built and vacancy rate) and housing cost for re}total and ownership units. The residential units proposed in the Project will be described in terms of unit type and projected cost. The impact analysis will estimate the-amount of housing in South San Francisco and northern San M;-teo County likely to be demanded by employees within the project. The analysis will include data on the numbers of employees for each land use, the average numbers of workers per household, the labor markets from which they will likely be hired and proportion of workers who would be induced to move to the local housing market and the projected household incomes of the employees. This information will then be matched to existinf~ housing resources as well as the proposed residential units to determine if adequate numbers of the appropriate type and cost of housing units can be expected to be '-available'io meet the demand ~enerated by the project. If such housin~ does not appear to be available, appropriate mitigation measures will be recommended. The land use discussion will involve a broader level of analysis, describing existing uses on the site in adjacent areas and discussing the ~ompatib'ility of the proposed project with this environment. Compatibilit~ with existing City General Plan policy will Also be described. Where significant impacts occur (Lc., ~dlacent land uses are not well suited to each other), mitigation measures will be proposed to enhance the project design. G. AIR This section will describe the current atmospheric environment of tile project site based on existing air quality and meteorological data. The section will _~!so include a description of applicable air quality ret~ulations and the regional air quality plan. Impacts of both consl:ruction and project operation will be assessed. Major air quality impacts of the proposed project would be caused by increases in boat and motor vehicle traffic. The analysis will identify the potential effects on local carbon monoxide (CO).concentrations and on the total regional emissions of major pollutants. This will be accomplished using the CALINE3 dispersion model developed by Caltrans and recommended by the State of Califoz~nia Air Resources Board and Bay Area Air Quality Management District. The cumulative effects of existing area traffic, particularly on Highway I01, along with project' generated traffic, will also be included in the analysis. Predicted levels of air POllution will be compared to air quality standards and to the growth allowances in i:he regional Air Quality Plan. Discrepancies, if any, will be highlighted. [n addition, special .impacts on sensitive receptors will be described.. Mitigation necessary to reduce or eliminate significant air quality impacts will be recommended as appropriate. AESTH]~TICS ' · · The physical and visual characteristics of the project area will be fully described to establish a framework for full exploration of the project's aesthetic and visual impacts. The project will be described in similar format to fully define its appearance'and design characteristics. The visual impact analysis will add~ess the effect the proposed project will have on views from adjacent areas. Detailed consideration will be given to viewshed (view area) and the sense of vista from nearby locations, including views from' public roads, particularly US 101, neighboring hills and buildings. Visual impacts to be I~urther evaluated concern building mass, vegetation, height/bulk relationships, scale relationships and the color, form and materials of all physical elements comprising the project. % The visual compatibility of the proposed project with adjacent land uses will be examined. Consideration will be giv~.n to the visual relationships of @roject land uses to existing and potential land uses considering the overall form of the proposed project, and project site development densities. Community image, land use transitions ~nd consistency of character will ~also be addressed. CumuLative impacts will be discussed with reference made to potential trends in development patterns in the vicinity of the project. .. '.. The visual impacts of night lighting; on the surrounding community and regional view perception will be evaluated. Visual impacts to be expected as a result of construction processes will be addressed and appropriate mitigation measures will be suggested. The topographic form and extent of site grading; proposed for roadways and site construction will be'assessed as will the anticipated appearance of the completed project. Alterations to veg;etative massings will also be compared to existing conditions. Recommendations on building; location and height wilt be made as appropriate, together with the location and e.,rtent of ope. n space and other areas to receive grading;, construc- tion and remedial planting and landscape treatment. Mitigations will also include an analysis of methods to establish a. compatible tie between the proposed project and adjacent land uses. · I. VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE The emphasis of this section will be upon the aquatic habitat. The proposed project site is within the historic marshlands of the Bay, but the past land uses have significantly altered the terresterial habitat and limited its wildlif~ values. However, field surveys will be conducted if neeessar~ by the EIP staff biologist, s on bot.h the aquatic and terresterial habitats to determine which wildlife species utilize the site and to what extent. Of special interest will be the use of the site by any rare species, such as California least terns (unlikely,. but possible given the habitat) and populations of waterfowl and shore birds durin~ the winter migration. A portion of the site of considerable interest is the mud fiat area off the northern shore of the site. Mud flats play an important role in the ecology of the Bay. They are private feeding areas for waterfowl, shore birds and young' fish (salmon, striped bass and herring). They also play an important role in supplying; oxygen to and removing; pollutants from the aquatic habitat.' EIP will evaluate the relative importance of this mud flat are~ by first determining the use level of mi~'ating waterfowl, shore birds and fish. Should it appear that population · . levels are redu'eed at this site when compared to a site of equivalent size elsewhere ir/the Bay, surveys, of invertebrate and benthic organisims Would be initiated. The purpose of these surveys is to establish the relative importance or value of this area to other areas in the' Bay, and .also to estimate a value of the site should it be necessary for offsite mitiTation of equal replacement value~ Other bioloKieal factors to be addressed would be possible changes in water circulation and flushing actions, water oxygen content and pollution levels as a result of the project. impacts to offsite habitats will also be considered such as the dumping of dredge materials in another aquatic area, or the transport of sediment to nearby marsh/ands, in each case. both positive and negativ& effects will be identified. EIP will wOrk closely with the California Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in developing any mitigation or compensation plans in an effort to assure approval of not only the Ell?,, but also BCDC and U.S. Army Corps of En~/neer permits. J. OTH~P. ISSUES · A number of additional issues will be addressed in the gilt. Potential impacts related to geolog3r and soil conditions and the energy consumption of the project have been identified in the initial study and will be evaluated in the EIR. Although unlikely, the discussion of other issues such as the potential for presence of archaeological resources on the site may also be required, SCHEDULE EIP's schedule for preparation of the United States Steel/American Bridge/G.S.A. properties /:IR is attached.. We propose to Complete the Administrative Draft l/Ill in six weeks and to publish the Draft gIR two weeks after ~eeeipt of the comments on the Administrative Draft EIR. We recognize the need for ex~peditious performance and stand ready to begin work upon receipt of the t~otiee to P~oeeed. No problems are anticipated in meeting the preferred schedule. ~ Should an EIS be required, the schedule for preparation of a joint EIS/EIR document would be extended by weeks. A proposed joint document schedule is also attached. ACt.,L:~,ERATED ENVIRONMENTAL l~t:v~W SCHEDULE U.S. STEEL/GSA PROPERTIES EIR' PUDLIC I IEARIN(~S ~' WEEKS I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 '13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1. Identify Issues '2. Collect Data 3. Impact Analysis 4. Administrative Draft EIR 5. Draft EI R 6. Public Involvement 7. Response to Comments