HomeMy WebLinkAboutP04-0043 ND Costco
Initial Study/
Mitigated Negative Declaration
Project:
Costco Gasoline Fueling Station!
Parking Lot Upgrade
Lead Agency:
City of South San Francisco
~~~
CASE NO: V04-~~1' U?ol\rOOI\ 4 \.1)lf\-OQ)2-
DATE CIRCULATED: Av~.YD~ \2- I ZCtJ~
DATE RECOMMENDEO: "c')-€p~ . j (0 f ZDoLf
DATE APPROVED: .Qc..+obec 1 j ''?LJ~ q
.
August 2004
Negative Declaration
To:
San Mateo County Clerk
555 County Center Drive
Redwood City CA 94060
From:
City of South San Francisco
315 Maple Avenue
South San Francisco CA 94083
Office of Planning and Research
State Clearinghouse
1400 Tenth Street
Sacramento CA 95812
In accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and City policy, an
Initial Study was conducted to determine whether the following project may have a significant
effect on the environment. On the basis of the Initial Study it has been determined that:
~ Although the proposed project could have a significant adverse effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant adverse effect in this case because the
mitigation measures in the Initial Study have been incorporated into the project. An
Environmental Impact Report is not required.
Project Description:
Costco Gasoline Facility and Parkinq Lot Upqrade
North and south sides of Belle Air Road, east of So. Airport Boulevard
(451-479 So. Airport Blvd.), APNs 015-173-040,015-173-080, and 015-
180-170 South San Francisco, San Mateo County
Construction eiqht (8) qasoline dispensers with sixteen (16) fuelinq
stations, a covered fuelinq canopy, installation of three (3) 30,000-qallon
underqround storaqe tanks, new landscapinq, parkinq lot improvements
for the main Costco store, new and reconstructed driveways and
identification siqns within an existinq Costco facilitv.
APPLICANT: Costco Wholesale
CONTACT PERSON
and TITLE: SUSy Kalkin, Prinicipal Planner, City of South San Francisco
TITLE:
LOCATION:
DESCRIPTION:
NOTICE:
This document and all support material are available for review in the office listed above. This
Negative Declaration may become final unless written comments are received at the above
office not later than September J1l.., 2004. If you wish to appeal the appropriateness or
adequacy of this document, address your written comments to the City of South San Francisco,
as referenced above, and state one or all of the following:
1) Identify the potential environmental effect(s), why they would occur and why they would
be significant. Please explain the basis for your comments and submit supporting
documentation; and
2) Suggest any mitigation measure which you believe would reduce or eliminate the
environmental effect t an acceptab level.
Date:~~ Signe . Title: Ch~/,4gr
Table of Contents
Introduction.................................................................................................................... ..2
Applicant/Contact Person................................................................................................2
Project Location and Context...........................................................................................2
Project Description...........................................................................................................3
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected.......................... .......... ................ ........... .....12
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts.................................... .......... ..... ..... ...... ................13
Attachment to Initial Study............................. ....................... .................... ................. .....24
1. Aesthetics............................................................................................... ..24
2. Agricultural Resources.......................................................................... ...25
3. Air Quality ............................................................................................. ..25
4. Biological Resources............................................................................... .31
5. Cultural Resources.................................................................................. .32
6. Geology and Soils.. ................................................ .................. ................34
7. Hazards and Hazardous Materials............................................................36
8. Hydrology and Water Quality ..................................................................38
9. Land Use and Planning ........ ................................ ................... .......... .......41
10. Mineral Resources................................................................................... .42
11. Noise... ................... ...................................... ........ .................... ................42
12. Population and Housing ..... ............................ .......... ........... ..... .........;......44
13. Public Services.........................................................................................46
14. Recreation............................................................................................ ....47
15. Transportation and Traffic ..................................... ............ ...... ................48
16. Utilities and Service Systems...................................................................68
17. Mandatory Findings of Significance........................................... ............. 70
Initial Study Pre parers. ..................................................................................................... 71
Agencies and Organizations Consulted ............................................. .......... .................... 71
References........................................................................................................................ 71
Appendices....................................................................................................................... 72
City of South San Francisco
Environmental Checklist/
Initial Study
Introduction
This Initial Study has been prepared in accord with the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and assesses the potential environmental impacts of
implementing the proposed project described below. The Initial Study consists of a completed
environmental checklist and a brief explanation of the environmental topics addressed in the
checklist.
Applicant/Contact Person
Barghausen Consulting Engineering
Attn: Bruce Creager
18215 72nd Avenue
Kent W A 98032
Project Location and Context
The project is sited in the eastern portion of South San Francisco within San Mateo County.
More specifically, the project is located on both the north and south sides of Belle Air Road, east
of South Airport Boulevard in the East of 101 portion of South San Francisco.
The Assessor's Parcel Numbers (APN) of the project site includes 015-173-040, 015-173-080,
and 015-180-170, and the street address is 451-479 South Airport Boulevard.
The project site encompasses 3.6 acres ofland on the south side of Belle Air Road. A portion of
the site is used as an accessory parking area for an existing 132,769 square foot Costco
Wholesale establishment located on a 10.79 acre parcel on the north side of Belle Air Road. A
small portion of the proj ect site located on the immediate southeast comer of South Airport
Boulevard and Belle Air Road is presently vacant and fenced to preclude public access.
Land uses near the project area include Colma Creek to the north of the site; the City of South
San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Plant and an aviation fuel tank farm to the east;
light industrial uses on the west side of South Airport Boulevard to the west and warehouses to
the south.
Exhibit 1 depicts the regional setting of South San Francisco and Exhibit 2 shows the location of
the project in context with nearby major streets and highways, San Francisco Bay and other
features. Exhibit 3 is a recent aerial photo of the project site and surrounding area.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 2
August 2004
Project Description
Project history and background
The existing Costco site was originally developed as a Price Club facility approximately twenty
years ago. Previous uses of the site included a Pan American Airways engine rebuilding facility
in the 1950's and a moving and storage warehouse in the 1970's.
Costco Wholesale provides a range of goods and services to club members. Recently, the line of
services has expanded to include sale of gasoline. A portion of the existing Costco parking area
lying south of Belle Air Road has been proposed to be modified to include a gasoline dispensing
facility.
A previous Use Permit application for a fueling facility_filed on behalf of Costco was denied by
the South San Francisco Planning Commission on AprilS, 2001.
Most recently, the South San Francisco City Council denied a similar Use Permit application on
appeal from a denial by the Planning Commission. This action took place on January 17,2003.
This application included a proposal to install five fueling islands with 10 pumps and a
maximum of 20 fueling positions. The dispensing facility was proposed to be located on the
south side of Belle Air Road in the easterly portion of the existing Costco parking lot.
Proposed improvements
The current proposal includes installation of an automated self-serve fueling station that would
be an accessory to the existing Costco warehouse facility on the north side of Belle Air Road.
Purchase of gasoline would be limited to Costco members only.
The fueling station would be located on the northwest corner of Belle Air Road and South
Airport Boulevard that is currently vacant. Improvements would consist ofa 14'6" high, 32' by
120' canopy with four fueling islands that would cover eight (8) gasoline dispensers with sixteen
(16) fueling stations. Related improvements would include three (3) 30,000-gallon underground
storage tanks and a 6-foot by 12-foot controller structure which would house an electronic
monitoring and alarm system.
Exhibit 4 shows the proposed site plan for the project.
Hours of operation for the proposed facility would be 6 am to 10 pm during weekdays, with
shorter hours on weekends. The facility would be largely automated with sales completed via
electronic means (credit and debit cards), however, the facility would be staffed by one employee
during most hours of operation. Two employees would be assigned to the facility during peak
business periods.
No other auto services would be offered at the gasoline facility, although the existing Costco
facility on the north side of Belle Air Road sells and installs tires and automobile batteries. No
tune-ups or similar mechanical work are undertaken on the site nor would such services be
provided in the future.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 3
August 2004
The canopy would be designed in a manner similar to the existing Costco building on the north
side of Belle Air Road, with use of fluted concrete block and painted fascia. New externally
illuminated signs would be attached to the canopy structure.
As part of the project, existing Costco parking lots on the north and south side of Belle Air Road
would be redesigned and reconstructed to increase on-site parking from 706 to 722 stalls. Two
existing driveways along the south side of Belle Air Road would be modified: the driveway in
the approximate center of the site would be widened from approximately 24 to 30 feet and an
existing driveway at the terminus of Belle Air Road would be reduced from 30 to 25 feet in
width. An existing driveway along South Airport Boulevard would be converted to a one-way
driveway, and a new driveway with a width of 40 feet would be constructed near the intersection
of Belle Air Road and South Airport Boulevard to accommodate anticipated gasoline facility
traffic. Along the north side of Belle Air Road, the main driveway to the Costco store would be
widened to a width of35 feet and a secondary 25-foot wide driveway would be added on the
north side of the terminus of Belle Air Road.
Other improvements made to the south side of Belle Air Road would include re-striping of the
lot so that some travel lanes would be one-way only to accommodate the expected increase in
vehicular activity. Other special traffic techniques are proposed to be implemented to maximize
traffic queuing capacity. These are described in Section 11, Traffic and Transportation, of this
Initial Study.
The project would also include adding a landscaped berm on the southeast corner of South
Airport Boulevard and Belle Air Road to assist in screening the proposed gas dispensing facility.
New trees, shrubs and landscape improvements would be made in the parking lots on the north
and south side of Belle Air Road, including the replacement of older trees that have not proven to
be compatible with local climactic conditions. New and replacement 32' 6" parking lot light
standards would be added to the project area. Exhibit 5 shows the proposed landscape
improvements.
The proposed exterior elevations of the fueling station canopy are shown on Exhibit 6.
The applicant anticipates that approximately 6.5 million gallons of gasoline would be sold at this
location on a yearly basis.
The project plans indicate the abandonment of an existing sanitary sewer line that extends
through the southerly portion of the lot. A new storm drain easement would be dedicated to the
City that would be located within the southerly portion of the project site. Both easements are
shown in the site plan, Exhibit 3.
Phasing of improvements
If approved, the proposed gasoline facility would be constructed in 2005.
Land use entitlements
The applicant is requesting approval of a Use Permit from the City of South San Francisco.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 4
August 2004
..
o
~
i
"
c:
g
'5
()
>.
m
Q;
-l!
m
'"
~
l:l
'"
'"
c
~
~
'"
::<
;;;
Exhibit 1
REGIONAL LOCATION
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
COSTCO WHOLESALE GAS STATION ADDITION
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
I
o
J
2
,
4
,
8
,
6
,
10 miles
,
...
o
~
~
OV,e;TER
PO""
>>\:~~:~!ir
;;~~::'~'~:'~':;:: :' I r - H Tt~~
,,,,$-
:1';.
~:
"\\..
~.. ~~".,
lit; . '''-
i
','.
~. ~:~~
\"-""~
\<'i\
.JL
'.
\
\
/1
SAN 1111
POI
Project Site
/,;(
, ..
/::~{f \ '\
,\
_.~-%'--...."t--
o
c:
g
a
()
"
Q)
Q;
->!
Q)
'"
SEAPl.ANIE
~
J:I
..
'v
~
-<
~
"
"
is
"
I
Exhibit 2
PROJECT LOCATION
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
COSTCO WHOLESALE GAS STATION ADDITION
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
NOT
TO
SCALE
o
I
1/4
,
1/2
,
3/4
.
1 mile
W
t-
en
t-
o
W
.,
o
C') a:
- 0.
:s LL
~ 0
UJ ;:
W
:;:
..J
<C
a:
w
<C
z_
z
o
Ez
co
c~
<Ca:
zct
0...1
o-CJ
u1<~
(I)....w
-(I)>
uCI)i=
z<c<l:
<c ,ft ~
a:'"'z
u"UJe
z...lw
<c<c~
(I)(I)CJ
UJ-
:E:...II::
1-0:=
:):E:....
0>>
(I)~e
u,,0~
OU(/)
>1-...1
I-CI)~
_01::
UU~
./~
Iii
fl.p ..
Ii III
Iii =
,{f'," ~
II! 0
..~.c
~-_...-
~::.--
ID... ----
@- ----
0.::-----
@-::-_.....-
0...:::.....
0-.... -....-
e>:;:r:---- ...
--=--..=-
'. ~-,.':.... ,.'
,. ____--- ___ ,., I
W.~_- d/'~;::::"- ~- if!
/r/-====-~" __~, . 'trii-
" ,A. - - ~ .' ' "
f".A --" /.. ,!!
"\,/~/ """ ," ~,.. =:7 1\\
/ ----." \. __~_.. = .J ji'
"\ (;?,/,,; (_.:) ~-~~ ::-:::-- ~_~'I
'.. ,,' "----/ \. ""'----.,.
'\ /: ,;;8'-
'. '
"'. '
''.,
'.,
SOURCE:
/1-
Exhibit 4
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
o
Jo....I 50 100
....., .
CITY OF SOU
COSTCO WH6~E~N FRANCISCO
INITIAL STUDY I MITIGAT~; ;::T~~ATION ADDITION
DECLARATION
200 feet
.
"',
",
'''',
,~
&
~
'''"
"" ,
'" .'~~~\~
'''''' ~-::;;::~:::,'
~ '~
-.......-..". ~,.:.; \~,.
-', ~>, \\
'I !1-.'~1111 '/, ,:.t.
! ~ :u'J' J",- ;.\ ..' I I : -::,~, ~=.
"'" " .. '-:n' .1L.. ". //l'\
\ I
\ 'j \l
\
',-
"
",
i
I
!
::=::
--
-
........
/.
l<:
/'
/~~.
.' O<dtnJ
. ." "
J' ...
"'-':.-...c:ncIlIM~
~""OJ"""'lDLICDtOl'
""~IllPIt"""'''''ME
JiM1ICIML.ClDmCWJmCIlLMlWFOIIl
1CUnt.........-co...,.~..
'lZr2ntrW,-.
\',
\\ :
\\ f
\\
\.
t,
. .
.
I
,
.
I
,
.
4
--
==
Cosft'O
1 ----
--
.....,.
....f':.'.:
. ~ . ;
"
/j t,
I.ri
ijr'"
II'
, '"
iI! :
! !! f
. r:
,~ t
TREES:
o
&
\lj5J
o
o
(:)
o
IRISTANIA CONFERTA I
IlRISIIANE BCIlt
ME1ROSIDEROS EXCEI.SUS I
NEW ZEAlAND CHRIS1MAS TREE
N:N:.IA IIElANOXVI.ON I
BlACICWOOD N;N:;/A
FICUS Nl11IlI\ I
INOIAN LAIJREL
PYRUS KAWAKAMIlI
EVERGREEN PEAR
EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN
SOURCE: David Babcock & Associates, 05-25-2004,
/~
Exhibit 5
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
COSTCO WHOLESALE GAS STATION ADDITION
INITIAL STUDY I MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PRELIMINARY
LANDSCAPE PLAN
o 50 100 200 feet
...... ....., , .
r-
!
'I
I !
!i!
Q
!<
~
?S
~ I
I ~
~
{~l IJ
Ii
~
" "
ffl~
"'Y'-
-;::.
t ._
f
~ ~I: I
~~I
". ~l
~ ~,~ ~
-;::. I
~ .-
. ...
~ --
- .. '"
~i
Ill.
~
II
r-
!i!P
~
III
~
~.
~i
~
~i
~i
.0
tn
Z
o
~
CD >
_ w
:a ...I
:c w
>< I-
UJ 0
W
""')
o
a:
D.
~l ~
~I ~
Z
0
i=z
~' -0
C_
o I c~
<I: a:
8 z<c
~ o~
-w
K o1ci:c
- (J~w
~ ~i ~ ~(/);::
~ F q- @- (J(/)~
~ III .2 z<l:CJ
F (.) <l:CJw
~ w .l!l a: z
~ :c: iLUJc
irl -' !2 z...Iw
~ ~ ~ '<l; <I:<I:~
, ~ ~ (1)(/)CJ
, ;n UJ-
I 1 z J:...II::
'ii ~~ ~ t I-O~
l! c:
~ :)J:.....
!i i!:i :; 0:=i5
~i ~ (/)oi:
~i l't (jj iL(Jrn
01-...1
_-1 l) >CI)S
~ 1-01::
0 OO~
CJ)
1. Project description:
Installation of 8 vehicle fuel dispensing pumps for use by
Costco members, a pump island canopy, fuel controller
station, reconfigured parking lot, replacement parking
spaces, new and reconstructed driveways and landscape
improvements.
2. Lead agency:
City of South San Francisco
Planning Division
315 Maple Avenue/P.O. Box 711
South San Francisco CA 94803
3. Contact person:
Susy Kalkin, Principal Planner
(650) 877-8535
4. Project location:
451-479 South Airport Boulevard (APNs 015-173-040,
015-173-080 & 015-180-170)
5. Project sponsor:
Barghausen Consulting Engineers
Contact: Bruce Creager
6. General Plan designation:
Community Commercial
7. Zoning:
Planned Commercial (PCL)
8. Public agency required approvals:
· Approval of Negative Declaration (City of South San Francisco)
· Approval of Use Permit (City of South San Francisco)
· Approval of encroachment permit (City of South San Francisco)
· Approval of Building Permit (City of South San Francisco)
· Approval of fueling permit (BAAQMD)
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 11
August 2004
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving
at least one impact that is a "potentially significant impact" as indicated by the checklist on the
following pages.
x Aesthetics - Agricultural x Air Quality
Resources
x Biological Resources x Cultural Resources x Geology/Soils
x Hazards and x HydrologylWater x Land U se/ Planning
Hazardous Materials Quality
- Mineral Ftesources x Noise - Population!
Housing
x Public Services - Recreation x Transportation!
Circulation
x Utilities/Service - Mandatory Findings
Systems of Significance
Determination (to be completed by Lead Agency):
On the basis ofthis initial evaluation:
_I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment and
the previous Negative Declaration certified for this project by the City of South San Francisco
adequately addresses potential impacts.
--.1L 1 find that although the proposed proj ect could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an
attached sheet have been added to the project. A Negative Declaration will be prepared.
_ 1 find that although the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment,
but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on earlier
analysis as described on the attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or
"potentially significant unless mitigated." An Environmental Impact Report is required, but
must only analyze the effects that remain to be addressed.
_ 1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have
been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been
avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that
are imposed on the proposed project
Signatur
Date'
b.~fI
~CIS"c/)
Printed Name:
For
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 12
August 2004
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
l) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "no impact" answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parenthesis
following each question. A "no impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced
information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one
involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "no impact" answer should
be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general factors (e.g. the
project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific
screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action, including off-site as well as on-site,
cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as
operational impacts.
3) "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate ifthere is substantial evidence that an effect
is significant. If there are one or more "potentially significant impact" entries when the
determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) "Less Than Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" implies the incorporation of
mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "potentially significant effect" to a "less
than significant impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and
briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 13
August 2004
Environmental Impacts (Note: Source of determination listed in parenthesis. See listing
of sources used to determine each potential impact at the end of the checklist)
Note: A full discussion of each item is found
following the checklist.
I. Aesthetics. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse impact on a scenic
vista? (Source: 2, 8)
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including but not limited to trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway? (Source: 8)
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its
surroundings? (Source: 8)
d) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area? (Source: 8)
II. Agricultural Resources
Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or
Farmland of Statewide Importance, as
showing on the maps prepared pursuant to
the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources
Agency, to a non-agricultural use? (Source:
1,8)
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agriculture
use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Source:
1,8)
c) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of
farmland to a non-agricultural use? (Source:
1,8)
III. Air Quality (Where available, the
significance criteria established by the
applicable air quality management district
may be relied on to make the following
determinations). Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan? (Source: 4)
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation? (Source: 4)
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
MitiQation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 14
August 2004
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors? (4)
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations? (Source:4)
e) Create objectionable odors? (Source: 4)
IV. Biological Resources. Would the project
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies or regulations, or by
the California Department of Fish and Game
or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
(Source: 2)
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies or regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Source:
2)
c) Have a substantial adverse impact on
federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including but not limited to marsh, vernal
pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption or other
means?
(Source: 2)
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites? (Source: 2)
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as tree
protection ordinances? (Source: 2)
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 15
August 2004
f) Conflict with the provision of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan or other
approved local, regional or state habitat
conservation plan? (Source: 1,2)
V. Cultural Resources. Would the project
a) Cause a substantial adverse impact in the
significance of a historical resource as
defined in Sec. 15064.5? (Source: 3)
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archeological resource
pursuant to Sec. 15064.5 (Source: 3)
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or unique geologic
feature? (Source: 3)
d) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of a formal cemetery?
(Source: 3)
VI. Geology and Soils. Would the project
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk
of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist or based on other known evidence
of a known fault (Source: 5)
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking (5)
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction? (5)
iv) Landslides? (5)
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil? (5)
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project and potentially result in
on- and off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or similar hazards
(Source: 5)
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 13-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial risks to life or
property? (Source: 5)
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 16
August 2004
e) Have soils capable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative
wastewater disposal systems where sewers
are not available for the disposal of waste?
(Source: 5)
VII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Would
the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport,
use or disposal of hazardous materials
(Source: 6)
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous into the environment?
(Source: 6)
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school? (Source: 6)
d) Be located on a site which is included on a
list of hazardous materials sites complied
pursuant to Government Code Sec. 65962.5
and, as a result, would it create a significant
hazard to the public or the environment?
(Source: 6)
e) For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such plan has not been
adopted, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the
project area? (Source: 2)
f) For a project within the vicinity of private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the
project area? (Source: 2)
g) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with the adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
(Source: 8)
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitie:ation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Page 17
August 2004
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
h) Expose people or structures to a significant
risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires, including where wildlands
are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
(Source: 8)
IX. Hydrology and Water Quality. Would the
project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements? (Source: 2, 9)
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net
deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the
local groundwater table level (e.g. the
production rate of existing nearby wells
would drop to a level which would not
support existing land uses or planned uses
for which permits have been granted?
(Source: 2, 9)
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through
the aeration of the course of a stream or
river, in a manner which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-
site? (Source: 8, 9)
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or areas, including through
the alteration of a course or stream or river,
or substantially increase the rate or amount
of surface runoff in a manner which would
result in flooding on- or off-site? (Source: 8,
9)
e) 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? (Source: 8,9)
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water
quality? (Source: 9)
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard
area as mapped on a Flood Hazard Boundary
or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood
delineation map? (Source: 2)
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Miti~ation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costeo Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 18
August 2004
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area
structures which impede or redirect flood
flows? (Source: 2)
i) Expose people or structures to a significant
risk of loss, injury, and death involving
flooding, including flooding as a result of
the failure of a levee or dam? (2)
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow?
(2)
IX. Land Use and Planning. Would the project.'
a) Physically divide an established community?
(Source: 1, 2, 8)
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan,
policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including but
not limited to the general plan, specific plan,
or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose
of avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect? (Source: 1, 2)
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan? (1, 2,8)
X. Mineral Resources. Would the project
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to
the region and the residents of the state?
(Source: 1, 2)
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general Plan, specific
plan or other land use plan? (Source: 1,2)
XI. Noise. Would the proposal result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise
levels in excess of standards established in
the general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
(Source: 2)
b) Exposure of persons or to generation of
excessive groundbome vibration or
groundbome noise levels? (Source: 2, 8)
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above
existing levels without the project? (Source:
2,8)
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X,
X
X
X
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 19
August 2004
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase
in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels without the project? (Source:2)
e) For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport
or public use airport, would the project
expose people residing or working n the
project area to excessive noise levels?
(Source: 2)
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels? (Source: 2)
XII. Population and Housing. Would the project
a) Induce substantial population growth in an
area, either directly or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)? (Source: 2, 9)
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere? (2, 9)
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the replacement of housing
elsewhere? (Source: 8)
XIII. Public Services. Would the proposal:
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service rations, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public
services? (Sources: 1,2,9)
Fire protection
Police protection
Schools
Parks
Other public facilities
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 20
Aug ust 2004
XIV. Recreation:
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood or regional facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated
(Source: 2)
b) Does the project include recreational facilities
or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
(Source: 2)
XV. Transportation and Traffic. Would the
project.'
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is
substantial in relation to the existing traffic
load and capacity of the street system (Le.
result in a substantial increase in either the
number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads or congestion at
intersections)? (7)
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a
level of service standard established by the
County Congestion Management Agency for
designated roads or highways? (7)
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,
including either an increase in traffic levels
or a change in location that results in
substantial safety risks? (7, 9)
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses, such as
farm equipment? (7, 8, 9)
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (8)
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (8)
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or
programs supporting alternative transportation
(such as bus turnouts and bicycle facilities)
(1)
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 21
August 2004
XVI. Utilities and Service Systems. Would the
project
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of
the applicable Regional Water Quality
Control Board? (2)
b) Require or result in the construction of new
water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects? (2, 8)
c) 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? (9)
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project from existing water
entitlements and resources, or are new or
expanded entitlements needed? (2)
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may
serve the project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the providers existing
commitments? (9)
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the
project's solid waste disposal needs? (2)
g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes
and regulations related to solid waste? (2)
XVI. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
a) Does the project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number of or restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or
animal or eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
X
X
X
X
X
X
.
X
X
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 22
August 2004
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of other current projects and the
effects of probable future projects).
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Impact
Mitigation
X
X
c) Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
Sources used to determine potential environmental impacts
1. South San Francisco General Plan
2. South San Francisco General Plan EIR
3 Archeological/Cultural Records Search, Northwest Information Center
4. Air Quality Analysis, Don Ballanti
5. Geotechnical Investigation of Costco Gasoline Facility, Kleinfelder
6. Environmental Investigation Report of Costco Gasoline Facility, Kleinfelder
7. Traffic analysis of Costco Gasoline Facility, Crane Transportation Group
8. Site Visit
9. Other Source
XVII. Earlier Analyses
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative
declaration. Reference Section 15063 (c)(3)(d).
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
Portions of the environmental setting, project impacts and mitigation measures for this
Initial Study refer to environmental information contained in the General Plan and
General Plan EIR (1999) (SCH#97122030), available for review at the South San
Francisco Planning Department, 315 Maple Avenue, South San Francisco, during normal
business hours.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 23
August 2004
Attachment to Initial Study
Discussion of Checklist
1. Aesthetics
Environmental Setting
The project site is located along the South Airport Boulevard corridor, which is comprised of a
range of light industrial, lodging and related commercial land uses. Surrounding uses consist of
similar light industrial and public uses; the City's Water Quality Control Plant and an aviation
fuel tank farm are located immediately to the east of the site.
Distant views of Sign Hill and San Bruno Mountain are visible from the project site. Colma
Creek, located directly north of the existing Costco Warehouse, enters San Francisco Bay just to
the east of the site. This edge of the property includes established Bay Trail improvements site.
As an existing parking lot, a number of overhead lights have been constructed on the site.
Street lights have also been installed along adjacent streets.
Project Impacts
a) Have a substantial adverse impact on a scenic vista? NI. Although the project includes a
pump island canopy on a site where no overhead structures currently exist, the proposed
project would not block any views of a scenic vista since no residences, parks,
playgrounds or other areas of public gathering are located on or adjacent to the site. No
impacts would therefore result.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including state scenic highway? NI. No
substantial changes to scenic resources are proposed, since the site has already been
developed for a commercial land use and the proposed project would represent an
accessory use to the existing primary use. South Airport Boulevard is not identified as a
scenic highway. No impacts are therefore anticipated with regard to scenic resources.
c) Substantially degrade existing visual character or the quality of the site? NI. The project
would represent a modification to the existing Costco parking area to include a fueling
station. The station would be located on the east side of the property, away from South
Airport Boulevard. The proposed facility would not be located near residential uses,
offices or other areas with high employee populations. No impact would therefore result
regarding degradation of the visual character of the project site should the proposed
project be approved.
d) Create light or glare? LS. A number of light sources presently exist on the site and within
the project area Approval and implementation of the proposed project would add new
sources oflight and glare, since the project includes the addition oflighting as part of the
pump island canopy. Indirectly illuminated signs would also be installed on the canopy
structure. It is anticipated that new light sources would exceed existing light levels.
However, less-than-significant impacts are anticipated with regard to light and glare
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 24
August 2004
since the facility would be setback from South Airport Boulevard and no sensitive
receptors exist on or adjacent to the project site, including but not limited to residences,
schools, parks, hospitals.
2. Agricultural Resources
Environmental Setting
The project site and surrounding area has been developed for a number of years for primarily
light industrial and commercial uses. Although underlying soils may support agriculture, no
crops have been cultivated in many years nor have any portions of the project area been used for
animal grazing. No Williamson Act conservation agreements have been signed for properties
affected by this project, since the great majority of the land is owned by public agencies. No
agricultural zoning had been adopted for any portion of the project area by the City of South San
Francisco.
Proiect Impacts
a-c) Convert Prime Farmland, conflict with agricultural zoning or agriculture land use or
convert prime farmland to a non-agricultural use? NI. The project area lies in a highly
urbanized area of South San Francisco and there would be no impact with regard to
agricultural uses, zoning or Williamson Act Land Conservation agreements.
3. Air Quality
(Note: this section is based on an air quality and health risk assessment prepared by Donald
Ballanti, Certified Meteorologist).
Environmental Setting
The amount of a given pollutant in the atmosphere is determined by the rate of release and the
atmosphere's ability to transport and dilute the pollutant. The major determinants of transport
and dilution are wind, atmospheric stability, terrain and, for photochemical pollutants, sunshine.
Northwest winds are most common in South San Francisco, reflecting the orientation of wind
gaps within the mountains of the San Francisco Peninsula. Winds are persistent and strong,
providing excellent ventilation and carrying pollutants downwind. Winds are lightest on the
average in fall and winter.
The persistent winds in South San Francisco result in a relatively low potential for air pollution.
Even so, in fall and winter there are periods of several days when winds are very light and local
pollutants can build up.
Both the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency and the California Air Resources Board have
established ambient air quality standards for common pollutants. These ambient air quality
standards are levels of contaminants which represent safe levels that avoid specific adverse
health effects associated with each pollutant. The ambient air quality standards cover what are
called "criteria" pollutants because the health and other effects of each pollutant are described in
criteria documents.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 25
August 2004
The federal Clean Air Act requires the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to identify
air quality standards. California has also adopted more stringent ambient air quality standards for
some pollutants. Table 1 summarizes current state and national standards.
The local air quality agency is the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). The
BAAQMD enforces rules and regulations regarding air pollution sources and is the primary
agency preparing the regional air quality plans mandated under state and federal law. The
BAAQMD has prepared air quality impact guidelines for use in preparing environmental
documents under the California Environmental Quality Act.
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) monitors air quality at several
locations within the San Francisco Bay Air Basin, although none are located in South San
Francisco. The monitoring sites closest to the project site are located in San Francisco to the
north and Redwood City to the south. Table 2 summarizes exceedances of the state and federal
standards at these two sites. Table 2 shows that most of the ambient air quality standards are met
in the project area with the exception of the state standard for PMIO and ozone. The federal ozone
standard is also exceeded in other parts of the Bay Area air basin.
Table 1. Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards
Pollutant Averaging Federal State
Time Primary Standard
Standard
Ozone I-Hour 0.12 PPM 0.09 PPM
8-Hour 0.08 PPM --
Carbon Monoxide 8-Hour 9.0 PPM 9.0 PPM
I-Hour 35.0 PPM 20.0 PPM
Nitrogen Dioxide Annual Average 0.05 PPM --
I-Hour -- 0.25 PPM
Sulfur Dioxide Annual Average 0.03 PPM --
24-Hour 0.14 PPM 0.05 PPM
I-Hour -- 0.25 PPM
PM 10 Annual Average 50 g/m' 20 g/m'
24-Hour 150 g/m3 50 g/m3
PM25 Annual 15 g/m' 12 g/m'
24-Hour 65 g/m3 --
Lead Calendar Quarter 1.5 g/m' --
30 Day A vera~e -- 1.5 ~/m3
Sulfates 24 Hour 25 g/m' --
Hydrogen Sulfide I-Hour 0.03 PPM --
Vinyl Chloride 24-Hour 0.01 PPM --
Notes:
PPM = Parts per Million
g/m3 = Micrograms per Cubic Meter
Source: California Air Resources Board, Ambient Air Quality Standards (7/9/03)
http://wwwoarboca.gov.aqs/aaqs2.pdf
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 26
August 2004
Table 2. Air Quality Data Summary for San Francisco and Redwood City
Pollutant Standard Monitoring Site Days Standard Exceeded
2001 2002 2003
Ozone Federal I-Hour San Francisco 0 0 0
Redwood City 0 0 0
Ozone State I-Hour San Francisco 0 0 0
Redwood City 1 0 0
Ozone Federal 8-Hour1 San Francisco 0 0 0
Redwood City 0 0 0
PM 10 Federal 24-Hour San Francisco 0 0 0
Redwood City 0 0 0
PM 10 State 24-Hour San Francisco 8 4 1
Redwood City 3 1 0
PM25 Federal 24-Hour San Francisco 2 4 0
Redwood City 1 0 0
Carbon State/Federal San Francisco 0 0 0
Monoxide 8-Hour Redwood City 0 0 0
Nitrogen State I-Hour San Francisco 0 0 0
Dioxide Redwood City 0 0 0
Source: Air Resources Board, Aerometric Data Analysis and Management (ADAM), 2004. (http:
Ilwwwoarb.ca.gov.ladam/cgi-bin/adamtop/d2wstart)
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 27
August 2004
Proiect Impacts
a) Would the project conflict or obstruct implementation of an air quality plan? NI. The
San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin is currently non-attainment for ozone (state and
federal ambient standards) and PMIO (state ambient standard). While air quality plans
exist for ozone, none exists (or is currently required) for PMIO. The Revised San
Francisco Bay Area Ozone Attainment Planfor the i-Hour National Ozone Standard is
the current ozone air quality plan required under the federal Clean Air Act. The state-
mandated regional air quality plan is the Bay Area 2000 Clean Air Plan. These plans
contain mobile source controls, stationary source controls and transportation control
measures to be implemented in the region to attain the state and federal ozone standards
within the Bay Area Air Basin.
A project would be judged to conflict with or obstruct implementation of the regional air
quality plan if it would be inconsistent with the growth assumptions, in terms of
population, employment or regional growth in Vehicle Miles Traveled.
The proposed project would not conflict with the growth assumptions made in the
preparation of the regional air quality plans nor would obstruct implementation of
control measures contained in the regional air quality plans. There would therefore be no
impact.
b) Would the project violate any air quality standards? LS/M. Two related portions of this
impact have been identified: construction related impacts and long-term operational
impacts. These are discussed below.
Construction
The proposed project would not require demolition of any existing structures.
Construction activities would temporarily affect local air quality, causing a temporary
increase in particulate dust and other pollutants. Uncontrolled dust emissions during
construction have the potential to exceed the ambient air quality standards locally. This
impact is potentially significant, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines provide thresholds of
significance for air quality impacts. The BAAQMD significance threshold for
construction dust impact is based on the appropriateness of construction dust controls.
The BAAQMD guidelines provide feasible control measures for construction emission
of PMIO' If the appropriate construction controls are to be implemented, then air
pollutant emissions for construction activities would be reduced to a less-than-
significant level. See Mitigation 1, below.
Mitigation Measure 1. The following measures are recommended for inclusion
in construction contracts to control fugitive dust emissions.
a) Water all active construction areas at least twice daily.
b ) Water or cover stockpiles of debris, soil, sand or other materials that can
be blown by the wind.
c) Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all
trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard.
d) Sweep daily (preferably with water sweepers) all paved access road,
parking areas and staging areas at construction sites.
e) Sweep streets daily (preferably with water sweepers) if visible soil
material is carried onto adjacent public streets.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 28
August 2004
Operation
Development projects in the Bay Area are most likely to violate and air quality standard
or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation through
generation of vehicle trips. New vehicle trips add to carbon monoxide concentrations
near streets providing access to the site.
The CALINE-4 computer simulation model was applied to three intersections affected
by project traffic. The four model runs were:
.
Existing conditions (2004)
.
Existing Plus Approved Projects (2005)
.
Existing Plus Approved Projects Plus Proposed Project (2005)
.
Cumulative Plus Proposed Project (2020)
The model results were used to predict the maximum I-and 8-hour concentrations,
corresponding to the 1- and 8-hour averaging times specified in the state and federal
ambient air quality standards for carbon monoxide.
Table 3 shows the results of the CALINE-4 analysis for the peak I-hour and 8-hour
traffic periods in parts per million (PPM). The most stringent ambient air quality
standards are also shown. Concentrations are predicted not to exceed the ambient
standards with or without the proposed project. The additional project traffic would
increase carbon monoxide concentrations by less than 0.1 PPM and predicted
concentrations remain below the applicable state and federal standards. Project impacts
on local carbon monoxide concentrations are considered less-than-significant.
c) Would the project result in cumulatively considerable air pollutants? LS. To evaluate
emissions associated with the project, the URBEMIS 2002 computer program was
employed. The daily increase in regional emissions from auto travel is shown in Table 3
for reactive organic gases (hydrocarbons) and oxides of nitrogen (two precursors of
ozone), carbon monoxide and PMlO (particulate matter, 10 micron).
Guidelines for the evaluation of project impacts issued by the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District consider emission increases to be significant if they exceed 80 lbs
per day for regional pollutants (ROG and NOx' PMlO). The increases in emissions shown
in Table 4 are well below these criteria, so the project would have a less-than-significant
impact on regional air quality.
Guidelines for the evaluation of project impacts issued by the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District consider emission increases to be significant if they exceed 80 lbs
per day for regional pollutants (ROG and NOx, PMlO). The increases in emissions shown
in Table 4 are well below these criteria, so the project would have a less-than-significant
impact on regional air quality.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 29
August 2004
Table 3. Predicted Worst-Case Carbon Monoxide Concentrations
at Selected Intersections in Parts Per Million
Intersection Existing Existing + Existing + Cumulative +
(2004) Approved Approved Proposed
Projects Projects Project
(2005) +Proposed (2020)
Project (2005)
I-Hr 8-Hr
I-Hr 8-Hr I-Hr 8-Hr I-Hr 8-Hr
So Airport! 7.0 4.3 6.7 4.1 6.8 4.2 4.7 2.7
Utah
S. Airport/ 6.7 4.1 6.5 3.9 6.6 4.0 4.7 2.7
Belle Air
So Airport/ 6.9 4.2 6.6 4.0 6.6 4.1 4.7 2.7
North Access/
1-3800nramp
Applicable 20.0 9.0 20.0 9.0 20.0 9.0 20.0 9.0
Standard
Source: Donald Ball anti
Table 4. Project Regional Emissions in Pounds Per Day
Reactive Nitrogen Oxides PM10
Organic Gases
Project New Daily 11.2 8.2 4.6
Emissions
BAAQMD Threshold 80.0 80.0 80.0
Source: Donald Ballanti
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? LS. The project
would result in the new emissions of Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs). The Costco
gasoline station would be a source of gasoline vapors that would include T ACs such as
benzene.
Gasoline vapors are released during the filling of both the stationary underground storage
tanks and the transfer from those underground tanks to individual vehicles. The
BAAQMD has stringent requirements for the control of gasoline vapor emissions from
gasoline dispensing facilities that require all new facilities to install and maintain CARB
Certified Vapor Recovery Systems. As a potential source of T ACs, a gasoline filling
station is subject to the BAAQMD's toxic risk screening and risk management
procedures.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 30
August 2004
A screening risk assessment has been conducted utilizing the procedures and emission
factors defined in California Air Pollution Control Officers' Air Toxics "Hot Spots"
Program Gasoline Service Station Industry-wide Risk Assessment Guidelines. Using
aerial photographs of the project environs, the distance between the center of the
proposed gasoline facility and the nearest occupied structure was determined.
The CAPCOA procedures provide a very conservative estimate of cancer risk per million
gallons of gasoline pumped based on distance from the facility. This risk is based on a
continuous exposure over a 70-year lifetime. The risk then must be adjusted to reflect the
actual exposure. The nearest building is industrial in nature, so the risk must be adjusted
downward to reflect a reduced exposure. It is assumed that the maximum exposure would
be 46 years, 240 days a year and 8 hours per day. The resulting adjustment factor is
0.114. The resulting adjusted risk of cancer (per million gallons pumped) is 0.544 in one
million.
BAAQMD rules and regulations require that permits be denied for new sources of any
carcinogenic air contaminant unless it can be shown that it will not result in:
· A maximum individual cancer risk greater than one in one million at any receptor
location, if the facility is constructed without T -BACT (Toxic Best Available
Controls).
· A maximum individual cancer risk greater than ten in one million at any receptor
location, if the facility is constructed with T -BACT.
The proposed gasoline facility would be equipped with emission control equipment that
qualifies as T -BACT for this type of facility, the appropriate limit on risk is 10 in one
million. This threshold would be exceeded only if throughput exceeded 18.4 million
gallons per year. This level of throughput is above the 15 million gallon allowable
throughput typically requested for similar Costco gasoline facilities.
The actual throughput limitation on the facility will be established by the BAAQMD
based on their own risk analysis. The throughput limit will be established at a level that
will ensure that cancer and non-cancer risks are below the significance thresholds.
BAAQMD regulations and procedures, already established and enforced as part of the air
quality permit review process, would ensure that any potential impacts due to emission of
hazardous or toxic air contaminants would be reduced to a level of less-than-significant.
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number or people? LS. During
construction the various diesel-powered vehicles and equipment in use on the site would
create odors. These odors are temporary and not likely to be noticeable much beyond the
project boundaries. The potential for diesel odors impacts is less-than-significant.
4. Biological Resources
Environmental Setting
The project site is located within an upland, urbanized area of South San Francisco. The site is
largely paved and has been developed for light industrial and commercial uses for a number of
City of South San Francisco Page 31
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade August 2004
years. The immediate corner of the project site remains unpaved, but appears to have been
recently disked for weed control purposes. This corner area has been fenced to preclude public
access.
No wetlands have been observed on the site.
Figure 9-1 (Biological Resources) and 9-3 (Ecological Sensitive Lands) contained in the General
Plan Existing Conditions and Planning Issues Report do not identify the presence of any
significant biological or ecological resources on the site.
Proiect Impacts
a) Have a substantial adverse impact on a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species?
NI. The project site has been developed as parking area and has been urbanized with
previous industrial uses for a number of years. No candidate, sensitive or special-status
plant or animal species exist on the site. No impacts would therefore result.
b, c) Have a substantial adverse impact on riparian habitat or federally protected wetlands?
NI. No impacts would result to wetlands, since the site is largely paved as a parking lot
and no wetlands exist on the site.
d) Interfere with movement of native fish or wildlife species? NI. Fencing has been
constructed along the southerly and easterly property lines that would preclude migration
by wildlife species. No impacts would therefore result.
e, f) Conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources or any adopted
Habitat Conservation Plans or Natural Community Conservation Plans? NI. The site is
not located within the boundaries of any Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural
Community Conservation Plan. No impacts would therefore result.
5. Cultural Resources
Environmental Setting
Archeological overview
The geomorphological setting of the project area is pertinent as the matrix in which
archaeological resources would occur. Most of South San Francisco is within the Colma Creek
watershed, which has been the subject of extensive geomorphological study. However, the area
east of Highway 101 are largely in areas of filled San Francisco Bay and are generally areas
highly sensitive for prehistoric archaeological deposits.
The area near Colma Creek is in the immediate flood plain and margins of the Bay subject to
filling by the meandering creek. These downstream areas have been subject to both natural and
artificial filling. The more northerly of the eastern geographic area, around Point San Bruno, are
also mostly in both natural and artificial fill, the artificial fill lying on top of coarse alluvial sands
and gravels washed down from the slopes of San Bruno Mountain.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 32
August 2004
PrehistoriclEthnohistoricl Archaeological
Though it is likely the San Francisco Peninsula has been inhabited by humans for approximately
10,000 years, data confirming such a long tenure is lacking in San Mateo and San Francisco
counties. The oldest published date for San Mateo County remains that from a site near the outlet
of Co 1m a Creek to the Bay at SMA-40, at just over 5100 years before present. Nearly equally old
are the oldest component ofthe University Village Site (SMA-77) at the southeast of the county,
and the "BART Man" in San Francisco. Hints of possibly older occupation on the San Mateo
coast have been published, but are unsupported by technical dating techniques. It is believed that
the Peninsula, including the Colma Creek drainage, was likely occupied by Native Americans at
least 5000 years ago, but by different people than would later own the area.
Archeological records search
Archaeological research for the proposed project was initiated with a search of relevant records,
maps, and archives maintained by the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical
Resources Information System (CHRIS) at Sonoma State University. The results of the search
(File No. 01-17137, June 28,2002) indicate a moderate possibility of encountering Native
American resources and a low possibility of encountering historic or other cultural resources on
the project site.
The Existing Conditions and Planning Issues Report for the General Plan does not identify any
historic or prehistoric resources on the project site.
Protect Impacts
a) Cause substantial adverse change to significant historic resources? NI. Based on the
cultural and historical search prepared by the Northwest Information Center, no historical
resources were identified on the project site. No impacts are therefore anticipated with
regard to significant historical resources.
b) Cause a substantial adverse impact or destruction to archeological resource? LS/M. The
presence of sensitive archeological resources on the site appear to be low, based on the
cultural resources records search and information contained in the South San Francisco
General Plan. However, since extensive excavation is proposed for the tank and filler
system, a possibility exists of encountering cultural resources. The following mitigation
measure is therefore recommended to ensure that any impacts to an archeological
resources would be less-than-significant.
Mitigation Measure 2: If archeological materials or artifacts are identified, work
on the project shall cease until a resource protection plan conforming to CEQA
Section 15064.5 is prepared by a qualified archeologist and/or paleontologist and
approved by the South San Francisco Chief Planner. Project work may be
resumed in compliance with such plan. If human remains are encountered, the
County Coroner shall be contacted immediately and the provisions of State law
carried out.
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or unique geological
feature? LS/M. Any potential impacts to palenotological impacts will be addressed as
part of Mitigation Measure 2.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 33
August 2004
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of a formal cemetery? NI.
No formal cemeteries have been identified in either the archeological or architectural
historical resources survey, so no impacts would result.
6. Geology and Soils
Environmental Setting
(Note: this section is based on a geotechnical investigation of the site prepared by Kleinfelder in
January, 2002. The report has been peer reviewed by the geotechnical and hazardous materials
firm of Treadwell & Rollo and is available for review at the South San Francisco Planning
Division office. A copy of the Treadwell & Rollo peer review letter which also includes a review
of proposed underground tank buoyancy calculations, is included in the Appendix).
Geology and soils
The site is located on the northeast portion of the San Francisco Peninsula, which lies within the
Coast Range Geomorphic Province. The Coast Range consists of northwest trending mountains
and valleys. The region has undergone a complex geologic history of sedimentation, volcanism,
folding, uplift and erosion. This geologic province is thought to have been formed by northwest-
southeast tectonic forces caused by the intersection of the North American Plate moving
northwesterly and the Pacific Crustal Plate moving southeasterly. The contact between these
plates is the San Andreas fault zone.
San Francisco Bay is located less than one mile east of the site. The site is underlain by
depressed rock block which is Cenozoic in age, and is wedged between two uplifted blocks
featuring the East Bay hills and the Coastal Ranges of the San Francisco Peninsula on the west.
The San Andreas and Hayward faults roughly form the west and east dimensions of the
depressed block, respectively.
The site itself was created by reclaiming former tidelands of the Bay along the easterly edge of
San Francisco Bay by the placement of fill material.
The native bay soil deposits underlying the existing fill generally consist of soft compressible
recent Bay mud. This layer is underlain by alluvial deposits that were derived mainly from
erosion of the adjacent hills to the west and deposition of this material by ancient stream
channels over bedrock below. The depth to bedrock is on the order of 100 feet. Bedrock in the
vicinity of the project site generally consists of serpentine rock.
Groundwater was encountered from approximately 4 to 10 feet below ground surface, although
this level is subject to fluctuations based on recent rainfall, construction activities near the site
and other factors.
Seismic hazards
In terms of seismic hazards, the City of South San Francisco, and the Bay area as a whole, is
located in one ofthe most seismically active regions in the United States. Several major faults
and fault zones traverse the region, including the San Andreas, approximately 3.5 to 5 kilometers
(km) from the site, the San Gregorio fault, the Hayward fault, the Calaveras fault, the Coyote
City of South San Francisco Page 34
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade August 2004
Point fault and the Hunters Point fault. The closest fault zone to the project area is the Coyote
Point fault zone, which lies north of the project area. The zone consists of a complex two mile
wide zone of faulting with three prominent strands in the vicinity of the project area. Because the
California Department of Mines and Geology has not evaluated the Coyote Point and Hunters
Point fault zones, neither have been included within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone.
The 1990 Working Group on the California earthquake Probabilities estimated a 67% probability
ofa major earthquake (7.0+ magnitude) by the year 2020. There are no know active faults within
the project area.
Proiect Impacts
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse impacts, including loss,
injury or death related to ground rupture, seismic ground shaking, groundfailure, or
landslides? LS. Proposed improvements on the site would be subject to moderate to
severe ground shaking during seismic events on nearby fault zones. In the absence of an
Earthquake Safety Zone on the site, the risk of ground rupture is considered low. With
adherence to construction techniques identified in the Kleinfelder geotechnical report and
the Uniform Building Code, less-than-significant seismic impacts to humans or structures
are anticipated. No impacts related to landslide hazard is anticipated, since the project site
and surrounding properties on all sides are float with minimal topographic relief.
b) Is the site subject to substantial erosion and/or the loss of topsoil? LS/M. The proposed
project would include excavation for placement of three underground storage tanks and
excavations for filler lines and related utilities. Although limited, a possibility exists that
stockpiling of trench spoils could erode into nearby streets, drainage facilities and
ultimately into San Francisco Bay. This would be a significant impact. The following,
mitigation measure is therefore recommended to reduce erosion impacts to a less-than-
significant level.
Mitigation Measure 3. Contract specifications for this project shall require the
preparation and implementation of an erosion control plan for all portions of the
project that would involve trenching, excavation or stockpiling of dirt. The plan
shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and be consistent with City of
South San Francisco and Regional Water Quality Control Board guidelines and
standards.
c-d) Is the site located on soil that is unstable or expansive or result in potential lateral
spreading, liquefaction, landslide or collapse? LS. The General Plan Background Report
indicates that much of the project area consists of artificial fill over Bay mud, which is
susceptible to liquefaction and lateral spreading, especially during a seismic event.
According to the project design engineer, the presence of potential liquefaction and other
soil and geotechnical hazards has been taken into account in the project plans, so less-
than-significant impacts are anticipated with regard to liquefaction and lateral spreading.
Since the project site is generally flat, no impacts are anticipated with regard to
landslides.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 35
August 2004
e) Have soils incapable of supporting on-site septic tanks if sewers are not available? NI.
The proposed project does not include sewer facilities, so there would be no impacts with
regard to septic systems.
7. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
(Note: The following section is based on an Environmental Investigation Report prepared for the
proposed project by Kleinfelder, a geotechnical and hazardous materials consulting firm in
December, 2001. The report has been peer reviewed by the geotechnical and hazardous materials
firm of Treadwell & Rollo and is available for review in the South San Francisco Planning
Division office. The peer review letter is attached as an Appendix. A peer review letter of the
proposed fuel filling system has been peer reviewed by the firm of Gettler-Ryan, underground
tank designed, and is also attached as an Appendix to this document).
Environmental Setting
The environmental analysis completed by Kleinfelder notes that previous site uses included an
underground storage tank associated with historic site uses. Remediation was completed on the
site in 1988 and the underground tank removed. Elevated concentrations of total recoverable
petroleum hydrocarbons (TRPH) and 2-butane (methyl ethyl ketone [MEKD and metals were
detected in soil samples at that time. Total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPH-g) and a
number of hydrocarbons, including benzene, toluene, ethylbenzenes and total xylenes were
found in groundwater samples.
The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board issued a closure letter for the site
in 1990, but required additional investigations to characterize metals in the soil and volatile
hydrocarbons in the soil and groundwater. Testing was accomplished in 1992. Due to high levels
of mineral spirits found in the soil as well as Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons~iesel (TPH-d)
found in the local groundwater. Contaminated soils were removed and groundwater monitoring
was implemented.
In 2000, a soil and groundwater investigation was undertaken as part of the earlier gasoline
facility proposal. Levels of contamination were found to be below applicable regulatory
guidelines and metals were detected. Specifically, chromium was detected at concentrations at or
in excess of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards. Evidence of
hydrocarbons and other metals were also detected, however, it was concluded that the levels
detected should not pose a threat to human health of the proposed use of the site.
A follow-up investigation was completed in December 2001, which included four soil borings.
Results of the borings indicate the presence ofTPH-g and TPH-d, but below minimum
regulatory standards of significance. Neither aromatic hydrocarbons nor MTBEs were found in
the soil samples. Chromium was similarly not detected in the latest sampling. No contaminants
above applicable regulatory standards were found in the groundwater sampling.
Prolect Impacts
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport,
use or disposal of hazardous materials? LS. Implementation of the proposed project would
require the routine transport and handing of bulk gasoline from the refinery to the proposed
City of South San Francisco Page 36
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade August 2004
dispensing station. This would be considered a less-than-significant impact, since transport
of such materials on public thoroughfares is regulated by the California Department of
Transportation and California Highway Patrol. No mitigation measures are required.
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into
the environment? LSIM. The Kleinfelder report identifies no significant levels of
contamination on the site above action levels by appropriate regulatory agencies. However,
the report also recommends that the following measures be undertaken prior to such
activities.
Mitigation Measure 4. The following steps shall be taken prior to any excavation
on the project site:
a) Soil samples shall be collected and analyzed for soluble chromium prior to
disposal, either on-site or off-site.
b) If dewatering of excavated areas is required, water sampling shall be
undertaken by a qualified consultant prior to disposal and water disposal
practices consistent with applicable regulatory standards undertaken.
In terms of safety aspects of the proposed fuel tank and dispensing system, the applicant has
proposed to include several safety features that would minimize the possibility of accidental
fuel spills and/or leaks into the surrounding soil or groundwater. These features would
include installation of double-wall fuel tanks, use of a "hold down" slab as part of the
installation to minimize movement, installation of a containment sump to collect fuel from
leakage, overflows or water intrusion. The fueling system would also be equipped with a
tank monitor and leak detection system operating on a 7 day per week, 24 hour per day basis
that would have the capability of shutting down fueling if a leak were to be detected. Fuel
dispensers would include an automatic shut-off valve in the event the pump were to be
struck by a vehicle, or a vehicle left the area with a filler hose attached. Emergency shut-off
switches would be installed at various locations around the proposed facility that would
include an audible alarm. Finally, a number of fire extinguishers would be located
throughout the facility.
A peer review of the proposed Costco dispensing and fueling system has been prepared by
the firm of Gettler-Ryan, underground tank civil engineers and contractors. Based upon their
review of the plans, the proposed fueling system meets industry standard criteria for these
types of installations. The following mitigation measure is recommended, however, to
ensure that any safety issues are reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measure 5. The fueling system engineer and/or contractor shall
provide written certification to the City of South San Francisco that all applicable
codes, standards and manufacturers' recommendations have been met as part of
the installation and set-up of the fuel dispensing system. This shall be done prior
to the operation of the system.
c) Emit hazardous materials or handle hazardous materials or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? NI. No
City of South San Francisco Page 37
Initial Study/Costeo Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade August 2004
public schools exist or are planned within a one-quarter mile radius of any of the project
sites. The closest school is Martin Elementary School, located at 25 School Street,
approximately 2 miles from the site. No impacts would therefore result.
d) Is the site listed as a hazardous materials site? NI. The project site is not includes on the
most recent "Cortese List" of identified hazardous waste and substances sites (August 15,
2002) as compiled and maintained by the Department of Toxics Substances Control. There
is therefore no impact with regards to the project site being identified as a hazardous
materials site.
e,f) Is the site located within an airport land use plan of a public airport or private airstrip?
NI. The project site is located within the "Airport Vicinity Special Use Zone" for San
Francisco International Airport, roughly defined by the FAR Part 77 horizontal surface.
This SUZ is an area of frequent aircraft overflights but relatively low accident risk.
Industrial, transportation, communication and utility uses (including transportation
terminals and automobile parking) are identified as compatible uses within this zone. No
impacts are therefore anticipated regarding airport safety issues.
g) Interference with an emergency evacuation plan? NI. The proposed project would not
involve major change to existing roads or development patterns. Therefore, no impacts are
anticipated with regard to interference with emergency evacuation plans.
h) Expose people and structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? NI. The project area lies
in a substantially urbanized area with minimal risk of wildland fires. No impacts are
therefore anticipated.
8. Hydrology and Water Quality
Environmental Setting
The main surface body of water within South San Francisco is Colma Creek, a perennial stream
with a watershed of approximately 16 square miles. Colma Creek extends in a southeastern
direction through the center of the community. The two primary tributaries of Colma Creek
include Twelve Mile Creek and Spruce Creek. Both of these smaller creeks have been almost all
channelized and/or undergrounded.
Colma Creek provides the main transport of stormwater runoff and other runoff from South San
Francisco into the Bay. East of the 101 Freeway, Colma Creek is contained in concrete and rip-
rap channels.
San Francisco Bay, another major body of water, forms the easterly boundary of South San
Francisco.
Existing storm drain facilities have been constructed in streets abutting the project site to
accommodate stormwater runoff.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 38
August 2004
Surface water quality
All flows into Colma Creek originate as stormwater, irrigation runoff or are from similar sources.
As an urban stream, Colma Creek is expected to have high levels of heavy metals as well as
other pollutants typical of urban bodies of water.
South San Francisco has joined the other cities and San Mateo County to create the San Mateo
Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program. The purpose of this program is to
administer a Joint Municipal NPDES Permit for stormwater quality management. Each
participant has adopted a Stormwater Management Plan to ensure that Best Management
Practices are enforced to protect surface water quality, during both construction and operational
stages of a project.
Groundwater
Low topographic elevations and the Colma Creek floodplain in the East of 101 area provide
conditions conducive to high groundwater. The Kleinfelder report (December 2001) indicates
that groundwater was encountered at a depths ranging from 4 to 15 feet from the surface,
however, groundwater levels are subject to fluctuation based on seasonal rainfall, groundwater
withdrawal and construction activities on adjacent sites.
Flooding and tsunami hazards
Periodic flooding occurs along most of the right-of-way of Colma Creek in South San Francisco,
however, based on the Flood Insurance Rate Map for this portion of South San Francisco,
(Community Panel No. 0650620002B), the project site lies outside of the 100-year flood plain as
mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
The project site is not anticipated to be subject to tsunami hazards from San Francisco Bay,
based on Figure 10-2 contained in the 1999 General Plan Existing Conditions Report.
Proiect Impacts
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? LS. Approval of the
requested project would increase surface water flow that could affect surface water quality
standards. Due to the small area of increased impervious surface, the potential for violation
of surface water standards are considered minor and less-than-significant. Mitigation
Measure 3, will ensure that erosion during grading and excavation activities would be
controlled No impacts are anticipated with regard to exceeding water quality discharge
requirements since there would be no contribution to the City's wastewater flow.
Adherence to Mitigation Measure 4 would reduce any impacts related to dewatering
activities, associated with encountering groundwater during excavation, would be reduced
to a less-than-significant level.
b) Substantially deplete groundwater recharge areas or lowering of water table? NI. No
impacts are anticipated with regard to depletion of groundwater resources, since the project
would not require use of water resources. Similarly, no impacts are anticipated with regard
to overcovering groundwater recharge areas since minimal new impervious surfaces would
be created as part of the project.
c) Substantially alter drainage patterns, including streambed courses such that substantial
siltation or erosion would occur? LS/M. Limited installation of additional impervious
City of South San Francisco Page 39lInitial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade August 2004
surfaces is anticipated with the proposed project, which would include surfacing an existing
open field on the southeast corner of South Airport Boulevard and Belle Air Road. Since
the majority of the site is presently paved and used for a parking lot, impacts to existing
drainage patterns would be less-than-significant.
However, a portion ofthe project does include excavation to allow for placement of three
underground storage tanks. Due to the proximity of the site to Colma Creek and San
Francisco Bay, there is a possibility of significant impacts due to erosion of excavated
material. This is a potentially significant impact that would be mitigated by Mitigation
Measure 3.
d) Substantially alter drainage patterns or result injlooding, either on or off the project site?
LS. Less-than-significant impacts or changes to drainage patterns are anticipated since only
minor amounts of impervious surfaces are proposed to be added to the site. No major
changes to existing drainage patterns would be involved.
e) Create stormwater runoff that would exceed the capacity of drainage systems or add
substantial amounts of polluted runofj? LS. Minimal increases in the quantity of existing
drainage would result upon construction of the proposed project, since small amounts of
additional impervious surfaces are proposed for the site. This would represent a less-than-
significant impact Based on previous discussions with the South San Francisco Public
Works Department, no significant drainage issues have been noted in this portion of the
community. Less-than-significant impacts would therefore result with regard to drainage
systems.
f) Substantially degrade water quality? LS/M. With adherence to Mitigation Measure 3 (soil
erosion), there would be less-than-significant impacts related to degradation of water
quality due to increases in soil erosion. However, given the nature of site use which is
anticipated to attract a large number of vehicles, there would be a potentially significant
impact to surface water quality due deposits of oil, spillage of gas and deposits of other
organic and inorganic material as a result of more human activity on the site. The following
mitigation measure is therefore recommended to reduce the potential for surface water
quality impacts to a less-than-significant level:'
Mitigation Measure 6. The project developer's civil engineer shall prepare a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) adhering to South San Francisco
and Regional Water Quality Control Board standards to assure long-term
adherence to surface water quality standards. The SWPPP shall incorporate the
most recent Best Management Practices, including, but not limited to frequent
sweeping of the site, labeling storm drain inlets and adding a permanent cover
over solid waste dumpsters.
g) Place housing within a 1 OO-year jlood hazard area as mapped by a Flood Insurance Rate
Map? NI. The proposed project does not include a housing component, so there would be
no impact with regarding to placement of housing within a 100-year flood plain.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 40
August 2004
h, i) Place within a lOa-year flood hazard boundary structures that impeded or redirect flood
flow, including dam failures? NI. The site is located outside of a 100-year flood plain. No
impacts are anticipated with regard to impedance of flood waters or flows.
j) Result in inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflows? NI. The project site lies outside of
anticipated tsunami impact areas, based on the South San Francisco General Plan. Also, the
site is flat with minimal topographic relief, so the risk of impacts from mudflows or
landslides is very unlikely. No impacts are therefore anticipated.
9. Land Use and Planning
Environmental Betting
Existing land uses
The South Airport Boulevard corridor has been developed with a mix of lodging facilities,
restaurants, light industrial and warehouse uses.
More specifically, immediately east of the site, a large aviation fuel tank farm has been
constructed to serve San Francisco International Airport. A freight-forwarding building has been
established south of the project site. West of the project site, a mix of light industrial and
warehouse uses have been constructed. North of the project site lies Colma Creek.
Regulatory framework
Land uses within South San Francisco are regulated by the South San Francisco General Plan,
which was updated in 1999. The General Plan includes the Land Use Element, Transportation
Element, Parks, Public Facilities and Services Element, Economic Development Element, Open
Space and Conservation Element, Health and Safety Element and Noise Element.
The General Plan Land Use Map designates the site for "Community Commercial" development.
This designation allows for retail and department stores, eating and drinking establishments,
commercial recreation, service stations, auto sales and service, financial, business and personal
services, motels and educational and social services. Maximum permitted development intensity
of 0.50.
General Plan land use designations in the vicinity of the project site include a Planned
Commercial uses to the north, Mixed Industrial uses to the east, and Business Commercial to the
south and east.
Additionally, the City's East of 101 Area Plan, adopted in 1994, continues as a guide for detailed
implementation of the General Plan policies. The project site is located in an area designated
Planned Commercial in the Area Plan. The Plan notes that retail uses along South Airport
Boulevard "are intended to provide services to the employees of the East of 101 Area as well as
accommodate destination uses such as warehouse style retail specialty stores."
The City of South San Francisco Zoning Ordinance regulates land uses on private property in the
community. Current zoning of the site is Planned Commercial (PCL). This zoning district allows
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 41
August 2004
a wide variety of commercial activities including but not limited to retail sales, offices, research
and development, restaurants, lodging services, and gasoline sales.
The project site is located within the Downtown Central Redevelopment Project Area. The goals
and objectives of the redevelopment plan include facilitating commercial activity, retaining and
expanding existing businesses, increasing sales and revenues for the City, and developing areas
that are stagnant of improperly used.
Proiect Impacts
a) Physically divide an established community? NI. Approval and construction of the
proposed project would involve a minor expansion to an existing conditionally permitted
land use. Since no residences have been constructed in the vicinity of the project, there
would be no disruption of any existing communities and no impacts would result.
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation? NI. The proposed project
is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Community Commercial, which
allows retail uses and service stations; it is consistent with the East of 101 Area Plan which
supports both employee serving and warehouse-type retail uses along South Airport
Boulevard; and it is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Downtown/Central
Redevelopment Plan which supports increased commercial activity, expansion of existing
businesses and development of underutilized properties. No impacts would therefore
result.
c) Conflict with a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? NI. No
such plan has been adopted within the City of South San Francisco. There would therefore
be no impact to a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan for the
proposed project.
10. Mineral Resources
Environmental Setting
The project area contains no known mineral resources. This is based on the Existing Conditions
Report prepared as part of the 1999 General Plan Update process.
Proiect Impacts
a, b) Result in the loss of availability of regionally or locally significant mineral resources? NI.
The City of South San Francisco General Plan (1999) does not indicate that significant
deposits of minerals exist within the project area, so no impacts would occur.
11. Noise
Environmental Setting
The City defmes "noise" as a sound or series of sounds that are intrusive, irritating, objectionable
and/or disruptive to daily life. Noise is primarily a concerns with regard to noise sensitive land
uses such as residences, schools, churches and hospitals. Although noise is controlled around
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 42
August 2004
commercial, industrial and recreation uses, community noise levels rarely exceed maximum
recommended levels for these uses.
The Noise Element of the General Plan EIR identifies the following primary sources of noise in
South San Francisco: aircraft noise from San Francisco International Airport, traffic noise from
freeways and arterial roadways in the community, railroad noise and industrial noise.
The Noise Element identifies the following maximum noise exposure levels by land use type.
Table 5. City of South San Francisco Noise Exposure Levels
Land Use Noise Exposure Level
Residential Less than 65: Satisfactory
66 to 70: Conditionally Acceptable
70+: Unacceptable
Commercial Less than 70:Satisfactory
70 to 80: Conditionally Acceptable
80+Airport-related development only
Industrial Up to 75: Satisfactory
75 to 85: Conditionally Acceptable
85+ Airport related development only
Open Up to 75: Satisfactory
75+ Avoid uses involving concentrations of
people or animals
Source: South San Francisco General Plan Noise Element, 1999
Noise level references reflect Community Noise Equivalent Levels (CNEL) decibels
Figure 4.5-2 of the General Plan EIR identifies the project site as lying within a 65 dB (CNEL)
aircraft noise contour area as mapped by the FAA in 2000. The site is also anticipated to fall
within the projected 65 dB noise contour for the year 2006. Figure 4.5-4 identifies the southwest
portion of the site as lying within the 65 dB noise contour level for projected road and rail
generated noise.
Proiect Impacts
a) Would the project expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess ofstandards
established by the General Plan or other applicable standard? NI. Surrounding land uses
include commercial, light industrial and warehousing. None of these uses is considered a
sensitive noise receptor, which typically include schools, hospitals, convalescent facilities
and similar uses. Operation of the proposed fueling station would be electrically powered
and is not anticipated to generate significant noise levels above threshold levels specified in
the Noise Element of the General Plan.
It is anticipated that several of the auto trips using the proposed facility would be "pass-by
trips" oriented to the main Costco facility on the north side of Belle Air Road and would
not be new trips solely to the fueling station. Also, a lack of noise sensitive land uses in the
project vicinity (schools, parks, residences and similar land uses) would result in no
impacts with regard to generation of excessive noise levels.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 43
August 2004
b) Exposure of people to excessive ground borne vibration or groundborne noise levels? NI.
Since no sensitive noise receptors exist near the project site, there would be no exposure of
people to excessive noise or vibration. No impacts would therefore result.
c) Substantial permanent increases in ambient noise levels? NI. There would be no substantial
change to the existing noise environment in the project area, since operation of the fueling
station would generate minimal increases in permanent noise levels. No impacts with
regard to potential permanent noise impacts are therefore anticipated.
d) Substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels without the project? LS. Construction of the project could result in short-term
noise and vibration due to trenching and grading for the fuel tanks and construction of the
pump islands, regarding and paving of existing parking areas, and related structures. There
would also be increased noise levels from trucks and other construction vehicles needed for
the project. In the short-term, these activities could exceed City noise exposure standards.
However, since there no sensitive noise receptors are present on or adjacent to the project
site, such noise levels would be less-than-significant.
e, 1) For a project located within an airport land use plan, would the project expose people to
excessive noise levels? NI. The FAA-accepted 1995 FAR Part 150 Noise Exposure Map
contained in the 1995 San Mateo County Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan for San
Francisco International Airport identifies the project site as lying outside the 65dB CNEL
contour, the standard significance threshold for noise exposure/land use compatibility
concerns. The Plan indicates that from an aircraft noise/land use compatibility standpoint
all residential, commercial, industrial and open space uses would be compatible with no
special noise insulation requirements for new construction. No impacts are therefore
anticipated in terms of this topic.
12. Population and Housing
Environmental Setting
Population
South San Francisco is San Mateo County's fourth largest City. Population growth in the City
has been cyclical, generally fueled first by heavy industrial uses in the early and mid-part of the
last century. More recently, biotechnology and related high tech and office uses have spurred
residential growth.
The one major residential project that is in the process of completion is the Terrabay project on
the south slopes of San Bruno Mountain. Other infill residential projects have been built along
the EI Camino corridor and other areas.
Since the supply of large vacant parcels of land in the community is nearly exhausted, future
residential growth is anticipated to be limited. Additional population growth must therefore come
from redevelopment projects.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 44
August 2004
The following table includes historical population projections for the Bay Area, San Mateo
County and South San Francisco, based on the Association of Bay Area Government's
Proiections 2003 publication.
The City's General Plan (1999) anticipates a maximum build-out population of 67,400 for the
community. No time horizon for build-out is assumed in the General Plan.
Table 6. Regional, County and City Population (I)
2000 Population 2010 Population 2020Population
Region 6,783,762 7,527,500 8,168,300
San Mateo 707,163 756,400 813,300
Co.
South San 60,732 64,000 70,200
Francisco
Source: ABAG Projections 2003
Employment
Employment trends in South San Francisco have been changing from a heavy industrial center,
dominated by steel mills, meat packing, ship building and similar "blue collar" industries to high
tech and research jobs. Due to the proximity to regional transportation facilities and to San
Francisco, continued employment growth is anticipated for the next 20+ years.
The following table summarizes projected employment growth in South San Francisco.
Table 7. Regional, County and City Employment (I)
2000 Jobs 2010 Jobs 2020 Jobs
Region 3,753,670 4,199,670 4,752,590
San Mateo 395,890 429,100 489,020
Co.
South San 53,230 57,020 62,400
Francisco
Source: ABAG Projections 2003
The South San Francisco General Plan EIR anticipates a buildout employment figure of71,400
for the General Plan, but no time horizon is attached to employment buildout.
Proiect Impacts
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly? NI. Approval
of the proposed project would not increase population growth in South San Francisco, since
the project proposes an expansion of an existing commercial use at the north side of the
City of South San Francisco Page 45
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade August 2004
project site. According to the project applicant, the proposed gasoline facility would be
automated and would employ the equivalent of one to two full time persons during the
hours of operation. This amount of future employment is negligible and no impacts are
anticipated with regard to employment projections. Similarly, since the project does not
include a housing or residential component, no impacts are anticipated with regard to
population increases within the community.
b,c) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing units or people? NI.
The northerly half ofthe project site is fully developed with a Costco Wholesale facility
and related parking and landscaping improvements. A portion of the southerly half of the
project site has been developed with a surface parking lot for the Costco facility with the
remaining portion of the site vacant. No impacts would therefore occur with regard to
population displacement since no residential dwellings would be removed.
13. Public Services
Environmental Setting
The following provide essential services to the community:
· Fire Protection. Fire protection services are handled by the City of South San
Francisco Fire Department. The Department provides fire suppression, fire
prevention, education and hazardous material control.
· Police Protection: Police and security protection is provided by the City of South San
Francisco Police Department, which maintains a 24-hour security patrol throughout
the community.
· Schools. The South San Francisco Unified School District provides K-12 educational
services to the community.
· Maintenance. Maintenance of streets, roads and other governmental facilities are the
responsibility of the City of South San Francisco.
· Solid Waste: Solid waste service is offered by South San Francisco Scavenger
Company. After collection, waste is brought to the Material Recovery Facility
Transfer Station in the east of 101 area and ultimately disposed of at the Ox Mountain
Sanitary Landfill located near Half Moon Bay. The Ox Mountain facility has a permit
to accept fill material until 2016. Upon expiration of that permit, the facility is
proposed for expansion.
Project Impacts
a) Fire protection? LS. Approval of the proposed project would have less-than-significant
impacts to fire protection services since the gasoline dispensing facilities would be
constructed to Uniform Fire Code standards.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 46
August 2004
b) Police protection? NI. Since all of the financial transactions associated with the facility
would be conducted via electronic means, no impacts to police services are anticipated
since the risk of robbery would be limited. Local traffic control issues, which are the
responsibility of the Police Department are addressed in Section 15 of this Initial Study.
c) Schools? NI. There would be no impact to school service should the proposed project be
approved since no new residential development would occur, nor would the project
indirectly induce new residential development.
d) Other governmental service, including maintenance ofpublicfacilities? NI. There would
be no impact to maintenance services provided by the City, since any off-site construction
would be constructed to City standard to minimize the need for maintenance.
e) Solid waste generation? LS. Less-than-significant impacts regarding generation of solid
waste is anticipated since construction of the proposed gasoline facility would generate a
small amount of construction debris. Long-term operation of the facility would result in no
impact regarding solid waste generation, since there would be no transaction regarding
packaged goods.
14. Recreation
Environmental Setting
South San Francisco maintains 319.7 acres of parks and open space, equivalent to 5.4 acres per
1,000 residents. This includes 70 acres of developed parkland, 168.5 acres of open space and
81.2 acres of school lands.
The City also provides a range of recreation programs available in 6 community recreation
buildings, some of which provide specialized services.
The project site is adjacent to the San Francisco Bay Trail. The Bay Trail was initiated by the
adoption of SB 100 in 1987 that promotes a continuous trail linkage around the Bay. A portion of
the Bay Trail through South San Francisco has been constructed along the north side of the '
project site, directly north of the Costco facility. An additional portion has been constructed
along the south side of Belle Air, as a striped bike path within the paved right-of-way, where it
connects with the new bridge near the entrance to the City's Water Quality Control Plant, located
directly east of the project site.
Proiect Impacts
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks? NI. No City
parks or open space lands are located on the project site, so no impacts are anticipated
should the proposed project be approved and implemented. Similarly, no impacts would
result to the Bay Trail, since the Trail is built adjacent to the site and is fully operational.
However, the project does include additional Bay Trail identification signs along the Belle
Air Road bikeway, providing additional recognition of the trail system.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 47
August 2004
b) Does the project include recreationalfacilities or require the construction of recreational
facilities? NI. Since no residential development is proposed as part of the project, no
recreational services are required to be acquired or constructed and no impacts would result.
15. Transportation and Traffic
(Note: The following traffic analysis has been prepared by Crane Transportation Group. The full
text of the report is contained in the Appendix of the Initial Study.)
Environmental Setting
Existing roadways
The project site is served by the following roadways:
South Airport Boulevard provides direct access to Belle Air Road. It is a four-lane arterial
roadway with a raised median in the project vicinity. Left and U-turn lanes are provided on
the approaches to select intersections and driveways where median breaks have been
provided. In the project vicinity, South Airport Boulevard has signalized intersections with
the U.S. 101 northbound on-off ramps, Utah Avenue, Belle Air Road, the 1-380-0n-
Ramp/North Access Road and the I 380-0ff-Ramp. A median break and left turn lanes are
provided at the south Beacon Street/U.S. Customs driveway intersection between the project
site and the I 380 on-off ramp intersections. At the north Beacon Street connection to South
Airport Boulevard, a raised median on South Airport Boulevard restricts movements to right
turns in and out only. A 200-foot-Iong left turn lane is provided on the southbound approach
to Belle Air Road.
Belle Air Road extends easterly from South Airport Boulevard for one block and ends. It is
50 feet wide curb-to-curb and provides access to the Costco parking areas and back of the
store unloading docks. Belle Air Road has three westbound approach lanes to South Airport
Boulevard (two for left turns and one for right turns) and one eastbound departure lane. Six-
foot-wide striped and signed Class II bike lanes are provided along both sides of the street. A
short (100-foot~long) left turn lane is provided on the eastbound Belle Air Road approach to
the Costco store entrance.
Existing traffic volumes
Weekday AM and PM peak period (7:00-9:00 AM and 4:00-6:00 PM) as well as Saturday
midday/afternoon (10:00 AM-4:00 PM) turn movement traffic counts were conducted by Crane
Transportation Group in mid-July 2000 at the South Airport Boulevard intersections with Belle
Air Road, Beacon Street (south), the 1380 On-Ramp/North Access Road and the 1380 Off-
Ramp. A second set of weekday AM and PM peak period counts were then conducted by Crane
Transportation Group in June 2002 at all of the same intersections as well as at the South Airport
Boulevard intersections with Utah Avenue and Beacon Street (north). In addition, in May 2004
weekday PM peak period counts were conducted by Crane Transportation Group at the South
Airport Boulevard intersections with the 1-380 interchange and Belle Air Road. Finally, late
1998 to 2000 counts conducted for other East of 101 traffic studies evaluating conditions along
South Airport Boulevard were also reviewed. Overall, June 2002 and May 2004 counts for most
movements at all intersections were lower to significantly lower than the counts from 1999 and
City of South San Francisco Page 48
Initial Study/Castca Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade August 2004
2000 (although May 2004 counts were higher than those from 2002). This is primarily
attributable to lower activity levels at San Francisco International Airport just to the south, the
corresponding decrease in airport-related business activity that is served by South Airport
Boulevard and reduced employment in some of the high tech companies in the "East of 101"
area. After consultation with City planning staff, it was determined that the counts previously
conducted in year 2000 for an earlier Costco gas station study would conservatively serve as the
"Existing Condition" for the current traffic analysis. Some of the July 2000 counts were then
adjusted slightly (based upon review of other year 1999 or 2000 counts at the two intersections
north of the project site to be included in the new analysis) to better reflect a more logical set of
volumes extending along South Airport Boulevard from the 1-380 interchange to the U.S. 101
Northbound Ramps intersection. The peak system traffic hours were determined to be 7:45-8:45
during the weekday AM commute, 4:45-5:45 during the weekday PM commute, and 1 :00-2:00
PM on Saturday.
Intersection operations
Signalized Intersections
Intersections, rather than roadway segments between intersections, are almost always the
capacity controlling locations for any circulation system. Signalized intersection operation is
graded based upon two different scales. The first scale employs a grading system called
Level of Service (LOS) which ranges from Level A, indicating uncongested flow and
minimum delay to drivers, down to Level F, indicating significant congestion and delay on
most or all intersection approaches. The Level of Service scale is also associated with a
control delay tabulation (year 2000 Transportation Research Board (TRB) Highway Capacity
Manual [HCM] operations method) at each intersection. The control delay designation
allows a more detailed examination of the impacts of a particular project. Greater detail
regarding the LOS/control delay relationship is provided in the Appendix of the traffic
analysis.
The South Airport Boulevard signalized intersections with the 1-380 On-RamplNorth Access
Road and the 1-380 Off-Ramp are located about 130 feet apart and operate as a coordinated
system. They have been evaluated using the SYNCHRO software program which provides
average vehicle delay and levels of service at each intersection for their combined (system)
operation as well as vehicle queuing between intersections.
Unsignalized Intersections.
Unsignalized intersection operation is also typically graded using the Level of Service A
through F scale. LOS ratings for all-way stop intersections are determined using a
methodology outlined in the year 2000 TRB Highway Capacity Manual. Under this
methodology, all-way stop intersections receive one LOS designation reflecting operation of
the entire intersection. Average control delay values are also calculated. Intersections with
side streets only stop sign controlled (two-way stop control) are also evaluated using the LOS
and average control delay scales using a methodology outlined in the year 2000 TRB
Highway Capacity Manual. However, unlike signalized or all-way stop analysis where the
LOS and control delay designations only pertain to the entire intersection, in side street stop
sign control analysis LOS and delay designations are computed for only the stop sign
controlled approaches or individual turn and through movements. The Appendix of the traffic
report provides greater detail about unsignalized analysis methodologies.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 49
August 2004
Standards of operation
Level of Service (LOS) D is considered by South San Francisco as the poorest acceptable
operation for signalized and all-way stop intersections; LOS E is considered to be the poorest
acceptable operation for side street stop sign controlled approaches or for specific turn
movements. The City has no minimum standards for movements from private driveways.
Existing Levels of Service (LOS)
Table 8 shows that currently the signalized South Airport Boulevard intersection with Belle Air
Road is operating at LOS A conditions during the weekday AM peak hour and LOS B during the
weekday PM and Saturday peak hours. The South Airport Boulevard intersections with Utah
Avenue and the U.S.101 Northbound Ramps are operating acceptably (at LOS B or C) during the
weekday AM and PM peak hours. At the South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street intersection the
stop sign controlled Beacon Street approach is operating at LOS C during the weekday AM peak
hour and an unacceptable LOS F during weekday PM peak hour conditions. At the South Airport
Boulevard/I-380 On-Ramp/North Access Road intersection, AM peak hour operation is LOS B
while PM peak hour operation is an unacceptable LOS E, while at the South Airport
Boulevard/I-380 Off-Ramp intersection, both AM and PM peak hour operation is LOS B.
Currently, during the weekday PM peak hour there are extended backups in the left turn lane on
the South Airport Boulevard northbound approach to the 1-380 interchange, as well as smaller
backups in the left and right turn lanes on the southbound interchange approach.
Signal warrant evaluation
Traffic signals are used to provide an orderly flow of traffic through an intersection. Many times
they are needed to offer side street traffic an opportunity to access a major road where high
volumes and/or high vehicle speeds block crossing or turn movements. They do not, however,
increase the capacity of an intersection (i.e., increase the overall intersection's ability to
accommodate additional vehicles) and, in fact, often slightly reduce the number of total vehicles
that can pass through an intersection in a given period of time. Signals can also cause an increase
in traffic accidents if installed at inappropriate locations.
There are 11 possible tests for determining whether a traffic signal should be considered for
installation. These tests, called "warrants," consider criteria such as actual traffic volume,
pedestrian volume, presence of school children, and accident history. Usually, two or more
warrants must be met before a signal is installed. In this report, the test for Peak Hour Volumes
(Warrant # 11) has been applied. When Warrant 11 is met there is a strong indication that a
detailed signal warrant analysis covering all possible warrants is appropriate. These rigorous
analyses are described in Chapter 9 of the Caltrans Traffic Manual while Warrant 11 is presented
in the Appendix of the full traffic report.
It is possible that an unsignalized intersection will not meet signal warrants, but will have one or
more movements that experience LOS F operations. Level of Service F can be indicated for a
very low volume of vehicles at a stop sign. Although these stopped vehicles may experience long
delays of one minute or more, there would not be an overall benefit ifthe higher numbers of
vehicles on the major street were stopped in favor of the few vehicles on the minor street. The
signal warrant considers a balance between major street and minor street delays, and may
indicate that there is overall benefit if drivers for some turn movements from the minor street
continue to experience long (LOS E or F) delays.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 50
August 2004
Currently, volumes at the South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street (south) intersection exceed
peak hour warrant criteria during weekday PM peak hour conditions.
Observed operational problems
No operational problems were observed during any of the survey periods at the South Airport
Boulevard intersections with the U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps, Utah Avenue, Belle Air Road or
Beacon Street. However, at the South Airport Boulevard intersections with the I 380 On- and
Off-Ramps/North Access Road, weekday PM peak hour vehicle demand intermittently to
frequently exceeds available storage in the single lane left turn pockets on the north and
southbound South Airport Boulevard intersection approaches. Demand exceeding available
storage is more frequent in the northbound direction (although May 2004 observations indicate
that the number of times southbound vehicles turning left to the North Access Road back out of
the available 200-foot-Iong left turn lane has increased significantly since the year 2000). In
addition, southbound drivers on South Airport Boulevard turning right to the 1-380 On-Ramp
rarely take full advantage of the possibility to conduct right turns from the combined
through/right turn lane as well as the adjacent exclusive right turn lane. Although a sign is
provided adjacent to the travel way indicating turns are allowed from both lanes, fewer than 10
percent of right turns are made from the combined through/right turn lane. Pavement markings
indicating turn possibilities are almost completely faded. Resulting use of the southbound
exclusive right turn lane for 90+ percent ofturns to the 1-380 On-ramp produces backups out of
the right turn lane during weekday PM commute peak hour conditions.
Planned roadway improvements
Recent studies conducted for expanded activities in and around San Francisco International
Airport and south of the project site have proposed a second left turn lane on the northbound
South Airport Boulevard approach to the 1-380 On-Ramp in conjunction with new street lighting
and sidewalks. Plans have been approved by Caltrans and the City of South San Francisco,
although final negotiations are still in progress between the Airport and South San Francisco
regarding payment of inspection fees once construction begins. It is likely that these
improvements will be installed within the next year.
The Bay Trail pedestrianlbicycle path section passing through the South Airport Boulevard/I-380
interchange will be provided within the next six months. The trail will cross South Airport
Boulevard on the north side of the North Access Road/I-380 westbound on-ramp signalized
intersection at a newly marked crosswalk. Pedestrian and bike rider push buttons will be
installed. Westerly of the South Airport Boulevard crossing, the trail will continue under the 1-
380 interchange ramps just east of the U.S. 101 freeway; it will not cross the 1-380 westbound
on-ramp at South Airport Boulevard. Easterly of the South Airport Boulevard crossing, the trail
will extend northerly for a slight distance on the east side of South Airport Boulevard then go
easterly across Colma Creek on the north side ofthe one lane (westbound) bridge connecting
South Airport Boulevard to the North Access Road.
The South San Francisco General Plan Amendment & Transportation Demand Management
Ordinance EIR has identified the need for improvements at the South Airport BoulevardlUtah
Avenue intersection before 2020. At Utah Avenue, improvements would include provision of a
second left turn lane on the southbound Airport Boulevard approach and the restriping of one
northbound through lane to provide a combined through/right turn lane.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 51
August 2004
A recent EIR for the Britannia East Grand project has identified the need for improvement to the
South Airport BoulevardlU.S. 101 Northbound Ramps intersection before 2020. The
improvement would be the provision of an additional off-ramp right turn lane and a second off-
ramp lane connection to the U.S. 101 freeway. City Engineering Department staff has indicated
that funding for these improvements will only be collected from local development if traffic
levels increase to levels projected in this study. Although it is likely that the City will include
these measures in their capital improvements program, they have not been assumed in place for
2020 evaluation in this study.
No improvements are currently planned or proposed along South Airport Boulevard adjacent to
the Costco site.
Year 2005 and 2020 Base Case (without project) operating conditions
At City Planning staff request, the impacts of the proposed Costco gas station have been
evaluated in relation to year 2005 and 2020 Base Case (without project) background conditions.
Future horizon Base Case volumes at the north end of South Airport Boulevard have been
develop'ed through traffic modeling efforts for various projects in the East of 101 area from an
initial calibration period of year 2000 conditions and do not reflect the current reduced traffic
volumes resulting from the September 11 incident or the high tech recession. Therefore, it is
probable that what is defined in this report as year 2005 conditions will, in reality, represent
traffic growth that may not be experienced until 2007 or later.
Volumes
F our sources of future year peak hour or daily volumes were available for various locations
along South Airport Boulevard between the 1-380 interchange and the U.S. 101 Northbound
Ramps intersection. In addition to the two previously referenced documents evaluating
growth at the airport, projections were also available from the City's 1999 General Plan
Update as well as from the February 2002 Britannia East Grand Project (Fuller O'Brien
Property) Recirculation EIR Circulation Analysis. Based upon the various growth rates in the
studies, by 2020 volumes along South Airport Boulevard were projected to grow by as little
as 15 percent (as predicted by the General Plan) or more than 60 percent (as predicted in the
Airport studies). No basis was provided in the Airport studies for the high growth rate; rather,
a three percent per year growth rate (which may have been experienced around the airport
area in the mid- to late 1990s) was projected to continue for 20 years.
Due to the lack of conformity between studies, it was decided to slightly increase the City's
General Plan traffic growth assumption (resulting in an estimated 18 percent growth by
2020) and apply this rate to all turn movements at all analyzed intersections with two
exceptions. Movements to and from the airport and those to and from the Costco store were
increased 40 percent by 2020 at a straight line growth rate of two percent per year. Figures 5
and 6 contained in the traffic analysis present weekday AM and PM peak hour and Saturday
peak hour volumes at all analyzed intersections for year 2005 and 2020 conditions,
respectively.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 52
August 2004
Year 2005 Base Case (without proiect) intersection operation
Table 8 shows that by 2005 without the Costco gas station in operation, the South Airport
Boulevard intersection with Belle Air Road would be operating at LOS A during the
weekday AM peak traffic hour and LOS B during both the weekday PM peak traffic hour
and the Saturday peak traffic hour. At the South Airport Boulevard intersection with the U.S.
101 Northbound Ramps, weekday AM and PM peak hour operation would be LOS B. At the
South Airport BoulevardJUtah Avenue intersection, weekday AM peak hour operation would
be an unacceptable LOS F while PM peak hour operation would be an acceptable LOS B. At
the South Airport Boulevard intersection with Beacon Street, the stop sign controlled Beacon
Street approach would be operating at LOS C during the weekday AM peak traffic hour and
an unacceptable LOS F during the weekday PM peak hour. At the South Airport Boulevard
intersection with the 1-380 On-Ramp and the North Access Road, operation would be an
acceptable LOS B during the weekday AM peak hour and an unacceptable LOS E during the
weekday PM peak hour, while at the South Airport Boulevard/I-380 off-ramp intersection
both AM and PM peak hour operation would be an acceptable LOS B. The unacceptable PM
peak hour LOS E operation at the 1-380 On-RamplNorth Access Road intersection assumes
that current improvement plans by the Airport to provide a second left turn lane on the
northbound intersection approach have not yet been implemented.
PM peak hour volumes at the South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street intersection would be
well above peak hour signal warrant criteria levels.
Yeiu 2020 Base Case (without proiect) intersection operation
Table 8 shows that by 2020 without the Costco gas station in operation, the South Airport
Boulevard intersection with Belle Air Road would be operating at LOS A during the
weekday AM peak traffic hour and LOS B during both the weekday PM peak traffic hour
and the Saturday peak traffic hour. At the South Airport Boulevard intersection with the U.S.
101 Northbound Ramps, weekday AM peak hour operation would be an unacceptable LOS
F, while PM peak hour operation would be an acceptable LOS C. At the South Airport
Boulevard/Utah Avenue intersection weekday AM peak hour operation would be LOS C
while PM peak hour operation would be LOS B. At the South Airport Boulevard intersection
with Beacon Street, the stop sign controlled Beacon Street approach would be operating
acceptably at LOS C during the weekday AM peak traffic hour and unacceptably at LOS F
during the weekday PM peak hour. At the South Airport Boulevard intersection with the 1-
380 On-Ramp and the North Access Road, operation would be an acceptable LOS B during
the weekday AM peak hour and an acceptable LOS A during the weekday PM peak hour.
The South Airport Boulevard/I-380 off-ramp intersection would be operating at LOS A
during the AM peak hour and LOS B during the PM peak hour. The unacceptable AM peak
hour operation of the South Airport Boulevard/U.S. 101 Northbound Hook Ramps
intersection would be due to significantly increased off-ramp volumes (above 3,000 vehicles
per hour). This volume of traffic would also be above the capacity of the single lane off-ramp
connection to the U.S. 101 freeway.
It should be noted that 2020 operating conditions reflect planned improvements at both the
South Airport BoulevardJUtah Avenue intersection and the South Airport Boulevard/I-380
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 53
August 2004
interchange. This is the reason why both locations are projected to be operating acceptably in
2020 and not 2005. It should also be noted that an improvement recently identified as needed
by 2020 at the South Airport Boulevard/U.S. 101 northbound ramps intersection has not been
included in the evaluation, but rather identified by the City as a needed Base Case (without
project) improvement that will be provided if traffic conditions warrant. To provide a
conservative analysis, this improvement has not been assumed in place by 2020.
PM peak hour volumes at the South Airport BoulevardlBeacon Street intersection would be
well above peak hour signal warrant criteria levels.
Table 8. Intersection Level of Service
ee ay ea our : - :
Year 2005 Year 2020
Base Case (No Base case + Base case (no Base case +
Intersection Existin~ Project) Project Proiect) Project
S. Airport Blvdo/UoSol0l NB B-15.2(I) B-1S.4 B-1S.9 F-101.9 F-106.5
Hook Ramps-
Wondercolor Lane (Silmal)
So Airport Blvdo/Utah Ave. C-26.4(1) F-9S.1 F-lOO.4 C-2200 C-25.0
(Signal)
S, Airport Blvd./Belle Air A-7.1(1) A-7.4 A-9.5 A-70S B-10.0
Rdo (Signal)
S. Airport Blvd./Beacon St. A-S.7/A-905/ A-S09/A-909/ A-900/B-10.1I A-9.2/B-10.5/ A-9.3/B-10.7/
South (Beacon Stop Sign C-1S00/C-22.S(2) C-1907/D-26.4 C-21.2/D-29.1 C-20.5/E-41.6 C-2201/E-4703
Controlled)
S. Airport Blvd.lI-3S0- B-1S.4 (I) B-1S.5 B-lS.7 B-11.5 B-l1.9
U.So101 North On-
RamplNorth Access Rd. (as
part of Signalized system)*
S. Airport Blvd./I-3S0- B-12.5(I) B-13.0 B-1301 A-S.9 A-S.9
UoSo101 North Off-Ramp (as
oart of Signalized system Vi<
W kd AMP kH
(7 45 8 45)
Year 2005 Year 2020
Base Case (No Base Case + Base Case (No Base -Case +
Intersection Existin!! Project) Project Project) Project
So Airport Blvd./UoS.101 NB B-1706(1) B-lS.6 B-1S06 C-21.4 C-21.5
Hook Ramps-
Wondercolor Lane (Signal) ..
So Airport Blvdo/Utah Ave. B-16.2(1) B-1709 B-lSol B-1706 B-1706
(Signal)
S. Airport Blvd./Belle Air B-l1.0(1) B-11.3 B-14.1 B-13.2 B-190S
Rd. (Signal)
S. Airport Blvd./Beacon St. B-13.1IA-SoS/ B-14.0/ A-9.0/ B-14.3/A-9.1I B-14.S/A-9.2/ C-15.0/A-9.3/
South (Beacon Stop Sign F-134/E-4400(2) F-22007/F-57.0 F-252/F-6307 F-399/F-I02 F-445/F-llS
Controlled)
S. Airport Blvd.lI-3S0- E-55.S(I) E-57.l E-59.0 A-9.4 A-9.6
U.So10l North On-
RamplNorth Access Rdo (as
part of Signalized system)*
S. Airport Blvd./I-3S0- B-13.7(1) B-1405 B-14.5 B-1202 B-12.3
U.S.I0l North Off-Ramp (as
part of Signalized system)*
Weekday PM Peak Hour (4:45-5:45)
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 54
August 2004
Year 2005 Year 2020
Base Case (No Base Case + Base Case (No Base Case +
Intersection Existing Project) Project Project) Project
S. Airport Blvd./BeIle Air Rd. B-1500(l) B-15.4 B-18.3 B-18.9 C-25.0
(Signal)
Saturday Peak Hour (1:00-2:00 PM)
(1) Signalized level of service-vehicle control delay in seconds.
(2) Unsignalized level of service-average vehicle control delay in seconds. Northbound left turn to
Beacon Street/Southbound left turn to UoSo Customs parking lot/Beacon Street eastbound stop sign
controlled approach/UoSo Customs parking lot westbound stop sign controlled approacho
* SYNCHRO analysis.
2000 Highway Capacity Manual Operations Methodology
Source: Crane Transportation Group
2005 Base case (without project) recommended improvements
The traffic report recommends implementation of the following roadway and related
improvements.
South Airport Boulevard/Utah Avenue (see Appendix Figure A-I in traffic report)
· Monitor traffic conditions and provide a second left turn lane on the southbound
South Airport Boulevard intersection approach when traffic conditions warrant.
Also, restripe one of the northbound through lanes to allow both through movements
and right turns, if required. This is a previously identified local traffic improvement
need.
South Airport Boulevard/I 380 On- and Off-Ramps/North Access Road Intersection
· Provide a second left turn lane on the northbound South Airport Boulevard approach
to the 1-380 On-Ramp and a fourth through lane on the South Airport Boulevard
approach to the 1380 Off-Ramp. Two of the four northbound through lanes at the 1-
380 off-ramp intersection will become the exclusive left turn lanes at the On-Ramp
intersection. The San Francisco International Airport is planning to construct this
improvement in the near future.
· Restripe the westbound North Access Road approach to South Airport Boulevard to
provide a single shared left/through lane and an exclusive through lane.
· Provide new pavement markings and increased informational signing on the
southbound South Airport Boulevard approach to the 1-380 On-Ramp to indicate the
possibility oftuming right to the On-Ramp from two lanes rather than just one lane.
· Adjust signal cycle length and phasing.
Above improvements and revised signal timing (if acceptable to Caltrans) also eliminate
southbound left turn backups out of the 200-foot-Iong turn pocket providing access to the
North Access Road (as shown above). However, if Caltrans chooses to continue with the
same signal timing and phasing, 95th percentile vehicle queues in the southbound left
turn lane will extend six to seven car lengths beyond the 200-foot length of the existing
turn pocket. Therefore, provide the following measure.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 55
August 2004
· Provide a second left turn lane on the southbound South Airport Boulevard approach
to the North Access Road. Adequate median width is available for this widening. In
conjunction with this added turn lane, restripe the North Access Road leg of the
intersection to provide two departure lanes (and one intersection approach lane). The
63- foot width of the North Access Road bridge just east of South Airport Boulevard
could accommodate this lane striping.
2020 Base case (without project) recommended improvements
The traffic report recommends implementation of the following roadway and related
improvements.
South Airport BoulevardlU.S. 101 Northbound Ramps (see Appendix Figure A-2 of
traffic report)
· Provide a second right turn lane on the U.S. 101 off-ramp.
· Provide a second off-ramp lane diverging from the U.S. 101 freeway.
South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street
· Although warranted, signalization of this intersection is not recommended.
Drivers experiencing extended delays attempting to make left turns from Beacon
Street (south) to northbound South Airport Boulevard have the option to make a
right turn from Beacon Street (north) and then make a U-turn at the Belle Air
Road signal.
Standards of significance
The addition of project traffic would produce a significant impact if:
.. Acceptable Base Case peak hour signalized intersection operation (LOS A, B, C or D)
is degraded to LOS E or F.
· Signalized intersections with unacceptable Base Case peak hour operation (LOS E or
F) have one percent or more traffic added to the intersection.
· Acceptable Base Case peak hour unsignalized intersection operation (LOS A, B, C, D
or E for approaches or turn movements) is degraded to LOS F.
· Unsignalized intersections with unacceptable Base Case peak hour operation (LOS F)
have one percent or more traffic added to the intersection.
.. Base Case volumes at an unsignalized intersection are increased above peak hour
signal warrant criteria levels.
· Unsignalized intersections with Base Case volumes already above peak hour signal
warrant criteria levels have one percent or more traffic added to the intersection.
· Vehic1e queues extend from the gas station onto Belle Air Road.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costeo Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 56
August 2004
· Vehicle queues in the left turn lane on the southbound South Airport Boulevard
approach to Belle Air Road extend beyond the available storage length.
· In the opinion of the registered traffic consultant conducting this study, a significant
safety or operational problem would result due to the proposed project.
Proiect Impacts
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial to existing traffic load and street capacity?
LS/M. The following analysis has been prepared to address the impacts of the proposed
project.
Trip generation and distribution
Research has been conducted as part of a recent study for a proposed Costco gas station in
Redwood City that details trip generation at three existing Costco gas stations in northern
California (in Santa Clara, Sunnyvale and Sacramento). Findings include each site's gross
trip generation (total vehicles in and out of the gas station), the number of customers
attracted that were already shopping at the adjacent Costco retail store and the number of
customers attracted from the flow oftraffic on the roadways adjacent to the gas station.
Data from the surveys were collected, in most part, for the three peak traffic periods under
examination for the proposed South San Francisco facility.
All data from the research sites were based upon gross trip rates per vehicle fueling
position (VFP). Each of the three surveyed sites has 12 VFP, while 16 VFP are proposed
for the South Airport Boulevard facility. This is the trip rate measurement criteria for gas
station trip generation used by the traffic engineering profession in their primary source of
trip rate data, Trip Generation, 7th Edition by the Institute of Transportation Engineers,
2003. Data used in this publication to develop trip rates for gasoline/service stations has
been collected from the 1970s to the 2000s throughout the United States. In contrast, the
oldest Costco gas station trip rate data was from 1998.
An initial examination of the trip rate data from the survey sites showed from 5 to 20
percent variations in trip rates per VFP between sites for the same time periods. This is
discussed in Appendix Table A-I of the traffic analysis. Even while the majority of gross
trip rates appeared reasonable, a disconnect would develop using any of the surveyed trip
rates from existing Costco gas stations based upon vehicle fueling positions for the
proposed South Airport Boulevard facility. The reasoning is as follows.
Costco indicates that the amount of gas sold during the year at their three surveyed
facilities ranged from 7.7 to 9.69 million gallons. The amount of gas projected to be
sold at their South Airport Boulevard facility is 6.5 million gallons, from 16 to 33
percent less than at the surveyed sites. However, the number of fueling positions at
the South Airport Boulevard facility (the criteria upon which trip generation is
normally based) will be 33 percent greater than at the surveyed sites (16 VFP versus
12 VFP). Therefore, assuming the Costco projections for gasoline to be sold at their
South Airport Boulevard facility are accurate, using a trip rate based upon VFP at
locations with fewer fueling positions but higher gallonage sold would produce an
unrealistically high projection of traffic for the South Airport Boulevard facility.
Costco management has indicated that the reason for the increased number of fueling
City of South San Francisco Page 57
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade August 2004
positions proposed at the South Airport Boulevard facility is to reduce the wait to get
gas, not due to higher gallonage.
In order to provide a more realistic projection of the traffic to be generated by the South
Airport Boulevard facility, peak hour trip rates from the three survey sites were developed
on a per million gallons sold basis rather than on a per vehicle fueling position basis. For
two of three time periods, there was a direct correlation between the reported gallons of
fuel sold at all three survey locations and the surveyed trip rates. As presented in Table 9,
trip rates based upon fuel sold produces, with one exception, very close relationships in
peak hour trip rates between the three survey sites.
The highest of the trip rates per million gallons sold from the three surveyed sites was
applied to the projected gallonage for the South Airport Boulevard facility. After
consultation with City planning staff, a 50 percent increase in estimated gallonage (taking
the total from 6.5 up to 9.75 million gallons) was used for traffic impact analysis purposes
in order to provide a conservative safety factor in the projections and to allow some room
for growth in customers. As shown in Table 10, projected gross two-way trip generation
(inbound + outbound) would be 294 trips during the weekday AM peak traffic hour, 410
trips during the weekday PM peak traffic hour and 452 trips during a Saturday peak traffic
hour.
Surveys at the three existing Costco gas stations also indicated that a significant portion of
Costco gas station customers typically come from customers already making a trip to the
Costco retail store (internal capture) or are attracted from the ambient traffic flow on the
adjacent roadway system (passby capture)-see Table 11. Using results for most time
periods from these surveys, projections were developed of the net new traffic that would
likely be added to the local roadway network by Costco's proposed South Airport
Boulevard gas station. As presented in Table 12, the lowest internal capture rates and the
lowest passby capture rates found at the three surveyed facilities were applied to the project
for weekday PM peak hour and Saturday peak hour projections. However, survey findings
for weekday AM peak hour conditions were not utilized because they were not considered
applicable to the South Airport Boulevard site. During weekday AM peak hour conditions,
all Costco retail stores are closed while the gas stations are open. Therefore, there is no
internal capture of retail traffic by the gas station during this period (and only a minor
capture projected from Costco employees). Survey findings (from two of the three gas
stations) indicated that 95 to 99 percent of all Costco gas station customers during the AM
peak hour were passby capture attracted from traffic traveling immediately adjacent to the
sites.
Given the location of the proposed project between two South Airport Boulevard
interchanges with the U.S.I0l and 1380 freeways and the high number of vehicles using
both interchanges to access employment sites to the north and south of the project site, it
was projected that a significant amount of the customers using the Costco gas station
during the morning commute peak traffic hour would be diverted from both interchanges.
These vehicles would be newly added to South Airport Boulevard in the immediate project
vicinity, and would need to travel twice through their respective interchanges due to the
diversion to the gas station. Overall, during the weekday AM commute peak hour, 36
percent of the Costco gas station customers were projected to be passby capture with 50
City of South San Francisco Page 58
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade August 2004
percent diverted from nearby interchanges and 14 percent being diverted (or newly added)
from locations farther away then the nearby interchanges.
Table 12 presents the net new traffic projected to be added to South Airport Boulevard at
the Costco site due to the proposed gas station. Net new two-way traffic would be 188 trips
during the weekday AM peak hour, 102 trips during the weekday PM peak hour and 154
trips during the Saturday peak hour. Net new (or diverted) traffic was projected to
distribute in proportion to volumes passing through the South Airport Boulevard/I-380
interchange and the South Airport BoulevardlU.S. 101 Northbound Ramps intersection.
Passby traffic capture was projected to occur in a pattern matching the ambient flow of
traffic along South Airport Boulevard.
Table 9. Existing Costco Gas Station Trip Generation Rates
Per Million of Gallons Sold
Trip Rates Per Million Gallons Sold
Location Yearly Million
Gallons Sold Weekday Saturday
AM PM
Peak Hour Peak Hour Peak Hour
Santa Clara 9.69 29.93 40.56 37.46
Sunnyvale 7.70 No Data 41.95 46.23
Collected
Sacramento 8.90 30.11 37.64 38.88
Source:
Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc.
DKS Associates, Redwood City Costco Gasoline Station Traffic/Circulation Element of EA, April 25,
2000
Evaluation by: Crane Transportation Group
Table 10. Costco South Airport Boulevard Proposed Gross Trip Generation
Weekday 2-way Trips
Estimated AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Saturday 2-way
Peak Hour Trips
Use Gallons
Pumped*
Rate** Vol Rate** Vol Rate** Vol
Gas Station 9,750,000 30.1 294 42.0 410 46.2 452
20 Fueling
Positions
* Costco Estimate of 6,500,000 gallons increased by 50% for conservative safety factor (% increase
determined in consultation with city Planning Staff)o
** Trip rate per million gallons pumped.
Source: Crane Transportation Group. Based upon trip rate data surveys from 3 existing Costco gas
stations in northern California contained in the Redwood City Costco Gasoline Station Traffic/Circulation
Element of EA, April 25, 2000 by OKS Associates.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 59
August 2004
Table 11. Costco Gas Station Gross Trip Reduction
Internal Capture Rate Passby Trip Rate
Survey Location Weekday Weekend Weekday Weekend
AM PM AM PM
Peak Hour Peak Peak Hour Peak Hour Peak Hour Peak Hour
Hour
Santa Clara Costcdl) 0% 56% 72% 95% 43% 13%
Sacramento Costcdl) 0% 70% 53% 99% 29% 44%
Sunnyvale Costco (2) 46% 59% (2) (2) (2)
(1) Trip generation rates listed in table are based on surveys conducted on a midweek day in June 1998
between the hours of 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM (midweek AM peak period) and 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM (midweek
PM peak period) and on Saturday, June 6,1998 between the hours of 12:00 PM and 3:00 PM (weekend
peak period).
(2) Trip reduction rate information not available for this location.
Source: OKS Associates
Table 12. Costco South Airport Blvd. Projected Net New Trip
Generation (after allowance for Internal and Passby Trips)
Weekday 2-way Trips Saturday
AM PM
Peak Hour Peak Hour Peak Hour
Gross Trip Generation 294 410 452
Internal Capture 0% (-Oil) 46% (-188) 53% (-238)
Passby Capture from South Airport 36% (-106) 29% (-120) 13% (-60)
Boulevard
Net New Trips Attracted to Costco Gas 64% (188) 25% (102) 34% (154)
Station-Potential Significant Diversion
From Other Nearbv Area Traffic
(1) Costco store closed.
Source: Crane Transportation Group partially based upon findings in the Redwood City Costco Gasoline
Station Traffic/Circulation Element of EA, April 25, 2000 by OKS Associates.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 60
August 2004
Table 13. South Airport Blvd./I-380 Westbound On-Ramp/North Access Road
Level of Service and Southbound Left Turn Queue Lengths with Various Mitigation
Alternatives (all evaluations includes Airport Planned & Funded Second Left Turn Lane
on Northbound So. Airport Blvd. Approach + Existing Signal Cycle Length and Phasing
Sequence)
Year 2005
Southbound S. Airport Blvd. Left Turn
Weekday PM Peak to N. Access Rd.
Hour Level Of
Mitigation Condition Service A vailable Stora~e 95th % Queue
Distance Len!!th
No Additional Base Case C-27.5 200' 356'
Measure
Base Case + Project C-31.1 200' 360'
Provide Second Base Case C-23.1 340' 258'
Southbound Left total 2 lanes total 2 lanes
Turn Lane
Base Case + Project C-26.6 340' 258'
total 2 lanes total 2 lanes
Year 2020
Southbound S. Airport Blvd. Left Turn
to N. Access Rd.
Mitigation Condition Weekday PM Peak A vailable Stora~e 95th % Queue
Hour Level Of Distance Length
Service
No Additional Base Case D-38.9 200' 392'
Measure
Base Case + Project D-43.0 200' 396'
Provide Second Base Case C-32.8 340' 278'
Southbound Left total 2 lanes total 2 lanes
Turn Lane.
Base Case + Project D-36.8 340' 280'
total 2 lanes total 2 lanes
Synchro software program, Year 2000 Highway Capacity Manual Analysis Methodologyo
Source: Crane Transportation Group
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costeo Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 61
August 2004
Table 14. Projected Number of Vehicles Queuing* on
Southbound South Airport Blvd. Approach to Belle Air Rd.
Year 2005
Weekday Weekday Saturday
Capacity** AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Peak Hour
Condition (vehicles) Demand Demand Demand
W /0 Project 8 2 8 5
With Project 8 4 10 7
Year 2020
Weekday Weekday Saturday
Capacity** AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Peak Hour
Condition (vehicles) Demand Demand Demand
W /0 Project 8 2 10 7
With Project 8 4 13 9
* 95th percentile demand
** 25 feet per vehicle
Year 2000 Highway Capacity Manual Analysis Methodology
Source: Crane Transportation Group
2005 Base Case + project intersection operation
Table 8 shows that Base Case + project intersection operation would not be significantly
different than Base Case operation. Gas station traffic would not change level of service at
any analyzed intersection during any analysis period and would not degrade acceptable
operation to unacceptable operation. At locations with unacceptable base Case conditions,
project traffic impacts would be as follows.
· AM Peak Hour
South Airport BoulevardlUtah Avenue (LOS F signalized operation)
The diversion of traffic to the gas station would change movements at the
intersection to produce a slightly increased (::I: 2 seconds) average delay for
drivers; The project would increase traffic at this intersection by 3.8 percent
(significant impact).
PM Peak Hour
South Airport Boulevard/I-380 On-Ramp-North Access Road (LOS E signalized
operation)
The diversion of project traffic through the interchange would increase average
delay for drivers by just under 2 seconds (from 57.1 to 59.0 seconds). The project
would increase traffic at this intersection by 1.3 percent (significant impact).
South Airport BoulevardlBeacon Street (LOS F stop sign controlled Beacon
Street approach)
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 62
August 2004
Project traffic would increase average delays for turns from the Beacon Street
approach by almost 32 seconds and further increase PM peak hour volumes above
signal warrant criteria levels. The project would increase traffic at this intersection
by 2.2 percent (significant impact). It should be noted, however, that the vast
majority of turns from Beacon Street would continue to be right turns, which
would experience acceptable delays.
2020 Base Case + project intersection operation
Table 8 shows that Base Case + project intersection operation would not be significantly
different than Base Case operation. Gas station traffic would not change level of service at
any signalized intersection during any analysis period and would not degrade acceptable
operation to unacceptable operation. At locations with unacceptable Base Case conditions,
project traffic impacts would be as follows.
· AM Peak Hour
South Airport BoulevardlU.S. 101 Northbound Ramps (LOS F signalized
operation)
The diversion of traffic to the gas station would increase average delay for drivers
by just under 5 seconds (from about 102 up to just under 107 seconds). The project
would increase traffic at this intersection by 0.7 percent (less-than-significant
impact).
· PM Peak Hour
South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street (LOS F stop sign controlled Beacon Street
approach)
Project traffic would increase average delays for turns from the Beacon Street
approach by almost 46 seconds and further increase PM peak hour volumes above
signal warrant criteria levels. The project would increase traffic at this intersection
by 2.0 percent (significant impact). It should be noted, however, that the vast
majority of turns from Beacon Street would continue to be right turns, which would
experience acceptable delays.
In sum, implementation of the proposed project is expected to result in significant impacts,
as follows:
· Year 2005, South Airport BoulevardlUtah Avenue: AM Peak Hour, increase of average
delay by 3.8%.
· Year 2005, South Airport Boulevard/I-380 pm ramp/North Access Road: PM Peak
Hour, increase average delay by 1.3%.
· Year 2005, South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street: PM Peak Hour, traffic increase at
this intersection by 2.0 %.
· Year 2020, South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street, PM Peak Hour, an increase of
average delay of 2%.
The following mitigation measure is recommended to reduce these impacts to a less-than-
significant level.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 63
August 2004
Mitigation Measure 7. In the short-term (Year 2005), the project developer shall:
a) At South Airport Boulevard/I-380 On-Ramp-North Access Road, provide
a fair share contribution towards providing additional pavement markings
and signing informing southbound drivers of the possibility of making
right turns to 1-380 from two lanes. IfCaltrans chooses not to significantly
adjust signal timing at this intersection after improvements by the Airport,
provide a fair share contribution towards providing a second left turn lane
on the southbound South Airport Boulevard approach as well as providing
two departure lanes and one approach lane on the North Access Road leg
of the intersection (see Table 13).
b) At South Airport BoulevardlUtah Avenue, provide a fair share
contribution towards improvement needs already identified for this
location.
c) At South Airport BoulevardlBeacon Street (South), provide a fair share
contribution towards signalization should the City decide to provide this
improvement.
Mitigation Measure 8. In the long-term (Year 2020), the project developer shall
provide a fair share contribution towards signalization at the South Airport
Boulevard/Beacon Street South should the City decide to provide this
improvement.
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a LOS standard established by the County
CMAfor designated roads)? LS. On a regional basis, the proposed Costco gas station
project would not generate 100 net new trips on nearby CMA roadways in anyone-hour
period, which is the minimum threshold for CMNC/CAG significance. A less-than-
significant impact would therefore occur with regard to this impact.
c) Change in air traffic patterns? NI. The proposed project involves construction of a gasoline
fueling station for the existing Costco. There would be no impact to current air traffic
patterns.
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible use? LS/M
The following factors have been evaluated in this analysis: vehicle queuing in front of
proposed gas pumps, impact of left turns from Belle Air Road into the gas station,
adequacy of storage in left turn lane on South Airport Boulevard southbound approach to
Belle Air Road, and frequency of tanker truck deliveries.
Vehicle queuing
Inbound access to the gas station would primarily be provided via a single driveway along
Belle Air Road about 160 feet east of South Airport Boulevard. This 40- foot-wide
driveway would allow vehicles to directly access lines leading to the gas pumps. Drivers
would have their choice of queuing in eight different lines, each line leading to two sets of
pumps (or vehicle fueling positions). Sixteen vehicles could be fueling at the same time.
There would be southbound approach storage room on the approach to each set of pumps
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 64
August 2004
ranging from 125 to 165 feet and providing room for between five and eight vehicles per
line.
Therefore, total available storage (not including vehicles pumping gas) with vehicles
entering the driveway closest to South Airport Boulevard (not extending across the
sidewalk adjacent to Belle Air Road) would be 54-58 vehicles.
To achieve maximum storage during peak demand time periods will require that a Costco
employee be located at the entrance to the gas station nearest South Airport Boulevard to
direct entering vehicles to the shortest queue line. As vehicle queues extend toward Belle
Air Road, Costco will temporarily close the driveway nearest South Airport Boulevard and
have all drivers enter the most easterly driveway on the south side of Belle Air Road. Use
of three internal aisles in this employee/overflow parking lot will provide an additional
single storage lane about 770 feet long, which will accommodate an additional 35 to 38
vehicles. Total off-street vehicle storage will therefore provide room for between::l: 89 and
96 vehicles.
Maximum queuing demand has been calculated for peak weekly gasoline demands of 50
and 60 percent above yearly average conditions. This reflects weekly pumping of 187,500
and 200,000 gallons, respectively. For comparison purposes, with Costco's projected 6.5
million gallons per year demand projected for the South Airport Boulevard facility, a
weekly average demand would be 125,000 gallons, while the maximum demand at their EI
Camino Real facility has been up to about 250,000 gallons per week in 2001.
Total vehicles per hour using the proposed gas station for the two gallonage levels would
be as follows:
Total Vehicles
Time Period Enterin!! Gas Station
50% Above Average 60% Above Average
Demand Demand
Weekday AM Peak Hour 147 157
Weekday PM Peak Hour 205 219
Saturday Afternoon Peak 226 241
Hour
Source: Crane Transportation Group
Based upon three days of surveys by Crane Transportation Group at the South San
Francisco El Camino Real Costco gas station in June 2001, the existing facility served, at a
minimum, 25 vehicles per hour per pump line (with two vehicles in each line pumping gas
at any given time), while the maximum number of vehicles served per hour per line was 27.
Thus, each driver on average, takes about 4.5 to 5 minutes to get gas. Using the minimum
rate would indicate that the proposed South Airport Boulevard facility's eight pump lines
would be able to accommodate, at a minimum, up to 200 vehicles per hour. Thus, with
demands 50 or 60 percent above average, the proposed South Airport Boulevard gas station
would be operating with demand exceeding available pump fueling position capacity
during the peak demand time periods on weekday and Saturday afternoons.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 65
August 2004
In regards to potential vehicle queuing, June 2001 weekday and Saturday surveys at the
Costco El Camino Real facility (when well over 200,000 gallons per week were being
pumped) showed maximum queues of 68 to 70 drivers waiting to get gas during six
different periods. Maximum queues occurred on Monday, the station's busiest weekday,
and on Saturday, the busiest weekend day. With the same capacity at the South Airport
Boulevard facility (16 vehicle fueling positions being proposed for the South Airport
Boulevard facility versus 16 at the EI Camino Real station), the maximum vehicle queue
waiting for gas (for comparable gallonage being pumped) would be about 68 to 70
vehicles. Since this level of activity is not being anticipated at the South Airport Boulevard
facility, the off-street storage for 89 to 96 vehicles being proposed for the South Airport
Boulevard station project (with maximum use of overflow storage in the parking aisles east
of the gas station) should be adequate for peak demand periods to preclude vehicles
backing onto Belle Air Road. Again, this assumes that Costco staff are available to direct
vehicles entering the gas station during peak demand periods. This impact would be
potentially significant. The following measure would reduce this impact to a less-than-
significant level:
Mitigation Measure 9. The developer shall provide one or more staff members at
the Belle Air Road main entrance to the gas station during peak use periods to
ensure uniform allocation of entering traffic to each of the eight lines leading to
the gas pumps. In addition, as needed, the attendants shall also temporarily close
access into the gas station from the main entrance (nearest South Airport
Boulevard) and provide access via the driveway farthest to the east along Belle
Air Road.
Left turns from Belle Air Road into gas station
Regarding the impact of left turns from Belle Air Road into the proposed gas station, one of
the primary sources of customers for the Costco gas station will be drivers already visiting
the Costco store. Those people stopping for gas after shopping will make a right turn from
the main store driveway onto Belle Air Road and then a left turn (80 feet to the west) into
the gas station. From 45 to 55 vehicles could be making this left turn during peak traffic
hours. In the vicinity of the proposed gas station main entrance, Belle Air Road has two
eastbound and two westbound travel lanes. The westbound lane that would be used by
Costco customers turning left into the gas station widens just west of the proposed gas
station entrance and transitions into two lanes used for left turns to southbound South
Airport Boulevard. Should a westbound driver on Belle Air Road turning left into the
Costco gas station be delayed any measurable amount of time (by the 400 to 500 inbound
vehicles per hour traveling westbound on Belle Air Road toward the Costco store entrance
driveway), it could disrupt the orderly flow of outbound traffic from the Costco store
towards the South Airport Boulevard signalized intersection. This would be a significant
impact. The following measure would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measure 10. Provide signing for traffic leaving the Costco store
driveway indicating that access to the gas station is via the driveway directly
across Belle Air Road (if not temporarily closed during peak queuing conditions)
or via the driveway farthest to the east along Belle Air Road. In conjunction with
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 66
August 2004
this measure, prohibit left turn movements from westbound Belle Air Road into
the gas station main entrance (by signing and striping).
Adequacy of storage in left turn lane on South Airport Boulevard southbound approach to
Belle Air Road
The left turn lane on the southbound South Airport Boulevard approach to Belle Air Road
is 200 feet long and can accommodate eight to nine automobiles. A landscaped median
extends at least 300 feet to the north of this turn pocket.
As part of the intersection level of service evaluation, projections were also obtained of the
maximum 95th percentile back of queue storage demand that would be likely to occur in
the left turn pocket on the southbound South Airport Boulevard approach to Belle Air
Road. As shown in Table 13, for Base Case (without project) conditions, the southbound
left turn lane is likely to experience occasional demands greater than the available storage
length before 2020 during weekday PM peak hour conditions. With the addition of gas
station traffic, vehicle queues would occasionally extend beyond the length of the left turn
pocket by 2005 during weekday PM Peak hour conditions. By or before 2020, the addition
of gas station traffic would increase maximum vehicle queues farther beyond the available
200-foot storage length during the weekday PM Peak hour and would also result in queues
extending beyond the available storage length during the Saturday peak traffic hour. This
would be a significant impact.
Mitigation Measure 11. At South Airport Boulevard/Belle Air Road, monitor use
of the southbound left turn lane and lengthen by at least 125 feet when maximum
queues begin extending towards the end of the lane. As an alternative mitigation,
provide loop detectors the entire length of the left turn pocket and program the
signal controller to give priority to emptying the left turn lane when vehicle
queues extend near the end of available storage. This would produce slightly less
efficient (but still acceptable) intersection operation during peak traffic periods,
but would still require lengthening the turn pocket by at least 50 feet.
Frequency of tanker truck deliveries
The tanker trucks serving Costco gas stations hold 7,800 gallons of fuel. The number of
trucks per day would vary depending upon the specific weekly demand for fuel by
customers. The number of trucks for three different demand levels would be as follows.
Costco Projected Average:
+50%
+60%
125,000 gallons/week = 16 trucks/week = 2.3 trucks/day
187,000 gallons/week = 24 trucks/week = 3.5 trucks/day
200,000 gallons/week = 26 trucks/week = 3.7 trucks/day
The gas station and the parking aisles in the existing employee parking lot have been
designed to accommodate the flow of tanker trucks through the site to and from Belle Air
Road.
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? NI. Multiple driveways from both South Airport
Boulevard and Belle Air Road serve the site that provides emergency and non-emergency
access. No changes are proposed with regard to site access and no impacts are anticipated.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 67
August 2004
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? NI. Construction of the proposed gasoline facility
and redevelopment of the Costco Wholesale parking lot and ancillary parking lots would
result in an increase of 16 parking spaces, from 706 (current) to 722 spaces. The revised
parking lot layout will result in parking aisles that are perpendicular to the warehouse
building rather than parallel as currently laid out, greatly improving internal circulation.
Based on the City of South San Francisco's Parking Ordinance, the existing Costco facility
requires 700 on-site spaces. This number is calculated on the City requirement to provide 1
space per 200 square feet of gross floor area and a total existing gross floor area of 139,850
square feet. With implementation of the proposed project, there would be 722 on-site
spaces, exceeding the City minimum parking requirement, and there would be no impact
with regard to parking.
g) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? NI. No changes to existing sidewalks
along the north and west frontages of the project site are proposed, or to the width of
adjoining public streets that would affect bicyclists. The proposed parking lot modifications
resulting in parking aisles that are perpendicular to the warehouse building rather than
parallel will improve pedestrian safety. No impact would therefore result to pedestrian or
bicycle access near the site.
16. Utilities and Service Systems
Environmental Setting
The project area is served by the following service providers:
· Water supply: California Water Service. This private water company obtains water via an
agreement with the San Francisco Water Department and from groundwater resources. In
addition to South San Francisco, the water company serves customers in San Carlos and
San Mateo. The Water Company prepares a range of water use projections based on
fluctuations in population and employment demands. The company has indicated an
adequate water supply for the highest projected demand for future uses.
· Sewage collection and treatment: City of South San Francisco. The City's sanitary sewer
collection system has an interconnecting work of gravity sewers, force mains and pump
stations which function together to bring wastewater from individual properties to the
Water Quality Control Plant. A number of the sewer lines, especially in the east of 101
area, are older and experience infiltration and inflow (i/i) during wet weather conditions
which cause the capacity of pump stations and the Water Quality Control Plant to be
exceeded. Older pump stations have also experienced reliability problems.
Wastewater treatment is accomplished at the City's Water Quality Control Plant, located
at the easterly terminus of Belle Air road just south of Colma Creek. The Plant also
provides service for the city of San Bruno, San Francisco International Airport and
portions of other communities. The Plant has been recently upgraded and expanded to
accommodate growing employment uses in the Plant's service area and to meet Regional
Water Quality Control Board discharge requirements. Additionally, the City is presently
undertaking a wet weather capacity enhancement program including upgrades of two
City of South San Francisco Page 68
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade August 2004
pump stations and installation of several relief sewers west of US 1 01, as well as
reliability upgrades at an aging pump station east of the freeway
· Storm drainage: City of South San Francisco maintains a series of drainage pipes and
culverts through the City to accommodate stormwater runoff. East of the 280 freeway,
stormwater flows into Colma Creek for ultimate disposal in San Francisco Bay.
· Electrical and natural gas power: Pacific Gas and Electric Co. provides electrical and
natural gas service to the City of South San Francisco through a series of overhead and
underground electrical lines. Existing pump stations receive electrical power from PG&E.
· Communications: SBC/Pacific Bell provides a range of telephone and telecommunication
service to homes and businesses in the community.
Proiect Impacts
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB? NI. The proposed project would
not contribute wastewater to the City's Water Quality Control Plant, since no sanitary
facilities would be constructed as part of the project. No impacts are therefore anticipated.
b) Require new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existingfacilities? NI.
The proposed project does not include any new sewer connections, since no sanitary
facilities are proposed. No additional use of water resources is anticipated since there would
be no habitable structures on the site. Minor increase in water use may be needed for
additional landscape irrigation purposes. No impacts are anticipated.
c) Require new storm drainage facilities? LS. Existing drainage patterns would not be
changed and a small amount of additional impervious surface added to construct the
proposed expansion of the Costco parking lot. However, the amount of additional
stormwater runoff would be minor and no new drainage facilities would be needed. No
impact would result.
d) Are sufficient water supplies available? NI. Based on information provided in the General
Plan Existing Conditions Report, the water purveyor to the City has indicated that an ample
water supply exists to serve future land uses. In this instance, the proposed project would
require minor sources of additional water for landscape irrigation purposes, so no impact to
water service is anticipated.
e) Adequate wastewater capacity to serve the proposed project? NI. See response to "a,"
above.
e, f) Solid waste disposal? LS. Small quantities of solid waste would be generated by the
implementation of the proposed project, which would be construction debris. This amount
of solid waste is anticipated to be less-than-significant and can be accommodated in the
local sanitary landfill.
g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? NI.
The existing service provider will ensure adherence to federal, state and local solid waste
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 69
August 2004
regulations should the proposed reorganization be approved. No impacts are anticipated in
this regard.
17. Mandatory Findings of Significance
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause afish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the
number of or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? No. The
preceding analysis indicates that the proposed project will not have a significant adverse
impact on overall environmental quality, including biological resources or cultural
resources.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects and the effects of probable future projects). No, the proposed project
involves the addition of an accessory fuel dispensing station to an existing Costco
Wholesale facility and redevelopment/reconfiguration of the existing Costco Wholesale
parking lot. The proposed project is consistent with the City's adopted General Plan, so
there would be no cumulative impacts associated with project approval.
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly? No. No such impacts have been discovered in
the course of preparing this Initial Study.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 70
August 2004
Initial Study Preparers
Jerry Haag, Urban Planner, project manager
Mark Crane, Crane Transportation Group, traffic and circulation
Phillip Smith, Treadwell & Rollo, hazardous materials
Richard Rogers, Treadwell & Rollo, geotechnical peer review
Jeffrey Ryan, Gettler-Ryan, fuel dispensing analysis
Donald Ballanti, air quality analysis
Jane Maxwell, report graphics
Agencies and Organizations Consulted
The following agencies and organizations were contacted in the course of this Initial Study:
City of South San Francisco
Susy Kalkin, Principal Planner
Richard Harmon, Associate Engineer
Barghausen Consulting Engineers (applicant planner and engineer)
Bruce Creager, Planner
References
South San Francisco General Plan: Existing Conditions and Planning Issues, Dyett &
Bhatia, 1997
South San Francisco General Plan, Dyett & Bhatia, 1999
South San Francisco General Plan EIR, EIP Associates, 1999
Records Search for Costco Wholesale Gas Station, Northwest Information Center, June
28, 2002.
State of California, Department of Toxic Substances Control, Website, July 9, 2004.
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costeo Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 71
August 2004
Appendices
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 72
August 2004
Traffic Analysis
-Crane Transportation Group
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 73
August 2004
TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT
PROPOSED COSTCO GAS STATION
ALONG SOUTH AIRPORT BOULEVARD
IN SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
June 28, 2004
Prepared For: City of South San Francisco
Prepared By: Crane Transportation Group
545 Burnett Avenue, Suite 101
San Francisco, California 94131
(415) 282-9656
I. INTRODUCTION
This report has been prepared at the request of the City of South San Francisco to detail the
circulation impacts due to a proposed Costco gas station to be located along the south side of
Belle Air Road just east of South Airport Boulevard and just south of an existing Costco retail
store (see Figure 1). It is serving as an update to August 2000 and July 2002 traffic studies by
Crane Transportation Group. The August 2000 study evaluated impacts of a proposed Costco
gas station that was to be located in the southeast corner of the South Airport BoulevardlBelle
Air Road intersection, while the July 2002 study evaluated impacts of a proposed Costco gas
station that was to be located on the south side of Belle Air Road about 600 feet east of South
Airport Boulevard. For the current study, weekday AM and PM peak hour operating conditions
have been evaluated at all major intersections along South Airport Boulevard from its
interchange with the 1-380 freeway on the south to its intersection with the U.S. 101 northbound
on-off hook ramps on the north. Saturday peak hour conditions have also been evaluated at the
South Airport BoulevardlBelle Air Road intersection that provides access to the Costco store and
the gasoline station site. Evaluation has been conducted for existing, year 2005 and year 2020
development horizons. Due to the reduction in volumes along South Airport Boulevard over the
past four years resulting from the downturn in business at San Francisco International Airport,
the downturn in business at many of the airport's support facilities accessed by South Airport
Boulevard and the downturn in business at many ofthe high tech companies in the "East of 101"
area, existing conditions in this study are reflective of year 1999 and 2000 volumes as determined
through past traffic studies. A series of May 2004 traffic counts along South Airport Boulevard
in the vicinity of the Costco site and the 1-380 interchange indicated current traffic volumes are
still not back to 1999/2000 levels. Trip generation and distribution projections of the proposed
Costco gas station have then been developed and year 2005 Base Case + project and year 2020
Base Case + project operating conditions determined. Projections have also been developed of
the maximum queuing that could be expected on the approaches to the gas pumps at the new
station and a determination has been made regarding the proposed station's ability to
accommodate maximum backups on-site. Measures have been developed, if needed, to provide
acceptable Base Case and Base Case + project operating conditions.
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 1
Proposed Costco Gas Station
II. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
1. Currently, all major intersections along South Airport Boulevard between the 1-380 ,
interchange on the south and the U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps intersection on the north
are operating at acceptable levels of service during weekday AM and PM peak hour
traffic conditions with the following two exceptions.
· The South Airport BoulevardlI-380 On-Ramp/North Access Road intersection is
operating unacceptably at LOS E during the weekday PM peak hour. During this time
there are occasional extended backups in the left turn lane on the northbound South
Airport Boulevard intersection approach as well as in the left and right turn lanes on
the southbound South Airport Boulevard intersection approach.
· The South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street (south) intersection has volumes
exceeding peak hour signal warrant criteria levels and the Beacon Street stop sign
controlled intersection approach is operating unacceptably at LOS F during the
weekday PM peak hour.
2. With year 2005 Base Case (without project) volumes, all major intersections along South
Airport Boulevard in the study area would be operating acceptably during peak traffic
hours with the following exceptions.
· The South Airport BoulevardlI-380 On-Ramp/North Access Road intersection would
be operating unacceptably at LOS E during the weekday PM peak hour.
· The South Airport Boulevard/Utah Avenue intersection would be operating
unacceptably at LOS F during the weekday AM peak hour.
· The South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street (south) intersection would have volumes
exceeding peak hour signal warrant criteria levels and the Beacon Street stop sign
controlled intersection approach would operate unacceptably at LOS F during the
weekday PM peak hour.
3. With year 2020 + Base Case (without project) volumes and planned improvements, all
major intersections along South Airport Boulevard in the study area would be operating
acceptably during peak traffic hours with the following exceptions.
· The South Airport BoulevardlU.S. 101 Northbound Ramps intersection would be
operating at LOS F during the weekday AM peak hour. In addition, the single
lane northbound off-ramp connection to the U.S. 101 freeway would have a
demand well in excess of capacity during the AM peak hour.
· The South Airport Boulevard/Belle Air Road intersection would occasionally
have queuing demand exceeding available storage in the left turn lane on the
southbound South Airport Boulevard intersection approach during the weekday
PM peak hour.
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 2
Proposed Costco Gas Station
· The South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street (south) intersection would have
volumes exceeding peak hour signal warrant criteria levels and the Beacon Street
stop sign controlled intersection approach would operate unacceptably at LOS F
during the weekday PM peak hour.
4. The proposed Costco Gas Station would be expected to generate a significant amount of
gross traffic during all three peak traffic periods analyzed. However, during a weekday
AM peak traffic hour (when the Costco retail store would be closed) about a third of the
expected 294 gross two-way trips should be attracted from traffic already passing by the
site on South Airport Boulevard, with the vast majority of remaining trips being diverted
from the 1-380 interchange to the south or the U.S.I0l Northbound Ramps interchange to
the north. During a weekday PM peak traffic hour about 45 percent of the gas station's
expected 410 gross two-way trips should be attracted from existing Costco retail
customers, with about 30 percent attracted from traffic already passing by the site on
South Airport Boulevard and the majority of the remaining 25 percent of customers
diverted from the I 380 orU.S.101 interchanges. During a Saturday peak traffic hour
about 53 percent of the gas station's expected 452 gross two-way trips should be attracted
from existing Costco retail customers, with about 13 percent attracted from traffic already
passing by the site on South Airport Boulevard and the majority of the remaining 34
percent of customers diverted from the I 380 or U.S. 1 0 1 interchanges.
5. The addition of Costco gas station traffic to the local roadway network would not change
level of service at any analyzed intersection. Impacts at those intersections projected to
be operating unacceptably in 2005 or 2020 with Base Case (without project) traffic
volumes are presented below. The City of South San Francisco typically uses a one
percent traffic added criteria to determine the significance of an impact with preexisting
unacceptable operation.
Year 2005
· South Airport BoulevardlUtah Avenue (LOS F Base Case AM Peak Hour)
Project traffic would increase volumes entering the intersection by 3.8% (significant)
· South Airport Boulevard/I-380 On-RamplNorth Access Road (LOS E Base Case PM
Peak Hour)
Project traffic would increase volumes entering the intersection by 1.3% (significant)
· South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street (south) (Beacon Street approach: LOS F
Base Case PM Peak Hour + Base Case total intersection volumes exceed signal
warrant criteria)
Project traffic would increase volumes entering the intersection by 2.2% (significant)
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 3
Proposed Costco Gas Station
Year 2020
· South Airport BoulevardlU.S. 101 Northbound Ramps (LOS F Base Case AM Peak
Hour)
Project traffic would increase volumes entering the intersection by 0.7% (less than
significant)
· South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street (south) (Beacon Street approach-LOS F Base
Case PM Peak Hour + Base Case volumes exceed signal warrant criteria)
Project traffic would increase volumes entering intersection by 2.0% (significant)
6. Project traffic on the approach to the gasoline pump islands should not back out to Belle
Air Road (even with up to 60 percent more gasoline being pumped than predicted by
Costco) assuming one or more Costco staff are positioned at the entrance to the gasoline
station to direct drivers to the shortest line and assuming that access into the on-site
queuing area on the south side of Belle Air Road can be easily adjusted by temporarily
closing various driveway entrances (potentially significant).
7. Costco traffic leaving the store parking lot on Belle Air Road and turning left to enter the
gas station could disrupt the heavy outbound flow of traffic from the store toward South
Airport Boulevard.
8. The addition of Costco gas station traffic would result in vehicle queues extending
beyond the available storage length in the left turn lane on the southbound South Airport
Boulevard approach to Belle Air Road during weekday PM peak hour conditions in 2005
and during both weekday PM peak hour and Saturday peak hour traffic conditions before
2020 (significant).
9. Costco would have, on average, between two and four tanker truck deliveries per day,
depending upon the amount of gas being pumped during a particular week. Tankertruck
access would be to and from Belle Air Road.
10. PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS
Improvement needs have already been identified and measures planned for the following
locations.
.
South Airport Boulevard/I-380 interchange (San Francisco International Airport)
South Airport BoulevardlUtah Avenue (South San Francisco)
South Airport BoulevardlU.S. 101 Northbound Ramps-just recently identified (South
San Francisco)
.
.
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 4
Proposed Costco Gas Station
11. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS AND MITIGATIONS
A. BASE CASE (WITHOUT PROJECT) RECOMMENDED
IMPROVEMENTS
1. Year 2005
South Airport BoulevardlUtah Avenue
· Monitor traffic conditions and provide a second left turn lane on the southbound
South Airport Boulevard intersection approach when traffic conditions warrant. Also,
restripe one of the northbound through lanes to allow both through movements and
right turns, if required. This is a previously identified local traffic improvement need.
South Airport BoulevardlI 380 On- and Off-Ramps/North Access Road Intersection
· Provide a second left turn lane on the northbound South Airport Boulevard approach
to the I 380 On-Ramp and a fourth through lane on the South Airport Boulevard
approach to the I 380 Off-Ramp. Two of the four northbound through lanes at the
1380 off-ramp intersection will become the exclusive left turn lanes at the On-Ramp
intersection. San Francisco International Airport is planning to construct this
improvement in the near future.
· Restripe the westbound North Access Road approach to South Airport Boulevard to
provide a left lane and an exclusive through lane.
· Provide new pavement markings and increased informational signing on the
southbound South Airport Boulevard approach to the I 380 On-Ramp to indicate the
possibility oftuming right to the On-Ramp from two lanes rather than just one lane.
· Adjust signal cycle length and phasing.
Above improvements and revised signal timing (if acceptable to Caltrans) also eliminate
southbound left turn backups out of the turn pocket accessing the North Access Road. However,
if Caltrans chooses to continue with the same signal timing and phasing, provide the following
measure.
· Provide a second left turn lane on the southbound South Airport Boulevard approach
to the North Access Road. Adequate median width is available for this widening. In
conjunction with this added turn lane, restripe the North Access Road leg of the
intersection to provide two departure lanes (and one intersection approach lane). The
63- foot width of the North Access Road bridge just east of South Airport Boulevard
could accommodate this lane striping.
South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street
· Although warranted, signalization of this intersection is not recommended. Drivers
experiencing extended delays attempting to make left turns from Beacon Street
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 5
Proposed Costco Gas Station
(south) to northbound South Airport Boulevard have the option to make a right turn
from Beacon Street (north) and then make a U-turn at the Belle Air Road signal.
2. Year 2020
South Airport BoulevardlU.S. 101 Northbound Ramps
· Provide a second right turn lane on the U.S. 101 off-ramp.
· Provide a second off-ramp lane diverging from the U.S. 101 freeway.
South Airport BoulevardIBeacon Street
· Although warranted, signalization of this intersection is not recommended. Drivers
experiencing extended delays attempting to make left turns from Beacon Street
(south) to northbound South Airport Boulevard have the option to make a right turn
from Beacon Street (north) and then make a U-turn at the Belle Air Road signal.
B. PROJECT MITIGATIONS
1. Year 2005
South Airport BoulevardJI-380 On-Ramp-North Access Road
· Provide a fair share contribution towards providing additional pavement markings and
signing informing southbound drivers of the possibility of making right turns to 1-380
from two lanes.
· If Caltrans chooses not to significantly adjust signal timing at this intersection after
improvements by the Airport:
Provide a fair share contribution towards providing a second left turn lane on the
southbound South Airport Boulevard approach as well as providing two departure
lanes and one approach lane on the North Access Road leg of the intersection.
South Airport BoulevardlUtah Avenue
· Provide a fair share contribution towards improvement needs already identified for
this location.
South Airport BoulevardIBelle Air Road
· Monitor use of the southbound left turn lane and lengthen by at least 50 feet when
maximum queues begin extending towards the end of the lane. As an alternative
mitigation, provide loop detectors the entire length of the left turn pocket and program
the signal controller to give priority to emptying the left turn lane when vehicle
queues extend near the end of available storage. This would produce slightly less
efficient (but still acceptable) intersection operation during peak traffic periods.
South Airport BoulevardIBeacon Street (South)
· Provide a fair share contribution towards signalization should the City decide to
provide this improvement.
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 6
Proposed Costco Gas Station
2. Year 2020
South Airport BoulevardlBelle Air Road
· Monitor use of the southbound left turn lane and lengthen by at least 125 feet when
maximum queues begin extending towards the end of the lane. As an alternative
mitigation, provide loop detectors the entire length ofthe left turn pocket and program
the signal controller to give priority to emptying the left turn lane when vehicle
queues extend near the end of available storage. This would produce slightly less
efficient (but still acceptable) intersection operation during peak traffic periods, but
would still require lengthening the turn pocket by at least 50 feet.
South Airport BoulevardlBeacon Street (South)
· Provide a fair share contribution towards signalization, should the City decide to
provide this improvement.
3. All Conditions
Gas Station Entrance
· Provide one or more staff members at the Belle Air Road main entrance to the gas
station during peak use periods to ensure uniform allocation of entering traffic to each
of the eight lines leading to the gas pumps. In addition, as needed, the attendants shall
also temporarily close access into the gas station from the main entrance (nearest
South Airport Boulevard) and provide access via the driveway farthest to the east
along Belle Air Road.
· Provide signing for traffic leaving the Costco store driveway indicating that access to
the gas station is via the driveway directly across Belle Air Road (if not temporarily
closed during peak queuing conditions) or via the driveway farthest to the east along
Belle Air Road. In conjunction with this measure, prohibit left turn movements from
westbound Belle Air Road into the gas station main entrance (by signing and
striping).
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 7
Proposed Costco Gas Station
III. PROPOSED PROJECT
Costco is proposing to build a gas station in the southeast corner ofthe South Airport
BoulevardlBelle Air Road intersection. It estimates that the facility will sell 6.5 million gallons
of gasoline yearly. The project site is currently undeveloped. An existing Costco retail store and
parking lot is located on the north side of Belle Air Road opposite the project site. The gas
station will have 16 vehicle fueling positions and eight approach lanes to the pumps (see
Figure 2). Access will primarily be via a single inbound driveway along Belle Air Road about
160 feet east of South Airport Boulevard, with secondary inbound access via a series of three
driveways farther east along Belle Air Road. Directional flow through the gas station would be
north to south, with outbound vehicles able to access Belle Air Road (at one of the three
driveways located farther to the east than the gas station entrance) or South Airport Boulevard
(via a right turn exit only driveway located about 230 feet south of Belle Air Road). A two-way
driveway serving an overflow Costco parking lot already exists along South Airport Boulevard at
this location. Outbound drivers destined to the south on South Airport Boulevard will be
directed to turn left once leaving the pumps and then follow signing, which will bring them back
to Belle Air Road. They will then be able to make a signal controlled left turn to proceed south
on South Airport Boulevard. Outbound drivers destined to the north on South Airport Boulevard
will be able to make a right turn directly from the site onto northbound South Airport Boulevard.
Outbound drivers turning right to northbound South Airport Boulevard will also be able to make
a U-turn at the Belle Air Road intersection (from the existing U-turn lane) in order to proceed
southbound.
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 8
Proposed Costeo Gas Station
IV. EXISTING SETTING
A. ROADWAYS (see Figure 1)
South Airport Boulevard provides direct access to Belle Air Road. It is a four-lane arterial
roadway with a raised median in the project vicinity. Left and V-turn lanes are provided on the
approaches to select intersections and driveways where median breaks have been provided. In
the project vicinity, Airport Boulevard has signalized intersections with the U.S. 101 northbound
on-offramps, Utah Avenue, Belle Air Road, the 1-380-0n-Ramp/North Access Road and the
I 380-0ff-Ramp. A median break and left turn lanes are provided at the south Beacon
StreetlU.S. Customs driveway intersection between the project site and the I 380 on-offramp
intersections. At the north Beacon Street connection to South Airport Boulevard, a raised medial
on South Airport Boulevard restricts movements to right turns in and out only. A 200-foot-Iong
left turn lane is provided on the southbound approach to Belle Air Road.
Belle Air Road extends easterly from South Airport Boulevard for one block and ends. It is 50
feet wide curb-to-curb and provides access to the Costco parking areas and back of the store
unloading docks. Belle Air Road has three westbound approach lanes to South Airport
Boulevard (two for left turns and one for right turns) and one eastbound departure lane. Six-foot-
wide striped and signed Class IT bike lanes are provided along both sides of the street. A short
(lOO-foot-long) left turn lane is provided on the eastbound Belle Air Road approach to the
Costco store entrance.
A schematic presentation of existing intersection approach lanes and intersection control is
provided in Figure 3.
B. VOLUMES
Weekday AM and PM peak period (7:00-9:00 AM and 4:00-6:00 PM) as well as Saturday
midday/afternoon (10:00 AM-4:00 PM) turn movement traffic counts were conducted by Crane
Transportation Group in mid-July 2000 at the South Airport Boulevard intersections with Belle
Air Road, Beacon Street (south), the I 380 On-Ramp/North Access Road and the I 380 Off-
Ramp. A second set of weekday AM and PM peak period counts were then conducted by Crane
Transportation Group in June 2002 at all of the same intersections as well as at the South Airport
Boulevard intersections with Utah Avenue and Beacon Street (north). In addition, a new
Saturday afternoon count was conducted at the South Airport BoulevardlBelle Air Road
intersection. In addition, in May 2004 weekday PM peak period counts were conducted by Crane
Transportation Group at the South Airport Boulevard intersections with the 1-380 interchange
and Belle Air Road. Finally, late 1998 to 2000 counts conducted for other East of 101 traffic
studies evaluating conditions along South Airport Boulevard were also reviewed. Overall, June
2002 and May 2004 counts for most movements at all intersections were lower to significantly
lower than the counts from 1999 and 2000 (although May 2004 counts were higher than those
from 2002). This is primarily attributable to lower activity levels at San Francisco International
Airport just to the south, the corresponding decrease in airport-related business activity that is
served by South Airport Boulevard and reduced employment in some of the high tech companies
in the "East of 101" area. After consultation with City planning staff, it was determined that the
counts previously conducted in year 2000 for the first Costco gas station study would
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 9
Proposed Costco Gas Station
conservatively serve as the "Existing Condition" for the current traffic analysis. Some of the July
2000 counts were then adjusted slightly (based upon review of other year 1999 or 2000 counts at
the two intersections north of the project site to be included in the new analysis) to better reflect a
more logical set of volumes extending along South Airport Boulevard from the 1-380 interchange
to the U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps intersection. The peak system traffic hours were determined
to be 7:45-8:45 during the weekday AM commute, 4:45-5:45 during the weekday PM,commute,
and 1 :00-2:00 PM on Saturday. Existing peak hour volumes are presented in Figure 4.
c. INTERSECTION OPERATION
1. Methodology
Signalized Intersections. Intersections, rather than roadway segments between intersections, are
almost always the capacity controlling locations for any circulation system. Signalized
intersection operation is graded based upon two different scales. The first scale employs a
grading system called Level of Service (LOS) which ranges from Level A, indicating
uncongested flow and minimum delay to drivers, down to Level F, indicating significant
congestion and delay on most or all intersection approaches. The Level of Service scale is also
associated with a control delay tabulation (year 2000 Transportation Research Board (TRB)
Highway Capacity Manual [HCM] operations method) at each intersection. The control delay
designation allows a more detailed examination of the impacts of a particular project. Greater
detail regarding the LOS/control delay relationship is provided in the Appendix.
The South Airport Boulevard signalized intersections with the I 380 On-Ramp/North Access
Road and the I 380 Off-Ramp are located about 130 feet apart and operate as a coordinated
system. They have been evaluated using the SYNCHRO software program which provides
average vehicle delay and levels of service at each intersection for their combined (system)
operation as well as vehicle queuing between intersections..
Unsignalized Intersections. Unsignalized intersection operation is also typically graded using
the Level of Service A through F scale. LOS ratings for all-way stop intersections are
determined using a methodology outlined in the year 2000 TRB Highway Capacity Manual.
Under this methodology, all-way stop intersections receive one LOS designation reflecting
operation of the entire intersection. Average control delay values are also calculated.
Intersections with side streets only stop sign controlled (two-way stop control) are also evaluated
using the LOS and average control delay scales using a methodology outlined in the year 2000
TRB Highway Capacity Manual. However, unlike signalized or all-way stop analysis where the
LOS and control delay designations only pertain to the entire intersection, in side street stop sign
control analysis LOS and delay designations are computed for only the stop sign controlled
approaches or individual turn and through movements. The Appendix provides greater detail
about unsignalized analysis methodologies.
2. Standards of Operation
Level of Service (LOS) D is considered by South San Francisco as the poorest acceptable
operation for signalized and all-way stop intersections; LOS E is considered to be the poorest
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 10
Proposed Costco Gas Station
acceptable operation for side street stop sign controlled approaches or for specific turn
movements. The City has no minimum standards for movements from private driveways.
3. Existing Levels of Service
Table 1 shows that currently the signalized South Airport Boulevard intersection with Belle Air
Road is operating at LOS A conditions during the weekday AM peak hour and LOS B during the
weekday PM and Saturday peak hours. The South Airport Boulevard intersections with Utah
Avenue and the U.S.I01 Northbound Ramps are operating acceptably (at LOS B or C) during the
weekday AM and PM peak hours. At the South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street intersection the
stop sign controlled Beacon Street approach is operating at LOS C during the weekday AM peak
hour and an unacceptable LOS F during weekday PM peak hour conditions. At the South
Airport Boulevard/I 380 On-RamplNorth Access Road intersection, AM peak hour operation is
LOS B while PM peak hour operation is an unacceptable LOS E, while at the South Airport
Boulevard/I-380 Off-Ramp intersection, both AM and PM peak hour operation is LOS B.
Currently, during the weekday PM peak hour there are extended backups in the left turn lane on
the South Airport Boulevard northbound approach to the 1-380 interchange, as well as smaller
backups in the left and right turn lanes on the southbound interchange approach.
4. Signal Warrant Evaluation
Traffic signals are used to provide an orderly flow of traffic through an intersection. Many times
they are needed to offer side street traffic an opportunity to access a major road where high
volumes and/or high vehicle speeds block crossing or turn movements. They do not, however,
increase the capacity of an intersection (i.e., increase the overall intersection's ability to
accommodate additional vehicles) and, in fact, often slightly reduce the number of total vehicles
that can pass through an intersection in a given period of time. Signals can also cause an increase
in traffic accidents if installed at inappropriate locations.
There are 11 possible tests for determining whether a traffic signal should be considered for
installation. These tests, called "warrants", consider criteria such as actual traffic volume,
pedestrian volume, presence of school children, and accident history. Usually, two or more
warrants must be met before a signal is installed. In this report, the test for Peak Hour Volumes
(Warrant #11) has been applied. When Warrant 11 is met there is a strong indication that a
detailed signal warrant analysis covering all possible warrants is appropriate. These rigorous
analyses are described in Chapter 9 of the Caltrans Traffic Manual while Warrant 11 is presented
in the Appendix of this report.
It is possible that an unsignalized intersection will not meet signal warrants, but will have one or
more movements that experience LOS F operations. Level of service F can be indicated for a
very low volume of vehicles at a stop sign. Although these stopped vehicles may experience
long delays of one minute or more, there would not be an overall benefit if the higher numbers of
vehicles on the major street are stopped in favor of the few vehicles on the minor street. The
signal warrant considers a balance between major street and minor street delays, and may
indicate that there is overall benefit if drivers for some turn movements from the minor street
continue to experience long (LOS E or F) delays.
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 11
Proposed Costco Gas Station
Currently, volumes at the South Airport BoulevardlBeacon Street (south) intersection exceed
peak hour warrant criteria during weekday PM peak hour conditions.
D. OBSERVED OPERATIONAL PROBLEMS
No operational problems were observed during any of the survey periods at the South Airport
Boulevard intersections with the U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps, Utah Avenue, Belle Air Road or
Beacon Street. However, at the South Airport Boulevard intersections with the I 380 On- and
Off-Ramps/North Access Road, weekday PM peak hour vehicle demand intermittently to
frequently exceeds available storage in the single lane left turn pockets on the north and
southbound South Airport Boulevard intersection approaches. Demand exceeding available
storage is more frequent in the northbound direction (although May 2004 observations indicate
that the number oftimes southbound vehicles turning left to the North Access Road back out of
the available 200-foot-Iong left turn lane has increased significantly since the year 2000). In
addition, southbound drivers on South Airport Boulevard turning right to the I 380 On-Ramp
rarely take full advantage of the possibility to conduct right turns from the combined
through/right turn lane as well as the adjacent exclusive right turn lane. Although a sign is
provided adjacent to the travel way indicating turns are allowed from both lanes, less than 10
percent of right turns are made from the combined through/right turn lane. Pavement markings
indicating turn possibilities are almost completely faded. Resulting use of the southbound
exclusive right turn lane for 90+ percent of turns to the I 380 On-ramp produces backups out of
the right turn lane during weekday PM commute peak hour conditions.
E. PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS
Recent studies conducted for expanded activities in and around San Francisco International
Airport and south of the project site have proposed a second left turn lane on the northbound
South Airport Boulevard approach to the I 380 On-Ramp! in conjunction with new street lighting
and sidewalks. Plans have been approved by Caltrans and the City of South San Francisco,
although final negotiations are still in progress between the Airport and South San Francisco
regarding payment of inspection fees once construction begins. It is likely that these
improvements will be installed within the next year.2 3
The Bay Trail pedestrianlbicycle path section passing through the South Airport Boulevard/I-380
interchange will be provided within the next six months.4 The trail will cross South Airport
Boulevard on the north side of the North Access Road/I-380 westbound on-ramp signalized
! Multi-Modal Transportation Center Supplemental Access Study by San Francisco International Airport,
Landside Operations, September 13, 19990 Multi-Modal Center Access Study (Update), San Francisco
International Airport by Leigh Fisher Associates, December I, 19990
2 Mr. Dennis Chuck, South San Francisco Department of Public Works (June 2004).
3 Mro Tony Breslin, San Francisco International Airport Facilities, Operations & Maintenance Department
(June 2004).
4 Mro Brian Swanson, San Francisco International Airport Bureau of Planning and Environmental Affairs
(June 2004).
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 12
Proposed Costco Gas Station
intersection at a newly marked crosswalk. Pedestrian and bike rider push buttons will be
installed. Westerly of the South Airport Boulevard crossing, the trail will continue under the 1-
380 interchange ramps just east of the U.S. 101 freeway; it will not cross the 1-380 westbound
on-ramp at South Airport Boulevard. Easterly of the South Airport Boulevard crossing, the trail
will extend northerly for a slight distance on the east side of South Airport Boulevard then go
easterly across Colma Creek on the north side of the one lane (westbound) bridge connecting
South Airport Boulevard to the North Access Road.
The South San Francisco General Plan Amendment & Transportation Demand Management
Ordinance EIR has identified the need for improvements at the South Airport Boulevard/Utah
Avenue intersection before 2020. At Utah Avenue, improvements would include provision of a
second left turn lane on the southbound Airport Boulevard approach and the restriping of one
northbound through lane to provide a combined through/right turn lane.5
A recent EIR for the Britannia East Grand project has identified the need for improvement to the
South Airport Boulevard/U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps intersection before 2020. The
improvement would be the provision of an additional off-ramp right turn lane and a second off-
ramp lane connection to the U.S. 101 freeway. City Public Works6 staffhas indicated that
funding for these improvements will only be collected from local development if traffic levels
increase to levels projected in this study. Although it is likely that the City will include these
measures in their capital improvements program, they have not been assumed in place for 2020
evaluation in this study.
No improvements are currently planned or proposed along South Airport Boulevard adjacent to
the Costco site. 7
5Mr. Dennis Chuck, South San Francisco Department of Public Works (June 2004).
6 Ibid.
7 Ibido
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 13
Proposed Costco Gas Station
v. YEAR 2005 AND 2020 BASE CASE (WITHOUT PROJECT)
OPERATING CONDITIONS
At City Planning staff request, the impacts of the proposed Costco gas station have been
evaluated in relation to year 2005 and 2020 Base Case (without project) background conditions.
Future horizon Base Case volumes at the north end of South Airport Boulevard have been
developed through traffic modeling efforts for various projects in the East of 101 area from an
initial calibration period of year 2000 conditions and do not reflect the current reduced traffic
volumes resulting from the September 11 incident or the high tech recession. Therefore, it is
probable that what is defined in this report as year 2005 conditions will, in reality, represent
traffic growth that may not be experienced until 2007 or later.
A. VOLUMES
Four sources of future year peak hour or daily volumes were available for various locations along
South Airport Boulevard between the 1-380 interchange and the U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps
intersection. In addition to the two previously referenced documents evaluating growth at the
airport, projections were also available from the City's recently adopted General Plan Update as
well as from the February 2002 Britannia East Grand Project (Fuller O'Brien Property)
Recirculation EIR Circulation Analysis. Based upon the various growth rates in the studies, by
2020 volumes along South Airport Boulevard were projected to grow by as little as 15 percent
(as predicted by the General Plan) or more than 60 percent (as predicted in the Airport studies).
No basis was provided in the Airport studies for the high growth rate; rather, a three percent per
year growth rate (which may have been experienced around the airport area in the mid- to late
1990s) was projected to continue for 20 years.
Due to the lack of conformity between studies, it was decided to slightly increase the City's
General Plan traffic growth assumption (resulting in an estimated 18 percent growth by 2020)
and apply this rate to all turn movements at all analyzed intersections with two exceptions.
Movements to and from the airport and those to and from the Costco store were increased 40
percent by 2020 at a straight line growth rate of two percent per year. Figures 5 and 6 present
weekday AM and PM peak hour and Saturday peak hour volumes at all analyzed intersections for
year 2005 and 2020 conditions, respectively.
B. BASE CASE (WITHOUT PROJECT) INTERSECTION OPERATION
1. Year 2005
Table 1 shows that by 2005 without the Costco gas station in operation, the South Airport
Boulevard intersection with Belle Air Road would be operating at LOS A during the weekday
AM peak traffic hour and LOS B during both the weekday PM peak traffic hour and the Saturday
peak traffic hour. At the South Airport Boulevard intersection with the U.S. 101 Northbound
Ramps, weekday AM and PM peak hour operation would be LOS B. At the South Airport
BoulevardlUtah Avenue intersection, weekday AM peak hour operation would be an
unacceptable LOS F while PM peak hour operation would be an acceptable LOS B. At the South
Airport Boulevard intersection with Beacon Street, the stop sign controlled Beacon Street
approach would be operating at LOS C during the weekday AM peak traffic hour and an
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 14
Proposed Costco Gas Station
unacceptable LOS F during the weekday PM peak hour. At the South Airport Boulevard
intersection with the 1380 On-Ramp and the North Access Road, operation would be an
acceptable LOS B during the weekday AM peak hour and an unacceptable LOS E during the
weekday PM peak hour, while at the South Airport BoulevardlI-380 off-ramp intersection both
AM and PM peak hour operation would be an acceptable LOS B. The unacceptable PM peak
hour LOS E operation at the 1-380 On-RamplNorth Access Road intersection assumes that
current improvement plans by the Airport to provide a second left turn lane on the northbound
intersection approach have not yet been implemented.
PM peak hour volumes at the South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street intersection would be well
above peak hour signal warrant criteria levels.
2. Year 2020
Table 1 shows that by 2020 without the Costco gas station in operation, the South Airport
Boulevard intersection with Belle Air Road would be operating at LOS A during the weekday
AM peak traffic hour and LOS B during both the weekday PM peak traffic hour and the Saturday
peak traffic hour. At the South Airport Boulevard intersection with the U.S. 101 Northbound
Ramps, weekday AM peak hour operation would be an unacceptable LOS F, while PM peak
hour operation would be an acceptable LOS C. At the South Airport BoulevardlUtah Avenue
intersection weekday AM peak hour operation would be LOS C while PM peak hour operation
would be LOS B. At the South Airport Boulevard intersection with Beacon Street, the stop sign
controlled Beacon Street approach would be operating acceptably at LOS C during the weekday
AM peak traffic hour and unacceptably at LOS F during the weekday PM peak hour. At the
South Airport Boulevard intersection with the I 380 On-Ramp and the North Access Road,
operation would be an acceptable LOS B during the weekday AM peak hour and an acceptable
LOS A during the weekday PM peak hour. The South Airport BoulevardlI-380 off-ramp
intersection would be operating at LOS A during the AM peak hour and LOS B during the PM
peak hour. The unacceptable AM peak hour operation of the South Airport BoulevardlU.S. 101
Northbound Hook Ramps intersection would be due to significantly increased off-ramp volumes
(above 3,000 vehicles per hour). This volume of traffic would also be above the capacity of the
single lane off-ramp connection to the U.S. 101 freeway.
It should be noted that 2020 operating conditions reflect planned improvements at both the South
Airport BoulevardlUtah Avenue intersection and the South Airport BoulevardlI-380 interchange.
This is the reason why both locations are projected to be operating acceptably in 2020 and not
2005. It should also be noted that an improvement recently identified as needed by 20208 at the
South Airport BoulevardlU.S. 101 northbound ramps intersection has not been included in the
evaluation, but rather identified by the City as a needed Base Case (without project)
improvement that will be provided if traffic conditions warrant. To provide a conservative
analysis, this improvement has not been assumed in place by 2020.
PM peak hour volumes at the South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street intersection would be well
above peak hour signal warrant criteria levels.
8 Britannia East Grand Recirculation EIR.
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 15
Proposed Costco Gas Station
VI. PROJECT IMPACTS
A. SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
The addition ofproject traffic would produce a significant impact if:
1. Acceptable Base Case peak hour signalized intersection operation (LOS A, B, C or D) is
degraded to LOS E or F.
2. Signalized intersections with unacceptable Base Case peak hour operation (LOS E or F)
have one percent or more traffic added to the intersection.
3. Acceptable Base Case peak hour unsignalized intersection operation (LOS A, B, C, D or
E for approaches or turn movements) is degraded to LOS F.
4. Unsignalized intersections with unacceptable Base Case peak hour operation (LOS F)
have one percent or more traffic added to the intersection.
5. Base Case volumes at an unsignalized intersection are increased above peak hour signal
warrant criteria levels.
6. Unsignalized intersections with Base Case volumes already above peak hour signal
warrant criteria levels have one percent or more traffic added to the intersection.
7. Vehicle queues extend from the gas station onto Belle Air Road.
8. Vehicle queues in the left turn lane on the southbound South Airport Boulevard approach
to Belle Air Road extend beyond the available storage length.
9. In the opinion of the registered traffic consultant conducting this study, a significant
safety or operational problem would result due to the proposed project.
B. TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION
Research has been conducted as part of a recent study for a proposed Costco gas station in
Redwood City that details trip generation at three existing Costco gas stations in northern
California (in Santa Clara, Sunnyvale and Sacramento). Findings include each site's gross trip
generation (total vehicles in and out of the gas station), the number of customers attracted that
were already shopping at the adjacent Costco retail store and the number of customers attracted
from the flow of traffic on the roadways adjacent to the gas station. Data from the surveys were
collected, in most part, for the three peak traffic periods under examination for the proposed
South San Francisco facility.
9 Redwood City Costco Gasoline Station Traffic/Circulation Element of an Environmental Assessment by
DKS Associates, April 25, 2000.
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 16
Proposed Costco Gas Station
All data from the research sites were based upon gross trip rates per vehicle fueling position
(VFP). Each of the three surveyed sites has 12 VFP, while 16 VFP are proposed for the South
Airport Boulevard facility. This is the trip rate measurement criteria for gas station trip
generation used by the traffic engineering profession in their primary source of trip rate data, Trip
Generation, 7th Edition by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2003. Data used in this
publication to develop trip rates for gasoline/service stations has been collected from the 1970s to
the 2000s throughout the United States. In contrast, the oldest Costco gas station trip rate data
was from 1998.
An initial examination of the trip rate data from the survey sites showed from 5 to 20 percent
variations in trip rates per VFP between sites for the same time periods-see Appendix Table A-
I. Even while the majority of gross trip rates appeared reasonable, a disconnect would develop
using any of the surveyed trip rates from existing Costco gas stations based upon vehicle fueling
positions for the proposed South Airport Boulevard facility. The reasoning is as follows.
Costco indicates that the amount of gas sold during the year at their three surveyed
facilities ranged from 7.7 to 9.69 million gallons. The amount of gas projected to be sold
at their South Airport Boulevard facility is 6.5 million gallons, from 16 to 33 percent less
than at the surveyed sites. However, the number of fueling positions at the South Airport
Boulevard facility (the criteria upon which trip generation is normally based) will be 33
percent greater than at the surveyed sites (16 VFP versus 12 VFP). Therefore, assuming
the Costco projections for gasoline to be sold at their South Airport Boulevard facility are
accurate, using a trip rate based upon VFP at locations with fewer fueling positions but
higher gallonage sold would produce an unrealistically high projection of traffic for the
South Airport Boulevard facility. Costco management has indicated that the reason for
the increased number of fueling positions proposed at the South Airport Boulevard
facility is to reduce the wait to get gas, not due to higher gallonage.
In order to provide a more realistic projection of the traffic to be generated by the South Airport
Boulevard facility, peak hour trip rates from the three survey sites were developed on a per
million gallons sold basis rather than on a per vehicle fueling position basis. For two of three
time periods, there was a direct correlation between the reported gallons of fuel sold at all three
survey locations and the surveyed trip rates. As presented in Table 2, trip rates based upon fuel
sold produces, with one exception, very close relationships in peak hour trip rates between the
three survey sites.
The highest of the trip rates per million gallons sold from the three surveyed sites was applied to
the projected gallonage for the South Airport Boulevard facility. After consultation with City
planning staff, a 50 percent increase in estimated gallonage (taking the total from 6.5 up to 9.75
million gallons) was used for traffic impact analysis purposes in order to provide a conservative
safety factor in the projections and to allow some room for growth in customers. As shown in
Table 3, projected gross two-way trip generation (inbound + outbound) would be 294 trips
during the weekday AM peak traffic hour, 410 trips during the weekday PM peak traffic hour and
452 trips during a Saturday peak traffic hour.
Surveys at the three existing Costco gas stations also indicated that a significant portion of
Costco gas station customers typically come from customers already making a trip to the Costco
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 17
Proposed Costco Gas Station
retail store (internal capture) or are attracted from the ambient traffic flow on the adjacent
roadway system (passby capture)-see Table 4. Using results for most time periods from these
surveys, projections were developed of the net new traffic that would likely be added to the local
roadway network by Costco' s proposed South Airport Boulevard gas station. As presented in
Table 5, the lowest internal capture rates and the lowest passby capture rates found at the three
surveyed facilities were applied to the project for weekday PM peak hour and Saturday peak hour
projections. However, survey findings for weekday AM peak hour conditions were not utilized
because they were not considered applicable to the South Airport Boulevard site. During
weekday AM peak hour conditions, all Costco retail stores are closed while the gas stations are
open. Therefore, there is no internal capture of retail traffic by the gas station during this period
(and only a minor capture projected from Costco employees). Survey findings (from two of the
three gas stations) indicated that 95 to 99 percent of all Costco gas station customers during the
AM peak hour were passby capture attracted from traffic traveling immediately adjacent to the
sites. Given the location of the proposed project between two South Airport Boulevard
interchanges with the U.S.I0l and I 380 freeways and the high number of vehicles using both
interchanges to access employment sites to the north and south of the project site, it was
projected that a significant amount of the customers using the Costco gas station during the
morning commute peak traffic hour would be diverted from both interchanges. These vehicles
would be newly added to South Airport Boulevard in the immediate project vicinity, and would
need to travel twice through their respective interchanges due to the diversion to the gas station.
Overall, during the weekday AM commute peak hour, 36 percent of the Costco gas station
customers were projected to be passby capture with 50 percent diverted from nearby interchanges
and 14 percent being diverted (or newly added) from locations farther away then the nearby
interchanges.
Table 5 presents the net new traffic projected to be added to South Airport Boulevard at the
Costco site due to the proposed gas station. Net new two-way traffic would be 188 trips during
the weekday AM peak hour, 102 trips during the weekday PM peak hour and 154 trips during the
Saturday peak hour. Net new (or diverted) traffic was projected to distribute in proportion to
volumes passing through the South Airport Boulevard/I-380 interchange and the South Airport
BoulevardlU.S. 101 Northbound Ramps intersection. Passby traffic capture was projected to
occur in a pattern matching the ambient flow of traffic along South Airport Boulevard. Figure 7
presents the incremental net change in traffic due to the project at all analyzed intersections
during the weekday AM and PM peak hours and Saturday peak hour, while Figures 8 and 9
present year 2005 Base Case + project and year 2020 Base Case + project volumes at the same
locations for the same time periods.
C. BASE CASE + PROJECT INTERSECTION OPERATION
1. Year 2005
Table 1 shows that Base Case + project intersection operation would not be significantly
different than Base Case operation. Gas station traffic would not change level of service at any
analyzed intersection during any analysis period and would not degrade acceptable operation to
unacceptable operation. At locations with unacceptable base Case conditions, project traffic
impacts would be as follows.
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 18
Proposed Costco Gas Station
· AM Peak Hour
· South Airport BoulevardlUtah Avenue (LOS F signalized operation)
The diversion of traffic to the gas station would change movements at the
intersection to produce a slightly increased (:I: 2 seconds) average delay for
drivers. The project would increase traffic at this intersection by 3.8 percent
(significant).
· PM Peak Hour
· South Airport BoulevardlI-380 On-Ramp-North Access Road (LOS E signalized
operation)
The diversion of project traffic through the interchange would increase average
delay for drivers by just under 2 seconds (from 57.1 to 59.0 seconds) The project
would increase traffic at this intersection by 1.3 percent (significant).
· South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street (LOS F stop sign controlled Beacon Street
approach)
Project traffic would increase average delays for turns from the Beacon Street
approach by almost 32 seconds and further increase PM peak hour volumes above
signal warrant criteria levels. The project would increase traffic at this
intersection by 2.2 percent (significant). It should be noted, however, that the vast
majority of turns from Beacon Street would continue to be right turns, which
would experience acceptable delays.
2. Year 2020
Table 1 shows that Base Case + project intersection operation would not be significantly
different than Base Case operation. Gas station traffic would not change level of service at any
signalized intersection during any analysis period and would not degrade acceptable operation to
unacceptable operation. At locations with unacceptable Base Case conditions, project traffic
impacts would be as follows.
· AM Peak Hour
· South Airport BoulevardlU.S. 101 Northbound Ramps (LOS F signalized
operation)
The diversion of traffic to the gas station would increase average delay for drivers
by just under 5 seconds (from about 102 up to just under 107 seconds). The
project would increase traffic at this intersection by 0.7 percent (less-than-
significant).
· PM Peak Hour
· South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street (LOS F stop sign controlled Beacon Street
approach)
Project traffic would increase average delays for turns from the Beacon Street
approach by almost 46 seconds and further increase PM peak hour volumes above
signal warrant criteria levels. The project would increase traffic at this
intersection by 2.0 percent (significant). It should be noted, however, that the vast
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 19
Proposed Costco Gas Station
majority of turns from Beacon Street would continue to be right turns, which
would experience acceptable delays.
C. VEHICLE QUEUING ON APPROACH TO GAS PUMPS
1. Available Storage
Inbound access to the gas station would primarily be provided via a single driveway along Belle
Air Road about 160 feet east of South Airport Boulevard (see Figure 2). This 40-foot-wide
driveway would allow vehicles to directly access lines leading to the gas pumps. Drivers would
have their choice of queuing in eight different lines , each line leading to two sets of pumps (or
vehicle fueling positions). Sixteen vehicles could be fueling at the same time. There would be
storage room on the approach to each set of pumps ranging from 125 to 165 feet and providing
room for between five and eight vehicles per line.
Therefore, total available storage (not including vehicles pumping gas) with vehicles entering the
driveway closest to South Airport Boulevard would be as follows:
· Storage in lines leading to pumps
(not extending across the sidewalk
adjacent to Belle Air Road)
54-58 vehicles
To achieve maximum storage during peak demand time periods will require that a Costco
employee be located at the entrance to the gas station nearest South Airport Boulevard to direct
entering vehicles to the shortest queue line; As vehicle queues extend toward Belle Air Road,
Costco will temporarily close the driveway nearest South Airport Boulevard and have all drivers
enter the most easterly driveway on the south side of Belle Air Road (see Figure 10). Use of
three internal aisles in this employee/overflow parking lot will provide an additional single
storage lane about 770 feet long, which will accommodate an additiona135 to 38 vehicles. Total
off-street vehicle storage will therefore provide room for between :I: 89 and 96 vehicles.
2. Maximum Queuing Demand
Maximum queuing demand has been calculated for peak weekly gasoline demands of 50 and 60
percent above yearly average conditions. This reflects weekly pumping of 187,500 and 200,000
gallons, respectively. For comparison purposes, with Costco's projected 6.5 million gallons per
year demand projected for the South Airport Boulevard facility, a weekly average demand would
be 125,000 gallons, while the maximum demand at their EI Camino Real facility has been up to
about 250,000 gallons per week in 2001.
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 20
Proposed Costco Gas Station
Total vehicles per hour using the proposed gas station for the two gallonage levels would be as
follows:
TOTAL VEmCLES
ENTERING GAS STATION
50% ABOVE 60% ABOVE
AVERAGE AVERAGE
TIME PERIOD DEMAND DEMAND
Weekday AM Peak Hour 147 157
Weekday PM Peak Hour 205 219
Saturday Afternoon Peak Hour 226 241
Source: Crane Transportation Group
Based upon three days of surveys by Crane Transportation Group at the South San Francisco EI
Camino Real Costco gas station in June 2001,10 the existing facility served, at a minimum, 25
vehicles per hour per pump line (with two vehicles in each line pumping gas at any given time),
while the maximum number of vehicles served per hour per line was 27. Thus, each driver on
average, takes about 4.5 to 5 minutes to get gas. Using the minimum rate would indicate that the
proposed South Airport Boulevard facility's eight pump lines would be able to accommodate, at
a minimum, up to 200 vehicles per hour. Thus, with demands 50 or 60 percent above average,
the proposed South Airport Boulevard gas station would be operating with demand exceeding
available pump fueling position capacity during the peak demand time periods on weekday and
Saturday afternoons.
In regards to potential vehicle queuing, June 2001 weekday and Saturday surveys at the Costco
EI Camino Real facility (when well over 200,000 gallons per week were being pumped) showed
maximum queues of 68 to 70 drivers waiting to get gas during six different periods. Maximum
queues occurred on Monday, the station's busiest weekday, and on Saturday, the busiest weekend
day. With the same capacity at the South Airport Boulevard facility (16 vehicle fueling positions
being proposed for the South Airport Boulevard facility versus 16 at the El Camino Real station),
the maximum vehicle queue waiting for gas (for comparable gallonage being pumped) would be
about 68 to 70 vehicles. Since this level of activity is not being anticipated at the South Airport
Boulevard facility, the off-street storage for 89 to 96 vehicles being proposed for the South
Airport Boulevard station project (with maximum use of overflow storage in the parking aisles
east of the gas station) should be adequate for peak demand periods to preclude vehicles backing
onto Belle Air Road. Again, this assumes that Costco staff are available to direct vehicles
entering the gas station during peak demand periods (potentially significant without Costco staff
direction).
10 Memo to South San Francisco Planning Staff, Will Vehicle Queues at Costco's Proposed South Airport
Boulevard Gasoline Station Extend Out of the Facility's Entry Driveways?, by Crane Transportation Group, July 2,
2001.
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 21
Proposed Costco Gas Station
D. IMPACT OF LEFT TURNS FROM BELLE AIR ROAD INTO GAS
STATION
One of the primary sources of customers for the Costco gas station will be drivers already
visiting the Costco store. Those people stopping for gas after shopping will make a right turn
from the main store driveway onto Belle Air Road and then a left turn (80 feet to the west) into
the gas station. Figures 11 and 12 present the projected number of vehicles turning left and right
(to and from) each gas station driveway for 2005 and 2020 weekday and Saturday peak hour
conditions. From 45 to 55 vehicles could be making this left turn during peak traffic hours. In
the vicinity of the proposed gas station main entrance, Belle Air Road has two eastbound and two
westbound travellanes. The westbound lane that would be used by Costco customers turning left
into the gas station widens just west of the proposed gas station entrance and transitions into two
lanes used for left turns to Southbound South Airport Boulevard. Should a westbound driver on
Belle Air Road turning left into the Costco gas station be delayed any measurable amount oftime
(by the 400 to 500 inbound vehicles per hour traveling westbound on Belle Air Road toward the
Costco store entrance driveway), it could disrupt the orderly flow of outbound traffic from the
Costco store towards the South Airport Boulevard signalized intersection. (Significant)
E. ADEQUACY OF STORAGE IN LEFT TURN LANE ON SOUTH
AIRPORT BOULEVARD SOUTHBOUND APPROACH TO BELLE AIR
ROAD
The left turn lane on the southbound South Airport Boulevard approach to Belle Air Road is 200
feet long and can accommodate eight to nine automobiles. A landscaped median extends at least
300 feet to the north of this turn pocket.
As part of the intersection level of service evaluation, projections were also obtained of the
maximum 95th percentile back of queue storage demand that would be likely to occur in the left
turn pocket on the southbound South Airport Boulevard approach to Belle Air Road. As shown
in Table 6, for Base Case (without project) conditions, the southbound left turn lane is likely to
experience occasional demands greater than the available storage length before 2020 during
weekday PM peak hour conditions. With the addition of gas station traffic, vehicle queues would
occasionally extend beyond the length of the left turn pocket by 2005 during weekday PM Peak
hour conditions. By or before 2020, the addition of gas station traffic would increase maximum
vehicle queues farther beyond the available 200-foot storage length during the weekday PM Peak
hour and would also result in queues extending beyond the available storage length during the
Saturday peak traffic hour (significant).
F. FREQUENCY OF TANKER TRUCK DELIVERIES
The tanker trucks serving Costco gas stations hold 7,800 gallons of fue1.1l The number of trucks
per day would vary depending upon the specific weekly demand for fuel by customers. The
number of trucks for three different demand levels would be as follows.
11 Mr. Bruce Creager, Barghausen Consulting Engineering, Inc. (July 2002).
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 22
Proposed Costco Gas Station
Costco Projected Average:
+50%
+60%
125,000 gallons/week = 16 trucks/week = 2.3 trucks/day
187,000 gallons/week = 24 trucks/week = 3.5 trucks/day
200,000 gallons/week = 26 trucks/week = 3.7 trucks/day
The gas station and the parking aisles in the existing employee parking lot have been designed to
accommodate the flow of tanker trucks through the site to and from Belle Air Road (see
Figure 13).
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 23
Proposed Costco Gas Station
VII. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS AND MITIGATIONS
A. BASE CASE (WITHOUT PROJECT) RECOMMENDED
IMPROVEMENTS
1. Year 2005
South Airport BoulevardlUtah Avenue (see Appendix Figure A-I)
· Monitor traffic conditions and provide a second left turn lane on the southbound
South Airport Boulevard intersection approach when traffic conditions warrant. Also,
restripe one of the northbound through lanes to allow both through movements and
right turns, if required. This is a previously identified local traffic improvement need.
Resultant AM Peak Hour Operation:
Base Case: LOS C-23.3 seconds vehicle delay
Base Case + Costco Gas Station: LOS C-23.5 seconds vehicle delay
South Airport BoulevardII 380 On- and Off-RampslNorth Access Road Intersection
(see Figure 10)
· Provide a second left turn lane on the northbound South Airport Boulevard approach
to the I 380 On-Ramp and a fourth through lane on the South Airport Boulevard
approach to the I 380 Off-Ramp. Two of the four northbound through lanes at the
1380 off-ramp intersection will become the exclusive left turn lanes at the On-Ramp
intersection. The San Francisco International Airport is planning to construct this
improvement in the near future.
· Restripe the westbound North Access Road approach to South Airport Boulevard to
provide a single shared left/through lane and an exclusive through lane.
· Provide new pavement markings and increased informational signing on the.
southbound South Airport Boulevard approach to the I 380 On-Ramp to indicate the
possibility ofturning right to the On-Ramp from two lanes rather than just one lane.
· Adjust signal cycle length and phasing.
Resultant Year 2005 Weekday PM Peak Hour Operation:
Base Case: LOS A-7.5 seconds vehicle delay
Southbound left turn 95th percentile vehicle queue = 170'
Base Case + Costco Gas Station: LOS A-7.6 seconds vehicle delay
Southbound left turn 95th percentile vehicle queue = 172'
Above improvements and revised signal timing (if acceptable to Caltrans) also eliminate
southbound left turn backups out of the 200-foot-Iong turn pocket providing access to the North
Access Road (as shown above). However, ifCaltrans chooses to continue with the same signal
timing and phasing, 95th percentile vehicle queues in the southbound left turn lane will extend
six to seven car lengths beyond the 200-foot length of the existing turn pocket (see Table 7).
Therefore, provide the following measure.
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 24
Proposed Costco Gas Station
· Provide a second left turn lane on the southbound South Airport Boulevard approach
to the North Access Road. Adequate median width is available for this widening. In
conjunction with this added turn lane, restripe the North Access Road leg of the
intersection to provide two departure lanes (and one intersection approach lane). The
63-foot width of the North Access Road bridge just east of South Airport Boulevard
could accommodate this lane striping.
Resultant Year 2005 Weekday PM Peak Hour Operation with Second Southbound
Left Turn Lane:
Base Case: LOS C-23.1 seconds vehicle delay
Total left turn storage provided in 2 lanes = 340' II 95th percentile total queue
demand = 258'
Resultant Year 2020 Weekday PM Peak Hour Operation with Second Southbound
Left Turn Lane:
Base Case: LOS C-32.8 seconds vehicle delay
Total left turn storage provided in 2 lanes = 340' II 95th percentile total queue
demand = 278'
South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street
· Although warranted, signalization of this intersection is not recommended. Drivers
experiencing extended delays attempting to make left turns from Beacon Street
(south) to northbound South Airport Boulevard have the option to make a right turn
from Beacon Street (north) and then make a U-turn at the Belle Air Road signal.
2. Year 2020
South Airport BoulevardlU.S. 101 Northbound Ramps (see Appendix Figure A-2)
· Provide a second right turn lane on the U.S. 101 off-ramp.
· Provide a second off-ramp lane diverging from the U.S. 101 freeway.
Resultant AM Peak Hour Operation:
Base Case: LOS 0-39.7 seconds vehicle delay
Base Case + Costco Gas Station: LOS D-39.4 seconds vehicle delay
South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street
· Although warranted, signalization of this intersection is not recommended. Drivers
experiencing extended delays attempting to make left turns from Beacon Street
(south) to northbound South Airport Boulevard have the option to make a right turn
from Beacon Street (north) and then make a U-turn at the Belle Air Road signal.
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 25
Proposed Costco Gas Station
B. PROJECT MITIGATIONS
1. Year 2005
South Airport BoulevardlI-380 On-Ramp-North Access Road
· Provide a fair share contribution towards providing additional pavement markings and
signing informing southbound drivers of the possibility of making right turns to 1-380
from two lanes.
· If Caltrans chooses not to significantly adjust signal timing at this intersection after
improvements by the Airport:
Provide a fair share contribution towards providing a second left turn lane on the
southbound South Airport Boulevard approach as well as providing two departure
lanes and one approach lane on the North Access Road leg of the intersection.
Resultant Year 2005 Weekday PM Peak Hour Operation with Second Southbound
Left Turn Lane:
Base Case + Costco Gas Station: LOS C-26.6 seconds vehicle delay
Total left turn storage provided in 2 lanes = 340' II 95th percentile total queue
demand = 258'
Resultant Year 2020 Weekday PM Peak Hour Operation with Second Southbound
Left Turn Lane:
Base Case + Costco Gas Station: LOS D-36.8 seconds vehicle delay
Total left turn storage provided in.2 lanes = 340' II 95th percentile total queue
demand = 280'
South Airport BoulevardlUtah Avenue
· Provide a fair share contribution towards improvement needs already identified for
this location.
South Airport Boulevard/Belle Air Road
· Monitor use of the southbound left turn lane and lengthen by at least 50 feet when
maximum queues begin extending towards the end of the lane. As an alternative
mitigation, provide loop detectors the entire length of the left turn pocket and program
the signal controller to give priority to emptying the left turn lane when vehicle
queues extend near the end of available storage. This would provide slightly less
efficient (but still acceptable) intersection operation during peak traffic periods.
South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street (South)
· Provide a fair share contribution towards signalization should the City decide to
provide this improvement.
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 26
Proposed Costco Gas Station
2. Year 2020
South Airport Boulevard/Belle Air Road
· Monitor use of the southbound left turn lane and lengthen by at least 125 feet when
maximum queues begin extending towards the end of the lane. As an alternative
mitigation, provide loop detectors the entire length of the left turn pocket and program
the signal controller to give priority to emptying the left turn lane when vehicle
queues extend near the end of available storage. This would produce slightly less
efficient (but still acceptable) intersection operation during peak traffic periods, but
would still require lengthening .the turn pocket by at least 50 feet.
South Airport Boulevard/Beacon Street (South)
· Provide a fair share contribution towards signalization should the City decide to
provide this improvement.
3. All Conditions
Gas Station Entrance
· Provide one or more staff members at the Belle Air Road main entrance to the gas
station during peak use periods to ensure uniform allocation of entering traffic to each
of the eight lines leading to the gas pumps. In addition, as needed, the attendants shall
also temporarily close access into the gas station from the main entrance (nearest
South Airport Boulevard) and provide access via the driveway farthest to the east
along Belle Air Road.
· Provide signing for traffic leaving the Costco store driveway indicating that access to
the gas station is via the driveway directly across Belle Air Road (if not temporarily
closed during peak queuing conditions) or via the driveway farthest to the east along
Belle Air Road. In conjunction with this measure, prohibit left turn movements from
westbound Belle Air Road into the gas station main entrance (by signing and
striping).
6/28/04 CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP Page 27
Proposed Costco Gas Station
FIGURES
Not To Scale
~~
NORTH
= PROJECT SITE
(Proposed Costco
Gas Station)
Costco Gas Station Traffic Study
r
~ CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP
Figure 1
Area Map
"
~
('Ill c
. !
.. 0-
~ .
!...
II- .-
eI)
'.\
\\
,--------
...
-
-
~
"8~'
\1~
. Q., 7S
-iQlQ
O'Qllp..
-g
w
s
:Ii
i:
~
1a
Ui
~
(!)
~
8
~
';)
~
<'
z
2
~
';.
o
t;
~
~\
US 101
Not To Scale
~~
NORTH
Utah Ave
t.
.-
.-
Belle Air Rd
:;;c
CI)
:t~~,+ us Customs
+~ , t,. Parking Lot
~ ~ tLsRd
tt
~ = Stop Sign
. = Signal
J.
J.
T
Costco Gas Station Traffic Study
~
CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP
Figure 3
Existing Intersection Control
and Lane Geometries
475 -l. 15 490 -l. 25
~5 ~ 25 +- 5 ~5 ~ 25 +- 15
~ of 25 ~ of 25 Not To Scale
NB 101 Ram s Wonderc%r Ln NB 101 Ram s Wondere%r Ln ~~
265 J. ~t~ 465 J. ~ t ~
NORTH
50 --. 75 215 5 20 --. 265 305 20
320,. 200,.
-l. 87 -l. 252
6 305512 +- 3 5 508 235 +- 5
~ ~ ~ of 192 ~ ~ ~ of 821
Utah Ave Utah Ave
7 J. ~t~ 5 .J- ~ t ~
6 --. 10 541 1 --. 16 324 167
5 ,. 204 16 ,.
~ 20 ~ 20
15 T 15 ,.
Ci3
8
o
!
~t~
45 10
725
~
.... PROJECT
C/)
c: SITE
8
gj
CD
20 1270
+ 25 -l. 25
~ ~ US Customs
of 20 Parking Lot SATURDAY
30 .J- ~t~ PEAK HOUR
90 ,. (1 :00-2:00 PM)
30 540 15
1390 -l. 120
+ N Access Rd
t
465
25 480
J 20 -l. 20
~ .. ~ US Customs
of 15 Parking Lot
10 .J-
15 ,.
510
345
t
/-380/US 101 North
Off Ramp 400 J.
290,.
+
-l. 290
N Access Rd
t
485
+- 5
of 1005 f\d
AcQeS
N ~
~ t 150
170 465
360
t
/-380/US 101 North
Off Ramp 210.J-
325,.
760
t
t
405
WEEKDAY
AM PEAK HOUR
(7:45-8:45)
WEEKDAY
PM PEAK HOUR
(4:45-5:45)
Costco Gas Station Traffic Stud
~
CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP
Figure 4
Existing Weekday AM & PM and Saturday
Peak Hour Volumes
118 560 27 ~ 16 ~1 6Y ~ ~ 27
~5 ~ 16
~ ~ ~ f"" 27 f"" 27 Not To Scale
NB 101 Ram s Wondercolor Ln NB 101 Ram L1!, ndercolor Ln ~~
909.J ~t~ 523.J ~t~
NORTH
55 --+- 85 275 5 22 --+- 264 333 22
604") 246")
~ 100 ~ 270
6 325 862 ~3 5 595313 .-. 5
~ ~ ~ f"" 200 -.J ~ ~ f"" 857
Utah Ave Utah Ave
7 .J ~t~ 5 .J- ~t~
6 --+- 1 --+-
5 ") 10 263 581 16 ") 16362 176
~ 25 -.J 20
15 ") 20 ")
... &5
CI,)
8 8
~ !
25 505 20 1365
~ 20 ~20 J. 25 ~ 25
-.J ~ US Customs ~ ~ US Customs
f"" 15 Parking Lot f"" 20 Parking Lot SATURDAY
10 .J ~ t ~ 30 .J ~ t ~ PEAK HOUR
15 ") 90 ") (1 :00-2:00 PM)
50795 10 35 570 15
535 ~ 315 1475 ~ 125
J. N Access Rd ~ N Access Rd-
t
540
~ 10 325
f"" 11 0 5 fld 845 305
l'lAcces -.JJ.~
~ '-380/US 101 North
~ t 160 On Ramp
360 180 540 375
. .
'-380/US 101 North t '-380/US 101 North t
Off Ramp 450.J- Off Ramp 230.J
310 ") 430 345") 805
WEEKDAY
AM PEAK HOUR
(ir:.a!i-II:.a!i)
WEEKDAY
PM PEAK HOUR
(4:45-5:45)
Costco Gas Station Traffic Stud
~
CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP
Figure 5
Year 2005 Weekday AM & PM and Saturday
Base Case (Without Project)
Peak Hour Volumes
625 27
~2 ~ ~
NB 101 Ram s
1852 j.
55 -.
1328 "
t..16
+- 5
f" 27
Wonder e%r Ln
~t~
93 314 5
t.. 95
6 4651485 +- 5
I f" 210
~ t ~ Utah Ave
7 j. ~ t ~
6 -. 635
5 " 10 295
~ 25
15 "
605
65~
~~~
U5 "5
6
u
m
m
600
30 I 20 t.. 20
~ t ~ us Customs
f" 20 Parking Lot
10 j.
25 "
645
~t~
55 940 15
t.. 375
N Access Rd
~
t
635
+- 30
290 625 27
~ ~ ~ Not To Scale
NB 101 Ram s ~~
778.J.
22 -. NORTH
455 "
t.. 312
5 640 470 +- 5
~ ~ ~ f" 925
Utah Ave
5 .J. ~t~
1 -.
20 " 20 395 195
~ 25
20 "
~
.... PROJECT
CJ)
8 SITE
~
25 1485
~ 25 t.. 30
., ~ us Customs
f" 25 Parking Lot SATURDAY
35 .J. ~ t ~ PEAK HOUR
105 " (1 :00-2:00 PM)
35 655 20
1615 t.. 150
~ N Access Rd
460 425
. .
1-3BOIUS 101 North t 1-3801US 101 North t
Off Ramp 515 j. Off Ramp 265.J.
405 " 570 455 " 1005
WEEKDAY
AM PEAK HOUR
(7:45-8:45)
Costco Gas Station Traffic Stud
WEEKDAY
PM PEAK HOUR
(4:45-5:45)
~
CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP
Figure 6
Year 2020 Weekday AM & PM and Saturday
Base Case (Without Project)
Peak Hour Volumes
-4 7 -5 7
., t ., t Not To Scale
NB 101 Ram s WondereD/or Ln NB 101 Ram s WondereD/or Ln ~~
-26 j- ~ t - 9 j- ~ t NORTH
T 7 29 6 T .7 11
20
~ -3 ~ - 5
44 -17 18 -5
.. 7 .. 6
~ l., Utah Ave ~ l., Utah Ave
t ~ t ~
21 6
39 23
(j)
~
CIS
&l
(j)
~
!
~ -5
.. 34 -17 56 b
Belle Air Rd ~ l.,~
PROJECT 1::
~
22
US Customs ~ US Customs
Parking Lot Parking Lot SATURDAY
t t PEAK HOUR
(1 :00-2:00 PM)
43 27
~ 12 22 ~4
N Access Rd ~ N Access Rd
t t
31 23
9
10
34
~
34
14
t
/-380/US 101 North
Off Ramp 16 j-
-10 T
t
8
t
/-380/US 101 North
Off Ramp 11 j-
-6..
t
Negative numbers reflect
Diversion of Base Case traffic
4
2
WEEKDAY
AM PEAK HOUR
(ir:~-tl:~)
WEEKDAY
PM PEAK HOUR
(4:45-5:45)
Costco Gas Station Traffic Stud
~
CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP
Figure 7
Weekday AM & PM and Saturday
Project Increment
Peak Hour Volumes
567 27 -l. 16 624 27 -l. 27
~4 ~ ~ +- 5 ~6 ~ ~ +- 16
f" 27 f" 27 Not To Scale
NB 101 Ram s Wonderc%r Ln NB 101 Ram s Wonderc%r Ln ~~
883j ~ t ~ 514j ~ t ~
55 -+ 92 304 5 22 -+ 271 344 22 NORTH
624T 252T
-l. 97 ~ 265
6 369 845 +- 3 5 613308 +- 5
~ ~ ~ f" 206 ~ ~ ~ f" 863
Utah Ave Utah Ave
7 j ~t~ 5 j ~ t ~
6 -+ 1 -+
5 T 10 302 601 16 T 16 385 182
~25 ~ 20
15 ""l- 20 ""l-
383
I 2411]
t ~~
PROJECT ~
SITE
.... ....
CJ) CJ)
5 c::
0 8
m !
lXl
539 20 1387
25~ 20 -t. 20 ~ 25
~ ~ US Customs ~ ~
f" 15 Parking Lot
10 j ~t~ 30 .J.
15 ""l- 50 838 10 90 ""l-
569 -l. 327 1497
~ N Access Rd ~
-t. 25
US Customs
f" 20 Parking Lot
~t~
35 597 15
SATURDAY
PEAK HOUR
(1 :00-2:00 PM)
~ 129
N Access Rd
t
518
374 383
+ +
1-380/US 101 North t 1-380/US 101 North t
Off Ramp 466.J. Off Ramp 241.J.
300 ""l- 434 339""l- 807
WEEKDAY
AM PEAK HOUR
(7:45-8:45)
WEEKDAY
PM PEAK HOUR
(4:45-5:45)
Costco Gas Station Traffic Stud
~
CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP
Figure 8
Year 2005 Weekday AM & PM and Saturday
Base Case + Project
Peak Hour Volumes
632 -t. 16 632 27 -t. 27
~8 ~ 27 +- 5 ~5 ~ ~ +- 16
~ f" 27 f" 27 Not To Scale
NB 101 Ram s WondereD/or Ln NB 101 Ram s WondereD/or Ln ~~
1826 j- ~t~ 769 j- ~ t ~
NORTH
55 -+ 100343 5 22 -+ 327 401 22
1348 T 461,.
-t. 112 -l. 307
6 5091468 +- 5 5 658 465 +- 5
~ ~ ~ f" 216 ~ ~ ~ f" 931
Utah Ave Utah Ave
7 j- ~t~ 5 j- ~ t ~
6 -+ 1 -...
5 T 10 334 655 20 ,. 20 418 201
~ 25 ~ 25
15 ,. 20 ,.
Ci5 -
C/)
c: 5
8 t)
(U ~
(I)
en
634 25 1507
30~ 20 -l. 20 ~ 25 -l. 30
~ ~ US Customs ~ ~ US Customs
f" 20 Parking Lot f" 25 Parking Lot SATURDAY
10 j- ~t~ 35 j- ~t~ PEAK HOUR
25 ,. 105 ,. (1 :00-2:00 PM)
55 15 35 682 20
983
679 -l. 387 1637 -l. 154
~ N Access Rd ~ N Access Rd
474 433
+ +
1-380/US 101 North t f-380/US 101 North t
Off Ramp 531 j- Off Ramp 276 j-
395,. 574 449,. 1007
WEEKDAY
AM PEAK HOUR
(7:45-8:45)
WEEKDAY
PM PEAK HOUR
(4:45-5:45)
Costco Gas Station Traffic Stud
~
CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP
Figure 9
Year 2020 Weekday AM & PM and Saturday
Base Case + Project
Peak Hour Volumes
c
.
-
0-
o
C
~
C.
o~
_0
... .
o .-
"" 1).i
. ",#
.. . Q)
i " ".
.- o.
II- u~
...eft
'" c
80
e
~
e
~
.
s
.~
\
J
--------
-
-
-
"0
~
en
.~
l-"
~
~
...
en
,
(!)
~
III
o
Q.
:;)
~
C)
:
g
'<
~
o.
~
~
~\
Not To Scale
~~
NORTH
~
Qi
1::
o
.~
":(
CI)
Costco
Store
~
Qi
1::
o
.~
":(
CI)
Costco
Store
132 ~ 40
~ .. 83
.
~ 123 55 ·
.
Belle i;; R~ ~ : ~ 20
110-+ ; 90 .J. : ~
147 T : 20-+. 53
Costco .
Gas :
Station ·
.. . .
'L 99 · ,
~____________~________L__
Gas Station
Driveway Exit
(Right turn only)
316
~
.
~ 344 295'
.
Belle At R~ ~ : +- 24
335-+ ; 310 .J.. ~ t
161 T: 25 -+: 69
Costco ,
Gas :
Station '
.. .,
'L~ ' ,
~____________~________L__
Gas Station
Driveway Exit
(Right turn only) WEEKDAY
PM PEAK HOUR
(4:45-5:45)
~ 65
.. 279
~
125
~
180
50
WEEKDAY
AM PEAK HOUR
(7:45-8:45) .
~
Qi
"5
.~
":(
CI)
Costco
Store
241 ~ 35
~ .. 318
.
~ 353 310'
.
.. 54 .1.
Belle Air Rd .... . ~ 30
391-+ ; 360 .J.: ~ t
171 T : 31 -+. 67
Costco .
Gas :
Station ·
.. . .
'L94 · ·
____________~________L__
Gas Station
Driveway Exit
(Right turn only)
~
321
65
SATURDAY
PEAK HOUR
(1 :00-2:00 PM)
- - - - = Driveways
Base Case + Project Traffic Access
Pattern Without Diversion of Inbound
Gas Station Traffic to Driveway Farther
East to Allow Additional On-Site Vehicle
Queueing
~n"t"n r.:"" ~t"tlnn T. ..., "'.....
CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP
Figure 11
Year 2005 Base Case + Project
Peak Hour Volumes
at Project Driveways
~
.
~ 463 410.
.
..54 .1.
Belle Air Rd ~ . ~ 40
541-+: 500 j.:~ t
171 -.: 41 -+. 67
Costco .
Gas :
Station ·
.... ..
~ 94 · ·
._._-._------_._-------~--
Gas Station
Driveway Exit
(Right tum only)
~
co
"6
.~
'<(
CI)
Costco
Store
.
~ 138 65 ·
.
Belle};; R; ~ : ~ 25
120-+ -:- 95 j.: ~
147 -.: 25-+. 53
Costco .
Gas :
Station ·
.... ..
~ 99 · ·
~____________~________L__
Gas Station
Driveway Exit
(Right tum only)
137 ~ 50
~ .. 88
~
130
WEEKDAY
AM PEAK HOUR
(7:45-8:45)
~
co
"6
.~
'<(
CI)
301 ~ 50
~ .. 413
~
411
Not To Scale
~~
NORTH
~
CO
t
2
.!i:
'<(
CI)
Costco
Store
.
~ 439 375 ·
.
BelleAfR~ ~ : ~39
455-+ ;. 415 j.. ~ t
161 -. : 40 -+: 69
Costco .
Gas :
Station ·
.... . .
~82 · ·
~____________~________L__
Gas Station .
Driveway Exit
(Right turn only) WEEKDAY
PM PEAK HOUR
(4:45-5:45)
396 ~ 85
~ .. 354
~
220
50
Costco
Store
65
SATURDAY
PEAK HOUR
(1 :00-2:00 PM)
~ I"'^",.,,^ ,,-- .,,-.,-., Tr..ffi, ",. ....
- - - - = Driveways
Base Case + Project Traffic Access
Pattern Without Diversion of Inbound
Gas Station Traffic to Driveway Farther
East to Allow Additional On-Site Vehicle
Queueing
"'"
~
CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP
Figure 12
Year 2020 Base Case + Project
Peak Hour Volumes
at Project Driveways
....
o
.1:
a-
e
...
...
I: ~
01-
;:.
C") ~ 0
'P ...-
tn...
! 0 0
::I ~ fa
m~e
I. U
... 0 U
,2C
0~
o U
(.)::1
a-
t-
a-
e
~
I:
~
t-
'tJ
:l
CiS
o
;:
e
l-
e:
o
il
CiS
Xl
(!l
o
.0
o
o
o
no
::>>
o
~
C)
Z
o
~
o
no
tn
Z
~
~i
~(J
TABLES
Table 1 (page 1 of 2)
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
S. Airport Blvd./U.S.1 01 B-15.2(1) B-18A B-18.9 F-I01.9 F-I06.5
NB Hook Ramps-
Wondercolor Lane (Signal)
S. Airport Blvd./Utah Ave. C-26A(1) F-98.1 F-lOOA C-22.0 C-25.0
(Signal)
S. Airport Blvd./Belle Air A-7.1(1) A-7A A-9.5 A-7.8 B-IO.O
Rd. (Signal)
S. Airport Blvd./Beacon A-8.7/A-9.5/ A-8.9/A-9.9/ A-9.0/B-lO.II A-9.2/B-IO.5/ A-9.3/B-IO.7/
St. South (Beacon Stop C-18.0/C-22.8(2) C-19.7/D-26A C-21.2/D-29.1 C-20.5/E-41.6 C-22.11E-47.3
Sign Controlled)
S. Airport Blvd./I-380- B-18A(I) B-18.5 B-18.7 B-Il.5 B-I1.9
U.S.lOl North On-
Ramp/North Access Rd.
(as part of Signalized
system)*
S. Airport Blvd./I-380- B-12.5(1) B-l3.0 B-l3 .1 A-8.9 A-8.9
U.S.IOI North Off-Ramp
(as part of Signalized
s tem *
S. Airport Blvd./U.S.lOI B-17.6(1) B-18.6 B-18.6 C-21.4 C-21.5
NB Hook Ramps-
Wondercolor Lane (Signal)
S. Airport Blvd./Utah Ave. B-16.2(1) B-17.9 B-18.1 B-17.6 B-17.6
(Signal)
S. Airport Blvd./Belle Air B-Il.O(l) B-I1.3 B-14.l B-l3.2 B-19.8
Rd. (Signal)
S. Airport Blvd./Beacon B-l3.II A-8.8/ B-14.0/A-9.0/ B-14.3/A-9.II B-14.8/A-9.2/ C-15.0/A-9.3/
St. South (Beacon Stop F-l34/E-44.0(2) F-220.7/F-57.0 F-252/F-63.7 F-399/F-102 F-445/F-118
Sign Controlled)
S. Airport Blvd./I-380- E-S5.S(I) E-57.I E-59.0 A-9.4 A-9.6
U.S.IOI North On-
Ramp/North Access Rd.
(as part of Signalized
system) *
S. Airport Blvd./I-380- B-l3.7(1) B-14.5 B-14.5 B-12.2 B-12.3
U.S.lOl North Off-Ramp
(as part of Signalized
s tem *
Table 1 (page 2 of 2)
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
(1)
(2)
Signalized level of service-vehicle control delay in seconds.
Unsignalized level of service-average vehicle control delay in seconds. Northbound left turn to Beacon
Street/Southbound left tUrn to u.S. Customs parking lot/Beacon Street eastbound stop sign controlled approach/U.S.
Customs parking lot westbound stop sign controlled approach.
SYNCHRO analysis.
*
2000 Highway Capacity Manual Operations Methodology
Source: Crane Transportation Group
Table 2
EXISTING COSTCO GAS STATION TRIP GENERATION RATES
PER MILLION GALLONS OF FUEL SOLD
Santa Clara
9.69
29.93
40.56
41.95
37.46
46.23
Sunnyvale
7.70
No Data
Collected
Sacramento
8.90
30.11
37.64
38.88
Source: Barg Hausen Consulting Engineers, Inc.
DKS Associates, Redwood City Costco Gasoline Station Traffic/Circulation Element of EA, April 25, 2000
Evaluation by: Crane Transportation Group
Table 3
COSTCO SOUTH AIRPORT BOULEVARD
PROPOSED GAS STATION GROSS TRIP GENERATION
Gas Station
20Fuelin Positions
9,750,000
30.1
294
42.0
410
46.2
452
Costco Estimate of 6,500,000 gallons increased by 50% for conservative safety factor (% increase determined in
consultation with city Planning Staff).
** Trip rate per million gallons pumped.
*
Source: Crane Transportation Group. Based upon trip rate data surveys from 3 existing Costco gas stations in northern
California contained in the Redwood City Costco Gasoline Station Traffic/Circulation Element of EA, April25, 2000 by DKS
Associates.
Table 4
COSTCO GAS STATION GROSS TRIP GENERATION
REDUCTION FACTORS
Santa Clara CostcO(I)
72%
Sacramento CostcO(I)
0%
70%
53%
Sunn ale Costco
2
46%
59%
(I) Trip generation rates listed in table are based on surveys conducted on a midweek day in June 1998 between the hours of
7:00 AM to 9:00 AM (midweek AM peak period) and 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM (midweek PM peak period) and on Saturday,
June 6, 1998 between the hours of 12:00 PM and 3:00 PM (weekend peak period).
(2) Trip reduction rate information not available for this location.
Source: DKS Associates
Table 5
COSTCO SOUTH AIRPORT BOULEVARD
PROJECTED NET NEW TRIP GENERATION
(AFTER ALLOWANCE FOR INTERNAL AND P ASSBY TRIPS)
Gross Trip Generation 294 410 452
Internal Capture 0% (_0)<1) 46% (-188) 53% (-238)
Passby Capture from South Airport 36% (-106) 29% (-120) 13% (-60)
Boulevard
Net New Trips Attracted to Costco Gas 64% (188) 25% (102) 34% (154)
Station-Potential Significant Diversion
From Other Nearb Area Traffic
(1) Costco store closed.
Source: Crane Transportation Group partially based upon findings in the Redwood City Costco Gasoline Station
Traffic/Circulation Element of EA, April 25, 2000 by DKS Associates.
Table 6
PROJECTED NUMBER OF VEHICLES QUEUING* IN LEFf TURN LANE
ON SOUTHBOUND SOUTH AIRPORT BOULEVARD
APPROACH TO BELLE AIR ROAD
YEAR 2005
W/O Project
8
8
2
With Pro. ect
4
8
10
5
7
YEAR 2020
W/O Project
With Pro. ect
8
8
2
4
10
13
7
9
* 95th percentile demand
** 25 feet per vehicle
Year 2000 Highway Capacity Manual Analysis Methodology
Source: Crane Transportation Group
Table 7
SOUTH AIRPORT BOULEV ARD/I-380 WESTBOUND ON-RAMPINORTH ACCESS ROAD
LEVEL OF SERVICE AND SOUTHBOUND LEFT TURN QUEUE LENGTHS
WITH VARIOUS MITIGATION ALTERNATIVES
(ALL EVALUATION INCLUDES AIRPORT PLANNED AND FUNDED SECOND LEFT TURN
LANE ON NORTHBOUND SOUTH AIRPORT BOULEVARD APPROACH + EXISTING
SIGNAL CYCLE LENGTH AND PHASING SEQUENCE)
YEAR 2005
SOUTHBOUND S. AIRPORT BLVD.
LEFT TURN TO N. ACCESS RD.
WEEKDAY PM
PEAK HOUR AVAILABLE
LEVEL OF STORAGE 95TH % QUEUE
MITIGATION CONDITION SERVICE DISTANCE LENGTH
No Additional Base Case C-27.5 200' 356'
Measure
Base Case + Project C- 31.1 200' 360'
Provide Second Base Case C-23.1 340' 258'
Southbound Left Turn total 2 lanes total 2 lanes
Lane
Base Case + Project C-26.6 340' 258'
total 2 lanes total 2 lanes
YEAR 2020
SOUTHBOUND S. AIRPORT BLVD.
LEFT TURN TO N. ACCESS RD.
WEEKDAY PM
PEAK HOUR AVAILABLE
LEVEL OF STORAGE 95TH % QUEUE
MITIGATION CONDITION SERVICE DISTANCE LENGTH
No Additional Base Case D-38.9 200' 392'
Measure
Base Case + Project D-43.0 200' 396'
Provide Second Base Case C-32.8 340' 278'
Southbound Left Turn total 2 lanes total 2 lanes
Lane
Base Case + Project D-36.8 340' 280'
total 2 lanes total 2 lanes
Synchro software program, Year 2000 Highway Capacity Manual Analysis Methodology.
Source: Crane Transportation Group
APPENDIX
tn
C G)
o ..
._ :s
.. tn
() ea
G) G)
~:s
! C
C 0
- .-
....
C ea
G) .~ G)
E :t:: :s
,,:sc
c" ~
G)G)<C
E ..
,AI .- .c
'7"'" :s ea
..A' c C"..
"",...G):)
G).=a:.....
..^ .
:s We - 'tJ
C) 'i ea ~
._.. C m
u-G)o
c .- ..
G) .~ ..
1ft " 0
....,,, c.
o <C .:
C'I,,<C
Oc.c
C'lea"
.. :s
ea tn 0
G) .. ,^
> ~ VI
"E
G) G)
tn >
o 0
c...
oc.
.. E
0._
a..
::l
o
D::
C)
Z
o
t=
~
D::
o
a..
U)
z
~
t-
W
z
<C
D::
o
o
t: G)
o ...
._ ::::s
.... 0
Co) CI:l 0
G)G)Q.
~ =s s
! t: CI:l
t:OO:
:;-c
t: CI:l t:
G) .~ ::::s
S:t:: 0
"O=S.c
t:"O.c:
G)G)t:
S...O
'-Z
N<( ::::s
I t: C' or-
<(CI:lG)O
G)- 0: or-
...0. .
::::s_catJ)
c;nCl:l t: .
.-... 0 ::>
LL G) ._ """:
t::t::"O
G) "0 >
Cl"Om
0<(....
N"O'"
Ot:O
NCI:le-
... 0'-
CI:l....<(
G)
>t:.c:
G)....
"OS::::S
G) G) 0
0>tJ)
o 0
Q....
OQ.
... S
0.-
Q.
:;)
o
0:::
C)
Z
o
;::i~
o
Q.
f/)
Z
c(
0:::
t-
W
Z
~
o
Table A-I
EXISTING COSTCO GASOLINE STATIONS
SURVEYED TRIP GENERATION RATES PER VEHICLE FUELING POSITION
Trip generation rates are given in number of vehicle trips generated/fueling position.
Trip generation rates listed in the table are based on rates published in the 6th Edition of the Institute of
Transportation Engineers' Trip Generation Manual.
No information available.
Trip generation rates listed in table are based on surveys conducted on Wednesday, June 17, 1998 between the hours
of 7 :00 AM to 9:00 AM (Midweek AM peak period) and 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM (Midweek PM peak period) and on
Saturday, June 6, 1998 between the hours of 12:00 PM and 3:00 PM (weekend peak period).
Trip generation rates listed in table are based on surveys conducted on Wednesday, October 13, 1999 between the
hours of 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM (Midweek PM peak period) and on Saturday, October 16, 1999 between the hours of
12:00 PM and 3 :00 PM (weekend peak period).
Only PM peak period and weekend trip generation surveys were conducted at this location.
lTE Rate(2)
12.3
24.1
22.3
6
14.6
32.7
27.9
26.9
Santa Clara CostcO(4)
Sacramento CostcO(4)
Sunn ale Costco(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
Source: DKS Associates
(3)
30.2
28.6
29.6
PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT
(U rban Area)
2 OR MORE LANES (MAJOR) OR 2 OR MORE LANES (MINOR)
600
:c
11.
> 500
.
:c
I- 0
w < 400
w 0
II: II:
t; ~
II: < 300
o w
Z :5
- ::;)
:5 ...I
0 200
>
:c
c:J
:c 100
0
400 500 600 700 800
*
*
900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800
MAJOR STREET. TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES. VPH
* NOTE
150 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET
APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER
THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE
Source: Caltrans Traffic Manual, July 1996
~ Caltrans Urban Area Peak Hour Volume Warrant
~RANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP
LEVEL OF SERVICE - CONTROL DELAY RELATIONSIDP FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
Level of Service
Control Delay Per Vehicle (in seconds)
A
~1O
B
> 10 - 20
C
> 20 - 35
D
> 35 - 55
E
> 55 - 80
F
>80
Control delay includes initial deceleration delay, queue move up 1;ime to first in line at the intersection, stopped delay as first
car in queue, and final acceleration delay.
Source: Highway Capacity Manual 2000, Transportation Research Board
LEVEL OF SERVICE - AVERAGE CONTROL DELAY RELATIONSIDP FOR TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL
(SIDE STREET STOP SIGN CONTROL) INTERSECTIONS
Level of Service
Average Control Delay Per Vehicle (in seconds)
A
0-10
B
> 10 - 15
C
> 15 - 25
D
> 25 - 35
E
> 35 - 50
F
>50
Control delay includes initial deceleration delay, queue move up time to first in line at the intersection, stopped delay as first
car in queue, and final acceleration delay.
Source: Highway Capacity Manual 2000, Transportation Research Board
This Report is intended for presentation and use in its entirety, together with all of its supporting
exhibits, schedules, and appendices. Crane Transportation Group will have no liability for any use
of the Report other than in its entirety, such as providing an excerpt to a third party or quoting a
portion of the Report. If you provide a portion of the Report to a third party, you agree to hold CTG
harmless against any liability to such third parties based upon their use of or reliance upon a less than
complete version of the Report.
Peer Review Letters
- Treadwell & Rollo
-Gettler- Ryan
City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Costco Gasoline Facility & Parking Lot Upgrade
Page 74
August 2004
TreacMelI&RoIIo
8 July 2004
Project 3451.01
Mr. Jerry Haag
Urban Planner
2039 University Avenue
Berkeley, California 94704
Subject:
Review of Kleinfelder Letter
of March 3, 2004
Costco Wholesale Gasoline Facility
South San Francisco, California
Dear Mr. Haag:
As per your request, we have reviewed a letter dated March 3, 2004 by Kleinfelder that
summarizes their review of buoyancy calculations for underground storage tanks at the Costco
site. Our review is in sequence to our previous review of a Kleinfelder report that addresses
geotechnical aspects of a gasoline facility. Our previous comments were contained in a report
dated 7 June 2002.
Three 30,000 gallon gasoline tanks are to be installed at the Costco site. Groundwater is about
four fee(below the. ground surface. Initially buoyancy forces on the tanks were to be resisted by
hold down anchors. We understand from the Kleinfelder letter that they have analyzed a hold
down slab the length of the tanks, 1.5 feet wider than the tanks, and 8 inches thick. They have
found the slab to be sufficient to resist uplift due to buoyancy.
We were not provided with the Kleinfelder calculations, and therefore have no comment on the
accuracy of their conclusions. However, if the slab is sufficient, it is an acceptable alternative to
the hold down anchors. It would make moot our comment regarding micro-piles versus auger-
cast piles in our 7 June 2002 letter, but not affect any of our other comments.
Please call if you have any questions regarding this letter.
Sincerely yours,
TREADWELL & ROLLO, INC.
~fia;~
Richard.D,Rodgers, G.E.r .....
Principal
345 10 1 02.RDR
Treadwell & Rollo, Inc. Environmental & Geotechnical Consultants
555 Montgomery Street, Suite 1300, San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone (415) 955-9040 Facsimile (415) 955-9041
7-
GETTLER - RYAN INC.
July 13, 2004 .
Mr. Phillip G. Smith
Treadwell & Rollo, Inc.
555 Montgomery Street, Suite 1300
San Francisco, Ca. 94111
Re: Costco Gasoline Facility- South San Francisco, Ca.
Gentlemen,
lam issuing this letter as my review ofthesubject project as redesigned by Barghausen
Consulting Engineers, Inc. It is my opinion that the description of the design, of the fuel
system, meets the criteria of the best available industry standards. I do not feel that this
installation will have a negative impact on the surrounding environment, due to the
proposed fuel system. Ihave found nothing in the revised design that should impact the
final decision by the City of-South San: Francisco on the merits of-this project. As the
materials I have reviewed are descriptive iunatureand did not include specific details or
specifications, a further more detailed review is recommended once the final plans and
specifications are prepared.
I hope this helps with the review of this project. .
Cc: Mr. Jerry Haag
6747 Sierra Court, Suite J .Oublin, CA94568. (925) 551-7555. Fax (925) 551-7888
3140 Gold Camp Drive, Suite 170 . Rancho Cordova,CA 95670. (916) 631-1300. Fax (916) 631-1317
1364 N. McDowell Blvd., Suite B2 .Petaluma, CA 94954 . (707) 789-3255 . Fax (707) 789-3218